Career communities - Wiley Online Library

Journal of Organizational Behavior J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004) Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com). DOI: 10.1002/job.254

Career communities: a preliminary exploration of member-defined career support structures POLLY PARKER1*, MICHAEL B. ARTHUR2 AND KERR INKSON3 1

The University of Auckland Business School, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand Sawyer School of Management, Suffolk University, Boston, Massachusetts, U.S.A. Department of Management and International Business, Massey University (Albany Campus), Auckland, New Zealand 2 3

Summary

This paper explores the concept of career communities: social structures that provide career support and frequently transcend the boundaries of any single organization. The theoretical background notes the convergence of a number of different perspectives from both career development and organization studies, pertaining to the social contextualization of careers. The methodology involved eliciting expressions of the (individual) subjective career from the members of three potential career communities, and then exploring (communal) intersubjective interpretations in focus groups. Our results suggest that career communities typically involve a hybrid of types rather than any one pure type. Preliminary support is found for the view that career communities facilitate career support, sensemaking and learning. The results invite further research into career communities and have implications for organizational behavior and human resource management, suggesting greater appreciation of the extra-organizational as well as intra-organizational communities in which careers develop. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Introduction Drawing from the theories of the intelligent career (Arthur, Claman, & DeFillippi, 1995), communities of practice (Wenger, 1998), and other relevant literatures, this paper introduces the concept of career communities and offers preliminary evidence to support it. Career communities are defined as ‘self-organizing member-defined social structures through which [individuals] draw career support’ (Parker, 2000). The concept was developed from a consideration of how people make sense of their careers in what many observers see as a ‘new economy,’ one that supersedes the stable social, political and economic

* Correspondence to: Polly Parker, The University of Auckland Business School, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand. E-mail: [email protected]

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Received 15 April 2003 Revised 31 October 2003 Accepted 21 November 2003

490

P. PARKER ET AL.

contexts of the industrial age. The emerging new economy depends on the creation and sharing of new knowledge and related individual learning (Senge, 1997). Moreover, the uncertainties of the new economic environment lead to careers unfolding in a fundamentally changed labor market (Cappelli, 1999). Individuals may be expected to assume greater personal responsibility for understanding their own needs, determining their own goals, and managing their own careers. Another effect of the new environment is a blurring of traditional foci on organizational behavior and human resource management. As a ‘new psychological contract’ between employer and employee unfolds (Rousseau, 1995) conventional employment loyalties become challenged by new projectbased (Blair, Grey, & Randle, 2001), contingent or contract-based (Allan, 2002; Gallagher & McLean Parks, 2001), and ‘casualized’ (Shalla, 2003) forms of work. Organizational behavior becomes not only behavior within organizations, but also behavior across organizations, and influenced by behavior outside of organizations. The view of the structured organization melds with a view of dynamic organizing (Weick, 1995) that involves both intra-organizational and inter-organizational relationships and sets new challenges for the study of both organizational behavior and human resource management (Arthur, Inkson, & Pringle, 1999). In these new circumstances there are advantages in paying fresh attention to the concept of ‘career.’ First, all definitions of career stress the effects over time of purposeful work behavior. A focus on careers thus replaces the assumption of organizational continuity that pervades most discourse in organizational behavior, and at the same time recognizes that most workers today adopt a long-term focus on their working lives, and order their short-term activities accordingly (Capelli, 1999). Second, a focus on careers emphasizes that the individual enacts his or her own work arrangements to achieve personal goals within the constraints and encouragements of a multifaceted environment (Weick, 1996). Rather than assuming that careers are created by powerful organizations, a career perspective suggests that people seek the power to develop their careers on their own terms. However, it is the argument of this paper that careers are not enacted alone, but interdependently and communally with relevant others (Weick, 1996, pp. 46–48), both inside and outside organizational boundaries, in what we term career communities. The concept of career communities acknowledges that career activity may extend well beyond the setting of a single employing organization. Consider, for example, the social, ethnic, and gender categories to which workers belong, the occupations with which workers identify, the education they undertake, the industries in which they gather experience, the homes and families in which they live, and the churches, voluntary societies, and leisure groups in which they participate. All of these may influence career behavior. All of these may also provide repositories of learning to which people may add or from which people may draw as their careers unfold. All of these provide potential members of career communities through which individuals may gain resources to develop their own career paths. If the study of organizational behavior or of human resource management is moving toward knowledge management, as some (e.g., Raich, 2002) would suggest, that study can benefit from a better understanding of people’s broader community attachments. This paper offers a step toward that understanding.

Theoretical Background: Convergent Approaches and Career Implications Theoretical perspectives relevant to this paper reflect a range of largely complementary approaches to understanding careers and their role in organizational behavior. Each of these approaches seeks Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

491

to contextualize individual career behavior within a larger set of social relationships. The approaches include the subjective career, the relational career, agency with communion, sensemaking, intelligent careers, inter-subjectivity, and communities of practice. Each of these approaches, outlined below, leads us to consider the place of community as a setting for career behavior.

The subjective career Whereas the objective career reflects the stream of positions, offices, statuses, and situations that serve as landmarks for gauging a person’s career situation (Barley, 1989, p. 49), the subjective career reflects an individual’s personal experience of the unfolding of the career. Through the subjective career, people interpret their experiences into a coherent pattern, which is often apparent in personal stories that capture the ‘richness, uniqueness and complexity’ of their lives (Savickas, 1997, p. 11). In an environment of continuous change, the subjective career offers the individual a particular strength as a stabilizing core or buffer generating internal guides for self-direction and personal responsibility in career decision-making (Hall, 2002). Even in highly innovative organizations that are committed to individual learning, unpredictability about the future applicability of that learning invites people to rely on these internal guides for their personal development (Weick & Berlinger, 1989). However, subjective careers do not occur in isolation. One of the seminal contributions of the Chicago School of Sociology was to emphasize the link between the personal meaning and identity derived by the career actor, and the wider social context in which that actor learns and develops (Barley, 1989). As we will show, career communities flourish when shared social environments become a context for, and a facilitator of, shared meanings, identities, and subjective career experiences.

The relational career A relational approach to careers assumes that careers are mediated by social processes (Hall & Associates, 1996) and emphasizes relationships and affiliative behavior over autonomy and individual mastery. It thus complements traditional theories that conceptualize career behavior purely as a product of individual action. For example, in new theories of mentoring, career actors are seen to have constellations of relationships (Kram, 1985) that enable career advancement and personal learning to be framed as two-way processes in which the individual moves through ‘increasingly complex states of interdependence’ (Kram, 1996, p. 140). Learning and development are supported by a variety of relationships, both inside and outside the workplace (Higgins, 2000; Higgins & Kram, 2001). A relational approach makes careers interactive with the person’s entire social environment (Hall, 1996, p. 342). In this way, the relational approach links to social network theory, where patterns of interdependent relations are interpreted through the roles that individuals play (for example, as authority figure, information source, worker, or gatekeeper) and the nature of the links between individuals, for example, regarding the provision of goods and services, the flow of information, the exercising of power and influence, or the development of affection (Wasserman & Galaskiewicz, 1994). To put it another way, network nodes representing people are thought of as being connected by lines representing interpersonal relationships (Scott, 1996). However, both the relational career and social network theory see larger patterns emerging from sets of interpersonal relations among relevant actors, but do not extend to focusing on community as a separate unit of analysis, which the concept of career communities seeks to do. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

492

P. PARKER ET AL.

Agency with communion Much contemporary popular advice about careers suggests that ‘we are all self-employed’ (Hakim, 2003) or that we are protagonists in a ‘free agent nation’ (Pink, 2002). However, critics of these views of the career as individualistic action have expressed concern at the narrow range of personal characteristics that are considered to be required for success, and the egocentric underpinnings that accentuate autonomy at the expense of connection (Du Gay & Salaman, 1996; Hirsch & Shanley, 1996). Perhaps most seriously, it has been suggested that in a world of flexible employment free agency induces a ‘corrosion of character’ of the kind that can only be expressed ‘by loyalty and mutual commitment, or through the pursuit of long-term goals, or by the practice of delayed gratification for the sake of a future end’ (Sennett, 1998, p. 10). The limitations of individual agency may be redressed through a parallel emphasis on communion. Communion expresses interdependence through an openness of oneself to, and integration of oneself with, the outer environment and other people. Communion evolves through a search for shared rather then personal meaning. Communion ‘tends not to assume personal accomplishment when events turn out favorably’ and—in contrast to agency—‘is less likely to be able to identify its contribution’ (Marshall, 1989, p. 285). In a self-organizing world, communion can assist the individual to shape the meaning of growth, learning, and development that are associated with his or her career, and can provide a shared context in which this may take place (Weick, 1996). There are good grounds for advocating ‘communion enhanced by agency’ as a sound basis for personal career development (Marshall, 1989).

