Parallel careers and their consequences for companies in Brazil.
| Autor | Azevedo, Maria Candida Baumer |
| Cargo | Report |
Introduction
The concept of parallel careers, or slash careers, is defined as having more than one professional career at the same time regardless of the amount of time devoted to each, whether the careers are related, whether financial compensation is earned, and whether the individual has an employer or is self-employed (Alboher, 2007). A parallel career is not a secondary job or a hobby, although the latter can become a parallel career with the addition of professional relations; the other part of the career relationship (the recruiter, boss, or client) has hiring or contracting options in addition to the person in question. The concept of parallel careers should not be confused with the dual career ladder, which is an option for a linear plan of career development that offers professionals, from a certain level of seniority upward, ascending mobility without requiring them to be in supervisory or management positions to grow hierarchically (Cesare & Thornton, 1993; Libera, 2011; Noe, 2002).
There is a gap in the literature due to a lack of previous research on this topic. Alboher (2007) used qualitative research based on an analysis of interviews with 32 PC holders to identify their experiences. Recently, Schuiling (2012) conducted a similar study that included additional cases of individual PC holders. The present study is the first to consider the company perspective.
This research examines how companies located in Brazil understand the need of some professionals to hold parallel careers. Brazil is considered because Brazilians usually work while studying. In contrast to other countries where serious work is begun after graduation, in Brazil, individuals begin their formal careers during their early college years. This study examines whether and how PC holders add value to businesses through their multiple careers. The research identifies the benefits and disadvantages of allowing and encouraging simultaneous careers for the holder as well as for the company (or companies) for which the PC holder works.
The research questions of this study consider companies' attitudes toward parallel careers, whether companies recognize such cases in their organizational charts, the most common combinations, reasons for parallel careers, and the benefits and drawbacks of parallel careers for companies and PC holders.
Theoretical Background
Changes in the employment context
In the 1990s, globalization, deregulation, and rapid advances in technology changed the landscape in most industries. These conditions led to widespread organizational change driven by the need to address international competition, economic and market shifts, and mergers and acquisitions (Doherty, 1996). Many organizations downsized, becoming leaner to improve productivity and performance (Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 2010). Downsizing reappeared during the second half of the 2000-2010 decade with the global economic crises (Krugman, 2009), becoming an integral part of organizational life (Datta, Guthrie, Basuil, & Pandey, 2010).
Employees' sense of loyalty was affected by the labor market deregulation that occurred during this period (Boulhol, 2009). Loyalty had thus far been the major force affecting the relationship between professionals and employers. This relationship, based on job security and commitment, was replaced by work insecurity and a decline in loyalty (Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 2010; Herriot & Pemberton, 1995; Robbins, 1999). This change affected those who were laid off as well as those who stayed with companies (Robbins, 1999). Many survivors felt that organizations violated the terms of their implicit psychological contracts (Appelbaum, Bethune, & Tannenbaum, 1999; Greenhalgh & Rosenblatt, 2010). This sentiment contributed to a shift from a "one career, one single company" path to a path involving employment with several organizations throughout life, and the focus shifted from the company to the individual's career (Klehe, Zikic, Van Vianen, & De Pater, 2011; Reilly, Brett, & Stroh, 1993; Wajcman & Martin, 2001).
With this shift, power also shifted from corporations to the workers (Michaels, Handfield-Jones, & Axelrod, 2001). Hiring talented professionals became more expensive. To attract these professionals, companies had to work harder (Michaels et al., 2001) because employability became the focus for individuals (Hay, 2002; Nilsson & Ellstrom, 2011). Under these conditions, higher wages and superior remuneration packages lost their primacy as retention tools (Earle, 2003; Moncarz, Zhao, & Kay, 2009; The Economist, 1999).
In the Information Age, individuals began to have access to unlimited information on job availability. Their loyalty shifted from the company to the career (Rynes & Cable, 2003; Wajcman & Martin, 2001). This change led many people to shift their organizational careers toward a more protean and/or boundaryless approach (Briscoe & Finkelstein, 2009).
