Workforce Development - A Good Investment?

Why The United States Needs a National Skills Agenda

The Council on Competitiveness in April published the Thrive report, the first in a series of targeted benchmarking reports intended to illuminate key areas of competitive advantage for Americans to succeed in the 21st century and provide an important framework for charting a path to prosperity for American citizens.

The Council on Competitiveness refers to itself as the only group of corporate CEOs, university presidents and labor leaders committed to the future prosperity of all Americans and enhanced U.S. competitiveness in the global economy through the creation of high-value economic activity in the United States.

The insightful report (available for free download) discusses in depth specific issues and strategies relating to increasing our global competitiveness through focused and aggressive workforce development practices.  The synopsis of the call to action follows:

During a time of turbulence and transition—driven by globalization, accelerating technological change, and volatility in global energy, currency and financial markets—America needs a national skills agenda to compete globally and to ensure a rising standard of living for its citizens.

National and Global Demographic Trends Are Raising Red Flags. Slowing growth of the U.S. workforce has the potential to slow economic output if productivity does not increase. Lack of adequate reading and math skills among new U.S. workers compounds this challenge. At the same time, hundreds of millions of educated foreign workers are entering the global workforce and competing for jobs that are increasingly vulnerable to Offshoring.

Four Critical Skills Strategies for the United States

1) Meet the Demand for Middle Skills

Middle-skilled jobs represent the largest number of total openings in the United States until 2016, and the United States is failing to adequately train Americans to take advantage of this opportunity. These jobs do not always require a college degree, but most require training, technical sophistication and initiative. They pay well and do not offshore easily.

2) Build Service Economy Skills

More than three-quarters of all jobs in the United States are in the service economy, yet many policymakers view them as low-skill, low-wage options. In fact, the service sector is driving demand for more complex and creative skill sets—including problem solving, communications, entrepreneurship, computational analysis, collaboration and teamwork.

3) Compete for Innovation Advantage

Simply saying America needs more scientists and engineers is no guarantee that the United States can compete successfully in a global economy in which many nations have copied our model. Policymakers must recognize that the margin of advantage will flow from the fusion of cutting-edge capabilities with entrepreneurial, creative and interdisciplinary talent. Four potential areas to start with to create competitive advantage:

• More integrative scientists and engineers

• More entrepreneurial scientists and engineers

• More business-savvy service scientists and engineers

• More computational scientists and engineers to leverage America’s IT advantage

4) Create Skills for Sustainability

Sustainability will become a more important determinant of global hiring and investment patterns. Where new and growing companies locate and where jobs are created will depend in large measure on which countries successfully anticipate these opportunities and take steps to educate and train workers in these fields. America must get out front and move fast to develop the talent and skills workforce to capture these opportunities.

We are ALL impacted by our willingness and ability to move this initiative ahead.  If we ALL take ownership at a personal level of just ONE of these areas and work with our companies, schools and colleagues, we CAN make a measurable difference in our country. 

If of course, you feel that leaving it to others will "git er done", then prepare yourself for the inevitable consequences.

Despite the slowdown in Construction, the skill shortage problem persists - Here's why...

Do you ever wonder what's ever become of all of those skilled workers being cut in the Construction industry as a sector (such as residential), or a geographic area slows down due to the cooling economy?

I was reading an interesting article "Tale of two construction sectors — one still booms, the other doesn't" in the Seattle Times that was discussing the shifts that have, and still are occurring in Construction - and why, despite the seeming abundance of construction talent - that the shortage is still bad, and worsening in many areas.

It's an insightful article and will help clarify the true level of work skills transferability in the Construction industry. 

Watch this space, as I'll be publishing a article (still under development) about specific things that Construction Employers can do to close the skills gap.

What are the pros and cons about telecommuting?

I have a blog I read with some frequency entitled HR Clean-up (Because HR is a Dirty Business), that recently published a great article entitled "Telecommuting"

It is written from the perspective of the current astronomical fuel prices we're seeing. The gist of the article follows:

There was an article, not a big one, in Sunday's Boston Globe that stated "4-day weeks, telecommuting look better to employers now".  Since I actually teach Virtual HR and I've been a proponent for flexible work arrangements for a long time, I read with interest. Traffic It turns out that soaring commuting costs are finally forcing employers to help employees out.  And, given that so many of us have moved away from work to find cheaper housing, employees are buckling under the increased expenses.  On top of employee costs, employer costs are also skyrocketing.  Companies are starting to figure out that office space isn't cheap--so if an employee is ok with heating and cooling themselves, why not? The other really big change is on the legal front.  Finally, there seems to be some movement to get a bit more flexible. As organizations start to embrace telecommuting, it will be critical for HR to be at the decision making table--along with IT, Building Services, and everyone else who makes the organization tick.  HR has an amazing opportunity to push the traditional boundaries of "butt in seat" and get companies to start measuring what counts--work output. It is going to be a long hot Summer and fuel costs are going to continue to escalate.

However, there are many faces beyond this article, that factor into the telecommuting discussion:

An article "Telecommuting not so great for those left in office" that was published in January 2008 by Kristina Cooke over at Reuters looks at how those that telecommute have less stress and a higher morale compared to those that are left to come into an office everyday. She mentions that “their co-workers tend to find the workplace less enjoyable, have fewer emotional ties to co-workers and generally feel less obligated to the organization.

