Brown S.D., Lent R. (Editors). Career development and counseling: putting theory and research to work

Подождите немного. Документ загружается.

116 M

AJOR

HEORIES OF

AREER

EVELOPMENT

, C

HOICE

AND

DJUSTMENT

In sum, research offers support for a number of theoretical assumptions (from

SCCT and from the larger social cognitive theory) about how self-efficacy and

outcome expectations function in relation to career interests, choice, perfor-

mance, and other career outcomes. The applications described in this section also

convey SCCT’s potential utility in understanding and facilitating the career de-

velopment of a diverse range of persons. While such applications are exciting in

their promise, there is need for additional research that clarifies how social cogni-

tive variables operate together with culture, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, sex-

ual orientation, and disability status to shape the career development of students

and workers. Theory-based intervention studies have begun to appear (e.g., Betz

& Schifano, 2000; Luzzo, Hasper, Albert, Bibby, & Martinelli, 1999), yet more such

work is needed to help strengthen the empirical basis for practical applications of

SCCT. Nevertheless, currently available findings may offer valuable implications

for career education and counseling practice. We consider such implications in

the next section.

APPLYING SOCIAL COGNITIVE CAREER THEORY TO

SELECTED CAREER DEVELOPMENT CONCERNS

Social Cognitive Career Theory suggests a host of ideas for developmental, preven-

tive, and remedial career interventions—that is, for promoting development of stu-

dents’ academic/career interests and competencies, for preventing or forestalling

career-related difficulties, and for helping people cope with existing problems in

choosing or adjusting to work. Suggestions for developmental and preventive ap-

plications can be derived from SCCT’s basic interest, choice, and performance

models—especially from hypotheses about how self-efficacy and the other social

cognitive variables develop in childhood and adolescence. In remedial applications,

the theory may be used as an organizing framework both for adapting existing

counseling methods and for developing novel intervention techniques. In this sec-

tion, we consider ways in which SCCT may be employed in dealing with selected

developmental and remedial career concerns.

ROMOTING

SPIRATIONS AND

NTERESTS IN

OUNG

ERSONS

From the perspective of SCCT, several key processes occur during childhood and

adolescence—within academic, family, peer, and other settings—that set the stage

for later choice-making and adjustment. These processes include acquisition of

self-efficacy and outcome expectations related to diverse activities, development

of career-relevant interests, and formation of career aspirations. (In SCCT, aspira-

tions represent provisional occupational goals or daydreams.) These processes re-

late to developmental tasks that are prominent during the elementary and middle

school years and are continually revisited and refined in high school and beyond

(Lent, Hackett, & Brown, 1999).

Young children typically have a very limited grasp of their capabilities, not to

mention career activities and paths. Given their limited experience and exposure

to career role models, their career-related interests and aspirations are likely to be

somewhat stereotypical, narrow, and fluid (e.g., a boy expressing the desire to be-

come a fireman one week and a baseball player the next). Over the course of child-

hood and adolescence, people typically receive increasing experience with varied

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 116

A Social Cognitive View of Career Development and Counseling 117

performance tasks as well as direct and vicarious exposure to a widening range of

career possibilities. These experiences lead to differentiated beliefs about an indi-

vidual’s capabilities in diverse activity domains and an expanded sense of the

working conditions and reinforcers afforded by different career options. Emer-

gent self-efficacy and outcome expectations, in turn, nurture career-relevant in-

terests and goals that tend to become more defined and crystallized over time, yet

are still relatively modifiable based on additional learning about the self (e.g., per-

sonal capabilities, values) and careers (e.g., skill requirements, available rein-

forcers). In this way, career aspirations gradually (but not invariably) tend to

become increasingly stable and realistic—which is to say, congruent with personal

interests, capabilities, and values.

This analysis suggests that self-efficacy and outcome expectations—and the

information on which they are based—are key to the cultivation of students’ aca-

demic and career interests and to the range and types of occupational options

they are willing to consider. At the same time, students’ career aspirations can

become constricted either because their environments provide limited or biased

exposure to particular efficacy-building experiences (e.g., few opportunities to

succeed at scientific pursuits, no gender-similar role models in math) or because

they acquire inaccurate self-efficacy or occupational outcome expectations. These

observations suggest that developmental interventions to promote favorable self-

efficacy and outcome expectations are likely to be most useful during childhood

and adolescence, before interests and aspirations become more stable and some

options become prematurely foreclosed.

