Journal of Vocational Behavior 59, 1–16 (2001)

doi:10.1006/jvbe.2000.1786, available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on

Relational Dimensions in Career Development

Hanoch Flum
Department of Education, Ben-Gurion University

In an effort to contribute to an enhanced conceptual understanding of the interconnection

between communion and agency in the context of career development, relational dimen-
sions from Josselson’s (1992) model are examined and applied to the vocational domain.
The attributes of each of these relational dimensions are discussed and illustrated in the con-
text of career development and work experience, with a particular emphasis on vocational
exploration as a core process across the life span. The relevance of each relational dimension
to exploration is exemplified with the goal of illuminating the connections between work
and interpersonal functioning. °C 2001 Academic Press

Work and love are hallmarks of mental health in the famous Freudian maxim;
they represent two central modes of human functioning. Most often they have
been regarded and treated as being exclusive rather than mutual elements of an
individual’s functioning. Work and love are treated as a duality, a conceptual
parallel to the agency and communion duality, and are translated in the Western
mind into polarities (cf. Savickas, 1991). In his book “The Duality of Human
Existence,” Bakan (1966) characterized the two modalities as “agency for the
existence of an organism as an individual, and communion for the participation of
the individual in some larger organism of which the individual is part” (pp. 14–15).
Hence, agency refers to the striving to separate, to master the environment, to
assert and expand the self. Communion refers to contact, connection, union, and a
sense of being at one with others. Bakan (1966) indicated that agency has been a
predominant and prevailing feature in Western culture during the past 200 years.
The traditional view of Western culture sees the self as being independent and
separate (Markus & Kitayama, 1991). In effect, the relational aspects of self have
been often marginalized in developmental conceptualizations.
This article concentrates on the relational dimension and emphasizes the con-
nection between agency and communion in an effort to bridge these polarities,
using the psychosocial construct of identity. In doing so, I join previous attempts
with the same emphasis. They include Forrest and Mikolaitis’ (1986) vision of
incorporating the relational component of identity into career development the-
ory, Hall’s organizational psychology perspective on the relationship dimension

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Hanoch Flum, Department of Education, Ben-Gurion
University, Beer Sheva, Israel. E-mail: [email protected].

1
0001-8791/01 $35.00
Copyright °C 2001 by Academic Press

All rights of reproduction in any form reserved.

2 HANOCH FLUM

of careers (Hall and Associates,1996), and Blustein’s (1994) suggestion of us-

ing the construct of embedded identity as a bridge construct in converging career
development theories.
At this juncture, career development theory can benefit from a deeper discussion
of relational dimensions. Adding to our linguistic tools by describing a number
of specific relational dimensions should illuminate the interface between work
and human relationships. Rather than general terms and broad strokes, examin-
ing some of the primary ways in which people construct their identities may help
bridge the intrapersonal and the interpersonal in career development. To this end,
seven of the eight relational dimensions in Josselson’s (1992) relational space
model will be considered in terms of the integrative function they serve in the
workplace and in career development. These modalities are based on descriptions
in various psychological conceptualizations and are further elaborated, clarified,
and differentially defined by Josselson (1992). The seven relational dimensions
to be referred to here do not rely on libidinal energy, whereas the eighth rela-
tional dimension, passionate experience, refers to libidinally rooted interpersonal
experience. Since other models in the career development literature (e.g., Bordin,
Nachman, & Segal, 1963) rely heavily on these theoretical roots, and because
I wish to stress the innovative aspect of Josselson’s model, I chose to examine
the seven relational modes and leave out the mode of passionate experience in
the present discussion. Career exploration, which is such a key element in work-
related experiences throughout the life span (Flum & Blustein, 2000), will serve
as a means of illustrating the interface between human relationships and career
development.

THE RELATIONAL DIMENSIONS

The relational dimensions in Josselson’s (1992) model refer to modes of human
connection. The first two, attachment and eye-to-eye validation, can be traced to
early experiences with the caregiver. Although the child–caregiver relationship is
somewhat transformed in later phases of life, it remains a dyad-based experience
with an Other. This is also true for the identification and idealization mode of
connection, when the individual strives to become like an Other and to link to
the powerful. As the self matures and others are clearly recognized, a sense of
a “we” in the relational space is experienced in the form of companionship and
mutuality. The relational basis is broader in the dimension of embeddedness with
others; holding is the first relational experience in life and it regains significance
toward the end of life. Throughout adulthood (especially) the experience of “being
held” may rely on being grounded in a broad base along with interpersonal support.
Tending (care) is the last dimension to be discussed; it represents a shift to reaching
out to others, a defined emotional experience of giving and caring, a specific
relational quality that at the same time can be experienced by the other person as
touching elements of some of the above qualities. In the following sections, each of
these relational dimensions will be used to illuminate important aspects of career
development.
 RELATIONAL DIMENSIONS 3