The beginning of the article states "Telecommuting may boost morale, and cut stress, but it can have the opposite effect on those left behind in the office, according to a new study"

The author cites how telecommuting has been a growing trend in the United States since about 2000. About 37 percent of U.S.-based and international companies now offer flexible work arrangements, with the number of those programs growing at a rate of 11 percent per year, according to the Society of Human Resource Management. but then goes on to explain how

The author cites research of Timothy Golden, a management professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute that claims that when a number of their co-workers toil away from the office by using computers, cell-phones or other electronic equipment, those who do not telecommute are more likely to be dissatisfied with their job and leave the company.

I'm a bit skeptical about this inference.

In the late 1990's I worked with IBA, an early pioneer in telecommuting, and participated in the establishment of the first "telework" centers around Washington DC.  Others have since sprung up, adding credence to the ideas of telecommuting in various "flavors".  In 2006, The Telework Coalition, conducted a Telework Benchmarking study of 13 large organizations with mature telework programs.

This study asked about the attitudes of those employees who did not telework. Both our study and two previously conducted studies by other organizations in which there were multiple participants showed that the non teleworking coworkers were both enthusiastically supportive and felt teleworking was good for the organization, or at the least, the situation was a non issue.

I believe that this area is ripe for investigation and action by management and HR practitioners.  Since each organizations' DNA is different, it may not be the right solution for every situation, but there are viable telecommuting approaches that will and do help organizations attract and retain talent in todays increasingly complex market.

Helping the parties understanding the risk reality in international assignments

According to a report done by Harvey & Weise in 1998, there is plenty of work left to be done before American companies can say that they're "global players."  (These folks know much about the subject, as well as their breakthrough research about ethical behavior by business executives.)

For one, their research points out that with globalization comes increases in international assignments. Yet the issues of mentoring in a global context have not received much management attention.  With all of the concern being given to the shrinking skilled workforce, perhaps it's time to better understand what's going on.

Researchers estimate that between 16 and 40 percent of American international workers fail to complete their assignments – a number that will escalate in the near future due to the increase in females and dual-career couples in international work.

Of those Americans who do complete their international assignments, 30 to 50 percent are considered ineffective or marginally effective by their companies.

Unsuccessful international workers and the resulting reduced effectiveness of the overseas assignments have considerable direct costs to companies (training, relocation, and housing expenses) as well as indirect costs (declining service levels and
lost foreign customers). 

The cost associated with a failed international assignment is estimated between US$100,000 and US$300,000, with a total cost per year for U.S.-based organizations of approximately US$2 billion.

Is that a big enough number to get your attention?

Games that Can Change the World

I read "Mission to Learn" on a regular basis, and recently read a piece that is not only insightful, but also illustrates why advancement of learning approaches is not only good for us as individuals, but also essential for the future of our planet.

The piece I'm referring to is "26 Learning Games to Change the World" written by Jeff Cobb, a really bright and talented guy.

If you have the urge to see what sorts of educational games might be out there that are geared towards making a difference in the world, this is a "MUST READ" article.

What you'll find

1. browser-based free games,
2. desktop-based free games,
3. and desktop-based "fee" games

The world is changing, and if you want to see what's happening in the area of immersive simulations, you'll find this article of real value.

How Interns figure into the picture

For many firms, interns may represent serious untapped potential.

An internship, provides training for those who are interested in a career in process technology or a related field, as well as providing skill/knowledge enhancement for those who seek to further their training in the process industry.  It also provides an opportunity for a real-world work experience.

Have you employed interns previously?  You may want to consider this resource, which is highly relevant today.

We all know that a significant labor shortage has been predicted, and knowledgeable entry-level technicians and craftspersons with some experience in the work environment are preferred by employers.

Internships benefit the Company in a number of ways.  Internships allow the company to invest in the community, and  Interns can be evaluated prior to hire - those you choose to hire tend to contribute to lower recruiting and turnover costs.  These Intern employees are partially trained when you bring them on-board and can be productive to the organization sooner.

They also bring the latest theories, ideas, and classroom training to their job to share with incumbent employees.  Accordingly, they also re-energize the work force with their enthusiasm, positive attitudes and work ethic.

Don't have an Internship program currently?  Watch this space for a future discussion on how you can begin one - and make it work for you.

About the Forgotten Middle

Skills2Compete has created Forgotten Middle state-by-state fact sheets that examine middle-skill jobs and the middle-skills gap in almost every state in the country

Middle-skill jobs, which require more than high-school, but less than a four-year degree, make up the largest part of America’s labor market.

All too often, key industries are unable to find enough sufficiently trained workers to fill these jobs. As a result, job creation and economic growth are stifled.  Few people realize that these middle skill jobs constitute approx 50% of the jobs in the US.

Why Women in Leadership Means Good Business

Thanks to Kellye Whitney managing editor for Talent Management magazine, wrote an excellent piece "Women in Leadership Means Good Business" in early April.

She cites "One of the most compelling reasons for an organization to pay attention to the demographic makeup of its workforce is that a diverse employee base can have significant bottom-line impact.  Yet, when the issue is workplace gender balance and actualizing women's economic and leadership potential, the United States trails behind less developed countries.

This well written article also identifies what companies that want to succeed in the 21st century will have to do to realize the full potential of women and make the necessary investments to nurture their talent.

Additionally, this piece also poses the question "Why are we spending a bunch trying to understand overseas markets while ignoring the basic dynamics of the  men and women in our own workforces?" 

The argument made in Kellye's portrayal, backed up by sound research, is both troubling and compelling when you realize that companies which claim to be recruiting, attracting, retaining and promoting the best possible talent, in reality are recruiting and promoting 80 percent men. 

