Project Report : Careers management and the Careers interview
Produced for: Centre for Career Management Skills, Reading University
Written by: Angus McKendrick
Date: July2009
1) Project aims:
Students commonly book a careers interview to discuss their career ideas, or because they are
concerned at their lack of them. I intended to give a sample of clients (from amongst those who are
at the early stages of careers thinking without firm ideas about their future) prior to such an
interview a short handout outlining some theories of career choice and development along with
suggestions for further reading if the client so desires. The consequent careers discussion would, as
part of the more general interview process, consider the relevance of this learning for the clients
own career progression. This report gives a brief account of the progress of the project, and
concludes some comments on whether this approach “worked” and has value for other Careers
Services.
2) Stage One: Prior to interviewing students:
In order to write my handout for students I read various books and articles related to theories of
career choice. I also looked at the overlap and separation between careers education and careers
guidance. I also attended a workshop run by Bill Law “Using narrative in careers guidance” at Derby
CEGS. I then wrote my draft handout, got advice and feedback from Phil McCash and from
colleagues in the Careers Service and then finalised my handout How do people choose and build
careers? I also consulted with colleagues about how to identify students for this project, and
arranged a small “library” of resources for the use of any students who wanted to follow up in depth
any of the references in the handout. I wrote a questionnaire to give to students shortly after the
interview. This stage of the project took longer than I expected. I felt I had to get to grips with quite
a large careers theory literature- often aimed at a specialist academic audience of fellow “career
theorists” with much impenetrable language which seemed to require knowledge of various debates
within different social science fields (sociology, psychology, business, philosophy). I needed to do
this, both to write my handout (I was, and am, unaware of any similar attempt to outline four major
career theories in three pages in a way that wasn’t unduly simplistic!), but also in order to feel
confident talking about career theory with students in individual discussion.
3) Stage Two: Interviewing students:
Numbers:
The project aimed to interview 30 students. There were various problems which meant this figure
was never achieved. Initially, due to the project starting later than expected, and the pre-interview
stage being more time consuming that I had envisaged, the “interviewing stage” started in late
Spring 2008- a period when we see fewer students than at other times of the year. I then decided to
conclude interviewing in Michaelmas term 2008, but faced various difficulties. It proved more
difficult than I had expected to get “referrals” from my colleagues. I think this was less a
consequence of any misgivings about the project (my colleagues were keen supporters) but rather a
combination of busyness leading to forgetting about it but also students reluctance to engage with
the project. As noted in Stage One, prior to an appointment students were expected to spend time
(not necessarily a long time- I reckoned a student would not have to take longer than an hour
reading the handout, and answering the questions asked). But our students lead very busy lives, and
I found that because this required a greater time commitment from students, than our usual
“bookable” long discussions, students were often reluctant to participate. It could also be that
students had a natural hesitation to be involved in this project- feeling that they wanted the usual
“tried and tested” careers interview rather than taking part in an “experiment”. My rough estimate
is that five students were informed about the project, and invited to participate, for every student
who did then choose to take part.
A further problem was that once interviews started I began to realise that the process of transcribing
these interviews was extremely time consuming, and I would have insufficient time allocated to the
project to complete all the tasks. Hence I only had sufficient time allocated to the project to conduct
16 interviews. While this is a smaller number than I had hoped for, I do think this is sufficient to
evaluate whether this approach to the guidance interview has value. These sixteen students came
from a wide range of subjects including Fine Art, Biology, Classics, Engineering, Philosophy and
Chemistry.
The interviews
I conducted 16 interviews with a range of students. The majority (10) were undergraduates with four
postgraduates and two contract research staff. Their subject of study ranged from Fine Art to
Biology, Classics to Engineering.
But, a further problem was encountered. While all 16 had agreed to read the handout prior to the
interview, only 11 had done so. The reason given by these five was once again busyness or
forgetfulness. In these cases, I did record the interview and used the handout to illustrate, as
appropriate, points I had made. Two of these five did subsequently let me know they had then gone
away and read the handout and found it useful. All participants signed consent forms allowing for
the taping of the interview and subsequent anonymous reporting of these interviews.
After the interviews participants were followed up with a questionnaire. All who had read the
handout found it interesting, with 82% also finding it useful (9 of the 11). This is an interesting
variation.
I have written an account of the project, “Encouraging students to engage with Career Theory” 1,
which focuses on the content of these interviews and student views as to the projects usefulness to
them.
