In a labor market driven by rapid technological change,[1] workers and learners face significant challenges in securing quality employment. This struggle is particularly pronounced for the nation’s 42 million low-wage earners,*[2] who have less access to accurate career information and fewer resources to devote to career exploration and upskilling.[3] Those workers often become trapped in a cycle of low-wage employment with minimal prospects for advancement.[4] There is an urgent need for a system of career navigation that will disrupt this cycle and help all workers advance.

As people experience more career transitions and longer work lives, career navigation becomes even more important.[5] However, there is a dearth of research as to how individuals–particularly low-wage workers–navigate their careers.[6] Data on how people acquire and use career information, leverage social capital, and deploy navigation skills remains limited.

To bridge this knowledge gap, we are conducting a multi-year, mixed-methods study of career navigation among low-wage workers. The initial phase of the research involved a nationally representative survey of this population, which yielded preliminary insights into how low-wage earners actually perceive and approach career navigation, discussed in this paper. The data also raise several new questions, which we intend to explore through qualitative research. We hope this study catalyzes employers, educators, and policymakers to adopt more effective and equitable career navigation policies and practices.

Preliminary Findings

Among low-wage earners, family and friends serve as the most common sources of career information. Individuals’ primary sources for seeking information vary by education level. For workers with at least some college experience, online career search tools are most utilized. In contrast, individuals with a high school diploma or less are more likely to turn to family for information. That underscores the significant, yet potentially limiting, role of social capital in career navigation and mobility.[7] While teachers and counselors are rated the most reliable and helpful sources of career information, their prevalence in providing information is minimal. Less than one in five workers reported receiving career information from their employer in the last six months.

Low-wage earners are highly confident in their skills and ability to communicate those skills to prospective employers. Two-thirds report that they know what skills are desired by employers, and nearly 63% believe they have or will soon have those skills. Moreover, 68% of low-wage earners feel confident that they can communicate those skills, which may be particularly critical in a skills-based economy. Yet less than half of individuals can list employers in their desired field, suggesting a disconnect between their beliefs and relevant industry knowledge.

To understand the factors that impact career fulfillment and mobility, we explored how information, confidence in one’s skills, social capital use, and decision-making relate to four career outcomes: being satisfied with one’s job, identifying an ideal career, progressing on a pathway toward that career, and aligning one’s job with that path. Several noteworthy trends emerged:

A significant majority of low-wage workers (62%) are satisfied with their jobs, despite earning low wages. Seventy percent of those workers say they have a “good job,” yet less than half report that their current job is an improvement over their last.
Less than half of low-wage earners (48%) have identified an “ideal career.” Of that population, 80% see themselves on a path toward that career, but only half report that their current job is aligned with their career path.
Nearly 62% of low-wage earners have leveraged a social connection to secure a job. Individuals on a career path are more likely to leverage social connections for career advancement.
Receiving career information from more than one information source is correlated with being on a pathway toward an ideal career. Relying on employers, teachers, and professional networks for career information is also related to that outcome, but those sources appear underutilized.
Less than half of low-wage workers report having enough time to consider multiple career options. Having sufficient time to consider various options is strongly associated with being on a pathway toward an ideal career.
Higher levels of confidence in one’s skills are directly related to progressing on a career path. Among workers whose current job aligns with their career path, 86% report that they know what skills are valuable to employers, 82% report having such valuable skills, and 83% say they can easily communicate those skills.

The use of generative AI for career information is nascent, and opportunities for technological innovation abound. Only 4% of workers report receiving career information from a genAI tool (e.g., ChatGPT or Gemini) in the past six months, and only 2% say they use a genAI tool as a primary source for career information. Analyzing and leveraging the qualities of trusted career information sources to train large language models warrants consideration.

*For the purpose of this research, “low-wage earners” are individuals who earn less than $40,000 per year or approximately $20 per hour for a 2,000-hour work year. For more information about this definition, see Appendix A.

Introduction

More than 42 million Americans work in low-wage jobs, resulting in persistent income insecurity.[8][9] Those workers, disproportionately Black and Hispanic individuals, women, and people with less than a college degree (Figure 1),[10] encounter significant barriers to economic advancement. Pathways from low-wage occupations to higher-paying positions are often unclear and inaccessible, leading individuals to cycle in and out of jobs that do not pay a living wage.[11]

There is a pressing need for a system of career navigation that will help workers and learners advance and find financial stability. In a 2023 paper, Unlocking Economic Prosperity: Career Navigation in a Time of Rapid Change, we reviewed the literature and landscape of career navigation, which we define as the process of acquiring knowledge, making informed career plans, and integrating education and work to progress throughout one’s career.[12] This is an emerging field that suffers from significant knowledge gaps. We nonetheless identified five drivers of navigation based on the existing evidence: career information, social capital, skills and credentials, wraparound support (e.g., coaching, childcare, transportation, etc.), and social structures (e.g., education pathways and economic conditions). While research on those topics continues to advance, the role of career information (i.e., data about jobs, wages, skills, and work conditions), in particular, remains under-researched.

