sustained dialogue unless the counselor first resonates with his prac-
tical, less reflective side.
The counselor could begin by probing what has attracted him
to “technology careers and architecture” and repelled him from
health occupations. The aim would be to begin mapping the social
space he has constructed for himself and understanding to what
extent it mirrors his birth niche (for example, what his family or
friends consider acceptable or unacceptable) but does not resonate
with his own likes and dislikes. And (this is very important) what
specificallyhas convinced him—if anything has—that he likes one
career option but dislikes another? Has he had experiences that
would actually test or reveal interests and abilities in the broad
occupational areas he has rejected or ignored? If not, how can he
get the relevant missing experience or exposure? In short, how can
he leverage his experiences to reveal better who he is and can be?
The key question is whether K’s evolving social space is pro-
gressing toward a congenial adult niche, albeit haltingly, or whether
that progression has stalled because K is unable or unwilling to
reject or resolve the incongruent aspects of his birth niche. Sam-
pling more of the culture’s menu of possibilities will help K in either
case, because it can both clarify and expand his options. It is not
clear at the moment that he sees any that truly satisfy him. If, how-
ever, he is unable or unwilling to deal with ill-fitting family ex-
pectations, then personal counseling may be needed in addition to
career counseling in order to ameliorate any cultural conflicts and
confusions or mental health problems.
The Case of E
E’s profile is highly consistent and differentiated. Virtually all of her
assessed and expressed interests are in Social and Enterprising occu-
pations, which are adjacent on Holland’s hexagon. Her life values,
two college majors, and the leaders she admires are Social in char-
acter, and her hobbies, memories, and favorite saying all reflect the
importance she places on affiliation. Consistent with this, E rejects
GOTTFREDSON’S THEORY OF CIRCUMSCRIPTION, COMPROMISE, AND SELF-CREATION 141