Introduction – Protean Career and Boundaryless Career
There is no doubt that there has been considerable change in the industry as far as jobs and employment is concerned. Over the years, there have been changes to the outlook and idea of professional environment , as well and it is safe to say that there has been quite a transition from the traditional employment idea of a 9-5 job to today’s time, when concepts such as virtual organization and freelancing are equally common to everyone as is a resume. Even though it may be highly likely for someone to think that he or she might be well versed with the industry trends and developments by being aware of the latest industrial jargon the truth is, the ideologies and character of the industry is ever evolving, changing and nevertheless adapting every single day. An important impact that this aspect has had, is on the area of individual professionalism and career development – the emergence of the concepts of protean career and boundaryless career. It is suggested that the decline of the traditional career has paved the way for the emergence of this ideology when it comes to career pursuit . This presentation will focus on aspects and factors associated with the two formats of career pursuit and aims to conclude with the selection of one over the other based entirely on the author’s perspective.
Discussion – characteristic features and differences in the two forms
It is widely stated that the emergence of the concepts of protean career and boundaryless career have emerged in the last two decades or so, as changes in information and communications technology have widened the scope of gathering information about trends and developments tremendously . At the same time, it is suggested by many experts that there has been great developments in the way resources, technology and logistical support is available to an individual, which have also played a catalytic role in the trends related to career development. As stated earlier, in this study the focus is on the aspects of a protean career and a boundaryless career. The first and foremost requirement of the same is to be able to highlight the characteristic features and also the differences of the two.
A protean career is widely regarded to be focused on the achievement of career success subjectively through vocational behavior which needs to be self directed. According to , a protean career “focuses on achieving subjective career success through self-directed vocational behavior”. What this means in simple terms is that a protean career is one whereby an individual is focused on career management and is not dependent entirely on an organization for the development of his career. It is widely suggested that the changes that have been associated with industry conditions in the last two decades have been the primary factors which led to the emergence of this concept. As suggested by , as the roles and responsibilities of job positions started to be continuously changed and defined by different organizations in the industry, the individual employees developed an employment and professional focus which warranted their own responsibility for development rather than being entirely dependent on employer organizations for the same. More and more individuals focused on the ways and methods by which they could develop and enhance their versatility within professional fields so as to be equally adaptable to new changes and challenges in the work environment. It is widely stated that a protean employee is identified by his endeavor of using his/her own professional values in their careers and not being molded by the organization of employment or engagement. A protean employee is far more likely to inculcate or hold intrinsic values as far as career is concerned and a non protean one will be more likely to develop his/her career vision on borrowed values from employing organizations or the work environment . It has been highlighted by experts that one of the most prominent features of a protean character is that individuals (protean employees) are able to make steady progress min their career by adjusting themselves and being highly adaptable to the changes which take place in their professional and work environments.
The other contemporary concept in the industry is that of boundaryless careers. There exist a lot of review in the industry that protean and boundaryless careers are the same as they are not a contemporary form of career management process, and that they enhance professional development of the employee . However, in reality, there is sufficient difference of a boundaryless career from that of a protean career. According to Arthur & Rousseau, a person is more likely to have a boundaryless career mindset when he does not hesitate to adapt to the changing work landscape in the industry through movement. A person is more likely to exploit his psychological and physical boundaries – more often than not crossing the same when assessing the changes in work environment and his flexibility . I
n other words, these individuals and employees cannot be always expected to stay confined within one organizational boundary when it comes to career management and professional development. It needs to be highlighted here that being ‘boundaryless does not always necessarily mean that the employee will be susceptible to employers more regularly, as the term boundaryless might imply. It means that the person would be more likely to provide services and grow professionally by associating himself with more than one organization at a time, which signifies the absence of a boundary when it comes to employment and career . Being boundaryless simply implies that these employees enjoy working on projects or assignments from different sources at a single point of time. They prefer engagements, situations and experiences which are gathered from engaging with not only one, but a number of organizations.
The above two paragraphs highlighted the theoretical aspects of the two career models which have been put up for discussion. Now that the ideology behind the two are clear, it is important to focus on the specific aspects and factors which make each superior or inferior to the other as far as industry conditions are concerned. For this presentation, the most basis aspects associated with professional engagement in the industry are highlighted and the aim is to assess how well each of the two career modes is suited to these. The factors to be discussed are opportunities and growth, returns, risks and flexibility. The same have been presented in the sections to follow.
