Career Development and Vocational Behavior of Racial and Ethnic Minorities

Frederick T.L. Leong

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• Print ISBN: 9780805826920
• eBook ISBN: 9781317759430
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: History & Theory in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

This volume presents the single most comprehensive source of knowledge on the career development of racial and ethnic minorities. In so doing, it serves as a resource to graduate students learning about career development and career counseling, counselors and psychologists providing career counseling to racial and ethnic minorities, and psychologists and counselors doing research on the career development of these diverse groups. In recognition of the value of both culture-specific and culture-general information about the vocational psychology of racial and ethnic minorities in the United States, the book has a dual focus. The first eight chapters are devoted to culture-specific information about career development and vocational behavior. The final two chapters synthesize and integrate the materials presented in the eight culture-specific chapters. The text has been divided into three sections. The first section focuses on career theory and research with racial and ethnic minorities. It consists of a review of the relevance and utility of various career theories and models from mainstream vocational psychology to our understanding of the vocational behavior and career development of racial and ethnic minorities -- African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and American Indians. These chapters also summarize other theories from ethnic minority psychology that add to our understanding of minority career development. Finally, they review the existing empirical literature on the career development of these groups and provide a critique of this literature with recommendations for future research. The second section focuses on assessment and intervention with racial and ethnic minorities. The inclusion of the assessment dimension is very important because assessment is such a large and significant component of the career counseling process with these groups. The chapter authors offer guidelines and recommendations for providing career interventions with racial and ethnic minorities. In presenting these guidelines, they also address some of the cultural factors unique to each group that may serve either as facilitators or as inhibitors in the career counseling process. The third section includes commentaries, suggestions, reactions, and syntheses of the previous sections from scholars in the field of vocational psychology. These authors identify and examine the common principles, problems, and themes running across the chapters, and offer suggestions for advancing the field of racial and ethnic minority vocational psychology. This book will become both a valuable source of current information about the vocational psychology of racial and ethnic minorities as well as an inspiration for future research into the career development and vocational behavior of these culturally different individuals.

I

Theory and Research

1

The Career Development of African Americans: Theoretical and Empirical Issues

Michael T. Brown

The University of California, Santa Barbara

The career development of the country’s almost 30 million African Americans needs urgent attention. They are the largest ethnic group in the United States after Whites, representing 12.1% of the population, but 1990 census data indicate that their poverty rate is about 31.9% and has fluctuated between 30% and 36% since 1970; in contrast, the rate for the nation is about 13.5%, fluctuating from only 8.7% to 12% during the same period (cf. Swinton, 1992). Census data also show that the average family income for African Americans has been about 58% of White family income in recent years.

The unemployment rate for African Americans has been above 11% each year since 1978 and has run about 2.5 times the rate for Whites for the last two decades (Swinton, 1992). Among teenagers, African Americans had an unemployment rate above 36% in 1990, whereas Whites had a rate less than half of this.

Swinton (1992) concluded that African Americans are disadvantaged not only economically, but also occupationally. Swinton observed that only 36.9% of African-American men, but 61.8% of White men were employed in the “good” jobs (i.e., executives, administrators, managers, and sales occupations) in 1990, whereas 45.2% of African-American men and only 23.9% of White men were employed in the “bad” jobs (i.e., administrative support, laborers, other service workers, and transportation and material movers occupations). Similarly, African-American women were less likely to be employed in “good” jobs than were White women; the relative percentages were 28.1 versus 40.8, respectively. Furthermore, African-American women were more likely to be employed in “bad” jobs than were White women; the respective percentages were 37.3 and 22.9.

Education has historically been viewed as the ticket to a better life, especially for African Americans. But McBay (1992) pointed out that most African-American children remain in de facto separated and unequal schools. Further, due to the insidious nature of poverty, McBay estimated that as many as half of all African-American children may not be prepared for the academic environment when they enter school. African-American educational attainment also continues to lag behind that of almost all other racial and ethnic groups, as reported in the 10th annual status report of Minorities in Higher Education (Carter & Wilson, 1992), published annually by the American Council on Education. Data show that African Americans have made some gains in college participation since 1985, but have not reduced the margin of difference between their rate and that of Whites (Carter & Wilson, 1992). Especially noteworthy is that the ratio of African-American earnings to White earnings, given comparable levels of education, is 87.9% for men and 92.53% for females, with the racial gap decreasing with increasing educational levels.

Importantly, the proportion of men in total African-American enrollment has consistently declined over the decade. In addition, Carter and Wilson (1992) reported that those few gains made in the number of African Americans awarded bachelor’s and master’s degrees in 1991 were made by African-American women. Given the economic and social status of African Americans, Jaynes and Williams (1989), of the National Research Council, concluded that, by almost all aggregate statistical measures, African Americans remain substantially behind Whites. Those data also caused Hacker (1992) to observe that two nations exist in the United States: one African American, the other White. He further observed that these nations were separate, unequal, and hostile to one another. Clearly there is a need to direct the attention of psychologists to the economic and social needs of African Americans.

