Developing self-efficacy and career optimism through participation in communities of practice within Australian creative industries

Abstract

Building a sustainable career in the creative industries is a challenging proposition. Creative workers face high levels of employment insecurity and limited career development opportunity. Those working in the sector must build discipline-oriented career self-management skills, while also finding ways to cope with the psychologically demanding nature of precarious work. Two competencies that contribute to creative career success are self-efficacy and career optimism, both of which support resilience and persistence in the face of career obstacles. This study used narrative data from 28 interviews across six creative disciplines to examine how creative workers who work within communities of practice build self-efficacy and career optimism. The findings suggested that, by participating in communities of practice, creative practitioners not only build professional skills that align with their discipline but also gain psychosocial support that promotes resilience. There is an opportunity, therefore, to enhance understanding of communities of practice with creative career development offerings.

Keywords

Career development career optimism communities of practice creative industries self-efficacy

Introduction

Creativity is a crucial contributor to success in knowledge economies (Bilton, 2010). The creative industries not only contribute significantly to the Australian economy but also act as an incubator to foster creative skills that benefit broader society. The creative industries labour market, however, is a challenging place for practitioners to build sustainable careers. High levels of insecure employment coupled with limited opportunity for professional development mean that creative workers need to find innovative ways to build career capability and coping skills. This study examined the role played by situated learning through communities of practice in building the career self-management skills of self-efficacy and career optimism. As a result, this study argues creative practitioners who engage in collaborative practice not only develop critical professional skills but also obtain necessary psychosocial support that fosters resilience to sustain them in the world of creative work.

Australian creative practitioners are at the coalface of precarious employment. Creative workers are pushed towards flexible or portfolio work through financial necessity and industry configuration (Bridgstock & Cunningham, 2015). According to the Throsby & Petetskaya (2017), the majority of artists spend less than 50% of their time on artistic practice, and income derived from creative practice has been falling in real terms since 2009. Moreover, the average artist’s income is 21% lower than that of similarly qualified workers in other economic sectors (Throsby & Petetskaya, 2017). Creative workers are typically employed on a casual, short-term, or contractual basis, and often undertake significant periods of volunteer work (Cunningham, Higgs, Freebody, & Anderson, 2010; Daniel, 2016; Throsby & Petetskaya, 2017). Furthermore, compared to the broader economy, the creative industries have higher proportions of sole traders and small-to-medium enterprises (SGS Economics and Planning, 2013). Census data show that 13% of those in the cultural sector are sole traders, compared to 6% in the broader economy; whereas almost 60% of those in the industry classifications for creative arts (musicians, writers, and performers) are self-employed (Cunningham, 2014).

Precariousness of work affects those in the sector both economically and psychologically (Patrick & Elks, 2015). High levels of self-employment, quasi-self-employment, and juggling of flexible work highlight the need for creative workers to engage in the “hustle”: the multi-faceted activity where workers form connections, learn about the industry, consolidate their reputations, and explore economic opportunities that lead to work (Mehta, 2017). To sustain the hustle, workers need to persist – often in the face of harsh conditions – and to actively develop career self-management skills. Once creative workers move beyond the structured educational environment, however, there is little career development opportunity. Recognising the discipline-specific characteristics of the creative industries, social cognitive career theories explain the processes through which people contribute to their own educational and career development. These theories emphasise the role that self-referent thinking plays in human motivation and behaviour (Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 1994). Most research into career self-management and creative workers, however, has focused on students (Daniel, 2010; Mehta, 2017) and does not consider what happens to practitioners after they enter the workforce and face the reality of the labour market.

This paper considers an alternate locus for the development of self-efficacy and optimism: professional working relationships that can be categorised as communities of practice. This study highlights the developmental and psychosocial benefits that come from engaging in collaborative work within the social learning environment. It demonstrates that communities of practice play a crucial role in providing essential psychosocial support to enhance self-efficacy and build career optimism. The study addressed two research questions: first, what evidence is there of communities of practice operating in the Australian creative sector? and, second, what impact do communities of practice have on self-efficacy and career optimism for members?

Literature review

Career success is the accumulated positive work and psychological outcomes resulting from work experiences (Seibert, Kraimer, & Liden, 2001). Those who can move up the societal and organisational hierarchies are typically regarded as successful and are more likely to view themselves as a success (Ng, Eby, Sorensen, & Feldman, 2005). For those who work in creative industries, however, the milestones of career success are more nebulous than obtaining a promotion or higher paying job. Creative work is often relational, aligning more with protean or boundaryless career models (Bravo, Seibert, Kraimer, Wayne, & Liden, 2015), while workers in the sector face increasingly precarious working conditions (Australia Council for the Arts, 2017). As a result, the skills, capabilities, and attitudes required to build career success might be different from those for workers in more stable organisational settings.