Attachment
Because of the relatively sound theoretical and empirical roots of the attachment
concept and by the virtue of the nature of this human experience, attachment is
the core relational mode in the argument presented in this article. Moreover, it is
a central pillar of the bridge between agency and communion. An oversimplified
view of an adult’s need for closeness and security is translated to regressive depen-
dency, but, Bowlby’s (1969, 1973) attachment theory maintains that attachment is
a fundamental need throughout life. In childhood the most likely attachment fig-
ures are parents, while adolescents develop a number of attachment relationships
with other people. At the same time, attachment relationships with parents tend
to persist, albeit with considerable transformation across the life span (Josselson,
1992).
Attachment is an active process of keeping closeness (either actually or sym-
bolically) to another person to reduce loneliness and anxiety (Bowlby, 1969). It is
an emotional bonding, a process that requires both the responsiveness of the other
as well as time to develop. This type of relationship offers individuals a sense of
security in which the availability of an attachment figure is experienced as a se-
cure base. Bowlby (1969) described an attachment relationship as “ a hub around
which the person’s life revolves” (p. 442). When people know that someone is
there for them, the relationship becomes a resource from which they draw strength
and enjoyment. Adults may have a primary attachment figure and a network of
secondary attachment relationships, people with whom individuals maintain af-
fectional bonds and on whom they can rely for responsiveness.
Early experiences in childhood establish individuals’ working models of at-
tachment (Bowlby, 1969). What a person comes to expect from attachment figures
early in life affects expectations of bonding and availability later. Thus, the expe-
rience of availability, responsiveness, and predictability of the attachment figure
shapes the development of working models. A person who is securely attached can
engage in exploratory behavior, while insecure attachment (anxious-ambivalent or
anxious-avoidant) signifies the lack of a secure base from where exploration could
be launched.
Classic adolescent theory (cf. Coleman, 1978) gives primacy to the separation–
individuation concept and associates health with detachment from primary Objects
(e.g., Blos, 1962; Freud, 1958). However, evidence from recent studies has indi-
cated that the healthiest developmental path for adolescents is rooted in secure
attachment with parents, attachment that is maintained, though revised. Adoles-
cents who are securely attached report warmth and enduring affection in their
relationships (Grotevant & Cooper, 1985; Kobak & Sceery, 1988) and tend to
feel confident about venturing into exploration and the formation of their identity
(Flum, 1994; Josselson, 1994). Hence, attachment provides the ground from which
exploratory behavior can proceed and on which identity can be constructed.
This established link between attachment and exploration beyond childhood is
very important when applied to career development. Indeed, findings from various
studies support this contention. Kracke’s (1997) research in Germany indicated that
4 HANOCH FLUM

when the relationship between parent and adolescent resembles secure attachment
it fosters career exploration. Similarly, Ketterson and Blustein (1997) reported
that higher levels of attachment of young adults to parents are associated with
exploratory activity. Elsewhere, Blustein and his colleagues (Blustein, Walbridge,
Friedlander, & Palladino, 1991) found that secure attachment is allied with progress
in career decision making. When considered in conjunction with other reports (e.g.
Kenny, 1990; O’Brien, 1996; Ryan, Solberg, & Brown, 1996) the important role of
attachment in career development is starting to crystallize, though many questions
await further investigation (cf. Blustein, Prezioso, & Schultheiss, 1995).
Prominent among these questions is the one that addresses later adulthood at-
tachment experiences in the work organization. A significant contribution by Hazan
and Shaver (1990), who have conceptualized work as exploration, identified three
distinct patterns of feelings regarding work. These patterns relate to the three types
of attachment. People who are comfortable with closeness to others and securely
attached seem to be most satisfied with their work and most confident about it.
They tend not to use work to meet unsatisfied needs for love or to avoid social
interaction. Anxious/ambivalent people tend to be preoccupied with attachment
issues to the extent that it affects their ability to focus on a task. Avoidant attach-
ment, Hazan and Shaver further reported, is associated with a preference to work
alone and with a compulsive approach to activity that serves as way of avoiding
other people.
The fluidity and change that characterize contemporary life in general, and
the world of work in particular, lead to more questions about the role of attach-
ments. Organizational and occupational structures have been substantially modi-
fied (Reich, 1991) and a “psychological contract” that promises a “job for life” is
becoming rare (Watts, 1996). Multiple transitions seem to characterize an adult’s
life at this point in time. Hence, attachments are threatened more than ever and the
fear of eventual loss may preclude establishing attachment relationships at work.
At the same time, attachments give a sense of continuity and help in counteracting
the anxiety, loneliness, and sense of loss that may occur in difficult transitions. As
much as we can foresee the future, it could be expected that the need to enhance the
sense of security and to have a secure base may become even more pronounced.
Furthermore, the importance of adaptive attachment connections is becoming even
more compelling when engagement in exploration is no longer a phase or stage
in one’s development, but is expected to be repeated periodically throughout life
(Flum & Blustein, 2000). As suggested by both research and theory, attachment to
significant others can facilitate exploration and self-determination (Deci & Ryan,
1991; Ketterson & Blustein, 1997; Kracke, 1997).
In a similar vein, Hall and his associates (1996) discussed a new conceptu-
alization of career and the relational influences on vocational development. In
this volume, Kahn (1996) described the lack of security that people experience
when working under the terms of the new contract. He examined, from the attach-
ment concept perspective, the inherent paradox in the demands for self-reliance as
promoted by work organizations and then suggested the notion of organizational
 RELATIONAL DIMENSIONS 5

caregiving. In the relational model that I describe herein, Kahn’s organizational

caregiving encompasses additional relational dimensions, as will be explained
later.