This paper seeks to begin the process of addressing that knowledge gap. It outlines initial findings from the first stage of a mixed-methods study of how low-wage earners navigate their careers. We surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,009 low-wage earners, defined as adult workers making less than $40,000 annually or approximately $20 per hour for a 2,000-hour work year,[13] less than a living wage across the country (Figure 1). See Appendix A for additional information about the methodology. [14] The overwhelming majority of respondents (89%) work in roles with little to no supervisory responsibilities.

Figure 1: Survey Respondent Profile (Low-Wage Workforce)

In this paper, we explore how certain career navigation activities relate to outcomes that indicate workers are on a path to economic advancement and fulfillment. We begin by describing trends in career navigation information acquisition, skill confidence, social capital, and decision-making across all low-wage earners. We then examine the correlations between those navigation activities or qualities and four career outcomes: (1) being satisfied with one’s job, (2) identifying an ideal career, (3) progressing on a career path, and (4) having a job that is aligned with that career path. The report concludes with general observations, based on the findings, and remaining research questions for the next phase of the study.

Career Information Sources

Access to accurate labor market information is critical for successful career navigation. As we discuss in Unlocking Economic Opportunity, existing research suggests that without accessible labor market data (i.e., data about job opportunities and trends, wages and salaries, career paths, skills requirements, etc.), individuals risk making decisions that lead to low-paying or undesirable careers. For example, a study of community college students found that individuals with no prior information about the labor market often perceived salaries as approximately 13% higher than they were.[15] Another study found that, when provided accurate salary information, students were more likely to change their majors to higher-paying fields.[16]

To understand how low-wage earners acquire career information–and what types of information they have (or lack)–we posed several questions. We began by explaining, “Career information includes details about job opportunities, career paths, required skills, advancement opportunities, work conditions, benefits, wages, and other relevant data.” The survey questions included:

Have you received career information in the last 6 months?
How helpful and reliable was this information?
What is your primary source for seeking career information?
What types of information do you need to better understand your ideal career?
Where do you share career information?

Our survey data show that family (31%) and friends (29%) were the two most common sources of career information for low-wage earners in the past six months (Figure 2). They were also the two most common sources of career advice. That is consistent with previous research that finds familial and social relationships have an outsized impact on individuals’ economic advancement.[17] An overwhelming majority of workers who receive information from family find it both helpful (75%) and reliable (71%) (Figure 3). Friends are viewed as slightly less dependable. Family is also the second most popular primary source for seeking information, which we discuss later.

Figure 2: Workers’ Career Information Sources (Past 6 Months)

Figure 3: Worker Ratings of Career Information Reliability and Helpfulness

Note: Respondents were only presented with the options selected in the question posed in Figure 2.

Teachers and professors were consistently rated as the most helpful (86%) and reliable (89%) sources of information, followed closely by career counselors. In the past six months, however, only 11% and 8% of low-wage earners received information from such individuals, respectively. Among those enrolled in an education or training program, the numbers are higher, but only 37% received career information from teachers and 24% received information from counselors. While unsurprising, the numbers indicate a missed opportunity to connect the vast majority of adult learners to trusted advisors. It is worth further investigation into the types of career information provided by teachers and counselors to understand whether it is possible to broaden their impact and how that might be achieved.

Social media is considered the least reliable information source, but half of individuals view the information as useful. Less than 30% of low-wage earners consider social media a reliable information source, which may account for the incredibly low reliance on it as a primary source (3%), with limited variation by age. Learners and workers view career service centers inversely. Career centers are assessed to be trustworthy, but not particularly helpful. That discrepancy may point to the accessibility and presentation of career information. Social media may offer frequent, easily accessible, and timely career insights, but user-generated content is unreliable and often biased.[18] In contrast, career centers provide vetted, trustworthy information, but they may be less accessible or user-friendly across different contexts.[19]

