Narrative Report of Career Interest Profiler
As stated above, the Career Interest Profiler (CIP; Psychometrics Canada, 2010) is a career interests assessment. It provides respondents with information about the level of interest they have in different types of activities based on Holland’s (1997) six occupational interest themes, including: Realist, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional (RIASEC). Holland’s theory was centered on the idea both people and work environments could be sorted based on their specific RIASEC typologies. He believed that pursuing a career in line with your interests (a person-environment RIASEC typology match) would lead to a greater deal of career satisfaction. In addition, the CIP suggests a series of careers in which people with similar interests to the respondent’s report high career satisfaction (suggesting that the position is a good match for the respondent’s interests).
|
My results showed that I had low levels of interest in conventional tasks, average interest in enterprising tasks, slightly above average interests in realistic and social tasks, high interest in investigative tasks, and very high interest in artistic tasks; I will focus on my top two interest types, artistic (A) and investigative (I). According to the report artistic people prefer creative endeavours in which they have the chance to express original ideas, while they dislike activities that are repetitive or overly structured. Investigative people on the other hand are genuinely curious individuals who love to understand and solve problems; however, they typically dislike tasks that are centered on interacting with others. As I am an A-I/I-A, according to the CIP, it is likely that I will enjoy positions that afford me the opportunity to express myself creatively while thinking about intricate ideas and how to solve complicated problems.
|
Reflection on Career Interest Profile Results
Discovering who I am is something that I’ve spent a great deal of time pondering over during my life. I know who I am, I know what my interests are, and I know what I enjoy. As a result, I had a fairly good idea, when looking at the RIASEC typologies, which categories I would score highest on. Indeed, during the RIASEC activity in class I chose to move to the investigative, artistic, and social groups matching my results on the CIP.
When I was much younger I had “decided” on a number of potential career paths. I knew that I either wanted to be an actor, a musician, or a philosopher. The fit between these types of careers and my RIASEC typology is uncanny. While I haven’t literally become any of these things professionally, I have maintained ties with my original career interests while pursuing career goals that I likely did not know existed while I was younger. I continue to practice my musicianship and my developing career as a mental health researcher could certainly be thought of as a type of philosophy.
My results are certainly in line with my current career path as a researcher. What I love about research is that it allows me to think deeply about complex problems and use my creativity to find possible solutions to them. Research in a university setting also gives the added benefit of a relative degree of freedom over how and when you conduct your research, something that is very important to me. Some of the suggested careers (i.e. "biochemist", "astronomer", etc.) are actually research focused disciplines.
Going back to my work philosophy, I believe that my interests have guided me on my current career path specifically due to the enjoyment they bring. I could have pursued a business degree with the hopes of making a great deal of money; however, this type of career likely doesn’t fit my interests and thus I likely wouldn’t have enjoyed it. On the other hand, the current path I’m on, and the positions I’ve enjoyed most in my past, are those that combined my creative, investigative, and social interests to some degree. It is clear that a career that fits with my interests is important to my satisfaction.
My lowest level of interest was for conventional tasks. This is very fitting in that, of my past positions I disliked those that involved a great deal of routine and repetition. My positions at General Motors (GM) and Rockbrune Bros. Moving and Storage were, for the most part, entirely routine and repetition. I quickly found this type of work to be far too tedious for me to derive any enjoyment out of it. I often found myself hoping for something more challenging and flexible.
One thing I would like to know more about the RIASEC typologies is the directionality of the RIASEC-abilities relationship. For example, I consider myself to be fairly proficient at investigative and artistic tasks. Do I have investigative and artistic ability due an innate interest in these types of tasks leading me to develop them more fully, or do I have natural investigative and artistic ability that has led to more sustained interest in these types of activities. If I was more interested in other types of activities (i.e. conventional or enterprising activities) would I also be more able to perform these types of activities?
When I was much younger I had “decided” on a number of potential career paths. I knew that I either wanted to be an actor, a musician, or a philosopher. The fit between these types of careers and my RIASEC typology is uncanny. While I haven’t literally become any of these things professionally, I have maintained ties with my original career interests while pursuing career goals that I likely did not know existed while I was younger. I continue to practice my musicianship and my developing career as a mental health researcher could certainly be thought of as a type of philosophy.
My results are certainly in line with my current career path as a researcher. What I love about research is that it allows me to think deeply about complex problems and use my creativity to find possible solutions to them. Research in a university setting also gives the added benefit of a relative degree of freedom over how and when you conduct your research, something that is very important to me. Some of the suggested careers (i.e. "biochemist", "astronomer", etc.) are actually research focused disciplines.
Going back to my work philosophy, I believe that my interests have guided me on my current career path specifically due to the enjoyment they bring. I could have pursued a business degree with the hopes of making a great deal of money; however, this type of career likely doesn’t fit my interests and thus I likely wouldn’t have enjoyed it. On the other hand, the current path I’m on, and the positions I’ve enjoyed most in my past, are those that combined my creative, investigative, and social interests to some degree. It is clear that a career that fits with my interests is important to my satisfaction.
My lowest level of interest was for conventional tasks. This is very fitting in that, of my past positions I disliked those that involved a great deal of routine and repetition. My positions at General Motors (GM) and Rockbrune Bros. Moving and Storage were, for the most part, entirely routine and repetition. I quickly found this type of work to be far too tedious for me to derive any enjoyment out of it. I often found myself hoping for something more challenging and flexible.
One thing I would like to know more about the RIASEC typologies is the directionality of the RIASEC-abilities relationship. For example, I consider myself to be fairly proficient at investigative and artistic tasks. Do I have investigative and artistic ability due an innate interest in these types of tasks leading me to develop them more fully, or do I have natural investigative and artistic ability that has led to more sustained interest in these types of activities. If I was more interested in other types of activities (i.e. conventional or enterprising activities) would I also be more able to perform these types of activities?