Facilitating the career development of African Americans may be one key to their economic, social, and psychological emancipation. John E. Jacob (1992), President and Chief Executive Officer of the National Urban League, reported that because African Americans are plagued by various forms of discrimination, opportunities for upward mobility, currently reduced for all persons, are even more limited for them. Citing Gallup survey results, Wilson and Brown (1992) reported that African Americans were three times as likely as Whites to express a need for career development assistance. Yet, as others (e.g., Brooks, 1990; Greenhaus & Parasuraman, 1986; London & Greller, 1991) indicated, little is known about the career behavior of African Americans, and meaningful research in the area has essentially halted since the late 1970s.

The purpose of this chapter is to review the current theoretical and empirical state of affairs as it pertains to the career development of African Americans and, if possible, to stimulate and advance such scholarship. Initially, an attempt was made to provide readers with an exhaustive review of the empirical literature appearing since Smith’s (1975, 1983) reviews of the literature. However, it became clear that the large and disorganized nature of literature warranted the sacrifice of breadth to gain parsimony and clarity; the intent being to focus current understanding and to best direct future scholarly endeavors.

What follows is a review of some of the major and most influential theories of career development including an articulation of its relevance or lack thereof with African-American populations. Also included in the review are relevant empirical findings supporting or disconfirming the applicability of the various theories to African Americans. A general review of the extant empirical literature concerning the career development of African Americans is then presented followed by a summary to the most clear, striking, or relevant findings. Finally, a discussion of future theoretical and empirical directions is presented. It should be noted that, due to space limitations, the career choice literature is the main focus of this chapter.

Theories of Career Choice

Theories of career choice have been frequently criticized for their lack of relevance to the career behavior of ethnic minorities, particularly African Americans (Brooks, 1990; Carter & Cook, 1992; Cheatham, 1990; Leonard, 1985; LoCascio, 1967; Osipow, 1983; Smith, 1975, 1983; Warnath, 1975). These criticisms center on three main points (cf. Brooks, 1990): They are based on erroneous assumptions, the theoretical concepts are not applicable to the various ethnic groups, and important determinants of career behavior are not addressed in the theories.

As many of the critics have stated (see Leonard, 1985; Smith, 1983), most theories of career choice assume that there is dignity in all work, that work is central to the lives of all individuals, that there exists a free and open labor market, and that most career choices flow essentially from the character of one’s personality. Some of these assumptions are questionable, in general, but particularly so when considered from the perspective of most ethnic minorities. For example, a cursory examination of occupational prestige data reveals that some jobs are more prized than others (e.g., see Featherman & Hauser, 1976). Also, the assumption of a free and open labor market discounts or ignores the fact of various forms of unjust discrimination, including colorism and ethnic bias.

As acknowledged by various theorists, most theories of career development were developed from research on primarily White, middle-class males; for example, one may wish to consider Super’s (1953) Middletown study or Roe’s (1951a, 1951b) studies of eminent scientists. The observation has led some (e.g., Carter & Cook, 1992; Cheatham, 1990; Smith, 1975, 1983; Warnath, 1975) to conclude that existing theoretical concepts lack applicability to ethnic minorities. However, later I show that such a conclusion may be premature given the paucity and inadequacy of research putting those concepts drawn from the theories to empirical tests using ethnic minority populations. It is more reasonable to assert that many concepts that have or may have relevance to the career development of ethnic minorities have been excluded from the most common or frequently cited theories, such as racial/ethnic discrimination or colorism.

What follows is a review of the most major and influential theories or models of career choice currently available as well as a review of relevant research on African Americans that supports or refutes theoretical claims. Also presented is an analysis of what might be missing from those theories that could render them more useful for understanding the career behavior of African Americans. An attempt is made to present alternative models or conceptions that may have particular impact on our understanding of African-American career development. For the purposes of this discussion, the following theories were selected: trait and factor theory (as reviewed by Brown, 1990), Roe’s theory (as revised in Roe & Lunneborg, 1990), Holland’s (1985) theory, and Super’s (1990) theory. Also included is Hackett and Betz’s (1981) career self-efficacy theory, Cheatham’s (1990) model of Africentricity and career development, and discussions of the concepts of colorism and racial/cultural identity, as these appear to be rich sources of new career development constructs.

