Counseling Psychology and Career Assessments/Counseling

[foreverbull]

Any counseling psychologists go the route of offering career counseling and assessments in private practice or other settings?

Which assessments do you offer to clients?

Since this niche is unique to counseling psychology, I’d be curious to see how many of us actually use the skills from grad school (I had two courses in career that were required) and provide career counseling (given that college career centers already provide this for free). I’m wondering if there’s a market out there for skilled, short-term career guidance/assessment in private practice.

I have yet to find a counseling psychologist who provides this in practice, but it is within my wheelhouse and would be a natural addition to the informal career guidance I’ve already provided some folks. I’m just not sure if there’s a market and whether certain assessments would be worth investing in, like Holland, etc.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[borne_before]

Any counseling psychologists go the route of offering career counseling and assessments in private practice or other settings?

Which assessments do you offer to clients?

Since this niche is unique to counseling psychology, I’d be curious to see how many of us actually use the skills from grad school (I had two courses in career that were required) and provide career counseling (given that college career centers already provide this for free). I’m wondering if there’s a market out there for skilled, short-term career guidance/assessment in private practice.

I have yet to find a counseling psychologist who provides this in practice, but it is within my wheelhouse and would be a natural addition to the informal career guidance I’ve already provided some folks. I’m just not sure if there’s a market and whether certain assessments would be worth investing in, like Holland, etc.

Might want to check out rehab psych/counseling.

 

[borne_before]

Or the Testing Psych community...

 

[R. Matey]

It's a great idea. For assessment, I think the issue is mainly that this service is offered for free in places like O*NET where the SDS has "good enough" validity compared to the SII, which can be a hefty fee for ongoing use. For counseling, I see career counseling referrals in the community on the state org listserv, so I think there's a market for it, but it's probably a niche market.

 

[foreverbull]

It's a great idea. For assessment, I think the issue is mainly that this service is offered for free in places like O*NET where the SDS has "good enough" validity compared to the SII, which can be a hefty fee for ongoing use. For counseling, I see career counseling referrals in the community on the state org listserv, so I think there's a market for it, but it's probably a niche market.

That is something to very carefully consider. These days you can even get the SII interpreted for you online for a fee (take it online and they provide a full written report), which is also something that gives me pause when considering whether to drop over a thousand to get certified in administering/interpreting it.

I’m wondering if private career assessment services are worth the investment or completely obsolete (if I offer more personalized career counseling sessions along with the assessment and interpretation to folks).

As you mention, it would be a niche market, which creates the problem of how to effectively find and target the demographic. I’m just info seeking at the moment, because I’m vacillating. I really like the idea of the assessment piece, but if it’s obsolete and there’s no market for it, I’d rather not invest in a lost cause.

 

[foreverbull]

Or the Testing Psych community...

Do you mean via one of the divisions of APA? Or online?

 

[R. Matey]

As you mention, it would be a niche market, which creates the problem of how to effectively find and target the demographic. I’m just info seeking at the moment, because I’m vacillating. I really like the idea of the assessment piece, but if it’s obsolete and there’s no market for it, I’d rather not invest in a lost cause.

I'm not sure it's entirely a lost cause. You could pilot the service with the O*NET ones--that's no different than using a PHQ-9 to evaluate depression. People usually have no idea about them and scoring them isn't exactly intuitive even though both the procedures and evaluations are publicly available so I think it would be a good service. Agree that the SII/SCI would really only be worth it if you can generate enough interest.

 

[JustNoticing]

I think I only know of one person from my many years of cohorts of my counseling psych program that does anything in the realm of voc/career psych. And on the other side, everyone in settings I've worked in who do that line of work are OTs or career counselors, or have some masters. I do wonder what the market for this would look like, I imagine many get these types of services at state agencies or at their career centers if in college. I do think it's a super valuable skillset and not appreciated widely enough so hope you can find a way to make it work!

 

[summerbabe]

Feels like some of this possible market might already be tapped somewhat by those who employ life coaches even though they would likely benefit more from brief and focused mental health interventions.

My in-house PhD program clinic offered both assessment focused services as well as more general career counseling and we always had plenty of interest in these services. But based on things such as SES of client requesting/needing this type of help, I’m not sure how viable this would be in a cash-pay private practice but your location and marketing would certainly be very relevant.

