Individual Career Management

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

Literature Review

The intent of this section is to provide an extensive theory-based research framework to depict some of the most influential work, in relation to the purpose of this study, within the fields of career studies and family business research. It begins with a broad discussion of career studies and from there deepen the understanding of individual career management by presenting various views of existing research. Next, it dives deep into some of the main areas of family business research and present literature relevant to this study on what is currently known about careers in family businesses.

Careers

The field of career studies has existed for decades with historical perspectives on traditional careers as highly structured, hierarchy based with organisational focus (Rosenbaum, 1979; Wilensky, 1960, 1961). Technological advancement, financial ambiguities, and an increasingly globalised world has changed the nature of the socio-economic environment and as a result, new conceptualisations of careers have emerged (King, 2004; Nikandrou & Galanaki, 2016; Sullivan & Baruch, 2009). Contemporary views tend to place career responsibility with individuals rather than organisations (King, 2001, 2004) and portray careers as self-directive (Sullivan & Baruch, 2009) with emphasis on flexibility and mobility (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996a; Hall, 1996).
Traditionally there has been a tendency to define careers in terms of the relationship between employers and employees, as how Hughes (1937) depicted careers as a moving perspective in which individuals oriented themselves with reference to social order and typical arrangements of work. Contemporary scholars tend to favour broader definitions, where less weight is placed on boundaries and organisational importance. Baruch and Rosenstein (1992) talk about careers in terms of an individual process of development along a sequence of both experience and jobs, which does not have to be limited to one organisation. Lee et al. (2014) provides a wide definition where they talk about careers from a sequence perspective, which develops as work experience accumulates. This and additional contemporary broad definitions originate from the boundaryless career concept by DeFillippi and Arthur (1994) and Hall’s (1996) protean careers.
Arthur and Rousseau (1996a) talks about careers as transcendent across boundaries. This mobility manifests through shifts within single employments in ways such as crossing functional divisions or hierarchical structures, but it can also take place through movement among employers, industry or occupations (DeFillippi & Arthur,1994). The boundaryless career is perceived as autonomous from the organisation where Arthur and Rousseau (1996a, 1996b) argue that these modern careers not only require individuals to self-manage their own careers but that this is how contemporary careers exist. Although the view of careers as boundaryless with emphasis on individual responsibility is shared by Baruch (2006), he differs from the majority of scholars of the boundaryless perspective on careers. This given that he argues that while careers are increasingly demanding individual responsibility and management, most careers in reality still exist to a large extent in accordance with the traditional view of careers. Baruch (2006) argue that both the traditional view of careers as managed and controlled by organisations and the opposing boundaryless perspective that onus of responsibility is with individuals, are two extremes. Instead it is suggested that a perspective that balances the relationship between individuals and organisations would be preferable (Sullivan & Baruch, 2009). This commonly occurring way of portraying traditional and boundaryless views of careers as two extremes at various ends of a scale is also considered not fully depicting reality by Nikandrou and Galanaki (2016) and King (2004) who all suggest that individuals with boundaryless careers may yet pursue traditional careers or, to some degree, a combination of the both.
The protean career adopts the notions of mobility and individualistic responsibility from the boundaryless perspective but in this view of careers emphasis is placed on flexibility in terms of individuals need and strive for personal development and growth (Hall, 1996; Sullivan & Baruch, 2009). The Greek god Proteus could change his shape at will and by using him as a metaphor for protean careerists, Hall (1996) depicts protean careers as self-managed, consisting of individuals accumulated experience from both education and work which may be changed and adapted through self-initiated behaviours in order to fulfil individual’s internal values and perceptions of career success (Hall, 1996; Nikandrou & Galanaki, 2016; Sullivan & Baruch, 2009).
As the view of careers has shifted from organisational to individualistic focus where careers are considered to be flexible and have the potential to exceed boundaries, it has also become increasingly common to consider career boundaries as both physical and psychological. Sullivan and Arthur (2006) discuss objective and subjective career changes as in crossing boundaries, using a terminology where they refer to physical and psychological career changes. They argue that career scholars tend to separate these in ways that ignores the interconnection between their respective career worlds. Sullivan and Baruch (2009) provide a definition that illuminate both the physical and psychological aspects of careers in terms of movement across physical and psychological boundaries. Their definition states that careers are experiences of individuals throughout their life span which may be work-related or otherwise relevant and not limited to the boundaries of organisations. Physical movement could be the shift from one employer to another or a change of occupation or industry. Psychological movement refer to the inner thoughts, ambitions, struggles, and attitudes of individuals. Movement across psychological boundaries could involve balancing an individual’s strive for development while fearing the lack of job security. A psychological boundary can also be exemplified in terms of whether the loss of a job is seen as failure or an opportunity for something new (Sullivan & Baruch, 2009).
The evolvement of these physical and psychological boundaryless and protean perspectives on careers (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996a; DeFillippi & Arthur, 1994; Hall, 1996; Sullivan & Arthur, 2006) constitutes, as depicted, the foundation of contemporary views on how onus is with individuals to manage their own careers. It is the responsibility of individuals to form and develop their careers to achieve their goals and career success through self-directed behaviours which constitutes the concept recognised as individual career management (Greenhaus et al., 2010; King, 2001, 2004).

