Transcript שקופית 1 - huji.ac.il

Facilitating Career
Decision-Making
Itamar Gati
The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
In this presentation, I will
Discuss the decision-theory viewpoint
 Present the PIC 3-stage cdm model
 Describe the CDDQ –theoretical basis and
practical utility
 Introduce the CDSQ – cdm style model and Q
 Demonstrate MBCD - Making Better Career

Decisions
Review research and demonstrate applications
 Highlight the unique features of our approach

2
Question to you 
What word was used in this presentation
(if I am careful enough) only twice?
3
But first,
how did I get here and why?









age 9 Immigration to Israel
18 – 21 compulsory military service
21 – 24 undergraduate studies (psy+econ)
22 – 24 research assistant of D. Kahneman
24 – 27 MA, Judgment and decision making
27 – 30 PhD Similarity, Amos Tversky
24 – 30 research associate, Hadassah
Career Counseling Institute
30 – 31 Fulbright Post Doc – Stanford Uni
31 – assistant prof – to professor, Hebrew Uni
4
Unique features of career decisions
 Quantity
of Information:
Often large N of alternatives and factors, within-occupation
variance,  information is practically unlimited
 Quality
of Information:
soft (i.e., verbal), subjective, fuzzy, inaccurate, biased
 Uncertainty
about:
the individual’s future preferences, future career options,
unpredictable changes and opportunities, probability of
implementing choice
 Non-cognitive
Factors:
emotional and personality-related factors, necessity for
compromise, actual or perceived social barriers and biases
5
From decision theory to
career counseling practice

Many factors contribute to the complexity and
difficulties involved in career decision-making
The claim:

Career counseling may be viewed as
decision counseling, which aims at facilitating
the clients' decision-making process, and
promotes better career decisions
6
If so evident, why was not decisiontheory adopted until now?
Because
 Normative decision theory is –

too rational
 too arbitrary
 too quantitative
 exceeds human’s information-processing capability

Descriptive decision theory is not helpful either –
it mainly documents human weakness


heuristics, biases, and fallacies
limited information-processing capabilities
7
The Proposed Approach –

By adopting decision theory and adapting it
to the unique features of career decisions,
theoretical knowledge can be translated into
practical interventions to facilitate individuals’
career choices

Specifically, we suggest focusing on a
prescriptive approach, and designing
systematic procedures that can help
individuals make better career decisions
(not necessarily rational ones!)
8
The 3 components of needs
assessment are:

the individual’s stage in the cdm process
(“where”)

the focuses of the individual’s cdm
difficulties (“what”)

the individual’s cdm style (“who”)
9
I-
Stages in the career
decision-making process
The PIC model (Gati & Asher, 2001)
separates the career decision- making
process into 3 distinct stages:
- Prescreening
- In-depth exploration
- Choice
10
Prescreening


Goal: Locating a small set (about 7) of promising
alternatives that deserve further, in-depth
exploration
Method: Sequential Elimination





Locate and prioritize relevant aspects or factors
Explicate within-aspect preferences
Eliminate incompatible alternatives
Check list of promising alternatives
Outcome: A list of verified promising
alternatives worth further, in-depth exploration
11
Steps in Sequential Elimination
Locating and prioritizing aspects or factors
Explicating within-factor preferences in the most
important factor not yet considered
Eliminating incompatible alternatives
Too many promising alternatives?
yes
no
This is the recommended list of occupations
worth further, in-depth exploration
12
A Schematic Presentation of the
Sequential Elimination Process
(within-aspects, across-alternatives)
Potential Alternatives
Aspects
a
b
1
2
3
4
.
.
.
.
N
(most
important)
(second in
importance)
c
.
n
Promising
Alternatives
13
Final step - Sensitivity Analysis
The Goal:
Verifying the “quality” of the promising list
The Method:





An alternative (compensatory-model-based)
search
“why not”
“almost compatible” options
“what if”
“similar alternatives”
14
In-depth exploration

Goal: Locating alternatives that are not only promising but
indeed suitable for the individual

Method: collecting additional information, focusing on one
promising alternative at a time:



