Extreme careerism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Careerism)
Jump to: navigation, search

According to Bratton and Kacmar's article, The Dark Side of Impression Management, extreme careerism is the propensity to pursue career advancement, power, and prestige through any positive or negative non-performance based activity that is deemed necessary. These "non-performance" based activities are activities in which an employee can easily manipulate the people whom he is trying to impress.[1] Extreme careerism has become increasingly common in the business and organisational world in the 1990s and 2000s.[citation needed] In the United States, seventeen additional workdays have been added to the calendar since 1994.[citation needed]

Cultural environment[edit]

How careerists view their occupational goals are highly influenced by cultural factors. How an individual interprets the term "career" can distinguish between an extreme careerist, and one who can leave their career at the door when they come home at night.

According to Schein,[2] there are three important aspects of cultural environments and careerism:

  • How culture influences the concept of careerism
  • How culture influences the importance of a career relative to personal and family matters.
  • How culture influences the bases of marginal careers.

The term "career" was once[when?] used for the purposes of status. Career was thought of as a long-term job opportunity, that many, in fact would hold until retirement. In the United States especially after WWII, those who were lucky enough to find a career would stay with the same company for decades. A career was seen as an upper-class, professional service, such as a doctor, lawyer, investor, banker or teacher. Occupations were seen as lower-class human services jobs, such as a taxi driver, clerk, secretary, or waste management. These "jobs" were not held to the high regard that careers were.

In the 2000s, the average American does not stay with the same company, business or organization until retirement.

In regards to commitment, an individual must rely and commit to the occupational setting, the family setting, and to his own setting. The careerist must determine what is the most important factor in their lives.[dubious ] To the career extremist, it is the occupational setting. Some organizations require the individual to be in "work-mode" at all times, while others believe that family time is more important. Most Latin American countries value family and personal time, whereas the United States pushes for a stronger workforce in regards to careerism.[citation needed] In the United States this is mainly because of the push for education. Currently, the United States ranks 10th among industrial countries for percentage of adults with college degrees. With this push in education many people have better careers and are then able to have the choice of family matters, personal matter, or career matters. Even though in the United States careerism is very important, family life is also a huge part of the culture. Many people start their families even while in school, then they begin their careers. Recently[when?] the importance of family matters and career matters has evolved and is becoming more and more tied together.

Cultures put pressure and determine what career motives are acceptable and how their success is measured. To extreme careerists, success is measured by acknowledgements through praise and material possessions, whether it be a new office, a raise or a congratulations in front of an individuals colleagues, notice is success. In the U.S., there is an extreme drive of personal success and those who are ambitious are the ones who gain the power in an organization.[citation needed]

See also[edit]

Sources and references[edit]

  1. ^ Griffin, Ricky W. (2004). Dark side of organizational behavior. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 
  2. ^ Culture as an Environmental Context for Careers.Edgar H. Schein Journal of Occupational Behaviour, Vol. 5, No. 1, A Special Issue on Environment and Career (Jan., 1984), pp. 71-81 http://www.jstor.org/stable/3000310