Creative industries career development research has explored the skills required of creative graduates and the role of educational institutions in building career self-management skills (Bridgstock, 2009, 2011, 2013). Other work focuses on how non-intellectual capabilities (Garcia, Restubog, Bordia, Bordia, & Roxas, 2015), such as self-efficacy, can help practitioners persevere in the face of uncertainty. Critics argue, however, that creative education institutions are encouraging practitioners to engage in entrepreneurial activities without evaluating the problems this provokes (McRobbie, 2016). Highlighting the neoliberal approach to career development in the creative industries, McRobbie (2016, p. 170) contended that the “new middle class of educated young persons is being ‘made up’ to withstand and prepare for a world of seemingly self-directed work often interrupted and relatively unprotected”.

Intrinsic motivation has been identified as an important contributor to career success (Ng & Feldman, 2014). Given the unprotected nature of creative careers, however, career self-efficacy – individuals’ self-belief in their ability to organise and execute actions to further their career (Lent et al., 1994) – becomes an important tool to maintain intrinsic motivation in the face of career challenges. Self-efficacy has been linked conceptually to motivation and persistence, or the willingness to continue with an activity in the face of setbacks. Self-efficacy not only affects the choices individuals make concerning their careers but also the effort, expenditure, thought patterns, and emotional reactions when confronted by obstacles (Lent et al., 1994). Unless practitioners believe they can produce desired outcomes through their actions, they have little incentive to act or persevere in the face of difficulty (Bandura, Barbaranelli, Caprara, & Pastorelli, 2001; Lent et al., 1994).

Self-efficacy has been found to influence aspirations and strength of commitment to them, the quality of analytic and strategic thinking, the levels of motivation and perseverance in the face of difficulties and setbacks, resilience to adversity, causal attributions for success and failures, and vulnerability to stress and depression (Bandura et al., 2001). While Bandura (1977) identified a number of ways to build self-efficacy, including vicarious learning, modelling, and encouragement from others, the career management literature recognises a need for further research into the antecedents of self-efficacy and outcome expectations (Lent, Ireland, Penn, Morris, & Sappington, 2017). One potential area for exploration is the role that professional relationships such as networking and communities of practice play as a locus for building self-efficacy and career optimism.

Career optimism has been found to link closely with both self-efficacy and career self-management. Career optimism is the tendency individuals have to expect the best possible outcome or to emphasise positive aspects of their future career (Garcia et al., 2015). The concept has been associated with career choice and exploration activities in the early stages of a career, but also with job satisfaction, commitment, and performance (Garcia et al., 2015). Importantly for those in the precarious creative industries, optimism has also been linked to coping strategies for those dealing with unemployment (Wanberg, 1997). While career optimism has been described as a disposition (Rottinghaus, Day, & Borgen, 2005), more recent studies have suggested it can be shaped or strengthened through a supportive environment (Garcia et al., 2015). From a creative industries perspective, there has been little research into the maintaining of career optimism, although the increasing focus on precariousness of employment is leading to more interest in the role of resilience as a career self-management strategy. Research conducted by Reid, Petocz, and Bennett (2016) recognises that creative worker self-esteem is largely intrinsic, but they also note that extrinsic factors, such as acceptance of individuals’ work by social groups and the community, also shape how creative workers feel about their career.

Networking, along with persistence and intrinsic motivation, is a critical element in career success within creative work (Daniel, 2016; Daniel, Fleischmann, & Welters, 2017; Ng & Feldman, 2014). Networking is vital as a referral source of ongoing work for revenue generation (Daniel et al., 2017), while peers and social networks can become role models and sources of affirmation and support (Komives, Osteen, Owen, Mainella, & Longerbeam, 2005). Networking, however, can also be indicative of what Wittel (2001), writing before the age of Linked-In or Facebook, described as network sociality: informational relationships based on technological connections or “catching up”. Networking itself might be of limited value from a career self-management perspective, but the move beyond the simple reciprocal exchange of clients and information to engaging in collaboration through situated learning and communities of practice can be vital in building successful careers.

Situated learning – a collaborative activity that involves deeper relationships than networking (Lave, 1991) – is a significant development opportunity for creative practitioners and one that many naturally gravitate towards. A community of practice differs from a network in that a community focuses on shared creation, whereas a network is limited to relationships and information (Fourie, 2009). Communities of practice are joint enterprises, involve mutual engagement and have a shared repertoire of communal resources, such as vocabulary, which emerges over time (Wenger, 1998). Wenger (2010) defined communities of practice as the containers of competence that make up a shared learning system, with engagement and production of physical and conceptual artefacts integral to meaningful learning. While communities of practice are built around the creation of work, the formation of peer networks also provides necessary development in the long term through legitimate peripheral participation (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Those who participate in a community, even though they might not recognise themselves as such (Roberts, 2006), create a shared definition of what competence is and hold each other accountable to this level.

