Keywords

Women in the Workplace

It is estimated that a little over half of women worldwide (ages 15+) participate in the workforce, while men’s participation rate is about 77% (The World Bank, 2016a, 2016b). In addition to the disparity in workforce participation, the average global gender wage gap is 24% and women spend well over double the amount of time on unpaid care and domestic work than men (United Nations, 2015). Furthermore, women are more likely to have work that is concentrated in areas that tend to have low pay and they are more likely to be unemployed (United Nations, 2015).

These statistics are concerning and indicate that gender equity is far from a reality, which is not only a concern for women, but also for men. According to the World Economic Forum (2016), “because women account for one-half of a country’s potential talent base, a nation’s competitiveness in the long term depends significantly on whether and how it educates and utilizes its women” (pp. 44–45). Unfortunately, though, the World Economic Forum indicated women will not reach parity with men for a century or more. Furthermore, with the ever-changing world of work and labor markets, gains in gender equality could be reversed “unless women and girls are better prepared for the type of occupations that are likely to grow in the future” (World Economic Forum, 2016, p. 45). To be employable in these occupations, individuals will need to have a deep knowledge of their area of work; be technologically agile; have the ability to engage in critical thinking and problem-solving with interdisciplinary and cross-functional teams; and possess high quality communication skills, flexibility, and emotional intelligence (Hrabowski, 2015). Unfortunately, in addition to these requirements, women must be able to overcome a variety of obstacles, many of which are grounded in gender stereotypes that go hand-in-hand with individual and institutional implicit, and explicit, bias.

Gender Role Socialization and Stereotyping

In her theory of circumscription and compromise, Gottfredson (2005) suggested that children begin to narrow preferences at an early age based on unconscious processes long before they have the cognitive capacity to use reason in their vocational choices. In her theory, one of the early stages of circumscription is orientation to sex roles, which may prompt children to unconsciously rule out choices based on their gender. After conducting two extensive literature reviews (see Hartung, Porfeli, & Vondracek, 2005; Watson & McMahon, 2005), Porfeli, Hartung, and Vondracek (2006) proposed that children start learning about the world of work at a young age, possible as early as the age of four, and that their career aspirations are influenced by gender-based stereotypes. Furthermore, they stated that there is a circumscription process that steers girls away from careers in math and the physical and biological sciences, and boys away from careers generally comprised of females. Intersectionality was also addressed in these reviews leading Porfeli et al. (2006) to conclude that “vocational learning and aspirations may be involved in a complex, dynamic relationship with an emerging sense of self that includes elements of sex, race, and social class” (p. 28). Indeed, while this chapter focuses primarily on women, the author urges readers to expand their perspectives by understanding that identity is how individuals think of themselves in relation to their social roles (Savickas, 2012) and “the intersectionality of racio-ethnicity, gender and other categories of social differences should be positioned as central to identity work” (Carrim & Nkomo, 2016, p. 262).

Research continues to accumulate regarding women in the workplace, supporting the idea that gendered stereotypes remain strong. Science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) are fields that have been stressed as providing excellent opportunities for women to access jobs and generate higher incomes. According to the Commission on the Status of Women (2014), “it is of critical importance that women and girls have equal access to education at all levels and acquire relevant skills, particularly in STEM-related fields, in order to take advantage of the growing opportunities in these fields” (p. 1). One such opportunity involves income; women in STEM occupations in the United States experience a smaller wage gap compared to men and overall, earn 33% more than those in non-STEM occupations (“Women in STEM,” n.d.).

However, while the importance of women in STEM is acknowledged, Beede et al. (2011) reported that women hold a disproportionately lower share of STEM undergraduate degrees (especially in engineering), and those with a STEM degree are more likely to work in education or healthcare while male STEM graduates are more likely to work in STEM occupations. Additionally, the United Nations (2015) reported that while female participation in higher education surpasses male participation in almost all developed countries and half of developing countries, only one in 20 women, compared to one in five men, graduated from engineering; and only one in 14 women graduated from science (excluding social sciences), compared to one out of nine men. Women are also underrepresented in advanced degree programs, especially in science-related fields, with women accounting for only 30% of researchers worldwide (United Nations, 2015).

