Giving meaning is already planting the seeds of sustainability: interview with Shékina Rochat
Shékina Rochat is a career psychologist, researcher, and dedicated practitioner. For several years, she has been exploring the connections between meaningful work, sustainability, and social justice. Trained in motivational interviewing, she became interested early on in supporting young people who had dropped out of conventional paths, and in how career guidance professionals can help remove the barriers that prevent ecological concerns from being integrated into career decisions.
In this interview conducted with our team (conducted by Tomas Sprlak), she shares her reflections on the ethical foundations of our profession, the tools she has developed, and the ways she introduces sustainability into guidance processes. She also invites us to experiment, to treat our practice as a small laboratory for change, and to work with ambivalence rather than trying to convince.
This inspiring conversation reminds us that “greening guidance” is not just about steering people toward so-called “green jobs.” It is about helping each individual build a professional life consistent with their values, connected to others and to the living world.
Exploring Green Guidance: Could you briefly introduce yourself? How did you come to practice Green Guidance?
Shékina Rochat: I trained as a career guidance psychologist and completed a doctoral thesis in career psychology. After that, I worked in a leadership role providing services to gymnasium students in Switzerland (equivalent to high school students preparing for university), and more broadly across Europe. My work combined administrative management with one-to-one support for young people.
What struck me most during that time was the worrying number of suicides among students. In Switzerland, most young people do not take the general academic route toward university; many go through apprenticeships. But in recent years, gymnasium has become a kind of default option for those who don’t know what else to do. That raises serious questions about the meaning of their studies.
I believe this loss of meaning is closely connected to the psychological distress and suicide risk I observed.
It was then that I attended the inauguration of the CePCO—the Research Center in Psychology of Counseling and Guidance at the University of Lausanne. Professor Jean Guichard gave a lecture presenting his work on Green Guidance and the importance of integrating the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) into career guidance. For me, it was a revelation. The question of meaning suddenly found an answer.
I thought: one of the best ways to restore meaning to studies or to life is to feel that you are contributing to something bigger than yourself.
If we can help people make career or study choices that connect to the SDGs—if we can help them see how their path, their studies, their job can contribute to a fairer and more sustainable world—then everyone wins. Society benefits, and the individual regains a sense of meaning.
It was in this context that what later became the card game Sustainable Career Card Sort was born. It began as group experiments with gymnasium students, exploring how the SDGs could be linked to their career paths.
“One of the best ways to restore meaning to one’s studies or life is to feel that one is acting for something larger than oneself. And if we can help people see how their path can contribute to a fairer and more sustainable world, then everyone wins.”
Exploring Green Guidance: What is your ethical approach? Some say you must remain neutral and impartial. How do you address this question in your practice?
Shékina Rochat: I think it’s an illusion to believe we can ever be completely neutral or impartial. If you look at codes of ethics in our field, none—except perhaps the UK one—require absolute neutrality or impartiality. What they do require is that we avoid projecting our own values onto clients. And to avoid that, we first need to know our own values. Being aware of what we carry inside ourselves is the first step to not imposing it on others.
Beyond that, what really matters is reflecting on the purpose of our work. Why do we do this job? What is the role of guidance today? I believe it is the goals of our work that shape our practice more than our personal values do.
So, talking about ecology in guidance is not about personal morality. It is a matter of professional responsibility: does our work make sense, is it useful, does it contribute to a desirable future? That is the real question.
Exploring Green Guidance: Concretely, in your guidance practice, how do you go about it? What works well for you?
Shékina Rochat: There are several situations.
- First, there are people for whom sustainability is already a clear concern—often adults changing careers, who want to reorient themselves toward work more aligned with their values. For them, the work is often easier, because they are already questioning the meaning they want their work to have. Classic tools are useful, but I also developed an Inventory of Eco-Orientation Difficulties, because I realized there are specific obstacles in these processes. These are difficulties career professionals know well, but here they take on a new dimension. And I believe we have all the necessary skills to support these people; we can draw many parallels with other types of guidance.
