The endless expectation to become ‘more’ employable (Costea et al., 2012) and the personal responsibility to continuously perform in a highly competitive market (Cremin, 2010); to gain, maintain and obtain employment and gain ‘skills and the qualifications that will make someone want to employ one’ (Oxford dictionary, 2011), could be captured as one of the core concerns within the notion of employability. The focus on the responsibility of the individual, not the state to determine the course of their own employment (Peck and Theodore, 2000; Garsten and Jacobsson, 2004), together with the expectation to continuously be engaged with bridging the gap with other competitors suggests that being employable is a continuous project: both a condition for gaining employment (Cremin, 2010) and for thriving in work. This notion incorporates the spheres of politics, citizenship, inclusion, education and lifestyle. It is often a catchphrase for policymakers (Philpott, 1999) and is also considered to be the New Labour workfare project (Jessop, 1994), even though labour market policies focusing on employability started before the New Labour government (Levitas, 2005; Peck and Theodore, 2000) and have continued after it.
However, whilst presented as aiming to reduce social inequality, counter discrimination, tackle unemployment and stimulate individuals to take part in the workforce (Levitas, 2005), employability is still a problematic concern for many in their attempts to retain employment. Nonetheless, this notion bears
within it significant meanings for those who are seeking work or are in employment. As such it is presented to them as a guide or a strategy (Cremin, 2010) to manoeuvre through employment insecurities (Sennett, 2006) and work ambiguities (cf. Gregg, 2011), which characterize many workplaces today.
One aspect embedded within employability is the expectation to be sellable. At the same time individuals are encouraged to be open, flexible and accountable to keep on learning, to have the social and personal abilities to communicate well, ‘team work’ and ‘network’ (Salomonsson, 2005). They are expected to perform their employability in a variety of other ways – all related to the constant commitment to improve and ‘work on’ their employability (Costea at al., 2012; Thrill, 2002).
While employability relates to engaging with the ambition, initiative, social discipline and ongoing commitment to constantly become more employable by gaining more skills and relevant experiences, they are also expected to maintain a sellable self (Fogde, 2011): a performative subject-position (Thrift, 2002). This subject-position may be based on a multifaceted learning process and ongoing introspective reflexivity: and can be expressed through mediums such as self- presentation; communication (Thunqvist, 2003, 2006); impression management and self-confidence. It is also related to acting out a character to brand oneself and self-promote (Salomonsoon, 2005: 120; Krejsler, 2007), display the appropriate practical awareness or attitude, fine codes and behaviours (Sharone, 2007) as well as self-selling and marketing not only one’s skills or labour, but also oneself as a product (Fogde, 2007).
The expectation to maintain a sellable self suggests that employability relates not only to having the required skills and education, but also to certain behaviours, traits and attitudes expected by prospective employers. To be employable, one thus needs to be able to: ‘... create, to stage manage, not only one’s own biography but the bonds and networks surrounding... constantly adapting to the conditions of the labour market, the education system, the welfare state...’ (Beck and Beck-Gernsheim, 2002: 4). This expectation to retain a sellable self then suggests that although the employability discourse engages with multi-layered sets of meanings from which individuals craft a notion of self, this, in turn, puts constraints on them, making them behave and think in a certain way, which may hinder their ability to be open at work.
A number of studies highlight the struggle to live up to the employability discourse and the sellable self. Fogde (2007, 2008) highlights the experiences of graduate job seekers who struggle to face the task of self-marketing and impression management. Her study illustrates how in order to maintain this a
sellable self, the study participants felt constrained to conceal information or ‘work on’ (when possible) certain traits such as shyness and low self-confidence which appeared to clash with the sellable self (Fogde, 2009: 41; Fogde 2011: 73) they were expected to take on. Similarly, Grey’s (1994) study illuminates the struggle of employees to continuously engage with ‘impression-management’. Although Grey (1994) does not refer directly to the notion of employability, his study illustrates the tensions that result from the requirement to demonstrate one’s self as sellable at numerous settings throughout one’s working life, such as the recruitment process, professional examination, rating and appraisal, assessment of performance and in social contexts.