Communities of practice also form places for collective identity construction, and participant narratives highlight shared understanding of career success. The collective nature of communities of practice makes them sites for self-efficacy building and career optimism, as they have the potential to provide support and shape a positive view of the career landscape (Garcia et al., 2015). Unlike development programmes or similar interventions, communities of practice do not focus on enhancing behaviours (measured against an externally created theoretical benchmark), but provide a contextual understanding of how careers are built within specific, situated discipline-based communities. Higgins, Dobrow, and Roloff (2010, pp. 28–29) found in their study of developmental networks that “individuals who continue to cultivate developmental relationships over the course of their careers may be better positioned in terms of withstanding inevitable career risks, stress, and hardships in today’s career environment”. Moreover, they found a positive relationship between the strength of developmental relationships and optimism (Higgins et al., 2010). Thus, those with tighter or stronger developmental networks receive psychosocial support that enhances self-confidence and belief in positive future outcomes.

Despite work practices seemingly having a natural alignment with situated learning, there is a lack of research examining the role of communities of practice within the creative industries. Jyrämä and Äyväri (2015) explored societal art projects and art management skills using a community of practice framework, and Fritsch (2008) utilised the methodology from an audience analysis perspective, while Hearn, Rodrigues, and Bridgstock (2014) considered social learning in creative services teams. Grugulis and Stoyanova (2011) examined the role of communities of practice within the film and TV sector, but argued that the fluid nature of organisational structures and working conditions creates transitory groups that limit the capacity for skill development.

These approaches, however, neglect the role that communities of practice, which are maintained by members for significant periods, plays across organisational boundaries. Cross-organisational communities provide learning, identity development, and psychosocial support that reflect the labour market experience of those working in the sector. McLeod, O’Donohoe, and Townley (2011), however, recognised that communities of practice might extend beyond organisational boundaries, highlighting the benefits to career trajectories for those in the British advertising industry. As a locus for career development, unrestrained by specific delivery costs or time constraints, and not shaped by organisational boundaries, communities of practice can be an integral element of career development and favourable psychosocial identity formation for creative workers and a way of building career optimism that reduces the friction between the precarious labour market and creative practice.

This research addressed a number of gaps in the creative industries career development literature. First, it considered career self-management strategies beyond the university environment, recognising not only the precarious nature of creative work but the fact that it is undertaken mainly outside traditional organisational boundaries. Second, it applied a social cognitive approach in order to explore how some creative workers engage in communities of practice, while others remain networkers, and considered the relationship these two types of engagement have with the development of self-efficacy and career optimism.

Method

This study explored the role of communities in promoting self-efficacy and optimism supporting creative workers’ career development. It uses career development narratives collected from 28 participants from four Australian cities to explore the psychosocial potential of communities of practice within the creative workforce. The study took a social cognitive approach, recognising the situation- and domain-specific nature of behaviour (Lent et al., 1994), and thus choices were made to collect multiple perspectives from a variety of disciplines and allow space for participants to co-construct, along with the researcher, their career development narratives. The initial focus was on investigating a breadth of disciplines within the Australian creative sector. However, the scope of this paper is narrowed to consider three smaller cases that reflect participation within communities of practice and three where participants engaged in networking-oriented relationships.

Interviews were chosen as the research tool, taking the position that “people’s knowledge, views, understandings, interpretations, experiences, and interactions are meaningful properties” (Mason, 2002, p. 1258/5131). Interviews captured the details of participants’ career development activities and reflections on their career success. The 30- to 60-minute interviews were conducted using a semi-structured format, beginning with a career overview before narrowing the topics to career development practices and professional identity. The semi-structured interviews fall into what Hollway and Jefferson (2000, p. 32/184) describe as “biographical-interpretive”, allowing elements of life story to unfold through the interview. While questions were developed before the data collection process, they remained a guide rather than a prescriptive set, recognising that the interview is both a dialogue and reality construction, rather than a technical mechanism to capture the subject’s version of reality (Riessman, 2008).

Data were collected and analysed using a case study approach (Yin, 1981) and through thematic narrative analysis (Riessman, 2008) using codes that incorporated both career development and arts management theories. Interview data were considered in various ways. A period of re-listening to each interview allowed themes to emerge before the interview was transcribed. Thematic categories, or codes, were identified using NVivo software and then considered against the interview questions to highlight emergent issues. Particular cases were selected to illustrate general patterns that emerged within the data, such as the role the community played in providing psychosocial support. Coding was used to create interpretive and conceptual themes and categories. Broad categories such as “career development” were then broken into sub-categories such as “facilitated learning” and “university” or “peer learning”, while also highlighting thematic issues such as “humility” and “confidence”.