Cheryan, Master, and Meltzoff (2015) asserted that stereotypes can act as a gatekeeper to educational fields such as computer science and engineering. In particular, they stated that women’s choices are especially constrained by stereotypes surrounding these fields and their perceptions, even if inaccurate, help shape their academic choices. Their arguments stem from research findings that suggested stereotype threat was more impactful (negatively) for women than men, with women feeling a lower sense of belonging in computer science when presented with stereotypical environments (Cheryan, Meltzoff, & Kim, 2011; Cheryan, Plaut, Davies, & Steele, 2009). Master, Cheryan, and Meltzoff (2016) suggested that presenting a more diverse image of computer science may help those that are more sensitive to stereotypes and likely to be deterred by them.

While much research has focused on women in STEM fields, gender stereotypes exist in numerous occupational fields. Buhr and Sideras (2015) found the presence of gender stereotypes in various subfields of International Relations, and the United Nations (2015) indicated that “occupational segregation of women and men continues to be deeply embedded in all regions” (p. 87) of the world with women predominating in the social services, especially education, health, and social work. Furthermore, women are less likely than men to hold managerial positions worldwide (United Nations, 2015). In 2015, while women held 51.5% of all management, professional, and related occupations in the United States, they still only held 27.9% of chief executive positions (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2016), only 4.4% of CEO positions at S&P 500 companies (Catalyst, 2016), and only 4.2% of CEOs in Fortune 500 companies (Zarya, 2016).

To fully embrace and achieve their employability potential, women must be resilient and find ways to overcome the obstacles introduced and reinforced by gender stereotyping. Career construction theory (Savickas 2005, 2013b) and counseling within the life design paradigm, as well as attention to constructs offered by social cognitive career theory (Lent,2012; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2002), can provide women with critical support in their endeavors.

Life Design

Much of today’s world is shaped by liquid modernity, which according to Bauman (2007), no longer provides the typical social structures and routines that have long provided reference points that shape patterns of acceptable behavior (as cited in Guichard, 2015). Instead, these reference points are fluid and do not provide individuals with social, organizational, and ideological frameworks of what is a ‘normal’ way of life (Guichard, 2015). Increasingly, individuals must map out their own way of being in this world in a manner that provides meaning and mattering within their own culture and context. This may be especially helpful for women in honoring their unique strengths and experiences, instead of comparing them to a masculine standard.

In this new era of liquid modernity, there are three key types of career interventions that are useful when used appropriately—career guidance, career education, and career counseling. According to Savickas (2012), career guidance focuses on enhancing self-knowledge, increasing occupational information, and thoughtfully matching them (Savickas, 2012), thus helping individuals develop a self-concept compatible with employability norms (Guichard, 2015). Career education emphasizes the development of agency required for career management by educating, preparing, advising, and coaching individuals to cultivate the attitudes and competencies needed to successfully accomplish career development tasks (Savickas, 2012, 2013a). Additionally, Guichard (2015) explained that career education involves learning about job activities and requirements, educational requirements, employment prospects, and job search activities such as résumés, cover letters, and job applications. Career guidance and career education were the guiding paradigms of the career development and counseling field for much of its history and are still important paradigms in helping others with career development and management (Savickas, 2013a).

However, in today’s world of liquid modernity, individuals navigate a world in which career path stability is rare, occupational prospects are fluidly defined and less predictable, and job transitions are more frequent (Savickas et al., 2009). Thus, individuals must learn to prepare for possibilities rather than formulate plans, making career counseling vital (Savickas, 2013b).

The intervention of counseling focuses clients’ reflection on themes in their career story and then extends the themes into the future. It may recognize similarity, and it may promote readiness, yet counseling mainly uses reflexive process and thematic content to design a life. It is about uniqueness more than resemblance and emotion more than reasoning (Savickas, 2013a, p. 653).

The life design paradigm and career counseling must supplement, and complement, career guidance and career education to assist individuals in finding consistency, coherence, and continuity of their identities in today’s uncertain and continually evolving workplace (Savickas, 2012). Through engagement in “life design dialogues”, career counselors partner with individuals to cultivate the reflexivity that is required to design their lives in ways that help them consider and define their own norms (Guichard, 2015, p. 18). This is an important qualification for women and others that are not of the “default” norm which is often inextricably linked with white male status and privilege. For a more in-depth discussion on life design, interested readers are referred to Chap. 4 by Pouyaud and Cohen-Scali (2017).