Fuzzy Math, perhaps? It doesn't seem to add up to me.

Are Construction Jobs Going Down Under?

One of my favorite sources on trends about the skilled labor shortage, is "Perfect Labor Storm 2.0" authored by Ira Wolfe, who constantly helps fill in the gaps about HOW people are coping with the worsening skills shortage.

One of Ira's latest excellent contributions is "Will U.S. construction workers flee to Australia?" where he discusses how the Australian Housing Industry Association (HIA) has called for a special visa scheme to recruit 15,000 overseas construction workers to combat the local (Australian) skills crisis. Thousands of skilled building workers could be lured from the faltering US housing industry to help ease the crisis "down under"

I'd like all of my readers in the construction space to ponder this, and carefully so.  Ask yourself what you think the economic will be to the US, when many workers choose to "relocate" their future to the other side of the globe. 

Just check out one of many sites offering Construction Jobs in Australia and you'll notice two things:

1. many companies are actively seeking qualified and skilled people to join them, and
2. these are the same types of jobs that are being cut by the implosion of the residential housing construction market in the U.S.

American construction workers may be surprised at how well they'll be received by the Australian workforce marketplace, and the incentives they'll have to come down to work.  Kind of makes you wonder when the last time their former American employers told them how valued they were?

Put yourself in the place of the laid-off or soon-to-be-laid-off construction worker.
There are a number of questions you might want to ask yourself...

• Did you feel valued at your last job? 
  
  • Was it because you were unappreciated, or was it because your work contribution was just "ordinary"?
• Do you have the skills to compete in the highly competitive Australian workforce
  • you didn't think they were looking for unskilled general labor did you?
  • (by skills, I mean the skills to survive in the marketplace, not just the technical skills to get the job)

Looking for another job, especially in another country, can be a daunting, as well as an enlightening process for US construction workers.  By entering into a job search in the other parts of the world, they will become informed of other opportunities and perhaps for the first time for most U.S. construction workers, lets them know how competitive they are in the "global" job market.  (HINT: If your skills have become outdated or job specific, you might want to consider a few training programs in order to update your skills, or develop new ones.)

American construction workers who consider the new global opportunities that are appearing, may also find that they need skills to adapt in a different culture that they never before had to consider.

Time of great risk or great opportunity?  I guess it depends on how you want to look at it.

What Should We Expect as Basic Administrative Skills?

When I interact with small business owners, I am appalled to hear the difficulty that they are having finding workers with the most basic administrative skills.  I recently spoke to a client who advertised a entry level sales position, got over 2,000 responses, and after sorting out the candidates, was left with only one (1) that demonstrated the attitude,, work ethic and technical skills that he required.

When I asked what he was looking for, he gave me his list. 
It looked like this:

• Familiarity with desktop operating systems (Apple OS, Windows)
• Ability to access files - understand the concept of connectivity - storage
• Perform basic word processing
• Operate E-mail, calendar, address book
• Able to perform data entry and chart preparation
• Create a brief informational presentation
• Ability to safeguard confidential information
• High-school graduate (not GED)
• Able to pass a drug test
• Valid active in-state drivers license

Note that sales experience was NOT one of his requirements.  He was prepared to train the new hire in his products / services and how to sell.

Is this indicative of what the "available" workforce looks like?

They Say It's Only Going to Get Worse. Really?

A recent article published at HR World, entitled "Job Filling Is Only Going to Get Harder" provides a glimpse into the future for employers.

“These numbers indicate a critical need for talent that’s forcing organizations to rethink their hiring and retention practices-or suffer the consequences,” said Steve Watson, international chairman of Stanton Chase, which has 57 offices in 35 countries and is a top 10-ranked global retained search firm.

Two-thirds of the firms are concerned . . . and another two-third are at least partially prepared for it.

However, according to the survey, 36 percent of employers are taking the bury head in sand route. That’s always productive.

Think it’s hard to fill jobs now? It’s going to get even harder. According to a recent survey by Stanton Chase International and Birkman International, there will be 11.5 million more jobs then workers by the year 2010. Why?

According to the research data from many sources, it’s because baby boomers are retiring and the new generation of workers have different work ethics, talent and expectations then their older counterparts.

I disagree and think this is view is a bit simplistic.  The worker shortage involves the boomer retirements, but you also have to factor in the shifting global demand for workers, a lower birthrate, people waiting until a later age to start families, shifting attitudes about work, and on and on.

Why our future depends on education...

Lee Iwan, a perennial favorite of mine, has published "Our future depends on education"

OK, Before you reply with a big DUH, consider what's really at  stake. Read the article, and I promise you, you will have a different point of view.

read more | digg story

It would appear that they AREN'T ready to work

Mark Schoeff Jr. over at Workforce Management published a brief entitled Skills Of Recent U.S. High School Graduates Leave Employers Cold that references previous posts in this blog about the report, “Are They Really Ready to Work?”

What's interesting about Mark's update is what has happened since this report was published. Workforce advocates came to  in late March to get the attention of Congress on what they call an urgent problem with the labor market: High school graduates are deficient and those with a college education only adequate in key skills employers are demanding to cope with global economic competition.

In a March 28 Capitol Hill briefing, the groups presented findings from their poll of about 400 companies showing that new entrants to the U.S. workforce generally disappoint those who would like to give them their first job. High school-educated workers lack the level of ability employers seek in everything from writing and work ethic to oral communication. Twenty-three percent to 27 percent of respondents said college graduates were weak in writing and leadership.