Only 4% of low-wage earners received career information from a generative AI tool, such as ChatGPT or Google Gemini, in the past six months (as of December 2024). Even fewer (2%) use genAI as a primary information source (Figure 4). It is worth noting that the actual use of genAI may be higher, as many users are unaware that AI technology is integrated with a variety of online career tools. Despite its low uptake, genAI tools are considered nearly as helpful as family and friends, with 70% finding the technology helpful, and fewer–but still a majority–viewing genAI tools as reliable (62%). Given the skepticism expressed in traditional and social media domains, it is unsurprising that job seekers are somewhat wary of career information provided by genAI tools.[20]

Figure 4: Workers’ Primary Source for Career Information

Online career search tools (e.g., CareerOneStop, Indeed, and Monster) are the most popular primary source for career information among low-wage earners. One in five respondents report relying on them as their first stop for information (Figure 4). Notably, information preferences differ by education level (Figure 5). Low-wage earners with less than a high school diploma indicate an overwhelming preference for family members as primary information sources (28%); they are significantly less likely to rely on online career search tools (5%) (Figure 5). Conversely, those with at least a bachelor’s degree are much more likely to report using online search tools (22%) relative to family (8%) as their primary source of information. Individuals with less education may benefit from online career search tools; it is worth further exploration as to why they use the platforms less frequently.

Figure 5: Primary Career Information Sources Vary by Education Level

Figure 6: Networks for Sharing Career Information

Low-wage earners are most likely to share career information among their immediate social circles. Among all respondents, more than 55% share information with family and 48% with friends (Figure 6). In contrast, a significant majority of respondents (65%) never share career information online. Of the 35% who share career information online at least sometimes, only 6% have ever shared wage and salary information on the internet.

Figure 7: Unmet Career Information Needs Among Low-Wage Earners

Lastly, more than one-third of workers reported that they need more wage or salary information about potential careers (Figure 7). They also indicated they would benefit from more information about career advancement opportunities (32%) and daily skills and tasks (30%). It is clear that there is a need for sources of information or associated tools and services that provide more detailed and nuanced career information, especially about compensation and long-term earnings potential, in accessible and easily navigated forms.

Skills Confidence, Social Capital & Decision-Making

Across the low-wage earner population, the majority of individuals are confident in their skills and industry knowledge. Two-thirds of workers report that they know what skills are desired by employers and nearly 63% believe they have or will soon have those skills. Moreover, 68% of low-wage earners feel they can communicate those skills to employers effectively. As skills-based talent practices spread, workers’ abilities to identify and communicate their skills become particularly valuable.[21] That said, we do not know which specific skills individuals are referencing–or if their self-assessments are accurate. Notably, less than 45% can list employers in their desired field–a significant gap in industry knowledge.

Figure 8: Workers’ Confidence in Their Skills & Industry Knowledge

Leveraging social capital to connect to employment is also common. Nearly 62% of low-wage earners have leveraged a social connection to secure a job (Figure 9). Over half have referred someone for a job and nearly 55% of workers have asked someone to recommend them for one. While social networking across income brackets is a strong predictor of economic mobility, research suggests that individuals are more likely to network with others in their income bracket. That may constrain low-wage earners’ access to higher-paying jobs.[22] As we discuss later in this brief, we find that greater use of social capital is associated with positive career outcomes in this study. This affirms existing research that demonstrates the role of social connections in increasing a job seeker’s likelihood of finding a job.[23][24]

Figure 9: Social Capital Use in Career Navigation

Figure 10: Workers’ Career Decision-Making Processes

Survey data are less encouraging with regard to career decision-making. Only half of low-wage earners report having time to fully consider career options (Figure 10). This means that more than 20 million Americans working in low-wage jobs do not have time to actively consider alternative career possibilities. That inability to make carefully considered and informed judgments likely impose a high, unanticipated cost on those workers. Research suggests that workers’ expectations about jobs often differ significantly from the outcomes they experience.[25] Time for career exploration may mitigate that friction, as workers can adjust their expectations to labor market realities. Below, we discuss how articulating a decision-making process relates to career outcomes. Across social capital, skill confidence, and decision-making qualities, we find strong correlations with positive career outcomes.