Is the occupation INDEED suitable for me?
 verifying compatibility with one’s preferences in the most
important aspects
 considering compatibility within the less important aspects
Am I suitable for the occupation?
 probability of actualization: previous studies, grades,
achievements
 fit with the core aspects of the occupation
Outcome: A few most suitable alternatives (about 3-4)
15
A Schematic Presentation of the
In-depth Exploration Stage
(within-alternative, across aspects)
Promising Alternatives
1
2
2
3
4
5
4
5
6
Suitable Alternatives
16
Choice


Goal: Choosing the most suitable alternative, and rankordering additional, second-best alternatives
Method:


comparing and evaluating the suitable alternatives
pinpointing the most suitable one
 Am I likely to activate it?



if not - selecting second-best alternative(s)
if yes - Am I confident in my choice?
 if not: Return to In-depth exploration stage
 if yes: Done!
Outcome: The best alternative or a rank-order of the
best alternatives
17
II Career
Decision-Making Difficulties

Among the first steps in helping individuals
make a career decision is locating the
focuses of the difficulties they face in the
decision-making process

Relying on decision theory, Gati, Krausz,
and Osipow (1996) proposed a taxonomy
for describing career decision-making
difficulties
18
Possible Focuses of Career
Decision-Making Difficulties
(Gati, Krausz, & Osipow, 1996)
During the Process
Prior to Engaging
in the Process
Lack of Readiness
due to
Lack of
Indecimotivation siveness
Lack of Information
about
Dysfunc- Cdm Self Occupations
tional process
beliefs
Ways of
obtaining
info.
Inconsistent
Information due to
Unreliable Internal
Info.
conflicts
External
conflicts
19
Career Decision-Making Difficulties
This taxonomy was based on:
the stage in the decision-making
process during which the difficulties
typically arise

the similarity between the sources of
the difficulties

the effects that the difficulties may
have on the process and the relevant
type of intervention

20
The Career Decision-making
Difficulties Questionnaire (CDDQ)

The Career Decision-making Difficulties
Questionnaire (CDDQ) was developed to test
this taxonomy and serve as a means for
assessing individuals’ career decision-making
difficulties

Cronbach Alpha internal consistency estimate of
the total CDDQ score: .92 – .95

For additional information – see www.cddq.org
--- the CDDQ is free
21
Empirical Structure of
CDM Difficulties (N = 10,000)
Lack of motivation
General indecisiveness
Dysfunctional beliefs
Lack of info. about self
Lack of info about process
LoI about occupations
LoI about addition sources of help
Unreliable Information
Internal conflicts
External conflicts
22
Sample items from the CDDQ
23
The Four Stages of Interpretation
1.
Ascertaining Credibility, using validity items and the
time required to fill out the questionnaire
2.
Estimating Differentiation based on the standard
deviation of the 10 difficulty-scale scores
3.
Locating the salient, moderate, or negligible
difficulties, based on the individual's absolute and
relative scale scores
4.
Determining the confidence in the feedback
and the need to add reservations to it
(based on doubtful credibility, partial differentiation, or low
informativeness)
24
The 4 Stages of Interpretation
1
Doubtful
2
Credible
Estimating
Differentiation
Questionable
3
Aggregate
Reasons to Add
Reservation (RAR)
B/W < 1
RAR = 3
RAR ≤ 2
4
Add Reservation
to Feedback
Not Credible
Evaluating
Credibility
Low
High
Locate Salient
Difficulties
Compute
Informativeness
(B /W )
B/W > 1
Receives
Feedback
No
Feedback
25
Four Studies for validating the proposed interpretation
Method
Participants: 15-30 career counselors and 25-80
graduate counseling students
 Questionnaires – including CDDQ responses:
- in Study 1 and 4 – all possible responses;
- in Studies 2 and 3 – responses of 16 actual clients


Results:

High similarity within-groups as well as between
counselors’ and students’ judgments High similarity
between the experts’ judgments and the proposed
algorithm at each stage
26
27
28
Among the salient difficulties is
“lack of information about the career
decision-making process” (4)
Three Levels of Difficulties (negligible, moderate, salient difficulty)
in the Ten Difficulty Categories and the Four Groups (N = 6192;
H-Hebrew, E-English, p-paper and pencil, I-Internet)
salient difficulty
moderate difficulty
no difficulty
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
29
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
H
H
E
E
0%
p I p I p Ip I p I p I p Ip I p I p I p I p I p Ip I p I p I p Ip I p I p I
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
The distribution of types of
feedback in the four groups
100%
90%
80%
feedback
add reservation
70%
60%
50%
no feedback
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
P&P
Internet
Hebrew
P&P
Internet
English
30
Conclusions

