I always like to read anything written by Itamar Gati. So much research within careers is small scale and qualitative; these studies are of course important and provide richness and flavour to our understanding. But Gati's study provide another element. Gati does BIG STUDIES with BIG DATA and although I don't particularly agree with his approach to careers in many respects, I do love his academic rigour.
This study looked at data provided by 38,000 young adults who had filled in a career interest inventory either in 1990 or in 2010 and compared the changes over time and the differences between sexes.
The findings indicate that gender differences in career interests have narrowed during that period, but a significant gap remains. I'll go on to highlight a few interesting details, but perhaps the most important point is that the data provide some evidence that differences in career interests may be socialised rather than genetic. If differences were genetic (ie girls were just born to find caring jobs more interesting) then we would be less likely to see changes over time.
Gender differences have reduced overall, but there are a few notable examples. Women in 1990 were far less interested in professional advancement, management, authoritativeness and income than men. In 2010 the differences were much reduced suggesting that young women these days are more likely to want to climb the career ladder. This feels like great progress and with any luck this change in interests may lead to more women making their way up the career ladder to the board room.
There are some areas in which gender differences have increased and these include counselling and community service. The gender differences have increased because men are now less likely to cite these as interests. And this is not such a good thing for diversity in the work place. These were female dominated areas twenty years ago and are now even more so.
What this says about gender equality is complex, and I'm not sure that it's easy to work out. It is surely a good thing that women are now feeling that they can overtly state a desire to climb to the top of the corporate ladder. But men becoming less interested in caring professions? What does that say?
My concern is that both these changes indicate that male values and male style are becoming increasingly valued in society. The jobs and qualities that have traditionally been seen as the reserve of men are clearly valued and women now are confident enough to aspire to these arenas. But the roles that have been traditionally associated with women are becoming less valued by society and men are less likely to want to be associated with them.
I wonder if the real sign of gender equality will be not only when women make up half the board room, but when men make up half the counsellors.
Gati, I. and Perez, M. (2013) Gender differences in career preferences from 1990 to 2010: gaps reduced but not eliminated Journal of Counseling psychology
Wednesday 26 February 2014
Tuesday 25 February 2014
Learning by teaching: possible model for career learning?
I'm doing a project at the moment that is looking at a teaching methodology called "learning by teaching'. It suggests that one of the best ways to get students to really understand any material inside and out is by asking them to run the teaching session. It was originally used for language teaching, but its impact has now been tested in a range of disciplines at different levels in educational settings, and in professional contexts with doctors and managers.
It's based in part on the thinking of Vygotsky, who did a lot of work on the relationship between language and thought, suggesting that when we start to speak, our thoughts are not yet fully formed. Instead we have with a fuzzy, vague notion in our heads, and then it's only as we start to talk and put the notion into words that we refine and crystallise our thoughts. It's almost as though our thoughts and our words are collaborating and working together. From an educational perspective, the implication is that for students to understand a topic properly, they need to talk about it.
The learning by teaching method then takes full advantage of this process by making the student put all their thoughts about a particular topic into words, which allows them to develop a really thorough understanding of the topic.
I'm interesting in this in my role as a lecturer, but I was wondering if and how we could apply it to career learning? My first instinct is that clients might feel a bit short changed. If they are coming along to a specialist workshop intended to enhance various aspects of their career decision making ability, then they might be expecting some more traditional didactic input from the career practitioner. But is my response a bit defensive, and does it suggest a lack of professional confidence? If there is evidence it works, then surely we would be letting our clients down if we didn't try it?
So how would it be then, if we arranged a series of career workshops all around learning by teaching? Could we conduct sessions that essentially ask participants to provide all the content? Would it work? Would it be credible?
We might have to think about how the approach fits with career learning topics, but I think with a little imagination, we'd find some creative ways to apply the methodology in a career context.
We could, for example, get participants to research career areas, and then tell each other about them (this might work better with a slightly homogenous group - for example, students from the same University course). We could put participants in small groups and get them to present to each other all about their own strengths, and talk about a time when they really excelled at something. We could get them talking about a time when they made a good decision, and get a dialogue going about exactly how they made that decision and what was so good about the process.
