Facilitating Narrative Change in Career Construction Counseling

CCC Effectiveness

CCC is a career counseling discourse that takes a narrative perspective on psychological functioning, one that views an individual’s stories as a means to organize personal experiences. Grounded in a conception of career as the story, one tells about their work life. CCC aims to increase the coherence and continuity of these narratives to enable new possibilities for self-construction and vocational identity (Savickas, 2019). In this sense, counselors support clients in rewriting the large story of their careers, or a macronarrative, through reflection on small stories about their vocational experiences, or micronarratives. The newly revised macronarrative tells a large story of who clients once were, who are they now, and who they want to become.

CCC practice evolves throughout three phases. In the first phase, the main counseling tasks are problem formulation and eliciting micronarratives about career construct (e.g., needs, interests, goals, values, and competencies). In the second phase, the main tasks are reconstructing the micronarratives into a macronarrative and formulating career plans to enact that macronarrative. To facilitate this process, counselors encourage clients to examine emotions and cognitions prompted by their stories. Counselors also foster life themes identification, that is, the identification of core problem or set of problems in life as well as the means to solve them (Savickas, 2019). The importance of life themes for narrative identity construction stems from their functioning as core meanings around which clients elaborate links between events and experiences. This way, wide dimensions of career meaning are elaborated to facilitate rewriting the career macronarrative. The revised organization of self-experience is completed as clients design new career plans. Finally, in the third phase, the counseling tasks involve helping clients to review actions intended to implement realistic career plans, encourage action in the real world, and promote reflection on changes accomplished and anticipated (Savickas, 2019).

Client’s Change in CCC From IMs Perspective

The IMs perspective (Gonçalves et al., 2009) has provided the theoretical and methodological tools to conceptualize and analyze clients’ change during CCC. Developed from research on psychotherapy process, it proposes psychopathology is associated with problematic self-narratives that restrict organization of experience because they are rigid, monothematic, or disorganized (Dimaggio, 2006; Hermans & Hermans-Jansen, 1995). From the perspective of the IMM, change occurs when the problematic self-narrative is revised by alternative ways of feeling, thinking, or acting (Gonçalves et al., 2009). These occasions of narrative transformation are called IMs. Throughout the intervention, clients’ narrative change evolves in a process that allows the initial problematic self-narrative to be transformed into a new self-narrative through an increasing proportion and complexity of IMs. These transformational IMs can be tracked using the Innovative Moments Coding System (IMCS; Gonçalves et al., 2011), which is a tool validated in hypothesis-testing research and case studies (see Gonçalves et al., 2011).

The IMCS identifies seven types of IMs, organized in three levels of increasing complexity of narrative elaboration. Level 1 IMs distance clients from their problem through specific actions or behaviors against the problem (Action 1 IMs), thoughts revealing new perspectives on the problem (Reflection 1 IMs), and criticism of the problem(s) or others who support it (Protest 1 IMs). Level 2 IMs center on change and not just on dealing with the problem. That is, innovation at this level is not defined by relation to the problem anymore. For example, clients refer to new (a) strategies implemented to overcome the problem (Reflection 2 IMs), (b) assertiveness and empowerment (Protest 2 IMs), and (c) career plans and investment in activities as consequence of change (Action 2 IMs). Finally, Level 3 IMs are characterized by reconceptualization. This is the most complex type of IM since it implies the description of changes achieved and of the processes that are involved in it. Below, in the description of practices evoking and expanding IMs, the process of change is illustrated, and examples of IMs are presented.

IMCS was applied in three case studies to assess intensively the evolution of clients’ narrative transformation throughout CCC (Cardoso et al., 2014a, 2014b, 2016). Subsequently, the comparative analysis of these case studies allowed us to propose a model on the sequence of clients’ changes during the intervention (Cardoso et al., 2019). Still in an exploratory phase of its development, this model integrates the sequence of IMs evolution with counseling tasks in each intervention phases. This process of constructing theory from a small subset of cases is based on Stiles (2007) model of theory-building case studies.

As can be seen in Figure 1, during the first phase of CCC, change involves Level 1 IMs. Action 1 and Protest 1 IMs are present; however, Reflection 1 IMs predominate. These changes allow clients to, gradually, distance themselves from the problem(s) by, for example, reconsidering problem(s) causes and consequences, making new problem(s) formulations (Reflection 1) or through expressions of career planning and exploration (Action 1). Changes mentioned occur in a close relation with counseling tasks of this phase, namely, problem formulation and career constructs exploration. In the second phase of CCC, Level 1 IMs are still present, being fundamental to sustain the emergence of Level 2 IMs. Reflection 2 IMs predominate, accompanied by Protest 2 and Action 2 IMs, to a lesser extent. This evolution of self-narrative elaboration revels the emergence of new self-positions, expressions of well-being (Reflection 2), positions of assertiveness and empowerment (Protest 2), as well as references to new career paths and behaviors that make them viable (Action 2). During this phase, clients’ narrative transformation parallels counseling tasks of reconstructing the career story and making career plans. Finally, in the third phase of CCC, Level 1 and Level 2 IMs continue to occur in large proportion. However, clients’ change has consolidated to allow the emergence of Level 3 IMs, which occur only when counselors invite clients to reflect on the changes achieved and the processes underpinning such changes.

