1. Making Better Career Decisions Itamar Gati The Hebrew University of Jerusalem

2. 2 Parsons (1908) Zytowski (2008)

3. 3 Career Decision-Making Difficulties One of 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 of career decision-making difficulties

4. 4 Prior to Engaging in the Process Lack of Readiness due to Lack of motivation Indeci- siveness Dysfunc- tional beliefs During the Process Lack of Information about Cdm process Self Occu- pations Ways of obtaining info. Inconsistent Information due to Unreliable Info. Internal conflicts External conflicts Possible Focuses of Career Decision-Making Difficulties (Gati, Krausz, & Osipow, 1996)

5. 5 www.cddq.orgwww.cddq.org :

6. 6 Sample from the CDDQ

7. 7 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) LP

8. 8 The PIC model (Gati & Asher, 2001) separates the career decision-making process into 3 distinct stages: - Prescreening - In-depth exploration - Choice Stages in the career decision-making process

9. 9 Prescreening Goal : Locating a small set (about 7) of promising alternatives that deserve further, in- depth exploration Method: Sequential Elimination

10. 10 A Schematic Presentation of the Sequential Elimination Process (within-aspects, across-alternatives) Potential Alternatives 1 2 3 4.... N Aspects a (most important) b (second in importance) c. n Promising Alternatives

11. 11 Prescreening (cont.) Method: Sequential Elimination  Locate and prioritize relevant aspects or factors  Explicate within-aspect preferences  Eliminate incompatible alternatives  Check list of promising alternatives (Sensitivity analysis)

12. 12 Prescreening (cont.) Goal: Locating a small set (about 7) of promising alternatives that deserve further, in-depth exploration Method: Sequential Elimination Outcome : A short list of “verified”, promising alternatives worth further, in-depth exploration

13. 13 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?  Am I suitable for the occupation? Outcome: A few (e.g., 3-4) most suitable alternatives

14. 14 Choice Goal: Choosing the most suitable alternative, and rank- ordering additional, second-best alternatives Method:  comparing and evaluating the suitable alternatives  pinpointing the most suitable one Am I likely to actualize it?  if not - selecting second-best alternative(s)  if yes - Am I confident in my choice? Outcome: The best alternative or a rank-order of the best alternatives

15. 15 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

16. 16 Making Better Career Decisions http://mbcd.intocareers.org

17. 17 However, Although Internet-based, career-related self-help sites are flourishing, these sites vary greatly in quality Therefore, it is very important to investigate the utility and validity of these self-help programs So, the question is Making Better Career Decisions Does it really work?

18. 18 MBCD’s Effect (Cohen’s d) on Reducing Career Decision-Making Difficulties (Gati, Saka, & Krausz, 2003)

19. 19 Predictive Validity of MBCD: A 6-year follow-up Frequencies of Occupational Choice Satisfaction by “Acceptance” and “Rejection” of MBCD's Recommendations (Gati, Gadassi, & Shemesh, 2006)

20. 20 Gender Differences in Directly Elicited and Indirectly Derived Preferred Occupations (279 Women + 79 Men, Mean Age=23; Gadassi & Gati, 2008) 2. Preferences in 31 career-related aspects MBCD 4. Indirectly Derived list of recommended occupations Data from participant: 1. Directly Elicited list of preferred occupations 5. comparison Occupational information database 3. Matching preferences & database

21. 21 Gender Differences in Directly Elicited and Indirectly Derived Preferred Occupations (279 Women + 79 Men, Mean Age=23; Gadassi & Gati, 2008) Masculine Feminine

22. 22 Conclusions Internet-based interactive systems, that implement decision-theory, can help individuals in making better career decisions Career counseling may be viewed as decision counseling, which aims at facilitating the clients' decision-making process, and promotes better career decisions The challenge – how to incorporate quality self- help tools in the face-to-face counseling process

23. 23 itamar.gati@huji.ac.il www.cddq.org

24. 24 end --

25. 25

26. 26 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 less influenced by gender stereotypes (Gadassi & Gati, 2008)

27. 27

28. 28 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 ranged from.92 to.95 The proposed structure was empirically supported (N=10,000) For additional information – see www.cddq.org --- the CDDQ is offered free of charge ---www.cddq.org

29. 29 Decision Status Before and After the “Dialogue” with MBCD After the dialogue Before the dialogue 12345 1- no direction 347670 2 - only a general direction 41661595 3 - considering a few specific alternatives 275884306 4 - would like to examine additional alternatives 235135546 5 - would like to collect information about a specific occupation 920214128 6 - sure which occupation to choose 301916