Running Head: APPLYING INFORMATION SEEKING MODELS

Applying Information Seeking Models to a Job Search: A Case Study Thea A. Evenstad Emporia State University

APPLYING INFORMATION SEEKING MODELS

I conducted an interview with a recent graduate from a five-year architecture program. I was interested in the job search he had recently concluded after accepting a position in India. He told me about his information search process as he looked for a job in his field. In this document, I compare his information search to the information seeking model set forth by Carol C. Kuhlthau in Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services (2nd ed.), as well as to several of the information seeking models selected by Donald O. Case in Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behavior (2nd ed.). My findings suggest that Johnsons model provides the best overview of information-seeking. First, I will briefly describe the information search my interviewee conducted. My interviewee started thinking about his job search during the winter. He talked to an employee in the Architecture and Allied Arts career development office and took a course entitled Context of the Profession during the winter months, but he did not begin his search in earnest until August. He had graduated in June, and after a few months off he needed to start making money. He dreaded starting the search; he thought it would take a long time and not produce the results he wanted, so he put it off. He desired a job located in a place where he wanted to live and where he could do work that was creatively satisfying and beneficial socially. He began his research by seeking out architecture firms that were highly desirable places for him to work. He utilized two main channels for seeking out this information: talking to friends and searching on the Internet. During the first part of his search, he found and applied at many top-tier firms. These firms were highly desirable in terms of his search criteria. After this first round, however, he had not gotten a job offer, so he made his search less specific. He sought out firms that he previously would not have considered based on their location or their work environment. He was offered a position at a firm in India; he had found out about the job from a friend who was a licensed

APPLYING INFORMATION SEEKING MODELS

architect and had previously worked for the firm. After the job offer, he discussed the firm and the position with the friend who had referred him and decided to accept the position. The sequence of emotions my interviewee experienced during the information search seemed to parallel those laid out by Kuhlthau in her initial model of the information search process (2004, p. 45). My interviewee noted experiencing dread during the initial stage of his search, when he knew he needed to search for a job but before he began looking in earnest. After he began his search, he felt optimistic about the many firms he had found that met his criteria. After the first round of applications, and subsequent failure to land a job, he felt hopeless. He felt like his search was futile. He decided to be less selective, and applied more widely. When he was offered a job and accepted, he felt happy with his decision and grateful for the unique opportunity. While this affective sequence does not directly match Kulthaus, many of the elements are similar and follow a similar progression from uncertainty to satisfaction. While the emotions described by my interviewee appeared to roughly fit Kuhlthaus model, the stages seem too dependent on the research tasks her model was developed to describe; this model does not appear to translate seamlessly to a problem-solving or decision-making part of everyday life, like a job search. I did note that my interviewees process could be described in the stages that Kuhlthau uses, it just was not a perfect fit: Stage 1: Initiation Interviewee acknowledges information need (find a job) and identifies channels (friends, internet) to use to meet that need. Stage 2: Selection Interviewee selects criteria to evaluate firms, including location, professional benefits, and ability to satisfy creative needs. Stage 3: Exploration Interviewee uses familiar sources (firms that were known from conferences, winning awards, or work featured on architecture and design blog, firms

APPLYING INFORMATION SEEKING MODELS

recommended by friends) as well as exploring possibilities online (like firms in desirable locations, e. g. the West Coast or Japan). Stage 4: Formulation Decide which firms to write a cover letter, send resume and portfolio. Discover application procedures and contact information to apply. Stage 5: Collection Assemble and prepare documents and portfolio for application based on information for each firm. Stage 6: Presentation Send application in to firms. Above, I attempt to use Kuhlthaus stages to characterize my interviewees information search. In some ways, these stages fit, but not quite as well as the research processes that Kuhlthau describes. The exploration and formulation stages seemed to take the bulk of his time during the search. Moreover, my interviewee had to use feedback received after completing stage 6 to decide to repeat stages 2-6. More investigation should be done using this model outside of traditional research environments and within everyday information searches in order to refine its application to these types of scenarios. The step-by-step process that Kuhlthau delineates does not seem to accommodate the iterative nature of the process nor the inputs that influence the process nearly as well as some of the models selected by Case in Looking for information (2008). For example, the Krikelas model (1983) incorporates the idea that information needs can be deferred, while information is gathered and put into memory and personal files for later use (in Case, 2008, p. 124). My interviewee recognized the need to start the job search in the winter months, but delayed the search until August. He continued to gather information about firms from architecture blogs, design award announcements, and conferences he attended even while he was not actively searching for a job. He then accessed this internal information during his search. As Case points