Eye-to-Eye Validation
The experience of eye-to-eye validation begins when the caregiver’s gaze at the
baby’s eyes is accompanied by a smile of satisfaction; this experience develops into
a recognition through eye-to-eye relating that we exist for the other. Through eye-
to-eye validation, individuals experience themselves as being valued, understood,
and mirrored by the other (cf. Kohut, 1977). In this mirroring process, the other
reflects our self. When individuals see aspects of themselves that are known by the
other, they become real. Receiving empathic responses provides a means to affirm
self and to confirm identity. Developmentally, this experience fosters a sense of self,
one that is separate yet in relation to the other. Empathic responses and adequate
mirroring function to consolidate a sense of who a person is as he or she is known to
self and to others. Indeed, Erikson (1968) stressed the significance of “a process of
simultaneous reflection and observation” (p. 22) in the identity-formation process.
Throughout life when individuals interact with others in different life theaters,
the validation (or lack of it) of their interests and competence by significant others
influences their career development. Vocational and leisure interests are not pro-
duced solely by the individual internally; they are typically produced in the space
between the individual and others, with the process of eye-to-eye validation very
often playing a crucial role (cf. Blustein & Flum, 1999). Similarly, the affirmation
(or lack of it) of an individual’s choices and performance by significant others may
affect the expression of the (true) self in a career context.
Often validation is believed to gain in force when it comes in the context of
relationships between a parent and a child, a teacher and a student, a mentor and
a mentee, or a counselor and a client (Josselson, 1992). However, an empathic
response does not have to occur in the context of hierarchical relationships or to
gain in significance because the other has authority. Mirroring is often effective
between peers and, indeed, eye-to-eye validation often requires being at the same
eye level. “ I could see myself in her eyes,” said Sarah, an interviewee in her
late 20s, while talking about a close friend, “she was interested in what I said
and could relate to it...I felt being understood...She never told me what to do, yet
her responses and the look in her eyes helped me to define what I wanted from
myself.”
Sometimes the other does not have to be especially important to trigger a process
by mirroring, as illustrated by the following anecdote that is adapted from an
interview with Linda, a research participant. Linda just listened to an emphatic
observation made by a total stranger she met on the train and it revived an interest
that she buried long ago. Following this conversation, Linda decided to spend the
next four years at school to turn this interest into a profession. Josselson (1992)
described the story of a 40-year-old, Warren, who recalled his adolescence. He
owed much to Bonnie, a neighbor his parents’ age who, in his words, “introduced
6 HANOCH FLUM

me to myself.” Like all male adolescents in his community he was expected to play
it tough and be good at sports; however, he was interested in existential issues and
wrote poetry. He further recalled:
The conversations I had with Bonnie were the first I ever had with a grown-up person about
serious things, and she helped me see it wasn’t a problem to have these feelings, which I had
thought it was. Anything tender or anything about feelings, you had to hide it or ignore it.
With her I didn’t have to (Josselson, 1992, p.106).

Validation becomes most necessary in time of transition. In periods of develop-

mental transition, such as adolescence (Flum & Porton, 1995), when restructuring
of the self takes place, people need the other to know who really they are (Josselson,
1992). The same applies to career transitions. In the period of job induction, for
instance, the susceptibility to others’ remarks, evaluation, and approval is at its
height. In this situation, individuals feel most truly themselves and are led out of
confusion when they feel understood, appreciated, and important. Counselors, for
instance, may recall their own experience of being validated when they presented
their first case in a practicum.
Career transitions are often marked by a process of exploration (Flum & Blustein,
2000). A process that involves both openness and vulnerability. The individual who
is exploring internally, as well as externally, needs validation. At the same time,
this individual may be more exposed to inadequate mirroring (Kohut, 1977) and
the individual’s internal confusion could be reflected in the other’s eyes (e.g., “You
have changed. I don’t know you anymore”). However, empathic responses could
help this person to be in touch with aspects of the self and experience them as real.
Mirroring could assist the emergence of new interests and confirm unique talents.
Experimentation with new ideas and an examination of one’s value system can
benefit from others’ validating responses, as Blustein (1994) suggested: “...(B)eing
able to expose oneself honestly and to experiment with different aspects of oneself
in a caring and empathic environment may foster the sort of self-discovery that is
integral to identity formation process...” (p.144).
An important aspect of validation is its instrumental role in promoting inter-
nalization and integration. These processes are relevant for both the content and
the process of career exploration. Just as one’s interests, sense of competence,
values, and accomplishments are more likely to be integrated and become part of
the self following validation, so is the process of exploration. While the individ-
ual is engaged in career exploration, the individual’s uncertainty and confusion
might be demanding for others who are in a relationship with this person. Recog-
nition by others of the exploration process for what it is and an acceptance of
the exploring individual serve to validate the experience for the person and foster
internalization and integration. Pitfalls related to eye-to-eye validation are clear
but not easy to detect. Mirroring should be adequate, not distorted. Mirroring is
adequate when it reflects recognition of who one is rather than what one ought
to be, when the other in connection communicates what is me rather than what
the other wants me to be. The absence of validation can easily been interpreted as
rejection.
 RELATIONAL DIMENSIONS 7