These are critical deficiencies that need to be addressed, and need to receive the funding priority to make the needed changes in our education and training infrastructure.  Left in it's current state, we'll be in a heck of a mess, increasingly unable to meet the most basic needs of our society.

U.S. Department of Labor Proposes Rules To Align Apprenticeship With The 21st Century Economy

WASHINGTON The U.S. Department of Labor has proposed rules to align the national apprenticeship system with the tools and flexibility needed for the 21st century global economy.

"Apprenticeship is a proven model of training that has been expanded beyond its traditional origins in industries such as construction to high growth industries and sectors," said Assistant Secretary of Labor for Employment and Training Emily Stover DeRocco. "We have proposed new regulations to reflect the 21st century global economy and the changes that have occurred in apprenticeship programs over the past 30 years."

The proposed rules would set up a more flexible and user-friendly approach for apprentices and employers, and make updates and changes affecting state apprenticeship agencies and the U.S. Department of Labor. The revisions would expand the ways that individuals can advance through apprenticeships. The types of training would expand from one to the following three approaches:

• Competency-based approach, which requires the apprentice to demonstrate competency in the defined subject areas and does not require any specific hours of On-the-Job Training (OJT) or Related Technical Instruction (RTI).
• Traditional, time-based approach, which requires the apprentice to complete a specific number of OJT and RTI hours.
• Hybrid approach, which requires the apprentice to complete a minimum number of OJT and RTI hours and demonstrate competency in the defined subject areas.

Electronic media would be added to the definition of Related Technical Instruction and, as a result, establish technology-based and distance learning as part of an apprentice's instruction.

The proposed changes provide for interim credential certificates, so that active apprentices can demonstrate their proficiency in particular required skills and competencies to employers. Provisions also feature reciprocity, which would allow programs to cross state lines, so long as the host state's applicable laws are followed. Program performance and accountability standards would be enhanced, while guidance and technical assistance would continue to give apprenticeship programs the best prospects for success.

What are Hard to Fill Jobs? Not What You Might Expect...

The country is not suffering for astrophysicists and neurosurgeons.

Rather, a majority of the "hardest-to-fill jobs" are done by blue collar workers, according to a survey by Manpower Inc.

The jobs most likely to go wanting are:

1. Sales representative
2. Teacher
3. Mechanic
4. Technician
5. Management/executive
6. Truck driver
7. Driver/delivery
8. Accountant
9. Laborer
10. Machine operator

To compile the results, Manpower surveyed more than 2,400 employers nationwide.

"With the variety of positions employers are struggling to fill, it seems like job seekers should have little trouble finding work," said Jonas Prising, president of Manpower North America, an employment services company. "Yet on a daily basis, we hear from clients who can't find the right people for open positions and candidates who are struggling to get hired. ... The talent crunch is more complex than a shortage of people."

In 2007, 41 percent of employers said that they had difficulty filling jobs, down from 44 percent in 2006. Sales representatives were also the hardest jobs to fill in 2006, though engineers and nurses were then second and third.

Is Generation X Ready to Take Over from Baby Boomers?

Whereas Baby Boomers were the last generation to go out behind the barn and cut a switch because we mouthed off to our mothers,  Gen-X kids  would quickly remind us that charges will be filed or they'll suffer mental anguish if they are so much as verbally reprimanded. Is the difference in upbringing a factor in their ability to work and lead ?

read more | digg story

Income inequality and how it affects the workforce

Paul Krugman, in an article entitled The Great Wealth Transfer articulates the simple reason why he thinks most Americans think the economy is fair to poor amidst the apparent "healthy" economy we enjoy.

For most Americans, it really is fair to poor. Wages have failed to keep up with rising prices. Even in 2005, a year in which the economy grew quite fast, the income of most non-elderly families lagged behind inflation.

The number of Americans in poverty has risen even in the face of an official economic recovery, as has the number of Americans without health insurance. Most Americans are little, if any, better off than they were last year and definitely worse off than they were in 2000.

But how is this possible? The economic pie is getting bigger -- how can it be true that most Americans are getting smaller slices? The answer, of course, is that a few people are getting much, much bigger slices. Although wages have stagnated since the 2000 elections, corporate profits have doubled.

The gap between the nation's CEOs and average workers is now ten times greater than it was a generation ago. And while the current administration's tax cuts shaved only a few hundred dollars off the tax bills of most Americans, they saved the richest one percent more than $44,000 on average. In fact, once all of these tax cuts take effect, it is estimated that those with incomes of more than $200,000 a year -- the richest five percent of the population -- will pocket almost half of the money. Those who make less than $75,000 a year -- eighty percent of America -- will receive barely a quarter of the cuts. In the post 2000 era, economic inequality is on the rise.

Rising inequality isn't new. The gap between rich and poor started growing before Ronald Reagan took office, and it continued to widen through the Clinton years. But what is happening under the current administration is something entirely unprecedented: For the first time in our history, so much growth is being siphoned off to a small, wealthy minority that most Americans are failing to gain ground even during a time of economic growth -- and they know it.

In the past few years, distrust of our government and its actions only worsens as economic inequality rises. Indeed, the gap between rich and poor doesn't just mean that few Americans share in the benefits of economic growth -- it also undermines the sense of shared experience that binds us together as a nation.

"Trust is based upon the belief that we are all in this together, part of a 'moral community,' " writes Eric Uslaner, a political scientist at the University of Maryland who has studied the effects of inequality on trust. "It is tough to convince people in a highly stratified society that the rich and the poor share common values, much less a common fate."

