Sung‐Kyung Yoo and Hyjin Lee
Traditionally, mid‐career has been considered a plateaued period marked by the experience of mastery and maintenance (Slay, Taylor, & Williamson, 2004). However, with the increase in career changes due to shifting economic conditions and organizational structures, mid‐career is now considered a time of transition and continued growth. Although career transitions occur throughout the lifespan, the transition around the age of 45, termed mid‐life career transition, is considered the most prevalent and critical. The purpose of this chapter is to discuss positive approaches to mid‐career or mid‐life career transition. To this end, three themes are specified and covered in depth.
The first theme is the overview of mid‐career transition. To understand mid‐career transition, we review the evolution of the notion of mid‐career from a time of maintenance to a time of transition. While discussing the key features of mid‐career transition, we try to differentiate the mid‐career transition and the mid‐life transition. In spite of the substantial overlap between the two concepts, the experiences of the mid‐career transition and the mid‐life career transition are distinct. The second theme is the review of the relevant theories that contribute to the understanding of mid‐career transition. Classical theories on mid‐life crisis provide an important framework to approach mid‐career as a time to simultaneously look back and look forward. Also, the recent models of the boundaryless and protean career provide critical importance of self‐directed and value‐driven attitude for individual initiated career transition. The last theme of the chapter is the promotion of a positive approach to mid‐career transition at both individual and organizational levels. Based on suggestions from the recent career models, we discuss the important roles of career adaptability and self‐awareness in facilitating positive mid‐career transition. In addition, a positive approach to mid‐career transition cannot be achieved without sufficient support from organizations. Due to the unpredictable fluctuation in the economy and rapid changes in employees’ needs, organizations are required to constantly align the characters of each employee with the requirements of each job, while also taking the situational context into consideration. Through this alignment process, a proper level of adaptability for mid‐career transition can be reached. Recent trends in organizational psychology practice are also discussed in this section.
Mid‐career was initially considered a time to maintain the career one had established in early adulthood (Super, 1957). However, the maintenance notion of mid‐career contrasts with the well‐known crisis notion of mid‐life, which views mid‐life as a critical developmental phase characterized by change points, or periods of transition (Jaques, 1965; Jung, 1966). This apparent disagreement between the notions of mid‐career and mid‐life can be explained by the fact that career researchers made overly specific distinction between “career” and “personal issues” in addressing career development (Hackett, 1993; Swanson & Holton, 2001). However, since the beginning of the 21st century, there has been an increased appreciation of the mobility and potential for continued growth in mid‐career. Such change was possible due to dramatic shifts in the economy and in organizations, as well as individuals’ increasing need for integration of work and nonwork experiences. This change of perspectives is reflected in the contemporary notion of mid‐career as a time for transition, in which individuals both look back and look forward (Vander Zanden, 2000). The concept of mid‐career transition appears to adequately incorporate the characteristics of mid‐life. We will discuss the issue of mid‐career transition as a way of integrating career and personal issues and as a phenomenon reflecting emerging changes in contemporary societies. In our discussion of mid‐career transition, we will use the terms “mid‐life career transition” and “mid‐career transition” distinctively, in spite of many commonalities between them. The term mid‐life career transition emphasizes career reevaluation and change that emerge as a reaction to mid‐life crisis, regardless of the person’s stage in his or her career. In contrast, mid‐career transition is defined as expeditions and changes undertaken at the midpoint of one’s working life, regardless of one’s biological age. Although there appears to be a substantial overlap between the two experiences, we will address their disparate psychological aspects.
To take a closer look at the phenomenon of mid‐career, we need to first explore the meaning of “mid.” When is mid‐career? The concept of mid‐career is based on the classical notion of mid‐life. Mid‐life, sometimes referred to as middle adulthood or middle age, is defined as the period between the ages of 35 and 65 (Dacey & Travers, 2004; Vander Zanden, 2000). Super (1957) defined the mid‐life career stage as a maintenance stage (ages 45–64), with preceding stages of growth stage (birth to age 14), exploration stage (ages 15–24), and establishment stage (ages 25–44), and followed by decline stage (age 65 and on). Since mid‐career issues were addressed within the career development stage model based on chronological ages, initially the term mid‐career was used interchangeably with mid‐life career.
Recognizing the limitation of proposing strict linearity and distinctiveness across career stages, Super (1980) later acknowledged that people who do not wish to continue their established career may recycle through various career stages, which may ramify into career change. Super, Savickas, & Super (1996) also questioned whether people want to continue their career for the rest of their working lives. They suggested that the developmental tasks of the maintenance stage (ages 45–65) are “holding on, keeping up, and innovating” (p. 134). The notion that mid‐career is not a time to merely hold onto the previously established career, but rather a time to generate career innovations, reflects the more active stance of contemporary mid‐career workers. Along with the expansion of Super’s life‐span, life‐space (LSLS) theory (1957, 1990; Super et al., 1996), which included the concepts of recycling and self‐concept implementation, other models of adult development (e.g., Golan, 1986; Levinson, 1980) also recognized that many college‐educated mid‐lifers reevaluated and changed their careers in relation to their personal lives and goals (Arbona, 2003). Similarly, scholars such as Sheehy (1976), Vaillant (1977), Gould (1978), and Levinson, Darrow, Klein, Levinson, & McKee (1978) began to argue that mid‐life can be a time of considerable transition, reshaping the view on mid‐life career as a time for potential continued growth (Wang, Olson, & Shultz, 2013). According to the revised view on mid‐career, individuals in middle adulthood are required to recycle through earlier career stages and crystallize a new choice (Savickas, 1990) through navigating new life situations and role transitions.