The four sources of efficacy information can be used as an organizing struc-

ture for psychoeducational interventions. Personal performance accomplish-

ments are a particularly valuable intervention target, given their potent effects on

self-efficacy. Incrementally graded success experiences can foster a sense of effi-

cacy at particular tasks, yet it is also important to attend to the manner in which

students interpret the quality of their performances. For example, objective suc-

cesses may not impact self-efficacy where students attribute their good grades to

luck, effort, or task ease. This is a common occurrence in the case of girls’ achieve-

ments in math, science, and other nontraditional activities (Hackett, 1995).

Efforts to modify students’ self-efficacy may, therefore, profit from inclusion of

cognitive restructuring procedures that encourage students to entertain self-

enhancing performance attributions (e.g., a person crediting his or her success to

developing personal capabilities, viewing ability as an acquirable attribute rather

than a fixed, inborn entity).

Useful intervention elements can also be fashioned from the other three

sources of efficacy information. For example, modeling can be used to assist stu-

dents to explore academic and career domains that they may not have previously

encountered or been encouraged to consider. Students are most likely to identify

with role models whom they perceive as being similar to themselves along impor-

tant dimensions, such as gender, ethnicity, and age. Social support and persuasion

can be used to encourage students to attempt new tasks, to persist despite initial

setbacks, and to interpret their performances favorably, for example, by focusing

on skill growth versus ultimate task success. Physiological and affective states

may also require attention where, for example, task-related anxiety appears to be

diminishing self-efficacy and disrupting performance. Relaxation exercises and

other cognitive-behavioral strategies can be used to reduce debilitative anxiety.

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 117

118 M

AJOR

HEORIES OF

AREER

EVELOPMENT

, C

HOICE

AND

DJUSTMENT

Content-specific efficacy beliefs (e.g., in math and other school subjects) need

not be the only focus of efficacy-building efforts. It also seems desirable to encour-

age self-efficacy and skills at larger “career process” domains, such as communica-

tion, teamwork, conflict management, leadership, and multicultural sensitivity.

Such general skill domains have been seen as integral to students’ transition from

school to work (Lent et al., 1999). In addition to a focus on self-efficacy enhance-

ment, SCCT would encourage a variety of other developmental intervention tar-

gets. In particular, exposure to career information (see Gore & Hitch, Chapter 16,

this volume) is key to fostering acquisition of realistic outcome expectations (i.e.,

beliefs about the working conditions and reinforcers available in diverse occupa-

tions). Social Cognitive Career Theory would also encourage age-appropriate in-

terventions designed to help students to explore their emerging interests and the

various careers with which they may be compatible (Turner & Lapan, Chapter 17,

this volume). Such interventions would best be approached with the explicit un-

derstanding (communicated to parents, teachers, and students) that interests,

goals, values, and skills are fluid attributes that can change and grow with addi-

tional experience. Assessment may, thus, best be viewed as a snapshot at a single

point in time, rather than as a reflection of immutable qualities.

Finally, SCCT would encourage a focus on fostering skills such as decision

making and goal setting (e.g., breaking larger distal goals into proximal subgoals,

locating supports for personal goals). Such skills can be taught by using examples

from domains, such as studying or friendships, that are meaningful to young

people and that can be generalized to career development. Social Cognitive Ca-

reer Theory has been used recently as a basis for designing (Prideaux, Patton, &

Creed, 2002) and evaluating (McWhirter, Rasheed, & Crothers, 2000) career edu-

cation programs.

ACILITATING

AREER

HOICE

-M

AKING AND

MPLEMENTATION

In an ideal scenario, people arrive at late adolescence or early adulthood with:

•A good appreciation of their interests, values, and talents.

•An understanding of how these self-attributes correspond with potential

vocational options.

•A clear goal, or choice, that links their self-attributes to a suitable career

path (i.e., one that can engage their interests, satisfy their values, and value

their talents).

•Adequate skills at making decisions, setting goals, and managing goal pur-

suit (i.e., self-regulation skills).

•An environment that provides needed support for their goals (e.g., social en-

couragement, mentors, financial resources) and minimal goal-related barri-

ers (racial discrimination).