Sensemaking about careers Weick’s conception of sensemaking offers a bridge between individual and community-based views of career by linking individual career outcomes with the inter-personal processes that give rise to them. According to Weick (1995, p. 18), sensemaking has seven key characteristics. It is grounded in the construction of individual identities that may be expected to drive career behavior. Sensemaking is also retrospective, so that whatever is ‘now at the present moment, underway will determine the meaning of whatever has just occurred’ (Weick, 1995, p. 27). Sensemaking further involves enactment, whereby people act ‘and in doing so create the materials that become the constraints and opportunities they face’ (Weick, 1995, p. 30). Thus, individuals enact not just their careers but also the social contexts of their careers. Enactment leads to a further property of sensemaking, in that it is social. Weick (1995, p. 39) sees a social substrate that shapes interpretations and interpreting, and notes that sensemaking ‘is never solitary because what a person does internally is contingent on others’ (Weick, 1995, p. 40). Sensemaking is also ongoing (Weick, 1995, p. 50) in that ‘people are always in the middle of things’ and that moreover, as life unfolds, our work activities trigger what we see and how we respond. Additionally, sensemaking involves cues that ‘are seeds from which people develop a larger sense of what may be occurring’ (Weick, 1995, p. 50). A final property of sensemaking is that it ‘driven by plausibility.’ Here, Weick borrows Fiske’s (1992, p. 87) imagery that sensemaking ‘takes a relative approach to truth, predicting that people will believe what can account for sensory experience but what is also interesting, attractive, emotionally appealing and goal relevant.’ Accuracy is not necessary, but what is necessary is ‘something that preserves plausibility and coherence, something that is reasonable and memorable, something that embodies past experience and expectations, something that resonates with other people . . . Sensemaking is about accounts that are socially acceptable and credible’ (Weick, 1995, pp. 60–61). Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

493

Intelligent careers Another relevant approach linking the individual career to the community is that of ‘intelligent careers’ (Arthur et al., 1995), which invites people to consider their career investments within the overall pattern of their unfolding lives. This distinguishes three distinct ‘ways of knowing’ that underlie career behavior. Knowing-why reflects individual motivation, values, and the construction of personal meaning and identity. It also includes attitudes to family, geographical location, and other non-work issues that affect career choice, adaptability, and commitment. These may change over time as experiences, interests, and family situations change. Knowing-how covers career-relevant skills and expertise, both explicit and tacit, which may be applied to a person’s work. In the traditional employment contract, these represent the person’s principal medium of exchange. They also provide a platform for further on-the-job learning and career growth. Knowing-whom includes the relationships that support a person’s unfolding career, such as contacts with family, friends, workmates, professional or industry associates, and social acquaintances. These relationships provide information, serve as a repository of the person’s unfolding reputation, and provide social and emotional support. The theory further proposes that the three ways of knowing interact over time, providing a dynamic picture of a person’s overall career investments. For example, (knowing-why) motivations or interests may promote the pursuit of further (knowing-how) skills and knowledge. Application of (knowinghow) job-related expertise may bring about fresh (knowing-whom) connections with others, who may in turn reinforce or weaken (knowing-why) identity and motivation. Altered (knowing-why) motivation may bring about subsequent investments in new (knowing-whom) connections or (knowinghow) learning experiences, and so on. Thus, issues of individual identity and knowledge (knowing-why, knowing-how) are continuously developed in close interaction with the individual’s social environment (knowing-whom). As we will show, these concepts provide a useful basis for considering how the dialectic between individual and community forces frames careers.

Inter-subjectivity Inter-subjectivity may be defined as shared consciousness among people who have overlapping cognitive, emotional, social, and/or physical interactions (Dreier, 1996). Within the social worlds in which they live and work, career actors share their own subjective experiences and use these experiences to make sense of other people’s (Borradori, 1994). The inter-subjectivity of the social spheres in which people participate shapes their personal meanings (Kim, 2001). Long-term career outcomes can be enhanced through the psychosocial support that people gain (Higgins & Kram, 2001). Career actors seek shared understanding with others. However, inter-subjective meanings are not necessarily aggregations of individual constructs (Dachler & Hosking, 1995). The dialectic between individual meaning and inter-subjective data is negotiated within each individual, between individuals, and between individuals and wider groups. There is an interplay between individual and collective levels of analysis, which allows for the greater understanding of each through the study of the other (Klein, Tosi, & Canella, 1999). Moreover, once this interplay has occurred the effects endure. Inter-subjective meanings, once negotiated, cannot be disaggregated back into individual components (Luhman, 1995). Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

494

P. PARKER ET AL.

Communities of practice A prominent example of inter-subjective understanding is that of ‘occupational communities’ (Van Maanen & Barley, 1984). One defining feature of these communities is the collective occupational identities that they foster, and which in turn shape members’ lives. Occupational communities reflect Tonnies’ (1963) concept of gemeinschaft, a sense of community experienced by people brought together through common interests—in this case common work interests—and a sense of tradition. Members become tied through rituals and language that provide a sense of cohesion and emphasize their distinctiveness from other kinds of worker (Lawrence, 1998). The features of collective identities, common work interests, and social cohesion suggest links with the three ways of knowing—knowingwhy, knowing-how, and knowing-whom—previously described. A closely related example of inter-subjective understanding is that of communities of practice, in which learning and knowing are conceptualized as stemming from participation in a shared practice (Brown & Duguid, 1991; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Wenger, 1996, 1998). Wenger (1998) describes three dimensions through which communities of practice function. These dimensions echo the ‘intelligent career’ ways of knowing outlined above. The dimension of ‘joint enterprise’ reflects the sense of shared mission or purpose behind a community’s activities, and can be seen as engaging with individual members’ knowing-why career investments. The dimension of a ‘shared repertoire’—of routines, ways of doing things, or more broadly of expertise—can similarly be interpreted as bringing in members’ knowing-how career investments. The dimension of ‘mutual engagement’ reflects the interactions among community members, and can be seen as tied to members’ knowing-whom career investments. Moreover, Wenger (1998) represents the three dimensions as being interdependent with one another, paralleling the interdependence among the three ways of knowing. It has been argued that communities of practice may evolve in a broad range of situations, and for a variety of purposes. For example, Brown and Duguid (1991, p. 49) observe that communities of practice often ‘incorporate people from outside’ the organization where the work is being performed, and Wenger (1998, p. 6) asserts ‘we belong to several communities of practice at any given time,’ and that people may participate on the periphery of one community while being centrally involved in another. These writers also note that community attachments will change as people’s circumstances change. In sum, communities of practice are dynamic, may transcend organizational boundaries, and serve the interests of their members.

Career communities From the review so far we suggest that membership of career-relevant communities is likely to be guided by the subjective career, to exhibit relational career behaviors, and to utilize communion balanced by agency. Membership can also be expected to involve persistent sensemaking and ‘intelligent’ career investments through the negotiation of inter-subjective meanings. However, it is a further step to consider the nature and mutuality of investments in the community as a whole by participating members. Career communities were previously defined as ‘self-organizing member-defined social structures through which [individuals] draw career support’ (Parker, 2000). The concept is closely related to that of communities of practice, described above, in that meaning and community are co-constructed in an ongoing process. However, we see career communities as providing explicit support for their members’ careers in accordance with the intelligent career framework previously described. That is, career communities serve as meeting grounds for the overlapping knowing-why, knowing-how, and knowingwhom investments of their members. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

495

Previous work by Parker (2000) and by Parker and Arthur (2000) has suggested a typology reflecting 10 possible ‘pure types’ of career community where interdependent career investments take place. These types cover what may be labeled as company (or organizational), industry, occupational, regional, ideological, project, alumni, support, family, and virtual career communities. Each type suggests an alternative basis for shared knowing-why, knowing-how, and knowing-whom career investments, as described in Table 1. Table 1. Career communities and related ways of knowing Community types Knowing-why

Knowing-how

Knowing-whom

Company

Identity and psychological well-being are linked to continuing participation in the company, and motivation is harnessed toward pursuit of company-specific goals

Learning agendas are guided by the company’s career paths and its training programs. Markets and competition, and the company’s strategic response, also shape learning opportunities

Involving fellow members of the same employer company, and often extending to social support through company employment benefits and company-sponsored leisure activities

Industrial

Identities are shaped by people’s industry affiliation. Motivation is influenced by the industry’s norms and its new developmental directions

New learning is informed by industry measures of expertise, where available, or by industry norms or recognized lines of industry development

