Essay Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/A-Model-Of-Career-Decision-Making-For-C 👈

1. Journal of Vocational Behavior 14, 119-133 (1979)
A Model of Career Decision Making for College Students
VINCENT A. HARREN
Southern Illinois University-Carbondale
This article presents a model of career decision making which is limited in its
application to typical undergraduate college students. Limiting the model to a
specific stage in the life-span and to a relatively homogeneous environment has
resulted in a comprehensive model which includes: a delineation of the internal
psychological process of decision making; identification of important developmen-
tal and personality characteristics of the decision maker; and specification of
immediate or anticipated environmental factors influencing decision making. The
model is intended to provide a conceptual framework for assessment of student
needs, designing counseling and educational interventions. and for generating
empirically testable hypotheses.
Decision-making models are conceptual frameworks for understanding
how decision makers process information and arrive at conclusions.
When these models are applied to vocational behavior, they can be
regarded as models of career decision making.
Jepsen and Dilley (1974, p. 332) characterize a decision-making model
as follows:
A decision-making conceptual framework assumes the presence of a decision-maker, a
decision situation (social expectation) and relevant information both from within and
outside the person. The information is arranged into decision-making concepts accord-
ing to the functions it serves. Two or more alternative actions are considered and
several outcomes or consequences are anticipated from each action. Each outcome has
two characteristics, probability or likelihood of occurrence in the future, and value. or
relative importance to the decision-maker. The information is arranged according to a
strategy so that the decision-maker can readily recognize an advantageous course of
action and make a commitment to this action.
Thus, a decision-making model is a description of a psychological
process in which one organizes information, deliberates among alterna-
tives, and makes a commitment to a course of action.
Career decision-making models need to be differentiated from career
Requests for reprints should be sent to Vincent A. Harren, Department of Psychology,
Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901.
119
OOOl-8791/79/020119-15$02.00/0
Copyright @ 1979 by Academic Press. Inc.
All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

2. 120 VINCENT A. HARREN
development models. The latter focus on the characteristics of the deci-
sion maker and the developmental tasks confronting the individual at each
stage or period in life. Career development models are broader in scope,
and, as a result, they pay less attention to the internal psychological
process the person uses to successfully resolve developmental tasks.
Alternatively, existing career decision-making models fail to specify how
the decision-making process varies, depending on the type of decision
involved and the personality and level of maturity of the decision maker.
Thus, career decision making needs to be understood within the context
of career development. It may be unrealistic, however, to provide a
comprehensive theory which covers the entire life-span as well as spec-
ifies the decision-making process involved in each life stage. A more
manageable approach is to focus on a given life stage or period of de-
velopment and to bring together decision making and developmental
concepts for a more complete understanding of vocational behavior
within that life stage. While this microtheory approach has the disadvan-
tage of limited applicability, it can be comprehensive within its range of
application. Perhaps this approach will encourage model-building appli-
cable to other life stages and ultimately lead to a comprehensive ma-
crotheory.
The model presented in this paper is intended to apply to undergraduate
college students in the typical age range. It is less applicable to noncol-
lege, young adults, and to older adults in college. It is a career decision-
making model, as characterized above, but it also specifies how the
decision-making process varies according to the characteristics of the
decision maker, the decision-making context, and the type of decision
involved.
This model owes its heritage, first and foremost, to the work of David
Tiedeman and his associates (Tiedeman, 1961;Tiedeman & O’Hara. 1963;
Miller & Tiedeman, 1972); secondly to the decision-making theory of
Janis and Mann (1977) and to the larger body of research and theory in the
field of cognitive dissonance (Wicklund & Brehm, 1976); thirdly to the
developmental theory of Chickering (1969); and finally to the self-concept
theory of Barrett and Harren (Note 1). The latter draws upon the work of
Korman (1970) and Super, Starishevsky, Matlin, and Jordaan, (1963).
Table 1presents a summary of the model. Four interrelated parameters
are postulated: Process, Characteristics, Tasks, and Conditions; and
within each parameter a number of constructs and processes are elabo-
rated. The core of the model is the Process, a four-stage, sequential
decision-making process through which the person progresses in making
and carrying out decisions. At each stage, the person is preoccupied with
different concerns or issues and is engaged in different covert and overt
behaviors to resolve these issues. Decision-maker Characteristics refer to
relatively stable personality traits which determine the person’s percep-

