Search results

The paper aims to examine the notion of the boundaryless career, arguing that the notion is problematic, and that simultaneous co‐existence of different types of careers makes both “new” and “old” types of careers possible.

The approach is twofold: a theoretical argument, and a qualitative ethnographic study, involving observations and interviews.

The theoretical argument questions the underlying premise and promise of the notion of the boundaryless career, namely that modern careers amount to a higher level of personal freedom. This empirical study will serve to illustrate the co‐constitutive nature of different career stories.

The research is qualitative and thereby limited in the following way: it serves to give a deep understanding of the phenomena at hand, but is not easily generalizable. However, the methodology can inspire scholars to explore the findings observed in this paper.

The idealization of the boundaryless career is problematic, as it poses problems to those concerned with the career. A more flexible ideal of careers would be preferable to researchers and organisational actors alike.

The paper gives a practical and empirical input to a debate that has been largely conceptual or generalized.