Career Construction Theory

Savickas’ (2005, 2012, 2013b) career construction theory advances Super’s (1957) seminal career development theory and is situated within the life design paradigm. It emphasizes that careers are co-constructed by individuals via interpersonal processes as they make career choices to help express their self-concepts and support their goals. This subjective career construction, according to Savickas (2013b), “imposes meaning and direction on their vocational behavior” (p. 150) and helps provide continuity and coherence across one’s career, but it is not done in a vacuum. Savickas (2013b) further asserted that individuals build their careers though “personal constructivism and social constructionism” (p. 147), thus emphasizing that one’s self (and career) is constructed within the context of one’s social world, and her/his interpretation of that reality.

In career construction counseling, clients tell stories about their work lives, as well as about current transitions and issues, and integrate those stories into “an identity narrative about self and work” (Savickas, 2013b, p. 168). Following deconstruction of these stories to illuminate assumptions, omissions, and what was overlooked or inadequately addressed, the stories are reconstructed into a grander narrative that defines (or redefines) one’s identity narrative or “life portrait” (Savickas, 2012, p. 15). The life portrait, which helps give individuals a sense of personal meaning and social mattering in their life, can facilitate action and movement into a more satisfying life (Savickas, 2013b). For a more comprehensive understanding of career construction theory and career construction/life design counseling, the reader is referred to Savickas (2013b, 2015).

There are two metacompetencies highlighted in career construction theory, identity and career adaptability. Identity gives personal meaning to vocational behavior and work activities within individuals’ lives and can offer the consistency, coherence, and continuity that helps individuals make meaning of their past to carry them forward to their futures (Savickas, 2012). “By holding onto the self in the form of a life story that provides coherence and continuity, they are able to pursue their purpose and projects with integrity and vitality” (Savickas, 2012, p. 14).

It should be noted that the self and identity are not synonymous. Identity involves how individuals think of the self in relation to their social roles (Savickas, 2012). Thus, identity formation is not just about exploring who one is, but also reconciling that self with one’s social world. Consequently, identity is fluid and “a developmental resource that updates in context” (Pouyaud, 2015, p. 63).

Career adaptability, the other metacompetency in career construction theory, represents individuals’ “resources for coping with current and anticipated tasks, transitions, traumas in their occupational roles that, to some degree large or small, alter their social integration” (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012, p. 662). There are four dimensions of career adaptability which will be discussed in greater detail later in this chapter.

Social Cognitive Career Theory

Social cognitive career theory (SCCT) (Lent, 2012; Lent, Brown, & Hackett, 2002) is based upon the premise of human agency—that individuals have the ability to exercise a certain degree of self-direction—and emphasizes the interplay between self-efficacy beliefs, outcome expectations, and personal goals which help facilitate the use of agency. SCCT also asserts, though, that individuals encounter a variety of factors, both supports and barriers, “that can strengthen, weaken or even override personal agency” (Lent, 2012, p. 118).

Self-efficacy beliefs signify one’s judgment about whether she/he is capable of producing a desired effect or accomplishing a certain level of performance with a certain domain or activity (Bandura, 1986). According to Bandura (1997), these beliefs can be acquired and modified through four types of learning experiences: (1) performance accomplishments—learning-based personal experiences within a specific performance domain/activity; (2) vicarious learning—learning based upon experiences of watching others; (3) social persuasion—learning based on others’ suggestions (or negations) that one can be successful; and (4) physiological and affective states—learning based on one’s physiological and affective state surrounding the performance domain/activity and her/his cognitive appraisal of that state. Of these learning experiences, Bandura (1977) stated that performance accomplishments are especially powerful.

Outcome expectations refer to individuals’ beliefs about the outcomes of executing certain behaviors, or the consequences of engaging in specific courses of action (Lent, 2012). Bandura (1986) asserted that self-efficacy and outcome expectations work together to influence various aspects of human behavior including what one will choose to pursue or avoid, and that self-efficacy may be the more influential of the two. Thus, an individual may hold high outcome expectations of a certain career but may avoid it if they do not hold high enough self-efficacy beliefs about their capabilities to succeed at it (Lent, 2012). However, it is also not unusual for outcome expectations to influence individuals with high self-efficacy, but who believe that the consequences of their course of action would be negative (Lent, 2012).

The third primary component of SCCT are personal goals (an important avenue through which agency is exercised) which are delineated into choice goals—what one plans to pursue, and performance goals—the quality one desires to achieve (Lent, 2012). According to SCCT, personal goal selection is highly affected by one’s self-efficacy and outcome expectations and in turn, one’s self-efficacy and outcome expectations are influenced by one’s progress, or lack of progress, in accomplishing goals (Lent, 2012).