Overall, it is suggested from the literature that there could be a number of characteristics, traits or information that may not fit into the ideal of the sellable self. Amongst others, these can include traits such as ‘shyness’ (Fogde, 2007), long-term illness (Charmaz, 1991), age (Fineman, 2011), race (Miles, 1989), religion (Dawkins, 2003), sexuality (Ward and Witstanley, 2003, 2005), disabilities (Holmqvist, 2008; Riessman, 2003), or any performance-related issue (Grey, 1994). As such, presenting certain information or traits that do not fit into the sellable self can be broad and varied and could have many implications for one’s employability and thus the decision as for what to reveal about oneself at work can become crucial (Sharone, 2007).
Not revealing information about oneself in employment settings can help to maintain employability by demonstrating a semblance of the sellable self or, in other words, a sellable semblance. However, this can also be constraining, leading to a struggle over hiding characteristics of oneself when at work, and potentially associated with a sense of pretence (Sharone, 2007). Concealing can also be related to a difficulty to build close relationships with colleagues, be open at work, and even the ability to do the work itself. In the context of health conditions, not revealing information about one’s illness at work can have more intensified implications. The dilemma of revealing or concealing in this context is extremely important for one’s employability and can have an impact on both health situations and employment circumstances (Beatty and Kirby, 2006). For people with an ongoing health condition, the protection of equality legislation could be gained only by declaring their condition to their employer. At the same time, this declaration could jeopardize one’s employability and their ability to demonstrate a sellable self. Thus, many of those with invisible health conditions may choose not to reveal it at work (Clair et al. 2005; Beatty and Kirby, 2006), maintaining a sellable semblance. Not revealing, however, may also be consuming. It may involve ongoing efforts to manage information, and the preoccupation, anxiety and a feeling of pretence that may be associated with
hiding (Smart and Wegner, 2000). Concealing can also have health implications which may then be linked to performance at work. Thus the dilemma over declaring or concealing at work is complex. It may also involve a wider set of considerations over the question of what to say, how much to display; when, where and to whom (Goffman, 1968).
This issue is particularly important to examine in the context of mental health at work. Not only may the stigma and the discrimination attached to mental-illness intensify the disclosure dilemma of MHCs, but also the growing numbers of mental illness worldwide (WHO, 2007) may stress the importance of studying theses issues in the context of employability. Against the background of growing figures on mental health concerns at work, one-fifth of employees would not disclose stress or mental health issues to their employer as they fear that this would jeopardize their employment (Mind, 2011: 2). Whilst depression alone is reported to become the second biggest cause for disability in the world by 2020 (WHO, 2003, Sunley, 2008), restricted self-disclosure may have crucial implications for the individual as well as the organization.
Despite the fact that people with severe and mild MHCs in the West hold jobs in a wide range of sectors (Mechanic et al., 2002), studies show that employment rates for these individuals are extremely low (Tsang et al. 2007; Rinaldi and Hill, 2000). This may be linked with discrimination, stigma and stereotyping associated with mental-illness and the consequent marginalization of these individuals from full work integration (Krupa et al., 2009). Those that are in work are often cyclically trapped into low-pay, poor-quality working conditions, with restricted opportunities for career development (Marmot Review, 2010). In work, people with MHCs report on financial and emotional constraints (Lefley, 1987) as well as experiences of protected relations with work colleagues and a constricted social network. Overall the experiences of these individuals are associated with restricted self-disclosure (Braunstein, 2000) and secrecy (Markowitz, 1998) and the consequent risk of delayed treatment (Gelb and Corrigan, 2008).
Separate from the prejudice and restricted managerial awareness to mental health at work (Hammond, 2001), the nature of the illness itself can limit the ability of persons with MHCs to cope with employment (Ritsher and Phelan, 2004). This is why disclosure at work and support in the workplace are critical for these individuals (e.g. Fung et al., 2007). The paucity of voices of people with MHCs in the organizational literature (Corrigan and Matthews, 2003) intensifies the importance for studying their employment. Nonetheless, the examination of the struggle of people with MHCs – a population with its more striking characteristics – offers an opportunity to elucidate extensive issues of the
paradoxes embedded within the attempts to live up to the employability discourse.