Relationships are centered around a particular industry, for example retailing, construction, boat-building or winemaking

Occupational

Identities are developed through an implicit social structure of belonging with similarly qualified people— often tied to the prestige associated with professional roles

Explicit and tacit knowledge are increased through participation with occupational peers, ideally in a process of continuous learning

Colleagues are connected and relationships sustained through occupational or professional associations. Entry into these networks is typically qualificationor experience-based

Regional

Individual identities are largely ‘local,’ but attach value to the collective prosperity of the host geographic region. Entrepreneurial activities are likely to be regionally focused

Informal exchange of information occurs through regional networks. Experimentation may be encouraged to advance learning across the geographical area

Social support emanates from a regional network of relationships producing loyalty to a larger group, and a shared interest in regional reputation and success

Ideological

People are driven by their internal beliefs and values or by a desire to make a contribution to society. Personal ideologies underlie choice of and commitment to work

Personal values underlie learning agendas. These in turn seek skills and knowledge, allowing for greater inclusion or expression of ideological beliefs

Key relationships and support stem from others with overlapping interests or values. Mutual support in turn reinforces a collective sense of purpose

Project

Short-term identification is with a specific project and its outcomes. People are also motivated to use current projects to enhance their employability on future projects

Short-term skill investments relate to project success. Longer-term investments involve exchange of current expertise for new learning, both tacit and explicit, among project group members

Relationships unfold through time-bound work arrangements that provide information regarding future work possibilities and also transmit reputation

Continues Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

496

P. PARKER ET AL.

Table 1. Continued Community types Knowing-why

Knowing-how

Knowing-whom

Alumni

Identification with a particular shared experience, for example through high school, university, the military or joint participation in a memorable training program

Learning builds from a shared life or educational experience, perhaps supplemented by overlapping subsequent application of shared learning through work

The sustaining of relationships stems from past shared experiences. Social networks are also maintained to increase ‘social capital’ for future career contacts and mobility

Support

Identifying with, seeking approval from, and being motivated to both support and find support through others experiencing a similar life situation

The nature of the support situation shapes the learning agenda. Also, the process of learning with others may be given primacy over the content of the learning itself

Involves the active encour agement and approval of colleagues. Relationships sustain a loyalty to one another and to shared over lapping interests

Family

Shared identification through family membership is a critical driver for learning, support and security. Loyalty to the family serves to shape its members’ career directions

Role and learning direction defined by family agendas. Stretches from traditional home-makers to broader participation in family structures, family business, and inter-generational dynamics

Relationships sustain an immediate or extended family structure. A strong emphasis is placed on trust, loyalty, reciprocity, and sensitivity within the overall family group

Virtual

Identification with and the maintenance of careerrelevant connections with others, but without direct interpersonal interaction

Involving knowledge or knowledge acquisition activities in the absence of face-to-face interaction. Includes remote membership of professional societies, or participation in the World Wide Web

Incorporates people who are not physically present, but with whom interaction occurs through mail, tele phone or (increasingly) electronic mail connections

If careers can develop within such a wide range of community types, the manager or organizational behavior specialist may raise an important question: What role can the notion of the organization as a community play in career development? The answer is that even in an environment of dissolving boundaries and ‘boundaryless careers’ (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996) organizations still provide many individuals with an important career focus, a sense of identity, a support system, and development opportunities. They may also be well placed to nurture ideological, support, and project career communities. Organizations may further be involved with, and prospectively derive important learning from, wider occupational, regional, and industry communities. However, the role of the organization in career development is more subtle than traditional ideas about the organization as a community would allow.

Three Propositions The preceding theoretical review suggests three propositions. They are concerned with: (a) the career support that career communities provide; (b) the sensemaking that occurs between the career actor and the career community; and (c) the individual and communal learning that career communities promote. The concept of career communities does not subjugate the career to any particular institution, nor constrain the person to any single community setting. It differs from a relational view of careers by Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

497

paying explicit attention to the career support that members find within identifiable communities, rather than through sets of interpersonal relationships. This leads to: Proposition 1: Career communities provide career support to their members through the development of interdependent knowing-why motivations to work, knowing-how job-related expertise, and knowing-whom relationships. Career communities facilitate not only support but also sensemaking. That is, they provide not just a general sense of personal development in a supportive social setting, but specific opportunities for each individual to map the careers terrain, and to interpret it in relation to his or her own career path-finding. Sensemaking stems not only from the subjective self, but also from larger social systems that give rise to shared, inter-subjective, understanding. This leads to: Proposition 2: Career communities facilitate sensemaking through the sharing of knowing-why, knowing-how, and knowing-whom career investments among a career community’s members. Careers may be seen as processes of continuous learning involving successive attainments of personal mastery over new areas of work (Hall, 2002, pp. 116–120). In this expanded view of the career, mastery entails more than the traditional accumulation of (knowing-how) job-related expertise. It also requires ongoing (knowing-why) identity development and the utilization of (knowing-whom) relationships in working with others. As each person organizes his or her subjective world, others become involved in an inter-subjective system of mutual influence (Stolorow, 1994). The reflexivity between the subjective self and the inter-subjective community provides opportunities for both individual and communal learning, across a range of social situations. This leads to: Proposition 3: Career communities facilitate both individual and communal learning.

Research Design A research program was designed to explore what were anticipated to be three different kinds of career community. Each community was selected for certain distinguishing features, and each suggested a different composite of the ‘pure types’ described above in Table 1.

Research population The first study involved members of the Rose Foundation,1 a not-for-profit charitable trust that provided counseling and support to the victims of sexual abuse. This group was selected because, while on the one hand it could be seen as a straightforward organizational community, on the other hand its members had a deep ideological commitment to their work, making the likelihood strong of individual career support, sensemaking, and learning through an ideological community. There were different disciplinary areas within the Foundation that suggested a likelihood of finding evidence of more than one type of occupational community within the group. The relatively small number of employees in the Rose Foundation (19) afforded the opportunity for the investigator to work with everyone. The second study involved a group of ‘Pacific professionals.’ These were people of Polynesian descent who lived and worked in a professional capacity in New Zealand. Pacific people are a minority 1

The ‘Rose Foundation’ is a pseudonym.

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

498

P. PARKER ET AL.

ethnic group comprising 6 per cent of the total New Zealand population (Fakahau, 1998). This group added a cross-cultural dimension because of their distinctive collective orientation, which is markedly different from the more individualistic orientation characterizing New Zealanders of European descent (Traynor & Watts, 1992). Furthermore, ethnic minority groups have been recognized as people who cultivate broad networks across traditional boundaries in order to establish supportive developmental relationships with others (Ibarra, 1995). The participants were all New Zealand residents who worked in the public sector throughout the country and were attending a leadership development program. It was anticipated that religious, ethnic, and/or family commitments would override more traditional organizational or occupational career orientations and communities. The third study involved ‘interim managers,’ selected because of the growth and significance of the contingent workforce (Gallagher & McLean Parks, 2001), and the likelihood of alternatives to organizational communities among mobile individuals with weak organizational ties. Interim managers are professionals, ‘who contract, often through an agency, to provide a client company with short-term cover, trouble shooting in an area of expertise, or completion of a pre-defined project’ (Inkson, Heising, & Rousseau, 2001). A hybrid of pure community types was anticipated because the interim managers were placed on project assignments by agencies, suggesting a possible tension between two overlapping ‘organizational communities,’ represented by the agency and the client company respectively. Because many of the sample group performed similar (accountancy) work there was also the possibility of occupational community attachments.

Organizational Context: Three Research Populations

The Rose Foundation The Rose Foundation is a registered charitable trust that provides 24-hour crisis callout support, telephone counseling, information and advocacy service, and ongoing therapeutic counseling for the victims of sexual assault. Environmental forces, particularly recent regulatory and funding changes, had culminated in a need for a radical transformation from an organizational culture based on feminist values (aimed simultaneously at personal healing and effecting social change) to more of a ‘bottom line’ business model. The management team recognized a need to align the past culture (supported by basic assumptions of a participative, feminist, dialogue) with the work group of the future. An essential step to build a frame for the future was to acknowledge individuals’ values and to assess their congruence with the mission and values of the organization. Pacific Professionals The Pacific professionals were members of ethnic communities such as Samoans, Tongans, and the Cook Islanders who had settled in Auckland, New Zealand, the city with the largest (immigrant) Polynesian population in the world. Pacific peoples share a common bond as migrants. The participants were all employees within the public sector and also leaders within their respective communities. They had been invited to attend a leadership development program that extended over 1 year and occurred in three geographical locations. The process whereby Polynesians acculturate in a Western society required retention of significant elements of their own traditions and identity. In working toward providing leadership to overcome stereotyping resulting from the generally low socio-economic status of their people, these leaders focused on the key cultural norms of religion and extended family orientations. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

499

Interim Managers The interim managers, or leased executives as they are known in New Zealand, were all registered with the same major agency for temporary staff. They were selected randomly from a list of 300 supplied by the agency. Typically, they were experienced managers and professional specialists—many of them accountants—who had previously pursued traditional occupational and organizational careers. The shift to contract work was often the result of organizational restructuring or personal geographical mobility. However, many chose to remain as contract workers because of their desire for greater variety, more control over their lives, more time with their families, pursuit of their own businesses, etc. The managers were technically self-employed but relied for their livelihood on their skills relevant to, and reputation in, the agencies and client organizations with which they were involved.