Evoking and Elaborating IMs in CCC

The sequence of client change described allows the use of IMs as markers for guiding process-oriented interventions. That is, practices focused on meaning (re)construction in which a counselor takes into account intervention process markers to decide what to say or do moment-by-moment during the session (Montesano et al., 2017). From this perspective, counseling tasks and IMs might be viewed as markers that counselors can use for fostering and reinforce client’s change throughout the intervention (Cardoso et al., 2014a). The evocation and elaboration of IMs benefit from four different kinds of dialogue as proposed by Montesano et al. (2017): (a) identifying and evaluating the effects of IMs by inviting the client to identify and provide an extended description of IMs, (b) highlighting contrasting self-positions and competing story lines, (c) asking for changes that the client was able to initiate or develop to draw attention to their own transformation, and (d) promoting a meta-perspective on change to foster higher order narrative elaboration such as the integration of emergent narrative novelty into a more comprehensive self-narrative.

The four types of conversation imply resources that have been already developed by several therapy and counseling approaches. Of course, the counselors’ choices depend on their toolbox. Hence, in the examples presented below, narrative practices are frequently mentioned since they belong to our repertoire (see Table 1). Next, we offer a detailed characterization of these types of dialogues for the counseling tasks in each intervention phase using an illustrative case.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Types of Conversation to Evoke and Elaborate IMs, Their Goals, and Illustrative Dialogues.

Conversation	Goal	Examples
Identifying and evaluating the effects of IMs	To identify and encourage an extended description of IMs	I’m not sure but your words sound like you felt kind of lost on which path to follow [Exploratory reflection] Feels abused [Empathic reflection]. If your sense of fulfillment spoke, what would it say? [Exploratory question]
Highlighting contrasting self-positions	To bring to the foreground contrasting self-positions and competing story lines	In that dilemma there are two dimensions of you, two Martin’s, isn’t it? [Highlighting the contrasting self-positions] If some episodes are of happiness others are of sadness. In “The cycle closes” You were sad about the end of school…[Evoking the contrasting self-position] “Say it louder” or “Do it again” [Highlighting one of the self-positions]
Asking for processes of change	To facilitate clients’ awareness of their change	“What allowed you to do that?” “How was that possible?” and “What could have prevented it from occurring” (for identification by the negative)
Promoting a meta-perspective on change	To foster higher order narrative elaboration such as the integration of emergent narrative novelty into a more comprehensive self-narrative	Tell me about your struggles against injustice [Inviting the elaboration of links across different situations and moments] Example of evoking Level 3 IMs: What is the difference between the person who initiated this process and that person today? [Evoking contrasting positionings] To realize that your work environment is toxic was important for your change?

Note. IM = innovative moment.

CCC Phase I—Sofia Tells Her Story

In Phase I, counseling tasks for supporting Sofia’s problem formulation and understanding career constructs (e.g., interests, aptitudes, and values) in micronarrative allowed the emergence of Level 1 IMs. During problem formulation, the evocation and examination of IMs was important to deepen her problem description and, consequently, its elaboration. In that sense, the counselor used questions to invite the client to stay with and explore the emergent narrative novelty. This type of dialogue facilitates personal experience differentiation or elaboration on the interface between career and personal issues. The following excerpt from the beginning of the first CCC session is illustrative:

In the foregoing excerpt, the client began by formulating the problem ambiguously. On the one hand, her words suggested a job placement intervention (e.g., “Help me to find another job”) and, on the other hand, it suggested the need for narrative identity clarification (e.g., “I don’t know where to go”). At the end, the emergence of a new problem formulation was achieved by using identifying and evaluating IMs to deepen Sofia’s understanding of her career issues. This type of dialogues was evoked through empathic inferences, exploratory reflections and “how” questions. The counselor created a coexploratory relationship in which the client felt sufficiently secure to deepen elaboration of her self-experience and provide extended descriptions of IMs. The following dialogue demonstrates this narrative process. The counselor used an empathic reflection to favor the symbolization of Sofia’s self-experience when she talked about her job dissatisfaction.

