We explained to you the importance of being clear about your values and how that can help you with your career investigation and your career decision-making. We then gave you some exercises to do to help you to reveal and to recognize the values that may have been demonstrated throughout your career so far. When you did those exercises you might have found it easy to put names to the values that you've identified, but you may not have done. And so, what we're going to cover in this video will maybe help you to do that more
effectively. One of the things we're going to look at is some of the frameworks that other people have
identified for career values. So that might give you some ideas of the, the names that you can use for things that are important to you. Quite often in the work we do with clients, we spend quite a bit of time helping them to articulate what is important to them in their careers. Sometimes they come in thinking they know
already, but often what they've thought about is a little bit ambiguous and vague, and not really useful in terms of investigation. So we spend time helping them to articulate it more clearly. And so that's what we're going to try and do today by showing you a number of different frameworks of values that have been identified by other people. And in the second part of this video, we're also going to talk about how you compare the
relative importance of these different values so that you can prioritize them when you're making decisions about careers. So many researchers have tried to categorize and identify what is important to human beings, what their needs are, what their motivations are, what their goals are. And each group of researchers have come up with different sets of values, different numbers of values.
So we're gong to introduce a few here just to illustrate what people have come up with. Many of these researchers have also tried to develop tools to help people work with these values. Sometimes in the form of questionnaires or interest inventories or the, what are called psychometric tools. Now these can be quite useful, for some people, in terms of identifying what is important to them and to be able to prioritize them, but you don't actually need to fill in the questionnaire to work that out for yourself. And in some ways, it may be more useful for you in the long term to take the long route and actually work these things out for yourself.
Because as we said earlier on, your values may change over time; every experience you have will change you slightly. So if you have to complete the questionnaire every job, for every job move that you make, that's
going to get slightly cumbersome and quite expensive. And so if you can develop the skills or be able to identify and to evaluate your own career needs and values, then that will actually save you time in the long
run. One of the frameworks that has been developed is called self-determination theory. This was developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan in about 2000, and it contains three intrinsic motivations all human beings are known to experience. One is a need for competence, the feeling that you are able to control your
environment, that you have the skills you need to master the tasks that face you. The next one is relatedness, the feeling that you are connected to the people around you, that you belong to particular groups. And the final one is autonomy, the feeling that you can make choices about your career or whatever is happening to you, that you have some kind of control over your life.
Now it's an interesting point that whenever you start a new job you will automatically experience a decrease in these needs. You'll feel less competent, you'll feel less connected because it's all new people, and you'll
feel less autonomy because you haven't yet got to the stage where you can make choices about what you
do. Bear that in mind when you start a new job. So the next theory we're going to talk briefly about is the theory of work adjustment. This was developed by Rene Dawis and Lloyd Lofquist from the University of Minnesota in about 1960, and have been worked on subsequently. The theory of work adjustment looks at how satisfactory a employee is to their employer based on how well their abilities match the requirements of the job. And it also looks at how satisfied an employee is with their employer, based on how well their values match the reinforces of their working environment. In this theory, they identify six key values, which are very common. And some of them are similar to the ones we've already talked about. Those values are achievement, the sense that you're making progress, that you're getting a sense of accomplishment in what you're doing. Comfort, the idea that you're not too stressed, not yet too bored by what you do. Status, the idea that you're getting praise and recognition, for what you do. Altruism, the idea that you're feeling a
sense of harmony with the people that you're working with, and also a sense that you're serving others.
Safety, the sense that there is an element of predictability and stability about your working environment.
And again, autonomy, the fact that you get to make choices. One of the really interesting things about this theory is the idea of adjustment. It doesn't assume that your fit with the job will be perfect from the start.
