|
Article Excerpt
The authors examined the chief work values, assessed by Super's Work Values Inventory--Revised (D. G. Zytowski, 2004b), across interest groups organized by the 6 Holland theme scales of the Kuder Career Search (D. G. Zytowski, 2004a). Results strengthen vocational theory through clarification of gender differences and conceptual commonalities between work values and interests. Future research directions and counseling applications are addressed.
**********
The comprehensive assessment of work-related characteristics is thought to be composed of vocational interests, abilities, personality, and work values (Brown & Brooks, 2002). Knowledge of these domains and their interrelationships strengthens understanding of career decision making and overall development. Among these variables, there has been a relative lack of research delineating the role of work values (Zytowski, 1994); research has apparently been limited by inconsistent definitions of the construct and lack of demarcation from other constructs such as personality and interests (Gordon, 1975; Kinnane & Suziedelis, 1962; Rokeach, 1968; Tyler, 1978). This study addresses definitional concerns and examines the linkages between work-relevant values and interests. Tyler theorized that relative patterns of interests and values serve as possibility-processing structures for shaping one's identity. She asserted, "There is some overlap between the two concepts, but they are not identical" (p. 147).
Values are thought to serve as criteria for evaluating the relative importance of competing alternatives and to focus on ends, including standards or goals (Dawis, 1991; Gordon, 1975), and values also influence the reasons that individuals engage in a particular activity. Rokeach (1968) defined a value as "an enduring belief that a specific mode of conduct or end-state of existence is personally or socially preferable to an opposite or converse mode of conduct or end-state of existence" (p. 5). He labeled modes of conduct "instrumental" (e.g., courageous, helpful) and end-states of existence "terminal" (e.g., security, freedom). Work values, a subset of values, may be regarded operationally as personal preferences for selected outcomes and rewards of working (Zytowski, 2004c).
Strong (1955) defined interests as "a liking/disliking state of mind accompanying the doing of an activity" (p. 138). Interests may be referred to as instrumental means to an end independent of perceived importance (Savickas, 1999). Examining the distinctions and commonalities between interests and work values has great potential for explicating the meaning of test results for individuals.
INTERFACE OF WORK VALUES AND INTERESTS
The conceptual connection between work values and interests and other related constructs, including attitudes, traits, and needs, has been noted by numerous theorists (cf. Ferguson, Humphreys, & Strong, 1941). Rokeach (1968) proposed that values and interests both cognitively represent needs and guide action; however, interests are more narrowly defined than values and resemble attitudes in that they represent the attractiveness of certain specific objects or activities. According to Rokeach, "an interest is but one of the many manifestations of a value, and therefore it has some of the attributes that a value has" (p. 22).
Super (1973) speculated that a hierarchy, describing different aspects of motivation, exists among these variables, with needs at the core, followed by values and personality traits, and interests at the surface. At the deepest level, needs represent "a lack of something which, if present, would contribute to the well-being of the individual and which is accompanied by a drive to do something about it" (Super, 1973, p. 189). Values are the qualities sought, rather than the activities or the objects that embody them. Accordingly, Super and Nevill (1986) defined interests as the activities involved in seeking particular objectives, or values. Consistent with the hierarchical model, they explained that values are more readily satisfied than needs. In his chapter on the psychology of interests, Savickas (1999) explicated that values serve an important role in guiding energies toward meeting a particular need via interests. According to Savickas, values "teleologically denote the objects or gratifications in the world that people seek to satisfy a need" (p. 49). Nevertheless, others consider values to be analogous to interests (Dukes, 1955; Macnab & Fitzsimmons, 1987) or at least sharing much common variance (Kinnane & Suziedelis, 1962).
More specifically, Holland's (1997) theory proposes that each of the six vocational types is associated with particular values (e.g., Investigative types value independence and intellectuality and not security or interpersonal relationships). Numerous interest measures, including the Self-Directed Search (SDS; Holland, 1997) and the Strong Interest Inventory (SII; Harmon, Hansen, Borgen, & Hammer, 1994), use the language of values to operationalize scores on measures using the Holland system. For example, the SII manual (Harmon et al., 1994) describes Realistic types as valuing tradition, practicality, and common sense; Investigative types value independence, curiosity, and learning; Artistic types value beauty, originality, and imagination; Social types value cooperation, generosity, and serving others; Enterprising types value risk taking, status, and competition; and Conventional types value accuracy, stability, and efficiency. Further research investigating the value characteristics of interest scores organized by Holland's system is necessary to increase the understanding of the theory and confidence in explaining results to clients.
Several noteworthy studies have established a framework for considering the theoretical relations between work values and interests. Dukes (1955) reviewed a number of studies from the 1940s that discussed values and interests. Allport, Vernon, and Lindzey's (1970) Study of Values revealed characteristic values among occupational groups analogous to the present-day Holland typology....
|