Career change may take place at any age across the lifespan; however, people often seek new career opportunities around the age of 45 (Guerrier & Philpot, 1978). Middle adulthood in general can be considered a critical time for change (Barclay, Stoltz, & Chung, 2011; Bobek & Robbins, 2005; Heppner, Multon, & Johnston, 1994). Researchers examining older people in organizations often put the threshold at 40 or 45, seeing “old” as referring to obsolete knowledge, skills, and attitudes (Kooij, De Lange, Jansen, & Dikkers, 2008). Therefore, the choices and experiences individuals make and have around the age of 45 significantly influence how people evaluate their present choices and options, as well as the risks they are willing to take. Whereas career reevaluation during mid‐career may emerge as a reaction to mid‐life crisis, individuals must also respond to rapid shifts in economic situations. With globalization and the intensified economic competition in the 21st century, individuals are required to proactively change their career more frequently.
As Hall (1996) suggested, the concept of one career in one life is not valid or realistic any more. A lifelong stationary career is not a norm in the 21st century. With higher demands for learning experiences and voluntary efforts by employees to change career, career transitions have escalated significantly. As a result, the career transition is not delayed until middle adulthood, and mid‐career transition may occur even before mid‐life. As a response to the dramatic changes in the 21st century, mid‐career workers, not limited to mid‐life workers, are now more mobile and less secure than in the past, and are expected to take greater responsibility in shaping their own career.
More recent career models (e.g., the protean career model [Hall, 1996, 2002], and the boundaryless career model [Arthur & Rousseau, 1996]) suggest the need for individual‐initiated career change in contemporary societies. To understand the background of mid‐career transition, we need to consider both macro‐ and micro‐level approaches, as Swanson & Holton (2001) and Ng, Sorensen, and Yim (2009) suggested. At macro‐level, we will focus on two conditions, economic changes and population aging. First, globalization and intensified economic competition have become increasingly apparent in the past 10 years (Power & Rothausen, 2003; Sullivan, 1999), and they are rapidly changing the shape of organizations. Power and Rothausen (2003) acknowledged a set of contemporary problems, such as the flattening of organizational structure that leads to fewer opportunities for individuals to move beyond the middle management level via vertical corporate ascension. Since there is no guarantee for promotion in developing organization‐specific skills and knowledge, more individuals are challenged to engage in multiple careers and to reinvent their career trajectories. Changes in economy and organizational systems are profoundly altering the way people live and relate to others (Carnoy, 2001; Liu, Englar‐Carlson, & Minichiello, 2012). Exposed to the turbulent and unpredictable contemporary workplace (Bauman, 1998; Beck, 1992; Giddens, 1991), people need to assume full responsibility for their career paths. As a result, careers are customized according to one’s needs, circumstances, and abilities. In other words, organization‐owned career paths are now replaced with individual‐initiated career paths.
In addition to the rapid changes in economic situations and organizational structures, population aging is another macro‐level contextual factor that affects the mid‐career transition. The population is aging and the workforce is “graying” (Alley & Crimmins, 2007). Especially, as the baby boomers – those born between 1957 to 1964 – age, most countries encounter the issue of an aging population and workforce. As individuals are living longer and more healthily, they are expected to spend about a third of their lives in retirement after leaving their main jobs (Owen & Flynn, 2004). Many studies show that middle‐age or elderly workers often wish to remain in the labor force and delay retirement. A survey in the USA found that approximately 80% of baby boomers anticipated working past the traditional retirement age, at least as part‐time employees (Harris Interactive, 2005). To remain in the labor force, mid‐career workers are required to be flexible in planning their future worklife. To help middle‐age and elderly workers delay retirement and remain in the workforce, the OECD countries (2015) argued for a new agenda of age‐friendly employment policies and practices. Also, the European Union has set targets to increase the labor market participation of workers between the ages of 50 and 69 by 50%. In addition to the macro‐level policies that accommodate the aging workforce, individuals are responsible for planning how and when to exit from the labor market. More recent career models promote more proactive and agentic attitudes in approaching career transition, which are highly applicable to mid‐career workers in their preparation for gradual retirement or career renewal (Bejian & Salomone, 1995; Murphy & Burck, 1976; Williams & Savickas, 1990). We will discuss means to help mid‐career workers prepare for career transition in the next section.
In addition to the macro‐level factors (e.g., economic conditions and industry differences), researchers on career mobility have also considered micro‐level factors (e.g., individual differences: dispositional attributes; Ng, Sorensen, Eby, & Feldman, 2007). A person’s career is not just “blowing in the wind in a world without boundaries” (Feldman 2002, p. 4), but is anchored by factors such as one’s interests, needs, abilities, values, and personality. Among these individual psychosocial variables influencing mid‐career transition, values and meaning of work have been identified as especially salient factors (Hall, Feldman, & Kim, 2013). Based on their reflection on why they work and what needs they want to fulfill through work, individuals prepare for and make decisions on mid‐career transition. Living in the 21st century, an era of well‐being, individuals care more about the integration of work and personal lives than ever before (Greenhaus & Allen, 2011). One recent meta‐analysis found that supporting work–family issues has become a major part of a supervisor’s role expectation at work (Kossek, Pichler, Bodner, & Hammer, 2011), showing how both employers and employees consider work and family integration important. The increasing concern for work–life integration among workers is an important background to mid‐career transition in the modern society.
When the career change is negative, the purpose and value of work play critical roles in fostering the meaningfulness of work. It is especially true for people who are highly self‐directed and value‐driven (Hall et al., 2013). As a person ages, the focus of his or her work and career plans subtly shifts from personal goals to the amount of time left to work (Smyer & Pitt‐Catsouphes, 2007). Recognizing the limited time left for work, mid‐career workers tend to seek meaning in work that is compatible with their meaning in life, and want to fulfill their life values through their career. Empirical studies show a certain connection between the meaning of work and the overall meaning of life (Holbeche & Springett, 2004). Steger and Dik (2009) recognized the importance of meaning in work by finding that meaning in work might make a lager contribution to meaning in life than meaning in life makes to meaningful work. It shows the importance of having meaning in one’s work during mid‐life for living up to one’s ideas of meaning in life.
The macro‐level changes in economic and employment conditions and the micro‐level changes in values and meanings related to work affect the experiences of mid‐career transition in certain ways. Now we will explore the key features of mid‐career transition that are distinct from mid‐life career transition.