3. 121
CAREER DECISION MAKING
TABLE I
Summary of the Model
Parameters Constructs Processes
Process
Awareness appraisal of self-in-situation
Planning exploration-crystallization
Commitment integration with self-concept system; bolster-
ing; action planning
Implementation success and satisfaction outcomes;
Conformity-Autonomy-Interdependence
Characteristics
Self-Concept: identity
Self-Esteem
degree of differentiation and integration
evaluative aspect: level of satisfaction with
self and degree of self-confidence
Style: Rational
Intuitive
Dependent
objective deliberation and self-appraisal
emotional self-awareness and fantasy
denial of responsibility: projected to others;
perception of restricted options
Tasks
Autonomy limited need for emotional support; instru-
mentality: cooperative interdependence
Interpersonal
maturity
Sense of
purpose
tolerance: interpersonal trust: intimacy
adjustment to college: educational career.
and life-style planning
Conditions
Task conditions:
Context conditions:
Interpersonal
evaluations
Psychological
states
Immanence
Alternatives
Consequences
Mutuality
Support
Probability
positive and negative feedback from others
level of state anxiety in decision maker; de-
fensive avoidance behaviors under high
anxiety
amount of time available before implementa-
tion
number of available different courses of ac-
tion
positive and negative effects on self and
others
a significant other must codecide
emotional and financial support from others
decision by others necessary for implementa-
tion

4. 122 VINCENT A. HARREN
tion of the Tasks and Conditions and which influence the person’s prog-
ress in the Process. The Tasks refer to career-relevant developmental
tasks of college students and their related decision-making tasks. Finally,
the Conditions refer to the immediate and anticipated situational factors
influencing the person and to the person’s present psychological state.
Each of these parameters of the model will be elaborated below. Sec-
ondly, the interaction of the parameters will be discussed; and, finally,
applications of the model in assessment and counseling and in research
will be illustrated.
Process
The Model postulates a four-stage sequential process: Awareness,
Planning, Commitment, and Implementation. Within each stage the per-
son attends to certain issues and concerns, the resolution of which even-
tually leads to transition to the next stage. The factors resulting in the
resolution of each stage and precipitating transition to the next stage are
specified. Progress is ordinarily forward. Blocking in a given stage or
recycling through the stages is possible, depending on a number of fac-
tors. Each stage is characterized as follows:
Ahrareness. During this stage, the individual attends to the present self-in-situation
and expands one’s time perspective to include part of the past and the future in one’s
psychological present. As one’s stream of consciousness expands, there is a gradual
awareness of where one is, at the moment, of where one has been, and of where one is
going. This process can be a deliberate “stocktaking” or a more intuitive attention to
present feelings. reverie about the past, and fantasy about the future. Specific aspects of
the self-in-situation are: consideration of the consequences (costs and benefits) of one’s
present course of action; awareness of one’s present level of success and satisfaction
with the consequences of prior decisions; one’s degree of self-confidence in decision
making; and degree of environmental press (e.g., immanence of deadlines, pressure
from significant others) for decisions. If dissatisfaction or anxiety results from this
appraisal of the self-in-situation. the individual recognizes a need to explore alterna-
tives. and transition into the Planning stage occurs.
Planning. This stage is characterized by an alternating, expanding and narrowing
process ofexploration and crystallization. The expanding aspect ofexploration involves
searching for information or data about the Task and about the Self-Concept in relation
to the Task. These data are processed by the individual subjectively; that is, personal
meaning is attached to the data according to the individual’s present self-concept
system. The information is reacted to in terms of internal criteria, which vary in terms of
degree of clarity or concreteness. and in terms of the degree of confidence with which
the person adheres to these criteria. As the narrowing process of crystallization begins,
the individual may not be able to complete the process and make the transition to
Commitment. Either more data are needed (e.g., knowledge of alternatives) or more
concrete and confident criteria are needed (e.g., knowledge ofone’s value priorities and
their relevance to the alternatives). Thus, the alternating expanding-narrowing process
continues until the person begins to settle upon a specific alternative and makes the
transition into the Commitment stage.
Commifmenr. Commitment is first a private, subjective conviction, and then a
“trying-out-on-others” process for feedback, with gradual progression from reversibil-

