Linear and Nonlinear Career Models

Abstract

The communicative dimensions of career models have been insufficiently explored in contemporary career literature. Linear or bureaucratic career models dominate career research, metaphors, paradigms, and ideologies while maintaining career myths. These myths suggest the possibility of flexibility and individualized routes to “success” in organizational systems incapable of offering such versatility. Nonlinear career models offer suggestive metaphors for re-visioning careers and the promise of personalized definitions of success, control, and growth. Nonlinear approaches reconfigure career concepts to incorporate acceptance of individual needs and communal values consonant with demographic and structural societal changes.

Women’s skills and career advancement: a review of gender (in)equality in an accounting workplace

“…In traditional career models, success is defined as the 'summit of the organizational hierarchy' from the bottom to the top (Buzzanell & Goldzwing, 1991). Women are unwilling to choose career-oriented jobs because they might need to temporarily leave to care for their families (Buzzanell & Goldzwing, 1991, p. 745).…”

Context Matters

“…Ciulla (2000), for example, noted how differing values and conceptions of work shape individual career behaviors and social norms. Similarly, Buzzanell and Goldzwig's (1991) classic work on the relation of language and spatial orientations to career success reports that although most career paths are described as linear journeys "up" corporate ladders, nonlinear routes better present most people's experiences. Yet, because such alternative trajectories do not align with the dominant career narrative, they are usually devalued and discouraged (Buzzanell & Goldzwig, 1991).…”

“…Yet career discourses help define what counts as meaningful, acceptable, and/or attainable work (Cheney et al, 2008) within particular contexts, concordantly informing recommended career actions and outcomes (Dries, 2011). Career outcomes affect quality of life (Cheney et al, 2008), social mobility (Buzzanell & Goldzwig, 1991), social justice (Dougherty, 2011) and employee engagement, and are often linked to turnover and organizational productivity (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002). Career outcomes affect quality of life (Cheney et al, 2008), social mobility (Buzzanell & Goldzwig, 1991), social justice (Dougherty, 2011) and employee engagement, and are often linked to turnover and organizational productivity (Harter, Schmidt, & Hayes, 2002).…”

“…People often attach strong ideological judgments to individualized career myths and idealized linear pathways even though such judgments may not hold across contexts or groups (Berkelaar & Buzzanell, 2015;Buzzanell & Goldzwig, 1991). People often attach strong ideological judgments to individualized career myths and idealized linear pathways even though such judgments may not hold across contexts or groups (Berkelaar & Buzzanell, 2015;Buzzanell & Goldzwig, 1991).…”

Part‐time Work as Practising Resistance: The Power of Counter‐arguments

“…The ability and willingness to work what counts as full time has become a synonym for commitment, productivity and professionalism (Dick and Hyde, ; McDonald, Bradley and Brown, ; Ozbilgin, Tsouroufli and Smith, ; Smithson, ) as well as masculinity (Meriläinen et al ., ; Simpson, ; Smithson, ). Consequently, the full‐timer is perceived as evidence of prioritizing work over non‐work, while the part‐timer is associated with ‘women's issues’ (McDonald, Bradley and Brown, ) and career‐limiting ‘mommy tracks’ (Buzzanell and Goldzwig, ), revealing disadvantages to women's lifetime employment and earning prospects (Lane, ; McDonald, Bradley and Brown, ; Smithson, ). In this context, part‐time work becomes a sensible and contested category, which essentially violates the deeply held beliefs about the importance of ‘being there’ (Lawrence and Corwin, ).…”