The 28 interviewees came from six disciplines: film, theatre, visual arts, music, digital design, and festival curation. Participants were sourced and selected via professional networks and snowball sampling (Mason, 2002) using the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization Framework for Cultural Statistics (2009) guidelines to gain a cross-section of participants representing different cultural domains, locations, and organisational or employment types. The aim was to produce a sample that was meaningful both theoretically and empirically (Mason, 2002) while including participants from a variety of cultural domains. Most participants had spent significant time working in the creative sector, although many had crossed disciplines or moved from creative practice into arts management. A summary of participants is provided in Table 1.

Table 1.

Research participant demographics.

Participant pseudonym	Discipline	Employment status	Age	Length of time employed in sector	Gender	Location
Bob	Digital design	Employee	41–45	20+ years	Male	Sydney
Liam	Digital design	Freelance	36–40	10–20 years	Male	Sydney
Sam	Digital design	Employee	31–35	5–10 years	Male	Sydney
Vince	Digital design	Employee	41–45	20+ years	Male	Sydney
Faith	Festival curation	Freelance	41–45	20+ years	Female	Sydney
Ida	Festival curation	Employee	45+	20+ years	Female	Melbourne
Katy	Festival curation	Freelance	41–45	20+ years	Female	Sydney
Kristen	Festival curation	Freelance	31–35	10–20 years	Female	Sydney
Kelly	Festival curation	Employee	31–35	10–20 years	Female	Sydney
Cora	Film	Freelance	36–40	10–20 years	Female	Hobart
Ian	Film	Freelance	36–40	5–10 years	Male	Hobart
Keith	Film	Freelance	41–45	10–20 years	Male	Hobart
Orla	Film	Freelance	36–40	10–20 years	Female	Hobart
Sara	Film	Freelance	36–40	5–10 years	Female	Hobart
Donna	Music	Consultant	41–45	10–20 years	Female	Sydney
Francis	Music	Employee	< 30	5–10 years	Female	Sydney
Lynn	Music	Employee	41–45	20+ years	Female	Sydney
Neil	Music	Employee	45+	20+ years	Male	Sydney
Sonia	Music	Employee	36–40	5–10 years	Female	Sydney
Tess	Theatre	Employee	45+	30+ years	Female	Adelaide
Henry	Theatre	Employee	31–35	10–20 years	Male	Adelaide
Marion	Theatre	Employee	≤30	5–10 years	Female	Adelaide
Oliver	Theatre	Freelance	≤30	1–5 years	Male	Adelaide
Zara	Theatre	Freelance	36–40	10–20 years	Female	Adelaide
Belle	Visual Arts	Employee	36–40	10–20 years	Female	Sydney
Karen	Visual Arts	Employee	45+	30+ years	Female	Sydney
Mary	Visual Arts	Volunteer	31–35	1–5 years	Female	Sydney
Tom	Visual Arts	Freelance	36–40	15–20 years	Male	Sydney

Each case is made up of four or five members of a local, discipline-based group that had worked together professionally. Together they construct an emergent picture of career development in the creative sector, one that represents not only individual perspectives but those of the community. While initially selected based on discipline and professional relationships, a number of the case studies exhibit characteristics of communities of practice, which raises questions about the role of social learning in creative industries career development. The following sections will demonstrate that creative workers who actively co-create and collaborate in shared practice through communities of practice have a stronger sense of self-efficacy and career optimism supporting resilience and maintenance of career optimism.

Results

Evidence of communities of practice in the Australian creative industries

In describing learning-oriented communities of practice, Wenger (2010) proposed three criteria for success: a level of energy concerning learning, a depth of social capital as represented by a sense of community and mutual engagement, and a degree of self-awareness in developing practice and the skills of those within it. Fourie (2009, p. 52) described thriving communities of practice as ones that “interact, learn together, build relationships, create knowledge and have a sense of belonging and commitment”. The key to defining a community of practice is finding groups of collaborative practitioners who move beyond the realm of networking only for the sake of informational exchange to the successful melding of practice and learning. Participants engaging in successful communities of practice are also aware of the benefits their community brings and consciously contribute to community outcomes.

While each case includes a variety of different professional relationships across a specific discipline, not all can be characterised as communities of practice. Those working in theatre are the most comprehensive example of understanding and actively promoting working within communities of practice. One subject stated that, to be successful, you need to “establish a cohort of some sort that will become the people you can go through with” then “set up situations where you can really try your ideas, and decide how to do that freely”. Another artistic director claimed “every director forms their own little group or family of performers and creatives that they like to work with because it’s quicker; you develop a shared language”.

Theatre practitioners, particularly those early in their careers, identified others who could augment their skills and support them in achieving artistic goals. One early-career director noted she was “lucky to find others that have those skill sets”. Theatre practitioners move from the periphery of their community closer to the core as participation in projects develops their skills (Handley, Sturdy, Fincham, & Clark, 2006; McLeod et al., 2011). A theatre academic suggested there was a “redundant” introduction of communities of practice into the university environment, given it is already inherent in theatrical practice. Theatre participants all spoke about shared practice development and the benefits of a common vocabulary and learning that benefited the collective, rather than just enhancing individual careers – all facets of a learning-oriented community of practice (Wenger, 1998, 2010). One practitioner recognised that, for communities of practice to exist over longer periods of time, new members must join (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002), suggesting “I think there’s a great deal of peer learning … and they are also good and ensuring they don’t work in a closed circle”.