With dramatic changes in the economy and in employment structure, a continuous and logically coherent working life is now less available (Carnoy, 1999), and career changes are becoming more prominent in contemporary societies. Career transition is marked by the “entry [to] a new occupation which requires fundamentally different skills, daily routines, and work environment from the present one” (Feldman, 2002, p. 76). Career change is defined as a shift from one job to another, or a complete change of career. Any career change, whether it is negative or positive, is disruptive (Farjoun, 2010). Especially, career changes in mid‐life are more prevalent and salient as they intermingle with biological, psychological, and social changes during mid‐life. As a subtype of mid‐career transition, mid‐life career transitions are a reaction to both experience and mortality (Zemon, 2002). Consequentially, the features of mid‐life career transition are different from mid‐career transition, although there are many commonalities. In this section, we will discuss the distinct features and focuses of mid‐life career transition and mid‐career transition.
Although chronological age is not equivalent to career age, chronological age is still a salient factor in career transition (David, 2005). As employees are getting more self‐driven, “age” plays a key role in mid‐life. Older individuals are less motivated to learn (Inceoglu, Segers, Bartram, & Vloeberghs, 2008; Maurer, 2001; Warr, 2001; Warr & Birdi, 1998). To put it more concretely, older employees are less motivated by extrinsically rewarding job features but more by intrinsically rewarding job features. Inceoglu, Segers, and Bartram’s empirical research (2012) through a motivation questionnaire over 9,388 employees showed that intrinsically rewarding job features such as interesting tasks, working with other people, and having autonomy over one’s own tasks tend to have stronger effects when employees are older. In contrast, extrinsically rewarding job features such as status, financial rewards, praise and outward signs of recognition, and a pleasant work environment tend to have weaker effect when employees are older. Kanfer and Ackerman (2004) also noticed that the need to achieve and meet the performance requirements tends to decline with age. Reasons for such decline include lower energy levels, habituation effects, and reduced expected values of the required effort (Warr, 2001).
Owen and Flynn (2004) noted that people in early adulthood change jobs due to more career‐related reasons. However, when people reach their mid‐thirties, they become less likely to experience positive change. Owen and Flynn (2004) empirically explored the types of career change during mid‐to‐late life transitions in employment, and found that only 28% of the research participants were choosers, those who would enjoy a new phase of life, or the “third age”; 40% were survivors, who made their career transitions for reasons beyond their control; and 32% were jugglers between work and nonwork. That only a limited percentage of mid‐life workers were choosers of their work implies that career changes in mid‐to‐late life are quite negative, marked by a decreased sense of control.
Other research results also negatively portray involuntary mid‐life career transition. For example, according to a report by Ilg (2010), in 2009 in the USA, only 18% of workers aged 25–54 were able to find another job after being laid off. This shows that although most mid‐life workers want to continue working either full‐ or part‐time, the chances of remaining in the workforce are reduced. Research also indicates significant negative effects of unemployment on middle‐aged workers (Murphy & Shillingford, 2012), which were especially evident and severe among men (Goodman, Schlossberg, & Anderson, 2006; Jeon & Jin, 2011; Levinson, 1978, 1990). Simmelink (2006) compared the negative psychological effects of a job loss or an involuntary career change to that of a grieving process, conveying the negative impact of losing one’s job. Research highlights that losing a job may result in lower self‐esteem, shame, isolation, and depression. And if depression does become worse, the ability to seek reemployment can be impaired (Guindon & Smith, 2002). Considering the negative effects of unprepared, mandated career transition during mid‐life, research and practice on facilitating positive career transition during mid‐life is imperative.
In spite of the vulnerability of mid‐life career transition, Huebner and Royal (2013) argued that voluntary mid‐life career changes could sometimes be attributed to self‐actualization concerns. It is not uncommon for a middle‐aged adult to ask himself why he is doing what he does for a living. In a serious reflection on this question, some workers realize that the original reasons for their career choices are no longer valid (Super & Bohn, 1970). Some workers may not be willing to sustain the personal sacrifice that they endured in their twenties and thirties. Changing careers in mid‐life is not always a rational decision; emotion often plays a strong role (Huebner & Royal, 2013). However, while the mid‐life workers reevaluate what they have accomplished, they also explore alternatives through seeking new information about the world of work (Super, 1980) or search for meaning in life. Some successfully attain this latter quest through discovering their calling (Huebner & Royal, 2013).
There are many reasons for voluntary mid‐life career change (Barclay et al., 2011). Some of these include occupational dissatisfaction (Brown, 1995; Donohue, 2007), lack of challenge (Vander Zanden, 2000), lack of career‐related identity (Dacey & Travers, 2004), stress and anxiety related to job insecurity (Donohue, 2007; Tivendell & Bourbonnais, 2000), workplace bullying (Donohue, 2007), and conflicts between work and other life roles (Brown, 1995). The reasons behind job changes and the specific transition processes they choose are incorporated in individuals’ experience of mid‐career transition.
As workers are constantly required to consider career changes to adapt to the dynamic shifts in the economy and globalized competition, frequent career changes and early exit are noticeable phenomena in the labor market. For example, the U.S. Department of Labor (2008) reported that a person born between 1957 and 1964 held 10.8 jobs between the ages of 19 and 42 on average (Barclay et al., 2011). Another survey with 724 Korean employers reported that the average number of career changes during working life was about 2.8 (Career, 2013). In terms of early exit phenomena, according to OECD, the average effective age of retirement from 2007 to 2012 in Korea was 71.1 for men and 69.8 for women. However, one recent survey conducted in 2015 reported that the Korean employees’ expected retirement age is 52, and that younger workers expect to retire at an earlier age than older workers do. In addition, the survey result showed that 82.8% of the participants expressed anxiety about being laid off unprepared (Job Korea, 2015). The early exit phenomenon is one of the worldwide concerns in the labor market (HayGroup, 2013).