Protean and boundaryless careers
The concept of the protean career was introduced by Hall (1976, 2004) as a process managed by the person, not the organization. A protean career consists of an individual's varied experiences in education, training, work in various organizations, and changes in occupational field. The protean person makes his/her own career choices, identifying the search for self-fulfillment as an integrative element of life. The individual is value driven and self-directed (Briscoe & Hall, 2006). Because it is shaped and driven by the individual, the protean career may be redirected; the goal is to meet the needs of the person as he and the environment change (Hall, 1976, 1996). The pursuit of the protean career requires a high level of self-awareness and personal responsibility. Many people cherish this autonomy, but others find this freedom terrifying, experiencing it as a lack of external support. A developmental or learning process is required for adaptation (Hall, 1996). As such, the protean career has commonly been characterized as highly adaptive, flexible, and self-directed with regard to the pursuit of psychological success (Greenhaus, Callanan, & DiRenzo, 2008).
The boundaryless career has been characterized by Arthur (1994), DeFillippi and Arthur (1994), Arthur and Rousseau (1996), and Sullivan and Arthur (2006), as independent of traditional organizational career arrangements. Its transposed boundaries may be physical or psychological. Movement across organizations and employers or across traditional hierarchical reporting and hierarchical advancement principles testifies to the lack of physical boundaries. An absence of psychological barriers emerges when validation and marketability are drawn from outside of the present employer. This lack of psychological barriers is sustained by external networks, rejecting career opportunities for personal or family reasons, or perceiving a boundaryless future regardless of structural constraints (Arthur, 1994; Segers, Inceoglu, Vloeberghs, Bartram, & Henderickx, 2008; Sullivan & Arthur, 2006).
In both cases, success is measured internally and is evaluated psychologically rather than objectively through a focus on external success in terms of aspects such as pay, rank, or hierarchical position (Briscoe, Hall, & DeMuth, 2006; Verbruggen, 2012). Success is a matter of value-driven orientation; personally meaningful goals are pursued instead of socially imposed ones. Personally meaningful goals provide the motivation for career decisions and create standards for the experience of psychological career success (Briscoe et al., 2006). All of these aspects represent a significant change from the traditional career, which typically develops within the confines of an employment setting and is characterized by hierarchical advancement (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996; Sullivan, 1999; Sullivan & Baruch, 2009).
Parallel careers
Parallel careers, or slash careers, as Alboher (2007) called them, suggest a balance between more than one professional career and the spreading of commitment among these careers. According to Alboher, the major difference between changing careers and slashing is that individuals who slash do not abandon their primary vocation; they enhance or reconfigure it.
A career is related to professional activities rather than to extracurricular interests or a hobby. A career does not necessarily have to produce income (Alboher, 2007). Parallelism suggests a focus on balancing multiple vocations and spreading commitment among them rather than primary and secondary engagement (Kirton, 2006). The amount of energy and time devoted to each career may change according to the success achieved and the life stage of the individual (Alboher, 2007). It is possible for individuals to simultaneously hold several parallel careers and to affiliate with and commit to them in more or less equal proportions (Layder, 1993).
To obtain a deep understanding of the concept of parallel careers, it is important to distinguish parallel careers from the holding of multiple jobs. Merely holding multiple jobs means that a person performs practically the same work for different organizations or employers. This circumstance is called a secondary labor market (Averett, 2001; Shishko & Rostker, 1976). An example would be a nurse working for two or more different hospitals at the same time. In this case, the content of the work is similar or even equivalent. In the case of parallel careers, the content may be related or complementary, but it is not the same.
People may opt for parallel careers for the following reasons:
-
Financial purposes - A way of increasing financial achievement to afford regular life expenses, pay off debts, or save money for a specific goal (Amirault, 1997; Lundborg, 1995; Martel, 2000; McCormick, 2003). This aim is accomplished by working in a different field. Otherwise, it would be a matter of merely having a second job in the same field.
-
Career change prior step - This step becomes necessary when...
Para continuar a ler
PEÇA SUA AVALIAÇÃOCOPYRIGHT GALE, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.
