|
The investigation has been conducted within a theoretical framework which we would call a 'social process' or 'relational' perspective on graduate identity. We are taking the notion of 'being a graduate' as having social significance, that it serves to differentiate between people in ways that are consequential. Such differentiation and consequences, for the purpose of this study, takes place in relation to the occupational arena, ie being a graduate makes a difference in terms of employment opportunity and outcome. However, by 'graduate identity' we mean something more than just the fact that someone has a degree, that they have graduated. Unless employers have some understanding of how the employment of graduates makes some difference, 'being a graduate' will have little social significance. Such understanding forms expectations. Graduates will thus have to engage with such understanding, in order to benefit from what employers are prepared to offer because of the difference they expect will be made by graduates.
A relational approach to identity is concerned with the processes by which individuals come to have their identities within society. However, the relational approach does not treat such identities as 'essences', having objective existence either as the attribution by others ('social identity') or as the self-concept of the individual person ('personal identity'). Rather, an identity is emergent from the dynamic interaction of the expression of identity aspirations on the part of the individual, and the identity attributions by society. We might thus speak of identification to indicate the active, continuing process. Thus Jenkins (1996) argues for a model of 'the internal-external dialectic of identification' to understand this process. Identity is determined neither externally (society) nor internally (the person). So, in respect of graduate identity, neither employers' expectations of what a graduate should be like, nor graduates' understanding and aspirations of what it is like to be a graduate in employment (as a graduate), are separately determining. Rather, these two sides of the dynamic process interact and affect each other.
Where an individual graduate gains entry to a job as a graduate, we might say that their graduate identity is being affirmed. The traditional route of recruitment to a graduate training scheme with a large employer would constitute such affirmation. On the other hand, when an individual graduate does not succeed in obtaining a job (they deem) suitable for a graduate, we might say that their graduate identity is being disaffirmed. Similarly, loss of a graduate job, through demotion or even dismissal, might also be referred to as identity disaffirmation. Because identity is related to self-concept, individuals will seek to avoid or overcome disaffirmation of their graduate identity in order to maintain a positive self-concept. This may involve changing their understanding of what kind of work, or what ways of working, are appropriate for a graduate. At the same time, employers may alter their own understandings and expectations of graduates, especially in the context of larger numbers and different types of graduates in the labour market.
This graduate identity approach appears to have significant potential for the study of graduates in smaller enterprises at the present time. The factors which are resulting in the growth of such employment strongly connect with the issues which the approach attempts to address. The rapid development of a mass higher education system is resulting in a much larger supply of graduates, whilst the traditional (perhaps stereotypical) route into graduate employment is becoming a relatively small part of graduate employment. As traditional recruiters of graduates increasingly employ graduates in other jobs, not previously treated as graduate jobs (Mason, 1995), we might ask how their understandings and expectations of graduates are changing. Similarly, we might ask such questions of employers who did not traditionally recruit employees as graduates (particularly smaller businesses) who now find that graduates are available, and perhaps applying, for jobs in such organisations. Of course, such understandings and expectations will be subject to a variety of influences, including policy recommendations, and their own experiences. However, rather than just examining these in a generalised and abstract manner, the graduate identity approach would be concerned with how such employers handle such understandings and expectations with graduates they actually employ.
In terms of the study reported here, we are more concerned with how graduates themselves handle the circumstances in which they find themselves, in the context of mass higher education and changing patterns of graduate employment. For those who do not get into a post which is recognisably a 'graduate job', how do they handle this as a disaffirmation? In order to gain some form of paid employment (likely to be a major imperative for future graduates, as more of the costs of higher education fall to students), do some graduates try to hide or disguise their graduate identity, eg by omitting degree from application forms, not speaking of it at work, etc? We know that many graduates take jobs which are not typically seen as 'graduate jobs', often working alongside non-graduates in similar positions. How do such graduates respond in such situations? Do they, for example, seek to change the character of their jobs, in ways which would turn them, in effect, into 'graduate jobs'? Many graduates take on temporary jobs, when they have not obtained a 'graduate job'; indeed, there is anecdotal evidence from First Destination surveys that many new graduates report as 'permanent' jobs which previously would have been reported as 'temporary'. How do graduates in such jobs view themselves and their anticipated futures as graduates? Do graduates who experience disaffirmation, in their initial career period, seek ways to gain affirmation in second or subsequent jobs?
Of course, the graduate identity is just one of a number of differing identities which have social significance. Other identities (understood from the relational perspective) and identity formation processes are acting simultaneously with the graduate identity. Classically in the social sciences, gender, race and class are regarded as major locations of identity issues. Occupational identity formation processes may also be significant, particularly in the professionalised occupations. Even the place of study may be significant in relation to identity, not just the university but possibly also a particular college. How do these other identity formation processes relate to that of the graduate identity? Do black graduates, for example, find that employers tend to construct their identity primarily on the basis of their ethnicity, rather than on their education? How do such graduates respond to this as a possibility? How do they respond as an experienced reality?
It is these kinds of questions and issues which would be raised by the relational perspective on identity, which informs our approach. As a pilot study, we can only begin to examine such issues. However, we believe that the approach has considerable potential to complement survey based studies, and to illuminate important issues regarding the links between higher education and the employment arena.