•A set of personality traits (e.g., low levels of negative affectivity, high levels

of conscientiousness) that can generally aid the process of making and im-

plementing important life decisions by, for example, minimizing chronic in-

decisiveness and maximizing follow-through with goals and plans.

Those who possess ample amounts of these personal and environmental re-

sources are unlikely to seek the services of a career counselor. Unfortunately,

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 118

A Social Cognitive View of Career Development and Counseling 119

however, problems may occur in any or all of these areas—and various other chal-

lenges, such as physical disabilities or difficulties in life domains apart from ca-

reer choice, may arise as well—that can hamper an individual’s efforts at career

choice-making and implementation. Adept career counselors are able to assess

and treat a wide array of these choice-limiting problems. While a full-scale dis-

cussion of career choice problems and solutions is beyond the scope of this chap-

ter, it is possible to highlight a few strategies derived from SCCT that can aid in

navigating certain impasses to career choice-making and implementation.

Expanding Choice Options Like most other approaches to career choice counsel-

ing, SCCT aims to help clients select from an array of occupations that corre-

spond reasonably well with important aspects of their work personalities (e.g.,

interests, values, skills). Some clients are blocked in this effort because their work

personalities are not sufficiently differentiated (e.g., measured interests produce

a low, flat profile) or because they feel stifled by a constricted range of career op-

tions. In such instances, my colleagues and I have found it helpful to explore the

social cognitive processes that may underlie choice problems, adapting assess-

ment strategies that are commonly used in career counseling (e.g., Brown & Lent,

1996). An important implication of SCCT’s interest model is that people often re-

ject potentially viable career options because of inaccurate self-efficacy and out-

come expectations (e.g., a person may believe, erroneously, that he or she does not

have the skills to perform effectively in a given occupation or that the occupation

does not offer the working conditions that he or she values). By revisiting previ-

ously discarded options and considering the reasons they have been discarded,

career clients can often clarify their interests, skills, and values—and also ex-

pand the range of potentially satisfying options from which they may choose.

We have used two strategies to explore discarded options. In the first strategy,

standardized measures of vocational interests, values/needs, and aptitudes are

administered, and the results are examined for discrepancies between the occupa-

tional options generated by the various measures. We especially look for aptitude-

interest and value-interest discrepancies. Instances in which clients appear to have

the aptitude to succeed at particular occupations, but where they show relatively

low interest in them, may suggest that personal capabilities are being discounted

(i.e., that interests may not have developed because their self-efficacy is unrealis-

tically low). Similarly, instances in which a client’s values appear compatible

with particular occupations, but where the client shows little interest in the occu-

pations, may suggest inaccurate outcome expectations (i.e., he or she may possess

limited or biased information about the occupations, resulting in faulty assump-

tions about its potential to meet his or her needs). Such discrepancies are targeted

for further discussion and, possibly, counseling aimed at boosting self-efficacy or

instilling accurate outcome expectations.

Our second strategy for exploring foreclosed occupational options uses a modi-

fied vocational card sort procedure. We first ask clients to sort a list of occupations

into three categories: (1) might choose, (2) would not choose, and (3) in question.

We then focus on those occupations that are sorted into the “would not choose”

and “in question” categories. The client is encouraged to sort these occupations

into more specific categories reflecting self-efficacy beliefs (i.e., “might choose if I

thought I had the skills”), outcome expectations (i.e., “might choose if I thought it

could offer things I value”), definite lack of interest (i.e., “wouldn’t choose under

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 119

120 M

AJOR

HEORIES OF

AREER

EVELOPMENT

, C

HOICE

AND

DJUSTMENT

any circumstance”), or other. Occupations sorted into the self-efficacy and outcome

expectation subcategories are then explored for accuracy of skill and outcome per-

ceptions. As with the first strategy, further assessment, efficacy-building, or infor-

mation gathering may then be employed to challenge faulty assumptions about self

or career and to maximize the range of possible choice options. (See Brown & Lent,

1996, for case examples of the use of each strategy with adult clients who were con-

sidering career changes.)

Coping with Barriers and Building Supports A key assumption of SCCT’s choice

model is that people are more likely to implement their career choices (e.g., to

translate their goals into actions) if they perceive that their preferred options will

be accompanied by minimal barriers and ample supports within the surrounding

environment. Conversely, clients who anticipate, for example, that their significant

others will disparage their favored path or that they will not be able to access the

financial support they need to pursue their choice may be less willing to follow

through with their goals. These assumptions have led us to build consideration of

potential choice supports and barriers directly into the choice counseling process.