The incorporation of a middle level of
discrimination increases the usefulness
of the feedback and decreases the
chances and implications of potential
errors

Adding reservations when appropriate is
essential for providing meaningful
feedback and decreasing the chances of
misleading conclusions
31
32
III –
Career
Decision-Making Styles

Diagnosing the client’s career decisionmaking style is important in order to “tailor”
the career-counseling intervention to his or
her unique characteristics

Previous research often did not take into
consideration the complexity and variety of
aspects related to the decision process
and classified decision-styles based only
on a single, most dominant
characteristic (e.g., rational vs. intuitive
decision-makers)
33
Goals

Developing a multidimensional model for describing
career decision-making styles, based on the
assumption that decision-making styles should be
described using several dimensions simultaneously
(i.e., using patterns of defining profiles)

Developing the Career Decision-making Styles
Questionnaire (CDSQ) for testing the model and
enabling a more accurate diagnosis of individual’s
career decision-making style

Empirically deriving a typology based on cluster
analysis of the CDSQ profiles from a large sample of
individuals
34
Previous Research
1. 39 labels used for describing decisionmaking styles were located
2. In light of the high resemblance among some of them
(e.g., logical [Arroba, 1977], rational [Harren, 1979],
active-planning [Jepsen, 1974], systematic [Johnson,
1978]), these 39 types were narrowed down
to 12 prototypes :
rational, perfectionist, procrastinator,
searching for tools, satisfying, hesitant,
impulsive, fatalist, intuitive, dependent,
rebellious, and pleasing.
35
Derivation of the 11 Dimensions
3. Comparing the 12 prototypes in terms of their common
and distinctive characteristics allowed us to uncover the
various characteristics differentiating among them
4. From this list we derived 11 basic dimensions relevant
for characterizing individuals' cdm styles.
Each dimension represents an attribute on which
individuals can be characterized along a continuum on
a bipolar scale:
e.g., on the dimension of pattern of information
processing individuals can be characterized from
"analytical" to "holistic";
desire to please others – "high" to "low".
36
The 11 Proposed Dimensions











Information processing (analytic vs. holistic)
Information gathering (much vs. little)
Amount of effort invested in the process (much vs. little)
Consultation with others (frequent vs. rare)
Aspiration for an "ideal occupation" (high vs. low)
Willingness to compromise (high vs. low)
Locus of control (internal vs. external)
Procrastination in entering the process (high vs. low)
Speed of making the final decision (fast vs. slow)
Dependence on others (high vs. low)
Desire to please others (high vs. low)
37
The Career-Decision-making
Style Questionnaire (CDSQ)

44 statements (4 items x 11 dimensions)

Response scale: 1 – Strongly disagree
7 – Strongly agree

The CDSQ is embedded in career-related
self-help Internet sites KIVUNIM.COM
(Hebrew), CDDQ.ORG (English)

3 Development samples (N=230, 404, 411)

Fourth sample - 479 subjects
to
38
Future Directions
http://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
39
Results – (Items)
Scale Reliabilities:
 median - .80, range .73 – .85
Factor analysis:
 10 factors
 Accounted-for Variance = .65
 2 dimensions were included in one factor
(Speed of making the final decision; Procrastination)
 Two items loaded higher on a “neighbor factor” (Informationprocessing; effort invested)
Cluster analysis:
 Accounted-for Variance = .81
 Items of 7 dimension clustered perfectly (4/4)
4 dimension – 3/4 items
40
Results - Typology
Group G1
G2
G3
G4
G5
G6
G7
DIMENSION
n=38
n=77
n=79 n=65 n=47
n=87
n=64
Information-processing
3.65
4.91
4.76
5.17
3.45
5.35
5.09
Information gathering
3.94
5.21
5.34
5.83
3.43
5.94
5.79
Amount of effort invested
4.82
6.06
6.05
5.41
4.62
6.32
5.72
Consultation with others
5.64
5.58
6.26
4.02
5.33
5.64
5.83
"ideal occupation"
4.12
2.01
3.12
2.25
3.39
2.56
2.14
Willingness to compromise
3.08
4.81
4.91
3.33
5.12
3.60
3.03
Locus of control
5.59
5.24
4.91
6.10
5.26
5.61
5.58
Speed of making decision
3.73
3.24
2.25
5.42
3.02
2.47
4.38
Procrastination
4.21
5.10
2.66
5.78
2.58
3.53
4.97
Dependence
6.16
5.60
3.89
6.47
5.76
6.19
6.40
Desire to please others
5.88
4.72
4.26
5.69
5.79
5.94
5.99
41
Conclusions