One possible area if you can develop some very specific professional networks might be working with teenagers with rich parents (but not f u rich) who are used to paying for things like consultants to get into the best private high school, concierge college admissions counseling, SAT/ACT tutors, etc.

 

[clausewitz2]

One possible area if you can develop some very specific professional networks might be working with teenagers with rich parents (but not f u rich) who are used to paying for things like consultants to get into the best private high school, concierge college admissions counseling, SAT/ACT tutors, etc.

A private practice psychologist in my area per their advertising specializes in 1) eating disorders and 2) career counseling, so I think it is safe to say yes, teenagers with rich parents are a good target demo.

 

[WisNeuro]

This area is a grab bag in our area. The state U has a clinic headed up by a clinical psychologist, but otherwise there are a ton of OTs and non-degreed "coaches" and other various midlevels doing this work. I'm sure it can be done well, just depends on your local area. Also, I wouldn't want to depend on this as a large part of my income, I'd imagine demand waxes and wanes a lot. Add the saturation by midlevels in certain markets, and your success is likely dependent on good marketing rather than good skills in the area.

 

[R. Matey]

Feels like some of this possible market might already be tapped somewhat by those who employ life coaches even though they would likely benefit more from brief and focused mental health interventions.

Unfortunately, this is true. In practice, coaches and midlevels who have no tether to voc psych are offering these services to the masses. It's sad because they rely more on pseudoscience rather than the vast, albeit increasingly dated, literature on career assessment.

 

[WisNeuro]

Unfortunately, this is true. In practice, coaches and midlevels who have no tether to voc psych are offering these services to the masses. It's sad because they rely more on pseudoscience rather than the vast, albeit increasingly dated, literature on career assessment.

Are people still using that test I took in HS that told me that I would be well suited to work as either a forest ranger or a chemist?

 

[R. Matey]

Are people still using that test I took in HS that told me that I would be well suited to work as either a forest ranger or a chemist?

Lol, a version of it, yes. The predictive of the various interest inventories has a positive relationship with how much they cost. The exception might be O*NET though because DOL contracts with people who continually research the instrument.

Also, bear in mind that those scores mean you may enjoy that type of work, not that you should do it or there isn't other work that you might also enjoy. Interest inventories also don't deal with the external environment (e.g., pay, working conditions, etc). Those are the property of those values assessment. For instance, chemists are scientists that carry out procedures, so based on what I know about you, that's not a surprising finding.

 

[borne_before]

Do you mean via one of the divisions of APA? Or online?

Sorry. There is a podcast called "the testing psychologist." It has a facebook group. While the podcast and founder are pretty solid, be careful because the facebook group can really highlight the lack of quality, disregard of evidence, dogmatic attachment to various "brands" in the field, and psychologists getting into testing psychology for the wrong reasons.

But, there can be some very solid kernels in there...

 

[Justanothergrad]

Any counseling psychologists go the route of offering career counseling and assessments in private practice or other settings?

Which assessments do you offer to clients?

Since this niche is unique to counseling psychology, I’d be curious to see how many of us actually use the skills from grad school (I had two courses in career that were required) and provide career counseling (given that college career centers already provide this for free). I’m wondering if there’s a market out there for skilled, short-term career guidance/assessment in private practice.

I have yet to find a counseling psychologist who provides this in practice, but it is within my wheelhouse and would be a natural addition to the informal career guidance I’ve already provided some folks. I’m just not sure if there’s a market and whether certain assessments would be worth investing in, like Holland, etc.

Perhaps in large cities where people have more money than sense, sure, but for the most part and with most people? No - voc psych doesn't represent a real steady market in PP and doesn't offer a ton of useful marketable skills. This is a market where you are replacable and dont offer anything unique - look for another thing on which to rely. If you want to give one, O*net worksish and is the right price - but don't expect a ton of validity outside of post hoc claims of predictive accuracy.

 

[R. Matey]

Perhaps in large cities where people have more money than sense, sure, but for the most part and with most people? No - voc psych doesn't represent a real steady market in PP and doesn't offer a ton of useful marketable skills. This is a market where you are replacable and dont offer anything unique - look for another thing on which to rely. If you want to give one, O*net worksish and is the right price - but don't expect a ton of validity outside of post hoc claims of predictive accuracy.

agree to disagree here since the favorite indoor sport of a few vocational psychologists is validating these measures in a few of our shared journals. I would think you would know that as well as I do.