To adapt to the frequent career changes and early exit, individuals have to prepare for and plan career changes much earlier than mid‐life. Whereas the mid‐life career transition is based on psychological development with an assumption of a stable world of work, the mid‐career transition needs a more strategic approach. More proactive initiation of career transitions can be found in mid‐career transitions than in mid‐life career transitions. The focus of mid‐career transition is to enhance the work value of potential employees, whereas the focus of mid‐life career transition is to prepare for a better exit from labor force. However, both types of transitions require self‐directed and value‐driven reflection on what individuals have done and what they want to fulfill in the future. In the rest of the chapter, we will use mid‐career transition as a term that incorporates mid‐life career transition, since the concept of mid‐career transition is not limited to the chronological developmental stage.
As reviewed above, the world of work demands employees to be increasingly adaptable, imposing greater pressure on them. Consequently, those who are at the midpoint of their career path need support from the organization and from people outside the workplace, including family, friends, or even professionals. However, as Peake and McDowall (2012) stated, noticeably little research exists on mid‐career transitions, especially on the impacts of mid‐career occupational transitions. In this section, we review the theories that have contributed to our understanding of mid‐career transition. Based on the review of relevant theories, we will draw important implications on how to facilitate mid‐career workers approach their career transition positively.
To understand the core features of mid‐career transition, we first begin with the mid‐life crisis theory. Although career change is a salient phenomenon throughout career development in contemporary society, it happens more frequently in mid‐life. Also, “mid,” either in life journey or in career trajectory, implies the notion of crisis, in that it leads to both rigorous examination of what has been done and anxious projection on what should be done. The mid‐life crisis theory provides insights on what people experience as they stand in the midway between the half gone and the half to come.
Mid‐life crisis is a term first coined by Jaques (1965), referring to a critical phase in human development during the thirties to early sixties, which is characterized by change points, or periods of transition. It is a time to simultaneously look back and to look forward (Vander Zanden, 2000), in which a person experiences doubt and anxiety, uncomfortable with the realization that his or her “life is half over” (Weaver, 2009). Mid‐life transition is considered a “crisis” requiring an examination of the self and life. Such reflection often conjures up feelings of panic (Bell, 1982), which are necessary for mid‐life renewal. Mid‐lifers in contemporary society are destined to face more intensified pressure of “now or never” (Blanton & Gordon, 1967). Thus, psychological theories of mid‐life crisis indicate that the major characteristics of mid‐life changes are self‐awareness and crisis.
Super’s (LSLS) model extended Super’s original life‐span approach asserting very specific age ranges and employing the notions of “maturity” and “planfulness.” However, the theory has been extended to include the concepts of “recycling” and “self‐concept implementation,” recognizing the cyclic feature of career changes that contributes to identity implementation. The LSLS model first recognized the importance of the mid‐career stage. However, although Super’s LSLS approach to career development is useful for exploring one’s needs and expectations in specific stages of the lifespan, LSLS has been criticized for its limited, narrow, and linear perspective (Peake & McDowall, 2012). In addition, the LSLS approach does not address the underlying processes that actually lead to one’s career change. Some career researchers have attempted to develop or extend Super’s LSLS approach to mid‐career transition.
Barclay et al. (2011) further extended Super’s LSLS model by explaining how the career transition processes occur. They integrated the transtheoretical model of change (TTM) with the LSLS theory in order to outline the processes of mid‐career changes (the integration of LSLS and TTM is summarized in Table 20.1). TTM is a well‐researched theory of behavior change that explains the process of change, addressing its cognitive, emotional, and behavioral aspects. By integrating Super’s model with the change process model, the researchers showed how mid‐career workers make voluntary transitions, starting with a lack of awareness of their dissatisfaction with their present career and ending with voluntary career transition. As shown in Table 20.1, those who change careers in mid‐life experience gradual shifts in their cognitions, emotions, and behaviors. This model was developed with the purpose of providing guidelines for counseling services for mid‐career workers.
Table 20.1 Model integrating the TTM and Super’s LSLS approach to career development.
Source: Barclay et al. (2011, p. 391). Reproduced with permission of John Wiley & Sons.
| Stage | Mid‐life career changer |
| Precontemplation/Disengagement |
|
| Contemplation/Growth |
|
| Preparation/Exploration |
|
| Action/Establishment |
|
| Maintenance/Maintenance |
|
As individuals assume more responsibility in reshaping their career, and as career transition becomes more salient, contemporary career models such as the boundaryless career model (Arthur & Rousseau, 1996) and the protean career model (Hall, 1996, 2002) are replacing the traditional models. The boundaryless career highlights seemingly infinite possibilities of the career and individual competencies in recognizing and utilizing the opportunity (Arthur, Inkson, & Pringle, 1999). The protean career emphasizes a self‐directed approach to the career, and a career that is managed by one’s own values (Hall, 2002). In this section we will explore the boundaryless and protean career separately, and then we will discuss the individual competencies suggested by the boundaryless and protean career models.
The concept of boundaryless career is useful in describing the prevalent career transitions in contemporary society. Arthur and Rousseau (1996) described boundaryless careers as the opposite of organizational careers and careers that are expected to unfold in a single employment setting. The boundaryless career model has stimulated career research (Wang et al., 2013), and has evolved to include other areas related to boundary issues, such as work/nonwork conflict, retirement transitions, and mentoring (Sullivan & Baruch, 2009). Sullivan and Arthur (2006) solidified the concept of boundaryless career by delineating the interdependence between physical mobility and psychological mobility. They suggested that the boundaryless career is a multifaceted phenomenon that encompasses and transcends various boundaries and levels of analysis, both physical and psychological, objective and subjective.
The boundaryless career highlights “being motivated by autonomy,” which tends to increase with age (Inceoglu et al., 2008; Ryff, 1995). In the middle stage of work life or personal life, individuals are expected to reshape the boundaries of their work or personal life according to their changing roles and identities. Thus, the core idea of the boundaryless career, which states that the boundary is not given but created by the individual, provides important implications in understanding mid‐career or mid‐life career transition. Also, the individual competencies required in the boundaryless career offer a useful framework in approaching issues of mid‐career transition. In the next section, we will explore ways to promote the individual competencies that are required for positive mid‐career transitions in the boundaryless career environment.