Despite film being a collectively produced art form, film workers are more likely to engage in cooperative rather than collaborative practice. Cooperation, where tasks are divided separately with defined responsibilities, is distinct from collaboration, which involves joint problem-solving, building of interaction, and understanding of the others’ values and norms (Jyrämä & Äyväri, 2015). Highly structured film production roles tend to reflect a cooperative approach, rather than one that facilitates shared practice. Practitioners who traversed the boundaries between film and theatre found a level of discomfort in their new discipline, given these different modes of working. One film participant described his “guilt” at the “indulgent” methods of theatre collaboration: “I was so used to deadline-based, ‘make this thing, change this, do that’, that it seemed insane to me”.

Communities of practice, however, can be found in the film community, but not necessarily on set. One participant suggested that, while film production is a highly structured environment, the screenwriting process offers more opportunity for collaborative work. This participant created an ongoing screenwriting community that significantly affected the careers of its members, participants describing the group as providing “critical feedback” essential to the work they do as artists. One long-time collaborator, who had been part of the writing group since its inception, noted that even though people “come and go”, a core group remained and, from that group, a variety of projects developed. Another participant added, “I’ve seen various members of the group, their careers. I reflect on it, everyone has come a long way [and] become leaders”. Another participant said the group “pushes each other and sets standards for work” to facilitate group learning and engagement, and, in reflecting on the learning that occurred in the community, said that it filled a gap in the current educational approach, which privileges vocational training. This screenwriting community had strong interpersonal relationships among members, demonstrating mutual feelings of trust, openness, a sense of belonging, shared commitment, and common values that enabled joint learning among the community members.

Festival curation participants also described the role that social learning played in their development, particularly for those whose practice spanned creative disciplines. One stated:

I haven’t had any [formal] training. I’ve learnt a lot from other people and observing other events and observing other things, and the thing that I’ve been able to do, being an omnivore and being across different industries, is that I can go ‘well, photographers do it like this, why don’t they do it in design?’

Those working in festival curation came from a diverse range of roles, organisation types, and work practices; yet, their one commonality was learning through experience on the job. One participant explained that learning through participation offers significant opportunity to build knowledge, skills and identity:

The way that I can teach you is that we work together. When I got to a point where I could start helping people, I wasn’t even doing this consciously, but when I look at the people I hired, they were all really, really bright young women who I sort of got along with and felt I could advise or help or whatever. And we’ve remained really good friends, and I don’t regard me as a mentor in that sense; we’ve never had that discussion, but I can see the parallels in those relationships.

Like many in the creative sector, this participant did not see benefits in formal mentoring, but recognised the importance of experienced community members guiding novices into the community of practice to help them develop their professional identity.

In comparison with those in theatre, festival curation, and film screenwriting, those in digital design, visual arts, and music took a more individualistic approach to their development. Participants suggested they “kick my own butt” and were less likely to collaborate with others. There was a difference in the language used by those who actively participated in shared practice and those whose engagement with the community was based on networking and peer influence. A music participant claimed, “networking is kind of a key thing”, and that she had developed a group of people around her that had “influence and networks, and power”. Relationships were based on what other individuals could do to further participants’ careers, as opposed to how they could work together to achieve common goals.

Similarly, those in visual arts said that the most important activity they could do was “concentrate on relationships, meeting people, talking to people”, but that often they failed to take this further towards active collaboration. In digital design, networking groups had barriers to entry (such as job title, experience level, or agency size), which precluded potential novice members of the community from entering and learning from those more experienced. Workers in digital design, visual arts, and music engaged with their peers in a way that was “informational” as opposed to “narrational”, preferring relationships based on the exchange of influence (Wittel, 2001) as opposed to shared practice.

How communities of practice support self-efficacy and career optimism

Evidence of how participation in communities of practice provides career development and psychosocial support can be identified by focusing on the narratives constructed by creative workers within theatre, film, and festival curation. Participation in such communities builds self-efficacy and creates positive professional identities that align with participants’ creative practice.

Film, theatre, and festival curation cases demonstrate high levels of psychosocial support for participants. One film participant argued that support networks are not just about making art, but building support and confidence: “I think it’s the [community] support. You can always find a crew if you really have to”. Being part of physical and online communities strengthens self-efficacy and career optimism:

I’ve got the confidence to say, ‘even if this is the way everyone else is doing it, this is the way we’re going to do it’. That’s my thing at the moment, where I finally feel I know what I’m doing as a creative person, and I also have confidence and I have a lot of contacts or communities.