5. CAREER DECISION MAKING 123
ity to irreversibility. That is. as one announces one’s intention, first to intimate others.
and then to others in one’s work group, and as the evaluative feedback is positive, the
individual’s confidence in commitment increases. The individual then incorporates and
integrates the commitment with existing aspects of the self-concept system. With this
integration, the individual moves to a second aspect of Commitment: a future orienta-
tion. in which plans are developed for implementation of the commitment. These plans
include specific action steps, contingency plans, and the awareness of a need for, and a
search for, detailed information in order to implement the decision. In addition. the
individual enters into a “bolstering” process in order to reaffirm the “rightness” of the
commitment: that is, she or he engages in a process of dissonance reduction, in which
the positive aspects of the chosen alternative and the negative aspects of rejected
alternatives are exaggerated. If either the action planning or the bolstering activities are
not carried out, the individual will revoke the commitment and regress to earlier stages
of the Process. Progression to Implementation occurs if closure is achieved in Commit-
ment. Closure involves: integration of the commitment into the self-concept system:
reduction of post-commitment dissonance; and reduction of anticipatory anxiety
through awareness of one’s assets and resources to implement. and through planning
specific action steps.
Prior to a description of the fourth stage of the Process, some introduc-
tion is needed. The onset of the Implementation stage is determined by
environmental circumstances. For instance, when the time has come to
leave home and go to the college one has chosen, or to arrive the first day
on a job, the individual implements the decision. At this point, the full
reality of the consequences of Commitment are faced. To the extent that
the person has been able to anticipate these consequences in the Planning
and Commitment stages, there is less likelihood that problems will arise
during Implementation. Two reality factors are involved: The first factor
is the “probability” characteristic referred to in the quotation at the
beginning of this paper (i.e., the likelihood of occurrence in the future, or
the likelihood that the decision can be implemented). The decision may, in
fact, not be implementable, depending on the Probabiliry Condition (see
Conditions section).
Assuming that the decision is implementable, the second factor is the
“value” characteristic referred to in the same quotation. This has to do
with the adjustment aspect of the decision, both in terms of objective
Success Outcomes and subjective Satisfaction Outcomes. Success Out-
comes involve the degree to which significant others in the implementa-
tion context (i.e., professors, classmates, bosses, coworkers, or friends
accept, respect, and value the individual and acknowledge her or his
contributions). Also involved are tangible rewards, such as high grades,
honors, salary increases, promotions, etc. Satisfaction Outcomes refer to
the degree of perceived need-value satisfaction and self-actualization the
person experiences in the implementation context. Satisfaction is experi-
enced relative to the anticipated satisfactions envisioned in the Planning
and Commitment stages, as well as in relation to the changing need-value
priorities of the individual in the course of one’s human development and

6. 124 VINCENT A. HARREN
changing life style. These Success and Satisfaction Outcomes determine
progress in Implementation.
Implemenfation. During this stage, the individual is inducted into the new context.
then reacts to the context, and finally is assimilated into the context. The subaspects of
this stage are called: Conformity, Autonomy, and Interdependence. These subaspects can
be regarded as adjustment solutions or phases through which the individual may move
back and forth. In Conformity, the person experiences a high need for social approval
and acceptance, and subordinates or inhibits one’s own needs-values-goals accordingly.
In Autonomy, these needs are asserted and perhaps exaggerated; and in Interdepen-
dence, they are adaptively modulated and merged into a reciprocal and mutual interac-
tion with others, representing a dynamic balance. or equilibrium, of self and context.
This dynamic balance may be upset as a result of: Changing needs-values-goals of the
individual: changing goals of the group; changes in the membership and in the power
distribution of the group: and external, systems-changes affecting the group. If Success
and Satisfaction Outcomes are consistently low. the individual will revoke the decision
being implemented and will recycle through the Process as new alternatives are consid-
ered.
Characteristics
Two decision-maker Characteristics are postulated to influence the
Process: Self-Concept and Style.
Self-Concept. In this model, Self-Concept refers to those vocationally
relevant attitudes or traits which the person attributes to him or herself.
Taken together, these traits can be considered as one’s vocational self-
concept, which in turn is organized as part of one’s self-concept system.
Two aspects of the Self-Concept that are central to the model are
Identity and Self-Esteem. Identity refers to the level of differentiation
and integration of the Self-Concept, whereas Self-Esteem refers to the
evaluative aspect of the Self-Concept.
A person with a highly differentiated Self-Concept is aware of a wide
range of self-attributed traits and holds these traits with a high degree of
clarity and confidence. A highly integrated Self-Concept is one in which
the self-attributed traits are interrelated in a unified, consistent self-
concept system. Thus, high levels of differentiation and integration of the
Self-Concept result in a clear and relatively stable Identity, or “sense of
who one is.” The person’s behavior tends to be consistent across situa-
tions, stable over time, and purposive or goal-directed.
The evaluative aspect of Self-Concept, Self-Esteem, refers to one’s
subjective sense of satisfaction with who one is. One’s Self-Esteem is
based on prior and current interpersonal evaluations from others (see
Conditions, below). To the extent that one is able to accurately incorpo-
rate interpersonal evaluations and to modify one’s self-concept system
accordingly, one’s level of self-esteem will be realistic (i.e.. consistent
with others’ expectations and evaluations).
Style. The second decision-maker characteristic postulated is decision-
making Style. Style refers to the individual’s characteristic mode of per-