The concept of protean career is defined as a career in which the person is (1) value‐driven, in the sense that his or her internal values provide the guidance and measure of success for his or her career; and (2) self‐directed in personal career management (Briscoe & Hall, 2002). Here, self‐direction implies autonomy and self‐determination, and value‐driven behavior indicates reliance on personal values to evaluate choices and career success (Briscoe & Hall, 2003). The protean career is not a particular career behavior but an attitude or orientation that affects career behavior. A summary of the characteristics of the protean career in comparison to those of the traditional career is presented in Table 20.2. Briscoe and Hall (2006) suggested four primary categories based on two core aspects, self‐directedness and value‐drivenness. People who are neither self‐directed nor value‐driven are labeled as “dependent,” those who are self‐directed but not value‐driven as “reactive,” those who are not self‐directed but value‐driven as “rigid,” and those who are both self‐directed and value‐driven as “protean” (Briscoe & Hall, 2006).
Table 20.2 Comparison between the characteristics of the protean career perspective and those of the traditional career perspective.
Source: Briscoe, Hall, and DeMuth (2006).
| Perspectives | Protean career | Traditional career |
| Driver | Individual | Organization |
| Core values | Freedom, growth | Promotion |
| Movability | High | Low |
| Type of success | Psychological success | Position, salary |
| Core attitudes | Job satisfaction, job commitment | Commitment to organization |
The protean career model is particularly relevant to mid‐career workers, as the two metacompetencies, adaptability and identity growth, are required to survive in a boundaryless environment (Hall & Mirvis, 1995). Individuals are required to develop skills and learn ways to enhance their adaptability and self‐reflection to facilitate identity growth. One of the difficulties mid‐career workers encounter is that they have to change their learning skills. They have already accumulated a set of skills and knowledge required in their main job, but they have to acquire a different set of learning skills to become adaptable and able to engage in continuous learning. Hall and colleagues (2013) noted that when the career change is positive, people may rely on increased self‐worth and self‐efficacy to find meaningfulness in work. However, when the change is negative, individuals with high protean career orientation find meaningfulness in work based on their purpose in life and value.
Since the boundaryless and protean careers assume that individuals take full responsibility in the context of limitless opportunities presented by their career, individual competencies in self‐directedness and self‐awareness regarding their own values are considered pivotal. In the boundaryless and protean career models, the importance of “individual competencies” outside the boundary of organization is emphasized (Briscoe et al., 2006). DeFillippi and Arthur (1994) suggested that the individual competencies of “knowing why,” “knowing how,” and “knowing whom” are required in the boundaryless career. The “knowing why” competency is the meaning that gives direction, identity, and motivation for work. The “knowing how” competency includes tacit knowledge and explicit knowledge necessary for work. The “knowing whom” competency comprises interpersonal and networking skills. Workers are responsible for developing these individual competencies to adapt to the boundaryless career environment. Based on the individual competencies, the boundaryless career explicates individuals’ physical and psychological mobility between different occupations and organizations. In this perspective, individuals are seen as independent, driven by inner‐directed choices, and capable of crossing organizational boundaries (Chin & Rasdi, 2014).
Two metacompetencies are central to the protean career: self‐awareness, which is a clear sense of one’s personal identity, and adaptability, which is the capacity to change (Hall et al., 2013). Hall and colleagues (2013) noted that possessing one metacompetency without the other can be highly problematic, and stressed the importance of balanced development between self‐awareness and adaptability. The two metacompetencies are comparable to the individual competencies of “knowing why,” “knowing how,” and “knowing whom.” These metacompetencies are necessary conditions for successful transition, especially when the labor market, organization of work, and underlying occupational knowledge bases are all subject to considerable change.
Gubler, Arnold, and Coombs (2014) reviewed the empirical literature published between 2006 and 2013 using the key words “protean career,” “self‐directed,” or “values‐driven,” and “boundaryless” or “boundaries.” With a comprehensive literature review, they found a consistent positive relationship between protean career orientation and various career outcomes including career satisfaction (e.g., Gasteiger & Briscoe, 2007; Volmer & Spurk, 2010), and job satisfaction (e.g., Baruch & Quick, 2007: Jung & Takeuchi, 2011). Also, career insight mediated the positive relationship between protean career attitude and perceived employability and career satisfaction (De Vos & Soens, 2008). More recently, Herrmann, Hirschi, and Baruch (2015) conducted a study with 526 German employees showing that a protean career orientation predicts proactive behaviors and career satisfaction beyond a proactive disposition and core self‐evaluation. Also, they found a significant mediating role of protean career orientation between proactive personality and positive career outcomes. For future studies, more clarity of the constructs and measures are required.
There are different forms of mid‐career transitions: voluntary or involuntary, planned or reactive. However, not all career transitions are positive. Research findings on the negative impact of unplanned and mandated mid‐career transition suggest that a proactive approach to mid‐career transition is not an option but rather a necessity in contemporary society. What should individuals and employers do to facilitate the positive approach to mid‐career transition? Recent career models reviewed in the previous section – that is, the mid‐career development model, extensions of the LSLS model, the protean career model, and the boundaryless career model – commonly emphasize the importance of self‐directed and value‐driven approaches to career transition. If mid‐career workers direct the transition themselves and have personal values to guide the change process, they will experience enhanced meaningfulness in both their work and personal lives. Considering the crisis notion of the “middle stage” in career and life that incorporates both danger and opportunity, the restoration of personal agency and goals through meaningful work can be considered the most positive approach to mid‐career transition. Therefore, we will next discuss ways to promote a self‐directed and value‐driven attitude in mid‐career transition, which can in turn lead to meaningfulness in work.