Outcome 1: Job Satisfaction

Sixty-two percent of low-wage earners are satisfied with their jobs, with limited variation by salary band (Figure 11). When asked the most important factors in selecting their job, respondents were most likely to note location or commute (42%) over wage or salary (37%), followed by scheduling considerations (36%) (Figure 12). That data may signal the optimism and resilience of American workers, while undermining prevailing characterizations about how the qualities and obligations of work are viewed by actual workers. Despite earning less than a living wage,[26] 70% of low-wage workers consider their current job a “good job.” That leaves almost 16 million workers who are dissatisfied with their jobs. Importantly, less than half of individuals indicated that their current job is an improvement over their last, affirming past research on the “stickiness” of low-wage work.[27]

Figure 11: Demographics of Workers Satisfied with Their Current Job

Figure 12: Top Factors Influencing Job Selection

Workers who are satisfied with their jobs were significantly more likely to receive information from their professional network, teachers, and employers in the last six months, compared to those who are dissatisfied. Nonetheless, only 22% of those individuals received career information from their employer. Their most common primary source for seeking career information was family (30%). They were also more likely to share career information with family, friends, and coworkers, compared to dissatisfied workers. However, the vast majority still do not share information with coworkers. More research is needed to understand the conditions under which individuals share information.

Job satisfaction is also linked to significantly higher levels of skill confidence. Three out of every four respondents satisfied with their jobs report that they can easily communicate their skills, 73% say they know what skills are valued by employers, and 69% indicate that they have or will soon have skills valuable to employers. Those figures are approximately 20 percentage points higher than individuals who are dissatisfied with their jobs. Moreover, workers who are satisfied with their jobs are 14 percentage points more likely to be able to name companies in their ideal career field than those who are dissatisfied. Still, only about half (49%) of satisfied respondents can name the companies in their ideal industry.

Leveraging social capital and having time for career exploration are also associated with job satisfaction. The majority of this group (65%) have secured a job through personal or professional connections and over half have referred a connection for hire. Satisfied workers are also 17 percentage points more likely to report having sufficient time to explore career options, though 44% still feel they lacked enough time to explore alternatives.

Outcome 2: Identifying an Ideal Career

Less than half of low-wage workers (48%) reported that they have identified an ideal career. In our survey, we note, “A career is more than just a job; it encompasses your long-term professional journey, including the roles you take on, the skills you develop, and the goals you achieve over time.” While we do not explicitly define “ideal career,” we ask respondents whether they have an ideal career in mind, then prompt them to select the field that most closely reflects their presumed preference. The most popular ideal industries include Arts, Design and Media, Education and Training, Healthcare, and Business (Figure 13).

Figure 13: Workers’ Top Ideal Industries

Figure 14: Demographics of Workers with an Identified Ideal Career

Young workers and those with more education are far more likely than their peers to have identified an ideal career (Figure 14). Moreover, individuals enrolled in education or training programs are more than five times as likely to have identified an ideal career, compared to those who are not currently enrolled. This finding is unsurprising, given survey data that shows students most often enroll in postsecondary education to advance in their careers.[28]

Individuals with an ideal career appear to seek career information more actively than the rest of the population. They report receiving information from more distinct sources (2.08 versus 1.28), ranging from online career search tools to professional networks and employers. This aligns with past studies of college students, which found that having a clear concept of a “future work self” is associated with more active career behaviors, like career planning.[29] Thirty-four percent of respondents with an ideal career received career information from friends in the last six months, but only 7% consider them a primary source, a much lower figure than the rest of the sample. That suggests that such workers are looking beyond their immediate social circles for career guidance.

Workers with an ideal career in mind are overwhelmingly more confident in their skills and more likely to be able to identify employers in their field. Three in four respondents with an ideal career report that they know what skills are valued by employers, they have or will soon have such skills, and they can readily communicate those skills. They are 28 percentage points more likely to state that they can readily list the names of desired employers compared to those without an ideal career, but over 40% of respondents report that they still cannot name from memory desired companies in their ideal career field. With respect to career fields, education, public service, and healthcare sectors–which have more structured career pathways–are associated with higher levels of confidence in skills. In contrast, fields such as arts and engineering, which may have less defined career trajectories, are associated with lower skill confidence levels.

Workers with identified ideal careers are statistically more likely to name their professional network as a primary information source, yet they are no more likely to secure a job through a connection than the rest of the population. They are also more likely to report having enough time to explore other career options, consistent with their greater investment in obtaining career information. That said, only slightly more than half (56%) report sufficient time to explore alternative careers, which may call into question whether the ideal career that they have identified is the best fit for their goals, interests, and skills. Limited time can make it particularly difficult for low-wage workers to develop new skills, career plans, or networks.

Outcome 3: Career Pathway Progression

We also asked survey respondents whether they believe they are on a pathway toward their ideal career. Some research suggests that career paths can provide clarity and direction for career navigation. In fact, some experts assert that pathway planning is one of the most powerful tools a worker has to navigate their career.[30] We presented the following definition of career path to survey respondents: “A planned progression of jobs and experiences leading towards your long-term career goals in a desired field.”