In particular, we have developed a set of steps to help clients:

1. Identify and anticipate possible barriers to their choice implementation.

2. Analyze the likelihood of encountering these barriers.

3. Prepare barrier-coping strategies (i.e., methods for preventing or managing

likely barriers).

4. Cultivate supports for their goals within their family, peer, and other key

social systems.

We have used a modified decisional balance sheet procedure to help clients identify

potential choice barriers. Specifically, we ask clients to generate both positive and

negative consequences in relation to each career option they are seriously consid-

ering. We then have them focus on the negative consequences that might prevent

them from pursuing each option. Next, the client is asked to estimate the chances

that each barrier will actually be encountered, and strategies are developed and

rehearsed for preventing or managing the most likely barriers. Brown and Lent

(1996) illustrate the use of these barrier-coping methods with a client who had

been reluctant to pursue her preferred option because of the fear that it would

jeopardize her romantic relationship. After identifying and analyzing this barrier,

the client was helped to neutralize it by negotiating a dual-career strategy with her

partner, enabling her to preserve the choice option she most wanted to pursue.

In addition to anticipating and preparing to deal with barriers, it can be very

useful to assist clients in building support systems to help sustain their choice ef-

forts (Lent et al., 2000). In fact, support-building has been identified as a key ele-

ment in successful career choice counseling (Brown & Ryan Krane, 2000). Once

clients have narrowed their career options, they can be encouraged to consider:

•Steps they need to take to implement their preferred options.

•Environmental (e.g., social, financial) resources that could help them to

achieve these steps.

•Resources they could use, specifically, to offset likely barriers to obtaining

their goals.

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 120

A Social Cognitive View of Career Development and Counseling 121

Counselors can also help clients to consider where and how to access needed

supports. In many cases, clients’ existing support systems can provide resources

useful to their goal pursuit (e.g., access to relevant job contacts). In other cases,

resources may be obtained by cultivating new or alternative support systems

(e.g., developing relationships with peers who will support, rather than deride,

their academic or career aspirations).

Clients’ families are often central to their career choice-making and implemen-

tation efforts, particularly in collectivist cultures. It is, therefore, useful to build

into counseling a consideration of how the client’s preferred options mesh with the

wishes of his or her family (or significant others). Clients sometimes need special

assistance in negotiating conflicts between their own goals and others’ goals for

them. Depending on the cultural context and the client’s preferences, family mem-

bers or other stakeholders can be invited to participate in choice counseling and to

assist the client in developing barrier-coping and support-building strategies.

Goal Setting and Implementation Some clients need additional assistance with the

processes of setting goals and managing pursuit of their goals. These processes can

be conceived as “career self-regulation skills” that need to be mastered so that

clients can create, enact, and alter satisfying career plans, especially in the future,

after counseling has been completed. Once decisions have been made and goals

have been selected, many factors can affect the likelihood that clients will imple-

ment, or follow through with, their preferred choice. We have already considered

the possible effects of environmental supports and barriers. Another important fac-

tor affecting choice implementation involves the manner in which people frame

their goals. It has been found, for example, that larger goals (e.g., becoming a doc-

tor) are more likely to be enacted if they are clear, specific, divided into manage-

able subgoals (e.g., taking premed courses, applying to medical schools), set close

in time to intended actions, stated publicly, and held with strong commitment

(Bandura, 1986). By contrast, vague, amorphous, distal, private, weakly held goals

(e.g., “I’ll probably go for some sort of advanced degree at some point”) provide far

less reliable guides for action. Clients can, therefore, be encouraged to frame their

goals in facilitative (e.g., clear, specific, proximal) terms and to consider specific

steps and resources needed to implement their goals. Because not all possible bar-

riers to choice implementation can be anticipated and averted, clients can be en-

couraged to remain flexible and adaptable in their decisional stance (Phillips,

1994), for example, by preparing backup plans.

ROMOTING

ORK

ATISFACTION

Social Cognitive Career Theory was originally conceived to help explain the

processes of interest development, choice-making, and performance. Although af-

fective processes and outcomes, such as educational or work satisfaction, were not

a central concern in the original theory, a social cognitive model of academic/career

satisfaction is under construction (Lent & Brown, 2003). Explication of this nascent

model is beyond the scope of this chapter. However, it is possible to outline, at least

tentatively, the counseling-related tenets of our satisfaction model-in-progress.