SCCT utilizes interlinking models to hypothesize how career interests and choices are largely influenced by self-efficacy and outcome expectations and are considered in concert with other person inputs (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, health status) and one’s context (Brown & Lent, 2016; Lent, 2005). The interested reader is referred to Lent (2005, 2012) and Lent et al. (2002) for a more thorough discussion of SCCT.

Resilience and Career Adaptability

In today’s liquid modernity, having healthy coping responses and behaviors is critical for successfully charting and navigating one’s career course. According to Bimrose and Hearne (2012), resilience and career adaptability are two such coping responses. While these concepts are similar, and perhaps overlapping, resilience is considered to be more reactive following a stressor antecedent (Luthans, Vogelgesang, & Lester, 2006), while career adaptability seems to have a more proactive element (Bimrose & Hearne, 2012).

Resilience

Mate and Ryan (2015) surmised that “women may require greater resilience than men over their careers” (p. 157) based on their study with working professionals which indicated that women, more than men, referred to how they overcame barriers and built resilience. It is also interesting to note that being female was found to be a resilient quality in two different studies (as cited in Richardson, 2002). Resilience is generally defined as a person’s ability to bounce back in spite of adverse circumstances or personal obstacles, and perhaps even grow and become stronger from the experiences (Luthans et al., 2006). For a more in-depth discussion on career resilience, interested readers are referred to Chap. 3 by Lengelle, Van der Heijden, and Meijers (2017).

Career Adaptability

As discussed earlier, career adaptability is a critical metacompetency within career construction theory and regards one’s resources for coping with career issues (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). “Career adaptability resources are the self-regulation strengths or capacities that a person may draw upon to solve the unfamiliar, complex, and ill-defined problems presented by developmental vocational tasks, occupational transitions, and work traumas” (Savickas & Porfeli, 2012, p. 662). The first dimension of career adaptability, career concern, involves developing a future orientation, or in other words, a sense that it is important to look ahead and prepare for the future (Savickas, 2013b; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). The second aspect of career adaptability is career control, which refers to the development of self-regulation to engage in vocational tasks and transition processes (Savickas, 2013b). Career control is not about independence, but instead consists of intrapersonal self-discipline and being conscientious, intentional, and decisive when engaged in career developmental tasks and transitions. Career curiosity comprises the third dimension and involves being inquisitive about, exploring, and experimenting with possible selves and future possibilities (Savickas, 2013b; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). Finally, the fourth element of career adaptability is career confidence, which is acquiring and enhancing self-efficacy to pursue aspirations, execute a plan of action to make educational and career choices, and implement those choices (Savickas, 2013b; Savickas & Porfeli, 2012). For a more in-depth discussion on career adaptability, interested readers are referred to Chap. 2 by Hartung and Cadaret (2017).

Similar to resilience, the construct of career adaptability has also been found to be of import to women. For example, McMahon, Watson, and Bimrose (2012) found in a qualitative study with women ages 45–65 years from Australia, England, and South Africa that career adaptability was evident during periods of transition and in other aspects of the careers of these women. This finding was supported in a study by Whiston, Feldwisch, Evans, Blackman, and Gilman (2015) of professional women over the age of 50 in the United States whom all reported career adaptability themes within their current and future projected career-related tasks, transitions, and traumas.

Practical Implications

Utilizing Career Construction Theory and SCCT

Both career construction theory (Savickas, 2013a, b) and SCCT (Lent, 2012; Lent et al., 2002) provide powerful, and empowering, avenues through which career counselors can conceptualize and work with women. Both theories address the dynamic interaction between individuals’ cultural and contextual environments and their personal characteristics, which influences their beliefs about themselves and the world around them. A high level of awareness of these person-environment interactions is important in working with women given the gendered contexts in which they work and live.

The process of career construction counseling lends itself to direct application in assisting women with their life and career design. This process involves the activities of construction, deconstruction, reconstruction, coconstruction, and action (Savickas, 2013b). In the construction and deconstruction activities, the Career Construction Interview (CCI) is conducted through which career counselors are able to elicit small stories from the client that reveal how she has constructed her “self, identity, and career” (Savickas, 2013b, p. 168). During this time, potentially dispiriting ideas, beliefs, scripts, or incidents (which often involve cultural biases) can be listened for and deconstructed, potentially opening new pathways not previously considered, or considered possible (Savickas, 2012, 2013b).