The evidence suggests that it gets students engaged with the subject matter and leads to deep level cognitive learning. I think it might be worth a try.
It's based in part on the thinking of Vygotsky, who did a lot of work on the relationship between language and thought, suggesting that when we start to speak, our thoughts are not yet fully formed. Instead we have with a fuzzy, vague notion in our heads, and then it's only as we start to talk and put the notion into words that we refine and crystallise our thoughts. It's almost as though our thoughts and our words are collaborating and working together. From an educational perspective, the implication is that for students to understand a topic properly, they need to talk about it.
The learning by teaching method then takes full advantage of this process by making the student put all their thoughts about a particular topic into words, which allows them to develop a really thorough understanding of the topic.
I'm interesting in this in my role as a lecturer, but I was wondering if and how we could apply it to career learning? My first instinct is that clients might feel a bit short changed. If they are coming along to a specialist workshop intended to enhance various aspects of their career decision making ability, then they might be expecting some more traditional didactic input from the career practitioner. But is my response a bit defensive, and does it suggest a lack of professional confidence? If there is evidence it works, then surely we would be letting our clients down if we didn't try it?
So how would it be then, if we arranged a series of career workshops all around learning by teaching? Could we conduct sessions that essentially ask participants to provide all the content? Would it work? Would it be credible?
We might have to think about how the approach fits with career learning topics, but I think with a little imagination, we'd find some creative ways to apply the methodology in a career context.
We could, for example, get participants to research career areas, and then tell each other about them (this might work better with a slightly homogenous group - for example, students from the same University course). We could put participants in small groups and get them to present to each other all about their own strengths, and talk about a time when they really excelled at something. We could get them talking about a time when they made a good decision, and get a dialogue going about exactly how they made that decision and what was so good about the process.
The evidence suggests that it gets students engaged with the subject matter and leads to deep level cognitive learning. I think it might be worth a try.
Saturday 15 February 2014
Erotic Capital: feminist solution or hostage to fortune?
I feel it's about time for another feminist rant. I'm co-writing a paper* about attractiveness in the work place, what advantages it confers on the beautiful and whether career practitioners should get involved in discussions around these kinds of issues.
Our starting place for this paper was a concept coined by Catherine Hakim - 'erotic capital'. We've heard of social capital and cultural capital, and Hakim suggests that erotic capital is similar, representing the advantages that can come with being attractive. She defines 'attractive' broadly, covering nice clothes, a good hair-do, posture, poise and charm as well as pure physical beauty.
Hakim is a sociologist and has written extensively on feminist issues in the past. She proposes the notion of erotic capital as a feminist one, but I'm not so sure about its long term contribution to equality. She acknowledges that women face considerable barriers in the work place, and suggests that women therefore should take full advantage of whatever assets they have. She says that research suggests that men rarely get enough sex, and therefore are often susceptible to the charms of a pretty lady.
Her point makes some sense in the short term. Women do indeed face unfair discrimination in the work place. They need to be better than their male counterparts to get the same rewards, and face prejudice in all industry areas at all levels. We've been trying for some time to get equality and haven't managed it - maybe it is time for a new approach? But I think we need to feel sure that a new approach doesn't do any damage.
One particular barrier which I think is pertinent to this debate is that women are assumed to be not as good as men in the work place. There is evidence from Neilsen and Huse (2010) that in the board room, people assume that women aren't going to make valuable contributions, and so are less likely to pay attention or rate their opinions. Schein's (1993) replication of her earlier Think Manager Think Male study (really interesting stuff - do google it if you haven't come across it before) showed that men still think that women in general don't have the skills you need to be a good manager.
So, my concern is this. If women go along with Hakim's suggestions, and make sure that they dress elegantly, spend money on expensive haircuts, and flatter and charm male colleagues, it may indeed lead to higher salaries and promotions. And who wouldn't want that? But what happens to all the stereotypes and prejudice in ten years time when the board rooms are full of attractive women who have got there by flashing their eyelashes and showing a well turned ankle, working side by side with men who have got their by merit? Are we not fueling the existing prejudice that women have less to contribute in the work place than men?
I'm not sure what the answer is, but I am concerned that this approach may compound existing prejudices in the long term.