 

[Justanothergrad]

agree to disagree here since the favorite indoor sport of a few vocational psychologists is validating these measures in a few of our shared journals. I would think you would know that as well as I do.

Been there. Done that. Published on it even. When tests predict math grades as well as they do job outcomes (not interests), the test does not have measurement precision. Even recent meta-analysis on things like RIASEC have had a small effect relationship with job satisfaction. Maybe thats acceptable for you to claim a level of predictive accuracy, its not to me. Best case is small to medium effects on such a vague construct (e.g., a code type) that potential 'fit' is vague and entirely open, leaving it difficult to make consistent (Reliable) and precise interpretations.

ETA: I dont fault the measures entirely, they're predicting WAY long off things. Thats stupid hard.

 

[WisNeuro]

I'm actually academically interested in this discussion. I have a family member who does corporate recruitment who asked me about a few measures that I actually do know well, like MBTI and DISC, which are essentially useless at predicting much of anything. But, I'm curious if these other measures have anything real behind them, or if they are just good at marketing like the MBTI. Any good citations?

 

[Justanothergrad]

I'm actually academically interested in this discussion. I have a family member who does corporate recruitment who asked me about a few measures that I actually do know well, like MBTI and DISC, which are essentially useless at predicting much of anything. But, I'm curious if these other measures have anything real behind them, or if they are just good at marketing like the MBTI. Any good citations?

APA PsycNet

psycnet.apa.org

https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024343

in contrast
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.530

Note. FFM is greater or equal in predictive utility. thus, I'm not impressed.

 

[WisNeuro]

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2020.103503
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024343

in contrast
https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.3.530

Note. FFM is greater or equal in predictive utility. thus, I'm not impressed.

I think the 1st one is behind your university system login.

But, correlations of .14 for job satisfaction and -.15 for job turnover do not seem......good. Especially considering how much an organization is paying for the test.

 

[summerbabe]

I have a family member who does corporate recruitment who asked me about a few measures that I actually do know well, like MBTI and DISC, which are essentially useless at predicting much of anything.

The question(s) they are trying to answer is obviously really important.

I only have some cursory exposure but my favorite assessment in this space is the Minnesota Importance Questionnaire (based on the Minnesota Theory of Work Adjustment) which bypasses interest all together and instead focused on our work needs (achievement vs autonomy, altruism vs comfort, etc). It was also designed as an academic instrument and is now 100% public domain since the creators have retired/passed away.

When I think of fit in the corporate world, a talented person can probably do a variety of things for an organization but if money was no matter, they probably would be doing something else, maybe drastically different that fit their true interests more.

So from that perspective, whether one’s most needed work values are met in their workplace might have greater predictive validity of tenure and your less important work values are areas where some compromises can be made (in exchange for things like salary).

Take the VA - you exchange a whole bunch of autonomy for comfort (stable paycheck, federal benefits, working within a specific tour of duty each day). That’s an exchange that’s fine for some people (who may stay their whole career) and something that drives people out after a few years, even if they are still interested in the work content.

But if somebody knew that autonomy might be their most important value they can’t compromise on, maybe they would have never gone into a VA/institutional job in the first place, even if everything else was perfect.

(MIQ) Minnesota Importance Questionnaire | Vocational Psychology Research

 

[R. Matey]

Been there. Done that. Published on it even. When tests predict math grades as well as they do job outcomes (not interests), the test does not have measurement precision. Even recent meta-analysis on things like RIASEC have had a small effect relationship with job satisfaction. Maybe thats acceptable for you to claim a level of predictive accuracy, its not to me. Best case is small to medium effects on such a vague construct (e.g., a code type) that potential 'fit' is vague and entirely open, leaving it difficult to make consistent (Reliable) and precise interpretations.

ETA: I dont fault the measures entirely, they're predicting WAY long off things. Thats stupid hard.

I think you're out of date on the literature, man. I'm linking recent papers on interest-job satisfaction. If there's a good faith to read these from anyone without institutional access, PM me and I'll see what I can do.

