TY - JOUR
T1 - “Swimming in the Dark”
T2 - A Q Methodology Study on the Career Development Needs of Doctoral Students in U.S. HRD Programs
AU - Sim, Eunbi
AU - Sims, Cynthia M.
AU - Parvaneh Shirazi, Hoda
AU - Sisco, Stephanie
AU - Bohonos, Jeremy W.
AU - Rose, Kevin J.
AU - Hurtienne, Matthew W.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2026. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
PY - 2026/8/25
Y1 - 2026/8/25
N2 - Background: Career development needs among doctoral students in human resource development (HRD) may vary according to career aspirations, professional experiences, social identities, financial circumstances, and institutional contexts. Yet limited research has examined how HRD doctoral students subjectively prioritize different forms of career development support. Purpose: This study explored HRD doctoral students’ subjective perspectives on their career development needs and the factors associated with variations in those needs. Research Design: A mixed-methods design combining Q methodology with focus group interviews (FGIs) was employed to identify shared and contrasting perspectives on career development support. Study Sample: Seventeen doctoral students from six U.S. HRD programs completed Q-sorts, and 13 participated in follow-up FGIs. Data Collection and/or Analysis: Participants sorted 70 career development statements derived from the literature, pilot interviews, and researcher discussions. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was used to identify shared viewpoints. Factor arrays were interpreted using the crib-sheet method and supplemented with open-ended responses and FGI data. Results: Three career development perspectives emerged: (1) support for academic appointments, (2) support for well-being, and (3) support for visibility and networking. Bipolar patterns further distinguished structural versus financial well-being needs and academic versus industry-oriented visibility and networking needs. Participants’ identities, positionalities, career aspirations, financial circumstances, and institutional and sociopolitical contexts shaped how they prioritized career development support. Conclusions: HRD doctoral students do not experience career development needs uniformly. HRD programs should move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches by providing differentiated, identity-responsive, and career-path-specific support that addresses students’ academic preparation, well-being, and access to professional networks and visibility.
AB - Background: Career development needs among doctoral students in human resource development (HRD) may vary according to career aspirations, professional experiences, social identities, financial circumstances, and institutional contexts. Yet limited research has examined how HRD doctoral students subjectively prioritize different forms of career development support. Purpose: This study explored HRD doctoral students’ subjective perspectives on their career development needs and the factors associated with variations in those needs. Research Design: A mixed-methods design combining Q methodology with focus group interviews (FGIs) was employed to identify shared and contrasting perspectives on career development support. Study Sample: Seventeen doctoral students from six U.S. HRD programs completed Q-sorts, and 13 participated in follow-up FGIs. Data Collection and/or Analysis: Participants sorted 70 career development statements derived from the literature, pilot interviews, and researcher discussions. Principal component analysis with varimax rotation was used to identify shared viewpoints. Factor arrays were interpreted using the crib-sheet method and supplemented with open-ended responses and FGI data. Results: Three career development perspectives emerged: (1) support for academic appointments, (2) support for well-being, and (3) support for visibility and networking. Bipolar patterns further distinguished structural versus financial well-being needs and academic versus industry-oriented visibility and networking needs. Participants’ identities, positionalities, career aspirations, financial circumstances, and institutional and sociopolitical contexts shaped how they prioritized career development support. Conclusions: HRD doctoral students do not experience career development needs uniformly. HRD programs should move beyond one-size-fits-all approaches by providing differentiated, identity-responsive, and career-path-specific support that addresses students’ academic preparation, well-being, and access to professional networks and visibility.
KW - career development
KW - HRD doctoral program
KW - Q methodology
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105049000373
U2 - 10.1177/15234223261480245
DO - 10.1177/15234223261480245
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105049000373
SN - 1523-4223
VL - 28
SP - 229
EP - 259
JO - Advances in Developing Human Resources
JF - Advances in Developing Human Resources
IS - 4
ER -