This article explores the relationship between students' identities, their ideas about professional appearance and their anticipated transition to the world of work. It is based on a series of semi-structured interviews with 13 students from a vocationally-focused university in England. It was found that participants viewed clothing and appearance as an important aspect of their transition to the workplace. They believed that, if carefully handled, their appearance could help them to fit in and satisfy the expectations of employers, although some participants anticipated that this process of fitting in might compromise their identity and values. The article addresses students' anticipated means of handling the tension between adapting to a new environment and ‘being themselves’. It is argued that the way this process is handled is intertwined with wider facets of identity – most notably those associated with gender.
AlthusserL. (1968), On Ideology, Verso Books, London.
2.
BridgstockR. (2011), ‘Skills for creative industries graduate success’, Education + Training, Vol 53, No 1, pp 9–26.
3.
ButlerJ. (1988), ‘Performative acts and gender constitution: An essay in phenomenology and feminist theory’, Theatre Journal, Vol 40, No 4, pp 519–531.
4.
CareyM. (2012), Qualitative Research Skills for Social Work: Theory and Practice, Ashgate, Farnham.
5.
CharmazK. (2006), Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis, Sage, London.
6.
CoffeyA.AtkinsonP. (1996), Making Sense of Qualitative Data: Complementary Research Strategies, Sage, London.
7.
CohenL.ManionL.MorrisonK. (2007), Research Methods in Education, 6th edition, Routledge, London.
8.
CôtéJ. (2002), ‘The role of identity capital in the transition to adulthood: The individualization thesis examined’, Journal of Youth Studies, Vol 5, No 2, pp 117–134.
9.
CrooksD.L. (2001), ‘The importance of symbolic interaction in grounded theory research on women's health’, Health Care For Women International, Vol 22, No 1/2, pp 11–27.
10.
DuttonJ.E.DukerichJ.M.HarquailC.V. (1994), ‘Organizational images and member identification’, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol 39, No 2, pp 239–263.
11.
GlaserB.G.StraussA.L. (1967), The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, Aldine Publishing Company, Chicago, IL.
12.
GoffmanE. (1959), The Presentation of the Self in Everyday Life, Doubleday, Garden City, NY.
13.
HagerP.HollandS. (2006) Graduate Attributes, Learning and Employability, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
14.
HallS. (1996), ‘Introduction: Who Needs “Identity”?’, in HallS.du GayP., eds, Questions of Cultural Identity, Sage, London, pp 1–18.
15.
HazenL.SyrdhalJ. (2010), ‘Dress codes and appearance policies: What not to wear at work’, The Colorado Lawyer, Vol 39, No 9, pp 55–63.
16.
HoggM.A.TerryD.J. (2000), ‘Social identity and self-categorization processes in organizational contexts’, Academy of Management Review, Vol 25, No 1, pp 121–140.
17.
HolmesL. (2001), ‘Reconsidering graduate employability: The “graduate identity” approach’, Quality in Higher Education, Vol 7No 2, pp 111–119.
18.
HoldenR.HamblettJ. (2007), ‘The transition from higher education into work: Tales of cohesion and fragmentation’, Education + Training, Vol 49, No 7, pp 516–585.
HuffcuttA.I.ConwayJ.M.RothP.L.StoneN.J. (2001), ‘Identification and meta-analytic assessment of psychological constructs measured in employment interviews’, Journal of Applied Psychology, Vol 86, No 5, pp 897–913.
21.
IbarraH. (2005), ‘Identity transitions: Possible selves, liminality and the dynamics of career change’, INSEAD Working Paper Series, INSEAD, Fontainebleu Cedex, France.
22.
JenkinsR. (1992), Pierre Bourdieu, Routledge, London.
23.
KelanE. (2013), ‘The becoming of business bodies: Gender, appearance, and leadership development’, Management Learning, Vol 44, No 1, pp 45–61.
24.
MacQueenK.M.McLellanE.KayK.MilsteinB (1998), ‘Codebook development for team-based qualitative analysis’, Field Methods, Vol 10, No 2, pp 31–36.
25.
ParmentierM.FischerE.ReuberA.R. (2013), ‘Positioning person brands in established organizational fields’, Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Vol 41, No 3, pp 373–387.
26.
PattonM. (1990) Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA.
27.
PetersK.RyanM.HaslamS.A.FernandesH. (2012) ‘To belong or not to belong: Evidence that women's occupational disidentification is promoted by lack of fit with masculine occupational prototypes’, Journal of Personnel Psychology, Vol 11, No 3, pp 148–158.
28.
PurcellK.EliasP.AtfieldG.BehleH.EllisonR.LuchinskayaD.SnapeJ.ConaghanL.TzanakouC. (2012), Futuretrack Stage 4: Transitions Into Employment, Further Study and Other Outcomes, HECSU (Higher Education Careers Service Unit), Manchester.
29.
RamarajanL.ReidE. (2013), ‘Shattering the myth of separate worlds: Negotiating non-work identities at work’, Academy Of Management Review, Vol 38, No 4, pp 621–644.
30.
TajfelH.TurnerJ.C. (1986), ‘The social identity theory of intergroup behavior’, in WorchelS.AustinW.G., eds, Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Burnham, Chicago, IL, pp 7–24.
31.
ToledanoE. (2012), ‘The looking-glass ceiling: Appearance-based discrimination in the workplace’, Cardozo Journal of Law and Gender, Vol 19, p 683.