Every participant in the film case mentioned the importance of the writing group in enhancing goal achievement. Similarly, the Adelaide-based theatre community saw support as one of the key benefits. A young playwright described his relationship with an emerging director as “theatre husband and wife”, adding:

We were able to emotionally support each other, intellectually support each other. I felt kind of calm when I was doing the most reckless things, whereas in previous relationships I felt much more anxious.

He stressed the importance of understanding community in the creation of work:

If you create a supportive environment where people feel safe and actually respected, that’s why it’s great to work with people when there is so much respect and care in the room. You can create much better work because everyone feels okay.

This description of a safe and supportive environment highlights the role that collaborative practice plays in counteracting the anxiety felt by creative workers in an increasingly individualised labour market. Fourie (2009) argued that trust is an integral part of a community of practice, providing a safe space for participants to ask for help and question disciplinary approaches. Collective learning and identity development help creative practitioners depersonalise the buffeting they receive from labour market challenges. In Adelaide, a peer-based community helped emerging theatre practitioners understand “aspects of the industry that they are taking personally”, while one film participant acknowledged the downside of working alone: “[when] it’s just you by yourself, I’ve found it’s not possible to get [the] enthusiasm”.

Creative workers are becoming increasingly accustomed to the precarious nature of their employment. The cost of being creative is often limited compensation for work without industrial protection (McRobbie, 2016). One festival curation participant expressed the ambivalence of her situation:

[I have had] years when I’ve done really well money wise and I’ve had years with no money. It is about values, but for me it’s also about the idea of freedom, which is a total lie because I’m not actually free

Creative work is work where individuals are “promised freedom (to self-actualise) while also being subjugated to the normalisation (and privatisation) of risk and uncertainty” (McRobbie, 2016, p. 170). The creative industries labour market isolates practitioners from the structures of support that have existed in traditional workplaces. Creative workers are responsible for actively constructing their own social bonds – focusing on building “a multitude of experiences and biographies” that include participation in “ephemeral but intense” relationships with “fast and overloaded social ties” (Wittel, 2001, p. 66). For research participants, participation in communities of practice is the antidote to these stressors.

Summary of findings

This study investigated the relationship between participation in communities of practice and development of the career self-management skills of self-efficacy and career optimism. The findings can be summarised in two sections. First, by examining professional groupings of creative workers, the research demonstrated how some groups developed and maintained communities of practice while others remained in the realm of network sociality. Second, by analysing the narratives of those within communities of practice, the study identified the benefits these communities provide in terms of career self-management. A summary of the findings is given in Table 2.

Table 2.

Summary of key findings.

Evidence from communities of practice	Benefits from communities of practice
Participants: Establish a cohort or community Share a common language Engage in collaborative practice with other community members Recognise that the community can augment their skills Understand that their community facilitates skill development Maintain the community over a period of time Ensure the community refreshes through new members Move from the periphery to the core as expertise develops	Confidence building Support for goal achievement Psychosocial support A safe space for idea testing Depersonalisation of failure Understanding of the labour market Recognition of the skills needed for career success

Evidence from communities of practice

Benefits from communities of practice

Participants:

Establish a cohort or community

Share a common language

Engage in collaborative practice with other community members

Recognise that the community can augment their skills

Understand that their community facilitates skill development

Maintain the community over a period of time

Ensure the community refreshes through new members

Move from the periphery to the core as expertise develops

Confidence building

Support for goal achievement

Psychosocial support

A safe space for idea testing

Depersonalisation of failure

Understanding of the labour market

Recognition of the skills needed for career success

Limitations and opportunity for further research

Like most research, this study has limitations and the results should be viewed with these in mind. Methodologically, this study comprised a qualitative examination of communities across the Australian creative sector and, in undertaking this approach, the research explored the effect of communities on self-efficacy and career optimism using narrative techniques. In this sense, the study aimed for depth, rather than breadth. Furthermore, the study captured narratives from participants at only one point in time. As Garcia et al. (2015) noted, there might be benefits in exploring how career optimism changes over time based on participant experiences.

The study also focused on the creative community from a disciplinary perspective in order to explore differences in the development of self-efficacy and career optimism. Other identity factors might affect creative workers’ career self-management skills and are worthy of further study. Cultural attributes such as ethnicity, gender, disability, and sexuality were not considered in this study, and while gender, class, and ethnicity were raised to varying degrees by participants, there is room to further explore other cultural attributes when considering career self-management.

This study addressed the relationship between communities of practice and self-efficacy and career optimism. There is further opportunity to consider alternate sources of self-efficacy and optimism in creative workers. Bandura (1977) identified a number of ways to build self-efficacy, including vicarious learning, modelling, and encouragement from others, which are visible within communities of practice. Performance accomplishments and emotional arousal (Bandura, 1977), however, are also important factors that were not explored in this study.

