Career Development: Analyzing Traditional and Protean Approaches

This report examines two primary approaches to career development: the traditional and the protean models. The traditional approach, rooted in hierarchical structures and organizational tenure, emphasizes career progression through promotions, status, and rewards, with success often measured by climbing the corporate ladder. Conversely, the protean career model prioritizes individual goals and well-being, with a focus on self-directed career management and values-driven career orientation. The report highlights the key differences between these models, including the locus of control (external vs. internal) and the metrics of success (organizational versus individual). It references key research in the field, including the work of Akkermans, Baruch, Chan, Clarke, and Gubler, to provide a comprehensive overview of these contrasting career development philosophies.

Running head: CAREER DEVELOPMENT
Traditional and Protean Approach of Career Development
Name of the Student
Name of the University
Author Note

1
CAREER DEVELOPMENT
Traditional and Protean Approach of Career Development
Traditional career is oriented externally and it emphasise the progression through
hierarchy positions and is measure on the basis of the job role, responsibility, status and
reward given by the organisation (Akkermans et al. 2013). Traditional mode of the career
development is thus dependent on the tenure of the service, geographic mobility and the
tenacity or rate at which the person is successful in climbing up the corporate ladder. It is one
of the dominant models of career development and is evaluation is dependent on growth
statistics in terms of promotions, appraisals and performance (Clarke 2013).
At present the careers are thought to be internally-oriented. It is now considered to be
mobile where the goals are set by the individuals and is measured on the basis of the
individual well-being (Gubler, Arnold and Coombs 2014). The concept of protean career
was first introduced by Douglas T. Hall in his book Careers in Organizations in the year
1976. This emerging form of career development is less dependent upon the organization in
terms of defining the career success and is more inclined on the individual goals or
achievement (Baruch 2014). It is basically a manifestation of the individual career action.
Individual, who is a protean, is supposed to keep psychological success much ahead of the
norms and the concerns which have their source outside of the concerned individual.
However, this psychological success is relative and varies from person to person (Chan et al.
2015). Two broad dimensions of the protean career are self-directed career management and
values-driven career orientation (Chan et al. 2015).

2
CAREER DEVELOPMENT
References
Akkermans, J., Brenninkmeijer, V., Huibers, M. and Blonk, R.W., 2013. Competencies for
the contemporary career: Development and preliminary validation of the Career
Competencies Questionnaire. Journal of Career Development, 40(3), pp.245-267.
Baruch, Y., 2014. The development and validation of a measure for protean career
orientation. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 25(19), pp.2702-
2723.
Chan, K.Y., Uy, M.A., Moon-ho, R.H., Sam, Y.L., Chernyshenko, O.S. and Yu, K.Y.T.,
2015. Comparing two career adaptability measures for career construction theory: Relations
with boundaryless mindset and protean career attitudes. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 87,
pp.22-31.
Clarke, M., 2013. The organizational career: not dead but in need of redefinition. The
International Journal of Human Resource Management, 24(4), pp.684-703.
Gubler, M., Arnold, J. and Coombs, C., 2014. Reassessing the protean career concept:
Empirical findings, conceptual components, and measurement. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 35(S1).

3
CAREER DEVELOPMENT