4) Dissemination of project
1
Appendix 1.
To date this has taken a number of forms. I have discussed the project with my colleagues,
culminating in a presentation given to my colleagues in June 2009. Through informal
contacts/AGCAS the handout I have produced has been requested by (to date) nine other University
Careers Services. The project has also featured in the HEA booklet by Phil McCash “Career studies
handbook: career development learning in practice (2009). I have written an article intended for
publication in Pheonix later in 2009 and hope to present my findings elsewhere. My report “students
thinking about career theory as part of their own career journey” will be on the CCMS website
shortly. I also will run a lunchtime session at Biennial 2009 later this summer.
5) What I learnt from the project
I am exceptionally grateful for CCMS for sponsoring this project. It has given me the time to become
more familiar with career theory, which I believe is having real benefit for my discussions with
students, and which has helped me develop my understanding of how careers are built. It has
allowed me to conduct an interesting experiment where I think the findings are mixed but mostly
positive. I have also begun to realise that everything takes far longer than you anticipate, and that
while optimism might be a good thing, perhaps I needed a little more realism as to the scope of the
project at the outset.
6) Finance
The bulk of the funding was spent on salary costs. In fact the days allocated to the project proved
insufficient, and approximately an additional ten days has been spent on this project than was
funded by CCMS. As well as the equipment and book purchases, this project also funded attending
several seminars held at Reading, CCMS/ course, at Derby Centre for Guidance Studies, and will
finance my attendance at the forthcoming AGCAS biennial conference.
6) Concluding remarks- could this approach to the careers interview have wider application?
I think there are some problems with this approach to the Careers Interview. One is that the number
of services offering long appointments is declining, and hence the possibility of this sort of
intervention is limited2. It may be more relevant to private careers counselling, where usually a
counsellor does spend significant time with their client. It could also be useful as part of a series of
interventions using a “careers coaching” model as has been adopted by some Careers Services.
A secondary, though important problem, is also that students are very busy people, and anything
that takes additional time to do is likely to prove less popular than other alternatives. We may
appreciate that making good career decisions involves a significant time commitment, but this is a
hard message to sell to students. Encouraging students to recognise the value of having to do a task
(in this case read the handout and think about it), prior to having a careers interview is not easy.
However, despite these problems, I feel that this approach can demonstrate real value. While the
sample was small, those who did engage with it found it useful. Students did recognise the relevance
of the material to their own future lives, and I believe that this led to more productive career
2
For example, at my own service, it is currently proposed that in future long discussions will be the rare
exception, with the majority of our one-to-one interventions with students lasting only a few minutes.
discussions. Jenny Ambrose and her colleagues have noted how Careers Interviews tend to follow an
approach modelled on a matching paradigm- this method of conducting careers discussions very
much challenges this approach partly by bringing career theory out into the open and sharing it with
our clients. Doing this, helps ensure our role in the careers discussion is one of career facilitator
rather than career solver.
I think that using a short career theory handout could also be useful outside the careers interviews.
As well as a stand-alone resource for students (we now have this handout in a slightly revised form
on our website), it could also be useful as a starting point in careers workshops and seminars for
students following careers education courses.
I think the project was a qualified success, pioneering an innovative approach to the Careers
Interview which has the potential for wider application. I also feel that the handout I produced will
successfully operate as a “stand-alone” resource- this would never have been developed without the
time I was given to learn more about Career Theory. I envisage continuing to use Career theory more
explicitly in my interviews with students- at this stage with students I have first seen for short “dropin” interviews- where I think it would be helpful I will ask them to read the handout prior to our
subsequent appointment. I am also encouraging my colleagues to use this approach as appropriate
with their students.
APPENDIX ONE:
Encouraging students to engage with Career theory- a small-scale research project; DRAFT
How many times in your Careers discussions with students have you explicitly referred to Careers
theory? I must admit that until recently I never had, and yet theory- whether we are aware of it or
not- is never far from the Careers Interview3. Frequently in my discussions I have referred to the
role of “luck” in building careers, yet never before have I shared with my client the theory of
“happenstance” which provides a valuable way for students to think about, and exploit, the role of
chance in building successful careers. And we are all aware of various structural constraints that can
often limit opportunities, yet talking about this with a client in an interview is sometimes difficult
given our natural desire to encourage our students to be positive and optimistic about their future.