Methodology Seeking subjective career data The first stage of the research design involved seeking subjective career data using the ‘intelligent career card sort’ (ICCS), an instrument developed specifically for this purpose (Parker & Arthur, 2002). The ICCS is derived using ideas originating in Q-methodology, where individually selected cards provide a point of departure for exploring the subjective self (Stephenson, 1953; McKeown & Thomas, 1988). At the time of the research the ICCS consisted of three sets of 40, 35 and 36 cards designed to represent possible aspects of knowing-why, knowing-how, and knowing-whom behavior, respectively (Parker, 2000). For each of the three ways of knowing, people were asked to select and rank order the seven cards that best described their present career situation. This methodology differs from traditional career assessment instruments, in that no direct assumptions are made about the items that people select. Rather, the items provide a starting point for subsequent articulation of their meaning and significance by the individuals involved (Parker, 2002). In working with individuals, the next step after administering the ICCS would be to ‘elicit the subjective career’ by helping a person to explore the underlying meanings associated with his or her selected items (Parker, 2002). In this research that step was deemed unnecessary as the purpose was to elicit inter-subjective data. However, the assumption was still made that people’s selections reflected their underlying subjective careers, and that personal meanings behind people’s ICCS selections would emerge through the dialectic between individual reflection on their choices and participating in subsequent group discussions.

Generating group data The next stage of the research design was to produce group data, that is to generate the inter-subjective data fundamental to the investigation of career communities. This involved first aggregating individual ICCS results by identifying the group’s most important selections, in terms of both frequency of selection and the relative rank order of individual card sort items (Parker, 2000). Following a precedent already established in the aggregation of Q-sort data (Carr, 1992), and based on the assumption that rankings followed a normal statistical distribution, a weighting system was used. The scale of weights ran from 0 (no selections) to 2 (unanimous selections of the item as highest ranked). In practice the emergent weights fell in a range from 0 to 1.22. The resultant data are summarized in Tables 2, 3 and 4. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

500

P. PARKER ET AL.

Table 2. Knowing-why: comparative rankings of selected items

I like to gain a sense of achievement in my work I like working in a supportive atmosphere I want to be challenged in my work I want to make a contribution to society I like being directly responsible for the results of my work I like to have a choice about the work that I do I like to work in an industry that matters I want to provide for my family

Rose Foundn

Frequency and weighting

Pacific profs

Frequency and weighting

2

73.7% 0.91 78.9% 1.12

1

70% 0.99

1

3

1 3

2 4

Leased Frequency and execs weighting 50% 0.70 46.8% 0.59

58% 0.85

36.8% 0.52 3

42% 0.62

3

48% 0.62

2

45% 0.63

4

35.5% 0.55

42.1% 0.62

Table 3. Knowing-how: comparative rankings of selected items Rose Frequency and Foundn weighting I enjoy working with people from whom I can learn I enjoy working in job situations from which I can learn I am open to fresh ideas

1

I enjoy working as part of a meaningful project I want to work as part of a meaningful project instead of a continuous job I an developing knowledge about my abilities I want to be a better leader I am becoming a more strategic thinker I pursue skills and knowledge specific to my occupation

2

73.7% 1.07

Pacific profs

Frequency and weighting

Leased Frequency and execs weighting

4

54% 0.61

3

40.3% 0.62

66.7% 0.88

3

60% 0.72

1

66% 0.82 50% 0.72 50% 0.77

4 2

3

66.7% 0.85 1 2

4

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

38.7% 0.67 48.3% 0.66

42.1% 0.55

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

501

Table 4. Knowing-whom: comparative rankings of selected items Rose Foundn I develop and maintain relationships with family I develop and maintain relationships with old friends I spend time with people from whom I can learn I develop and maintain relationships with customers and clients I develop and maintain relationships within my occupation I develop and maintain relationships for social support I seek to develop relationships to access new information I develop and maintain relationships with previous employers

Frequency and weighting

1 4

57.9% 0.98 36.8% 0.57

Pacific profs

Frequency and weighting

1

64% 1.17 68% 0.96

2

3 2

47.3% 0.66

3

42.1% 0.58

40% 0.50

Leased Frequency and execs weighting 1

69.3% 1.22

2

45.2% 0.64 35.5% 0.48

4

3 4

48.4% 0.63

36% 0.41

Focus groups were arranged to examine the group data. A key strength of focus groups is the encouragement the social setting provides for participants to explore the degree of consensus and diversity they share on a topic (Morgan & Kreuger, 1993; Morgan, 1996). It was anticipated this exploration could lead to further sensemaking (Weick, 1995) from which inter-subjective meanings emerge. Because examining the sensemaking process was an explicit purpose of the research, focus group methodology was considered more appropriate than any other. Therefore, in accordance with recommended guidelines (Stewart & Shandasani, 1990; Kreuger & King, 1998), three focus group interviews were conducted within each study in order to check for consistency of findings. Focus group participants in the three studies were drawn from those who had previously completed the ICCS. Each group had between four and seven participants. Each focus group meeting lasted around 2 hours and the time was allocated to ensure discussion of each of the three ways of knowing, and subsequently for consideration of the interdependence among them.

Eliciting inter-subjective career data The first author facilitated all focus groups. In addition, a co-facilitator, from a similar background to the group members, assisted with each group. This procedure afforded closer monitoring of body language and nuances of expression that were less obvious to an outsider (Kreuger & King, 1998). The co-facilitator’s familiarity with the group and the meanings behind the language they used provided the investigator with support during the focus group process, as well as in later data analysis and theme identification. Focus group data were audio-taped, and extensive notes were taken. Written transcriptions were developed, from which themes were identified with reference to the set of 10 ‘pure types’ of career community detailed in Table 1. This also allowed for the data to be analyzed within the framework of the three intelligent career ‘ways of knowing.’ Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

502

P. PARKER ET AL.

At the beginning of each focus group discussion the facilitator introduced the ranked and weighted ICCS results for that particular group. One advantage of presenting aggregated data as a point of departure was that participants could begin discussion around the most popular card sort selections, thus giving ‘voice’ to important data (Byers & Wilcox, 1991; Morgan, 1996). Another advantage was to discourage participants, perhaps under the influence of more vocal or powerful members, from starting out with any false levels of agreement or disagreement. Subsequent discussion was directed toward eliciting inter-subjective meanings associated with the selected card sort items, giving rise to the results reported below.

Results Descriptive inter-subjective data The data below summarize the unfolding focus group conversations for each of the three types of career investment among communities studied. They provide background evidence relevant to each of the research propositions: concerned with career support, sensemaking, and learning respectively. Knowing-why The participants from the Rose Foundation explained that their attraction to their first item, I like to gain a sense of achievement in my work, revolved around collective rather than individual achievement. They described how a sense of achievement was evident when they felt the Foundation was able to effect social change by supporting victims of sexual abuse to lead ‘normal’ lives again. At the same time there was a focus on a larger goal, which was articulated when the group spoke about their second selection, I want to make a contribution to society. Their goal was to change societal attitudes through political action—‘making a difference’ by ‘breaking the silence’ about sexual abuse, and encouraging others to do so. The next selection, I like to work in an industry that matters, evoked personal values that had drawn participants to work for the Foundation. The fourth selection, I like working in a supportive environment, reflected the therapists’ need for support from one another: ‘We have a collective focus and it’s emerged from individual needs. It’s the ‘‘I’’ and ‘‘we’’ dilemma—how can we do both simultaneously?’ For the Pacific professionals the first-choice item, I like to gain a sense of achievement from my work, was the same as that of the Rose Foundation counselors, but in contrast was linked to a goal of enhancing the position of Pacific peoples in New Zealand: ‘We want them to be the best they can be.’ This was closely allied to their second choice, I want to make a contribution to society, where ‘‘‘society’’ means our community.’ One participant described their position as ‘agents of change, working with a hard core bunch of kids that the school doesn’t want.’ As with the participants from the Rose Foundation, I enjoy working in a supportive environment (item three) was a necessary prerequisite to bring about their primary goal. As indicated earlier, Pacific peoples value togetherness and support. I want to provide for my family was the fourth rated item, and described to reflect the important role of family in the traditional values of Pacific peoples. In the case of interim managers, I like to gain a sense of achievement in my work was also rated most highly of all items. However, for this group ‘achievement’ had a much more individualistic connotation. They reported tension between achievement as determined by the individual and that expected by client companies, and said they often focused on their own interpretations. Because interim managers are expected to solve problems, doing so provided a sense of achievement and reinforced Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