That it will be okay, but actually as you go along, you might need to make adjustments to yourself, so that you better suit the environment, or you might need to make adjustments to the environment so it better suits yourself. And that's something we sometimes talk about with clients, this idea of they don't just have to leave a job because it's not perfect. But maybe they can change something about their job so that it becomes more perfect. So, the next framework is Schein's Career Anchors. This was developed by Edgar Schein from
MIT in around about the 1970s. Now these were developed specifically in relation to careers rather than
the more general needs which some of the early frameworks addressed. And there are eight of them. The first one is technical or functional competence, the idea of becoming an expert or a specialist in something, so gaining expert or specialist knowledge in a particular area, going deeper into something. The next one is general managerial competence. This is more about having overall charge of something, maybe seeing the bigger picture, or organizing or facilitating activities or people. The next couple we've come across before,
one is autonomy and independence, and the next one is security and stability. The final four are a little bit different. The first one is entrepreneurial or creativity, and this is about the desire to start things up and start new things and take risks within your career. The next one is service or dedication to a cause, the idea of doing something worthwhile with your life that helps other people. The next one is pure challenge, the idea
of wanting constant stimulation, change and novelty within your career. And then finally lifestyle flexibility,
the idea of having a balance between your working roles and other roles in your life. So we've progressively built the needs up from three to eight. We can take it further. In 1994, Martin Ford and CW Nichols
proposed a taxonomy of human needs which included 24 different needs that they identified.
Now, we've introduced you to these various frameworks, not because we think any one is better than any other, but we actually think it's quite useful for you to see a number of different ways of describing what's important to people so that you can work out for yourself what is important for you. So feel free to pick and choose from the different things that we talked about the words and descriptions that make most sense to you and to apply to your values. You may not be sure exactly how many values to include, so here's a little guide. Generally speaking, the earlier on in the decision making process, the early filtering stages, it's better to work with just a few, three or four, values just to get yourself closer to an answer. And that's also true if you're thinking more about the long term career decisions.
It's easier to work with just a few values, some of the really port, important values to think about your longer term career planning. However when it comes to thinking about specific job choices, choosing between one job or another, sometimes then it's useful to include more values within that list so that you get a more fine-grained appraisal of the difference between different options. But here's a little word of warning. If you're using more than say, four values don't try to do it all in your head. Use some kind of structured process to
help you evaluate how important these things are, and what information you're getting back about different careers, relating to those values. Otherwise it's too much to keep in your head at any one time. And it could be something as simple as just writing a pros and cons list for each option, relating to your values.
And I'm going to talk through a number of different methods that you can use. You'll also find on the page's link to this week, some help around those different methods. So one method is categorizing, just putting the different values into different categories based on their level of importance. Just as, for example, when recruiters are writing a person's specifications they often put their requirements into essential and desirable.
It may be helpful to be a little bit more sophisticated in that, so rather than just two categories, let's think about four. So the first category is critical. Now you, these are the things that are really deal breakers.
If these are not satisfied to the extent that you want them to be satisfied there is no point in looking any further at this option. The next category is important. Okay, there's some flexibility around these values.
You're still likely to be satisfied but maybe you're more flexible about the extent to which they're satisfying so you got more leeway on these areas. The next category is desirable. So these are things you'd definitely like
to have as part of your career and what you get from your career, but you are a lot more flexible about these and so if, if they're not there to the extent you want them to be, or even if they're missing a little bit then you could probably still live with it if everything else was okay. And the final category is optional. Now these are things that would be great if they were there, but you're not really going to miss them if they're not, as long as everything else is satisfied. So one of the things you might want to do is take the list of values that you've come up with, and see whether you can fit them into those categories. The next method, which is sometimes used in some of the psychometric tools we've talked about earlier, is called a forced choice. What you do here is you take each of your values and you compare them against each other in pairs. So say, for example, two of your values are work-life balance and creativity. You say, okay, let me compare work-life balance and creativity. If I had to choose between them, if it was one or the other but not both, which one would win? And then you do that for all of your values. You compare all of your values against all the other values to see which one would win. And then you see which one won most of the competitions and obviously that's
the top value. Another method is called progressive elimination. So, you start with your full list of values and then you work out which one is the first one you're going to drop. And it's a bit like voting people out of
reality TV shows. So, which of the values is the least important value, you, you don't mind losing? Okay, then you work with that list, and you work out what the next one is, and then what the next one is, and so on
until you have a more manageable number. Those are just three methods that you could use. There are others, but we'll stick with those for the moment. And you may want to use them to help identify what are the
most important values for you that you can share through your core contribution.
