Career paths

As we attempt to make sense of the expectations held by men and women who are currently seeking employment, we must acknowledge not only the content and outcomes of the anticipated or desired career (the career anchors), but also the structure of an anticipated or desired career. Michael Driver and Kenneth Brousseau (Brousseau & Driver, 1994) offered a taxonomy of career paths (which they called “career concepts”) many years ago, that still seems to be salient in the second decade of the 21st century. They first identified the traditional path (“Linear” career concept) that is so commonly found in 20th century corporations (and so vividly illustrated in the TV series Mad Men). The assumption is made that a successful career consists of upward movement through a hierarchical organization. A visual analogy might be the inclined plane. The young, ambitious corporate employee aspires to the C-suite with all of its associated power and prestige. Metaphorically, she moves up an inclined plan toward the top of a corporate pyramid. Career advancement produces not only increased status, but also a new job with new challenges and new responsibilities. Work never gets dull as long as there is room up on the organizational pyramid for this employee.

Unfortunately, there is only so much room at the top of the corporation, unless it continues to expand in size. Furthermore, there are many “glass ceilings” related to various discriminatory categories (gender, race, ethnicity, disabilities, etc.). A young woman, fresh out of a highly successful college career, assumes that she will move rapidly to the top of the organization, only to bang into a series of glass ceilings. She feels betrayed and soon either falls into a state of depression and a sense of powerlessness or looks for other pursuits, including the initiation of her own business (Hardesty, 1987). If the organization ceases to grow or even downsizes, there is little room at the top for a competent person. Mergers, acquisitions, and alliances make movement up the inclined plane of the pyramid even more unpredictable and perilous.

Driver and Brousseau’s second career path (the “Steady State” career concept) is also traditional—but it is often overlooked as a viable career model. This is the steady state path which is traveled by those who are essentially doing the same job when they are 50 or 60 years old as they were doing in their 20s and 30s. On the one hand, we have day laborers and migrant workers who spend their entire life digging ditches or picking fruit. There also are family farmers, craftspeople, and artists, who chose to direct efforts throughout their life to a specific task that requires unique expertise and extensive experience. The steady state career path is also populated by professionals—physicians, architects, accountants, engineers, technicians—who receive extensive education and training, usually resulting in a diploma and certification.

The major challenge for these steady state workers during the 20th century concerned stagnation and burnout. How does a school teacher continue to be excited about her students after 40 years? What keeps a nurse focused on her work after delivering many babies over 35 years? Why wouldn’t the cabinet maker “rest on his laurels” after building a strong reputation and making good money for each of his works of art? During the second decade of the 21st century, there is an additional challenge: the steady state is no longer very steady. This second career path requires stability—a society in which change in tastes and needs is a slow (even organic) process. Today, there is little stability in any sector of Western societies. The worlds of education, nursing and cabinet-making are changing as a result of shifting customer needs, new technologies, and economic crises. Can anyone expect, realistically, to be doing the same job for 30 or 40 years? Can we expect organizations and regulatory agencies to hold still while we perform our professional job?