Workforce Development - A Good Investment?

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

Companies May Lose Older Workers with Shortsighted Policies

A recent survey by Manpower revealed that only 21 percent have implemented retention strategies to keep them participating in the workforce.  Since senior employees are not enticed solely by money, using personality assessment and progressive retention strategies are part of a successful formula for retaining skilled talents. 

read more | digg story

Why Management is Fearful of Developing their Workforce

Recently, I was reading one of the great articles published by AmCheck (the Payroll Services, HR Solutions, and Employee Benefits people), that discussed the characteristics of a successful company.

One might think workforce development is an obvious characteristic of all successful companies and their managers. 

But Lominger Limited Inc. - a leadership development think tank and consultancy - reports that managers and employees ranked "developing direct reports" dead last out of all 67 competencies in its bi-annual study of leadership skills. That's right—managers are viewed and view themselves "worst" at developing their direct reports compared to all other skills in their toolbox.

What's your fear level?  Is it paralyzing you to the point where you may become a casualty to "inaction?"

Fears and hollow excuses are usually what prevents managers from developing their people. You may not be actively developing your reports job because you fear:

• Losing power. If you develop your people, you may not be the technical expert of your area anymore. (In reality, you agreed to not be the expert any more when you took a leadership position)
               
• Losing your good people. As people develop, they may want to grow further beyond the function of your department. Be aware, however, that if you are seen as a "people hoarder," your career will be severely diminished.
               
• Being "leap-frogged." Someone you develop may eventually get a job you want. You may even have to report to one of your previous direct reports. (Let's hope you developed them well.) If you use this excuse, you're revealing a basic insecurity about your own abilities.
               
• Creating a rival. Worse than the fear of being leap-frogged may be the fear that a former direct report could become an arch rival in your organization. This excuse is another indication of personal insecurity.

Or you may not be developing other leaders because it takes time or you want to avoid the responsibility. But what else are you doing with your time that is more important? Here are six reasons why you should can the excuses and work on your workforce-development skills:

• To improve productivity and effectiveness. While developing a direct report may cause some temporary reduction in productivity, it will pay dividends in your department, team or division in the long run
               
• To maximize long-term potential. Developing direct reports improves the long-run success of your entire company.
               
• To keep your sanity. Good people developers usually go home on time. Developing your people not only improves their capacity to perform, but it improves your capacity to delegate.
               
• To attract talent. When the word gets out that you are a people developer, the up-and-comers in your company line up to work in your department, team, shop or division.
               
• To "plant" good people. When people leave your area, they know your department's function, your methods and your needs, and can help you be successful from their new position
               
• To get promoted. Being a great people developer differentiates you from the pack. People say good things about you. People realize you are a more complete leader, not the usual, one-commodity manager.

No one becomes a great people developer overnight, and there's no one right way to do it. You should cater to your strengths and to your style. Here are some general tips for improvement:

• Be the motivator, not the "mom." Convince your employees that they are responsible for their own development. Each must have a written development plan, including both short- and long-term development goals. Remind employees that capitalism is "creative destruction" and that their jobs may dissolve without notice. Corporate maternalism breeds unhealthy dependence on the company and minimizes self-reliance.
               
• Incorporate their need to have a personal development plan into your performance-management process.
               
• Recognize that development is more than going to training. While training courses are an important aspect of development, so are rotations, special tasks, complex projects, reading assignments, informal "brown-bag discussions" and even successful staff meetings.
               
• Coach with a passion. Most people can remember a coach, teacher or mentor who dared to confront behavior when it was less than optimal. People developers constructively confront-in a private and professional way-when needed       
               
• Delegate incessantly, and make assignments with development in mind.
               
• Know your people, particularly their career aspirations.               
               