Of those who have an ideal career in mind, an overwhelming majority (80%) report that they are on a pathway to that career (Figure 15). That is an encouraging result, but it also means that roughly one in five low-wage earners who have identified an ideal career is not on a pathway toward that goal. That finding raises a critical question: what barriers are preventing those workers from advancing toward their ideal career? One-third of individuals on career paths are enrolled in an education or training program–almost six times the rate of those who are not on a path toward an ideal career. What mechanisms–perhaps generative AI based–might be provided that would help those workers investigate, settle upon, and pursue career paths before they make choices that lead them into the low-wage trap?

Figure 15: Demographics of Respondents on a Pathway Toward Their Ideal Career

Low-wage earners on a career path receive information from an average of 2.14 sources–a significantly higher number than those who are not on a career path. Notably, this group is also at least 10 percentage points more likely to have received information from their employer, friends, professional networks, and online search tools in the last six months.

They are significantly more likely to rely on their professional network, but less likely to view friends as primary sources, compared to those not on a career path. They are also much more likely to share information with friends, family, and coworkers than those not on a career path.

Workers on career paths also express much more confidence in their skills than those not on pathways. They are 16 percentage points more likely to report being confident in communicating their skills, 20 percentage points more likely to claim that they know what skills are valuable in their desired industry, and 28 percentage points more likely to report having or soon having requisite skills. Additionally, these workers are almost twice as likely to report that they can list the companies they would like to pursue a career. Perhaps unsurprisingly, they are also significantly more likely (by 15 percentage points) to report that they had sufficient time to explore their career options compared to those not on a career path. Having time to explore careers may grant individuals a greater opportunity to chart a career pathway toward an ideal job.

Outcome 4: Current Job Alignment

After inquiring about respondents’ career paths, we asked whether their current job advances them toward their ideal career. Only 50% agree. We classify those individuals as workers in “career-aligned jobs” (Figure 16). Older workers are more likely to have such a job, suggesting that it takes time in the workforce to secure a position that leads to advancement along one’s career path. It is striking that even though 80% of workers with an ideal career see themselves on a career path, only half believe their current job is aligned with that goal. This begs the question: how are other workers advancing along a career path, if not through their job? Is it through education? Perhaps a “side hustle”? To explore differences between those groups, we compared the behaviors of the respondents with “career-aligned jobs” to all individuals who report being on career paths. We also plan to address this question in our qualitative research.

Figure 16: Demographic of Workers with Jobs That Are Aligned to Their Ideal Career

Low-wage earners with career-aligned jobs have the highest likelihood of expressing confidence in their skills. Of workers whose job aligns with their ideal career, 86% report knowing what skills are valuable to employers, 82% report having such valuable skills, and 83% say they can easily communicate skills. Those numbers are significantly higher than the confidence levels for the full population of workers who report being on a career path. When asked to indicate their confidence in naming potential employers, 67% of those with career-aligned jobs responded affirmatively, compared to 50% of those on a career path, and 36% of the remainder of workers.

Surprisingly, workers in career-aligned jobs are significantly less likely to consider online tools as a primary source of information (13%). With respect to sharing career information, this group demonstrates significantly higher levels of information sharing than the full sample, but similar results to other workers on a career path. Notably, individuals with career-aligned jobs are 10 percentage points more likely to share information with coworkers. Those findings should prompt further research to investigate the role of career alignment in acquiring and sharing career information at work.

Lastly, workers in career-aligned jobs demonstrate significant use of social capital–69% of individuals in this group have secured a job through a personal or professional connection. There are insignificant differences between workers in career-aligned jobs and those without when it comes to requesting job recommendations from an acquaintance or referring an acquaintance for hire, though. This group is 16 percentage points more likely to report sufficient time to explore alternative career options compared to the rest of the workers in a career path. Across the four career outcomes, time for exploration is consistently associated with positive results.

Concluding Observations & Questions

The survey data reveal significant patterns in how low-wage workers seek information and pursue career advancement. Job satisfaction rates are much higher than many may expect. That observation suggests a need to re-examine our understanding of worker contentment and the various factors that contribute to job quality. Examining the basis of job satisfaction–whether it is linked to awareness of alternative opportunities or other aspects of employment–warrants further investigation. More time for exploration is associated with each of the career mobility outcomes–higher job satisfaction, identifying an ideal career, progressing along a career path, and securing a career-aligned job–indicating that providing opportunities for exploration should be a priority for educators.

