Value clarification is recognized as an important component of a rational career
choice. Several advantages result from including value clarification in the career
decision making process. First, the client can identify the satisfactions that are
inherent in the various occupations for eg., variety, independence, altruism, and
leadership/management (Super, 1970). These satisfactions are directly related to the work
environment. Second, the clients can identify the desired satisfactions that occur as a
result of working eg., economic returns, prestige, security, and leisure (Katz 1969, Super
1970). These satisfactions are directly related to the impact an occupation has on the
client’s life style. Third, the resources provided by examining values allows a client to
explore many discrete occupational alternatives (Zytowski, 1970). Thus, clients can make
an initial judgement as to the extent to which various occupations are compatible with
their values.
Rational career decision models (Jespen and Dilly 1974) and programs (Gelatt
Varenhorst and Carey 1972) rest partially upon an assessment of the values a decider
wishes to realize in a career. For eg., given considerations such as salary and interest,
which is more important? If there was a conflict between the two, on which should a
person place priority. Less dramatic, but still crucial, if there was an opportunity to
increase salary slightly with slight decrease in work interest (or vice versa) should one
do so? For resolving conflicts, appraising differences in occupations and estimating overall
occupational utilities, a well established set of priorities is essential.
Wagnus (1980) lamented that although thousands of studies had been conducted
regarding occupational choice decisions, very little was known about how job choices
were made. Since then there has been a substantial increase in our understanding of
the job choice process, using a variety of methods including a variety of variables. Direct
attribute and policy capturing designs have been particularly instrumental in enhancing
our understanding of job choice decision making. For example, Jurgensen’s (1978) study
of attribute importance found that individuals tended to report job security, type of work,
advancement opportunity and company characteristics as the most important attribute
in their own job choice decisions but, they believe that pay was most important for other
decisions. |
