What is career counseling? Is it different from other forms of counseling? Is it the same? Is there overlap? These questions are being asked with increasing frequency today as attempts are being made to clarify this form of counseling (Amundson, Harris-Bowlsbey, & Niles, 2009; Capuzzi & Stauffer, 2012; Savickas, 2011). Central to the ongoing discussion about career counseling are two issues. First is the issue of the nature of career counseling. What are its intrinsic characteristics and qualities? Are psychological processes involved? Second is the issue of structure. Does career counseling have structure? If so, what is the configuration, sequence, and interrelationships of the phases and subphases involved?
The Nature of Career Counseling
âHistorically, career and vocational counseling have served as the cornerstones upon which the counseling profession was builtâ (Dorn, 1992, p. 176). Unfortunately, along the path of history, career counseling became stereotyped. In many peopleâs minds it became time limited, it was devoid of psychological processes, and it focused on outcomes and methods (Osipow, 1982). Swanson (1995), paraphrasing the work of Manuele-Adkins, underscored this point:
Manuele-Adkins (1992) described elements of a stereotypic view of career counseling that discredit its psychological component and affect the quality and delivery of career counseling services. In this stereotypic view, career counseling is a rational process, with an emphasis on information-giving, testing, and computer-based systems; it is short-term, thus limiting the range of possible intervention strategies and obscuring psychological processes such as indecision; and it is different from personal counseling, thus lowering the perceived value of career counseling and increasing a false separation between work and nonwork. (p. 222)
Young and Domene (2012) added to this historical debate by stating there is still a disconnect âbetween career counseling and counseling for other areas of life, such as family, emotional difficulties and relationship issuesâ (p. 16). They pointed out that unfortunately practitioners in career counseling and counseling even have different professional identities, practices, and professional associations, which further adds to the separation. As a result, they noted, there is often failure to connect with each other and use each otherâs professional literature.
This separation has led some individuals to see counselors who do career counseling as active and directive because they use qualitative and quantitative assessments and information. Counselors who do personalâemotional counseling, in contrast, are seen by others as facilitative and exploratory because they focus on psychological processes, that is, on clientâcounselor interactions (Imbimbo, 1994). This dichotomy of views has led to the classic stereotype of career counseling as âthree interviews and a cloud of dustâ (Crites, 1981, pp. 49â52). It is not surprising, therefore, that career counseling does not fare well in the eyes of practitioners when compared to personalâemotional counseling, given the classic stereotype.
In addition, we believe this dichotomy has caused the public to form spurious beliefs and ideas about the nature of career counseling. Amundson et al. (2009) labeled these spurious beliefs and ideas as career counseling myths:
- Career counselors have at their disposal standardized assessments that can be used to tell people which occupation they should choose.
- Work role decisions can be made in isolation from other life roles.
- Career counseling does not address âpersonalâ issues.
- Career counselors do not need extensive counseling expertise to do their work competently.
- Career counseling does not address the clientâs context and culture.
- Career counseling is required only when a career decision must be made.
- Career counseling ends when a career decision is made. (p. 5)
Contrary to the classic stereotype, we believe that career counseling belongs in the general class of counseling because it has the same intrinsic characteristics and qualities that all forms of counseling possess. It differs from the rest of the class, however, because presenting problems often focus on work and career issues, and quantitative and qualitative assessment procedures and information are used more frequently. Swanson (1995) suggested this characterization of career counseling when she defined it as âan ongoing, face-to-face interaction between counselor and client, with the primary focus on work- or career-related issues; the interaction is psychological in nature, with the relationship between counselor and client serving an important functionâ (p. 245).
As those of you who are practicing counselors know, client presenting problems often are only a beginning point, and as counseling unfolds, other problems emerge. Career issues frequently become personalâemotional issues and family issues, and then career issues again (Andersen & Vandehey, 2012). Psychological distress is often present (Multon, Heppner, Gysbers, Zook, & Ellis-Kalton, 2001). Thoughts, emotions, and feelings are all involved. As Kidd (2004) pointed out, âWe . . . need to know more about how the expression of emotion affects career developmentâ (p. 443). Hartung (2011a) supported Kiddâs point by stating,
Emotion holds promise for providing answers to questions about the why of vocational behavior. It seems time to examine emotionâs role in career theory and practice more broadly and specifically in fostering goal directedness, shaping purpose, constructing meaning, increasing narratability, and promoting intentionality in life-career design. (p. 302)
The stereotyped division of counseling into the separate classes of personalâemotional and career is artificial and cannot stand in practice because many clients are dealing with multiple personalâemotional and career problems simultaneously, many of them connected and intertwined (R. E. Lent & Brown, 2013). This is not a new idea. Years ago, Super (1957) said, âThe distinction between vocational and personal counseling seems artificial, and the stressing of one at the expense of the other seems uncalled forâ (p. 196). More recently, Flores (2007) stated, âBoth the personal and career life spheres are understood to occur concurrently and to operate interdependently with one anotherâ (pp. 3â4). As Amundson (1998) suggested, âMost people come to counseling with life problems that do not fall neatly into the categories of career or personal: life just does not define itself that neatlyâ (p. 16).
If career counseling belongs to the same class as other forms of counseling, then why do we use the term career counseling at all? We advocate the use of the term partly because of history. As stated earlier, the use of the word vocational, now career, is part of our heritage.
History alone, however, is not a sufficient reason to continue to use the term career counseling. There is another reasonâthe need to focus attention on client problems dealing with work and career issues that require theoretical conceptions and interventions originating from career developme...