Does this affect the attitudes of the workforce?  Readers, what do you think?

Do We Understand How to Get to the Truth?

So many significant decisions are made in the workplace based on majority opinion or by the highest ranking person in the room.  Does this mean that the decisions are correct, or that the arguments presented are based on fact, or truth?

For that matter, where does one turn for education or guidance on how ethical decisions can be arrived at?

I recently reviewed, "The Fallibility Principle" author by T. Edward Damer, (the author of an earlier work entitled "Attacking Faulty Reasoning: A Practical Guide to Fallacy-free Arguments").

It is a relatively new  publication that seems to provide this type of guidance.   This book is written in such a way to give the reader the knowledge and insight to put forth good arguments as well as point out how to identify flaws in others.

Of particular interest is the author's focus on the quest for the truth, or as he puts it the most defensible position. While the techniques laid out in this book can be used to 'win' arguments, the focus in primarily on helping stakeholders find the truth.

Some leading education firms, like RedVector, specializing in the education needs of the Design and Construction industry, obviously think this is important.  They have several courses in their online catalog that stresses the importance of finding the truth and arriving at ethical business decisions:

• Ethics for Professional Architects Part I and II
• Ethical Decision Making for Engineers (3 part program)
• Ethics for Surveyors and Mappers
• 15 Hour Petroleum Engineer Package #1
• 15 Hour Mechanical Engineer Package #1
• 15 Hour Highway Engineering Package with Ethics
• 30 hour Business and Professional Development Package
• 8 hour Bridge Design Package with Ethics
• 15 Hour Civil Engineering Package with Ethics
• 15 Hour Structural Engineering Package with Ethics

I feel that in today's world, the truth of the matter is too often overshadowed by necessity or convenience.  Readers, what do you think?  Is additional education in ethical decision making a priority for you?

Professors take the long course in poverty

The American Association of University Professors, states 68% percent of all jobs in higher education are part-time, temporary, or both, and are often paid no more than $1,600 to $2,400 a course, without benefits of any sort, much less contracts extending beyond the current term. 

At a time when serious questions exist about the quality of education in the U.S. you'll find this article a painful insight how the university "system" is putting finances ahead of quality education. 

Do we really expect to turn out top talent from our schools, when we are shortchanging the teaching staff?

read more | digg story

Mining "silver" becoming increasingly popular

Looking for work in Japan? Shigeo Hirano  says you may have an edge if you are older than 60.  Hirano, president of staffing agency Mystar 60 Corp., says so-called "silver" workers are in growing demand as Japan's population ages.

"Japan's best engineers and technicians are leaving factories and offices for retirement," said Hirano, who heads the employment company which specializes in finding jobs for those aged 60 and over.  "Companies are realizing that hiring the elderly is the only way to retain high levels of skills and expertise," added Hirano, himself a sprightly 63.

A decline in young workers globally is exacerbating the concern as  the population ages at an unprecedented pace. The proportion of people over the age of 65 to total population is already the world's highest at 20 percent of Japan's population of 127 million people. The figure is forecast to hit 40 percent by 2055.

This and other information characterizing the worsening labor crunch were chronicled in a Reuters article published in the Boston Globe entitled "Greying workers wanted for hire in aging Japan"

Recruitment of "silver workers" is projected to play an increasing role in the quest for competent, experienced staff.  It is just one of many strategies to ensure the workforce needed for the 21st century.

Are We Creating Hardworking Idiots?

Thanks to Adrian Savage, a writer, Englishman, and a retired business executive, in that order. He authored the following piece "Creating Hardworking Idiots"
You can read his posts most days at Slow Leadership, a popular site for everyone who wants to build a civilized place to work and bring back the taste, zest and satisfaction to leadership.

The German World War II general Erich von Manstein is said to have categorized his officers into four types. The first type, he said, is lazy and stupid. His advice was to leave them alone because they don’t do any harm. The second type is hard-working and clever. He said that they make great officers because they ensure everything runs smoothly. The third group is composed of hardworking idiots. Von Manstein claims that you must immediately get rid of these, as they force everyone around them to perform pointless tasks. The fourth category are officers who are lazy and clever. These, he says, should be your generals. Discovering this information set me to wondering how General von Manstein’s categories might apply to business organizations today.

Lazy and Stupid

Most organizations have some managers within them who are lazy and stupid—at least, that has been my experience. Would you agree with the general that you can leave them alone, because they do no harm? I doubt it. Most organizations claim they try to get rid of any employee who is found to be lazy, let alone stupid as well. Maybe they try, but they don’t seem to be so successful, judging by the number who are left, some even in fairly exalted positions. Maybe one reason for this is that lazy and stupid people rarely do much active harm. The harm they do is more often based on missing opportunities and stifling the creativity of those who report to them. Bad enough, but not always easy to turn into clear grounds for dismissal—especially if the person in question is protected by someone powerful. Still, my guess is that even lazy and stupid people today realize that the best route to self-preservation is at least to appear busy and active.

Hardworking and Clever

Von Manstein’s next group is made up of hardworking, clever people. Organizations mostly want as many of these as they can get, for obvious reasons. But you’ll notice that the general seems to confine them to the military equivalent of middle management: jobs that are aimed at making everything run smoothly. I suspect one reason is that such people do make excellent administrators. They can take orders from above and turn them into practical ways of achieving the desired results. Some are so useful in these roles that they are never allowed to rise higher. Others maybe want to progress, but lack something that—at least in von Manstein’s view—is essential to become a good general. That something, it seems, is laziness. He wants the choice of generals to be made from people who are clever, naturally, but also lazy. Why should that make them better top executives?