7. CAREER DECISION MAKING 125
ceiving and responding to decision-making tasks, or the manner in which
the person goes about making decisions. Three styles are identified:
Rational, fntuirire, and Dependent. The first two styles involve personal
responsibility for decision making, whereas the Dependent Style involves
projection of responsibility. These styles are briefly described as follows:
Rational. This style is characterized by the ability to recognize the consequences of
earlier decisions for later decisions. It requires an extended time perspective in which
several sequential decisions are viewed as a means-end chain. The individual antici-
pates the need to make decisions in the future and prepares for them by seeking
information about self and the anticipated situation. The individual’s decisions are
carried through deliberately and logically. They are effective to the degree that accurate
information about the situation is acquired and the individual’s self-appraisal is realistic.
This style represents the ideal of the self-actualizing decision maker; one who is the
architect of one’s own future as one lives it.
Imuifiw. As in the rational style. the intuitive decision maker accepts responsibility
for decision making. The intuitive style, however, involves little anticipation of the
future, information-seeking behavior, or logical weighing of factors. Rather, it is charac-
terized by the use of fantasy. attention to present feelings, and an emotional self-
awareness as the basis for decision making. Commitment to a course of action is
reached relatively quickly. and its basic “rightness” is felt internally. Often the indi-
vidual cannot state explicitly how he or she decided. This style is less likely to result in
effective decision making than the rational style. due to fluctuations over time in the
individual’s internal state and to limited capacity to accur-ately represent an unfamiliar
situation in fantasy.
Dependenr. Unlike the rational and intuitive styles. the dependent style is charac-
terized by a denial of personal responsibility for decision making and a projection of that
responsibility outside of self. The individual is heavily influenced by the expectations
and desires authorities and peers have of him or her. One tends to be passive and
compliant. to have a high need for social approval and to perceive the environment as
providing restricted or limited options. While this style may reduce the immediate
anxiety associated with decision making, it is likely to ultimately result in lack of
fulfillment or personal satisfaction.
Earlier in this paper it was stated that career decision making needs to
be understood in the context of career development. Tiedeman and
O’Hara (1963. p. V) define career development “as the process offashion-
ing a vocational identity through differentiation and integration of the
personality as one confronts the problem of work in living.” Another
definition of career development, intended to apply to college students, is
as follows (Haney & Howland. 1978, p. 78):
Career development is defined as a process whereby individuals develop realistic goals
for professional and personal life-style futures. thereby building strategies for move-
ment towards these goals, through the investigation of appropriate and available options
open to the individual based on personal needs and direction-orientation and the
dynamics of surrounding social and economic environments.
These broad definitions encompass a wide range of behavior, and they
suggest that career development, in turn, needs to be understood in the
larger context of human development.

