Organizations cannot exist without managing the development of individuals that comprise their people. People in organizations are individuals who seek to find work situations and developmental opportunities which suit their needs. Thus, a career has been defined as the sequence of employment-related positions, roles, activities and experiences encountered by a person. As this definition suggests, a career is not simply an occupation but a personal sequence of employment-related events. As such, it may include self-employment and freelance work, as well as education and leisure activities that relate to a person’s work-life in some way. It is also closely related to the non-work aspects of a person’s life upon which it impinges. However, in a world rapidly modernizing, the boundaryless career captures the idea that careers are not tied to (or bound to) a single organization and that people will have a variety of work experiences in different organizations over the course of their careers.
Compared to the traditional career that is defined as professional advancement within one or two firms, a boundaryless career is defined as a sequence of job opportunities that go beyond the boundaries of a single employment setting. Some of the trademarks of a boundaryless career include: transferrable skills, knowledge and abilities across multiple firms, personal identification with meaningful work, on the job learning and the development of multiple networks and peer learning relationships and individual responsibility for career management. Having a bundaryless career maintains that an individual should be the agent of their own career, thus an organisation is less responsible for its employees’ career outcomes. This is why boundaryless careers concepts are becoming increasingly prevalent in the modern times.
The emergence of the boundaryless career implies an enlargement of the “career space” since work and non-work roles are likely to overlap and intermingle to the extent that they jointly shape a person’s career identity and sense of self. This overlapping and intermingling are significantly reinforced by the widespread use of technologies which “invade” the non-work sphere, such as laptops, virtual networks and mobile phones. Thus, any notion of a boundaryless career that overlooks the boundary between work and non-work is likely to be incomplete.
The benefits of a boundaryless career clearly enhance people’s career and non-career life at the individual level. This is because a boundaryless career brings about greater autonomy for the individual, granting wider discretion over both thought and action. Individuals clearly become main tile agents in career direction and progression. In other words, the responsibility to develop tacit knowledge falls squarely on the individual. On the group level, there might be fewer and weaker organization values since boundaryless careers are also characterized by less structure. Though the influence of individual firms may wane, this does not mean that collective organizational influence will become insignificant. The presence of network organizations and complex webs of strategic alliances may impose a structure of its own. The analogy of bone and cartilage might capture the difference between structure imposed by an individual organization and that provided by a group of loosely connected organizations.
Similarly, the organization as a group may benefit from a boundaryless career because it emphasizes the importance of network relationships (i.e., social capital). This perspective focuses on how each worker has a network of relationships with colleagues, friends, and other associates who provide information that aids in the worker’s development of career opportunities. Social capital is more readily acquired when a network contains no redundant contacts. This network configuration increases the amount of information and social contacts an individual can rely on to provide career assistance. On the other hand, the increased inter-firm mobility associated with the boundaryless career may also exert a significant influence on how explicit knowledge is internalized. With frequent movement within or between organizations, the internalization of new knowledge may become divorced from the development of commitment to an organization. The self-renewal that derives from expanding one’s tacit knowledge base and the consequent reframing of perspective may be seriously diminished.
Although boundaryless careers have many positive aspects, there are also potential negative aspects. The boundaryless career era may not significantly improve the working lives of women and minorities. For example, as firms become more fluid and hire a greater number of workers for shorter-term projects, discrimination in hiring and compensation may increase, especially as the pace of business may make it more difficult to monitor the fairness of employment practices. Sexual harassment may also increase as a contract, and part-time workers fear that reporting such incidents will cost them future jobs or as company practices make it difficult for short-term employees to follow through on complaints. Similarly, women and minorities outside formal organizational structures may have increased difficulty in finding sponsors and networks to gain career advice.
Individuals may have difficulty in determining what work experiences will lead to relevant tacit knowledge with boundaryless careers. A critical aspect of the knowledge creation perspective is that new knowledge should be of value in helping the firm to differentiate itself. The question boils down to what sorts of tacit knowledge organizations need. Though heightened inter-firm mobility will afford a greater opportunity for fit between an individual’s tacit knowledge and a variety of organizations’ needs, there may also be less clarity as to what types of knowledge one ought to pursue.
Under the boundaryless career model, success depends on continually learning new skills, developing new relationships, and capitalizing on existing skills and relationships. These people in organizations place a premium on flexibility and the capacity to do several different types of tasks, to learn new jobs, to adjust quickly to different group settings and organizational cultures, and to move from one firm, occupation, or industry to another. Thus, their employment security depends on their marketable skills rather than their dedication to one organization over time.
It is important to consider the boundaryless career concept as an appropriate model of thinking and method of conduct for certain individuals, certain organizations, and certain industries. It is wrong to assume that the concept is universal and may be functionally applied to anyone and in any situation. What stands out about this concept is that it has moved career studies away from being focused on intra- organizational career phenomena (traditional careers), and from the characterization of employees as being owned by the organisation they work for. Overall, it can be said that the boundaryless career theory is a useful theory. It is a multifaceted phenomenon that encompasses and transcends various boundaries and levels of analysis- physical and psychological, objective and subjective.The timeliness of this theory describes the current economic and employment relationships that are defined in many cases by less loyalty greater mobility and less certainty. Thus as long as the current culture context remains as it is the boundaryless career theory is useful.