A Qualitative Study on The Career Construction Process and Meaning of Work Among Undergraduate Students

Abstract

The 21st century has witnessed rapid and profound transformations that have reshaped working life. These changes significantly impact Generation Z, which is regarded as the workforce of the future. Transitioning into the workforce requires flexible career construction.

This study examined Generation Z’s career construction process and their attitudes toward working life. The research was conducted with third-year students enrolled in the departments of Labor Economics and Industrial Relations and Business Administration at Kocaeli University and Bursa Uludağ University. Responses of 50 participants were analyzed through thematic analysis using MAXQDA qualitative analysis software, version 2024.

The findings revealed that employment and career opportunities are the predominant factors influencing the deciding dimension of career construction. In the crystallizing dimension, family and friends play the most significant role, followed by the academic environment. In the exploration dimension, the primary sources of career-related information are family members and influential professionals. In the preparation dimension, students focus on academic activities, internships, work experience, courses, certificate programs, and training.

This study examined attitudes toward the meaning of work. Participants emphasized their preference for a tolerant, peaceful, and sincere work environment and identified success, receiving the rewards of their efforts, and contributing to life as important values. They also attached great importance to work-life balance and opportunities for development. The most frequently mentioned attributes used to describe an ideal employee were responsibility, hard work, discipline, and loyalty.

This study contributes to the existing literature by offering insights into young individuals’ career development processes and their perspectives on the meaning of work.

Keywords

• New Generation Workforce
• Career Construction
• Meaning of Work
• Generation Z

References

1. Allan, B. A., Owens, R. L., & Duffy, R. D. (2017). Generation me or meaning? Exploring meaningful work in college students and career counselors. Journal of Career Development, 44(6), 502-515. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894845316667599 google scholar
2. Aytaç, G., Çiğdemoğlu, C., Yılmaz, A. A., & Tuzlukaya, Ş. (2023). X, Y, Z kuşakları perspektifinden çalışma değerleri ve iş-yaşam dengesi. [Work values and work–life balance from the perspective of generations X, Y, and Z]. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi Dergisi, 58(3), 1736-1751. https://doi.org/10.15659/3.sektor-sosyal-ekonomi.23.08.2143 google scholar
3. Berg J. M., Dutton, J. E., & Wrzesniewski A. (2013). Job crafting and meaningful work. In B. J. Dik, Z. S. Byrne & M. F. Steger (Eds.), Purpose and meaning in the workplace (pp. 81–104). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/14183-005 google scholar
4. Bozkurt, V. (2023). Kuşaklar Sosyolojisi ve Z Kuşağı: Data Ne Söylüyor? [Generational Sociology and Generation Z: What Does the Data Say?]. In M. Yılmaz (Ed.), Bursa’da Z Kuşağını Anlamak (pp. 44-68). Mümin Ceyhan Bursa Kültür Kaynakları Araştırma Kütüphanesi Yayını. google scholar
5. Bozkurt, V., Arıboğan, D. Ü., Demir, N., & Arıboğan, A. (2024). The Socio-Political Attitudes of the Youth in Turkey. İnsan ve Toplum, 14(3), 53-81. https://doi.org/10.12658/M0738 google scholar
6. Braun, V. & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa google scholar
7. Bunderson, J. S., & Thompson, J. A. (2009). The call of the wild: Zookeepers, callings, and the double-edged sword of deeply meaningful work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1), 32-57. https://doi.org/10.2189/asqu.2009.54.1.32 google scholar
8. Chaudhry, S. (2024). Sustaining talent: A social exchange perspective on the Generation Z workforce. Development and Learning in Organizations: An International Journal, 38 (5), 19-22. https://doi.org/10.1108/DLO-11-2023-0245 google scholar

9. Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2007). Calling and vocation at work: Definitions and prospects for research and practice. The Counseling Psychologist, 37(3), 424-450. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011000008316430 (Original work published in 2009). google scholar
10. Dönmezoğulları, C. (2020). Kariyer yapılandırma kuramına dayalı psikoeğitim programının üniversite öğrencilerinin kariyer kararı ve güçlü yönler öz yeterlilik düzeylerine etkisi. [The effect of a career construction theory–based psychoeducational program on university students’ career decision-making and strengths self-efficacy levels]. (Doctoral dissertation). Ankara Üniversitesi. google scholar
11. Durmaz, Ş. & Okumuş, B. (2021). İş hayatında kuşaklar arası farklılıklar ve Z kuşağı. [Intergenerational differences in working life and Generation Z]. Pearson Journal of Social Sciences and Humanities, 6(16), 47-68. https://doi.org/10.46872/pj.448 google scholar
12. Elangovan, A. R., Pinder, C. C., & McLean, M. (2010). Callings and organizational behavior. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 76(3), 428-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2009.10.009 google scholar
13. Ersoy, A. & Yalçınoğlu, P. (Ed.) (2013). Nitel araştırmaya giriş. [An introduction to qualitative research]. Anı Yayıncılık. google scholar
14. Frankl, V. E. (1959). Man’s search for meaning. Beacon Press. google scholar
15. Ivanova, O. E., & Ryabinina, E. V. (2019). Assessing work values of Generation Z representatives and their impact on a person’s organizational behavior. Revista Espacios, 40(18). google scholar
16. İlhan, Ü. D. Kümbül Güler, B. & Aksaraylı, M. (2020). Sanayi sektöründe çalışan Y kuşağı üretim işçilerinde çalışma değerleri ile örgüte duygusal bağlılık arasındaki ilişkide işe bağlanmanın düzenleyici rolü. [The moderating role of work engagement in the relationship between work values and affective organizational commitment among Generation Y production workers in the industrial sector]. Journal of Economy Culture and Society, (62), 65-89. https://doi.org/10.26650/JECS2019-0083 google scholar
17. Lašáková, A., Vojteková, M., & Procházková, L. (2023). What (de)motivates Gen Z women and Gen Z men at work? Comparative study of gender differences in the young generation's motivation. Journal of Business Economics and Management (JBEM), 24(4), 771-796. https://doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2023.20439 google scholar
18. Mäkikangas, A., Minkkinen, J., Muotka, J., & Mauno, S. (2023). Illegitimate tasks, job crafting, and their longitudinal relationships with meaning of work. The International Journal of Human Resource Management, 34(7), 1330-1358. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585192.2021.1987956 google scholar
19. Manuti, A., Curci, A., & Van der Heijden, B. (2018). The meaning of working for young people: The case of the millennials. International Journal of Training and Development, 22(4), 274-288. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijtd.12138 google scholar
20. May, D. R., Gilson, R. L., & Harter, L. M. (2004). The psychological conditions of meaningfulness, safety and availability and the engagement of the human spirit at work. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 77(1), 11-37. https://doi.org/10.1348/096317904322915892 google scholar
21. Osorio, M. L. & Madero, S. (2025). Explaining Gen Z’s desire for hybrid work in corporate, family, and entrepreneurial settings. Business Horizons, 68, 83-93. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2024.02.008 google scholar
22. Pitura, J. (2023). Using the e-questionnaire in qualitative applied linguistics research. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 2(1), 100034. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100034 google scholar
23. Popaitoon, P. (2022). Fostering work meaningfulness for sustainable human resources: A study of Generation Z. Sustainability, 14(6), 3626. https://doi.org/10.3390/su14063626 google scholar
24. Pratt, M. G., Rockmann, K. W., & Kaufmann, J. B. (2006). Constructing professional identity: The role of work and identity learning cycles in the customization of identity among medical residents. Academy of Management Journal, 49(2), 235-262. https://doi.org/10.5465/amj.2006.20786060 google scholar
25. Rajesh, S., & Ekambaram, K. (2014). Generational diversity in the Indian workforce: An exploratory study. International Journal of Managerial Studies and Research, 2(7), 54–64. google scholar
26. Roberson, L. (1990). Functions of work meanings in organizations: Work meanings and work motivation. In A. P. Brief & W. R. Nord (Eds.), Meanings of occupational work: A collection of essays (pp. 107–134). Lexington Books/D. C. Heath and Com. google scholar
27. Rosso, B., Dekas, K. & Wrzesniewski, A. (2010). ‘On the meaning of work: A theoretical integration and review’. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30, 91–127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2010.09.001 google scholar
28. Savickas, M. L. (2012). Life design: A paradigm for career intervention in the 21st century. Journal of Counseling and Development, 90, 13-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1556-6676.2012.00002.x google scholar
29. Savickas, M. L., Porfeli, E. J., Hilton, T. L. & Savickas, S. (2018). The student career construction inventory. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 106, 138-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2018.01.009 google scholar
30. Schroth, H. (2019), “Are you ready for Gen Z in the workplace?”. California Management Review, 61(3), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1177/0008125619841006 google scholar
31. Smith, J., & Garriety, S. (2020). The art of flexibility: bridging five generations in the workforce. Strategic HR Review, 19(3), 107-110. https://doi.org/10.1108/SHR-01-2020-0005 google scholar
32. Spreitzer, G. M. (1996). Social structural characteristics of psychological empowerment. Academy of Management Journal, 39(2), 483-504. https://doi.org/10.5465/256789 google scholar
33. Steger, M. F., Dik, B. J., & Duffy, R. D. (2012). Measuring meaningful work: The work and meaning inventory (WAMI). Journal of Career Assessment, 20(3), 322-337. https://doi.org/10.1177/106907271143616 google scholar
34. Strauss, W., ve Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The History of America’s Future, 1584 to 2069. William Morrow and Company, Inc. google scholar
35. Türk Dil Kurumu. (2025, July 7). Nesil [Generation]. https://sozluk.gov.tr/ google scholar
36. Vieira, J., Gomes da Costa, C., & Santos, V. (2024). Talent management and Generation Z: A systematic literature review through the lens of employer branding. Administrative Sciences, 14(3), 49. https://doi.org/10.3390/admsci 14030049 google scholar
37. Wrzesniewski, A., McCauley, C., Rozin, P., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: People's relations to their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31(1), 21-33. https://doi.org/10.1006/jrpe.1997.2162 google scholar
38. Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 179-201. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2001.4378011 google scholar
39. Wrzesniewski, A. (2003). Finding positive meaning in work. Positive Organizational Scholarship: Foundations of a New Discipline, 296, 308. google scholar
40. Yadav, R., & Chaudhari, S. (2024). Do leadership behavior preferences differ among generations? A qualitative study of Gen X, Y, and Z in India. Asian Business & Management, 23(2), 337-365. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41291-024-00266-5 google scholar
41. Yıldırım, A. & Şimşek, H. (2018). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. [Qualitative research methods in social sciences]. Seçkin Akademik ve Mesleki Yayınlar. google scholar