Discussion

Reid et al. (2016) claimed that the continuation of important cultural work is dependent on the will and passion of the complex creative workforce. Creative workers are known for their passion and commitment to their work; they are rarely “in it” for the money alone. However, the nature of creative work places significant stresses on practitioners, both economically and psychosocially. Workers in the sector are required to build career self-management skills not only to achieve their career goals but also to support themselves psychologically in the flexible work environment. Creative workers take steps to counter the risks associated with creative labour and the emotional toll it enacts, through collective action such as working within communities of practice.

Communities of practice move beyond the information exchange of networking to activity based on shared history and narrative. Communities of practice build support structures based on mutual experience. Networking alone might be of limited career development value, but participation in communities of practice facilitates the building of self-efficacy and career optimism, which in turn have positive effects in motivating individuals to persist in the face of uncertain outcomes. Communities of practice are collective vehicles that support workers in building and maintaining enthusiasm, understanding the industry in which they operate, and forming non-competitive relationships that facilitate career success.

Self-efficacy and career optimism are linked to ongoing career success and resilience, particularly in the precarious workforce. Those who participate in supportive environments tend to view their futures more positively, as they know they have support around them, and positive interactions lead to more positive perspectives on both the environment and the self. This study demonstrated that creative workers who actively participate in communities of practice gain valuable benefits that lead to an increased sense of self-efficacy and optimism about their future careers. Participants in this research recognised both the skill enhancement and the psychosocial support that comes from collaboratively engaging with peers.

This research demonstrated that there is opportunity to strengthen the resilience of creative workers by facilitating understanding as to how communities of practice can add value to their careers. Principles of social learning should be taught; emerging practitioners should be encouraged to recognise, create and/or participate in communities of practice, and to understand the benefits they offer to both their creative practice and their career development. In addition, there is a need for spaces – created by industry bodies, professional associations, and passionate individuals – to facilitate public and private dialogue within communities, both physically and online. Community members must be encouraged to share the learning and value gained from their participation in community activity. Creating communities of practice is mostly an organic process, and there are no set rules to guarantee success, but, with further understanding of the value of these initiatives, more creative practitioners might participate and gain from their benefits.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.

Bandura

Barbaranelli

Caprara

G. V.

Pastorelli

(2001). Self‐efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Development, 72(1), 187–206.

Bilton

(2010). Manageable creativity. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 16(3), 255–269.

Bravo

Seibert

S. E.

Kraimer

M. L.

Wayne

S. J.

Liden

R. C.

(2015). Measuring career orientations in the era of the boundaryless career. Journal of Career Assessment, 25(3), 502–525.

Bridgstock

(2009). The graduate attributes we’ve overlooked: Enhancing graduate employability through career management skills. Higher Education Research & Development, 28(1), 31–44.

Bridgstock

(2011). Skills for creative industries graduate success. Education & Training, 53(1), 9–26.

Bridgstock

(2013). Professional capabilities for twenty‐first century creative careers: Lessons from outstandingly successful Australian artists and designers. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 32(2), 176–189.

Bridgstock

Cunningham

(2015). Creative labour and graduate outcomes: Implications for higher education and cultural policy. International Journal of Cultural Policy, 22(1), 10–26.

Cunningham

(2014). Creative labour and its discontents: A reappraisal. In Hearn

G. N.

Bridgstock

R. S.

Goldsmith

Rodgers

(Eds.), Creative work beyond the creative industries: Innovation, employment and education (pp. 25–46). Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.

10.

Cunningham

Higgs

Freebody

Anderson

(2010). What’s your other Job? A census analysis of arts employment in Australia. Sydney, Australia: Australia Council for the Arts.

11.

Daniel

(2010). Career development and creative arts students: An investigation into effectiveness of career theory and WIL experiences on practice. Australian Journal of Career Development, 19(2), 14–22.

12.

Daniel

(2016). Creative artists, career patterns and career theory: Insights from the Australian context. Australian Journal of Career Development, 25(3), 91–98.

13.

Daniel

Fleischmann

Welters

(2017). Professional development in the creative industries: Methods and insights from regional practitioners. Australian Journal of Career Development, 26(3), 113–123.

14.

Fourie

C. M.

(2009). Sensemaking in communities of practice (Doctoral dissertation). University of Stellenbosch, Stellenbosch. Retrieved from SunScholar: https://hdl-handle-net.web.bisu.edu.cn/10019.1/1913

15.

Fritsch

(2008). Can a “communities of practice” framework be applied to the creative industries as an identified audience for the V&A? V&A Online Journal. Available at: http://www.vam.ac.uk/ (accessed 12 January 2016).

16.

Garcia

P. R. J. M.

Restubog

S. L. D.

Bordia

Roxas

R. E. O.

(2015). Career optimism: The roles of contextual support and career decision-making self-efficacy. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 88, 10–18.

17.