The words of Sofia revealed how the empathic reflection prompted the symbolization of self-experience—“Exactly, I think the word is really that.” Conversation to identify and evaluate problem causes and consequences followed spontaneously as Sofia expanded the emergent narrative novelty. This way the expansion of Level 1 IMs allowed the recognition of personal issues (difficulties in establishing limits) underlying career problems. By contrast, such recognition prompted the intention to fight the problem.

During problem formulation, conversation asking for processes of change might also be evoked when clients refer to having already received support in dealing with career issues. In the following example, this type of conversation was evoked when Sofia said she was receiving psychotherapeutic support due to burnout at work:

The aforementioned dialogue shows the importance of asking for processes of change to evoke Level 2 IMs and highlight clients’ awareness on their transformation. The use of this type of dialogue during the first phase of CCC also illustrates the importance of flexibility in using the different types of conversation.

The counseling task of career constructs exploration involving narrative elaboration of personal needs, interests, aptitudes, or goals might occur during the process of problem formulation. With clients such as Sofia who present with indecision and uncertainty about a way forward, evocating and elaborating career constructs (Reflection 1 IMs) fosters the development of vocational identity as they increase self-knowledge about needs, interests, capabilities, values, and goals. In this sense, it is important that counselors attend to markers in a client’s discourse. For example, the counselor could take advantage of Sofia’s statement about her need for occupational fulfillment to ask “What do you need to feel fulfilled in your job?” Her responses would make her feel her needs and interests as more substantial and real.

Another way of linking the problem formulation to career constructs exploration involves discussion of career adaptability. The analysis of adaptability resources allows counselors to identify markers of clients’ readiness to cope with career challenges (Savickas, 2019). For examples, counselors may invite conversation on the processes of change by asking “What did you do to solve this career problem?” to elicit reference to career exploration behaviors (Action 1 IMs), intentions to face career problems (e.g., “I would like to have an experience in arts to know if this is what I want”—Reflection 1), and adaptive thoughts expressing optimism and/or self-confidence (e.g., “I believe that if I like it and try hard I can get there”—Reflection 1 IMs). Once again, the conversation inviting a client to stay and explore these IMs (e.g., “Tell me a little about the efforts you need to make to achieve your goals”) deepens problem understanding and examines client problem-solving intentions and adaptive thoughts (Reflection 1 IMs). Consider the following excerpt from the case of Sofia.

After Sofia referred to one of these jobs, the counselor requested that she “Describe a happy day in that job.” The description of a rewarding work episode put her in contact with a feeling of fulfillment. Then, the counselor had her elaborate on the emotional experience contained in the rewarding episode to symbolize her needs. Sofia explained that “Having people satisfied with the service I provide, makes a difference (….) feel useful [Expansion of reflection 1 IMs].” Dialogues that identify and evaluate the effects of IMs facilitate problem formulation and initial exploration of career constructs. They continue into the second phase of CCC and are joined by other types of conversation which eventually become predominant.

CCC Phase II—Sofia Rewrites Her Story

The major tasks of phase II are reconstructing the career macronarrativve and making career plans. To facilitate the reconstruction of the macronarrative, the client and counselor explore the meaning of needs, interests, and objectives that they elaborated beginning in Phase I and continuing in Phase II. However, this type of dialogue is not enough. Counselors should also highlight contrasting self-positions and prompt a meta-perspective on change. The former facilitates the awareness of life themes when it examines the contrast that constitutes life themes, that is, the juxtaposition between core problems and possible solutions. This contrast is also identified in other counseling and psychotherapy approaches as the dichotomy self versus self without the problem or the voice of the problem versus the voice of the person (Montesano et al., 2017). By highlighting contrasting self-positions, counselors also may bring to the foreground a nondominant narrative and, in this way, prompt the emergency of new self-positions necessary for career problems resolution. In turn, dialogue prompting a meta-perspective of change is necessary to bridge meanings between life episodes in different situations and moments (Montesano et al., 2017). Analyzing how needs are expressed at different times and situations is important in articulating life themes. This analysis enables clients to distance themselves from self-experience in order to reflexively identify patterns and regularities as well as to establish links between personal experiences at different times and situations (Savickas, 2019).

Usually, the second phase of CCC begins with the exploration of the meanings contained in the responses to the early recollections and role models questions (Savickas, 2019). The exploration of micronarratives about recollections and models are privileged moments that articulate the contrast between the problematic self-narrative and the alternative self-narrative, which constitutes the life themes. In early recollections, contrasting self-positions are highlighted when the counselor supports evocation and expansion of the problematic self-narrative in one or more early recollections and, after, invites clients to explore the voice of the nonproblematic self-narrative contained in another early recollection. The process is illustrated in Sofia’s discourse about two nonproblematic early recollections in which she reports two episodes of happiness, titled “Happy days” and “The fantastic first day at school,” and a problematic early recollection, titled “The cycle closes”:

Next, the counselor fostered IMs expansion by using exploratory questions that invited Sofia to provide an extended description of freedom (e.g., “Yeah, learning is important to you, enthusiasms you…tell me about that”) and learning experiences (e.g., “What did it mean that there was nothing else?”). After supporting the expansion and differentiation of happiness episodes, the counselor moved the dialogue to explore meanings in the problematic episode and, thus, highlight the contrasting positioning.