Lazy and Clever

One reason might be that laziness is the principal spur to creativity. Lazy people are always looking for easier, simpler, and less arduous ways to do things. If they are also clever, the chances are that they will find them, and make them available to everyone else. Lazy people are also natural delegators, and find it very attractive to let their subordinates get on with their work without interference from above. Lazy, but bright, generals would be likely to make sure they focused on the essentials and ignored anything that might make for unnecessary work, whether for themselves or other people. In fact, it’s hard to see why you would not want your top managers to be as lazy as they are clever. It would indeed make them great strategists and leaders of people.

Hardworking Idiots

Now to the last group: the ones von Manstein said that you should get rid of immediately.
That group is made up of people who are hardworking idiots, in his words. He says such people force those around them into pointless activities. I don’t know about you, but I suffered from several bosses I would unhesitatingly put into precisely that category. They were extremely hardworking—and demanded the same from their subordinates—but what they set others to work on (and what they spent their own time in doing) was mostly worthless. Maybe they were actually lazy and stupid people trying hard to seem busy, but too stupid to choose the right things to be busy about. It certainly felt like busyness for its own sake, and it was hateful. Or were they naturally hardworking idiots? Some probably were, but it’s my opinion that most such people are clever enough. It is the organization that makes them function like morons.

Today’s fast-paced, macho style of organizational culture creates, and then fosters, the hardworking idiot. Indeed, I think it takes a great many sound, useful, hardworking, and clever people and turns them into idiots by denying them the time or the opportunity to think or use their brains. If you don’t look busy all the time, you’re virtually asking for a pink slip, never mind what it is that you are doing—or whether it is actually of any use to the organization or its customers. It’s all so rushed and frenetic. If all that matters is “meeting the numbers” and getting things done (whatever those things are), managers will be forced into working hard at projects that they know make no sense.

The dumbing down of organizations isn’t caused by poor educational standards or faulty recruitment. It’s due mostly to the crazy pace that is set, and the obsessive focus on the most obvious, rigidly short-term objectives. The result is a sharp increase in hardworking idiots: people who are coerced into long hours and constant busyness, while being systematically forced to act like idiots by the culture around them. Don’t ask questions. Don’t cause problems by thinking, or waste time on coming up with new ideas. Don’t think about the future, or try to anticipate problems before they arise. Just keep at it, do exactly what is expected of you, and always get the most done in the least amount of time and at the lowest cost. If von Manstein is correct, the result will be that more and more employees will be used to perform essentially pointless tasks. Isn’t that exactly what we see?

I think that even a fairly cursory look around most organizations today would confirm the accuracy of this observation. Consider all the time wasted in unnecessary meetings. The obsessive emphasis on staying in touch, regardless of need. The torrents of e-mails, most of which are simply copies of documents of no direct relevance to the people to whom they are sent. The constant collecting of data for no clear reason. Management by numbers and motivation by numerically-based performance measures. Trust replaced by obsessive control and leadership by forced ranking of subordinates against vague criteria determined by committees with no idea of the specific circumstances.

You do not need ethical insight or human understanding to operate a machine, and machines are how many of today’s leaders see their organization: machines for making quick profits, not civilized communities of people working together to a common end. We can only hope some organizations at least see the error of their ways before the hardworking idiot becomes the commonest creature in the hierarchy. We are well on the way to that point, which is probably why so many people cherish dreams of getting out of the corporate rat race. It’s no fun to be forced to deny your own intelligence on a daily basis. We can still reverse the trend, but only by dropping the current out-dated dogmas, dangerous half truths, and total nonsense that disfigure management thinking. Let’s do it before it is too late.

Does Workplace Loyalty Cut Both Ways?

I suspect that one of the main reasons why so many people put up with long hours, constant demands to increase output, and even Hamburger Management is simply loyalty: loyalty to colleagues and friends, loyalty to a workplace, even corporate loyalty.

Not familiar with Hamburger Management? A relatively new term, coined by the folks over at Slow Leadership, refers to the process of doing everything as quickly and cheaply as possible. When everything has to be done yesterday, there can be no time for debate or questioning. Blind obedience is required because that is the only response that fits the constant demands for going faster and doing more with fewer and fewer resources. Blaming others? Hamburger Management is like every other type of cheap, shoddy goods. It doesn’t work very well. So those who use it must constantly find excuses to avoid the truth being seen: that they are incompetent because of the methods they are using.

I recently was introduced to an excellent piece entitled: Workplace Loyalty Cuts Both Ways, authored by Carmine Coyote. a brand of Adrian Savage a noted marketing guru, Englishman and a retired business executive who lives in Tucson, Arizona. You can read his serious thoughts most days at Slow Leadership, the site for anyone who wants to bring back the taste, zest and satisfaction to leadership; and his crazier ones at The Coyote Within..   It's really a good article.

The trouble is that organizations don’t appear to have the same sense of loyalty in return. That puts a huge strain on employees. Do you pitch in and help out your colleagues, who are struggling with the latest batch of unreasoning demands from on high? Or do you start polishing your resume and get ready to walk out the door as quickly as possible? Do you stay with your belief that the job you’re doing is both worthwhile and valuable—even if it’s poorly paid, as so many jobs in teaching, nursing, and other public services tend to be?

Or do you decide to follow the money into a different career—or even consider leaving to work overseas—and let go of your loyalty to an ideal?