Grugulis

Stoyanova

(2011). The missing middle: Communities of practice in a freelance labour market. Work, Employment and Society, 25(2), 342–351.

18.

Handley

Sturdy

Fincham

Clark

(2006). Within and beyond communities of practice: Making sense of learning through participation, identity and practice. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 641–653.

19.

Hearn

Rodrigues

J. H. P.

Bridgstock

(2014). Learning processes in creative services teams: Towards a dynamic systems theory. In Hearn

G. N.

Bridgstock

R. S.

Goldsmith

Rodgers

(Eds.), Creative work beyond the creative industries: Innovation, employment and education (pp. 175–192). Cheltenham, England: Edward Elgar.

20.

Higgins

Dobrow

S. R.

Roloff

K. S.

(2010). Optimism and the boundaryless career: The role of developmental relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 31(5), 749–769.

21.

Hollway

Jefferson

(2000). Doing qualitative research differently: Free association, narrative and the interview method (Kindle version). Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com.au/

22.

Jyrämä

Äyväri

(2015, June). Art encountering society: Identifying the skills. Paper presented at International Conference on Arts and Cultural Management, Aix-en-Provence, France.

23.

Komives

S. R.

Osteen

Owen

J. E.

Mainella

F. C.

Longerbeam

S. D.

(2005). Developing a leadership identity: A grounded theory. Journal of College Student Development, 46(6), 593–611.

24.

Lave

(1991). Situating learning in communities of practice. Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, 2, 63–82.

25.

Lave

Wenger

(1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

26.

Lent

R. W.

Brown

S. D.

Hackett

(1994). Toward a unifying social cognitive theory of career and academic interest, choice, and performance. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 45(1), 79–122.

27.

Lent

R. W.

Ireland

G. W.

Penn

L. T.

Morris

T. R.

Sappington

(2017). Sources of self-efficacy and outcome expectations for career exploration and decision-making: A test of the social cognitive model of career self-management. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 99, 107–117.

28.

Mason

(2002). Qualitative researching (Kindle version). Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com.au/

29.

McLeod

O’Donohoe

Townley

(2011). Pot noodles, placements and peer regard: Creative career trajectories and communities of practice in the British advertising industry. British Journal of Management, 22(1), 114–131.

30.

McRobbie

(2016). Be creative: Making a living in the new culture industries (Kindle version). Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com.au/

31.

Mehta

(2017). “ Hustling” in film school as socialization for early career work in media industries. Poetics, 63, 22–32.

32.

T. W.

Eby

L. T.

Sorensen

K. L.

Feldman

D. C.

(2005). Predictors of objective and subjective career success: A meta‐analysis. Personnel Psychology, 58(2), 367–408.

33.

T. W.

Feldman

D. C.

(2014). Subjective career success: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 85(2), 169–179.

34.

Patrick

Elks

(2015). From battery hens to chicken feed: The perceived precarity and identity of Australian journalists. Asia Pacific Journal of Arts and Cultural Management, 12(1), 48–65.

35.

Reid

Petocz

Bennett

(2016). Is creative work sustainable? Understanding identity, motivation, and worth. Australian Journal of Career Development, 25(1), 33–41.

36.

Riessman

C. K.

(2008). Narrative methods for the human sciences (Kindle version). Retrieved from https://www.amazon.com.au/

37.

Roberts

(2006). Limits to communities of practice. Journal of Management Studies, 43(3), 623–639.

38.

Rottinghaus

P. J.

Day

S. X.

Borgen

F. H.

(2005). The Career Futures Inventory: A measure of career-related adaptability and optimism. Journal of Career Assessment, 13(1), 3–24.

39.

SGS Economics and Planning. (2013). Valuing Australia’s creative industries. Sydney, Australia: Creative Industries Innovation Centre.

40.

Seibert

S. E.

Kraimer

M. L.

Liden

R. C.

(2001). A social capital theory of career success. Academy of Management Journal, 44(2), 219–237.

41.

Throsby

Petetskaya

(2017). Making art work: An economic study of professional artists in Australia. Sydney, Australia: Australia Council for the Arts.

42.

United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2009). The 2009 UNESCO Framework for Cultural Statistics. Montreal, Canada: Author.

43.

Wanberg

C. R.

(1997). Antecedents and outcomes of coping behaviors among unemployed and reemployed individuals. Journal of Applied Psychology, 82(5), 731–744.

44.

Wenger

(1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

45.

Wenger

(2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In Blackmore

(Ed.), Social learning systems and communities of practice (pp. 179–198). London, England: Springer.

46.

Wenger

McDermott

Snyder

W. M.

(2002). Cultivating communities of practice: A guide to managing knowledge ( Vol.4). Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

47.

Wittel

(2001). Toward a network sociality. Theory, Culture & Society, 18(6), 51–76.

48.

Yin

R. K.

(1981). The case study as a serious research strategy. Science Communication, 3(1), 97–114.