Responsible careers: Systemic reflexivity in shifting landscapes

Abstract

This article examines responsible careers, in which people seek to have an impact on societal challenges such as environmental sustainability and social justice. We propose a dynamic model of responsible careers based on studying 32 individuals in the emerging organizational fields of corporate responsibility, social entrepreneurship, sustainability, and social investing. We describe six career practices — expressing self, connecting to others, constructing contribution, institutionalizing, field shaping, and engaging systemically. Observations suggest that development of these practices is influenced by four learning dynamics: people’s perceptions of ‘shifting landscapes’ in which they seek to orient themselves, exploration and both biographical and systemic reflexivity. Our interdisciplinary and empirically grounded approach, integrating psychological intentions and institutional context, strengthens theorizing about responsible careers. The proposed model depicts responsible careers as continually evolving, sometimes precarious, and as dynamically enacted in relation to pluralist, shifting landscapes.

Incorporating citizens: corporate political engagement with climate change in Australia

“…A third way in which businesses incorporated citizenship activities was by linking employees' personal environmental concerns with corporate sustainability initiatives (Tams and Marshall, 2011;Wright and Nyberg, 2012). This subject position of the ethical employee was evident in many firms which sought to develop a 'green culture' as a means of better attracting and retaining staff.…”

Career scripts in clusters: A social position approach

“…Rather, they should be considered from the point of view of individuals' beliefs, as expressing what they represent to themselves and justify in a given context. Moreover, we do not consider that scripts correspond to implicit or explicit expressions of organizational or institutional expectations, as Cappellen and Janssens (2010) or Tams and Marshall (2011) propose when using the notions of institutional and organizational scripts. Organizations' expectations of careers refer to norms or models, but not to scripts.…”

New directions for boundaryless careers: Agency and interdependence in a changing world

“…Boundaryless careers are dependent on employment settings (Higgins, 2005), labor market intermediaries (Cappelli & Hamori, 2007; King et al, 2005), industry fields (Jones, 2001; Peterson & Anand, 2002), and the institutional resources conveyed through social networks and occupational groups (Barley & Kunda, 2006; O'Mahony & Bechky, 2006; Zeitz, Blau, & Fertig, 2009). They are also shaped by cultural expectations and ethnicity (Ituma & Simpson, 2009; Pringle & Mallon, 2003), popular sentiments (Wrzesniewski, 2002), and global socio‐economic trends (Tams & Arthur, 2007; Tams & Marshall, 2010). Research examining careers within these wider institutional and cultural contexts challenges any unbridled notion of career agency.…”

“…This is implied in a definition of calling as being primarily motivated by the pursuit of psychological definitions of career success (Mirvis & Hall, 1994) and a view that the work one is doing is one's purpose of life (Hall & Chandler, 2005). In contrast, a more interdependent interpretation is evident when agency references significant others (Bailyn, 1993), reference groups (Bosley, Arnold, & Cohen, 2009; Lawrence, 2006), institutions (e.g., Pang et al, 2008), and society (Tams & Marshall, 2010). From an interdependent perspective, calling derives its primary purpose from service to a larger cause such as one's occupation and moral duty (Bunderson & Thompson, 2009; Weber, 1930), social usefulness (Wrzesniewski et al, 1997), and public debates about social and environmental responsibility (Tams & Marshall, 2010).…”