210 likes | 411 Views
The Implications of Preference Crystallization on Career Decision-Making. Itamar Gati and Aviva Shimoni Hebrew University Beit Berl of Jerusalem Academic College. Facilitating Career Decision-Making.
E N D
The Implications of Preference Crystallizationon Career Decision-Making Itamar Gati and Aviva Shimoni Hebrew University Beit Berl of Jerusalem Academic College
Facilitating Career Decision-Making is one of the goals of career counseling One approach for guiding this process is the PICmodel: Prescreening career alternatives to locate a small and manageable set of promising occupations In-depth exploration of promising alternatives to locate the suitable ones Choiceof the most suitable alternative
Prescreening The goalto locate a small group ofpromising alternativeswhich merit an in-depth exploration The meansclients’ career-related preferences (including interests, length of training, team work, verbal ability, etc.) The 3 Facets of Preferences: • The relative importance of each aspect • The level regarded as optimal • Additional, less desirable, but yet acceptable level(s) – reflecting thewillingness to compromise
Assessing theCrystallization of Preferences Crystallization of Preferencesrefers to the degree to which individuals are aware of what they regard as desirable, undesirable, and unacceptable, and which aspects are important, less important, and unimportant to them. Why is this important? • The degree of preference crystallization is an indicator of decision-making readiness • uncrystallized preferences can lead to non-optimal choices
The Goal • Defining the concept of preference crystallization as expressed in terms of career-related aspects by adopting and adapting concepts from vocational interest • Developinga theoretically-based and empirically-tested quantitative model for assessing clients’ degree of preference crystallization • Validating the proposed indicators using experts’ judgments and client’s self-reports
The Proposed Indicators of Preference Crystallization Differentiationbetween the aspects’ ratings, reflected by the variance and the resolution of the client’s preferences Consistencybetween the ratings of related aspect couples (e.g., travel - work environment) Coherenceamong the 3 facets of preferences (relative importance and optimal level, and relative importance and willingness to compromise)
METHOD Participants Experts– 20 career counselors Clients – 247 MBCDusers Clients – 1019 Surfers in Future Directions Tools Making Better Career Decisions -aself-directed, Internet-based career guidance system based on the PICmodel.Prescreening is based on sequential-elimination, using the individuals' preferences in 31 career-related aspects Future Direction –a free, anonymousIsraeli Internet career guidance portal; the assessment of preference crystallization is based on the algorithm developed and validated using the expert counselors’ judgments
Making Better Career Decisionshttp://mbcd.intocareers.org
Future Directionshttp://www.kivunim.com An Israeli website in Hebrew, designed for assisting deliberating individuals in making their career decisions. It is a public service and is offered free of charge.
METHOD -Procedure VALIDATION BY EXPERTS Career counselors’ expert judgments of the preference crystallization of career clients Data - Career-related preferences of 6 individuals from a sample of 247 cases from the database of MBCD VALIDATION BY CLIENTS’ SELF-REPORTSof vocational decisiveness Data - 247MBCDclients’ career-related preferences and self-reportedvocational decisiveness VALIDATION BY CLIENTS’ SELF-REPORTSClients’ self-reported degree of preference crystallization Data - 1019 Future Directionsyoung adults self-assessed and measured aspects-based-estimate of preference crystallization
Results - VALIDATION BY COUNSELORS: Crystallization of Preferences Judged crystallization
RESULTS -VALIDATION BY EXPERTS Correlations between Experts’ Judgments and the respective Computed Measures of Preference Crystallization
RESULTS -VALIDATION BY CLIENTS’ SELF-REPORTED VOCATIONAL DECIDEDNESS One way ANOVA: Group 4 [users who had "adefined vocational direction”] had higher overall crystallization than Group1 [“do not have even a general sense of direction”]
Results –Degree of Preference Crystallization (N=1019) Highly crystallized (33%) Medium crystallization (13%) Low crystallization (36%) Others (inconsistent) (19%)
Results – Degree of Preference Crystallization (N=1019) (35%) Accurate (35%) "Modest” (31%) Overconfidence In measured pref. crystallizationdifference between men and women: 43% of men tend to be medium, women about 1/3 in each level
Major Findings • Individuals differ in the degree of the crystallization of their preferences • Individuals differ in the awareness of the degree to which their preferences are crystallized • The proposed measures of preference- crystallization matched experts’ judgments • Clients with more crystallized preferences were more decisive
Theoretical & Practical Implications • Expanding the concept of vocational-interest crystallization to the crystallization of career-related preferences • Face-to-face Counseling: Assessing client’s readiness in terms of their crystallization of career-related preferences • Integration of crystallization indicators based on career-related aspects into self-help Internet (computerized) interactive programs – guiding clients with low levels of preference crystallization to face-to-face counseling
www.cddq.org Itamar.gati@huji.ac.il
Results - VALIDATION BY STUDENTS: Crystalization of Preferences
Measures of Preference Crystallization 3 indicators of crystallization