8. 126 VINCENT A. HARREN
Consequently, in the model presented here, three student development
tasks are proposed: Autonomy, Interpersonal Maturity, and Sense of
Purpose (adapted from Chickering, 1969). Within each developmental
task, specific career decision-making tasks are identified. These develop-
mental tasks are regarded as particularly salient for the college student,
and asone progresses in their resolution one’s Identity is further clarified.
Autonomy. Autonomy involves developing the capacity to be relatively free of the
need for emotional support and approval of others. It also involves the capacity to
engage in instrumental, goal-directed behavior in relation to one’s needs. Finally, the
autonomous individual is capable of mature, realistic dependence, or interdependence.
This interdependence is characterized by reciprocally satisfying interpersonal relation-
ships and cooperative instrumental activities. Some specific decision-making tasks
related to Autonomy are: to leave home; to go to college, to find a job.
Interpersonal mafurirv. This developmental task involves the capacity to develop
relationships with others that are flexible, nonstereotypic. and mutually trusting. It
involves intimacy with the opposite sex, reciprocal love, and the capacity for long-term
commitments. Decision-making tasks related to Interpersonal Maturity are: to choose a
roommate; to find a life partner; to marry: to choose a mentor: and to dissolve
relationships that are deteriorating, restrictive, or destructive.
Sense of purpose. This developmental task follows upon and assumes relative
success or progress in accomplishing the above two developmental tasks. A Sense of
Purpose involves conscious educational planning, accurate awareness of one’s college
environment, and achieving a balance between academic pursuits (i.e., study) and other
aspects of collegiate life (i.e.. extracurricular activities). It also involves a future
orientation in which one is aware of the world of work and one’s potential place in it.
Finally. it involves planning one’s life style: achieving a balance between work, leisure
and family: searching for opportunities for self-expression that are synergistic with
societal welfare: and developing an openness and flexibility in order to respond to a
changing environment. The decision-making tasks related to a Sense of Purpose are: to
choose a major held of study in college: to find satisfying leisure activities, and to
choose an occupation.
Progress in these developmental tasks is a function of a developmental
history of successful decisions (i.e., decisions which have had positive
consequences for the individual). Thus, when the individual is faced with
a specific decision related to a given developmental task, his or her degree
of progress in that decision depends upon one’s overall progress in the
associated developmental task.
Conditions
The fourth parameter of the model refers to the immediate and antici-
pated situational factors affecting the decision maker and his or her
present psychological state. The following types of Conditions are postu-
lated: Interpersonal Evaluations, Psychological States, Task Conditions,
and Context Conditions.
Interpersonal evaluations. This refers to the positive and negative
reactions and feedback the decision maker receives from others. Evalua-

9. CAREER DECISION MAKING 127
tions include: acceptance, liking and approval, or their opposites, as well
as performance evaluations (e.g., grades). Positive evaluations reinforce
the person’s past decisions being implemented and current decisions in
the Planning and Commitment stages, whereas negative evaluations cause
blocking in a given stage or regression to an earlier stage. Some negative
evaluation, however. is necessary in order to initiate the Process. That is,
sufficient state anxiety needs to be generated in the person in order to
mobilize him or her and to precipitate the Awareness stage.
Psychological states. This condition refers to the level of state anxiety
aroused in the person as a function of the other Conditions and the
decision-maker Characteristics. A curvilinear relationship between anx-
iety and decision making is postulated; either high or low anxiety results
in ineffective decision making, while moderate anxiety is facilitative.
Moderate anxiety precipitates the decision-making Process and fosters
progress through the stages, whereas low anxiety results in continuance
of one’s present course of action without any perceived need to decide.
High levels of anxiety result in various defensive avoidance behaviors
such as: denial to awareness: procrastination; impulsive commitment or
implementation: and projection of responsibility for decision making.
Tusk conditions. These conditions refer to a specific career-relevant
task, such as choosing a major or applying for a job. The three Task
Conditions are: Immanence, Alternutives. and Consequences.
Immanence refers to the amount of time the decision maker has available before
implementation is required. For some tasks, there may be no specific deadline, such as
when one must choose a major, while for others there is. such as the deadline for
application to college or graduate school. Immanence become relevant, then, when a
situational demand or opportunity presents itself. If the demand is remote, the
decision-making Process is not initiated. On the other hand. if it is highly immanent, the
person is propelled immediately into Implementation or has missed the opportunity to
decide.
Alfernari~*es refer to the available different courses of action the decision maker has
and perceives. If too many alternatives are available, the narrowing process of crystalli-
zation during Planning will be extensive. If no perceived alternatives are available. the
individual continues in her or his present course of action but does not accept responsi-
bility for its consequences. In some cases. the alternatives are not clearly defined by the
situation, so that the decision maker must generate or create his or her own alternatives.
Consequences refer to the positive and negative consequences to self and others at
each stage in the process with respect to each task. These consequences refer to
tangible gains and losses, as well as to self- and social approval or disapproval. These
consequences are applied in assessing one’s present course of action if continued and in
assessing each alternative one considers.
Context conditions. These conditions refer to the decision maker’s
interpersonal relationships and the role significant others play relative to
the decision-making task. Three Context Conditions are specified: Mutu-
ality, Support, and Probability.