The literature on overall life satisfaction and satisfaction with specific life do-

mains, such as work, suggests that certain personality traits (e.g., extraversion,

absence of neuroticism) are reliably associated with satisfaction (DeNeve &

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 121

122 M

AJOR

HEORIES OF

AREER

EVELOPMENT

, C

HOICE

AND

DJUSTMENT

Cooper, 1998; Judge, Heller, & Mount, 2002). Thus, to a certain extent, people who

tend to be happy and outgoing in general are also likely to be happy in their

school and work lives. Such findings do not, by themselves, offer much in the way

of counseling implications because personality and affective tendencies are often

relatively stable and difficult to change (Brown, Ryan, & McPartland, 1996). How-

ever, satisfaction is also, fortunately, linked to several factors that are readily

modifiable and subject to personal control. These agentic factors include several

of the social cognitive elements.

It has been found, for example, that personal goals are importantly related to

satisfaction outcomes (Lent, in press). While several aspects of goals may affect

satisfaction within a given life domain (e.g., simply having goals, having self-set

goals), making progress toward valued personal goals appears to be a particu-

larly important determinant of satisfaction. Working backwards in the presumed

causal chain, people are more likely to make progress on their valued goals and to

be satisfied to the extent that they (1) feel self-efficacious, (2) hold favorable out-

come expectations, and (3) have access to environmental supports and resources

relevant to the pursuit of their goal.

The counseling implications of this brief analysis are reasonably straightfor-

ward. If work (or educational) satisfaction results partly from goal progress in

work (or educational) spheres, then satisfaction might be promoted by enabling

workers (and students) to set and make progress toward valued personal goals

(e.g., working toward a hoped-for grade in their major). This focus on goal prog-

ress would draw on strategies described earlier. For example, students or new

workers can be helped to:

•Set reasonable yet challenging performance goals (i.e., goals that are con-

gruent with current skills but that may promote further skill growth).

•Break complex, distal goals into simpler, proximal subgoals.

•Decide on how goal progress can be measured and what steps can be taken

when progress does not meet expectations.

•Focus on and self-reinforce incremental progress and not just ultimate goal

attainment.

•Identify and access environmental supports and resources that can aid goal

progress.

•Anticipate and prepare strategies to cope with barriers to goal attainment.

This focus on promoting progress toward personal goals may work well as a gen-

eral guide to prevention of educational or work dissatisfaction as well as a way to

promote satisfaction and continued development of skills and interests. For exam-

ple, more experienced workers may be assisted to ward off burnout by setting and

progressing toward new goals or by considering job redesign or restructuring op-

tions that can infuse their work with new challenges and opportunities for value

fulfillment. Parenthetically, what is called “burnout” may often be more aptly de-

scribed as “rust-out”—that is, situations in which all work-related goals have been

met, skills and incentives have plateaued, and work has, thereby, been divested of

much of its interest value and enjoyment. Where work satisfaction cannot be pro-

moted in other ways—or where the work role is not one of the individual’s most

valued life domains—involvement (and goal setting) in other life domains, such as

leisure or volunteer activities, may provide alternative outlets for life satisfaction.

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 122

A Social Cognitive View of Career Development and Counseling 123

Apart from these preventive and developmental possibilities, remedial applica-

tions may profit from analysis of the source and type of dissatisfaction that a client

is experiencing. Educational or work dissatisfaction can stem from a number of

causes, such as acute or chronic work stresses, job skill requirements that signifi-

cantly overshoot or undershoot the client’s current capabilities, interpersonal diffi-

culties, or discrepancies between personal values and work reinforcers (e.g.,

inadequate salary). Moreover, work (dis)satisfaction can be divided into more spe-

cific components, such as job facet satisfaction and organizational satisfaction (see

Dawis, Chapter 1, this volume; Fritzsche & Parrish, Chapter 8, this volume). Appro-

priate cognitive-behavioral strategies can be derived from social cognitive and re-

lated theories to address various sources and types of work dissatisfaction. For

example, performance deficits can be remediated by focusing on self-efficacy and

skill promotion strategies described in the next section, and interpersonal prob-

lems can often be handled through conflict resolution procedures or development

of particular interpersonal skills and strategies (e.g., assertion, leadership, collabo-

rative problem solving, cross-cultural communication).