The predominant reliance on family and friends as career information sources underscores the critical role of social capital in career navigation, while also raising questions about the nature of the information being disseminated. That is especially true for individuals with less education, as they are far more likely to rely on family as a primary source. Nonetheless, leveraging social connections to secure employment is closely related to progressing along a career path, indicating the myriad, and perhaps contradictory, ways social networks can contribute to career navigation and advancement.

Higher levels of skill confidence and industry knowledge are also associated with each of the four career outcomes. However, further research is needed to determine the nature of those skills. Are they technical competencies or “durable” skills, like communication and problem-solving? Are they in-demand skills that facilitate upward mobility or do they inadvertently contribute to the “low-wage trap?” It is also critical to examine whether employers recognize those skills or if workers’ skill confidence accurately reflects their competence in the workplace.[31] The data appear to contradict employers’ complaints about the challenges of finding qualified job applicants with workplace-relevant skills.[32]

Multiple reliable and helpful information sources appear to be underutilized, including employers, teachers, and counselors. The small percentage of individuals who received career information directly from employers in the last six months indicates that communication between businesses and low-wage earners is limited. Employers can do more to engage their low-wage workforce, including by providing clear and accessible information about wages and articulating career pathways and the associated skill requirements. Teachers and counselors can also play a more substantial role in providing information, given their low utilization rates but high levels of trustworthiness. Filling that gap is likely to constitute a challenge for career counselors, given the shortage of trained professionals and the resulting high caseloads for those in the field.[33]

There is a clear opportunity for generative AI to play a greater role in career navigation. While current use is nascent, it is worth exploring how genAI can become a valuable source of information, and how it can be trained on reliable, useful sources to ensure it provides accurate and personalized guidance. There must also be investment in making online platforms more accessible and relevant, particularly for workers with less education. While AI is often embedded in the backend of various online career tools, it is worth discussing how it can play a more impactful role, and how it can amplify perspectives from teachers, counselors, or employers to support individuals’ career mapping.

The data in this paper provide an initial research foundation, and the next phase of our study will delve into low-wage earners’ career navigation experiences through qualitative research. Through focus groups and interviews, we will examine the themes and questions that arose in our survey analysis. We hope that combining both quantitative and qualitative insights will enable us to build a comprehensive system of career navigation that supports career mobility.

As we begin the qualitative phase of the study, we’re interested in your perspectives. What questions does the research spark for you? Let us know:

Share Your Questions Here

Appendix A. Survey Methodology

In Fall 2024, The Project on Workforce at Harvard conducted a nationally representative study to understand how low-wage workers navigate their careers. The survey was administered using Ipsos’ Knowledge Panel, the largest online panel in the United States, which relies on probability-based sampling methods to provide a representative sampling frame of non-institutionalized adults aged 18 and older residing in the United States. Panel members from a representative sample of households were invited by email to participate, with the survey administered in both English and Spanish. The data collection process included a pretest followed by the main survey. Adjustments made after the pretest ensured that only data from the main survey were included in the final dataset.

The data were collected from November 20, 2024, through December 2, 2024. A total of 1,009 surveys were completed. The median length of the survey was nine minutes.

To select the general sample population, the Knowledge Panel developed geo-demographic dimensions used for weighting, including gender, age, race/Hispanic ethnicity, education, census region, household income, home ownership status, household size, metropolitan area, Hispanic origin, and language dominance when the survey is administered in both English and Spanish. We recognize some dimensions, specifically gender and race, are not inclusive of all identities and limited our analysis to an extent.

To ensure the survey was representative of the low-wage worker population, our research team provided additional weights during survey collection for the following variables: race, gender, and age. For a detailed picture of the survey demographics, see Figure 17 for respondent profiles of workers below.

Figure 17: Full Survey Respondent Profile

All respondents self-identified as low-wage workers by responding “no” to the question, “Is your current salary greater than $40,000 ($20 per hour)?” While there is no universal definition of a low-wage worker, we surveyed individuals making less than $40,000, or approximately $20 per hour for a 2,000 hour work year, consistent with past research conducted by Joseph B. Fuller and the Managing the Future of Work initiative at the Harvard Business School. This is less than a living wage in all states, according to MIT's Living Wage Calculator and less than 200% of the federal poverty level for a family of two.

The survey includes questions about workers’ career backgrounds, ideal careers and career pathways, skill awareness, information sources, and job search strategies. The surveys are a mix of multiple-choice questions and matrices. The full survey instrument is available in the following section of this appendix.