I recently had the opportunity to run a small project which aimed to see whether raising “career
theory” in my individual discussions with students could be valuable, by encouraging such students
who were themselves in the process of making career plans think more widely about Career theory. I
was very lucky to receive funding from the Centre for Career Management Studies, Reading
University, to whom I am extremely grateful.
What did I do?
Students who participated had first had a short “drop-in” discussion with an adviser, were selected
as they were at a relatively early stage of Career thinking (e.g. “I don’t know what to do when I finish
my course”), and asked if they minded participating in the project. The aim wasn’t that they had a
forty five minute “career theory tutorial” but that at this longer careers appointment, some time
would be given to explore their own views about “career” as part of a wider discussion. Students
who agreed to participate, were prior to this appointment, asked to read a four page handout I
wrote titled “How do people chose and build careers”. This outlined four different careers theories:
matching, developmental, structural and happenstance. Students were also asked to consider prior
to the appointment four questions I posed in the handout4.
As could have been expected, when presented with the choice between a follow up longer
appointment with no significant work required beforehand, or an appointment which would first
require some hard thought, the majority offered the choice chose not to participate! However
sufficient students (16) did opt to participate for me to offer some thoughts as to the value of this
novel approach to the Careers Interview. Students came from a wide range of disciplines including
Engineering, Fine Arts, Chemistry, Classics and Philosophy.
What did students think of the Career Theories outlined?
At each interview I asked the participant early in the interview if they had read the handout and
what they made of it. We then discussed any implications of this, for their own career future.
Students who participated frequently wanted to talk in some detail about the theories outlined in
3
Bimrose, J, Barnes, SA, & Hughes, D (2005) Effective guidance One Year On: evidence from longitudinal case
studies in England, DfeS/Warwick Institute for Employment Research
4
Copy of the handout is at Appendix 1.
the handouts, and talked of its relevance to their own views and ideas for their future career. In the
handout I had asked students to decide if any particular career theory they felt particularly attracted
to. Several students pointed out that the different theories aren’t always incompatible :
I think all of the theories here are compatible, its not a case of choosing between
structuralism or development theory or whatever. In a way elements of each theory can be
incorporated into- its not a matter of choosing between competing theories
or that all had something to offer : It wasn’t that there was one (theory/approach) that
particularly struck me but that there were parts of each one that interested me….
One student pointed out I think distinguishing so sharply between the different approaches
is a little artificial….
Matching theories
Different students, as you could expect, felt more positive about different theories. Generally
though matching theories were least popular:
I did find the ideas of John Holland silly. I think its an outdated way of thinking, isn’t it?.. how
can you easily differentiate between say, social and artistic what if you are both….
…the difficulty with this is its hard to say that there is just one career that’s right for
anybody…I think it’s a bit strict to say that, like, that for this career you have to have these
Although there was an awareness that employers do tend to use matching approaches to selection:
….five qualities and if you don’t have them you need to go and find something else. Well
surely that’s not right?
One student commented on how we can then try to turn ourselves into something different from
what we are to become suitable for certain job roles. Her account can demonstrate the link between
matching and developmental theories:
something that struck me about this approach is that it seems to me we form ideas about
what we should aspire to be, its more kind of the abilities that we emphasise the skills which
correspond to our alter-ego. I feel I have got a certain idea of where I would like to see myself
in the next ten years. I really don’t know if this is based on an image of the skills I have or me
talking myself into thinking that I should have these skills…
Developmental theories
In general students made fewer mentions of, and identified less, with development theories
although one student commented:
I find this somewhat uplifting to think that the decisions I make are not in any sense final. Its
about a process.
This, though, was countered by another who made the pertinent comment that:
development (theory) is an interesting one but it doesn’t help me with the step I need to take
now
Another student commenting on development theory made the interesting point that
retrospectively looking at ones career based on how successful one had been could lead to different
theories seeming more appropriate:
(development) is more realistic..most people use chance and fate and then they develop
themselves rather than saying “I want to do this because I have such and such skills” Most of
the people who are successful haven’t planned their career with a Prospects Planner
approach, I don’t think… (but then she mentions that perhaps the “failed” Richard Bransons
where things didn’t work out, would have been better off using a Prospects Planner
approach))….
Structural/sociological theories
Given the nature of the student intake at Oxford, it is not surprising that students didn’t feel that
there were particular structural constraints or barriers that they had to overcome. But what did
influence students’ career views were their peers and their family, and these were frequently
mentioned. Two examples:
If your peers are all experiencing the same thing theres a sort of snowball effect. I’ve seen
all of, no loads of my friends sort of tumbled into accountancy and law or started to go down
that route at least.