While feminist theories are highly diverse and complex, when considering the deconstruction process with women, understanding two foundational themes of feminist approaches to counseling is valuable: (1) the personal is political, meaning that personal problems are connected to and influenced by the socio-political climate, and (2) issues and “symptoms” are often coping mechanisms that have arisen in response to dealing with oppression (Enns, 2004). Given that women’s environments are embedded with gendered stereotypes shaping thoughts, feelings, beliefs, and behaviors, it makes sense that women may face unique challenges in their career development and employability. For example, in a review of vocational psychology literature, Brown and Lent (2016) discussed results from a study conducted by Thompson and Dahling (2012) that suggested gender and socioeconomic privilege predicted individuals’ exposure to learning experiences, which subsequently helped shape career-related self-efficacy and outcome expectations. Thompson and Dahling (2012) recommended that exploration occur around experiences with resources and barriers that influence women’s perceptions of available career options. By deconstructing gendered stereotypes that emerge from women’s stories, and helping women consciously and realistically appraise their stories, new insights may emerge that can open new doors and possibilities.

After listening to the client’s micronarratives elicited from the CCI, the career counselor reconstructs a subjective macronarrative of identity (Savickas, 2012, 2013b). The identity macronarrative “explains clients’ past, orients them to the present, and guides them into the future” (Savickas, 2012, p. 16). Furthermore, it highlights the person’s career theme which involves how the person shifts “preoccupation” to “occupation,” thus allowing her to use work as a means towards becoming more whole (Savickas, 2012, 2013b). Stated otherwise, the person can move from “pain-filled to triumph-filled themes” and toward social contributions (Maree, 2013, p. 4). All of this comes together as a life portrait that the counselor shares with the client, encouraging her to reflect upon and emotionally engage with it, subsequently allowing the client and counselor to modify it and “craft a move in meaning with which to confront choices” (Savickas, 2012, p. 17). This move in meaning can include a greater awareness of how the client’s choices have been affected by gender stereotypes and oppression which may allow her to view herself and her future life design with a broader perspective.

Lastly, after shifting tension to intention in co-constructing the life portrait for the individual’s next life chapter, action must ensue to turn that intention into behaviors (Savickas, 2013b). Savickas (2012) also stated that action stimulates further creating of the self, shaping of identity, and career constructing. Developing goals to drive action is essential because according to SCCT, goals are one way in which agency is exercised (Lent, 2012).

Throughout co-construction and action, it is important for the career counselor to continue to listen deeply to both verbal and non-verbal communications from the client and address limiting thoughts and beliefs that may inhibit action. Furthermore, throughout the career construction process, clues will emerge regarding career adaptability assets and limitations, as well as cognitions and behaviors surrounding self-efficacy and outcome expectations. The career counselor and client can work together to identify areas in need of strengthening and co-develop action plans in support of those needs.

Building Resilience and Career Adaptability

Career construction counseling can be an avenue for developing resilience via its purposeful engagement in reflection, introspection, and reflexivity. Richardson (2002) defined resiliency as “the process of coping with adversity, change, or opportunity in a manner that results in the identification, fortification, and enrichment of resilient qualities or protective factors” (Richardson, 2002, p. 308). He also indicated that to facilitate the resiliency process, counselors must help people discover the driving force that resides within them. In his resiliency process model, he explains that life disruptions cause emotions that may lead to introspection and eventually the reintegration process. Resilient reintegration, according to Richardson (2002), involves gaining insight or growing, and results in identification and strengthening of resilience qualities. Thus, individuals engaged in career construction counseling are provided the opportunity to explore their life disruptions in a reflective manner that leads to introspection and reflexivity to develop greater insight and awareness, possibly bolstering resilience.

Likewise, Luthans and colleagues (2006) asserted that resilience can be developed and enhanced through interventions that emphasize introspection and the development of coping skills. Tomassini (2016) has described the construct of reflective resilience as a “pragmatic meta-competence, put in action by individuals in order to take deliberations about their own lives, especially when facing negative conditions which require intensified levels of internal conversation and a strengthened focus on personal projects for overcoming such conditions” (p. 188). Additionally, reflexivity is important and described by Archer (2007) as individuals’ “mental ability…to consider themselves in relation to their social context and vice versa” (p. 4). This is similar to Savickas’ (2012) description of identity as reconciling one’s knowledge of self with her social world. Through career construction counseling, the identity narrative provides greater clarity, coherence, and continuity for the individual (Savickas, 2013b), which in turn, may assist with developing or enhancing resilience.