The next way of working with values that we're going to talk about we call ranging. One of the problems we often find with clients, when they're making career decisions, is black and white thinking. They will often think well, does this job have what I want, or doesn't it? And sometimes it's not whether the job has what you
want or not, it's how much does it have it. And so the solution is ranged thinking, thinking about what's the
acceptable range that satisfies that value in relation to this job. And this is a little bit more realistic because
it gives you some flexibility and room for adjustment in terms of changing the job to suit you or changing yourself to suit the job a little bit more. So let's give you an example. Say one of the things you want from
your job is the opportunity to interact with people. Now sometimes we, we get people who say, well, I, in my previous job I didn't interact enough people at all. So I want a job where I'm interacting with people a lot. And so, does this job have interacting with people as something that's part of it? And it's very hard to say, well, does it or doesn't it? A better question to say is, well, okay, what extent does it have interaction with people as part of it? And also, how does it vary from time to time within the job? So one thing to do is look for the maximum and minimum of the range for that particular value. So, at the time when the job is the most isolated, how often is it like that? You know, how few people will you interact with? Or how long will it be between interacting with people? And at its most interactive, what, what's the maximum end of that range? So what's the maximum number of people you interact with in a day or how long can you go without
interacting with people? And so once you've got the maximum and minimum, you've got an idea of
what the range of operation is for that particular role related to that value. Once you've worked out your own optimum range, you can then use this to inform your investigation of your various different options. So for example, you can then ask questions of people working within that profession or that particular area what's the kind of operating range of that value within their role? And that's going to help inform your future choices, because the bigger the overlap with your own operating range, the better the fit and the more likely you
are to feel satisfied and rewarded within that particular career.
So far, we've looked at several different theories of values. And now we're going to just spend some
time looking at a theory that acknowledges that our values or priorities can change over our working
life. That theory is called Kaleidoscope Careers and it was produced in 2005 by Mainiero and Sullivan.
Their argument is that career priorites change over time and then that prioritization is influenced by the interplay of three factors, or how they describe it, the ABC of careers. The ABC of careers are authenticity,
balance, and challenge. Authenticity is about insuring that your role and working environment are consistent with your values, ideals and sense of identity. Balance is about ensuring that you achieve an optimum equilibrium between work and non-work. And this could not just be a balance between work and family life, but between different work roles, for example. And finally, challenge is about ensuring that your working
life is stimulating and that you're progressing and developing. As you can see, we've used a pie chart to
illustrate the three core features of the Kaleidoscope Careers theory, namely authenticity, balance and challenge. And it might be that you now want to spend time drawing your own pie chart, for how those factors are balanced within your own current working environment. If you also want to, you could reflect
back to the lifeline activity you did at the start of this week, and perhaps draw pie charts for each
key stage of your career development, which you've highlighted on your lifeline activity. It's up to you.
The most important thing is that you spend time reflecting on how these factors might be pertinent to
you and how you could again use them to generate questions to ask for your future career direction. And we'll be giving you advice on how to do that later on.
effectively. One of the things we're going to look at is some of the frameworks that other people have
identified for career values. So that might give you some ideas of the, the names that you can use for things that are important to you. Quite often in the work we do with clients, we spend quite a bit of time helping them to articulate what is important to them in their careers. Sometimes they come in thinking they know
already, but often what they've thought about is a little bit ambiguous and vague, and not really useful in terms of investigation. So we spend time helping them to articulate it more clearly. And so that's what we're going to try and do today by showing you a number of different frameworks of values that have been identified by other people. And in the second part of this video, we're also going to talk about how you compare the
relative importance of these different values so that you can prioritize them when you're making decisions about careers. So many researchers have tried to categorize and identify what is important to human beings, what their needs are, what their motivations are, what their goals are. And each group of researchers have come up with different sets of values, different numbers of values.