- Then there are people who don’t spontaneously mention sustainability, but who question the meaning of their professional lives. That’s a perfect entry point. As I said earlier, one of the best ways to find meaning is to feel that you are contributing to something that goes beyond yourself. That makes it natural to bring in the ecological and social dimensions of sustainability. And this question of meaning is becoming more and more present—not just for adults but also for young people, who wonder how to give meaning to their future in such an uncertain world.
- Finally, there are people who do not consider sustainability at all. That is often more challenging. In those cases, I don’t force the subject. But if I see that their career ideas are clearly at odds with sustainability, I will raise the question. For example: “If you want to become an airline pilot, how do you see the future of this sector and its ecological challenges?” That simple question can open reflection. Sometimes it creates dissonance: “It’s true, I know this isn’t good for the environment, but I really love it…” That moment of ambivalence is a place to work—it helps build critical awareness.
In general, I think it’s important to ask, right from the beginning: “How do you see the future? How do you project yourself in a world with so many ecological and social uncertainties? Where do you stand in relation to that?”
I’ve realized that if we don’t dare to ask this early on, we sometimes miss something. Some people don’t bring up these issues until the very end, saying: “This solution appeals to me because it aligns with my sustainability values.” And then I regret not opening that space earlier.
Research shows the same thing. One of my students asked young people in school: “Have you taken sustainability into account in your career choices?”
Most answered: “I didn’t even know that was possible. Why didn’t anyone talk about it with us? I would have thought about it if someone had made me aware.” They were almost indignant that the link hadn’t been made for them. That shows these are latent questions that deserve to be asked. And as career professionals, we clearly have a role to play in opening those perspectives.
Exploring Green Guidance: How do you use motivational interviewing in the context of Green Guidance?
Shékina Rochat: My doctoral thesis focused on motivational interviewing and how it can be used to encourage people to engage in guidance or integration processes, even when they initially lack motivation.
The method was originally developed in addiction treatment, to help people stop drinking or smoking. At the time, I was working with adolescents stuck between school and the world of work—often there under obligation, sent by someone else, with little desire to participate. Many never returned after the first meeting.
That’s when I trained in motivational interviewing and saw its positive impact. Since then, it has shaped my entire practice. For me, it’s the most appropriate stance in guidance, with any type of client.
The core idea is to help people explore their ambivalence—for example: “Should I take ecological aspects into account in my career choices or not?” The goal is not to convince or argue, but to help the person articulate their own arguments based on what matters to them. We can provide information, but only with their agreement.
When someone is unmotivated, we highlight the gap between their current situation and what they really want. For example, with a young person who spends all day gaming at their parents’ home, I might ask: “Okay, this works for now… but what if this continues for one year, two years, five years?”
Often they reply: “No, in five years I don’t want to live with my parents anymore.”
Then I ask: “Alright, so what would need to happen between now and then to make that possible?” And that’s where awareness begins.
It’s the same with sustainability. We start with what matters most to the person: “What’s most important to you in life?” They might answer: “Being healthy, having a happy family.”
Then we can ask: “How do you imagine that being possible in a world affected by ecological crises and natural disasters?”
The point is to meet people where they are and build on their own values and concerns to open up sustainability questions—not by forcing, but by encouraging genuine reflection.
Exploring Green Guidance: What do you see as the impact of this work? People often ask: “How many people have you steered toward green jobs?” How do you respond?
Shékina Rochat: In our profession, we rarely get direct feedback on the real impact of our work. Of course, we may think: “This person found a path that suits them, so that’s a success.” But we don’t know how long that path will continue to make sense for them.
Measuring impact is generally very difficult. Personally, I see guidance as a meeting where we help people solve the problems that block their orientation—including the barriers that prevent them from considering sustainability.