Like person-environment fit theories, an SCCT perspective acknowledges that

work dissatisfaction can result from incongruence between personal and envi-

ronmental attributes and that dissatisfaction can, therefore, be reduced by im-

proving the fit between P and E. For example, value-reinforcer incongruence may

be addressed via worker-supervisor negotiation, job restructuring, skill upgrad-

ing, or, where necessary, job or career change counseling. One important differ-

ence from traditional P-E fit theories, however, is that SCCT accepts that the

incongruence (or discorrespondence) can occur along any number of dimensions

(e.g., interest, personality, value, skill) that may be salient to the individual. An-

other difference is the assumption that the subjective perception of P-E fit is often

more important than objectively assessed fit in determining an individual’s satis-

faction with the work environment. For example, dissatisfaction can result from

the conviction, accurate or not, that a person’s skills considerably undershoot or

exceed job requirements or that the job does not adequately draw on or reward his

or her primary talents (sometimes referred to as underemployment). These dif-

ferences call for multifaceted fit assessment and remedial efforts that build on,

yet extend beyond, what P-E theories would prescribe. (Brown & Lent, 1996, dis-

cuss examples of SCCT-based counseling that had been initiated by clients expe-

riencing work dissatisfaction due to poor perceived fit between their values or

skills and the outlets afforded by their work settings.)

ACILITATING

ORK

ERFORMANCE

Social Cognitive Career Theory offers several implications for efforts to promote

academic/career success and optimize performance. The basic hypotheses of

SCCT’s performance model suggest that self-efficacy beliefs can facilitate attain-

ment in a given academic or career domain as long as an individual possesses at

least minimally adequate levels of the skills required in that domain. While this

does not mean that every student or worker can be transformed into an Einstein

simply by increasing his or her confidence, it does imply, as suggested earlier, that

self-efficacy can help people make the most of the skills they have and facilitate

further development of their skills, thereby enhancing future attainments. Thus,

procedures designed to boost self-efficacy beliefs may be valuable ingredi

ents

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 123

124 M

AJOR

HEORIES OF

AREER

EVELOPMENT

, C

HOICE

AND

DJUSTMENT

both in developmentally oriented skill-building programs (discussed earlier in

the context of promoting aspirations) and in remedial efforts with persons expe-

riencing performance difficulties.

A basic efficacy-based strategy for improving performance involves exploring

possible discrepancies between self-efficacy estimates and data on objectively as-

sessed skills or past performance. Intervention procedures may then be designed

that are responsive to the type of discrepancy that is identified. For example, stu-

dents or workers with weak self-efficacy beliefs but adequate skills in the relevant

performance domain may benefit from relatively nonintensive interventions de-

signed to promote their self-efficacy and, possibly, further develop their skills, de-

pending on their current skill level. Those exhibiting both weak self-efficacy and

deficient skills, however, may be good candidates for more intensive remedial skill-

building efforts that can be organized around the sources of efficacy information.

There may also be occasions where the extent of the skill deficit is very large, the

client is unwilling to engage in (or may be unlikely to profit from) remedial activi-

ties, or the environment (e.g., college, work organization) is unwilling to support

such activities or has decided to terminate the student or employee. In P-E fit

terms, such scenarios reflect a serious mismatch between the individual’s skills

and the skill requirements of the setting. In such cases, educational or career choice

(or change) counseling can be offered, with an eye toward identifying suitable, al-

ternative academic or occupational options having ability requirements that are

more nearly correspondent with the client’s current skills. Social Cognitive Career

Theory does not imply that self-efficacy compensates for a lack of requisite skills or

that efforts to boost self-efficacy are always indicated—in fact, such efforts seem

unlikely to impact performance (and any resulting gains in self-efficacy are un-

likely to be sustained) if they ignore seriously deficient skills.

Where the client possesses adequate skills but weak self-efficacy beliefs in a

given performance domain, the theory would suggest the value of activities de-

signed to help him or her:

• Obtain personal mastery experiences with progressively more challenging

tasks in that domain.

•Review past success experiences.

•Interpret past and present successes in ways that promote, rather than dis-

count, perceived competence.