Individual Career Management

The concept of individual career management emerged in career studies in the mid-nineties (Greenhaus et al., 2010) and has since been a subject for vocational research among scholars from various disciplines such as management, psychology, and economics (Lee et al., 2014). Individual career management involve actions and choices of individuals in their pursuit to achieve their career goals, development, and opportunities (Chang, Feng & Shyu, 2014; King, 2004; Kossek et al., 1998) with the purpose to result in a self-fulfilling impact. Career management by individuals can be both proactive and reactive and is not limited to job entry but is required in all phases that the longitudinal process of a career might include (Abele & Wiese, 2008; King, 2004).
The existing body of literature on individual career management is extensive and the self-regulatory concept has been portrayed with various emphasis among career scholars. Some focus on the aspect of planning (Orpen, 1994) while others have placed emphasis on competence development and goal attainment (Chang et al., 2014; Kossek et al., 1998). Individual career management has also been discussed with focus on career success (Nikandrou & Galanaki, 2016). It is noted that these differences among emphasis in the literature can be divided into two major sub-sections; (1) behaviours, which include actions such as planning and choices, and (2) outcomes, which involve aspects of goals, development, and success. The subsequent sections below will depict how these different perspectives on individual career management are discussed in the literature.

READ  OPERATIONS CAPABILITIES

Career Behaviours

Individual career management include behaviours which individuals engage in as proactive or reactive actions to realise their career ambitions (King, 2001, 2004; Nikandrou and Galanaki, 2016; Smale et al., 2019). Abele and Wiese (2008) discuss the importance of self-management behaviours in terms of self-management strategies which they argue have a positive relationship with career success. They suggest that generalised behaviours are insufficient and that individuals need to engage in specific strategic behaviours such as networking and extensive work engagement, for successful individual career management. Furthermore, Abele and Wiese (2008) depict a relationship between individuals who holds career attitudes of psychological and physical mobility and successful career management, resulting from that such individuals to a greater extent will engage in specific strategic behaviours. Similarly, Nikandrou and Galanaki (2016) emphasise that individual career management behaviours involve deliberate choices. In accordance, Smale et al. (2019) argue that individual career management involve proactive behaviours where individuals actively take control of their careers. Using the terminology career self-management, King (2001, 2004) address individual career management from the perspective of vocational psychology where she correspondingly emphasises that individuals are required to engage in behaviours related to making conscious choices, and planning. Influence and positioning are two of the behavioural categories identified by King (2001, 2004), although contrary to Smale et al. (2019) she argues that both proactive and reactive self-management behaviours may result in successful career management.
A discussion on more generalised individual career management behaviours and career tactics is provided by Orpen (1994), who place emphasis on career planning and goals which he depicts from a process perspective. According to Orpen (1994) individual career planning entails that individuals identify what they desire for their careers, estimate their strengths and weaknesses in regard to their objectives and consciously determine the path and choices needed to achieve the desired goals. Unlike most scholars, Orpen (1994) talks about career management as being a responsibility for both individuals and the organisation that employs them, making career management a joint responsibility. In contrast, in a study investigating organisational training programs aimed at facilitating and encourage career management behaviours among individuals, Kossek et al. (1998) found that the programs did not have the encouraging effect that was intended. Instead the individuals seemed far less engaged in the behaviours after having participated in the programs, supporting the contemporary view that individual career management is a self-regulatory concept, requiring self-directed responsibility of individuals. Kossek et al. (1998) provide an additional emphasis on individual career management behaviours where they argue that developmental feedback seeking, and job mobility preparedness constitute the major behaviours included in individual career management. Concomitantly, another contribution to the discussion of behavioural action is provided by Duffy and Dik (2009), who portray that existing theories related to how individuals’ behaviours in making career choices differ in many ways, yet all primarily focus on the connection to internal goals, needs, and pursuit of satisfaction. The authors suggest that individuals who feel that they have control over their own choices and career paths also have a high degree of perceived satisfaction. Correspondingly, Murphy and Ensher (2001) emphasise the aspect of behaviours concerning career planning, described as a combination of self-regulatory processes partially including, goal setting and self-assessment.

Career Outcomes

Many scholars address individual career management with emphasis on career success (Abele & Wiese, 2008; Chang et al., 2014; De Vos et al., 2011; Orpen, 1994; Smale et al., 2019). The discussion on career success is complex and it appears that in attempts to distinguish and define what it is, it has become increasingly popular in the literature to differentiate between objective and subjective career success. Objective career success refers to verifiable accomplishments such as promotion, position, and income (Abele & Wiese, 2008) whereas subjective success reflects individuals perceived fulfilment in terms of career satisfaction (Chang et al., 2014). Judge, Cable, Boudreau, and Bretz (1995) define career success in a way that includes both the objective and subjective elements by referring to career success as work-related or psychological accomplishments that an individual accumulates from working experiences.

1 Introduction
1.1 Background
1.1.1 Individual Career Management
1.1.2 The Context of Family Business
1.2 Problem Discussion
1.3 Purpose and Research Questions
1.4 Delimitations
2 Literature Review
2.1 Careers
2.2 Individual Career Management
2.2.1 Career Behaviours
2.2.2 Career Outcomes
2.3 Individual Career Management and Context
2.4 Careers in Family Businesses
2.4.1 Family Business
2.4.2 Family Involvement and Influence
2.4.3 Succession Planning
2.5 Summary Literature Review
3 Methodology and Method
3.1 Research Philosophy
3.2 Research Design
3.2.1 Research Approach
3.3 Literature Review
3.4 Primary Data Collection
3.4.1 Qualitative Interviews
3.4.1.1 Selection of Interview Participants
3.5 Data Analysis
3.6 Research Ethics
3.7 Research Quality
4 Empirical findings
4.5 Individual and Family Business in Symbiosis
4.6 Vocational Identity
5 Analysis
5.1 Career Choices
5.2 Career Planning
5.3 Career Goals
5.4 Career Development
5.5 Framework of Individual Career Management in Family Business
6 Discussion and Conclusions
6.1 Purpose and Research Questions
6.2 Implications
6.2.1 Theoretical Implications
6.2.2 Practical Implications
6.2.3 Societal Implications
6.3 Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research
References
Appendices
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT

Related Posts