Hanna & Rounds (2020) APA PsycNet
Hoff et al., (2020) Interest fit and job satisfaction: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Weigand et al. (2021) Misfit matters: A re-examination of interest fit and job satisfaction

 

[Justanothergrad]

I think you're out of date on the literature, man. I'm linking recent papers on interest-job satisfaction. If there's a good faith to read these from anyone without institutional access, PM me and I'll see what I can do.

Hanna & Rounds (2020) APA PsycNet
Hoff et al., (2020) Interest fit and job satisfaction: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Weigand et al. (2021) Misfit matters: A re-examination of interest fit and job satisfaction

You cited one of the same ones I cited, FYIW. And the .19 effect sizes don't impress me (see Hoff et al., 2020). We can disagree, but I'm not out of date on the lit. The effects are generally small and vague - achievable with equal rates with non-vocational assessments (see the FFM prediction meta-analysis I posted)

 

[R. Matey]

You cited one of the same ones I cited, FYIW. And the .19 effect sizes don't impress me (see Hoff et al., 2020). We can disagree, but I'm not out of date on the lit. The effects are generally small and vague - achievable with equal rates with non-vocational assessments (see the FFM prediction meta-analysis I posted)

Ah, my browser formatted that link in a weird way so I didn't see it. I'm fine agreeing to disagree since I already said as much, but since we're not going to have a good faith discussion about these papers, I'll just outline a few points from the articles that I think are important for anyone else's benefit. Ignore or comment if you want.

1. 0.19 is the overall effect across measures and facets of job satisfaction. For some facets of job satisfaction (e.g., job choice and organizational satisfaction) the effects are nearly double.

2. Hanna and Rounds show a very high hit rate of 50.8 across a nearly eighty year period.

3. Relatedly, job satisfaction is merely one outcome. Effects are stronger in other outcomes (e.g., completing college).

4. Weigand et al. (2021) shows in two studies (albeit with MTurk participants) that fit is asymmetical across measures of job satisfaction, which could partially explain small effects.

5. The FFM paper doesn't not deal adequately with the file drawer problem (e.g., made no attempts to contact authors). Effects are smaller in some cases than they are in the Hoff paper.

Edit: The take home message is that interest inventories aren't worthless by a long a shot, and dismissing them out of hand doesn't consider the evidence. Clinically, I think it's best to combine the SDS with the values and skills assessments on O*NET and then work through the results. There probably isn't a market to do this exclusively, but I think it's still a valuable skill within any treatment plan.

 

[WisNeuro]

Ah, my browser formatted that link in a weird way so I didn't see it. I'm fine agreeing to disagree since I already said as much, but since we're not going to have a good faith discussion about these papers, I'll just outline a few points from the articles that I think are important for anyone else's benefit. Ignore or comment if you want.

1. 0.19 is the overall effect across measures and facets of job satisfaction. For some facets of job satisfaction (e.g., job choice and organizational satisfaction) the effects are nearly double.

2. Hanna and Rounds show a very high hit rate of 50.8 across a nearly eighty year period.

3. Relatedly, job satisfaction is merely one outcome. Effects are stronger in other outcomes (e.g., completing college).

4. Weigand et al. (2021) shows in two studies (albeit with MTurk participants) that fit is asymmetical across measures of job satisfaction, which could partially explain small effects.

5. The FFM paper doesn't not deal adequately with the file drawer problem (e.g., made no attempts to contact authors). Effects are smaller in some cases than they are in the Hoff paper.

Edit: The take home message is that interest inventories aren't worthless by a long a shot, and dismissing them out of hand doesn't consider the evidence. Clinically, I think it's best to combine the SDS with the values and skills assessments on O*NET and then work through the results. There probably isn't a market to do this exclusively, but I think it's still a valuable skill within any treatment plan.

My big question would be in how these assessments are most commonly used in the Corporate world. What are they actually predicting, as they do not seem to predict job satisfaction or turnover that well.

 

[R. Matey]

My big question would be in how these assessments are most commonly used in the Corporate world. What are they actually predicting, as they do not seem to predict job satisfaction or turnover that well.

That last point is debatable, but truthfully I think corporations are more likely use the Enneagram than these instruments. Some recruiting companies might, but even that would surprise me. So while we may disagree on the overall predictive validity of interest inventories, that's just an academic disagreement--@Justanothergrad is 100% right that voc has essentially made itself irrelevant to the problems of the real world.