You owe it to yourself to read Workplace Loyalty Cuts Both Ways
check it out for the full coverage.

We All Want To Work for A Company That Supports Us, Don't We?

I wanted to share this with you my readers.  I received this message from a close friend of ours, who also like myself is a vet.

My cousin sent this to me and I thought you all would like to know about it.  Happy holiday shopping!
Shannon

I know I needed this reminder since Sears isn't always my first choice. Amazing when you think of how long the war has lasted and they haven't withdrawn from their commitment. Could we each buy at least one thing at Sears this year? How does Sears treat its employees who are called up for military duty? By law, they are required to hold their jobs open and available, but nothing more. Usually, people take a big pay cut and lose benefits as a result of being called up.

Sears is voluntarily paying the difference in salaries and maintaining all benefits, including medical insurance and bonus programs, for all called up reservist employees for up to two years. I submit that Sears is an exemplary corporate citizen and should be recognized for its contribution.

I suggest we all shop at Sears, and be sure to find a manager to tell them why we are there so the company gets the positive reinforcement it well deserves. Pass it on.

Decided to check this before I sent it forward. So I sent the following e-mail to the Sears Customer Service Department: I received this e-mail and I would like to know if it is true. If it is, th e Internet may have just become one very good source of advertisement for your company. I know I would go out of my way to buy products from Sears instead of another store for a like item, even if it's cheaper at that store.

This is their answer to my e-mail:
Dear Customer: Thank you for contacting Sears.The information is factual. We appreciate your positive feedback. Sears regards service to our country as one of greatest sacrifices our young men and women can make. We are happy to do our part to lessen the burden they bear at this time.
Bill Thorn
Sears Customer Care
webcenter@sears.com
1-800-349-4358

Please pass this on to all your friends. Sears needs to be recognized for this outstanding contribution and we need to show them as Americans, we do appreciate what they are doing for our military!!!

It's Verified ! By Snopes.com at: http://www.snopes.com/politics/military/sears.asp (shows the entire article)
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/s/sears.htm

Our Schools are Becoming Dropout Factories

Imagine a nation in which all students, from Benton Harbor to Watts, from Akron to Baltimore, from Chicago’s South side to rural South Carolina, routinely graduate from high school ready and prepared to succeed in college or advanced post-secondary training. Imagine the social and economic implications of being able to say to any child, in any locale in the United States, “you will be provided with a high school that will educate you, challenge you, care for you, support you, and graduate you ready to compete and succeed in the world.” Fifty years after Brown vs. the Board of Education, the image of public high schools providing all youth with equal opportunity to receive a high quality education remains inspiring and compelling.

Current reality, however, offers a much more troubled picture. In each of the locations listed above, half or more of high school students do not graduate, let alone leave high school prepared to fully participate in civic life. It is no coincidence that these locales are gripped by high rates of unemployment, crime, ill health, and chronic despair. For many in these and other areas, the only real and lasting pipeline out of poverty in modern America, a solid high school education followed by post secondary schooling or training, is cracked and broken. Consider the central findings of this study:

• Nearly half of our nation’s African American students, nearly 40% of Latino students, and only 11% of white students attend high schools in which graduation is not the norm.
• Between 1993 and 2002, the number of high schools with the lowest levels of success in promoting freshmen to senior status on time (a strong correlate of high dropout and low graduation rates) increased by 75%, compared with only an 8% increase in the total number of high schools.
• There are currently between 900 and 1,000 high schools in the country in which graduating is at best a 50/50 proposition. In 2,000 high schools, a typical freshman class shrinks by 40% or more by the time the students reach their senior year. This represents nearly one in five regular or vocational high schools in the U.S. that enroll 300 or more students.
• A majority minority high school is five times more likely to have weak promoting power (promote 50% or fewer freshmen to senior status on time) than a majority white school.
• Poverty appears to be the key correlate of high schools with weak promoting power. Majority minority high schools with more resources (e.g., selective programs, higher per pupil expenditures, suburban location) successfully promote students to senior status at the same rate as majority white schools.
• The majority of high schools with weak promoting power are located in northern and western cities and throughout the southern states.
• High schools with the worst promoting power are concentrated in a sub-set of states. Nearly 80% of the nation’s high schools that produce the highest number of dropouts can be found in just 15 states (Arizona, California, Georgia, Florida, Illinois, Louisiana, Michigan, Mississippi, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Texas).
• While only 20% of high schools that enroll more than 300 students are located in large and medium-sized cities, 60% of the nation’s high schools with the lowest levels of promoting power are found in these cities.
• Many cities have high concentrations of high schools with weak promoting power. In half of the nation’s largest 100 cities, 50% or more of high school students who attend regular or vocational high schools with more than 300 students attend high schools with weak promoting power. In some cities, students have virtually no other choice but to attend a high school with weak promoting power.
• More than half of African American students in Illinois, Ohio, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania attend high schools in which the majority of students do not graduate on time, if at all. African American students in these states are up to 10 times more likely to attend a high school with very weak promoting power, high dropout and low graduation rates than white students.
• Five southern states—Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina, Florida, and Texas— collectively lead the nation in both total number and level of concentration of high schools with weak promoting power.

These findings are a chilling reminder of how much further we need to go to truly realize the vision of Brown. They are also a call to action. We must no longer tolerate the squandered potential, limited life chances, and social malaise that result from poorly educating our nation’s youth. Increasing momentum for high school reform is a promising development but must not become a passing fad. With sustained commitment and judicious use of resources, transforming the American high school will be a powerful vehicle to achieving a more just and prosperous society.