The examples above show the complementary use of all types of conversation to evoke and elaborate contrasts in positions. First, conversation to identify and evaluate the effects of IMs was used to evoke and expand narrative novelty associated with each of the self-positions. Then, conversation promoting a meta-perspective on change was applied to expand new meanings across different situations and moments and, therefore, to elaborate the first sketches in the process of rewriting the narrative identity.

As mentioned, the exploration of role-models meanings is a second privileged moment to highlight contrasting self-positions. In fact, role models function like guides that people use to make sense of their own lives and, therefore, the analysis of their meaning evokes ideals to be achieved that might be contrasted with the actual-self (Higgins, 1987). This dialogue heightens clients’ self-awareness of the characteristics and attributes they have used and continue to use as blueprints for self-construction (Savickas, 2019). The process starts by asking questions that evoke regularities and patterns common to role models (e.g., “What do the role models have in common?” “How are you like…?” or “How are you different…?”). Then, such meanings are expanded by conversation that highlights contrasting self-positions and promotes a meta-perspective on change. This type of dialogues enables clients to contrast regularities and patterns across different moments and situations in their life history and, consequently, to elaborate the first sketches of narrative continuity and coherence. The process of elaborating IMs resulting from role model analysis is illustrated in the following vignette.

After clients have elaborated narratively about the person who they are becoming (i.e., role-model characteristics), counselors evoke a contrast by focusing on current experiences or personal characteristics that differ from the idealized self-condition. For Sofia, the contrast was made with current work experiences.

As life themes become clearer in clients’ narratives, counselors more frequently use conversations to promote a meta-perspective on change that reorganize new meanings into a coherent totality. With Sofia, the theme of people, identified during early recollections and role models analysis, was once again addressed during the analysis of her life motto.

This process is concluded when counselors support clients to project solutions for their life themes through the elaboration of new career plans. In the dialogue that follows the counselor starts by helping Sofia to ground construction of career plans in her life themes.

The question, “In what activities could you find the balance you need?” is generic to invite reference to activities across all career roles. In the next step, the expansion of action 2 IMs is made by using specific questions focused on each career role (e.g., “Could you give me examples of leisure time activities where the relationship with others and helping others may be present?”). By evoking career plans in different roles, counselors expand career construction possibilities and make CCC a real-life design practice.

CCC Phase III—Sofia Enacts Her Story

The evocation of career goals introduces Phase III of CCC which reviews actions intended to implement career plans and reconceptualization of change are the main tasks. Revising client’s initiatives to implement career plans requires dialogue on (a) career barriers and supports to open the possibility for clients to reconsider career problems causes and effects (Reflection 1 IMs), (b) increase the motivation for coping with career barriers (Reflection 1 IMs), and (c) express both critical positions toward those who support the problems (Protest 1 IMs) and positions of empowerment to assert career plans (Protest 2 IMs). In addition, the expansion of Reflection 1 IMs benefits from questions that promote realism in clients’ view of career barriers (e.g., “What are the evidences that you have been discriminated?”) and evoke reflection on possible solutions (e.g., “How do you plan to deal with discrimination in your job?”). Such questions may unfold both irrational beliefs underlying perception of career barriers (Reflection 1 IMs) and forgotten self-versions such as expressions of optimism and self-confidence as consequence of changes achieved (Reflection 2 IMs).

Reconceptualizing clients’ transformation is the second major counseling task of Phase III. It involves evoking Level 3 IMs that contrast how clients were at the beginning of the intervention and how they are at the end. After elaborating on these two moments/positions, clients are supported in elaborating on the transformation between one position (“how I was”) to the other (“how I am now”). Analysis of the transformation described requires that clients distance themselves from self-experience to elaborate on the process of change as well as describe comprehensively the change factors. The following vignette illustrates Level 3 IM evocation and elaboration with Sofia.

Having completed the elaboration of one self-position, the conversation moves to the evocation and expansion of the contrasting positioning.

The foregoing example also shows how elaboration of contrasting self-positions might evoke references to change factors which are used to expand Level 3 IMs:

Sofia’s words illustrate the role of reflexivity inherent to Level 3 IMs that consolidate narrative continuity and coherence, which allow the emergence of new patterns of functioning, and interrupting habitual ways of thinking, feeling, or acting (Gonçalves & Ribeiro, 2012).