10. 128 VINCENT A. HARREN
The Murunliry condition refers to the degree that significant others are affected by the
decision, such that codecisions or mutual decisions are required. For example. a
married person deciding to quit his or her job to go to school requires a mutual decision
on the part of the spouse to relocate and perhaps to support the spouse financially.
Other common examples are: the many mutual decisions encountered by dual-career
couples: the decision by a couple to make a major purchase (a home or a new car); the
decision to have a child: and the decision to separate or divorce.
The Support condition refers to the significant others who provide emotional 01
financial support for the decision maker in order to implement the decision. Such factors
are included as: social approval of close friends: encouragement by others who are
implementing the same decision being planned; money from parents, or a loan OI
scholarship to go to school. etc. Support is not only important in initiating implementa-
tion, but also in continuing implementation. That is. withdrawal of support during
implementation may result in revoking the decision.
The Probability condition has to do with whether or not a decision can be im-
plemented. Most decisions require a reciprocal decision on another’s part. For exam-
ple. a decision to go to a specific college requires being admitted to that college: a
decision to enter an occupation requires being offered a job or position in that occupa-
tion. For other decisions. such as choice of major. there is little reciprocity and
relatively easy access and entry. A high probability condition is in effect. then. when
either the decision does not require a reciprocal decision. or the likelihood of a recip-
rocal decision being forthcoming is objectively high.
Thus far, we have presented the four parameters of the model: Process,
Characteristics, Tasks, and Conditions. Next, we shall discuss how the
parameters interrelate.
Interaction of the Model’s Parameters
The fundamental assumption of this model is that progress through the
stagesof the decision-making process depends upon the characteristics of
the decision maker, the type of decision involved, and the decision-
making context. What follows is an elaboration of this assumption.
In general, an effective decision maker can be characterized asfollows:
The person has a moderate to high level of self-esteem which is based upon accurate
incorporation of the interpersonal evaluations from others. The self-concept system is
realistic (i.e., consistent with others’ perceptions), yet flexible and open to new experi-
ences. The person’s self-concept is highly differentiated (i.e.. the individual has a clear
awareness of her or his interests, values, skills, and other self-attributed traits and is
confident in this self-knowledge), At the same time. the self-concept is integrated (i.e..
the individual has a relatively stable identity, which results in consistent and purposive
behavior). The person takes responsibility for decision making and relies primarily on a
rational style of decision making. Finally, the person has made considerable progress in
accomplishing the three developmental tasks: he or she is both emotionally and instru-
mentally autonomous. has mature interpersonal relationships, and has developed a
sense of purpose.
This description of the overall influence of the decision-maker Charac-
teristics can be further elaborated as they interact with the Conditions
parameter at each stage in the Process.
Awareness. During Awareness, the individual’s capacity to utilize the

11. CAREER DECISION MAKING 129
evaluations of others in the appraisal of the self-in-situation is related to
the individual’s level of self-esteem and to the degree of realism and
flexibility of the self-concept. That is, if the feedback from others is
negative and inconsistent with the individual’s self-concept, anxiety is
generated. To reduce the anxiety, the decision maker may deny or distort
the feedback. In order for these evaluations to be eventually recognized
and utilized in the appraisal of self-in-situation, certain factors must
obtain with respect to the frequency of occurrence of the feedback, its
salience or centrality for the self-concept system, and the perceived locus
of control of the person’s behavior being evaluated. Specifically, if the
individual receives the samefeedback in a number of different situations
regarding a Task-relevant area of functioning which is central to one’s
view of self and specifically connected to behavior over which one per-
ceives oneself as exerting control, then that feedback, no matter how
discrepant it is with the individual’s self-concept system, will eventually
be recognized in consciousness.
For example, a student majoring in premedicine who is receiving failing
grades in anatomy and physiology will initially distort these evaluations
until the evidence mounts and the student can no longer maintain the
distortions. Eventually, the student will consider the significance of the
feedback relative to his or her present course of action (i.e., continuing to
major in premedicine). As Task Immanence increases (the deadline for
applying to medical school), there is greater press to evaluate the feed-
back. If this student is primarily Rational in decision-making style, this
deadline will be anticipated in sufficient time to reconsider and possibly
revoke the decision and begin recycling through the Process. Assuming
the negative evaluations have reached consciousness and their conse-
quences have begun to be incorporated into the self-concept during the
person’s appraisal of self-in-situation, then the individual, without com-
pletely abandoning the present course of action, will begin to recognize
the need for alternatives, which signals the transition into the Planning
stage.
Planning. Aspects of the decision-maker characteristics most salient
during Planning are Style and Identity. How planning is carried out is a
function of Style. whereas successful resolution of the Planning stage is a
function of Identity. The former is not elaborated here but can be sur-
mised by reviewing the style descriptions provided earlier. The role of
Identity, however, is critical. The expanding-narrowing process of explo-
ration-crystallization during Planning requires a clear sense of Identity.
The data search in exploration cannot be processed in crystallization
without some degree of identity formation. Contained in the concept of
Identity is a sense of “who I am;” of “what my need-value priorities
are:” of “what I am good at;” of “where I am heading:” and of “what
general life goals are important to me now.” Identity also assumes that

