Organizational career development is not dead: a case study on managing the new career during organizational change

Abstract

SummaryNew forms of careers have received increased attention in contemporary organizational research. A prominent focus in this research has been whether and how, in an increasingly unpredictable career environment, individuals are taking responsibility for their own career development. The implication is that career is becoming less central to organizational management practices. At the same time there is evidence that organizational changes typically described in this literature (such as delayering the organization in a quest for flexibility) have had a negative impact on career progress, resulting in resistance to change. The implication here is that career concerns are more central to organizational management practices. This in-depth qualitative case study examines whether individuals do in fact take more responsibility for their career development during times of organizational change. We also examine whether this does indeed mean that the organization takes less responsibility for career management. Our data indicate that individuals are, in fact, taking more responsibility for their own careers. At the same time we found that the organization in our case study also became more actively involved in career development and management. However, this active approach did not resemble traditional top-down career management and development. To us, the pattern of organizational and individual career development actions appear to constitute a kind of 'organizational dance,' a highly interactive mutual influence process, in which both parties are at once the agent and the target of career influence. Strengths and limitations of the study are discussed, as are directions for future research.

Exploring supportive and developmental career management through business strategies and coaching

“…Despite this shift toward individual, and not organizational, responsibility and ownership for careers due to the dynamic nature of labor markets, several authors have argued and demonstrated that organizational career management is not dead (e.g., Baruch, 2006;Herriot & Pemberton, 1996;Lips-Wiersma & Hall, 2007;Sturges, Guest, Conway, & Davey, 2002). The transition from predominantly organizational to individualistic career management requires, however, that organizations move away from the traditional command and control, top-down career management and development approach (Baruch, 2006;Lips-Wiersma & Hall, 2007), and become "supportive and developmental" (Baruch, 2006, p. 130) contrast to what some new career theorists have suggested (e.g., Arthur, Inkson, & Pringle, 1999), organizations should not withdraw from active career management but should become differently involved.…”

The Impact of Human Resource Management Practices on Employee Readiness for Change during Mergers and Acquisitions

“…There is evidence, however, that the organisational changes typically described in the literature, such as delayering in a quest for flexibility, have had a negative impact on career progress and resulted in resistance to change (Lips-Wiersma & Hall 2007). Organisations focus on career development to build engagement during difficult times so that stressed employees have a positive focus on the future (Knight 2014).…”

Linking Administrators Roles in Career Programs to Proactive Behavior as a Determinant of Employees Promotion Opportunities

“…A well-designed career master plan helps administrators to appropriately perform their responsibilities: first, determine a balance between workers' careers requirements and the organization's manpower requirements (Antoniu, 2010;Ismail, Daud, & Madrah 2011;Lips-Wiersma & Hall, 2007). Second, determine appropriate career instruments in order to help employees to achieve their career goals such as through internal training, formal education, counseling, job rotation, succession plans, work simplification and care the quality of employees' work life in organizations (Chang et al, 2007;Ismail et al, 2011;Koen, Klehe, Van Vianen, Zikic, & Nauta 2010;Kulkarni, 2013).…”