Where to Find Women Building Bridges

Responding to the London 2012 Olympics and the push to get women into Construction, members of the WorcNet Women’s network, based in Skipton, hosted a “Women Into Construction” seminar at the Craven College Construction Launch event on Monday 5 June.

The seminar included presentations from two women ambassadors from the Construction Industry Training Board. Vicky Belton works as a Civil Engineer and Helen Dickinson as a Quantity Surveyor, they each presented on their journey and experiences as women in the construction industry. Attique Barlas told the audience of a scheme to introduce minority groups and women into construction, offering a four week placement and a guaranteed interview which could lead to a job and further training. Mary Kelly gave a very inspiring talk on the work of the Walter Segal Trust which supports people who are interested in self build opportunities, and Keith and Jane Barber from SHE Build UK told of their business which employs and trains women construction workers for their property management and development company in Bradford.

Members of the North Northumberland and Cumbrian Women’s Networks who travelled down to the Launch event are taking back information to their own networks and local colleges in a bid to establish a similar project in their own areas.

Following the formal launch event, some of the WorcNet members who are currently undertaking a 10 week starter course in construction, hosted an evening dinner at the Rendezvous Hotel for the speakers and the guests from other networks, where they talked about their experiences on the course and their hopes for the future.

WorcNet Co-ordinator Debi Hawkins said “We are really pleased that 11 of our members have taken part in this first Women In Construction course and we are working with the College to progress women into more specialized courses later on in the year. We hope to be running another Women In Construction course from September. We will be having a Women In Construction taster day in September which will include presentations, workshops and hands on activities.”

For more information on WorcNet, the courses or the taster day please contact Debi, Kath or Karen on 01756 692788 or worcnet@craven-college.ac.uk

Emerging Health Care Trends 2007 Survey Results

Today, employers appear to be making a "choice of roads" decision when it comes to providing healthcare for their employees.  The choice taken can have significant effect for the employer as it impacts their ability to retain existing employees as well as colors the attractiveness of the organization when seen through the eye of certain classes of job-seekers.

There are two distinct types of employers, and their beliefs and behaviors are dramatically different in how they view the value of Healthcare benefits according to Hewitt Associates in a recent survey report.
Download emerging_health_care_trends_2007_survey_results.pdf  

There are the “Stop Light-to-Stop Light” employers who find they are primarily focused on managing trends.  They have substantial resistance to cutting benefits because they view health care benefits as an attraction and retention tool and are in a competitive market for talent. At the same time, however, they do not tend to see health and productivity as a business issue.

Then there are the respondents indicate they will become much more involved in health and health care benefits, referred to as the "Superhighway" companies

Employers from both roads ranked managing cost and competitive positioning as their top two business issues related to health care. However, the next most important business issue for Superhighway employers is a leadership mandate to address health care, whereas Stop Light-to-Stop Light employers are worried about profitability. Similarly, employers from both roads ranked employee satisfaction and protection from catastrophic loss as the top two employee issues related to health benefits. Superhighway employers ranked improving productivity next, while Stop Light-to-Stop Light employers are worried about turnover.

Small employers have been exiting from health care, dropping sponsorship of their plans entirely.  However, for most large employers, this approach would create significant difficulties for many of their employees. If an employee or dependent currently had a serious medical condition, for example, he or she may be denied coverage entirely in the individual marketplace. While costs continue to escalate, very few large employers are currently considering dropping sponsorship of health care
plans.

The Hewitt survey validates this trend—no respondents believe their organization will be less involved in health care benefits over the next three to five years than they are today.  What remains to be see is how each group reconciles the cost of quality healthcare to the demands of an increasingly tighter labor market.

Launch of www.Skills2Compete.org with resources for advancing a 21st-century skill guarantee

 

Reminder!  Register by Thursday, Nov. 8th A 21st-Century Vision for Opportunity and Innovation Launch of the Skills2Compete Campaign A National Webinar Monday, November 12, 2007 at 12:00 p.m. EST To register, email carlam@workforcealliance.or Learn About the Research Harry J. Holzer Professor of Public Policy, Georgetown University Visiting Fellow, Urban Institute will talk about the campaign report, America's Forgotten Middle-Skill Jobs by Holzer and Robert Lerman.. Hear from Representatives of Endorsing Organizations National Association of Manufacturers Phyllis Eisen, Vice President, The Manufacturing Institute & Executive Director, Center for Workforce Success International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers R. Thomas Buffenbarger, International President Kentucky Community and Technical College System Dr. Keith Bird, Chancellor Training, Inc. National Elsa Bengel, Vice President, Boston YMCA Education & Training The Workforce Alliance Andy Van Kleunen, Executive Director See the Resources Launch of www.Skills2Compete.org with resources for advancing a 21st-century skill guarantee. Register now for the national launch of the Skills2Compete campaign by emailing carlam@workforcealliance.org. Those who register will receive dial-in information one prior to the event.  Learn more about the campaign and endorse at our temporary campaign website at www.workforcealliance.org/endorseS2C.           The Skills2Compete Vision: Every U.S. worker should have access to the equivalent of at least two years of education or training past high school—leading to a vocational credential, industry certification, or one's first two years of college—to be pursued at whatever point and pace makes sense for individual workers and industries. Every person must also have the opportunity to obtain the basic skills needed to pursue such education.

Visit our temporary campaign website at www.WorkforceAlliance.org/S2C

Human Capital and the war for talent

What are the factors that will determine the size and makeup of tomorrow's workforce?