Life Span Theory and Career Theories: Rapprochement or Estrangement?

Abstract

On the assumption that cross-fertilization across (allied) disciplines is profitable, one of the contemporary theories of human development, namely life span theory, is selected for its potential usefulness for career theory, research, and practice. Life span theory is a particularly apt choice for such an exercise because of its overarching framework, comprehensiveness, multiple levels of generality/specificity, and relevance of content. The key ideas of life span theory or life span developmental psychology are outlined and discussed first. Largely adapted from the writings of Paul Baltes, the first set of these key ideas includes the following: Lifelong processes in development; plasticity as pivotal, more importance to change than in previous theories of development; the need to reformulate the concept of developmental change; development as a gain-loss dynamic; and development as a process of selective adaptation involving the coordination of three processes (i.e., selection, optimization, and compensation). The second set of key ideas, also drawn from Baltes's work, includes culture as compensation, coevolution of biology and culture, development as a process of biocultural co-construction, and an incomplete architecture of human development.

Next, in order to clarify the extent to which life span theory opens new perspectives or reiterates extant perspectives, selected career theories are examined for their extent of rapprochement with life span theory: theory of work adjustment; Holland’s theory of vocational personalities in work environments; Super’s life-span, life-space approach to career development; theory of career construction; and social cognitive career theory. It is found that although there is some rapprochement between life span theory in human development and career theories, this rapprochement is neither consistent nor adequate. At best, there is some recognition of the need for a life span orientation and variable acknowledgement of the value of plasticity.

This exercise yields new directions as well as reinforces existing foci in career theory, research, and practice. It is clear, for example, that greater attention needs to be paid to lifelong processes in career development. In which case, there is a simultaneous need to orient ourselves to plasticity in career development. The complementarity of the constructs of lifelong development and plasticity needs better reception and integration in career theory, research, and practice.

Using life span theory, career development can be viewed as constituted of gains and losses in adaptive capacities or functions through selection and selective optimization at multiple points in the life span. Individuals and groups can be assisted in identifying the specific adaptive capacities or functions that they would like to strengthen and the careers or types of jobs that provide the means to do so. Successful career development can be facilitated by promoting (a) general plasticity and (b) assisting individuals and groups in maximizing gains and minimizing losses. Lastly, in the careers field we must recognize that the limits of human development are unknown because these limits are continually extended through biocultural coevolution. Therefore, the conclusions about career development can be only based partly (and not wholly) on the past, and we need to continually regenerate our knowledge base as well as modes of practice.