The proposed and tested 11 dimensions can
be used to characterize individuals' career
decision-making styles

Using the CDSQ, homogeneous groups of
clients with similar career decision-making
styles can be empirically identified; creating a
novel and more refined multi-dimensional
typology of decision-making styles
42
Implications for Counseling

The CDSQ allows a more accurate diagnosis
of the counselees' career decision-making
styles, thus better “tailoring” the counseling
intervention to the unique needs of
individuals and groups with different
characteristics

The CDSQ allows individuals to learn about
their career decision-making style and thus to
consider adopting more desirable strategies
43
So far, I reviewed
3 components of client’s needs assessment (the
3 “W”s) :

The individual’s stage in the cdm process (“Where”)

The focuses of the individual’s cdm difficulties (“What”)

The individual’s cdm style (“Who”)
So, what’s next?

Some demonstrations of how can the decision-making
approach be implemented in order to actually facilitate
clients’ cdm
44

Specifically,
if career decision-making requires collecting
a vast amount of information, and
if complex information-processing is needed,

we must then utilize the best available
resource:
Career counselors’ expert knowledge, that can
be elicited and transformed into Information and
Communication Technology-based systems

Indeed,
- The computer-assisted career guidance
systems, based on a decision-theory model,
can help overcome human’s cognitive limitations
- There are several computer-assisted career
guidance systems available today on the Internet
45
MBCD
Making Better Career Decisions
MBCD is an Internet-based career planning
system that is a unique combination of

a career-information system
 a decision-making support system
 an expert system
Based on the rationale of the PIC model,
MBCD is designed to help deliberating
individuals make better career decisions
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
However,
Although Internet-based, career-related
self-help sites are flourishing,
these sites, as well as “stand-alone”
computer-assisted career-guidance
systems, vary greatly in quality
Therefore,
it is very important to investigate the utility
and validity of these self-help programs
54
But,
Making
Better
Career
Decisions
Does it really work?
55
Criteria for Testing the Benefits of
Making Better Career Decisions
•
Examine users' perceptions of MBCD
•
Examine changes in user’s decision status
•
Examine perceived benefits
•
Locate factors that contribute to these
variables
56
MBCD’s Effect (Cohen’s d) on Reducing
Career Decision-Making Difficulties
(Gati, Saka, & Krausz, 2003)
0.8
0.72
0.65
d
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.31
0.3
0.2
0.11
0.1
0
Lack of
Readiness
Lack of
Information
Inconsistent
Information
Total CDDQ
57
Decision Status
Before and After the “Dialogue” with MBCD
Before the dialogue
After the dialogue
1
2
3
4
5
1- no direction
34
7
6
7
0
2 - only a general
direction
41
66
15
9
5
3 - considering a
few specific alternatives
27
58
84
30
6
4 - would like to examine
additional alternatives
23
51
35
54
6
5 - would like to collect
information about a
specific occupation
658- sure which
occupation to choose
9
20
21
41
28
3
0
1
9
16
Perceived Suitability of the "Promising Alternatives" List
(N=693)
100%
90%
too long
80%
70%
60%
50%
suitable
40%
30%
too short
20%
10%
0%
2
3-4
5
6
7
8-10 11-15 16-25
26+
(n=23) (n=74) (n=71) (n=121) (n=236) (n=45) (n=40) (n=46) (n=37)
Number of Alternatives
(n - of users)
59
Predictive Validity of MBCD
(Gati, Gadassi, & Shemesh, 2006)

Design: Comparing the Occupational
Choice Satisfaction (OCS) of two groups six
years after using MBCD and getting a list of
occupations recommended for further
exploration:

those whose present occupation was
included in MBCD’s recommended list (44%)

those whose present occupation was not
included in MBCD’s recommended list (56%)
60
Method