Idealization and Identification

Idealization and identification link individuals with models who move them
to strive to be like others (Josselson, 1992). In this form of relatedness, people
express the qualities that they value in the other. In idealization, individuals are
concerned with characteristics they do not themselves possess. Idealizable others
embody individuals’ ideals and serve as a template for their ambition. Idealization
can foster growth and empower the individual.
Identification is a process whereby an aspect of the idealized is internalized
and becomes the individual’s own. Identification is an important developmental
mechanism that links relationships with others to the growing self. Erikson (1968)
regarded identifications as relationally based building blocks of identity. A crucial
task of adolescence is to integrate childhood identifications into a whole that is
larger than the sum of these identifications, in effect, using the idealizations to help
form one’s identity. Similarly, in sociology, Foote (1951) entitled his influential
article “Identification as the basis for a theory of motivation,” an article in which he
discussed the mechanism of role identification. In the present model, idealization
and identification form a wish to be like the idealized other; thus, the individual’s
primary need for relatedness can become a source of motivation. What begins
as a means of connection can evolve into internalized goals and ambitions. Deci
and Ryan (1991) described internalization, following Schafer’s (1968) work, as
the process by which people actively transform external regulations into internal
regulations. In their self-determination theory of motivation, the need for relat-
edness is the primary catalyst for internalization. Identification is an intermediate
phase of this process, leading to a coherent integration with the self. However, it
should be noted, although Deci and Ryan depict the need for relatedness as being
fundamental, they describe identification in terms of regulations not relationships.
Identification is, of course, not necessarily with a person as a whole. Identi-
fication could be with an aspect of a person (part-identification), with a specific
quality, characteristic, or behavior, or with something that is represented by a per-
son (e.g., interest, belief, value, and attitude). Involvement in the relational space
while exploring is likely to facilitate identification. However, identification is de-
scribed as a form of regulation that is an intermediate level of internalization, a
degree along a continuum (Deci & Ryan, 1991; Grolnick, Deci, & Ryan, 1997),
which is required to be brought into a coherent relation to other aspects of the self
in order to be integrated. Similarly, from a different perspective, identification (or
part-identification) is regarded as a building block that has to be synthesized into
an identity (Erikson, 1968; Josselson, 1994). From both perspectives, I suggest
that exploration shapes the synthesis of identifications into a coherent identity. In
other words, exploration helps to process identifications by taking them in and
actively transforming them into an integrated self-structure or identity.
In analyzing narratives of her interviewees, Josselson (1994) observed that “(t)he
development of interests, values and even careers wends through a narrative of
identification, with friends and strangers as well as with parents and teachers”
(p. 96). I have found (Flum, 1998) it surprisingly easy to deconstruct some of
8 HANOCH FLUM

the core identifications of young Ethiopian immigrants in Israel. They tend to

report active identification with a significant other in different contexts and to tell
their developmental story with identifications as lighthouses, or guides, that mark
their way. Levi, one of the first Ethiopian Jewish immigrants in Israel to reach
a graduate level of higher education, described in his narrative a process that is
clearly anchored by active identifications. He articulated how he extracted certain
qualities from a specific person in each developmental phase—an admired uncle
who represented the significance of education early in life, a school principal
who embodied the value of learning and knowledge, another uncle that he felt
committed to follow his footsteps and emulate his success in another context—
and actively transformed these qualities and made them his own (for more detailed
examples, see Flum, 1998). By actively identifying with a model and aspiring to
increase the resemblance to the model (cf. Schafer, 1968), Levi formed his own
interests, values, and goals.
However, the developmental picture of idealization is not complete if the poten-
tial for pain is ignored. Idealizable others are a source of meaning, but heroes are
likely to fall. The idealized is bound to become only real. This process may involve
the experience of disillusionment. In most cases, the process of disillusionment
evolves gradually, but in some cases, there is the danger that the individual would
be left with a sense of despair and emptiness.

Mutuality
Mutuality is the process of shared experience that leads to the resonance indi-
viduals feel when they act together. In effect, mutuality reflects the emotional
connection that we experience following responsiveness to and with others
(Josselson, 1992). Unlike the previous dimensions where the relational process
is articulated in terms of a target individual, mutuality occurs between selves. The
discourse is a we discourse all around.
Mutuality represents the experience of joining together. It is an interaction in
which mutual empathy, transcending the self and the other, belongs to them jointly.
As Jordan (1991) noted, mutuality paradoxically affirms both the intrapersonal
sense of self and the self as part of a larger relational unit. Hence, mutuality
does not imply a loss of distinctiveness of self. Rather, mutuality is a process of
attunement to the other’s inner experience, on both affective and cognitive levels, “a
process during which one’s self-boundaries undergo momentary alteration, which
in itself allows the possibility for change in the self. Empathy in this sense, then,
always contains the opportunity for mutual growth and impact” (Jordan, 1991,
p. 82). Intersubjectivity facilitates the motivation to understand the other’s meaning
system from this person’s frame of reference and it means taking account of the
other.
On the face of it, this relational dimension applies to social experiences of sharing
and friendship that may develop in the workplace and could become very important
to how people feel at work. Nevertheless, mutuality is somehow perceived as
being divorced from the work itself. However, I argue that mutuality is a source of
 RELATIONAL DIMENSIONS 9