Hall et al.’s (2013) notion of two critical metacompetencies, self‐awareness and adaptability, has useful implications for the facilitation of positive approach to mid‐career transition. They emphasized that the balanced development of the two metacompetences is crucial in achieving meaningful work. The roles of adaptability and self‐awareness have also been recognized in the boundaryless and protean career models. As career development has become cyclical instead of linear, and mobility has become a standard feature of careers, individuals’ responsibility to initiate their career transition is becoming more emphasized. To assume full responsibility in their mid‐career transition, individuals first need to be equipped with the adaptability to cope with changing roles and workforce. In addition, to reevaluate their past and future career, awareness of their own values and meaning in life is essential. Sullivan and Emerson (2000) and Hall (1996) noted that, in contemporary society which is moving toward the boundaryless career, the focus is shifting from extrinsic to intrinsic rewards, and self‐reliance is becoming increasingly more important. Facing growing insecurity and mobility, mid‐career workers are required to be self‐determined and self‐directed, guided by their values and meanings in life.
Deriving from Super’s (1980) work on career maturity, Savickas (1997, 2005, 2008) coined the term “career adapt‐ability” as a psychosocial construct that denotes an individual’s readiness and resources for coping with current and anticipated tasks, transitions, and traumas in their occupational roles, and that alters their social integration to a certain degree. Furthermore, career adapt‐ability is related to the individual capability to make successful transitions in the labor market. Research suggests that those with a high level of career adapt‐ability can easily adjust themselves to changing occupational situations. Generally, career adaptability has been suggested as a key competency in career success (O’Connel, McNeely, & Hall, 2008; Omar, & Noordin, 2013).
The “five‐fold career adapt‐abilities competency framework” (see Table 20.3) was developed from a cross‐cultural quantitative study on career counseling. Savickas and colleagues (2009) proposed a life design approach to career development with the five competencies, or five Cs, as focal points (Bimrose, Brown, Barnes, & Hughes, 2011). The five Cs stand for control, curiosity, commitment, confidence, and concern. These five separate but interrelated competencies are crucial factors in increasing individuals’ adaptive responses to career transitions (Bimrose et al., 2011).
Table 20.3 The five‐fold career adapt‐abilities competency framework.
Source: Author.
| Competencies | Definition |
| Control | Learning through challenging work, increasing influence on one’s career situations, updating a substantive knowledge base |
| Curiosity | Experimenting with a wider set of new and different activities and projects; exploring a wider range of opportunities and possibilities; learning through interactions at work |
| Commitment | Learning through interactions at work; how individuals should experiment with new and different activities and projects, rather than being focused narrowly on getting into a particular job, so that new possibilities can be generated |
| Confidence | Belief in self and own ability to achieve what is necessary to achieve one’s career goal |
| Concern | Stimulating or developing a positive and optimistic attitude toward the future |
Researchers suggest that this framework can be used to motivate workers in mid‐career to adopt behaviors that can promote positive career changes. Recent study on career adaptability evidenced the relationship between career adaptability and job satisfaction in a sample of 577 older workers from Australia (Zacher & Griffin, 2015). The result indicated that older workers’ chronological age was positively related to motivation to continue working, and motivation to continue working was also related to career adaptability and job satisfaction. Furthermore, counselors can focus on career adapt‐ability with the goal of supporting clients to become more resilient and capable of managing risk and uncertainty in the rapidly changing and unpredictable education, training, and employment contexts (Brown, Bimrose, Barnes, & Hughes, 2012). Brown and colleagues (2012) emphasized the role of “learning.” They stated that adults in employment who do not engage in substantive up‐skilling or re‐skilling through either formal learning or training at work for periods of 5–10 years, are at increasing risk of being locked in particular ways of working. Because of their low adaptability, these workers become vulnerable in the labor market, especially if their jobs or circumstances change (Brown et al., 2010, p. 754). Career adaptability, one particular type of competency, can be seen as a combination of working experience, continuous learning, and proactive self‐development.
The importance of lifelong learning to enhance career adaptability has been constantly emphasized. Power and Rothausen (2003) addressed the need for a strategic and proactive approach to maintain future employability, through continuous honing of skills and accumulation of knowledge that are applicable across various jobs. In the boundaryless career, professional loyalty instead of organizational loyalty receives greater respect (Sullivan & Emerson, 2000), and experience and expertise are valued (Wang et al., 2013). Thus, the learning for career adaptability is not limited to learning skills and knowledge for promotion within a specific organization. However, one of the problems with middle‐aged or elderly workers is that they do not have a clear view on their skills and know‐how. Also, learning opportunities for skill development in either formal or informal settings are not easily accessible for these individuals (Cedefop, 2011). If mid‐career workers are not provided with adequate learning opportunities, they may experience frustrations in career transition. In addition, potential misplacement and lack of preparation can lead to low levels of job performance and job satisfaction.
Although there is a rising need for lifelong learning to enhance career adaptability, some workers display a lack of commitment to learn in preparation for any future career change. The lack of commitment to enhance adaptability may be a signal of career stagnation, indicating the need to be more adventurous in one’s current career path. Traditionally, workers placed value primarily on their work performance. However, today people value intrinsic reward or psychological success more than they do extrinsic values, and they are more aware of their own psychological standards. Mid‐career workers in particular have the need to develop personal value and purpose at work. When mid‐career workers realize the gap between their career identity and personal identity, they begin to consider career changes. Even when they are well established in their career and experience mastery in mid‐career, they may change their attitudes toward or perceptions of their career (Slay et al., 2004). Power and Rothausen (2003) suggested that as an individual accumulates experience, a personalized definition of work – answers to the questions of what he or she does, for whom, and why – evolves. In mid‐career, workers tend to rely on their own subjective definition of work, which includes the personal meaning of the work, or what they personally want to achieve as the result of their efforts.
In developing self‐awareness, self‐reflection on personal values and meaning is vital. Values are core beliefs that serve as standards against which individuals judge their and others’ daily performance (Rokeach, 1973). Thus, “for a job to be satisfying, it must allow individuals to engage in activities that they believe are worthwhile, which in turn allows them to compare themselves favorably with others” (Brown, 1995). Noon and Blyton (1997) suggested that the majority of people, regardless of their jobs, would continue to work even if there is no financial need, in order to gain social contact and sustain their identities. Confirmation of personal value and meaning of work is especially important when the career change is negative (Hall et al., 2013). When individuals reflect on their career, they need an overarching value system to provide orientation and direction against which they examine their career trajectory.