Similar to earlier suggestions for promoting self-efficacy beliefs, clients can be en-

couraged to attribute success experiences at skill development to internal, stable

factors, particularly personal ability, rather than to internal, unstable (e.g., effort),

or external (luck, task simplicity) factors. For instance, as clients succeed at perfor-

mance tasks or as they review past experiences, they can be asked for their per-

ceived reasons for task success. Nonadaptive attributions can be challenged, for

example, by having clients generate and evaluate alternative interpretations for

their performance successes (Brown & Lent, 1996).

This focus on providing, reviewing, and interpreting mastery experiences can

be augmented by counseling activities that draw on the other sources of self-

efficacy. For instance, providing exposure to relevant models, verbal support, or

assistance with anxiety coping can help to elevate self-efficacy and, in turn, skill

development and performance. In addition, SCCT points to outcome expectations

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 124

A Social Cognitive View of Career Development and Counseling 125

and performance goals as operating, along with self-efficacy, as key motivators of

performance. Thus, a comprehensive approach to performance facilitation might

also entail efforts to instill beneficial outcome expectations (e.g., accurate knowl-

edge of work conditions and reinforcers) and realistic, yet challenging, perfor-

mance goals (e.g., goals that are achievable but that can stretch and further refine

an individual’s skills).

SUMMARY

Social Cognitive Career Theory is an evolving framework that seeks to build on and

extend Bandura’s (1986, 1997) general social cognitive theory to the understanding

of career development processes. This framework highlights social cognitive vari-

ables, such as self-efficacy, that enable people to exercise personal agency in their

own career development; it is also concerned with the ways in which other person

and environmental factors (e.g., gender, culture, barriers, supports) help shap

people’s career paths. Originally aimed at explaining academic and career interest,

choice, and performance processes, the theory is currently being extended to the

study of educational and work satisfaction. This chapter overviewed the theory’s

basic elements, predictions, and research status; it also considered some of SCCT’s

implications for the design of developmental and counseling interventions.

REFERENCES

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A socialcognitive theory. Engle-

wood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Betz, N. E., & Hackett, G. (1981). The relationship of career-related self-efficacy expecta-

tions to perceived career options in college women and men. Journal of Counseling Psy-

chology, 28, 399–410.

Betz, N. E., & Schifano, R. S. (2000). Evaluation of an intervention to increase Realistic

self-efficacy and interests in college women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 35–52.

Brown, S. D., & Lent, R. W. (1996). A social cognitive framework for career choice coun-

seling. Career Development Quarterly, 44, 354–366.

Brown, S. D., Ryan, N. E., & McPartland, E. B. (1996). Why are so many people happy and

what do we do for those who aren’t? A reaction to Lightsey. Counseling Psychologist, 24,

751–757.

Brown, S. D., & Ryan Krane, N. E. (2000). Four (or five) sessions and a cloud of dust: Old as-

sumptions and new observations about career counseling. In S. D. Brown & R. W. Lent

(Eds.), Handbook of counseling psychology (3rd ed., pp. 740–766). New York: Wiley.

de Bruin, G. P. (1999). Social Cognitive Career Theory as an explanatory model for career

counselling in South Africa. In G. B. Stead & M. B. Watson (Eds.), Career psychology in

the South African context (pp. 91–102). Pretoria, South Africa: J. L. van Schaik.

DeNeve, K. M., & Cooper, H. (1998). The happy personality: A meta-analysis of 137 per-

sonality traits and subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 124, 197–229.

Fabian, E. S. (2000). Social cognitive theory of careers and individuals with serious men-

tal health disorders: Implications for psychiatric rehabilitation programs. Psychiatric

Rehabilitation Journal, 23, 262–269.

Fouad, N. A., & Smith, P. L. (1996). A test of a social cognitive model for middle school

students: Math and science. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 43, 338–346.

Gainor, K. A., & Lent, R. W. (1998). Social cognitive expectations and racial identity atti-

tudes in predicting the math choice intentions of Black college students. Journal of

Counseling Psychology, 45, 403–413.

Hackett, G. (1995). Self-efficacy in career choice and development. In A. Bandura (Ed.), Self-

efficacy in changing societies (pp. 232–258). Cambridge, England: Cambridge University

Press.

c05.qxd 8/5/04 9:00 AM Page 125