Because as we said earlier on, your values may change over time; every experience you have will change you slightly. So if you have to complete the questionnaire every job, for every job move that you make, that's
going to get slightly cumbersome and quite expensive. And so if you can develop the skills or be able to identify and to evaluate your own career needs and values, then that will actually save you time in the long
run. One of the frameworks that has been developed is called self-determination theory. This was developed by Edward Deci and Richard Ryan in about 2000, and it contains three intrinsic motivations all human beings are known to experience. One is a need for competence, the feeling that you are able to control your
environment, that you have the skills you need to master the tasks that face you. The next one is relatedness, the feeling that you are connected to the people around you, that you belong to particular groups. And the final one is autonomy, the feeling that you can make choices about your career or whatever is happening to you, that you have some kind of control over your life.
feel less autonomy because you haven't yet got to the stage where you can make choices about what you
do. Bear that in mind when you start a new job. So the next theory we're going to talk briefly about is the theory of work adjustment. This was developed by Rene Dawis and Lloyd Lofquist from the University of Minnesota in about 1960, and have been worked on subsequently. The theory of work adjustment looks at how satisfactory a employee is to their employer based on how well their abilities match the requirements of the job. And it also looks at how satisfied an employee is with their employer, based on how well their values match the reinforces of their working environment. In this theory, they identify six key values, which are very common. And some of them are similar to the ones we've already talked about. Those values are achievement, the sense that you're making progress, that you're getting a sense of accomplishment in what you're doing. Comfort, the idea that you're not too stressed, not yet too bored by what you do. Status, the idea that you're getting praise and recognition, for what you do. Altruism, the idea that you're feeling a
sense of harmony with the people that you're working with, and also a sense that you're serving others.
Safety, the sense that there is an element of predictability and stability about your working environment.
That it will be okay, but actually as you go along, you might need to make adjustments to yourself, so that you better suit the environment, or you might need to make adjustments to the environment so it better suits yourself. And that's something we sometimes talk about with clients, this idea of they don't just have to leave a job because it's not perfect. But maybe they can change something about their job so that it becomes more perfect. So, the next framework is Schein's Career Anchors. This was developed by Edgar Schein from
MIT in around about the 1970s. Now these were developed specifically in relation to careers rather than
the more general needs which some of the early frameworks addressed. And there are eight of them. The first one is technical or functional competence, the idea of becoming an expert or a specialist in something, so gaining expert or specialist knowledge in a particular area, going deeper into something. The next one is general managerial competence. This is more about having overall charge of something, maybe seeing the bigger picture, or organizing or facilitating activities or people. The next couple we've come across before,
one is autonomy and independence, and the next one is security and stability. The final four are a little bit different. The first one is entrepreneurial or creativity, and this is about the desire to start things up and start new things and take risks within your career. The next one is service or dedication to a cause, the idea of doing something worthwhile with your life that helps other people. The next one is pure challenge, the idea
of wanting constant stimulation, change and novelty within your career. And then finally lifestyle flexibility,
the idea of having a balance between your working roles and other roles in your life. So we've progressively built the needs up from three to eight. We can take it further. In 1994, Martin Ford and CW Nichols
proposed a taxonomy of human needs which included 24 different needs that they identified.
It's easier to work with just a few values, some of the really port, important values to think about your longer term career planning. However when it comes to thinking about specific job choices, choosing between one job or another, sometimes then it's useful to include more values within that list so that you get a more fine-grained appraisal of the difference between different options. But here's a little word of warning. If you're using more than say, four values don't try to do it all in your head. Use some kind of structured process to
help you evaluate how important these things are, and what information you're getting back about different careers, relating to those values. Otherwise it's too much to keep in your head at any one time. And it could be something as simple as just writing a pros and cons list for each option, relating to your values.
It may be helpful to be a little bit more sophisticated in that, so rather than just two categories, let's think about four. So the first category is critical. Now you, these are the things that are really deal breakers.
If these are not satisfied to the extent that you want them to be satisfied there is no point in looking any further at this option. The next category is important. Okay, there's some flexibility around these values.