Research in meaning shows a certain connection between the meaning of work and the overall meaning of life (Steger & Dik, 2009). In the face of the unstable and dynamic nature of modern society, individuals tend to make career transitions in such a way that their meaning in work corresponds with their meaning in life. Through an arduous process of exploring the meaning of their work and duty, they reform their perspectives on meaning, and ultimately discover their greatest value (Briscoe et al., 2006). In the same context, Erikson and Peck noted that through searching for meaning, people achieve personal growth, discover new possibilities, and enter the next developmental stage (Weaver, 2009). According to Weaver (2009), people can move closer to achieving their individuation through creative work, experience of love and fortitude, and acceptance and “owning” of the whole self. Furthermore, this allows them to deepen the meaning of their existence and continue their process of personal growth.
Thus, through a training of perspective change and intervention that promotes positive attitude, which turns a crisis into an opportunity, successful mid‐career transition can be achieved. Individuals should be encouraged to utilize transition as an opportunity for change and a steppingstone for the exploration of their ideal jobs.
We will now look at the “organizational‐level” factors that facilitate mid‐career transitions. Generally speaking, in the perspective of business management, “Human Resources” (HR) or “Human Capital” is viewed as a crucial factor that determines performance output in organizations. Thus, the HR department is responsible for the balanced management of strategies, organizational climate, systematic processes, as well as “people,” or the human resources.
HR departments typically consist of two divisions: Human Resource Management (HRM), and Human Resource Development (HRD). Although each division has unique purposes and responsibilities, they are not separate entities. There is growing support for the integration of HRM and HRD to increase the effectiveness of HR practices in organizations.
Scholars have emphasized the importance of gaining competitive advantage through employees, and identified several HR practices necessary to obtain this advantage (Pfeffer, 1998; Vermeeren et al., 2014). First of all, the HRM department, through processes such as screening and placement, can assist workers during the challenging period of mid‐career transition. For example, individually tailored jobs can improve workers’ productivity, which is the ultimate goal of HRM itself as well. Based on the old‐fashioned notion of the organization as director and employees as the passive follower, it is hard to find a fit between the job and individual. It is even more so in the contemporary world, where there is a constant fluctuation in external environments and in the characteristics required of workers. In the case of the mid‐life career crisis, individuals have a higher tendency to experience low motivation toward work; thus, the expected performance level becomes harder to reach.
Therefore, we can state that HRM has a responsibility to align the characters of each employee and the requirements of each job, while taking continuous changes in the environment and individuals in consideration. Through this alignment process, a proper level of adapt‐ability for mid‐career transition can be achieved.
Strategic HRM practices also affect the employee–organization relationship. Since every employee has different needs, strategic HRM practices are required for the establishment and maintenance of a positive relationship between the employee and organization. For example, as Wang et al. (2013) stated, “employees in their early career stages will have different needs compared to employees in their mid and late career stages. Therefore, differentiated systems of HR practices are needed to address both the needs of various constituents within the organization and the contingencies posed by the organization’s strategy and environment.” In particular, health care and retirement benefits are the two most important employee benefits for mid‐ and late‐career workers. Institutional support that utilizes individually tailored HRM strategies is expected to be particularly effective in assisting individuals about to retire (Kim & Jin, 2013).
HRD is an important research area that has received much research attention. Theorists have been actively defining HRD from a global perspective (Khan, Khan, & Mahmood, 2012). From the perspective of HRM, HRD is a “set of systematic and planned activities designed by an organization to provide its members with the opportunities to learn necessary skills to meet current and future job demands” (Werner & DeSimone, 2006, p. 5). Traditionally, HRD was regarded as a subdiscipline of HRM. However, the definition and scope of HRD have evolved from the narrow definition limited to training. HRD is now considered a “process of developing and unleashing expertise for the purpose of improving individual, team, work process, and organizational system performance” (Khan et al., 2012). Broadly speaking, HRD has been defined as a “process for developing and unleashing human expertise through organization development and personnel training and development for the purpose of improving performance” (Swanson & Holton, 2001).
Scholars have argued that training enhances innovation through promoting a learning climate in the organization (Sung & Choi, 2014). Recent business studies suggest that the capacity for constant learning is a condition for organizational survival, in addition to individuals’ self‐directed learning (Mansour, Chik, & Mohamad, 2014; Senge, 1997). Organizations should pay attention to creating a learning climate in order to facilitate the learning process of employees, especially those who are in need of organizational support. According to Al‐Kahtani and Khan (2013), HR plays an active role in the modern economic scenario of every country, and its development in the organization context is a process through which the employees are helped in a continuous and planned manner. Through HRD, workers develop their general capabilities as individuals, and discover and harness their inner potentials for personal and/or organizational development. Since HRD is a key factor of an HR system, it is important to review recent HRD programs that aim to positively change employees’ perspectives to enhance their performance. In the same vein, HRD practices in the organization can contribute to the creation of a “learning and facilitating environment” at the workplace for mid‐career workers.
Slay et al. (2004) provided several important suggestions for HRD practices for mid‐life career transition. First, they noted that HRD should increase the use of professional growth plans for mid‐life employees who often experience fewer advancement opportunities as they age. Although mid‐life employees need to upskill or reskill their abilities in order to increase their career adapt‐abilities, they often lack support from the organization. Another suggestion from Slay and colleagues (2004) is job crafting. Job crafting is a “creative and improvised process that captures how individuals locally adapt their jobs in ways that create and sustain a viable definition of the work they do and who they are at work” (Wrzesniewski & Dutton, 2001). Other researchers have also offered several recommendations for HRD practices. One of them is to provide training programs to help managers recognize that “individuals [define] the same work differently as well as how to affirm and create opportunities for individuals as strengths and career desires become evident.” As employees learn to see their own work in a different light, they realize the significance of their work. In other words, they find their meaning of work. In the same vein, organizations can encourage employees to “redesign” their jobs in ways that mirror their “reflected best self” (Roberts, Dutton, Spreitzer, Heaphy, & Quinn, 2005).
