In order to highlight the predicament of dislocated workers, the authors of this article utilize insights from the book by David Blustein’s titled The Psychology of working: A new perspective for career development, counseling, and public policy in abstracting contemporary career problems. The authors aim at strengthening the understanding of unintended career changes and to enable career help for these workers (Hees, Rottinghaus, Briddick, & Conrath, 2011, p. 334). Additionally, using examples or case studies, the authors argue how the incorporation of insights from psychology of working helps in the concerns such as finance, and social justice concerns among workers with no employment (Hees et al., 2011, p. 333). Finally, with examples the authors provide counselling strategies especially for those dislocated workers thinking of going back to school.
Analysis of the article
In analyzing the article, I will offer my opinion and critique of the article under examination.
My opinion includes what I find helpful in the article and the manner of proceeding in it. The authors of the article have done an exemplary work. They have divided the article into different sections making it easy to read and follow the development of their thoughts. Importantly, they highlight a plight of that part of the population who are not always considered at risk due to uncertainties of the economy (Hees et al., 2011, p. 334). These are the workers that are laid off or lose their employments and careers due to globalization and economic meltdown just to mention a few causes and therefore may require education or retraining in order to increase their chances of employability. However, the authors make a very important point when they note that the present day dislocated workers include in their ranks both middle and upper class workers susceptible to fluctuation in the world economy (Hees et al., 2011, p. 336).
Another important aspect in the article is that the authors give a reason for deciding to use David Blustein’s psychology of working. The authors claim that three Blustein’s characteristics of self-determination, finances and work are expressed by unemployed they have worked with (Hees et al., 2011, p. 336). Furthermore, the use of case studies in the article does justice to the claims made by the authors and helps to buttress their findings and conclusions.
The authors expose a significant gap between what traditional theories claim and the reality on the ground. For instance, what classical or conventional career theories ascribe and reality facing the contemporary workers do not converge. Normally traditional career theories highlight the importance of career choices; however, globalization and economic factors regulate the availability of work and resources for majority of people in the contemporary world (Hees et al., 2011, p. 337). Thus, the authors propose the necessity of practitioners to broaden their horizon on matters pertaining to psychological and material needs of clients undergoing grief due to job loss (Hees et al., 2011, p. 337).
I have two critiques for the authors of the article. The authors draw a lot from David Blustein’s psychology of work as a fundamental source to buttress and give their work authenticity. However, they fail to mention if there are other works in opposition or that critique the opinion of David Blustein, which could have enlightened the reader by examining these alternative opinions. In addition, this would have offered the reader the opportunity to compare the effectiveness of David Blustein’s view in comparison to the divergent opinion or observation. This omission by the authors constitutes some partiality, as I would not expect such an oversight from these competent authors.
The authors make a bold claim when they state that families that employ proactive coping strategies and plan how to deal with an unemployment before it happens are more likely to be successfully reemployed (Hees et al., 2011, p. 338). However, the author does not expand or explain this point and even offer supporting statistics as they do in article when dealing with other pertinent issues. Again, the authors offer only one reference (DeBaryshe, Stern, & Yuen, 1998) to support this assertion. I expected them to offer more than one reference so as to have more sources of information for such an important assertion in line with the topic been handled.
Blustein, D. L., Kenna, A. C., Gill, N., & DeVoy, J. E. (2008). The psychology of working: A
new framework for counseling practice and public policy. The Career Development
Quarterly, 56(4), 294-308.
Hees, C. K., Rottinghaus, P. J., Briddick, W. C., & Conrath, J. A. (2012). Work‐to‐School
Transitions in the Age of the Displaced Worker: A Psychology of Working
Perspective. The Career Development Quarterly, 60(4), 333-342.