12. 130 VINCENT A. HARREN
there has been considerable progress with respect to the three student
development tasks of Autonomy, Interpersonal Maturity, and Sense of
Purpose. If Commitment and Implementation proceeds without Identity,
setbacks and eventual revoking of the decision are likely.
Commitment. In Commitment, several aspects of the decision-maker
Characteristics come into play. Commitment requires that the alternative
selected and its vocational self-concept implications be incorporated and
integrated with the self-concept system. A prerequisite for this incotpora-
tion is a flexible and integrated self-concept system. As one announces
one’s commitment, the evaluative feedback from others (their reaction to
one’s intention) also needs to be incorporated. Upon incorporation of the
commitment and reintegration of the self-concept system, action steps
can be planned. The amount of action planning engaged in is determined
by the available time (i.e., Task Immanence, and the person’s decision-
making style). Finally, the amount of postcommitment dissonance reduc-
tion, or bolstering, is a function of degree of Identity, level of Self-
Esteem, the anticipated Probability and Mutuality Conditions, and the
anticipated Success and Satisfaction Outcomes.
Implementation. During Implementation, decision-making style is im-
portant. For the Dependent person, the Conformity solution of the Im-
plementation stage is comfortable, and the person adapts to the imple-
mentation context readily. All that is required is high group structure
through explicit expectations of group members and accommodation to
these expectations. A stable degree of adjustment may be attained here,
and the person may continue indefinitely with this Conformity solution.
To the extent that the individual’s needs-values-goals are frustrated,
however, the person moves into Autonomy. Here, Identity and Self-
Esteem are involved in the person’s willingness to assert self in an
implementation context that is not conducive to self-actualization. Inte-
gration will be accomplished according to: the level of Identity the person
possesses, the degree of progress in the developmental tasks, the degree
of flexibility in the self-concept system, and the degree of flexibility in the
implementation context. The effective decision maker recognizes that no
implementation context will perfectly match the individual, and he or she
appraises those aspects of the person-situation that are negotiable and
achieves some level of Interdependence, at least temporarily. As changes
in one’s Sense of Purpose, especially regarding life-style, and changes in
one’s Mutuality conditions occur, different solutions within the im-
plementation context will be attempted. To the extent that such solutions
are unsuccessful, the person may revoke the decision and recycle through
the process.
Applications of the Model
The potential of this model for assessment and counseling and for
research is discussed here.

13. CAREER DECISION MAKING 131
Assessment and counseling. A brief case study illustration is presented
below to demonstrate the model’s utility for the practicing counselor. This
case (a pseudonym) is a report of an actual interview of a research
participant.
CASE OF DAVID
David is extremely interesting in that he shopped around (here and
other campuses) for what he wanted to be and took six years. He was a
campus radical in his day and now considers himself conservative. His
friends are unhappy about his decision of law as a career (he has been
accepted to - University and will work in a law firm until Fall semes-
ter). He originally majored in Design here but felt he “wasn’t good enough
to sell myself’ in the business. When he finally came to choose law, it was
basically because it is the life style he likes (a profession which is impor-
tant to his family, money, wearing a suit, prestige) plus an opportunity to
use his verbal and intellectual skills.
When David decided upon law as a career, he also decided to choose a
major that would get him a BA as fast as possible. He selected four
potential majors and visited each department. He then selected Sociology
as his major, took two 12-hour semesters, and is graduating this semester.
David is very analytical and has trouble expressing his feelings, espe-
cially to women. His father is an accountant and always rejected others’
displays of affection, etc., and didn’t show any himself. David is very
bright and charming. His idea of using law to get into politics is very
plausible.
We can analyze this case using some of the concepts of the model as
follows: David’s relatively high level of self-esteem is reflected in his
confidence in his verbal skills and in his expectation of high success and
satisfaction outcomes. He expects to succeed in law school, to become a
practicing lawyer, and eventually to enter politics. His self-concept is
quite differentiated, especially with respect to his values and their rela-
tionship to his career. He aspires to money, power and prestige, and an
anticipated life-style of “the good life.”
The consistency and purposiveness of his behavior is especially evi-
dent, once he made a commitment to law school. His selection of sociol-
ogy (after seeking information from four departments) as the quickest
route to graduation and entry to law school and his plans to work in a law
firm until entering law school in the fall are not only evidence of achieving
a sense of purpose, but also indicate a rational decision-making style.
With respect to the developmental task of Autonomy, David had con-
siderable difficulty. His major in Design and his radical days earlier in
college suggest a reaction against parental influence and a need for emo-
tional support and approval from peers. Now, however, his decision to
enter law does not please his friends, but he is apparently free of the need