So for me, impact isn’t measured by the number of people who change to green professions, but by our ability to remove obstacles that stop them from considering these dimensions.
The outcomes can vary widely: one person may switch to a job in the ecological transition; another may simply become aware of the systemic impacts of their work. Some decide to change their profession from within, through advocacy or awareness-raising.
And sometimes, nothing seems to change immediately—but three years later, they make a career shift, start an association, or get involved locally. So the idea is really to plant seeds, clear obstacles, prepare fertile ground. Ideally, people leave with a greater sense of meaning in their career. But that’s hard to measure, especially in the short term.
So I focus on what I can control: identifying obstacles and helping to remove them.
Exploring Green Guidance: You have developed a “5-As model” of the different phases of the guidance process. How does this connect with introducing sustainability at each stage?
Shékina Rochat: The idea of this model was to clarify the main stages of a successful guidance process—something rarely formalized until now. Where models do exist, they differ widely. So this was an attempt at synthesis.
Once you have this base—and I say this modestly—I find it really useful. It makes many things clearer. For example, when we talk about Green Guidance, we can ask: at what stage of the process are we acting, under what conditions, and with whom?
Here are the phases:
- Welcome (Accueillir). This is the first step. Even the environment can send a message: a WWF poster in the waiting room, water served in glasses instead of plastic. These details signal values. If you know from the outset that your approach strongly integrates sustainability, it’s important to say so—not to impose, but so the person knows what to expect and doesn’t feel trapped. For example: “For me, career guidance is a way to contribute to greater sustainability in professions. My approach goes in that direction. Let’s reflect together on what that could mean for you.”
- Analyze (Analyser). This phase is about understanding the person’s situation, past and present. You might ask: “What did you enjoy at school—biology? What exactly?” Such questions can open links to sustainability. When discussing aspirations, the SDGs can be a useful reference: “What would you like your career to contribute to?” One might reply: “If I could help restore ocean ecosystems, that would be amazing.” This connects personal meaning with collective issues. It’s also the stage to identify obstacles, where tools like the Inventory of Eco-Orientation Difficulties are useful.
- Agree (Accorder). Here you agree on what you’ll work on together, the directions to explore. If the client hasn’t mentioned sustainability, you can suggest it now—but always co-constructively. If they aren’t interested, that’s respected.
- Activate (Activer). This is where in-depth tools come in, such as Jean Guichard’s identity exercises or strengths-based activities linked to the SDGs. It’s the heart of the process, connecting a person’s inner resources with a vision of a sustainable world.
- Accompany (Accompagner). Finally, the goal is to support planning and action, preparing people for the obstacles that will inevitably arise—especially when aiming for sustainable careers. This also means acknowledging that sustainability is not a one-time decision but an ongoing process requiring adjustment and resilience.
“For me, the key message is: dare. Dare to ask people about these topics. Dare to create the tools you need. And treat your practice as a small laboratory for change.”
Exploring Green Guidance: Do you have a call to action or a key message you want to share—a challenge you see for the guidance field?
Shékina Rochat: For me, the main message is: dare. Dare to ask people these questions. If they react badly, that’s fine—you’ve still learned something. If it doesn’t resonate, that’s also useful information. But more often than not, you’ll be surprised at how deeply these themes connect with people.
Also, dare to create the tools you need. What you’re doing with Lab Green Guidance is excellent: collecting existing tools, making them accessible, encouraging experimentation. I often tell clients: “You’re my guinea pig… it’s the first time I’m using this tool, I’d love your feedback.”
People often appreciate being part of creation. It’s empowering for them too. So yes: dare to test, dare to see your practice as “work in progress.” Not everything will work perfectly—and that’s okay. It can always be improved. Above all, don’t wait for everything to be scientifically validated before trying it out. Research processes are long, and sometimes sterile for practice.
Instead, see your practice as a small laboratory. And if something works, dare to talk about it, share your results—just as you are already doing within our association Lab Green Guidance in France.