empowerment for the individuals in the we (cf. Surrey, 1991). Shared experiences
resonate and create a unit of we with an authentic emotional flow that empowers
the participating individuals. People tend to think about a work team as operating
on cognitive and behavioral levels; in fact, in the empirical literature on teams
in organizations, the array of team functions includes variables such as exchange
of information, team tasks, and team performance (Ilgen, 1999). But relational
affect, the process of mutuality and the resonance that resides in the team, could be
essential for the team’s success. The experience of engaging in a creation together
as a team has the potential of feeling like participating in something larger than
self and thus is very different from an individual effort.
In work teams that are expected to resolve problems, or to design creative
innovations, solutions and ideas are often conceived in the space between rather
than by individuals. In these increasingly common work groups, an experience of
mutuality may be a key to success in attaining performance goals and to ensuring
satisfaction for the team members. Mutuality occurs in a climate of cooperation
and is unlikely to thrive under competition. This is reflected in the words of Guy,
a young man I interviewed as a part of a research project. Guy works for a very
successful high-tech company and describes his work by stating the following:
“We work as a team. We are three in a room and we all know what the others are
doing.” He explained that all three of them, two males and a female, collaborated
on the development of the same software.
At the beginning, the atmosphere was very interest-like...questions and answers, nothing
beyond...We used to spend breaks and meal-time separately, with other acquaintances. Now
it is very different. We are a team; we are very good work mates. We do everything together
at work. During the breaks we share past experiences, we talk about a movie, we go to drink
together, we tell personal stories, we share a lot. There is no competitive atmosphere in our
room whatsoever. We have very good “chemistry”...we understand each other. Sometimes it
is enough to look at each other eyes to know that we think the same. We understand each
other so well that what I think has a clear meaning in the eyes of the other. When one of us
encounters a problem, the others are immediately there to help in the most natural and sincere
way. Our cooperation contributes enormously to the final product.
A person who fails to take part emotionally as well is likely to experience
dissonance and emotional isolation. When mutuality fails, misunderstanding and
disappointment may result. Furthermore, mutuality is essential for psychological
growth (Miller, 1986, 1988). Hence, development can be hampered when mutuality
consistently fails in its various expressions and emotional isolation sets in.
Adolescents’ exploration relies considerably on mutuality and much of ado-
lescence friendship serves this end (Erikson, 1968; cf. Flum & Lavi-Yudelevitch,
submitted). Career exploration in adolescence (Super, Savickas, & Super, 1996) is
no exception. Much of the adolescent self-exploration and self-discovery is done
relationally and the we experience counteracts the danger of loneliness in this pro-
cess. Sharing the path with somebody else who is on the same path allows for
clarification of interests, abilities, and values. Adolescents share secrets, dreams,
and fantasies with their close friends. They often picture possible selves, then pro-
cess and develop them together. Mutuality is a platform from which adolescents
10 HANOCH FLUM

are likely to venture into new career possibilities that go beyond parental expec-
tations. Adolescents’ dreams eventually “crystallize into a publicly recognized
vocational identity with corresponding preferences for a group of occupations”
(Super, Savickas, & Super, 1996, p. 132). At the same time, the danger is that
adolescent exploration may remain in the space between. In such a case, diffusion
rather than crystallization may be engendered. Theoretically, it seems that the like-
lihood of crystallization and the development of commitment (specification and
implementation, in Super’s terms) are enhanced when other relational dimensions
(e.g., eye-to-eye validation) are active along with mutuality.
In the next two dimensions the relational picture is further expanded to include
larger systems or rather to focus on the individual within a larger system.

Embeddedness
A sense of belongingness in a social group reflects connection through embed-
dedness (Josselson, 1992). To be embedded is to be connected with others who
share a set of meanings, to be part of a collective that shares a certain solidarity.
Embeddedness as a concept offers a perspective on social context along with the
individual’s psychological experience of being the same as others from a defined
social group. To avoid social isolation and to have a sense that they have a place,
individuals need to belong, to experience embeddedness. When Erikson (1968)
described identity formation in terms of finding one’s niche, he regarded it as a
process of finding one’s own self within a meaningful web of connections. Being
part of this web, or embedded in it, ensures commonality, sharing characteristics
that become the reason for acceptance and recognition by others and a root for the
individual’s identity.
In Super’s career development theory, the multiple social roles in the individual’s
life space illustrate veins of embeddedness in the community through various
theaters. Among these roles, the salience of (i.e., participation in, commitment to,
and value expectation for) the work role is very important (Super, et al., 1996).
On a more abstract level, it could be argued that work embeds adults in their
culture. Even when work is done in relative isolation, it is an activity that ties the
individual to the larger community. By working, people participate, cooperate, and
contribute to their communities. The work role promotes belongingness by linking
an individual to a certain defined work-related community, a group with which one
shares interests and values.
While individuals yearn to belong to a group, “there is always tension between
inclusion and individuality. We want to be enough a part of the group to take part
but we fear losing our individuality. At the same time, we fear to be so much
an individual that we lose our tie to the group” (Josselson, 1992, p. 181). Many
work-related conflicts (on individual and organizational levels) can be reduced
to this basic tension and then conceptualized through the relational dimension of
embeddedness.
Some important aspects of embeddedness are not usually a matter of choice
(e.g., gender, race, ethnicity, and the culture that one is born to) and may affect
 RELATIONAL DIMENSIONS 11