Participants

The original sample included 123 clients
who used MBCD in 1997, as part of their
counseling at the Hadassah CareerCounseling Institute

Out of the 73 that were located after six+
years, 70 agreed to participate in the
follow-up:
44 women (64%) and 26 men (36%),
aged 23 to 51 (mean = 28.4, SD = 5.03)
61
Frequencies of Occupational Choice Satisfaction
by “Acceptance” and “Rejection” of MBCD's
Recommendations (Gati, Gadassi, & Shemesh, 2006)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
16%
18%
low satisfaction
44%
medium satisfaction
high satisfaction
84%
38%
accepted
did not accept
recommendations
recommendations
62
Alternative Explanations –
were not supported

Differences in the lengths of the lists
No difference was found in the OCS between clients
whose list included 15 or fewer occupations and clients
whose list included more than 15 occupations

Clients who accepted MBCD’s
recommendations are more compliant,
and therefore more inclined to report a high
level of satisfaction
However, following the compensatory-model-based
recommendations did not contribute to the OCS
63
Gender Differences in Directly and Indirectly
derived Preferred Occupations
(279 Women + 79 Men, Mean Age=23; Gadassi & Gati, 2007)
Means of the Femininity-Masculinity Ratings
According to Type of List and Gender
3.18
3.13
2.96
Men
Women
2.71
Derived
3.3
3.2
3.1
3
2.9
2.8
2.7
2.6
2.5
2.4
Explicit
64
Summary of Major Findings


PIC is compatible with people’s intuitive ways
of making decisions (Gati & Tikotzki, 1989)
Most users report progress in the career
decision-making process (Gati, Kleiman, Saka, &
Zakai, 2003)
 Satisfaction was also reported among those who
did not progress in the process
 Users are “goal-directed” – the closer they are to
making a decision, the more satisfied they are with
MBCD

The list of “recommended” occupations are
not gender-type biased (Gadassi & Gati, 2007)
65
What I did not review today





Career compromises – framings and their
implications
The assessment of career-related preference
crystallization (based on the aspects-based
approach)
Career indecisiveness (i.e., emotional and
personality related career decision-making
difficulties)
Core aspects – that capture the essence of
occupations
Dysfunctional beliefs – which, why, when
66
In Conclusion –
Features of our Approach

Prescreening is essential when the number of
potential alternatives (e.g., occupations, majors,
jobs) is large

Instead of focusing on occupations (alternatives) we
suggest to focus on aspects or characteristic of the
options

Instead of the “snap-shot” – static assessments of
vocational interests (e.g., the 3-highest RIASEC
Holland’s code), use for prescreening a wide range
of factors aspects elicited by a dynamic,
interactive process
67
In Conclusion –
Features of our Approach (cont.)

From the viewpoint of the individual, this enables:
- Differentiating between relative importance of
factors, the optimal level, and the willingness to
compromise
- Assessing the individual’s preference crystallization
(does s/he knows what s/he is looking for)

With respect to occupations, this enables:
- Characterizing occupations in terms of a range of
levels, representing the within-occupation variance
- Highlighting the essence of the occupation (using
the core aspects)
68
We believe that . . .

Career-related assessments can and has to be
useful both in self-help and in personal, face-toface counseling situations

Computers can and should be used not only for
scoring (and “arbitrary” feedback), but also for
monitoring a dynamic interaction and providing
flexible interpretations (including “reservations”)

Experts’ knowledge can and should be elicited,
and then transformed to design and improve
interpretive feedbacks on assessments
69
We also believe that . . .

Career choices are the outcome of decisionmaking processes; therefore, career counseling
is, in fact, decision counseling

Decision theory can be translated into practical
interventions aimed at facilitating individuals’
career decision-making

The goal should be promoting a systematic
decision making process – not a rational one
70
Finally, we also believe that . . .

Career-related assessments can be transformed
into user-friendly Internet-based systems, which
can also be incorporated into counseling
interventions

Interpretive feedback is important but has to be
“tailored” and validated

Theory-based interventions should always be
empirically tested for theoretical validity as well as
practical effectiveness
71

And what was the word I used (hopefully)
only twice?
72
To conclude
From the presented perspective, the goal
of career counseling is
facilitating
making better career decisions
73
www.cddq.org
[email protected]
74
end
--
75