Nelisen, S. and Huse, M. (2010) Women directors’ contribution to board decision-making and strategic involvement: The role of equality perception European Management Review 7 16 – 29
Schein, V. E., & Davidson, M. J. ( 1993). Think manager–think male: Managerial sex typing among U.K. business students. Management Development Review, 6( 3), 24– 28
* with Tristram Hooley from iCeGs
Our starting place for this paper was a concept coined by Catherine Hakim - 'erotic capital'. We've heard of social capital and cultural capital, and Hakim suggests that erotic capital is similar, representing the advantages that can come with being attractive. She defines 'attractive' broadly, covering nice clothes, a good hair-do, posture, poise and charm as well as pure physical beauty.
Hakim is a sociologist and has written extensively on feminist issues in the past. She proposes the notion of erotic capital as a feminist one, but I'm not so sure about its long term contribution to equality. She acknowledges that women face considerable barriers in the work place, and suggests that women therefore should take full advantage of whatever assets they have. She says that research suggests that men rarely get enough sex, and therefore are often susceptible to the charms of a pretty lady.
Her point makes some sense in the short term. Women do indeed face unfair discrimination in the work place. They need to be better than their male counterparts to get the same rewards, and face prejudice in all industry areas at all levels. We've been trying for some time to get equality and haven't managed it - maybe it is time for a new approach? But I think we need to feel sure that a new approach doesn't do any damage.
One particular barrier which I think is pertinent to this debate is that women are assumed to be not as good as men in the work place. There is evidence from Neilsen and Huse (2010) that in the board room, people assume that women aren't going to make valuable contributions, and so are less likely to pay attention or rate their opinions. Schein's (1993) replication of her earlier Think Manager Think Male study (really interesting stuff - do google it if you haven't come across it before) showed that men still think that women in general don't have the skills you need to be a good manager.
So, my concern is this. If women go along with Hakim's suggestions, and make sure that they dress elegantly, spend money on expensive haircuts, and flatter and charm male colleagues, it may indeed lead to higher salaries and promotions. And who wouldn't want that? But what happens to all the stereotypes and prejudice in ten years time when the board rooms are full of attractive women who have got there by flashing their eyelashes and showing a well turned ankle, working side by side with men who have got their by merit? Are we not fueling the existing prejudice that women have less to contribute in the work place than men?
I'm not sure what the answer is, but I am concerned that this approach may compound existing prejudices in the long term.
Nelisen, S. and Huse, M. (2010) Women directors’ contribution to board decision-making and strategic involvement: The role of equality perception European Management Review 7 16 – 29
Schein, V. E., & Davidson, M. J. ( 1993). Think manager–think male: Managerial sex typing among U.K. business students. Management Development Review, 6( 3), 24– 28
* with Tristram Hooley from iCeGs
Wednesday 12 February 2014
Occupational Prestige
I'm just reading some bits and pieces on occupational prestige. There tends to be pretty good consensus around which jobs are most prestigious, and there is a surprising degree of stability in rankings of occupational prestige, across time and culture. Doctors, for example, have held a high occupational status for centuries, in more or less all culture. But identifying what factors make one occupation more prestigious than another have been surprisingly hard to pin down.
There have been theories that suggest that key factors are influence and money - jobs which have a wide ranging influence, and those which are linked to financial power houses (NB I don't here mean high salaries, but people who have influence on how money is spent - budget holders and the like) are more likely to be prestigious. So power is usually important, but there are those who think that the causal relationship is the other way round - ie people in high prestige jobs are powerful, rather than that power leads to high prestige. I was thinking that academics are often asked to take on powerful roles (advisory committees, influencing policy etc) even though their jobs in themselves are neither powerful nor in charge of large sums of money.
Education and skill are other factors that are frequently mentioned. Most high prestige jobs require extensive training and / or high levels of education to enter.
