AN ISSUE WORTH TALKING ABOUT
(January/February 2003 Issue)

The question of being Directive or Non-Directive is a big issue for career counselors. It is an issue on which we would be very likely to take sides. Opinions would generate a lot of heat. It is good to reconsider where you stand and why, and be open to new perspectives. Most counselors would be loathe to state that they "tell a client what to do." Nonetheless, directiveness can slide into the conversation in a multitude of subtle or not-so-subtle ways:

• "Your test scores seem to be pointing toward . . . ."
  
• "From what you’ve said, you seem to be leaning toward . . ."
  
• "Of the fields you’ve mentioned, the ones that show the best prospects in labor market studies are . . . ."
  
• "Based on your interests (or skills), have you considered these fields . . .?"
  
• "People with your experiences tend to like . . . . ."
  
• "You probably ought not consider going into . . . . . . "
  
  

Some counselors would argue that the above responses are not directive. Nonetheless, whenever a counselor attempts to synthesize information from the client and lean it toward or away from certain career options, the counselor is taking responsibility for directing the conversation.

I am particularly opposed to telling clients they are not suited for certain career areas, instead of letting their own experiences give them the feedback they are looking for.

The alternative, non-directiveness, has several features which can be attractive or unattractive to both counselor and client, depending on your perspective. It can be slower, it seems to put more pressure on the client to "decide", and it may make the counselor seem less "authoritative". Clients are often in a hurry to get going on their career paths, so they may welcome a nudge of directiveness from the counselor. After all, a 30, 45, or 60-minute session ends pretty quickly and, if the client leaves without a "decision", they may feel antsy. "What am I going to tell Mom, my spouse, my friends?", they wonder.

On the other hand, taking responsibility for introspection and exploration tends to make the client stronger and more self-reliant. Lack of immediate decisions gives the client breathing room and thus facilitates the exploration process.

Non-directiveness asks the client to "look inside" and find where their energy is leading them.. The counselor maintains that this is not just for "intuitives", but for everyone.

Some people do not do much introspection. Is it also good for them to "look inside"? Yes, the non-directive counselor would say. Accessing your inner energy can be learned. Without it, the client is at the mercy of the rush of events around her and far more vulnerable to the external influence of friends, family, and the consumerist culture.

Many counselors believe that the career directions for certain clients are obvious or at least that there are certain fields they should definitely not go into. If the client wants such "advice", they’re willing to give it. They view this as being helpful. Without it, they believe the client would go down the wrong road, suffer failures, and perhaps never get going in the right direction.

But, argue the non-directive counselors, do we ever know the "right" direction for a client? How do we know it? There is no research which demonstrates career counselors’ ability to predict future satisfying careers. I would propose there never will be such research, because the factors inherent in any career decision are too numerous and many such factors are buried in the client’s unconscious.

Ahah!, argue the directive counselors. If it’s all so unconscious, how can we ever work with that? How can we incorporate what the client does not know herself?

The non-directives respond by saying that methods of accessing one’s inner self can help to bring unconscious material into the client’s career development process. Meditation, for example, can be a powerful means of observing and beginning to understand one’s conscious and unconscious drives.

My opinion is that directiveness can do a lot of harm, and I believe that non-directiveness encourages clients to recognize and use their own internal powers. Others would disagree. Thus, the debate needs to be very much alive today, and we need to confront each other with our views, so that we learn from practices other than our own.

There are vast differences among career counselors in directiveness. Some stand as total opposites. We need to hash this out with each other, because our clients are being affected by our directiveness and non-directiveness, sometimes dramatically so.

To give added weight and depth to your position on directiveness, imagine that you had counseled certain family members or other loved ones and then imagine how your counseling might have affected their careers.

The question of directiveness and non-directiveness is at the heart of our profession. That it divides us so sharply is evidence that we have not faced the question as fully as we should.

Howard Figler, Ph.D., is the author of The Complete Job Search Handbook and The Career Counsleor's Handbook [1999, with Richard N. Bolles]. He can be reached at: hefigler@pacbell.net