• When interviewing potential hires for your department, discuss an estimated time for them to move on (assuming this fits their career aspirations), usually by the end of three years. Make moving on a goal, and promise that you will help them find their next position within the company when they have developed to your expectations and performed in their current job for a reasonable period of time.
• Creatively reward people who actively develop themselves. Money is not always the right answer. Know your people and reward them with a motivating intangible.

Lose that fear!  You will pay a dear price for not developing your available talent in the next few years.  Remember, this is one of those thinngs you pay for, whether you do it or not.

Looked at the 2008 Federal Budget Lately?

I recently took a closer look at the 2008 Federal Budget.  What I saw troubled me - a lot.

It cuts funding for career and technical education in half, and job training programs by $1 billion.

These programs are critical if we are going to continue to prepare workers to meet the demands of the 21st century workforce. Job Corps is reduced by $55 million, or 3.5 percent. It also would cut Head Start by $100 million.

As we enter a time of increasingly sophisticated skills being needed in order to meet the workforce needs of today and tomorrow, doesn't this seem a bit strange to you?

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.

Laborers Are Unskilled, Right?

A common misconception is that the "common laborer" you encounter falls into the "unskilled labor" category.  In discussions I have with others, I sometimes hear things like "well they're just laborers, anybody could do their job.  Wow!  DO these people need to get up-to-date!

Sure, there are plenty of "general labor" jobs where anyone who can fog a mirror could be pressed into service, but there are in every industry "laborers" that don't fit into the category of "tradesmen", but who have a vital role, and need to have a set of skills to do their job.

For example, in the Construction Industry, here are some of the categories of "LABORER" that the U.S. Department of Labor includes as skilled labor (and have specific "prevailing wages" defined under the Davis-Bacon Act)

• potmen
• power tool operator
• small machine operator
• concrete labor including concrete preparation
• signalmen
• laser beam operator
• waterproofer
• open caisson
• test pit
• underpinning
• pier hole and ditches
• laggers and all work associated with lagging
• strippers
• operator of hand derricks
• vibrator operators
• pipe layers
• tile layers (tile laid on road construction projects ONLY)
• operators of jackhammer
• paving breakers
• spaders or any machine that does the same general type of work
• scaffold builders
• operators of towmasters
• scootcretes
• buggymobiles and other machines of similar character
• operators of tampers and rammers and other machines that do the same general type of work, whether powered by air, electric or gasoline
• builders of trestle scaffolds over one tier high
• sand blaster
• power and chain saw operators used in clearing
• installers of well points
• wagon drill operators
• acetylene burners and
• licensed powdermen.

After looking at this list, it should be clear that these laborers need to have specific skills, right?  Ask yourself, in the "War for Talent", what are you doing to recruit people with these skills, test for these skills, or development of these skills?

Is Fraud or Incompetence Now a Skillset?

I am an avid reader of CFO magazine, an award-winning Economist Group publication, dedicated to providing relevant insights to senior financial executives around the world. Reaching an international audience of over one million corporate decision makers each month through specialized events, conferences and research, it is a highly credible "microscope" into the complex world of corporate finance.

Just for grins, I went back into the first three (3) weeks of headlines for September 2007 and discovered the following:

• Apple's Jobs Was Subpoenaed, Report Says
• Ex-CFO Says He Won't Be the "Fall Guy"
• Del. Court Slaps Staples on Backdating
• Retiree Miscount Leads to Restatement
• Quest's Quest for More Backdating Errors
• German conglomerate, embroiled in scandal
• Wachovia Sued over Drink Company's Spill
• Dynegy Settles Charges with Pensioners
• UTStarcom to Redo China Revenue Report
• Mentor to Fraud? Two Former Execs Settle
• SEC Charges Hedge Fund Head over PIPEs
• SEC Aims to Clean Up Grocery Spill
• Dried Dough: Krispy Kreme's Woes
• Fairchild Dumps KPMG
• CTRL-ALT-DELETE: Dell Frozen, Restarting
• Former HealthSouth CFO Back in Court
• Grand Theft Auto, for Real
• The Morality Play
• Shareholders Cry Foul in Calpine Plan
• Former CFO of a high-end car dealer is accused of embezzlement
• Ex-Controller Settles Fraud Case
• Unregistered Auditors Busted by SEC
• SEC Takes Aim at Ex-Nortel Finance Execs
• CFOs' Optimism Plummets to Six-Year Low
• CSC Tax Review Uncovers Years of Errors
• Wireless Company's CFO Takes a Leap
• Ace Discovers $154M Inventory Error
• Finite-risk Probe Halts Assurant Buyback
• Couple Guilty in "Pillow-talk" Case
• Top Exec Steps Down from FASB Parent
• Macau Gambling Plan Loses $1B in Loans
• Saks Settles SEC Vendor-Allowance Suit
• Motive Inc. Restates, Looks for Auditor
• Did Fake Purchase Orders Oust CFO?
• Overhill Farms CFO Goes over the Fence
• Internal Probe Stalls Retailer's Filings
• CEO Put on Leave Following Audit
• Uncollectibles Force SEC Settlement
• Internal Probe Stalls Children's Place Filings

I couldn't believe it - almost 40 headlines IN 21 DAYS showcasing matters relating to corporate fraud or incompetence (or both).

Makes me wonder?  Is fraud or mismanagement of company assets becoming a "corporate value?"  The headlines over three weeks would seem to indicate that is the case?  Has greed overtaken "core values" as being more desirable for workers than working hard, protecting company assets and keeping the customer satisfied?

Is the "I got mine" mentality, where managers and executives put their own self interest ahead of the employees, customers and shareholders leading to higher levels of frustration in the business world resulting in the attitude of "what the hell, everybody else is doing it?"

If this phenomenon is occurring on an increasingly widespread basis, what effect does this have on Workforce Development?  Do frustrated competent and honest workers leave for places they perceive as better or more ethical?  Does it become harder to attract and recruit top talent, when a cloud (either publicized or not) hangs over the business/organization?  Or do the "opportunists" flock to the firms being investigated in the hopes that they can profit from the "birds of a feather" mentality?

Readers - what do you say?

Offshoring is also eroding the quality of the U.S, workforce

Offshoring is increasingly eroding the quality of the workforce in the US. There are fewer entry level IT jobs in the US. These jobs go to increasingly Indian or Chinese software engineers. Similarly, the legal and investment banking tasks sent overseas are the yeoman's work that historically enabled young people to learn the profession. Next are the entry level jobs in architecture and design/engineering.

Fortunately, many service firms aren't of a scale where this sort of outsourcing is viable, but nevertheless, it reduces the number of domestic training positions. It's a hollowing out of service industries. The fact that is is now happening at the very large firms that do the most sophisticated corporate work begs the question of where their next generation of executives / principals and partners will come from.

Where will it end.  Keep watching this blog.  We've got answers coming for you.

Tougher US immigration leading to 'reverse brain-drain': study

The huge backlog in US immigration visas is leading to a "reverse brain-drain" that will force skilled workers to return to their home country, a report released Wednesday concludes.

read more | digg story

Restraining Your Employees Isn't the Same as Retaining Them

Ever year it seems that companies complain more about their retention problems, but perhaps the problem is that they aren't loyal to employees, so employees aren't loyal to them - and the policies they do put in place are often intended more to handcuff employees to the company, rather than to help employees.

read more | digg story

Are Workforce Wages Really Keeping Up?

The government’s inflation numbers, along with other economic statistics it issues, are being manipulated to make it appear that the U.S. economy is doing better than it actually is and to limit Social Security and other benefits tied to the Consumer Price Index.

The prices of particular goods and services included in the CPI are subject to "hedonic" adjustments based on changes in quality as determined by government bureaucrats. Such adjustments often cause inflation to be understated, inflation-adjusted gross domestic product and other measures of economic output to be overstated, and wages, pensions, and Social Security payments tied to the index to lag behind the actual cost of living.