So, I can reveal that the most prestigious occupations are:
Zhou, Q. (2005) The Institutional Logic of Occupational Prestige Ranking: Reconceptualization and Reanalyses American Journal of Sociology 111 (1) 90 - 140
There have been theories that suggest that key factors are influence and money - jobs which have a wide ranging influence, and those which are linked to financial power houses (NB I don't here mean high salaries, but people who have influence on how money is spent - budget holders and the like) are more likely to be prestigious. So power is usually important, but there are those who think that the causal relationship is the other way round - ie people in high prestige jobs are powerful, rather than that power leads to high prestige. I was thinking that academics are often asked to take on powerful roles (advisory committees, influencing policy etc) even though their jobs in themselves are neither powerful nor in charge of large sums of money.
Education and skill are other factors that are frequently mentioned. Most high prestige jobs require extensive training and / or high levels of education to enter.
So, I can reveal that the most prestigious occupations are:
- Physician
- Lawyer
- Computer systems analyst
- Post-secondary teacher
- Physicist or astronomer
- Chemist
- Chemical engineer
- Architects
- Biological or life scientist
- Physical scientist
- Dentist
- Judge
- Engineer
- Chief executive
- Geologist
- Psychologist
- Manager, medicine
- Aerospace engineer
- Clergy
- Civil engineer
Zhou, Q. (2005) The Institutional Logic of Occupational Prestige Ranking: Reconceptualization and Reanalyses American Journal of Sociology 111 (1) 90 - 140
Sunday 9 February 2014
Social class and careers
I've been thinking a bit lately about social class and the many and varied benefits that being middle class might have on our career paths.
There's some issues that are fairly obvious. We know that some fields (such as politics, the media and fashion) all but require a significant period of unpaid work experience, and managing this when you have parents who can support you financially is bound to be helpful. We also know how important networks are, and that the notion of 'social capital' is important. The middle classes are much more likely to have access to interesting opportunities for internships and jobs because of their well connected parents. Greenback and Hepworth (2008) conducted a great piece of research a few years ago into the impact that social class has on career decision making styles and had some interesting findings which illustrate the uphill struggle that working class kids face when competing with middle class kids. Working class kids, for example, tend to focus on their degree first, and then start thinking about jobs afterwards. This seems like a very reasonable approach in itself, but at job interviews, these young people are up against the middle class kids who have already may have notched up a number of relevant internships. Those middle class competitors will be able to talk with confidence about the skills needed in the workplace, commercial issues and can prove that they understand the behaviour needed in a professional environment.
But what I've been thinking particularly about is not the fact that being middle class can bring specific benefits (networks, the flexibility associated with money, approaches to employability) but that being middle class is an advantage simply because being middle class is more admired - not that it's associated with any particular qualities or behaviour, but just because it's more desirable to be middle class.
There is plenty of evidence that an attractive appearance is linked with a range of positive employment outcomes - more money, more promotion, more job offers etc. But what is interesting is that the notion of attractiveness, in much of this research, is much broader than basic good looks, including things such as 'tasteful' clothing, 'well applied' make up, and the ability to know how to behave in social settings. Which in many cases boils down simply to looking (or being) more middle class. I don't just mean that middle class people are more able to afford to dress 'well', it's more that society decrees that what we think of as 'tasteful' or 'well' dressed is simply the way that middle class people look.
I've also read something recently about accents (eg Rakic et al. 2011) , and essentially, a middle class accent is more likely to get you a job than a working class one - not because there is anything intrinsically better about it, but simple because it symbolises the middle classes.
Then finally, I've just been reading a really interesting article on the advertising industry (McLeod et al 2009) which essentially suggests that ad agencies favour middle class applicants in part because they are more likely to be fit in and be desirable to clients.
The impact of social class is deep, subtle and insidious. And I don't know what we should do about it. It's a complex issue (far more nuanced than I'm making it seem in this post). But you could argue that it's woven into the fabric of our society (maybe any society?) that being middle class is better than being working class. And whilst we, as a society or as a bunch of practitioners, can work with clients to change some of the issues - encouraging all clients to get involved in work experience early on, teach people how to develop and make the most of their networks, there are many symbols of class which are hard for individuals to change, and which are deeply ingrained in our society. And these confer advantages to the middle classes, simply by signalling that they are middle class.