other aspects that are generally regarded as the individual’s choice. The individual’s
perception of occupational space, for instance, is often framed by the individual’s
yearning to be embedded, which then impacts choices.
At the same time, a sense of embeddedness could serve as a springboard for
forming high vocational aspirations. An illustration of the role of embeddedness
in the development of vocational aspiration can be found in my study of young
new immigrants in Israel (Flum, 1998). In this study, young immigrants from rural
Ethiopia to Israel, who are among the first to reach higher education, emphasized
that their embeddedness featured prominently in their career decision making.
These young people perceived themselves as representing their ethnic community.
Their sense of embeddedness drove them to attain higher education and form
high-level career aspirations. Some of these new immigrants specifically sought
an occupation through which they could contribute to the well-being of their own
ethnic community.
One of the characteristics of the late modern open and fluid society is the relative
space that people are given in adult life (e.g., options of occupational mobility) to
choose and change contexts of embeddedness (e.g., by job change). This means
that individuals can leave and join groups, that they can even form a new context
of embeddedness, but at the same time they may lose a significant source of
embeddedness or experience the deprivation of embeddedness more often than in
the past. People may experience the absence of embeddedness by feeling lost or
alienated.

Holding
The next dimension to be discussed here is based on our first relational expe-
rience (Josselson, 1992). Once out of the womb, the infant’s earliest experience
is being held. From these early moments throughout life individuals need to be
held. What starts with arms around early in life becomes social support later.
To prevent people from falling they need somebody to be there for them to hold
them first physically and later symbolically. Individuals need the support of people
to counteract the fear of falling, to feel bounded and grounded. Hence, holding
encompasses social support, but the individual’s experience reaches beyond to a
fundamental experience of being safe.
Winnicott (1965) described the developmental need for an adequate “holding
environment.” In his theorizing, the holding mother (“the good enough mother”)
has the fundamental task of creating the environment in which an infant develops
a self. The infant is allowed a range of experiences while being held and protected
from being too overwhelmed. Later in childhood, the family is the primary holding
environment. The arms become more symbolic. In adolescence, the experience of
being held and supported facilitates personal exploration in general and career
exploration in particular.
Later in life, work organizations may serve as a sort of a holding environment.
We still tend to expect the work organization to promote our sense of boundedness
and groundedness, to respond to our need to be held. We still expect the work
12 HANOCH FLUM

organization to serve as an environment of growth, an environment in which we

could feel safe to let our innate potentials emerge. I repeat “we still expect” because
the rapidly changing nature of work organizations is shifting and evolving at a
frenetic pace. As the old hierarchical career ladder is folding, and the commitment
of the organization toward the individual decreases, the modified psychological
contract that results loses some of the stabilizing aspects of holding. The loss of
aspects of the holding function of the organization is reflected, for instance, in
less tenured jobs, more temporary workers, and people who are hired for ad hoc
projects.
Rapid changes shake the ground often and work-related transitions are likely
to be experienced as a loss of groundedness and boundedness. The loss of a job
is often described in terms of sinking, an allusion to the infant’s terror of falling.
Conversely, people often take the initiative and look for a new job when they
feel that the organization is on shaky ground or that insufficient space exists for
self-expression; then they tend to talk about feeling “suffocated” at work, perhaps
reflecting an excessive degree of holding. The psychological impact of the loss
of holding and its effect on the individual’s identity and well-being should be
considered carefully in future inquiry.
The next relational dimension represents a change of perspective. Tending is
positioned differently in the space between. Being a giving experience of connec-
tion, tending denotes a unidirectional experience at the non-receiving end of the
space (Josselson, 1992).

Tending (care)
Tending, or care, is a fundamentally different relational dimension that repre-
sents the experience of connection through emotional offering to the other person.
The perspective of the relationship shifts to a reaching out mode. As such, this
could be experienced by the other person as being held, as being validated, etc.
While people need to feel needed, they need to provide care, need to tend. Tending
can be expressed as a wish to hold or a wish to validate, for instance, and indeed it
may contain these elements. But the overall internal experience stands on its own
as a tending experience of connection, emanating from the need to care.
Developmentally, the need to care for others is often conceptualized as being
related to the interaction with parents early in life. In Roe’s (1956) conceptu-
alization these early experiences may determine later work orientation and vo-
cational direction. While the empirical evidence for Roe’s assertion is equivo-
cal, later research into the development of altruism and prosocial behavior (e.g.,
Eisenberg & Mussen, 1989) sheds some light on the developmental process of
tending.
White (1966) described growth in adulthood as being marked by both the stabi-
lization of ego identity and the expansion of caring. For Erikson (1964), care
is a central quality of adult life and he equates the individual’s identity with
what the individual tends. His notion of generativity that connotes the concern to
nurture future generations encompasses the transcendence of love through work.
 RELATIONAL DIMENSIONS 13