…(sociological approaches) talk about internalising values and hence leading similar lives to
their peers which is something I’ve felt is a pressure. I’ve noticed some of my friends doing
this and falling easily into sort of, a bit of parental pressure to get a real job….
But one student made the interesting comment about how sometimes people might listen to others
but at other times do just what they feel is right for them:
The reason why she is doing it is for her mother…. The only worthwhile careers (she feels) are
law and medicine. She is putting herself through it to satisfy the ambitions of her mother. So I
think in a way that is a slightly different process for her because at the age of 28 she almost
by chance decided to listen to her mum, who she usually ignored
In our discussion she expressed her view that careers were built often based on the individuals
random reaction to the situation they were in, rather than logic being the basis for career choice.
Happenstance
Several students commented on happenstance, finding it reassuring that people could build
successful careers without a grand plan. One student, who had hitherto tried extensively to identify
“the perfect job” by a combination of using tools like Prospects Planner, personality inventories and
reading of much careers literature without ever having identified the career that would “fit” him was
relieved:
It was interesting especially the bit at the end about how things sometimes just happen… one
doesn’t always have a grand plan that one follows through life…
Another also found this knowledge reassuring:
theres the happenstance thing which is sort of like trying something out and seeing what
happens. I don’t envisage a 12 year plan or anything but I just want to do something
interesting for the next 3 or 4 years
One student who had found reading about career theory valuable felt that this new awareness
would help her decide on a career path. Her view was that different theories recognised the
different realities of different careers:
Are some careers more chance based than others- so if you want to be an accountant… but
for media its quite different … I’d prefer to have a job that didn’t depend on random factors
to then determine whether I made it or not
Of course a problem all of the students were facing was that they were approaching a period of
transition. As one student expressed it:
(pointing to development section) But I can’t afford the time to have tentative hypothesis
and try them out. I took five years to complete a doctorate. I feel the next thing I do I either
have to do for half a year and move on, or it has to be right because I really would not want
to find myself at the age of 34 still suspended and still facing super-dramatic decision
making….
Was it worth doing? Student views
Students’ reactions to the handout and the careers discussion were positive. All had found it
interesting although fewer in a follow up questionnaire said reading the handout and discussing it
had been useful (still over 80%). But this didn’t always mean that they were happy to have learnt
what they did. Often students want certainty:
the traditional thing that there must be a certain job that’s just right for me and a perfect
match for skills and other attributes- yes that’s what I want
But while my participants recognised that such certainty wasn’t likely to be a possibility gaining a
better awareness of the messiness and uncertainty in building careers isn’t always a nice thing to
know. Several students, while knowing it wasn’t possible, really would have preferred it if I could
have just told them what to do with their lives. As one told me “it would be great if you could just tell
me what to do”.
Of course, the careers interview covered more than simply a discussion of career theory. The idea
was for this awareness of theory to inform the clients approach to the career decision making
process they faced, and of course the interviews then did cover some of the more familiar territory
of career discussions (how to identify suitable careers, how do I know what I’d be good at, etc).
Student feedback about the interviews as a whole (rather than the above question about career
theory) was very positive.
I’ll end this section with the least, and most positive comments expressed about introducing career
theory to these discussions:
[AM: was it worth reading?] It wasn’t something I had thought of before… it was sort of
interesting… not massively helpful. It sort of clarified what I thought
[AM My purpose is to use (the handout) to get a discussion going but hopefully the discussion
isn’t just for my benefit] (interrupts) no, not at all, you have actually helped me tremendously
just by introducing to me a way of thinking about career. I feel reassured…
Was it worth doing? My views
I did feel that these discussions had a depth that was sometimes missing from my more usual long
discussions with students. Whereas the later often focussed on the “nitty-gritty” of helping students
approach the problem of identifying suitable careers, or of finding routes into their chosen careers, I
believe that being able to place the students career decision within a larger context led to a more
productive discussion. Of course this is a subjective matter, and the fact that I was trialing something
different may itself have had a positive effect on the careers discussions (i.e. the “Hawthorne
effect”).
I also felt during these interviews that I got to know more of the student, than often in my usual
interviews. Students were more likely to confide in me their fears and concerns, than was usually
the case (e.g. I’m quite depressed and paralysed because there is a huge shift in my life), and I felt
that the format of these discussions gave “permission” for students to talk about personal issues in a
way that can be hard to surface otherwise. And becoming more aware of the vulnerabilities and
insecurities of our students does, I think, lead to more constructive discussions.