APPLYING INFORMATION SEEKING MODELS out in his discussion of subjective versus objective views of the information search, the

subjective view of information does not deny that purposeful thought leads to information seeking, but rather emphasizes that humans are often driven to make sense of an entire situation, not merely its component data, and that rational goals are often overstated (2008, p. 77). The information gathering that takes place prior to the purposeful thought and rational goals of active information seeking can be just as important to the process, as Krikelas points out in his model. Additionally, Krikelass model also establishes the two main sources of external information as direct interpersonal contact and recorded literature. This appears to correspond to some extent with my interviewees two main channels for information: friends in the architecture field (interpersonal) and architectural firm websites (recorded). Case calls attention to the fact that Krikelass model is lacking a direct consideration of characteristics of the seeker (2008, p. 127). For my interviewee, the personal style of seeking, situational factors, and subjective analysis of how to complete the task and what actions to take all mattered a great deal. The Bystrm and Jrvelin model (2005) takes into account personal, situational, and subjective factors that affect the analysis of the need and the choice of action. Moreover, this model includes evaluation, at which point the seeker decides that the need is satisfied, the need cannot be satisfied, or further seeking is needed. This model depicts the iterative nature of the search and the personal factors that influence the search. Bystrm and Jrvelin have taken into account factors that were present in my interviewees information search that were not evident in Kuhlthaus or Krikelass models. One element not described by any of the models previously addressed in this paper is the idea of capitalsocial, material, and cultural/cognitive. The Savolainen model (2005) of Everyday Life Information Seeking shows problem-solving behavior (like finding a job) as

APPLYING INFORMATION SEEKING MODELS

encompassed within the mastery of life (in Case, 2008, p. 131). In turn, mastery of life is influenced by values and attitudes, current situation of life, and access to the three kinds of capital listed above. He utilized his social capital to find firms and get referrals for openings from other members of the field. My interviewee drew upon his cultural and cognitive capital to use the internet to find architectural firm information and decide which firms to apply to and how to create an appealing and high quality application and portfolio. He also noted how gaps in his cultural capital (lack of fluency in Japanese, for example) might have cost him the ability to satisfy his need within the Japanese work environment, even though that was highly desirable to him. This model is far more successful in addressing everyday life information seeking. The Johnson model, however, is best at encapsulating all of these disparate parts of the information search. One reason might be that it incorporates a lot of elements, while still leaving the items included general enough to apply widelyto many different types of information searches, information seekers, and information seeking environments. Personal relevance factors contribute to the decision about information carrier factors, which in turn influence actions. This model describes my interviewees process from personal relevance factors (age and background, direct experience seeking jobs and personal contact network, what jobs are salient or applicable within his situation, and his beliefs about work and self-efficacy) to information carrier factors (what channels provide the most up-to-date and useful content about jobs in his field while possessing ease of accessibility). Decisions about information carrier factors lead to information seeking actions (calling a friend who is a licensed architect and asking for leads). Case notes that Johnson posits a sense-making perspective; Case writes that Johnsons model supports the idea that all information seeking takes place within a context and must be understood as influenced by context (2008, p. 135). A model that allows for the whole story to be told seems best.

APPLYING INFORMATION SEEKING MODELS References

Case, Donald O. (2008). Looking for information: A survey of research on information seeking, needs, and behavior (2nd ed.). Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Publishing Group Limited. Kuhlthau, Carol C. (2004). Seeking meaning: A process approach to library and information services (2nd ed.). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.