Mortgage interest and other costs of home ownership are left out of the index completely, on grounds that an owned home is an "investment." Instead, an "equivalent rent" component is included in the index—making up 30 percent of the core CPI—based on surveys of rental costs in various parts of the country.

This provides an additional way for the government to understate inflation and continue to report positive economic news. In recent years, for example, the real-estate bubble has caused home prices to rise sharply along with a burst of new home construction, putting downward pressure on rents. The result has been to understate the housing cost component of the CPI and the index as a whole.  SO wen you hear that the CPI inflation rate is low, remember that the government's CPI (Consumer Price Index) numbers, exclude food, housing, and energy. 

Unfortunately, worker wages (which are disproportionately spent on items like food, housing, and energy) as a result have been falling behind in many parts of the country.  So before you look at statistics and say "gee that's great, we appear to be doing OK, look a bit harder at the data and take the time to understand what's really happening.

Short Circuited - Has Common Sense left the Building?

The good folks over at Opportunity at Work, have a great reputation for providing well thought through  and clearly presented information about today's workplace based upon the conviction that economic and productivity growth fairly shared is essential to our Nation's continued progress.  They are a division of the Center for Law and Social Policy is a national nonprofit that works to improve the lives of low-income people.  Unfortunately in our society there are people that are skilled and unskilled that fall into this category, as the costs of being in the workforce increase beyond that of wage growth.  And it looks like a few thousand more are being added to the list.

A post this week entitled Circuit City Chooses the Low Road describes a situation that unfortunately is not uncommon.  You may have read this widely publicized article about how Circuit City has chosen massive layoffs that will in effect result in displacing knowledgable skilled workers with lesser skilled or unskilled labor.  In the piece cited, "Circuit City announced yesterday" that it is laying off approximately 3,400 store associates. According to the company, the layoffs are targeted at employees who “were paid well above the market-based salary range for their role.” Based on reports from workers, it appears that they simply established a cut-off wage for each department and are laying off anyone who earned above it. This means that they are getting rid of their most experienced workers and those who have received performance-based wage increases in the past.

Does anybody join me in seeing the apparent insanity of this move?  Do you want to go to any business where you will be shelling out hundreds to thousands of dollars for a purchase, and have to deal with someone who is not knowledgeable, articulate and able to comprehend the increasingly complex sets of requirements and choices that must be considered.  If the company representative cannot answer these types of questions, why would you buy from an operation like this when there are firms who recognize that a knowledgeable person is worth their weight in gold.

I know of many large Fortune sized firms and smaller firms that have taken this approach, and saw their businesses suffer, and saw their market share decrease.  Has "common sense" left the building?

Do we still live in the Dark Ages here in America?

If you haven't recently been over to CR4, the GlobalSpec discussion group, there's a lot happening lately.

One of the more interesting discussions is regarding the issue of gender inequality in the engineering discipline.  A recent article "Bias Continuing Issue for Women in Science Careers", that cites a  Reuters piece via CNN.com, "Women trying to make it as scientists face bias, hostility and a lack of respect that all combine to hold them back....These barriers both frighten women away from scientific careers and block the women who try to succeed," as reported by the most recent issue of the Journal of Science.

We cannot afford this type of bias today, as the ranks of engineers continues to dwindle, and an estimated 50% of the engineer ranks are looking at retirement in the next decade.

The Society of Women Engineers is working hard to change this, but this is a specialization wide issue that must be dealt with in a much broader sense.  In case you weren't aware, SWE is the driving force that establishes engineering as a highly desirable career aspiration for women. SWE empowers women to succeed and advance in those aspirations and be recognized for their life-changing contributions and achievements as engineers and leaders.  It is important to set the expectation that women are needed in engineering as they ponder career choices.  It is even more important to ensure that once they enter the engineering discipline that they are given the opportunity to grow and prosper.