Career construction counseling also helps individuals view their work across their lifetime to gain perspective on how the past informs the present and connects to the future, thus giving a sense of continuity which “allows individuals to envision how today’s effort builds tomorrow’s success” (Savickas, 2013b). Shifts in perspectives and identification of new pathways and goals can help build a future orientation and planful attitudes (i.e., career concern), in part because they can instill hope. Indeed, Maree (2015) found that life design counseling helped to infuse hope in individuals, and Niles (2011) asserted that “having a sense of hope allows a person to consider the possibilities in any situation” (p. 174).

In addition to promoting career concern, consideration of potential selves and future opportunities can also cultivate career curiosity. Building upon this curiosity, career counselors can partner with clients to reflect upon ways in which unplanned events have presented opportunities in their past, and work to facilitate an increased awareness of (and curiosity about) future unplanned events (see HLT, Krumboltz, 2009). Career guidance can also capitalize upon and contribute to career curiosity in helping the individual to explore her interests, values, skills, strengths, and so on, and how potential opportunities may be compatible.

Conscious deliberation and choice-making about which opportunities to take action on can potentially develop and enhance career control (Peila-Shuster, 2016). Additionally, career counselors can assist women in identifying areas over which they have control and in strategizing how to overcome obstacles (Masdonati & Fournier, 2015), or mitigate and cope with those situations over which they do not have control. Career education can be called upon to also build career control as the individual is educated, advised, and coached through various career development tasks such as learning about educational and/or job requirements, developing resumes, networking, and interviewing.

Lastly, to build self-efficacy, thus contributing to career confidence, it is useful to remember Bandura’s (Bandura, 1977, 1986, 1997) four sources of efficacy information (performance accomplishments, vicarious learning, social persuasion, and physiological or affective states). Since performance accomplishments are considered the strongest of these learning experiences (Bandura, 1977), reflecting upon previous successful experiences with the client, and building upon current and future mastery experiences, can be useful strategies in building self-efficacy. Additionally, cognitive restructuring that encourages women to credit their successes to the development of personal capabilities, rather than to luck or the ease of the activity, can encourage greater self-efficacy and can help them view “ability as an acquirable attribute” (Lent, 2012, p. 135). Another approach to developing self-efficacy can include facilitating the client’s exposure to positive role models (vicarious learning experiences). In doing so, it is important to keep in mind the suggestion from Master et al. (2016) that it may be more helpful for career role models to present a diverse image of the fields they are representing (e.g., not only women in science, but women that do not represent a stereotypical image of a scientist). To also support and build self-efficacy, career counselors can use their relationship with the client as a source of encouragement (social persuasion), and help cognitively reframe physiological or affective states (e.g., from nervous to excited), and/or teach interventions such as mindfulness to positively influence these states.

Conclusion and a Call for Advocacy

The gendered workplace is still a reality and is highly influenced by gender role socialization and stereotyping. The application and integration of career construction theory and social cognitive career theory through the lens of the life design paradigm can assist career counselors to intentionally and carefully consider the personal, cultural, contextual, and socio-political forces at work in women’s lives. Furthermore, the career construction counseling process itself involves multiple avenues for building resilience and career adaptability, as well as for examining self-efficacy beliefs and outcome expectations.

While much of this chapter has focused on working directly with clientele, these interventions do not carry their fullest impact if there is not also change at the institutional and societal levels. “The cognitive, emotional, and behavioral changes that women make must be matched with institutional changes” (Enns, 2004, p. 8). Handelsman and Sakraney (n.d.) suggested open discussions regarding implicit bias can reduce the impact of it on the behaviors of individuals in organizations and communities. They further asserted that even small changes in institutional policies and practices can work towards bias mitigation. Furthermore, advocacy that embraces the understanding that career development is part of life-span development is also essential. It is imperative to start career development with children, not in the form of having children make career choices, but instead as a means to expand young minds to “learn to imagine, explore, and problem solve in order to construct a viable work future” (Hartung et al., 2005, p. 63). It is imperative to combat, or at least mitigate, “the many spoken and unspoken messages that individuals are exposed to throughout their lives that provide powerful guidance in how they think about themselves and design their lives” (Peila-Shuster, 2015). Hence, there must be a concerted effort towards greater critical consciousness (Martín-Baró, 1994) in our educational systems, as well as in the world of work and beyond, so that oppressive messages and experiences can be replaced with those that are more inclusive, honor differences, expand options, and facilitate optimal life design.