Greenbank and Hepworth (2008) Working class students and the career decision making process: A qualitative study: Manchester HECSU
McLeod, C., O'Donohoe, S. and Townley, B. (2009)The elephant in the room? Class and creative careers in British advertising agencies Human Relations 2009 62: 1011
Rakic, T., Steffens, m.C. and Mummendey, A. (2011) When it matters how you promounce it: the interview of regional accents on job interview outcome British Journal of Psychology 102 868 - 883
There's some issues that are fairly obvious. We know that some fields (such as politics, the media and fashion) all but require a significant period of unpaid work experience, and managing this when you have parents who can support you financially is bound to be helpful. We also know how important networks are, and that the notion of 'social capital' is important. The middle classes are much more likely to have access to interesting opportunities for internships and jobs because of their well connected parents. Greenback and Hepworth (2008) conducted a great piece of research a few years ago into the impact that social class has on career decision making styles and had some interesting findings which illustrate the uphill struggle that working class kids face when competing with middle class kids. Working class kids, for example, tend to focus on their degree first, and then start thinking about jobs afterwards. This seems like a very reasonable approach in itself, but at job interviews, these young people are up against the middle class kids who have already may have notched up a number of relevant internships. Those middle class competitors will be able to talk with confidence about the skills needed in the workplace, commercial issues and can prove that they understand the behaviour needed in a professional environment.
But what I've been thinking particularly about is not the fact that being middle class can bring specific benefits (networks, the flexibility associated with money, approaches to employability) but that being middle class is an advantage simply because being middle class is more admired - not that it's associated with any particular qualities or behaviour, but just because it's more desirable to be middle class.
There is plenty of evidence that an attractive appearance is linked with a range of positive employment outcomes - more money, more promotion, more job offers etc. But what is interesting is that the notion of attractiveness, in much of this research, is much broader than basic good looks, including things such as 'tasteful' clothing, 'well applied' make up, and the ability to know how to behave in social settings. Which in many cases boils down simply to looking (or being) more middle class. I don't just mean that middle class people are more able to afford to dress 'well', it's more that society decrees that what we think of as 'tasteful' or 'well' dressed is simply the way that middle class people look.
I've also read something recently about accents (eg Rakic et al. 2011) , and essentially, a middle class accent is more likely to get you a job than a working class one - not because there is anything intrinsically better about it, but simple because it symbolises the middle classes.
Then finally, I've just been reading a really interesting article on the advertising industry (McLeod et al 2009) which essentially suggests that ad agencies favour middle class applicants in part because they are more likely to be fit in and be desirable to clients.
The impact of social class is deep, subtle and insidious. And I don't know what we should do about it. It's a complex issue (far more nuanced than I'm making it seem in this post). But you could argue that it's woven into the fabric of our society (maybe any society?) that being middle class is better than being working class. And whilst we, as a society or as a bunch of practitioners, can work with clients to change some of the issues - encouraging all clients to get involved in work experience early on, teach people how to develop and make the most of their networks, there are many symbols of class which are hard for individuals to change, and which are deeply ingrained in our society. And these confer advantages to the middle classes, simply by signalling that they are middle class.
Greenbank and Hepworth (2008) Working class students and the career decision making process: A qualitative study: Manchester HECSU
McLeod, C., O'Donohoe, S. and Townley, B. (2009)The elephant in the room? Class and creative careers in British advertising agencies Human Relations 2009 62: 1011
Rakic, T., Steffens, m.C. and Mummendey, A. (2011) When it matters how you promounce it: the interview of regional accents on job interview outcome British Journal of Psychology 102 868 - 883
Wednesday 5 February 2014
Freelance success
Many career coaches make their living as freelancers, so I was intrigued to read the findings of this study which explores the factors that make a freelancer successful.
Self-employment is, for many, a desirable career choice. It can provide autonomy and flexibility, and the financial rewards can be great. But we know that many small business fold within their first year, and many freelance careers fail to take off. Born and Witteloostujin (2013) examined the careers of a large number of freelancers and identified three factors which consistently seem to be linked to those who make a success of their freelance careers.
The first is networking. This is perhaps no surprise. We know anecdotally that work for freelancers often if not usually comes through word of mouth, so the ability to network is bound to have an impact. The paper suggests though that it's not just about numbers. What is crucial is how strategic an individual is in their networking - it's about targeting those you connect with and raising your profile with the right people in the right way.