503

positive self-esteem. This linked to the next item, I want to be challenged in my work. There was general agreement that ‘you wouldn’t be an [interim manager] if you didn’t like challenge,’ and although they wanted to choose the challenges they took on, they recognized that the choice of work was secondary to the choice to work. The sentiment that I like being directly responsible for the results of my work was also strongly expressed, and consistent with the project-based nature of their work. In sum, the interim managers’ motivations to work and career were much more individualistic and instrumental in orientation than those described by either the sexual abuse therapists or the Pacific professionals. Knowing-how For the Rose Foundation, the first-ranked knowing-how item, I enjoy working with people from whom I can learn, reflected the desire for a safe environment as a context for learning. Their second selection, I enjoy working on a meaningful project, was described as a way to work alongside others from whom they wanted to learn, and to extend themselves in the process. Participants related their third item, I am developing knowledge about my abilities, to their abilities to work in challenging situations, such as working alongside senior colleagues, or on varied case loads to develop broader occupational perspectives. Their fourth item, I pursue skills and knowledge specific to my occupation, reflected participants’ particular professional skills, but at the same time they valued working alongside others in order to learn more broadly, ‘so that we don’t short-change ourselves.’ Client cases often involved temporary combinations of therapists and counselors. The first selection of the Pacific professionals was I want to be a better leader, reflecting their immediate workshop focus on leadership. The second and third items were I am becoming a more strategic thinker and I am open to fresh ideas, both of which they applied in the focus group to the central problem of Pacific people’s advancement in society. A pattern emerged of a group who acknowledged that to effect their overall (knowing-why) aims of enhancing the position of their people, they required (knowing-how) leadership skills. Many saw that the way to do this was conveyed by the fourth card, I enjoy working with people from whom I can learn. This involved developing new ideas among their ethnic colleagues and gathering ideas from people of other ethnic backgrounds, notably European, with whom they worked. The most important knowing-how item for the interim managers was I am open to fresh ideas. This item was seen as a necessary aspect of maintaining their employability and ensuring that they retained a competitive advantage in the labor markets in which they participated. Their second item was I want to work on successive projects instead of a continuous job and their fourth item was I enjoy working as part of a meaningful project, indicating that project work and project-to-project mobility were principal means to pursue learning goals. The third item was I enjoy working in job situations from which I can learn. Taken together, these selections were seen as reinforcing the interim managers’ knowingwhy motivations for challenge and achievement. Knowing-whom Knowing-whom career investments offer special cues as to the location and functions of an individual’s career communities. Among the participants in all three studies, the most important knowingwhom item was I develop and maintain relationships with family. For Rose Foundation participants, their families provided the underlying support that enabled them to do their work. ‘The reason I’m here is because I can be supported as I contribute.’ Their second selection, I spend time with people from whom I can learn, was seen as occupationally grounded, and congruent with participants’ larger social agenda. The third and fourth items, I develop and maintain relationships for social support and I develop and maintain relationships with old friends, were used to emphasize the importance of receiving support from others who knew about the counselors’ work, and the knowing-why motivation to make a difference in society. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

504

P. PARKER ET AL.

When the Pacific professionals spoke about the item I develop and maintain relationships with family, they re-emphasized the importance of family in their lives. However, their notion of family was broader than the Western nuclear family concept, and could include people who do not share blood ties. The family was the source of people’s individual and collective identities and critical to their feeling of belonging. Their second through fourth rated items, I spend time with people from whom I can learn, I seek to develop relationships to access new information, and I develop and maintain relationships with customers and clients, were all used to emphasize the relational approach that underlies the collective orientations of these people, and that provide a social context for learning. Interim managers ranked the item I develop and maintain relationships with family first, and claimed that any disadvantages of their jobs were ‘more than compensated for from having a better relationship at home.’ Their second, third, and fourth selections indicated other aspects of important relationships. I develop and maintain relationships with old friends was used to describe how friends compensated for the transient nature of the interim managers’ work arrangements and provided ‘payback from years that you put into developing and maintaining these relationships.’ I develop and maintain relationships with customers and clients and I develop and maintain relationships with previous employers were seen as a natural outcome of the executives’ work performance and mobility, and reflected the managers’ reliance on these contacts for future work prospects.

Support for propositions Proposition 1 When asked about the links they saw across the three ways of knowing, participants in the studies offered distinctive sets of explanations. Although the primacy accorded to each way of knowing differed between studies, each set of explanations appeared persuasive. Members of the Rose Foundation based their career community in a (knowing-why) feminist ideological core that was explicit in their charter. Their attention to effecting social change emphasized the need to balance a tension between the individual ‘I’ and the communal ‘we,’ and focused an underlying question about how to pursue both agendas simultaneously. Members’ discussion of the interdependency among the three ways of knowing affirmed that the sharing of information and knowledge increased personal knowing-how expertise through knowing-whom relationships. ‘If I get the support I can achieve what I—and we—want through contributing to society. The ripple effect goes wider and wider and becomes a political effect.’ Similarly, the knowing-why motivation and values of the Pacific professionals were key drivers of their knowing-how skills and their knowing-whom relationships. They wanted to enhance the position of Pacific peoples in New Zealand, and placed particular emphasis on working with their youth. Their knowing-why desire for achievement and challenge was met by developing knowing-how skills, particularly in leadership, that enabled them better to contribute to the larger society. Leadership development brought them into closer association with others through knowing-whom relationships that reinforced the centrality of family in the Pacific culture and indeed of the culture itself. This in turn reinforced their knowing-why identity. The interim managers’ primary focus was on the bounded nature, in both time and scope, of the projects they worked on and the (knowing-how) skills that were involved in these projects. The projects met the interim managers’ knowing-why desire to achieve and to experience challenge in their work. Achievement enhanced their expertise and reputation, and added to their employability. Both reputation and learning were critical to their careers, and both were symbiotically connected to their knowing-whom networks. Because of the transient nature of their employment, the support of family and friends was important. However, for some, choosing work with less security provided for more Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

505

quality time with their families, thus further linking their knowing-how skill investments to their knowing-why family-related values. Because of the individualized and mobile nature of their employment, their career communities beyond family lacked the focus and concentration of the other two groups. In all three studies, participants experienced career support through shared knowing-why motivations, connected to overlapping knowing-how knowledge investments, and to knowing-whom attachments. For both the Rose Foundation members and the Pacific professionals, the communities studied provided direct support. For the interim managers, support from the community was more muted, but still clear. Proposition 1 appeared to be largely supported. Proposition 2 Since each focus group was asked to interpret the meaning of the aggregate ICCS data with which it was presented, the focus group discussions may be seen as exercises in sensemaking. Moreover, Weick’s seven characteristics of sensemaking were all in evidence in the discussions observed. For example: *

*

*

*

*

Sensemaking is grounded in identity construction. Explicit sharing of knowing-why drivers was an important aspect of the focus group discussions. For example, the Rose Foundation members were explicit about the reflexivity between individual and collective identity, and of the tension experienced in pursuing both simultaneously. For the Pacific professionals, a clear and strong sense of identity was fundamental for them to effect their work and act as role models for Pacific youth. Identifying as an interim manager enabled individuals to assume responsibility for their chosen work. The sharing of personal experiences with others appeared to reinforce both individual and collective identity within each of the three groups. Sensemaking has a retrospective focus. In the focus group discussions, participants reflected on their work and careers to capture jointly the realities of their lived experience and to clarify issues of current importance. For example, the Rose Foundation members felt a boost in motivation for their present work by reflecting on the previous work of the creators of the Foundation. For them, this aspect of sensemaking focused attention on the larger agenda of their work—to effect social change in society over time. Similarly for Pacific professionals retrospective sensemaking enabled them to note the relatively enhanced position of Pacific youth in New Zealand society, and to attribute some of that to their own efforts. Sensemaking involves enactment. Each group enacted its environment through the application of its distinctive knowing-why motivations and knowing-how expertise. Moreover, the focus group discussions clarified ways that members created situations that subsequently constrained them. For example, the interim managers’ penchant for project work constrained their ability to choose other kinds of work. The Pacific people’s commitment to work through family channels distracted them from considering other approaches. Sensemaking is a social activity. The focus groups provided a social occasion. The discussions demonstrated how social interaction facilitated the shared understandings that were in part brought to, in part developed through, the conversations that took place. For Rose Foundation members, the focus group discussions reinforced the frequently unexpressed need to give and receive support from one another, a process they saw as parallel with their work in society. For interim managers, the discussions facilitated a rare opportunity to share ideas with others who worked in similar— sometimes lonely—situations. Sensemaking is ongoing. The initial responses to the facilitator, and further elaborations, interjections, and overall energy brought to the focus group served to support Weick’s position that not only are people ‘always in the middle of things’ but that what they are in the middle of only comes to make sense when ‘those same people focus on the past from some point beyond it’ (Weick, 1995,