We recognize that there are limitations to our study. Most notably, for our analysis, we categorized all individuals who did not identify an ideal career as “not on a career path” because they did not indicate that they are on a pathway toward an ideal career. However, we recognize that there may be other workers who are on career paths toward jobs that are not their “ideal” positions.

We are concerned about the Dunning-Kruger effect in relation to survey responses about skill confidence and job search strategies. The overwhelmingly positive responses regarding respondents’ confidence (e.g., in their ability to communicate their skills to employers) may point to an overestimation of abilities or bias towards more socially desirable answers.

Appendix B. Survey Instrument

View Survey Instrument

Appendix C. Comparison by Skill Confidence, Career Information, and Social Capital

The analysis is based on mean differences between the groups for each outcome category and their difference, as summarized in Table 1.

Appendix D: Outcome Comparison by Demographics

To complement the prior analysis of skill confidence and career information, this section presents demographic differences across four key career outcomes to better understand the population segments associated with each (See Table 2). Each outcome group is compared to its counterpart (e.g., individuals who are satisfied with their job vs. those who are not), and we interpret these as descriptive profiles of the individuals who report achieving each outcome.

About the Authors

Joseph B. Fuller is a Professor of Management Practice in General Management at the Harvard Business School, where he co-leads the school’s Managing the Future of Work project.

Kerry McKittrick is a Co-Director of the Project on Workforce at Harvard University’s Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy.

Amanda Holloway is a Research Project Manager at the Project on Workforce at Harvard University’s Malcolm Wiener Center for Social Policy.

Rony Rodriguez Ramirez is a Ph.D. candidate at the Harvard Graduate School of Education and a Doctoral Researcher at the Project on Workforce at Harvard.

Ali Epstein is a Master of Public Policy candidate at the Harvard Kennedy School and a Research Assistant at the Project on Workforce at Harvard.

Acknowledgments

The development of data tools and visuals was critical in the analysis and writing of this paper, and for that, we thank Rony Rodriguez Ramirez and Isaiah Baldissera. We also thank Katie Russo and Sergei Rodkin from Ipsos for their support in launching the survey. We are grateful to all the individuals who participated in the survey, without whom this paper would not be possible.

The research included in this report was made possible through funding by Walmart. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report are those of the authors alone and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Walmart.

Please direct inquiries to: Kerry McKittrick (kerry_mckittrick@gse.harvard.edu)

Suggested citation: Joseph B. Fuller, Kerry McKittrick, et al. (April 2025). Navigating Opportunity: Career Information and Mobility in Low-Wage Employment. Published by the Harvard Kennedy School.

Endnotes

Bick, Alexander, Adam Blandin, and David J. Deming. “The Rapid Adoption of Generative AI.” Working Paper. Working Paper Series. National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2024. 10.3386/w32966.
“Low-Wage Workforce Tracker,” Economic Policy Institute, January 2025, https://www.epi.org/low-wage-workforce/.
Fuller, Joseph B., Kerry McKittrick, et al. Unlocking Economic Prosperity: Career Navigation in a Time of Rapid Change. Harvard Kennedy School. 2023. https://www.pw.hks.harvard.edu/post/career-navigation.
Escobari, Marcela, Ian Seyal, and Carlos Daboin Contreras. 2021. Moving up: Promoting Workers’ Upward Mobility Using Network Analysis. Brookings Institution, 2021. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/moving-up-promoting-workers-upward-mobility-in-a-time-ofchange/.
OECD. 2024. Promoting Better Career Choices for Longer Working Lives: Stepping Up Not Stepping Out. Ageing and Employment Policies. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/1ef9a0d0-en.
Fuller, McKittrick, et al. Unlocking Economic Prosperity.
Chetty, Raj, Matthew O. Jackson, Theresa Kuchler, et al. “Social capital II: determinants of economic connectedness.” Nature 608, 122–134 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04997-3.
Fuller, Joseph B. and Manjari Raman. Building From the Bottom Up.

Harvard Business School. 2022. https://www.hbs.edu/managing-the-future-of-work/research/Pages/building-from-the-bottom-up.aspx.