The project also brought theory alive to me- whereas previously I found it difficult to see the
relevance of “careers theory” to my actual practice to students, being expected to talk about these
theories with students certainly made me develop a better understanding of these theories.
Discussing these theories with students, has also helped clarify and develop my own view of the
relevance of different theories to career choice and development. Perhaps my research can help
explain a seeming contradiction that has been pointed out in a large scale research project the
Warwick Institute for Employment Research conducted into Careers Interviews5? This research
noted that the framework for Careers discussions is often based on a matching paradigm, yet many
of these same practitioners had indicated to the researcher their view they are more convinced by
other theories of career choice. I think a likely explanation for this mismatch lies in the fact that
Careers Advisers see students at points of transition. At that moment, students are confronted with
information from recruiters, and using tools like Prospects Planner and aptitude tests, that make
clear that matching theories do have relevance when trying to move into a particular job (maybe the
student doesn’t have to actually be a “fit” with a companies requirements to get a job, but they
certainly do have to put on a very good show that indicates a fit6). As such there is an immediacy
5
Bimrose, J, Barnes, SA, & Hughes, D (2005) Effective guidance One Year On: evidence from longitudinal case
studies in England, DfeS/Warwick Institute for Employment Research
6
Brown and Hesketh, the Mismanagement of Talent, for more about this.
about helping the student make this transition that lends itself to a “matching” approach to the
Careers discussion, which it is often difficult to avoid. Because other theories don’t help the client at
that moment deal with their particular career problem (e.g. I need to find a job soon), there is a
natural tendency to move towards a “matching” model as appropriate to such career discussions.
And without explicit discussion of careers theory, it may be hard to move beyond this.
I’d also agree with the student who felt that certain theories might seem more relevant to some
careers fields than others. If one asked an accountant how they made it to senior partner level with
a big-4 accounting firm, its unlikely that they would focus on chance meetings as being key to their
success, but rather having the right skills and personal qualities for that particular occupation. On
the other hand, a successful film director is highly likely to highlight the role of luck in determining
their future. In reality different theories are often trying to explain different things (matching works
best at points of forced transition, and for the selection process for most jobs); development to help
students appreciate how they and their goals are likely to change over time; happenstance helps
students develop an appreciation of the importance of taking advantage of the situations we find
ourselves in, which itself may be more vital to career progression in some occupational fields than
others; while sociological and structural theories can help clients be aware of the role of others both
on our own decisions and the decisions others make on our behalf. As such the theories I focussed
on for the handout, are, as the student I’ve already quoted above noted linked:
I think all of the theories here are compatible, its not a case of choosing between
structuralism or development theory or whatever. In a way elements of each theory can be
incorporated into- its not a matter of choosing between competing theories
So, should you start using career theory in your Careers Interviews?
I did find it very valuable to have the time to spend on this project. But I would be wary of suggesting
this as a way forward suitable for all audiences. As I’ve noted, it did require “buy-in” from the
student, and this can be difficult to achieve. I don’t think forcing students to read and think about
career theory prior to an interview will lead to a productive interview with a reluctant participant7!
And of course, it does require Careers Services to have the facility to offer long appointments. But
given these constraints, I do think using a handout can be a useful tool which may lead to more
productive discussions with students, than can otherwise be the case.
I have also found that I have given out the handout to quite a number of students I have seen during
“normal” careers interviews- and these students have let me know they have also found the
handout interesting and useful. At Oxford we have recently also put up the handout onto our
website as a stand-alone resource, and it will be interesting to see if this is valued and used by our
students. Using this type of handout could also form the basis for discussion in seminars within
Careers studies/education courses, something which we don’t current offer at Oxford.
7
When I started the project I thought that perhaps this could best work with students like ours at Oxford
University (very intelligent, with the capability of engaging with what can be quite difficult theory). But in fact, I
no longer think this. Its possible, as I hope I have achieved in the handout, to write about career theory in a
way that any degree level student can engage with).
Finally, of course as I’ve noted above we all do use “theory” in our interviews with students, its
often just that we do this in an unconscious way- I hope that reading this report, and the handout I
produced will help you think about the role of theory in your careers work. And, if so, do let me
know your own views. I’d really welcome suggestions and criticisms of this project and the points
I’ve made here- and also would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Angus McKendrick, Careers Adviser, Oxford University