(1) Opportunities and Growth – as far as opportunities are concerned, it might seem that both these modes of career management are equally suited to provide an individual with enough employment opportunities. It is in fact true, that both protean career and boundaryless career increases the opportunities for an individual. A boundaryless employee, as the name suggests is not confined to one particular organization on one hand, and on the other the protean employee is not dependent on the development of his values on the employer organization . However, as far as opportunities are concerned, the key factor concerned in this case is the degree of flexibility in comparison. No matter how well developed an employee is, within an organization he is deficiently bound by the contract of employment. If the same does not allow the employee to utilize his skills and expertise then growth and professional development is somewhat arrested – at least till the time the employee is associated with his employer organization. This is absent in the case of boundaryless career, which does give boundaryless career and edge.
(2) Returns – if the focus of the discussion is solely based on an exchange system – that the employee provides services and the employer provides the remuneration, it will also be seen that a boundaryless career has more potential as compared to a protean career. In a protean career, growth in remuneration, though highly influenced by performance of the employee is possible only during negotiations when the same employer or another recognizes the bundle of benefits provided . However, in case of a boundaryless career the same cannot be influenced by one employer. The fact that at one single point of time the boundaryless employee can be associated with as many clients as he/she can handle, increases the scope of returns far more than in the case of a protean career.
(3) Flexibility – needless to say here that even in this case, a boundaryless career will have an edge over a protean career. An individual following a boundaryless career will be far more likely to have as much flexibility in his schedule as compared to a protean employee working for one particular organization. However, this flexibility is in terms of limits and the scope of professional engagement only. Simply stated, at one point of time, a protean employee works for one organization and a boundaryless employee can definitely work for more than one . It needs to be specified that it does not signify that a protean employee cannot be versatile and flexible within his own organization.
(4) Risks – the final factor which is necessary to dissect in this discussion is the risk factor. There will be no doubts when the statement is made that a protean career will always be more secured than that of a boundaryless career. The essence of being boundaryless means that an employee is not bound to any one particular organization – that the relationship between him and the organization is purely on the basis of work being provided to be done, and payments made on the successful completion of the same. If there is no work being provided, the organization does not have the responsibility to pay. This makes a boundaryless career far more risky than that of a protean career . Till there is no major change in the volume of work available, a boundaryless career will seem to be far more rewarding as compared to a protean career. But what happens in unwanted situations? For boundaryless employees, it will be more difficult to survive, but for protean employees, the employer organization will make it a point to sustain their most valued resources within their organizations.
Conclusion
It is difficult to state for certain that one of the discussed career models is better than the other on the basis of theoretical evidence and perspective. However, on a personal level which is influenced by own opinions, the author would like to select the boundaryless career over a protean one. The reason behind the selection is that the returns are higher and better and the only limitation is the risk in terms of non-availability of projects during testing times. Even if times are indeed so, the higher returns associated do neutralize the risk factor.
References
Abele, A.E. & Spurk, D. “How do objective and subjective career success interrelate over time?” Journal of Occupational and Organisational Psychology 82 (2009a): 803-824.
Arthur, M. B., & Rousseau, D. M. The boundaryless career: A new employment principle for a new organizational era. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996.
De Vos, A. & Soens, N. “Protean attitude and career success: the mediating role of self-management.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 73 (2008): 449-456.
Feldman, D. C. & Ng, T. W. H. “Careers: Mobility, embeddedness, and success.” Journal of Management 33.3 (2007): 350-377.
Hall, D. T. Protean careers in and out of organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.
—. “The protean career: A quarter-century journey.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 65.1 (2004): 1-13.
Meyer, J. P., Becker, T. E. & Vandenberghe, C. “Employee commitment and motivation: a conceptual analysis and integrative model.” Journal of Applied Psychology 89.6 (2004): 991-1007.
Pringle, J.K. & Mallon M. “Challenges to the boundaryless career odyssey.” International Journal of Human Resource Management 15.4 (2003): 839-853.
Ragin, C. C. “Set relations in social research: Evaluating their consistency and coverage.” Political Analysis 14.3 (2006): 291-310.
Raykov, T., & Marcoulides, G. A. A course in structural equation modeling. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc., 2010.
Sullivan, S.N. & Baruch, Y. “Advances in career theory and research: critical review and agenda for future exploration.” Journal of Management 35.6 (2009): 1452-1571.
