A capability approach to career development: An introduction and implications for practice

Abstract

In the UK, the concept of employability is influential in current conceptualizations of career development. It is an example of a discourse underpinned by faith in individual transformation as a response to unstable labour markets, a position that is not unproblematic when structural factors are taken into account. This article introduces an alternative perspective, the Capability Approach (CA), to encourage debate about its value, and to begin to outline what it means for career counselling and development practice. An overview of the CA is provided, and the resonance between the concerns of the CA and those of career development practitioners will be highlighted. Key difficulties in applying the approach are identified before implications of the CA for practice are considered.

A critique of the Capability Approach’s potential for application to career guidance

“…As such capabilities are the combinations of functionings and the real (not just formal and/or 'in principle' freedoms) opportunity to achieve them (Sen, 2003). This distinction is crucial to understand the contribution of conversion factors including social conditioning which may make an individual unable to choose (Robertson & Egdell, 2018;Sen, 2003). In acknowledging the influence of social relations as well as the societal and institutional structures, the CA rejects methodological/ontological individualism (Robeyns, 2005).…”

“…To achieve this, the processes of assessment and measurement need to be made explicit. However, the operationalisation of the CA in this way is challenging because of the complexity, context dependency and its under-specificity (Chiappero-Martinetti et al, 2015;Robertson & Egdell, 2018;Robeyns, 2008;Roemer, 1996;Srinivasan, 1994).…”

“…However, Pogge (2002, p. 210) questions the value of capability lists, and the equitability of their application, as it would involve "grading all citizens for their natural aptitudes toward each of the capabilities on the list, determining their specific deficits, and ensuring that these deficits are duly neutralized through suitable compensatory benefits". Specificity is also required by career development practitioners rather than broad-brush higher-level descriptive frameworks like Nussbaum's (Robertson & Egdell, 2018). Context sensitivity would also be important.…”

“…All the issues explored in this section have ethical implications for practitioners. The CA to career guidance would suggest that autonomy is a central ethical principle for practice (Robertson & Egdell, 2018), and that career choices are to be understood as valuesbased. Ethical problems and dilemmas may arise where there are clashes between the priorities of individuals, communities, practitioners, and career services.…”

“…Authors have sought to apply the CA as a theoretical perspective to describe career development experiences or to understand processes of career guidance (e.g. Picard, 2019;Robertson, 2015;Robertson & Egdell, 2018). Indeed, there now exist a wide range of theories of career choice and development with numerous recent contributions to this literature.…”