The second key factor is establishing a niche. It seems to be easier to make a success of your business or freelance career if it's highly specialised. This is one that I didn't expect, but on reflection, it makes sense to me, and fits with many stories of successful freelance careers. My initial thoughts were that if your practice is generic, then you are more likely to appeal to a wider range of clients, and therefore will get more business. But I think the key is that from a client perspective, there is something very attractive about engaging the services of a real expert. Specialising in a specific arena both gives you the opportunity to become an expert, and gives a clear message to clients that you are one.
These two factors are useful ones for career coaches, and could lead to useful conversations that could provide clients with a valuable competitive edge.
The third factor is interesting too. The researchers found that individuals whose work life balance mattered to them were less likely to make a success of a freelance career. This does make sense, doesn't it? It is hard to get established in a new field, and presumably, you're more likely to get repeat business if you can say yes to any offers that come your way, and the more hours you can spend preparing, the better the quality of your work.
This factor I think could be particularly valuable for discussions with clients who are motivated by the flexibility that a freelance career can bring. As a freelancer, you can certainly take a month off work every winter to learn to scuba dive in Brazil, and you are free to arrange your time to make sure you're there to drop the kids at school every day. But I wonder at what cost to your professional success?
Born, A., & Witteloostuijn, A. (2013). Drivers of freelance career success. Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 24-46
Self-employment is, for many, a desirable career choice. It can provide autonomy and flexibility, and the financial rewards can be great. But we know that many small business fold within their first year, and many freelance careers fail to take off. Born and Witteloostujin (2013) examined the careers of a large number of freelancers and identified three factors which consistently seem to be linked to those who make a success of their freelance careers.
The first is networking. This is perhaps no surprise. We know anecdotally that work for freelancers often if not usually comes through word of mouth, so the ability to network is bound to have an impact. The paper suggests though that it's not just about numbers. What is crucial is how strategic an individual is in their networking - it's about targeting those you connect with and raising your profile with the right people in the right way.
The second key factor is establishing a niche. It seems to be easier to make a success of your business or freelance career if it's highly specialised. This is one that I didn't expect, but on reflection, it makes sense to me, and fits with many stories of successful freelance careers. My initial thoughts were that if your practice is generic, then you are more likely to appeal to a wider range of clients, and therefore will get more business. But I think the key is that from a client perspective, there is something very attractive about engaging the services of a real expert. Specialising in a specific arena both gives you the opportunity to become an expert, and gives a clear message to clients that you are one.
These two factors are useful ones for career coaches, and could lead to useful conversations that could provide clients with a valuable competitive edge.
The third factor is interesting too. The researchers found that individuals whose work life balance mattered to them were less likely to make a success of a freelance career. This does make sense, doesn't it? It is hard to get established in a new field, and presumably, you're more likely to get repeat business if you can say yes to any offers that come your way, and the more hours you can spend preparing, the better the quality of your work.
This factor I think could be particularly valuable for discussions with clients who are motivated by the flexibility that a freelance career can bring. As a freelancer, you can certainly take a month off work every winter to learn to scuba dive in Brazil, and you are free to arrange your time to make sure you're there to drop the kids at school every day. But I wonder at what cost to your professional success?
Born, A., & Witteloostuijn, A. (2013). Drivers of freelance career success. Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 34(1), 24-46
Sunday 2 February 2014
The Quarter-Life Crisis: does it exist, and does that matter?
I've been working with one of my career coaching graduates (Hiba Dabis) on a paper about the Quarter Life crisis, and I've come to the conclusion that this concept is a useful addition to the career coach's understanding of career development.
The quarter life crisis is something that some people experience early on in adult hood (there is also research into the "turning 30 crisis" which is very similar but where the turning 30 crisis relates specifically to age, the quarterlife crisis is defined more by experiences). It's a crisis of identity and usually occurs when people start to feel that the life they are leading is incongruous with the adult that they are. It's often seen in people who have ended up following a career path that was highly influenced by their parents, school or peer group, and in individuals who perhaps didn't have a high degree of self-clarity in their late adolescence. Those going through a quarter-life crisis experience self-doubt, struggle with self-esteem and question their decisions. This can lead to insecurity, confusion, loneliness and a great feeling of isolation.