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

506

*

*

P. PARKER ET AL.

p. 43). A particularly pertinent example of this stems from the historical work of the Rose Foundation members mentioned above, who saw their respective contributions to their ‘cause’ as part of an ongoing crusade. Sensemaking is focused on and extracted by cues. In this case the cues came from the initial responses that group members provided to the items on the ICCS cards. These individual cues provided a point of reference from which members could pursue further understanding. For each group, the focus on cues and extraction of meaning paralleled other aspects of sensemaking. For example, the Rose Foundation members were reminded that their larger goal was to effect societal change and also that this was ongoing work effected in a social environment. The Pacific professionals reflected on how the social aspect of the focus interviews paralled the social aspect of their leadership work, and furthermore that this was also ongoing work. Interim managers appreciated the areas of overlap and differences that reinforced personal motivations to preserve their chosen way of working. Sensemaking is driven by plausibility. Evidence emerged from the coherence and reasonableness of the participants’ input into each group. The substantial sense of agreement that evolved among each set of focus group participants was, above all, evident in the discussions concerning the links across the three areas of career investment. It seemed that the plausibility within each of the three ways of knowing was reinforced when their dynamic interdependence was considered.

Thus, in a process congruent with the distinctive characteristics of sensemaking, the ability of participants to identify with and make sense of their communal ICCS data was enhanced through discussion of their career investments. Proposition 2 appeared to be clearly supported. Proposition 3 The links between the subjective and inter-subjective career data evident in the results already reported draw attention to the processes through which individuals and their communities inform one another. This view downplays assumptions of individual agency, and emphasizes wider social processes. As previously discussed, a prominent feature of these processes is communal learning. For the Rose Foundation, members’ data illustrated how learning the (knowing-how) skills to promote social change occurred through interactions in (knowing-whom) relationships. The sharing and application of their (knowing-how) skills and knowledge developed individual competence as well as promoting the work of the Foundation, thus reinforcing both their individual (knowing-why) identities and their shared identification with a larger purpose. The Pacific professionals had (knowing-why) motivation to enhance the position of their people. Similarly to the Rose Foundation participants, support from one another’s (knowing-whom) relationships—this time reinforced by a larger sense of family in their ethnic culture—provided encouragement for the learning of new (knowing-how) skills, most tangibly in the context of their communal leadership course. These skills could in turn be applied to further the professionals’ collective cause. For the interim managers, new (knowing-how) learning on each project, in communities based on client organizations and industries, facilitated the opportunity for movement to new projects, and these led to subsequent (knowing-why) challenges. Their learning and reputation developed through these challenges reaffirmed their sense of (knowing-why) identity—as ‘project’ professionals—in their careers. However, their (knowing-whom) networks appeared to be less strong, and were concerned more with personal clients rather than with occupational peers. In sum, while individual learning was evident in all three studies, communal learning was only clearly evident in two of them: the Rose Foundation and Pacific professionals. Among the interim managers communal learning was less evident. Perhaps this was because their kind of work had only recently become established, community attachments were not yet fully developed, and the (peer) community focused by the study was relatively weak in contrast with client- and agency-based Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

507

communities. Overall, however, there was considerable evidence of communal learning in the career communities studied, and Proposition 3 was substantially supported.

Discussion: The Future of Career Communities Limitations of this study The methodology used in this research is subject to two principal limitations, concerned with the subjective career and the use of focus groups respectively. Subjective career data—in contrast to objective career data such as salary and job level—presents ‘problems in terms of [both] validity and reliability of measurement’ (Stebbins, 1970, p. 42). Particular problems arise from the intervention of the researcher, and the constraints stemming from his or her interviewing skills, or research interests. Moreover, despite the widespread use of focus groups in social science research, it has been claimed that ‘an overarching theory of focus groups does not exist in the literature’ (Parent, Gallupe, Salisbury, & Handelman, 2000, p. 50). Focus groups elicit inherently subjective data, may be dominated by particular voices, and have limited generalizability. They are also subject to group dynamics: data belonging neither to individuals within the group, nor to the whole group, but stemming from discourses which emerge in a particular research context (Smithson, 2000). These limitations were moderated by the research method adopted. The use of the ICCS allowed for the generation of subjective career data, and inclusion of those data in focus group discussions, with minimal researcher intervention. Regarding the limitations of focus groups, Myers (1998) suggests viewing these as constraints of the focus group method rather than reasons to invalidate the research findings. In the research reported in this paper, the dominance of particular voices was in part controlled by the data that participants were asked to interpret, since this consisted of only the most important ICCS items across the sample investigated. The list of items also provided a means to bring people back to the key issues—under the initiative of the facilitator, the co-facilitator or any other member of the group assembled—after any particular voice had been heard. The reported research also suggests a number of directions for future studies of career communities, concerning their prevalence, their role in the development of identity, their influence over interpretations of career success, and their implications for organizational behavior and Human Resource Management.

Prevalence of career communities In all three of the studies reported, no ‘pure type’ of career community emerged. Rather, results from each study suggested a hybrid career community that could be described through the typology presented in Table 1. The Rose Foundation members appeared as an ideological type seeking to make a contribution to society, an occupational type learning through their shared roles, a support type in the encouragement they gave one other, and a company type in their collaborative work for the Foundation. Different combinations of pure career community types suggest themselves for the other two research groups: for Pacific professionals, ideological, family and support; and for interim managers, project, occupational and industry. Moreover, the typology identified in Table 1 was useful in describing the attributes of the groups examined, and may be similarly useful as a starting point for additional studies. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

508

P. PARKER ET AL.

These data suggest that at a time when the implicit rules underpinning employment and careers continue to change (e.g., Cappelli, 1999), people may become less likely to invest solely in organizational or company communities. Also, these communities are likely to evolve their own memberdefined guidelines (Zabusky & Barley, 1996), or, as their members move to new settings, may be re-created as alumni communities (Higgins & Thomas, 2001). As the importance of temporary, project-based forms of organization increases, so does that of the contributing communities within which new knowledge gets stored (Lindkvist & So¨derlund, 2002). Future research can productively explore both the range and functioning of diverse community attachments.

Community and identity development A further issue concerns identity development. In each of the three studies, there was evidence that participants’ identities were tied to the work that they did. For members of the Rose Foundation this involved their readiness to stand up against sexual abuse. For the Pacific professionals it involved identification with their own people, and working to support them. For the interim managers it involved providing valued professional services to their clients. However, these observations anticipate a larger question of identity development, which is seen as a critical aspect of individual adaptation as careers unfold (Morrison & Hall, 2001). A person’s identity is a social product, reflecting ‘the way the person sees him or herself and is seen by others in the context of a given social role’ (Hall, Zhu, & Yan, 2002). As a result, communities can place their ‘stamp of approval’ (Ibarra, 2003, p. 130) on their members’ desired identities. However, because any single community can tend to typecast, and new community opportunities can arise frequently, simultaneous participation in multiple career communities can provide additional channels for identity development. New community attachments can also ‘offer inclusion, provide a safe base, and replace [any] community that is being lost’ (Ibarra, 2003, p. 129). Unfortunately, there is a dearth of studies on the process of migration through communities and the significance of new attachments as careers unfold. More studies, particularly more studies that adopt a longitudinal approach by studying careers across time, would clearly be helpful.