14. 132 VINCENT A. HARREN
for their emotional support and approval. With respect to interpersonal
maturity, however, he has difficulty expressing feelings and developing
intimacy with the opposite sex.
Recommendations for counseling include working on further progress
in developing interpersonal maturity and further clarification of identity,
especially in recognizing the importance of being open to his own future
development and life-style changes.
While this analysis of the Case of David could be further elaborated,
perhaps enough has been said to illustrate the model’s usefulness.
Research hypotheses. A number of hypotheses are implicit in the elab-
oration of the parameters and constructs of the model and in the section
on the interaction of the model’s parameters. Nevertheless, a few of these
are made explicit here by way of illustration.
(1) Effective decision makers will be more advanced in the decision-
making process than ineffective decision makers (i.e., individuals
with high self-esteem and a well differentiated and integrated iden-
tity, and individuals who are rational as opposed to intuitive or
dependent in decision-making style).
(2) Individuals who are more advanced in the resolution of a given
developmental task are more likely to resolve decision-making
tasks associated with that developmental task.
(3) The decision-making process is initiated or precipitated:
(a) when the individual receives negative interpersonal evaluations
relevant to a task being implemented;
(b) when the individual experiences consistently low levels of suc-
cess and satisfaction outcomes (relative to those anticipated
during the planning and commitment stages);
(c) when Task Immanence increases (an approaching deadline for a
decision).
(4) Movement through the decision-making process is facilitated:
(a) when the individual receives positive evaluations while engag-
ing in task relevant behavior at each stage (e.g.; reinforcement
for engaging in information-seeking behavior during Planning;
positive reactions from important others when trying-out-on-
others one’s intentions during Commitment):
(b) when high Support and high Probability Conditions obtain;
(c) when available alternatives are known, limited to a few in
number, and sufficiently differentiated from each other in terms
of positive and negative consequences;
(d) when the individual experiences moderate levels of task-specific
anxiety and low levels of generalized trait anxiety.
The above hypotheses are but a few of those that can be generated by
the model. The author and his associates are engaged in a research

15. CAREER DECISION MAKING 133
program in which some of these hypotheses have already been tested,
while others are under investigation. It is the author’s hope that this paper
will have stimulated others to use the model in their own settings in
pursuing their counseling, teaching, and research activities.
REFERENCES
Chickering, A. W. Education and idenriry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1969.
Haney, T., & Howland, P. A. Career courses for credit: Necessity or luxury? Journal of
College Placement, 1978, 75-79.
Janis, I. L., & Mann, L. Decision making: A psychological analysis of conflict, choice and
commitment. New York: Free Press, 1977.
Jepsen, D., & Dilley, J. Vocational decision-making models: A review and comparative
analysis. Review of Educational Research, 1974, 44, 331-349.
Korman, A. Toward a hypothesis of work behavior. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1970,
54, 31-41.
Miller, A. L., & Tiedeman, D. V. Decision making for the seventies: The cubing of the
Tiedeman paradigm and its application in career education. Pocus on Guidance, 1972,
5, l-16.
Super, D. E., Starishevsky. R., Matlin. N., & Jordaan, J. P. Career development: Self
concept theory. New York: College Entrance Examination Board, 1963.
Tiedeman, D. V. Decision and vocational development: A paradigm and its implications.
Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1961. 40, 15-21.
Tiedeman, D. V.. & O’Hara, R. P. Career development: Choice and adjustment. New York:
College Entrance Examination Board, 1963.
Wicklund. R. A.. & Brehm. J. W. Perspectives on cogniti,e dissonance. Hillsdale, NY:
Lawrence Earlbaum Assoc.. 1976.
REFERENCE NOTE
I. Barrett, T. C., & Harren, V. A. Self-conception: A model for humanistic-existential
psychotherapy. Unpublished manuscript, 1977. (Available from Vincent A. Harren.
Department of Psychology, Southern Illinois University, Carbondale, IL 62901).
Received: June 5. 1978