Holland's Person-Environment Theory

Ashley Murphy & Eric Syty

3

-Explained how personal and interpersonal factors interact to influence choice of occupation.

-Individuals choose fields consistent with motivations, knowledge, personality and abilities.

-Supported/rewarded for attitudes and behaviors once in the field.

(Lattuca, L.R. & Stark, J.S., 2009)

Theory

Theory

(Evans, N.J., Forney, D.S., Guido, F., Patten, L., & Renn, K., 2010)

● Explored satisfaction, achievement, persistence, and degree of fit between persons and environments.

● Behavior in social and educational settings explained.

● Four major assumptions:

− People resemble each of 6 personality types.

− 6 model environments paralleling equalities and attributes of each personality type.

− People seek out environments providing opportunities to use talents/express values and attitudes.

− Behavior results from interaction of person and environment.

Personality Types● Realistic

− Activities involving working with objects, tools, machines and animals.

− Value concrete things (money, personal qualities-power/status).

− Conforming, practical, inflexible, reserved.

● Investigative

− Activities that call for systematic investigation designed to understand/control physical, biological, cultural phenomena.

− Analytical, intellectual, precise, cautious.

● Artistic

− Spontaneous, creative, unregulated activities leading to creation of various art forms.

− Value aesthetic qualities (self-expression), tend to be emotional, expressive, imaginative, impulsive.

● Social

− Activities that involve working with others in ways that educate, inform, cure or enlighten.

− Value helping others, engaging in social activities,

− Social types described as helpful, friendly, empathic.

(Evans, N.J., Forney, D.S., Guido, F., Patten, L., & Renn, K., 2010)

Personality Types● Enterprising

− Prefer working with others to achieve organizational goals/material outcomes.

− Value political and economic achievement, tend to be domineering, extroverted, self-confident, resourceful, adventurous.

● Conventional

− Activities that involve working with data in systematic, orderly, explicit ways.

− Value business/monetary achievement.

− Described as careful, conforming, efficient, inflexible, practical

(Evans, N.J., Forney, D.S., Guido, F., Patten, L., & Renn, K., 2010)

● Combine to form personality profiles that consist of 2-6 types(typically three).● Dominant type is listed first, followed by second most dominant,

etc.

- Individuals are not limited to just one “type”, they can potentially be all six, but there should always be a most and least dominant.

- The behaviors are influenced by the interactions of both people and environment.

- Common ground identified in which institutional instructors can work together productively.

- Groups of individuals with similar interests/characteristics to engage in distinctive activities.

Strengths:

-The person-type should match up with the environment-type

- The behaviors are influenced by the interactions of both people and environment.

-Evidence that faculty in academic departments, classified according to Holland’s 6 personality types, differed from theory.

-Some may be discouraged due to reinforcement/rewarding different patterns of abilities and interests.

Weaknesses:

1.Freshmen Student-Athletes:- This theory could be the basis for a mandatory workshop, and will allow each individual to be

more confortable in their own shoes.

2. Anyone who is “undecided” as a program:- We can help figure out the specific

environments that they work best in, or fit well with. From there help pick majors or even organizations that fit well.

*Ideally it could be applied to all incoming freshmen as a form of assurance or enlightenment.

Application to a student group

10

Potential Applications to Practice

-Athletic programming (as previously mentioned)-Residence hall staff -Advising staff-New student orientation staff-Staff that works with current high school seniors and/or juniors-Career Center/Development

Extra ExtraSome of Holland’s personality/environment “types” coincided with some of the “Measures of Personality Characteristics” as

mentioned in What matters in college? Four critical years revisited.

Social ←→ Social ActivismInvestigative ←→ ScholarshipArtistic ←→ Artistic InclinationEnterprising ←→ Leadership

Conventional ←→ Status Striving

Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pages 111- 125

Questions?

Comments??

Concerns???

We also accept praise, high fives and standing ovations!

References

Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., & Guido, F., Patten, L., & Renn, K. (2010). Student development theory in college: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Lattica, L.R. & Stark, J.S. (2009). Shaping the college curriculum: Academic plans in context (2nd edition), 102-103.

Smart, J. C., Feldman, K. A., & Ethington, C. A. (2006). Holland’s theory and patterns of college student success. National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. http://nces.ed.gov/npec/pdf/smart_team_report.pdf