Community-centered career success The studies reported here suggest that career communities had an influence over what their members viewed as career success. Rose Foundation members appeared to experience career success through providing a better service for their clients. Pacific professionals appeared to experience it in terms of their contribution to the advancement of their people. Interim managers appeared to experience it in terms of the success of the projects they completed, and of reserving time for their families. These suggestions are consistent with earlier work by Zabusky and Barley (1996) proposing that career success may be shaped by a ‘culture of achievement’ where success is measured by one’s peers, rather than by a ‘culture of advancement’ where success is measured by objective, rather than subjective, markers of career success. The suggestion that career communities influence subjective career success finds support in research by Eby, Butts, and Lockwood (2003). This provides strong evidence that people’s investments in each of the three ways of knowing that are evident in the dynamic of career communities—that is, of knowingwhy, knowing-how, and knowing-whom—contribute to perceived career success. Moreover, the evidence holds good for a relatively wide range of occupations and, at least implicitly, of community attachments. More work needs to be done to confirm the significance of community in these results, but there is a clear suggestion that we can benefit from a shift in our assumptions about career success—away from Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

509

those of individual agency tied to objective success and toward those of communal activity tied to subjective success.

Organizational support The Rose Foundation group members were all from the same organization and in their case the organization emerged as a meeting-place where group members could pursue shared ideological goals. The Pacific professionals were an inter-organizational group, and their purpose—to enhance the position of Pacific peoples—lay beyond that of any employing organization, though it could be practiced within each. The interim managers provided project work for the organizations that sought their services but identified with each another around shared occupational investments, and around the lifestyles and family opportunities that their work provided. While organizational behavior literature pays persistent attention to the influence of community-like groups within the setting of a single organization (e.g., Hackman, 2002), it has rarely extended the concept of community to situations that transcend such settings. This observation also applies to recent work on communities of practice (e.g., Driver, 2002), even though—as already noted—previous writers on that concept envisioned extra-organizational connections. The evidence here suggests that external community attachments are relevant to organizational behavior. Consequently, future research needs to ask more detailed questions about the processes and learning activities that those external attachments involve, and the consequences of these not only for careers but also for organizations and for the larger economic systems in which both careers and companies function.

The prospects for ‘organizing’ The Rose Foundation created career opportunities through which its members could express key values, and was itself a creation of the shared inter-subjective understanding of its members. The Pacific professionals shared a vision—to enhance the position of Pacific peoples—that lay beyond the vision of any employer organization. The interim managers preferred employment arrangements that transcended any client company’s purpose. In each case, transferable or ‘boundaryles’ benefits (Arthur et al., 1999) prevailed over organization-specific benefits. To a substantial degree, individuals set their own priorities and pursued them in communities of their own choice. The familiar statusdriven career architecture of fast tracks, competitive ‘tournaments’ (Rosenbaum, 1989), and relegation to ‘plateaus’ for lesser performers was largely absent. As career communities nurture their members’ separate but overlapping career agendas, the questions for organizations become less those of people recruitment and retention and more those of knowledge recruitment and retention, in a world where knowledge is dispersed far outside familiar organizational boundaries (Arthur & Parker, 2002). This does not mean that organizations have no role to play in the development of community-based career knowledge and its utilization in their activities. Managers may be interested not only that these communities exist but also in how useful they can be. Smart organizations seeking to retain employee commitment and harness career-related energy can draw on external community knowledge, help employees to foster such community attachments, and benefit from the support those communities provide to their members.

Directions for future research The idea of communities that transcend, rather than exist within, the boundaries of any single employer is relatively new to organizational research. The idea that those communities can provide support for Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

510

P. PARKER ET AL.

contemporary boundaryless careers—where individuals either exhibit or perceive the opportunity for career mobility—is also new. Pervious work has looked at inter-organizational networks, and identified benefits in possession of ‘loose ties’ or of external mentors (Higgins, 2000; Higgins & Kram, 2001). However, the concept of community support is fundamentally different, and suggests a level of social cohesion and continuity that network-based approaches lack. If people can find this kind of support, the preceding paragraphs also suggest the basis for larger and more systematic research efforts. We might ask not only how prevalent are career communities, but how do they differ according to differences in the host culture, and how rapidly can career communities self-generate in the light of less secure employment futures? We might also ask not only if career communities foster identity development, but what kind of stories do participants tell, how do those stories change over time, and how can career communities either foster or hinder efforts to promote greater diversity in the workplace? If career communities influence their members’ meanings of career success, how consistent are those meanings within a community, and what kind of differences will we find across communities? Turning to learning, what are the processes of individual and community learning that we might identify over time, how does each party influence the other, and with what consequences for the kinds of careers that we encourage people to pursue? Regarding support, what external economic or political forces are likely to moderate the support organizations can offer to career community learning? What does access to privileged career community knowledge mean for traditional views about individual loyalty to employer organizations? These are a sampling of the kind of new research questions that the concept of career communities invites.

Conclusion This paper has presented a new concept of career communities, and has provided preliminary evidence of its value through an analysis of our research data. Our evidence suggests that career communities provide a basis for career support, a context for individual sensemaking, and that they facilitate both individual and community learning. We therefore suggest that career communities provide a valuable function—one that any single employer may not be able to provide in a turbulent labor market. The research reported here raises further issues concerning the prevalence of career communities, their role in contributing to identity development, the subjective meaning of career success, the relevance of career communities to the way that organizations support careers, and how that support can lead to new opportunities for organizations through the external relationships that members’ career community attachments provide. Examination of career communities can also add to our larger appreciation of how careers fundamentally underlie the process of organizing as it unfolds over time, and across—as well as within—organizations. These issues suggest a broader research agenda around the fundamental concern of how career communities can support boundaryless careers. Finally, the data reported have implications for current conceptualizations of organizational behavior and its primary concern with the ‘here-and-now,’ where ‘here’ lies within employing company boundaries and ‘now’ relates to relatively immediate issues for each party to the employment contract. Notwithstanding the special status of the employing organization as a key community in its own right and as a prospective nurturer of extra-organizational communities, the data suggest that organizational behavior can benefit from adopting a broader, emphatically inter-organizational, frame of reference. Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

511

Acknowledgements We are indebted to Denise Rousseau and two anonymous reviewers for their feedback on an earlier version of this article.

Author biographies Polly Parker is Senior Lecturer at the University of Auckland Business School in New Zealand. She has recent publications in the areas of career and HRM, using the Intelligent Careers Card Sort for career counselling, and careers and IT. She also practices as a career and leadership coach. Her current research interests include dual career couples, dot.com careers, and leadership development from a careers perspective. Michael B Arthur is Professor of Management at Suffolk University, Boston, Massachusetts. He has edited and authored several books on career phenomena, including the Handbook of Career Theory, The Boundaryless Career, and a series of later works concerned with the nature and economic implications of ‘new careers.’ His latest work is concerned with the relationship between career behavior and the unfolding of the knowledge-based economy. Kerr Inkson is Professor of Management at the Auckland campus of Massey University, New Zealand. He has published extensively in organizational behavior, including studies of organization structure and of attitudes to work. In recent years he has focused on careers, particularly new forms of career, career self-management, travel and careers, temporary and contingent work, and the use of metaphor in career discourse, theory, and practice.

References Allan, P. (2002). The contingent workforce: challenges and new directions. American Business Review, 20(2), 103–111. Arthur, M. B., & Parker, P. (2002). Technology, community, and the practice of HRM. Human Resource Planning, 25(4), 38–47. Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. (Eds.). (1996). The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era. New York: Oxford University Press. Arthur, M. B., Claman, P. H., & DeFillippi, R. J. (1995). Intelligent enterprise, intelligent career. Academy of Management Executive, 9(4), 7–20. Arthur, M. B., Inkson, K., & Pringle, J. K. (1999). The new careers: Individual action and economic change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Barley, S. (1989). Careers, identities, and institutions: the legacy of the Chicago School of Sociology. In M. B. Arthur, D. T. Hall, & B. S. Lawrence (Eds.), Handbook of career theory (pp. 41–65). Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Blair, H., Grey, S., & Randle, K. (2001). Working in film: employment in a project based industry. Personnel Review, 30(2), 170–185. Borradori, G. (1994). The American philosopher: Conversations with Quine, Davidson, Putnam, Nozick, Danto, Cavell, MacIntyre, and Kuhn/Giovanni (transl. R. Crocitto). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a unified view of working. Organizational Science, 2, 40–57.