Hence, the need to care is not satisfied only by caring for one’s children, but by
tending to others’ needs through one’s work. Tending, therefore, can include a
large variety of work experiences. Some are more direct relational experiences,
while some may be more general or abstract, but nevertheless are experienced as
care.
Tending is, for example, an experience emphasized by a mentor who tries to
promote a mentee’s skills and confidence by guidance. Brenda reports (Josselson,
1996, p. 195) that when she was appointed to a new managerial position she found
herself supervising “two warring factions. I watched them become people who
work together as a real team and I think that I facilitated that. That’s been most
rewarding thing—watching them work together.” Brenda’s sense of competence
as a manager was enhanced through her experience of tending to people who were
fighting and by resolving the conflict through her care. Similarly, a teacher or a
doctor, a bus driver or an investment consultant may explain their job in generative
terms and describe their work experience as caring for others.
As Erikson suggested, empirical evidence shows that midlife men and women
score higher on generativity than younger or older adults (McAdams, de St. Aubin,
& Logan, 1993). Colby and Damon (1992) described individuals with a sense of
destiny about their work. At the center of their life story is a commitment to
doing good for others in their community. In the same vein, in a recent research
report on “the psychosocial construction of generative lives,” McAdams, Diamond,
de St. Aubin, and Mansfield (1997) reported that high generative participants
experience the world as a place where people need to care for others and they tell
a story of commitment that guides their behavior throughout the life span. Care is
central to their identity. Indeed, in reviewing research on generativity McAdams,
Diamond, de St. Aubin, and Mansfield (1997) conclude that generativity has been
positively associated with both agentic and communal motivation. In this sense,
the need to reach out to others and its reflection in the experience of tending
display most clearly the convergence of agency and communion in work and in
the individual’s identity. Young people explore the tending-in-the-self. They try to
clarify to themselves what they care for, how they can translate their care to actual
choices, as a core issue of their identity exploration. For many, this objective of
exploration becomes acute at different times of their life and may have immediate
career implications.

CONCLUSION
By examining from a career development perspective the meaning of different
primary ways of connection, I have described how relational qualities are closely
allied with work experiences and career development. The discussion in the present
article shows how various relational experiences foster exploration (attachment and
holding), frame or circumscribe the limits of exploration and serve as a motivational
spring board (e.g., embeddedness), become an arena for exploration and add the
experience of a we to the process (mutuality), set an objective for exploration or
steer the process toward career choice (e.g., tending), and produce direct building
14 HANOCH FLUM

blocks as part and parcel of this process (idealization and identification, eye-to-eye
validation).
Having delineated each of the relational modes separately, it is now important
to note that some of them have more in common with each other than others.
Holding and attachment, for instance, are related and both function to enhance an
individual’s sense of security. Attachment is a more widely used concept that refers
to an experience of emotional linkage with the attachment figure. It relates to an
attachment system that is developed late in infancy and impacts relationships later
in life. It is a continuous experience rather than situational. Holding is the very
early experience of “arms around,” arms that prevent falling, an experience that
individuals may feel especially in need for again late in life. Through adulthood,
the support can be experienced interpersonally, but the individual can be held by the
work organization as well. A sense of groundedness can be gained by working in an
organization and by work-related interactions. Kahn (1996) advanced the concept
of organizational caregiving to account for the sense of security that is produced
within organization members. His point of departure is attachment theory, but his
description speaks more about holding: “...people may experience themselves as
anchored in organizational contexts and situations that are, like high seas, turbulent
and frightening. Work relationships have the potential to help people feel connected
rather than disconnected, held fast rather than floundering...” (Kahn, 1996, p. 163).
Different threads of connection are often closely interwoven. The deconstruc-
tion of the relational tapestry into distinct threads may facilitate individuals’ability
to identify the specific needs of individuals. Future research may deepen under-
standing of the unique contribution that connection makes to career development
and the vocational experience. This, in turn, could be applied to remedy some of
the troubling aspects of progress that we foresee in the information age and the
21st century, to promote development and mental health in the ever-expanding
linkage between work and relational life.

REFERENCES
Bakan, D. (1966). The duality of human existence: Isolation and communion in western man. Boston:
Beacon Press.
Blos, P. (1962). On adolescence: A psychoanalytic interpretation. New York: Free Press.
Blustein, D. L. (1994). “Who am I?”: The question of self and identity in career development. In
M. L. Savickas & R. W. Lent (Eds.), Convergence in career development theories: Implications
for science and practice (pp. 139–154). Palo Alto, CA: CPP Books.
Blustein, D. L., & Flum, H. (1999). A self-determination perspective of interests and exploration in
career development. In M. L. Savickas & A. R. Spokane (Eds.), Vocational interests: Meaning,
measurement, and counseling use (pp. 345–368). Palo Alto, CA: Davies-Black.
Blustein, D. L., Prezioso, M. S., & Schultheiss, D. P. (1995). Attachment theory and career development:
Current status and future directions. The Counseling Psychologist, 23, 416–432.
Blustein, D. L., Walbridge, M., Friedlander, M., & Palladino, D. (1991). Contributions of psychological
separation and parental attachment to the career development process. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 38, 39–50.
Bordin, E. S., Nachman, B., & Segal, S. J. (1963). An articulated framework for vocational development.
Journal of Counseling Psychology, 10, 107–116.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss. Vol. 1: Attachment. New York: Basic Books.
 RELATIONAL DIMENSIONS 15

Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss. Vol. 2: Separation. New York: Basic Books.
Colby, A., & Damon, W. (1992). Some do care: Contemporary lives of moral commitment. New York:
Free Press.
Coleman, J. C. (1978). Current contradictions in adolescent theory. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
7, 1–11.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In
R. Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska symposium on motivation (pp. 237–288). Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
Eisenberg, N., & Mussen, P. (1989). The roots of prosocial behavior in children. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Erikson, E. (1964). Insight and responsibility. New York: Norton.
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
Flum, H. (1994). The evolutive style of identity formation. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23,
489–498.
Flum, H. (1998). Embedded identity: The case of young high-achieving Ethiopian jewish immigrants
in Israel. Journal of Youth Studies, 1, 143–161.
Flum, H., & Blustein, D. L. (2000). Reinvigorating the study of vocational exploration: A framework
for research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 56, 380–404.
Flum, H., & Lavi-Yudelevitch, M. Adolescents’ relatedness and identity formation: A narrative study.
Manuscript submitted for publication.
Flum, H., & Porton, H. (1995). Relational processes and identity formation in adolescence: The example
of “A Separate Peace,” Genetic, Social & General Psychology Monographs, 121, 369–389.
Foote, N. N. (1951). Identification as the basis for a theory of motivation. American Sociological
Review, 16, 14–21.
Forrest, L., & Mikolaitis, N. (1986). The relationship component of identity: An expansion of career
development theory. Career Development Quarterly, 35, 76–88.
Freud, A. (1958). Adolescence. Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 16, 225–278.
Grolnick, W. S., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1997). Internalization within the family: The self-
determination theory perspective. In J. E. Grusec & L. Kuczynski (Eds.), Parenting and children’s
internalization of values (pp. 135–161). New York: Wiley.
Grotevant, H. D., & Cooper, C. R. (1985). Patterns of interaction in family relationships and the
development of identity exploration in adolescence. Child Development, 56, 415–428.
Hall, D. T., & associates (1996). The career is dead - long live the career: A relational approach to
careers. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Hazan, C. & Shaver, P. R. (1990). Love and work: An attachment-theoretical perspective. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 270–280.
Ilgen, D. R. (1999). Teams embedded in organizations: Some implications. American Psychologist,
54, 129–139.
Jordan, J. V. (1991). The meaning of mutuality. In J. V. Jordan, A. G. Kaplan, J. B. Miller, I. P.
Stiver, & J. L. Surrey (Eds.), Women’s growth in connection: Writings from the Stone Center
(pp. 81–96). New York: Guilford Press.
Josselson, R. (1992). The space between us: Exploring dimensions of human relationships. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Josselson, R. (1994). Identity and relatedness in the life cycle. In H. A. Bosma, T. L. G. Graafsma,
H. D. Grotevant, & D. J. de Levita (Eds.), Identity and development: An interdisciplinary
approach (pp. 81–102). Thousand Oaks, CA.: Sage.
Josselson, R. (1996). Revising herself: A story of women’s identity from college to midlife. New York:
Oxford University Press.
Kahn, W. A. (1996). Secure base relationships at work. In D. T. Hall & Associates (Eds.), The career
is dead-long live the career: A relational approach to careers (pp. 158–179). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
Kenny, M. E. (1990). College seniors’ perceptions of parental attachments. Journal of College Student
Development, 31, 39–46.
16 HANOCH FLUM

Ketterson, T. U., & Blustein, D. L. (1997). Attachment relationships and the career exploration
process. Career Development Quarterly, 46, 167–178.
Kobak, R. R., & Sceery, A. (1988). Attachment in late adolescence: Working models, affect regulation,
and representations of self and others. Child Development, 59, 135–146.
Kohut,, H. (1977). The restoration of the self . New York: International University Press.
Kracke, B. (1997). Parental behaviors and adolescents’ career exploration. The Career Development
Quarterly, 45, 341–350.
Markus, H., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion and
motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 224–253.
McAdams, D. P., de St. Aubin, E., & Logan, R. L. (1993). Generativity among young, midlife, and
older adults. Psychology and Aging, 8, 221–230.
McAdams, D. P., Diamond, A., de St. Aubin, E., & Mansfield, E. (1997). Stories of commitment: The
psychosocial construction of generative lives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72,
678–694.
Miller, J. B. (1986). What do we mean by relationships? Work in Progress, Stone Center working
paper series, 22, Wellesley, MA: Stone Center.
Miller, J. B. (1988). Connections, disconnections, and violations. Work in Progress, Stone Center
working paper series, 33, Wellesley, MA: Stone Center.
O’Brien, K. M. (1996). The influence of psychological separation and parental attachment on the
career development of adolescent women. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 48, 257–274.
Reich, R. B. (1991). The work of nations. New York: Vintage Books.
Roe, A. (1956). The psychology of occupations. New York: Wiley.
Ryan, N. E., Solberg, V. S., & Brown, S. D. (1996). Family dysfunction, parental attachments,
and career search self-efficacy among community college students. Journal of Counseling
Psychology, 43, 84–89.
Savickas, M. L. (1991). The meaning of work and love: Career issues and interventions. The Career
Devlopment Quarterly, 39, 315–324.
Schaefer, R. (1968). Aspects of internalization. New York: International Universities Press.
Super, D. E., Savickas, M. L., & Super, C. M. (1996). The life-span, life-space approach to careers.
In D. Brown & L. Brooks (Eds.), Career choice and development (3rd ed., pp. 121–178). San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Surrey, J. L. (1991). Relationship and empowermwnt. In J. V. Jordan, A. G. Kaplan, J. B. Miller,
I. P. Stiver, & J. L. Surrey (Eds.), Women’s growth in connection: Writings from the Stone Center
(pp. 162–180). New York: Guilford Press.
Watts, A. G. (1996). Toward a policy for lifelong career development: A transatlantic perspective.
Career Development Quarterly, 45, 41–53.
White, R. W. (1966). Lives in progress (2nd ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Winnicott, D. W. (1965). The maturational process and the facilitating environment. Madison, CT:
International Universities Press.

Received April 13, 2000; published online April 12, 2001