Trait and Factor Theory

According to Brown (1990), the essence of the trait and factor theory lies in the following four propositions: Each individual has a unique set of traits that can be reliably and validly measured; occupations require that individuals possess specific traits to be successful; it is possible and desirable to match a person’s unique set of traits to those required by occupations; the closer the match between personal characteristics and those required by an occupation, the greater the likelihood of satisfaction with and productivity and tenure in the occupation. Brown stated that the theory is as applicable to minorities as it is to White males. However, no specific test of these propositions, using African-American populations, were uncovered in this review.

Several problems are associated with the propositions that appear to limit the extent to which the theory may be useful in understanding African-American career development. For example, given the general controversy regarding the psychological testing of African Americans and other ethnic minorities (cf. Anastasi, 1982), particularly as it pertains to ability testing (cf. Franklin, 1991; Guthrie, 1976; Helms, 1992; White, 1984), the trait-factor proposition concerning reliable and valid measurement of traits remains a prominent issue as pertains to these persons. But perhaps a greater problem with the measurement proposition is that, because of an inadequate understanding of the diverse life experiences of African Americans, an untapped domain of potential factors salient to the career behavior of these persons has been inadequately defined, operationalized, and investigated.

Regarding the proposition that occupations require a person to possess certain traits in order to be successful in it, the assumption may hold for both African Americans and Whites, but research has not addressed whether both groups are required by occupations to have the same or different sets of traits. Recently, however, Edwards and Polite (1992) developed a profile of successful African Americans based on their research that includes elements likely to be similar to Whites, like faith and personal responsibility, and others that are likely to be different, like transcendence of a racial-victim perspective and managing others’ racial perceptions and reactions; however, this work is in need of cross-validation and extension.

The trait-factor assertion that it is possible and desirable to match individual characteristics to those required by an occupation assumes that the most important or relevant traits or factors regarding African-American career success are reliably and validly measured. But if the requirements for success are different for African Americans, a question arises as to whether that difference is justifiable, legal, and measurable.

The last trait-factor proposition is that, the closer the match between individual traits and those traits required by the occupation, the greater the likelihood of individual success. This issue has yet to be explored with African Americans. The characteristics most relevant to African-American career success, aside from the pioneering work of Edwards and Polite (1992), have yet to be identified, measured, and cross-validated. It is well known, however, that psychological measures account for 36% of the variance in performance ratings, at best (Brown, 1990); consequently, 64% of that variance must be accountable by other factors. A number of important questions arise: Might factors like those identified by Edwards and Polite account for the unexplained portion of performance rating variance? Are there racial/ethnic differences in those success factors? If so, what are the implications of those differences, particularly for African Americans?

The preceding discussion notwithstanding, it may be premature to dismiss the trait and factor theory as irrelevant to the career behavior of African Americans, given the paucity of well-controlled, well-designed research testing the validity of trait-factor notions to the career behavior of African Americans. However, given that many of the propositions appear untenable, Brown’s (1990) conclusion that the theory is likely to apply equally well to African Americans and other ethnic minorities seems premature at best, most likely misleading, and unwarranted, at worst.

Roe’s Theory

There are two major contributions Roe (1956; Roe & Lunneborg, 1990) made to the career development literature: a psychologically based classification system of occupations and a theory of how personality development affects occupational choice. Regarding the classification system, Roe proposed that occupations can be ordered both along a continuum based on the intensity and nature of the interpersonal relationships involved in them and hierarchically on the basis of the degree of responsibility, capacity, and skill involved in each occupation. No specific test of Roe’s structure of occupations with African-American populations could be located. Roe and Lunneborg (1990) indicated, however, that the classification system does not address “minority issues” (p. 80). Those minority issues were not specified, but it is clear that Roe’s occupational categories, as well as other currently available classification systems, fail to consider the overrepresentation of African Americans in low-level service and laborer fields (Gottfredson, 1978a; Swinton, 1992; U.S. Department of Labor, 1991), and that the structure of occupations, not unlike the structure of occupational opportunity, may be very different for African Americans.

As pertains to the theory of personality and occupational choice, Roe proposed that genetic endowments combine with family background and childrearing experiences to shape individual need structures that, in turn, affect the level and kind of occupation chosen and pursued. In discussing the impact of race on occupational choice and opportunity, Roe suggested social, and not physical, differences might account for ethnic differences in career choice behavior (see June & Pringle, 1977; Roe, 1956). More recently (see Roe & Lunneborg, 1990), Roe articulated a formula that includes race within the constellation of factors classified as background factors. She (Roe & Lunenborg, 1990) stated that: “belonging to a minority group may be a heavily weighted aspect” (p. 88), with the determining issue being the extent to which a minority group member’s background differs from the majority. Nonetheless, no specific test of Roe’s formula with African-A...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication Page
• Contents
• Foreword
• Introduction and Overview
• I Theory and Research
• II Assessment and Intervention
• 3 Future Directions
• List of Contributors
• Author Index
• Subject Index