Rossi and Mebert had a look at a group of young people in 2011 and found no support for the concept of a quarter life crisis. They found that all the different emotions associated with this time of life could be explained by other factors, with depression and levels of job and life satisfaction being predicted by social and family support, income and identity development. Their research concludes that young adults may be depressed or have low job satisfaction, but this is no different from depression and job satisfaction at any other stage in life.
But I can't help but thinking that Rossi and Mebert were asking the wrong question. From the perspective of a coaching practitioner, one of the really useful applications of a theory is that it can help clients to normalise their experiences, which in turn can help them to accept their situation, validate their emotional responses and can reduce feelings of isolation. It is clearly helpful for practitioners to have some understanding of the antecedents of some of the emotional elements of the quarterlife crisis. If we know that social support is linked to enhanced life and job experience, and a clear sense of identity is likely to reduce depression, then these can point towards particular discussions and interventions to help. But I would also suggest that some of the feelings of isolation, self-doubt and the sense of failure experienced by many young adults might be softened a little by the understanding that their situation is not unique, and that the idea of a 'quarterlife crisis' is experienced and resolved by many.
Thinking back to my own crisis of identity in my mid-twenties, I can't help by think that knowing that my inability to define myself and my sense of loss and confusion were part of a tried and tested developmental path might have made me feel less isolated and less of a failure.
I do appreciate the importance of academic rigour when we try to identify concepts within psychology, but I also think it's incumbent on us as coaches to think about how we can use the academic research to best effect with our clients.
Dabis, H. (2013) Navigating the Stormy Seas of the Quarterlife crisis MA Dissertation University of East London
Rossi, N. E., & Mebert, C. J. (2011). Does a Quarterlife Crisis Exist?. Journal Of Genetic Psychology, 172(2), 141-161
The quarter life crisis is something that some people experience early on in adult hood (there is also research into the "turning 30 crisis" which is very similar but where the turning 30 crisis relates specifically to age, the quarterlife crisis is defined more by experiences). It's a crisis of identity and usually occurs when people start to feel that the life they are leading is incongruous with the adult that they are. It's often seen in people who have ended up following a career path that was highly influenced by their parents, school or peer group, and in individuals who perhaps didn't have a high degree of self-clarity in their late adolescence. Those going through a quarter-life crisis experience self-doubt, struggle with self-esteem and question their decisions. This can lead to insecurity, confusion, loneliness and a great feeling of isolation.
Rossi and Mebert had a look at a group of young people in 2011 and found no support for the concept of a quarter life crisis. They found that all the different emotions associated with this time of life could be explained by other factors, with depression and levels of job and life satisfaction being predicted by social and family support, income and identity development. Their research concludes that young adults may be depressed or have low job satisfaction, but this is no different from depression and job satisfaction at any other stage in life.
But I can't help but thinking that Rossi and Mebert were asking the wrong question. From the perspective of a coaching practitioner, one of the really useful applications of a theory is that it can help clients to normalise their experiences, which in turn can help them to accept their situation, validate their emotional responses and can reduce feelings of isolation. It is clearly helpful for practitioners to have some understanding of the antecedents of some of the emotional elements of the quarterlife crisis. If we know that social support is linked to enhanced life and job experience, and a clear sense of identity is likely to reduce depression, then these can point towards particular discussions and interventions to help. But I would also suggest that some of the feelings of isolation, self-doubt and the sense of failure experienced by many young adults might be softened a little by the understanding that their situation is not unique, and that the idea of a 'quarterlife crisis' is experienced and resolved by many.
Thinking back to my own crisis of identity in my mid-twenties, I can't help by think that knowing that my inability to define myself and my sense of loss and confusion were part of a tried and tested developmental path might have made me feel less isolated and less of a failure.
I do appreciate the importance of academic rigour when we try to identify concepts within psychology, but I also think it's incumbent on us as coaches to think about how we can use the academic research to best effect with our clients.
Dabis, H. (2013) Navigating the Stormy Seas of the Quarterlife crisis MA Dissertation University of East London
Rossi, N. E., & Mebert, C. J. (2011). Does a Quarterlife Crisis Exist?. Journal Of Genetic Psychology, 172(2), 141-161
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)