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

512

P. PARKER ET AL.

Byers, Y. B., & Wilcox, J. R. (1991). Focus groups: a qualitative opportunity for researchers. Journal of Business Communication, 28(1), 63–78. Capelli, P. (1999). Career jobs are dead. California Management Review, 42(1), 146–167. Carr, S. C. (1992). A primer on the use of Q-technique factor analysis. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 25, 133–138. Dachler, P. H., & Hosking, D.-M. (1995). The primacy of relations in socially constructing organizational realities. In D.-M. Hosking, H. P. Dachler, & K. J. Gergen (Eds.), Management and organization: Relational alternatives to individualism (pp. 1–28). Aldershot: Ashgate. Dreier, O. (1996). Re-searching psychotherapeutic practice. In S. Chaiklin, & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 104–124). New York: Cambridge University Press. Driver, M. (2002). Learning and leadership in organizations: toward complementary communities of practice. Management Learning, 33(1), 99–126. du Gay, P., Salaman, G., & Rees, G. (1996). The conduct of management and the management of conduct: contemporary managerial discourse and the constitution of the ‘competent’ manager. Journal of Management Studies, 33(3), 263–282. Eby, L. T., Butts, M., & Lockwood, A. (2003). Predictors of success in the era of the boundaryless career. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 689–703. Fakahau, T. (1998). Pacific Island People living in New Zealand—1998. New Zealand: Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs. Fiske, S. T. (1992). Thinking is for doing: portraits of social cognition from daguerreotype to laserphoto. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 877–889. Gallagher, D. G., & McLean Parks, J. (2001). I pledge thee my troth . . . contingently: commitment and the contingent work relationship. Human Resource Management Review, 11(3), 181–208. Hackman, J. R. (2002). Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Hakim, C. (2003). We are all self-employed: How to take control of your career. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Hall, D. T. (1996). Final reflections: long live the career! In D. T. Hall & Associates, The career is dead: Long live the career (pp. 337–345). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hall, D. T. (2002). Careers in and out of organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Hall, D. T., & Associates (1996). The career is dead: Long live the career. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Hall, D. T., Zhu, G., & Yan, A. (2002). Career creativity as protean identity transformation. In M. A. Peiperl, M. B. Arthur, & N. Anand (Eds.), Career creativity: Explorations in the remaking of work (pp. 159–179). London: Oxford University Press. Higgins, M. (2000). The more the merrier? Multiple developmental relationships and work satisfaction. Journal of Management Development, 19, 277–296. Higgins, M., & Kram, K. E. (2001). Reconceptualizing mentoring at work: a developmental network perspective. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 264–288. Higgins, M., & Thomas, D. (2001). Constellations and careers: toward understanding the effects of multiple developmental relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22, 223–247. Hirsch, P., & Shanley, M. (1996). The rhetoric of boundaryless—or how the newly empowered managerial class bought into its own marginalization. In M. B. Arthur, & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era (pp. 218–233). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ibarra, H. (1995). Race, opportunity and diversity of social circles in managerial networks. Academy of Management Journal, 38(3), 673–703. Ibarra, H. (2003). Working identity. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Inkson, K., Heising, A., & Rousseau, D. M. (2001). The interim manager: prototype of the twenty-first century worker? Human Relations, 54(3), 259–285. Kim, B. (2001). Social constructivism. Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching, and technology. http:// itstudio.coe.uga.edu/ebook/Social Constructivism.htm [23 August 2003]. Klein, K. J., Tosi, H., & Canella A. J., Jr. (1999). Multilevel theory building: benefits, barriers, and new developments. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 243–248. Kram, K. R. (1985). Mentoring at work: Developmental relationships in organizational life. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman. Kram, K. E. (1996). A relational approach to career development. In D. T. Hall & Associates. The career is dead: Long live the career (pp. 132–157). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Kreuger, R. A., & King, J. A. (1998). Involving community members in focus groups. In D. L. Morgan, & R. A. Kreuger (Eds.), Involving community members in focus groups: The focus group kit. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

CAREER COMMUNITIES

513

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Lawrence, T. B. (1998). Examining resources in an occupational community: reputation in Canadian forensic accounting. Human Relations, 51, 1103–1131. Lindkvist, L., & So¨derlund, J. (2002). What goes on in projects: on goal-directed learning processes. In K. SahlinAndersson, & A. So¨derholm (Eds.), Beyond project management: New perspectives on the temporary– permanent dilemma (pp. 278–291). Copenhagen: Copenhagen Business School Press. Luhman, N. (1995). Social systems. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Marshall, J. (1989). Re-visioning career concepts: a feminist invitation. In M. B. Arthur, D. T. Hall, & B. S. Lawrence (Eds.), Handbook of career theory (pp. 275–291). New York: Cambridge University Press. McKeown, B., & Thomas, D. (1988). Q methodology: Quantitative applications in the social sciences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review Sociology, 22, 129–152. Morgan, D. L., & Kreuger, R. A. (1993). When to use focus groups and why. In D. L. Morgan (Ed.), Successful focus groups: Advancing the state of the art (pp. 3–19). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Morrison, R. W., & Hall, D. T. (2001). A proposed model of individual adaptability. Working paper, Boston University, Boston, MA. Myers, G. (1998). Displaying opinions: topics and disagreement in focus groups. Language in Society, 27, 85–111. Parent, M., Gallupe, R. B., Salisbury, D., & Handelman, J. M. (2000). Information and Management, 38(1), 47–58. Parker, H. L. P. (2000). Career communities. Doctoral thesis, University of Auckland, New Zealand. Parker, P. (2002). Working with the intelligent career model. Journal of Employment Counseling, 39(2), 83–96. Parker, P., & Arthur, M. B. (2000). Careers, organising and community. In M. Peiperl, M. B. Arthur, R. Goffee, & T. Morris (Eds.), Career frontiers: New conceptions of working lives (pp. 99–121). London: Oxford University Press. Parker, P., & Arthur, M. B. (2002). Bringing ‘new science’ into careers research. M@n@gement, 5(1), 105–125. Pink, D. (2002). Free agent nation: The future of working for yourself. New York: Warner. Raich, M. (2002). HRM in the knowledge-based economy: is there an afterlife? Journal of European Industrial Training, 26(1), 269–273. Rosenbaum, J. E. (1989). Organizational career systems and employee misperceptions. In M. B. Arthur, D. T. Hall, & B. S. Lawrence (Eds.), Handbook of career theory. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Rousseau, D. M. (1995). Psychological contracts in organizations: Understanding written and unwritten agreements. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Savickas, M. L. (1997). The spirit in career counseling: fostering self-completion through work. In D. P. Bloch, & J. R. Lee (Eds.), Connections between spirit and work in career development (pp. 3–25). Palo Alto, CA: DavisBlack. Scott, J. (1996). A toolkit for social network analysis. Acta Sociologica, 39, 211–216. Senge, P. M. (1997). Communities of leaders and learners. Harvard Business Review, 75(5), 30–32. Sennett, R. (1998). The corrosion of character: The personal consequences of work in the new capitalism. New York: Norton. Shalla, V. (2003). Part-time shift: the struggle over the casualization of airline customer sales and service agent work. Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 40(1), 93–110. Smithson, J. (2000). Using and analyzing focus groups: limitations and possibilities. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 3(2), 103–119. Stebbins, R. A. (1970). Career: the subjective approach. Sociology Quarterly, 11, 32–49. Stephenson, W. (1953). The study of behavior: Q-technique and its methodology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Stewart, D. W., & Shandasani, P. N. (1990). Focus groups: Theory and practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Stolorow, R. D. (1994). Subjectivity and self psychology. In R. D. Stolorow, G. Atwood, & B. Brandchaft (Eds.), The inter-subjective perspective (pp. 31–39). North vale, NJ: Jason Aronson. Tonnies, F. (1963). Community and society ¼ Gemeimschaft und Gesellschaft. New York: Harper & Row. Traynor, W. J., & Watts, W. R. (1992). Management development in the Pacific during the 1990s: how to survive with coconuts. Journal of Management Development, 11(2), 67–69. Van Maanen, J., & Barley, S. R. (1984). Occupational communities: culture and control in organizations. In B. M. Staw (Ed.), Research in organizational behavior (Vol. 6, pp. 287–365). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press. Wasserman, S., & Galaskiewicz, J. (1994). Advances in social network analysis: Research in the social and behavioral sciences. London: Sage.

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)

514

P. PARKER ET AL.

Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Weick, K. (1996). Enactment and the boundaryless career: organising as we work. In M. B. Arthur, & D. M. Rousseau (Eds.), The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational erd (pp. 40– 57). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Weick, K. E., & Berlinger, L. R. (1989). Career improvisation in self-designing organizations. In M. B. Arthur, D. T. Hall, & B. S. Lawrence (Eds.), Handbook of career theory (pp. 313–328). New York: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E. (1996). Communities of practice: the social fabric of a learning organization. Healthcare Forum, 39(4), 20–26. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press. Zabusky, S. E., & Barley, S. R. (1996). Redefining success: ethnographic observations on the careers of technicians. In P. Osterman (Ed.), Broken ladders: Managerial careers in the new economy (pp. 185–214). New York: Oxford University Press.

Copyright # 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

J. Organiz. Behav. 25, 489–514 (2004)