“Low-Wage Workforce Tracker.”
Ross, Martha, Nicole Bateman, and Alec Friedhoff. A Closer Look at Low-Wage Workers across the Country. Brookings Institution, 2020. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/low-wage-workforce/.
Escobari et al., Moving Up.
Fuller, McKittrick, et al. Unlocking Economic Prosperity.
Fuller and Raman. Building from the Bottom Up.
“Living Wage Calculator,” Massachusetts Institute of Technology, April 2025, https://livingwage.mit.edu/.
Baker, Rachel, Eric Bettinger, Brian Jacob, and Ioana Marinescu. “The Effect of Labor Market Information on Community College Students’ Major Choice.” Working Paper. Working Paper Series. National Bureau of Economic Research, April 2017. https://doi.org/10.3386/w23333.
Wiswall, Matthew, and Basit Zafar. “How Do College Students Respond to Public Information about Earnings?” Journal of Human Capital 9, no. 2 (June 2015): 117–69. https://doi.org/10.1086/681542.
Chetty, Raj, Matthew O. Jackson, Theresa Kuchler, et al. “Social Capital I: measurement and associations with economic mobility.” Nature 608, 108-121 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-022-04996-4.
Sampson, James P., Debra S. Osborn, Jaana Kettunen, Pei-Chun Hou, et al. “The Validity of Social Media–Based Career Information.” The Career Development Quarterly 66, no. 2 (2018): 121–34. https://doi.org/10.1002/cdq.12127.
Anne Chamberlain et al., “Study of the American Job Center Customer Experience” (Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Labor & IMPAQ International, December 2017), https://www.dol.gov/sites/dolgov/files/OASP/legacy/files/Customer-Experience-Summary-Report.pdf.
Sun, Yujie, Dongfang Sheng, Zihan Zhou, and Yifei Wu. “AI hallucination: towards a comprehensive classification of distorted information in artificial intelligence-generated content,” Humanit Soc Sci Commun 11 no. 1278 (2024) https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-03811-x.
Fuller, Joseph B., Christina Langer, Julia Nitschke, Layla O’Kane, et al. 2022. The Emerging Degree Reset: How the Shift to Skills-Based Hiring Holds the Keys to Growing the U.S. Workforce at a Time of Talent Shortage. Philadelphia: The Burning Glass Institute. https://www.hbs.edu/managing-the-future-of-work/Documents/research/emerging_degree_reset_020922.pdf.
Chetty et al., “Social capital I.”
Barbulescu, Roxana. “The Strength of Many Kinds of Ties: Unpacking the Role of Social Contacts Across Stages of the Job Search Process.” Organization Science 26, no. 4 (August 2015): 1040–58, https://doi.org/10.1287/orsc.2015.0978.
Cappellari, Lorenzo, and Konstantinos Tatsiramos. “With a Little Help from My Friends? Quality of Social Networks, Job Finding and Job Match Quality.” European Economic Review 78 (August 2015): 55–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2015.04.002.
Conlon, John J., Laura Pilossoph, Matthew Wiswall, and Basit Zafar. “Labor Market Search With Imperfect Information and Learning.” Working Paper. Working Paper Series. National Bureau of Economic Research, September 2018, 10.3386/w24988.
“Living Wage Calculator.”
Fuller and Raman. Building from the Bottom Up.
Strada Education Network and Gallup. 2019. Back to School? What Adults Without Degrees Say About Pursuing Additional Education and Training. https://www.strada.org/reports/back-to-school.
Taber, Brian J., and Maureen Blankemeyer. “Future Work Self and Career Adaptability in the Prediction of Proactive Career Behaviors.” Journal of Vocational Behavior 86 (February 1, 2015): 20–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jvb.2014.10.005.
Gati, Itamar, Nimrod Levin, and Shiri Landman-Tal, “Decision-Making Models and Career Guidance,” in International Handbook of Career Guidance, ed. James A. Athanasou and Harsha N. Perera (Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2019), 115–45, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-25153-6_6.
Dunning, David, Chip Heath, and Jerry M. Suls. “Flawed Self-Assessment: Implications for Health, Education, and the Workplace.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest 5, no. 3 (2004): 69-106. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00018.x
Kate Davidson. “Employers Find ‘Soft Skills’ Like Critical Thinking in Short Supply.” Wall Street Journal, August 30, 2016, https://www.wsj.com/articles/employers-find-soft-skills-like-critical-thinking-in-short-supply-1472549400.
Laura Chrisco Brennan. “When it Comes to College and Career Support, the Counselor Shortage is Only Part of the Problem.” The Hechinger Report, July 23, 2019, https://hechingerreport.org/opinion-when-it-comes-to-college-and-career-support-the-counselor-shortage-is-only-part-of-the-problem/

Navigating Opportunity: Career Information and Mobility in Low-Wage Employment

Contents

Executive Summary