So far, we have reviewed the effects of HR practices for employees, especially those undergoing mid‐career transition. Another important message is that constant investment in HR is not optional. During times of economic difficulties, organizations often reduce the budget for training and development. For instance, in a survey on HRM in Irish enterprises, more than half of the firms reported a decrease in their budget for training and development (Mulhall, 2014; Roche, Teague, Coughlan, & Fahy, 2011). In another survey in Romanian enterprises, 82% of companies reduced spending on HR in 2009 after the global recession (Daedalus Millward Brown, 2010). In addition, scholars should pay greater attention to the interpersonal relation competencies of each employee, as the performance of members in any organization depends on the members’ ability to effectively interact with their superiors, subordinates, and co‐workers within the organization, as well as with customers, suppliers, and the general public (Hullamani, & Ramakrishna, 2013). In the case of mid‐career transitioners, HRD can extend the scope of developmental programs to help with not only “self‐awareness” but also “interpersonal relations,” so that the workers can establish their career goals according to their future plans. In this way, HRD will be able to broaden individuals’ views on their capabilities, which will guide their career paths in a positive direction.
The mid‐career transition began to receive research attention in the late 1990s. The recent theoretical and empirical studies on careers indicate that career development has gone beyond the traditional, linear, male‐oriented, and organizationally based career (Sullivan & Baruch, 2009). Career research is now paying increasing attention to the cultural, work, personal, and environmental contexts of the contemporary society. The issue of mid‐career is related to the individual developmental task, and is affected by changes in the organizational and global environments. Therefore, future research should focus on the effects of diverse psychosocial factors across multiple levels on mid‐career transition. However, there has been a lack of an integrative approach that incorporates multiple factors across multiple levels and shows how these factors together contribute to the mid‐career transition. Future research need to develop an integrative framework to explain how various factors facilitate or impede the mid‐career transition. To do so, researchers should take a multidisciplinary approach and utilize advanced analytical methods such as multilevel analysis.
Future research also needs to recognize that most mid‐career transition in the real world is temporal and dynamic, as opposed to static and cross‐sectional. Thus, researchers are encouraged to pay closer attention to longitudinal changes. For example, do workers with high levels of self‐awareness predict better performance and subjective job satisfaction in the future? Does a specific mentoring approach facilitate career adaptabilities with time? Does a high level of involvement in learning in the initial career phase predict later voluntary career changes? Longitudinal studies may provide answers to these potential research questions.
Recent studies consistently suggest that future researchers should consider societal culture as an important context in examining the experience of mid‐career transition (Wang, et al., 2013). In different cultures, mid‐career workers may develop disparate needs and values. For example, Li, Tsui, and Weldon (2000) showed that in Confucian culture older age is typically associated with seniority and higher social hierarchies. Therefore, older workers in those societies may particularly value opportunities to participate in company policy making, even if such practice is only an act of formality. In addition, in Confucian culture, more rigid gender roles are ascribed to each gender, assigning breadwinning to men and family chores to women. Although increasing numbers of women are entering the workforce, the gender roles are still rigid in many aspects. Consequently, men in mid‐career transition in Confucian culture may experience greater anxiety about career changes.
As continuous learning has been shown to be crucial in career adaptability, future research should examine and identify the characteristics of effective career strategies and actions. Also, further research is needed to clarify how mid‐career workers transfer knowledge attained through training or mentoring to on‐the‐job performance. Specifically, future research should identify whether there are certain training processes or mentoring approaches that facilitate the successful transfer of knowledge. In addition, we need to understand the source of low motivation among mid‐career workers who may be forced to retire earlier than they desire. Since self‐directedness is the key factor in managing self‐initiated career transition, understanding the source of low motivation would provide valuable insights for effective interventions to enhance self‐directedness.
Sense of purpose and meaning is found to be an important drive for mid‐life and mid‐career transition. With a high level of protean career orientation, the meaningfulness of work is expected to lead to better job performance and greater satisfaction at work. Considering that the mid‐career transition and mid‐life career transition have negative connotations, it would be interesting to see how the protean career orientation and the sense of meaningfulness interact with each other. Future studies also need to identify individual and organizational factors related to the high level of protean career orientation and sense of meaningfulness during mid‐career transition.
Finally, future researchers need to acknowledge that career patterns that are considered deviant from traditional career perspectives appear in the modern society. For example, contingent workers, who make up a growing portion of the workforce, may be stigmatized as “temporary” and less likely to receive the necessary mentoring and/or training to make progress in their career (Wang et al., 2013). Due to the devastating economic situation in several countries, these nontraditional career patterns have evolved rapidly. The concept of mid‐career transition may be too traditional to apply to these career patterns. Future researchers need to expand their research interest to include these evolving career patterns.
In this chapter, we have reviewed the theoretical and empirical literature relevant to mid‐career transition. The notion of mid‐career is rooted in mid‐life career, but the concept of mid‐career has been revised due to worldwide economic and organizational changes. To understand the nature of mid‐career transition, we have reviewed the evolution of the notion of mid‐career and the impact of environmental and individual factors on mid‐career changes. During our discussion, we have differentiated between the concepts of mid‐career transition and mid‐life career transition. Next, we have provided the theoretical context for understanding the key features of mid‐career transition in contemporary society. Super’s initial model of mid‐career development was expanded to include recycling based on self‐concept implementation. In addition, we have discussed recent career models, that is boundaryless and protean career models, and their emphasis on individual‐initiated career transition as opposed to organization‐owned career transition. Lastly, we have discussed ways to facilitate a positive approach to mid‐career transition both at the individual and organizational levels. To achieve successful individual‐initiated career transition, self‐directed and value‐driven attitudes toward career transition are critical. Although the mid‐career transition is recognized as an insecure and vulnerable experience, individuals can approach it positively if they are prepared to be self‐directed and value‐driven. Also, organizations need to take an active role in the balanced management of strategies, organizational climate, and systematic process, as well as human resources. Future studies on mid‐career transition should integrate multiple factors across multiple levels. In addition, future researchers need to move beyond the traditional approach to take into consideration the impacts of culture, gender, and types of work on the mid‐career transition, as well as emerging new career patterns.