You're still likely to be satisfied but maybe you're more flexible about the extent to which they're satisfying so you got more leeway on these areas. The next category is desirable. So these are things you'd definitely like
to have as part of your career and what you get from your career, but you are a lot more flexible about these and so if, if they're not there to the extent you want them to be, or even if they're missing a little bit then you could probably still live with it if everything else was okay. And the final category is optional. Now these are things that would be great if they were there, but you're not really going to miss them if they're not, as long as everything else is satisfied. So one of the things you might want to do is take the list of values that you've come up with, and see whether you can fit them into those categories. The next method, which is sometimes used in some of the psychometric tools we've talked about earlier, is called a forced choice. What you do here is you take each of your values and you compare them against each other in pairs. So say, for example, two of your values are work-life balance and creativity. You say, okay, let me compare work-life balance and creativity. If I had to choose between them, if it was one or the other but not both, which one would win? And then you do that for all of your values. You compare all of your values against all the other values to see which one would win. And then you see which one won most of the competitions and obviously that's
the top value. Another method is called progressive elimination. So, you start with your full list of values and then you work out which one is the first one you're going to drop. And it's a bit like voting people out of
reality TV shows. So, which of the values is the least important value, you, you don't mind losing? Okay, then you work with that list, and you work out what the next one is, and then what the next one is, and so on
until you have a more manageable number. Those are just three methods that you could use. There are others, but we'll stick with those for the moment. And you may want to use them to help identify what are the
most important values for you that you can share through your core contribution.
want or not, it's how much does it have it. And so the solution is ranged thinking, thinking about what's the
acceptable range that satisfies that value in relation to this job. And this is a little bit more realistic because
it gives you some flexibility and room for adjustment in terms of changing the job to suit you or changing yourself to suit the job a little bit more. So let's give you an example. Say one of the things you want from
your job is the opportunity to interact with people. Now sometimes we, we get people who say, well, I, in my previous job I didn't interact enough people at all. So I want a job where I'm interacting with people a lot. And so, does this job have interacting with people as something that's part of it? And it's very hard to say, well, does it or doesn't it? A better question to say is, well, okay, what extent does it have interaction with people as part of it? And also, how does it vary from time to time within the job? So one thing to do is look for the maximum and minimum of the range for that particular value. So, at the time when the job is the most isolated, how often is it like that? You know, how few people will you interact with? Or how long will it be between interacting with people? And at its most interactive, what, what's the maximum end of that range? So what's the maximum number of people you interact with in a day or how long can you go without
interacting with people? And so once you've got the maximum and minimum, you've got an idea of
what the range of operation is for that particular role related to that value. Once you've worked out your own optimum range, you can then use this to inform your investigation of your various different options. So for example, you can then ask questions of people working within that profession or that particular area what's the kind of operating range of that value within their role? And that's going to help inform your future choices, because the bigger the overlap with your own operating range, the better the fit and the more likely you
are to feel satisfied and rewarded within that particular career.
time looking at a theory that acknowledges that our values or priorities can change over our working
life. That theory is called Kaleidoscope Careers and it was produced in 2005 by Mainiero and Sullivan.
Their argument is that career priorites change over time and then that prioritization is influenced by the interplay of three factors, or how they describe it, the ABC of careers. The ABC of careers are authenticity,
balance, and challenge. Authenticity is about insuring that your role and working environment are consistent with your values, ideals and sense of identity. Balance is about ensuring that you achieve an optimum equilibrium between work and non-work. And this could not just be a balance between work and family life, but between different work roles, for example. And finally, challenge is about ensuring that your working
life is stimulating and that you're progressing and developing. As you can see, we've used a pie chart to
illustrate the three core features of the Kaleidoscope Careers theory, namely authenticity, balance and challenge. And it might be that you now want to spend time drawing your own pie chart, for how those factors are balanced within your own current working environment. If you also want to, you could reflect
back to the lifeline activity you did at the start of this week, and perhaps draw pie charts for each
key stage of your career development, which you've highlighted on your lifeline activity. It's up to you.
The most important thing is that you spend time reflecting on how these factors might be pertinent to
you and how you could again use them to generate questions to ask for your future career direction. And we'll be giving you advice on how to do that later on.
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου