Tag Archives: Future of Work

Develop Your Career Agility

Posted on by Bill Ryan

We often hear about the virtue of agility as both a requirement to achieve business success and as a needed worker trait when navigating a career during a time of flux. Knowing how to advantageously manage change is considered smart and profitable. Many however, may wonder how exactly agility is to be practiced. Is it just a matter of adopting a new mindset or are there specific actions that need to be taken? What follows are my thoughts on agility in the context of career development for the individual worker.

Yes, mentally shifting away from habitual rigidity and unchallenged assumptions is a good place to start. It can help to adopt a heuristic such as the SMART goals model to guide and gauge your agility practice. To review, SMART is an acronym for change actions that are specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time bound. Bringing order and a degree of simplification to the decision-making process will improve your ability to adapt.

Beyond these beginning measures it is advisable to be aware of market, industry, and professional trends which will impact your career. These trends will be relatively temporal, so tuning in regularly to the twists and turns of work-related currents is an approach best integrated into your professional practice. To illustrate, let us examine some general contemporary proclivities in the 2024 world of work worthy of consideration when career planning.

The old career rules or conventions are changing. It has been old news for a while that rarely do workers spend their entire careers with a single employer anymore like the Boomers did. But the change does not stop there. The combination of advanced communications and analytic technology combined with a shifting ethic regarding work/life balance has disrupted the traditional relationship between employer and employee. In short, valued talent has a leg up on demanding concessions from employers yearning to keep them in-house for as long as possible.

For example, management has been getting the message that the cost burden placed on employees to work is increasingly being viewed as unacceptable. Traditionally, it has always been the responsibility of workers to absorb certain costs to remain employed, such as commuting, child care, and housing expenses. One of the consequences of the pandemic has been for workers to realize that these costs are a liability not sufficiently covered by the compensation they receive. A corresponding recognition is that productivity for many positions does not diminish when work is performed remotely.

With return to work mandates seen increasingly as an expensive and unnecessary encumbrance on employees, management is beginning to offer cost offsets such as housing subsidies, caregiver benefits, student loan assistance, and even financial literacy programs. The hope is that such initiatives will retain high quality employees.

Some employers are also becoming more agreeable to flex time arrangements. Taking extended work breaks for family reasons, delaying retirement, returning from retirement, working part time temporarily, job sharing, and other individualized deals are becoming more common. In general, management sees the need to make it simpler and more desirable for talent to stay or return from leaves.

Another trend which we have heard a lot about over the past year and a half is the onset of Artificial Intelligence and how it will both improve and devastate our jobs. AI will undoubtedly change the employment landscape in ways that practically scream for workers to be agile. I think it is safe to say that job refashioning will be a multi-year trend that is underway as we speak due to AI. One consultant who is an expert on future of work issues predicts that AI will intervene in up to 70% of text and data-laden jobs by 2025, which is up from under 10% in 2023.

Anticipating and preparing for AI’s influence in your profession would seem to be the understatement of the year. As companies and individual contributors figure our how to best leverage AI’s potential while mitigating its downsides, all of us need to find that career sweet spot between over-hyping AI’s consequences and ignoring its likely effects.

Hopefully, this gives you some practical ideas to contemplate when making career plans for an unpredictable future. Workforce disruption is likely to be significant in the near term. Exercising agility is a key component of what should be your preparedness regimen.

 

Workplace Culture Caution

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Workplace culture unfolds to be what it is due to interactions of several influences. Included among these affects are how leadership and managerial styles project specific decision-making approaches, the modes of communication present, and guidance behaviors displayed by management and mentors. In addition, organizations may attempt to adhere to mission statements or other codified value declarations to drive operations, policies, and procedures. Workspace design can also matter when assessing the safety, comfort, and efficiency of the workplace. Further, diversity and inclusion, learning and development, and work-life balance initiatives can make a difference in employee attitudes.

All of these factors are important, but I will argue that the quality of employee engagement internally within their workplace and especially among each other’s colleagues is chief among the impacts shaping workplace culture.

Workers in an organization or business typically make up the bulk of bodies at the workplace. For any establishment to be successful several conditions must be evident among the members of this cohort. We know that the type of work being performed must feel meaningful and purposeful; that there are prospects for career growth or advancement; that positive and productive behaviors are recognized and reinforced; that employees feel a significant degree of empowerment and autonomy to make their own decisions; and that workers feel transparency and fairness is always evident in how decisions are made and performance evaluated.

The collective psychology of employees plays a crucial role in whether organizational prosperity is achieved or not. But workers should not expect managers to be the sole kingpins of whether their progress is favorable or not. Sure, poor leadership can sink the ship. However, workers themselves are also critical to workplace positivity, or lack thereof.

Poor or even dysfunctional workplace culture results from a series of mishaps and inadequate calculations caused by management or workers or a combination of the two. But it is the workers I want to stay focused on at this time. In particular, I want to address the phenomenon of a workplace culture that is misguided psychologically with the cause originating from the employees themselves.

I will use an example from my own professional past to help make my point. I worked for many years in an environment that praised egalitarianism. Equity was baked into system. We bargained for contracts collectively. There was no compensation differential between men and women. Unionism was strong. To be clear, I think these are all great traits and would not trade any of them away. But this equity-based culture produced an unintended liability that to my knowledge has never been resolved.

Workers largely prided themselves on staying in their own work lane — working collaboratively at times, but mostly performing a solo function that required a lot of stamina. We were all pulling oars, which meant we needed to work mechanistically. To have someone stray off course because they wanted to be too creative, or too much of a leader, or too, well, different in the way that they wanted to handle their job, then the mainstream raised their shackles. Questions of, ‘Who-do-they-think-they-are?’ and ‘Looks-to-me-like-they’re-trying-to-suck-up-to-management?’ began to get buzzed about.

Homogeneity was culturally rewarded. Divergence and distinction were not. Inbred psychological unsafety and insecurity had too much of a hold on the group. There are many other scenarios that embody cultural breakdown. The journey to worker psychological unsafety can come a number of different ways.

So, once a consensus of stakeholders recognize there is a problem, how then best to remedy it? One suggestion is for the workforce to consider adoption of an agile mindset. Let me explain. About twenty years ago a group of software development engineers instituted an Agile Manifesto, which they believed would strengthen an organization’s ability to produce. Agility was their reaction against an overly bureaucratic and rigid process which they claimed slowed production and innovation. Being agile meant introducing flexibility and adaptability to the process, leading to greater invention and dynamism.

The agile movement has since found applications in many other areas of operations, including HR, sales, customer service, project management, employee management, and elsewhere. The changed frame of mind an agile approach ushers in has demonstrated value and it can as well in employee-to-employee relations.

Among the benefits an agile process brings is to address how to handle internal conflicts within the group so that each group member can function efficiently and securely. What is encouraged is open communication, give and take, question and answer, working the problem, and acting and reacting with respect for each participant and the process. What is discouraged is staying rooted in unchanging and low-production practices and in censoring one another. The anticipated outcome is a shift to a workplace of high psychological safety and greater production.

The scaffolding necessary to transition to a cultural change of this magnitude is beyond the scope of this essay. However, for many workplaces it can happen and needs to happen. A workplace saturated in creativity, managed risk, and mutual regard beats a workplace steeped in fear and survival any day of the week.

 

Meta Cities: Repurposing Where We Live and Work

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Harvard Business Review recently released a 2023 talent management piece by Richard Florida from the University of Toronto and Vladislav Boutenko, Antoine Vetrano, and Sara Saloo, all with Boston Consulting Group, entitled The Rise of the Meta City. Their thesis reveals an emerging development in the evolving work-from-home (WFH) paradigm that is novel and worth considering as we envision the future of both our careers and where to become a resident.

It is no secret that mobility-enhancing technologies combined with the face to face limitations wrought by the Pandemic resulted in a rapid expansion of remote work. From approximately 6% of the American workforce working remotely in 2019 to 18% by 2021 shows how briskly the phenomenon swelled. A recent BCG survey from August 2023 indicates that only 7% of companies require full time return to work whereas 8% of companies have discarded offices completely. This means the vast majority of business are operating with some form of hybrid working.

A consequence of the proliferation of WFH employment is that many more digitally-centric employees are choosing to live outside of the traditional commute radius from their employers’ offices. With customary commutes being curtailed, workers are incentivized to look at residential options in areas that are more affordable and which feature a higher quality of life. For example, a LinkedIn study identified small to mid-sized cities receiving WFH transplants such as Springfield, MA, Tallahassee, FL, Portland, OR, College Station, TX, and Wenatchee, WA. Some locations actually offer cash incentives for WFH employees to move there like Tulsa, OK and Perry County, IN.

This realignment of workers from office to home and from employer-based cities to increasingly distant residential locations is starting to reveal patterns. A significant new template emerging is the rise of what Florida et al call the “Meta City”. Initially, it is helpful to think of meta cities as not entirely fixed geographically. The old inner city to suburb to exurb to rural model is not applicable here. Rather, the dimensions of the meta city extend from a major economic hub city to a host of far flung smaller cities in other parts of the country or globe. Modern telecommunications technology and talent flows allow for cities which may be geographically separate to operate as distinct units economically.

Some examples are called for to better visualize this spectacle. New York City is a top-dog economic hub in a number of industries, but most importantly in the finance sector. Financial talent flows into and out of NYC most measurably with other American cities like Los Angeles, Miami, Chicago, Washington, DC, and Atlanta, among others. This hub and satellite configuration comprises a finance meta city. London, too, is major finance hub with Manchester, Birmingham, Dublin, Edinburgh, and Cambridge serving as financial talent satellites. San Francisco is a principal technology hub city connected to smaller, but also tech heavy cities like Austin, Seattle, Boston, and San Diego.

The concept of talent flow is crucial to an understanding of the growth of meta cities. The flow of talented employees refers to physical mobility of people among the cities of the meta unit and also to remote contributions made by talent within the unit. To illustrate, Emily retains employment with Company A in New York, but chooses to live and work from Miami because of the high cost of living in New York and its long winters. Jason also works at Company A in New York where he intentionally lives because he loves the vibrancy of the city, and from there collaborates with Emily on a daily basis as part of a development team.

Although Florida et al do not refer to rural living, presumably the meta cities are speckled with geographically dispersed talent who “work” inside of meta cities, but live in a variety of non-urban locations.

Meta cities are an interesting outgrowth of the remote working trend, a glimpse into how the new generations choose to live and work, and also how the economy of the twenty-first century is coming into its own.

 

Knowing When It Is Time for a New Job

Posted on by Bill Ryan

It is common for a worker to know at different times throughout their working years that they have hit a rut. Their energy is leaking, enthusiasm is waning, anxieties are building, and performance is suffering. Questions arise in the self-dialogue pointing to serious doubts about their job. Eventually, the feelings of dissatisfaction mount and the worker becomes faced with a dualistic and existential choice concerning their job — should they stay or should they go.

In this piece I would like to review the signs and the nature of employment discontent in hopes that an analysis of the topic may yield a useful suggestion or at least a degree of solace for those undergoing job disgruntlement. Given my encouragement of purpose as a prime motivator for what leads to job satisfaction, I turn to writer and speaker John Coleman, who examines the value of purpose in work and life, to see what his latest thinking is on the subject.

Feeling purpose is fundamental to work contentment. Without it our efforts seem to be adrift and our self-confidence diminishes. Coleman highlights several indicators to be mindful of while on the job. These signals carry meaning concerning the problem of work frustration. When they are present one should consider themselves forewarned. What follows is an amalgamation of considerations from Coleman’s writing.

Avoidance: We all have the odd day when we do not feel like going to work. But if this feeling is becoming chronic and frequent, then something about the job is amiss. Procrastination is a form of indecisiveness. Postponing or hesitating to make important decisions because your heart is not into it or you are fearful about possible outcomes is a sign a change needs to be made.

Growth: As we spend considerable time on a job we generally enjoy noticing the skill development and emotional lift that comes from feeling we are growing both as a subject matter expert and as a person. Building mastery in an area should be a cause for celebration. If it is not, then it probably means growth has stalled and you no longer feel as if you are providing employer or customer value.

Achievement: Related to the issue of growth is the concern about whether your original career goals for this job have been achieved. If they have, perhaps your job is no longer delivering adequate challenges or breakthroughs. Periodically, it is a good idea to reflect and assess if the objectives you set for yourself when initiating the employment have been met or not. If so, why are you staying in your role?

Workplace: Could the work environment in which you are functioning be the cause of your job angst? It is possible that an accumulated toll could be robbing you of your energy and enthusiasm due to a workplace which is toxic, unnecessarily stressful, or encouraging you to operate in ways contrary to your values. It is imperative to feel that you have and can sustain integrity and a positive character at work.

Maybe the change you need, if any of the above difficulties arise, does not require necessarily leaving your current employer, but could instead involve trying to practice what Coleman describes as “job crafting”. It is worth exploring with your employer if they can give you a degree of latitude to make adjustments to the way in which you meet your employer’s goals.

Having a manager that is willing to engage in some employee development with you such that you can continue to satisfy the responsibilities for which you were hired, while also remediating the liabilities causing your discontent, could be a win-win.

Life is too short to feel stuck in a job that does not bring happiness. You owe it to yourself and your career to be placed in a position in which you can thrive.

 

 

 

 

 

When Considering an Encore Career

Posted on by Bill Ryan

I recently attended a high school reunion. This was not the typical high school reunion, which is attended only by alumni from your graduating year. I attended a private all-male boarding school in the Berkshires of western Massachusetts, which operated from 1926 until 1971, after which time it closed.

So, reunions for this school include any surviving alumni from any year during the time the school was open. This most recent 2023 reunion included alumni ranging from the graduating year of 1948 until 1971.

As you can imagine, nearly all of the attendees are now retired from their careers. But not everyone. As I chatted with a number of alumni I found that among those not fully retired there were two distinct categories of workers.

There were those who continued working at their primary careers, but at a more reduced or dialed-down level, meaning they were not putting in the same amount of time or handling the same degrees of stress as when they were full time employees.

Then there were those who desired to continue working, but at some type of work which was either very different or tangentially related to their former employment. This latter category is sometimes referred to as an encore career.

One of the great benefits of both our current labor force and our prolonged healthy lives relative to previous generations is that we have an option of pursuing an encore career. Establishing one, however, brings a new set of challenges that an older individual needs to be prepared to confront.

Just because you present yourself as an experienced and reliable resource with a long track record of accomplishments does not mean you will automatically be seen as a shoo-in for the new gig. In fact, the case most often seems to be that your age decreases your chances of being accepted. This requires that initiating an encore career be done systematically and attentively.

To begin with do not shy away from being old, but instead embrace it and spin your advanced age as a positive. You have gained a lot of work experience, solved many problems, and built an in-depth skillset.

Emphasizing your general tenacity, dependability, and trustworthiness can go a long way to gaining stakeholder and customer trust, which in many cases is as important or more critical than expertise alone. People who will need your services or who will want to join with you in delivering services want the comfort of someone they can rely on. Gaining that trust early on is crucial.

Another key to attaining trust is to highlight connections between your past successes and what you are promising to deliver in your new role. There will be overlaps in type, quality, or circumstances linking accomplishments previously achieved with intended future benefits you propose to supply.

One way to identify and credibly discuss these junctures is to prepare responses to some of the toughest questions you could get in an interview or from prospective customers during a vetting process. If needed, gain assistance from trusted contacts who can be skilled in playing the skeptic forcing you to justify your claims.

Through rehearsal, anticipate the concerns from others whose trust and support you will need to succeed in your encore career and heighten your authenticity by eliciting how your past performance has prepared you for future challenges.

Also, throughout the longevity of your career you have hopefully cultivated and maintained relationships with work related individuals which span generations. Being able to depend on younger professionals who can vouch for your excellence can go a long way in polishing your new brand.

Show others that you are not just a monument to legacy ways of operating, but that your instincts and inclination are toward continuous learning and improvements with an attitude of welcoming new problems to solve. Demonstrate how you are still passionate about the work you want to do, even at this late stage in life.

 

 

 

The Need for Versatile Leaders

Posted on by Bill Ryan

There is no shortage of disruptions to our workplaces and to our careers. They come in two styles, one transient and the other sustained. There are the short-lived perturbations, for example our current experiences with inflation, Covid, the war in Ukraine, and spotty supply chain shortages. Then there are the disturbances which have roots in recent history and continually transform, such as the evolutions of globalization and technology, including the advent of generative AI. Taken as a whole, it can seem as if there is little time for complacency or work that is of slow tempo. 

Managers seem especially exposed to the fluctuations and inconsistencies of the modern workplace. They are called upon to guide direct reports through turbulence and insecurity while attempting to follow strategic policies. This can be quite challenging. The way leaders handle threats and turmoil matters for the health of their careers and of the careers of workers who are impacted by managers’ approach to volatility. 

Versatile leaders have been identified as valuable resources for a workplace to have during times of upheaval. They can be beneficial when the need arises to manage resources efficiently to remain productive. Maintaining employee engagement and adaptability during periods of uncertainty requires a special kind of leader. Organizations are increasingly aware of how important it is to have versatile leaders. 

Rob Kaiser of Kaiser Leadership Solutions and Ryne Sherman and Robert Hogan, both of Hogan Assessment Solutions, have been studying versatility in leadership for twenty-six years. They note how from the late nineties to the mid-2000s co-worker ratings of leadership identified the trait of versatility as an important leadership trait 35% of the time. By the time of the Great Recession in 2008, versatility was seen as a significant leadership attribute in 50% of the ratings. And by the time of the pandemic, it shot to 63%. The demand for versatile leadership is growing in recognition. Given the rate of change expanding as it is, it is easy to see why. 

Kaiser et al define versatility as the leadership ability to function effectively in a context characterized as volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous. Within that setting, versatile leaders can quickly adapt by applying a range of appropriate skills and behaviors that reshuffle and redeploy resources to preserve productivity. This type of leadership manifests in two distinct ways. One style is more forceful and direct as in a single point of command tasked with making the hard choices. The other approach reaches out to employees in an empowering and supportive way to provide tranquility and to ease concerns. The skilled practitioner of versatility knows how to shift between these modes as the situations dictate. 

In fact, a leader who may be well versed and experienced in one of these modes, but unable to adroitly shift to the other does not qualify as a versatile leader and indeed may be a lower quality leader overall due to their situational limitations. However, the good news is that versatility can be an acquired capability. Counterintuitively, versatile leaders are not correlated with any specific personality type. To the contrary, versatile leaders are represented across multiple personality types. Given that the research of Kaiser et al identifies fewer than 10% of the leadership workforce as versatile, the incentive is there for increased versatility training. 

Although personality alone may not be a strong predictor of versatility other background elements are. It has been documented that leaders who have had many kinds of work experiences requiring the development of a diverse range of skills in circumstances for which they were not already highly qualified can be de facto versatility training. The more a leader finds herself or himself faced with assignments that are a stretch, combined with an innate attitude that sees these duties as learning opportunities, then versatility is enhanced. Potential leaders who want to be relevant in today’s world should take note. 

An AI Bill of Rights

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Often it is difficult to separate living from working. Our personal lives and professions can become intertwined such that it can seem pointless to differentiate those aspects which are personal from professional. Such is the case when considering one of today’s hottest topics, the impact of artificial intelligence. Is AI going to sway our lives in general or be mostly an employment issue? A fair prediction is that AI is going to change the landscapes of both our lives and of our work. 

As citizens and as workers we should have a strong say in what the influence of AI is going to be in our daily lives and on our jobs. The disruptive potential is too huge to leave AI development solely up to engineers and their corporate employers. If AI advancements are to be the result of free market innovation, then those of us who are future customers and recipients of its consequences should have the freedom to weigh in and heavily influence its maturation. 

A practical way to approach this challenge is through the lens of individual rights. Ever since the seventeenth century philosopher John Locke proposed the existence of fundamental natural rights, such as of life, liberty, and property, we westerners have organized our social, political, and economic institutions around the notion of personhood rights to both preserve and extend the enjoyment of our lives. We bestow upon ourselves the rights necessary to live fruitful lives free of destructive intrusion. Now is the time to apply these rights in the face of AI infiltration. 

A useful place to ground a national debate about AI’s proliferation is with the Biden Administration’s White House Office of Science and Technology Policy’s proposal known as the Blueprint for an AI Bill of Rights (https://www.whitehouse.gov/ostp/ai-bill-of-rights/). This is a thoughtful approach to identifying the key areas of contention in the planning, application, and mobilization of AI-based automated systems. 

Five principles are presented as foundational to designating what constitutes an AI Bill of Rights. To summarize: 

Safe and Effective Systems: An AI system should undergo input and testing from various sources to ensure its ability to deliver value free from the risk of malicious or unintended consequences. Humane industry standards and protective measures should apply, including the power to shut down harmful applications. Data usage is to be transparent, necessary, and respectful of personal integrity. 

Algorithmic Discrimination Protections: The biases, inequities, and discriminatory practices of people should not migrate to automated systems. Indefensible digital treatment of people based on their individual differences is to be considered unjust. Legal protections of ordinary citizens and farsighted equity assessments of intended and unintended uses of systems should be crucial in the design and deployment of AI systems. 

Data Privacy: This concern has been with us since the advent of Web 2.0. People should have ownership and agency over their data. The right to privacy is strong among free and independent people. This should be reflected in the automated systems they use. Exercising consent and having the ability to opt in and out of these systems with no restrictions should be inherent in their development. 

Notice and Explanation: It should not take a computer science degree for ordinary users to understand what they are getting into with AI systems. Clear and unambiguous language that informs operators about system functionality, intent, outcomes, updates, and risks are to be considered basic. 

Human Alternatives, Consideration, and Fallback: In short, when a user determines that an automated system has become too unwieldy or its functionality too untenable, then he or she should be able to have access to a real person to help them. No one should feel trapped within the confines of an all-powerful system they do not understand and cannot properly operate. 

These principles could become a friendly conversation starter. As citizens we need a simple tool to unify the discussion as we confront this significant challenge. This AI Bill of Rights could be it. 

We Are More Than Checklists

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Back in 2009 a well received book was published called The Checklist Manifesto by Atul Gawande, a surgeon, author, and public health researcher. The book promotes the use of developing and utilizing checklists to enhance the quality of outcomes resulting from the execution of complex procedures. Dr. Gawande cites many examples of how the deliberate use of checklists leads to greater efficiencies, more uniform discharge of protocols, and improved protections, particularly regarding procedures in which safety is a concern.

Upon examination, causes of unintended consequences and accidents can often be attributed to missed steps in a process, which had they been followed would have mitigated or prevented the mishap. Sure, we all make mistakes. But if we take the time to analyze why a mistake was made, we often find it was because of things like hurrying too much, lacking focus, being distracted, or not having enough experience. These flaws almost always mean measures that should have been taken were not taken.

So, to deploy and to use complete checklists consistently makes perfect sense. In fact, the application of step by step lists is considered so best-practice these days that many of our careers can be seen as little more than a requirement to effectively execute a series of predetermined sequential actions. Take a look at almost any job description. It is little more than a laundry list of expected deliverables like a set of boxes to be checked. It could be said that much of our work is therefore formulaic.

To the extent that we reduce our careers to predicable, stringent, and rote to-do rosters, the more accommodating we make our careers for AI replication. Author Ian Leslie makes an interesting observation in a recent Substack piece. Responding to the fear many express about the growth of AI he points out how we assist the machines to adapt to our ways of doing things because we are adapting our work lives to the ways AI works. When human agency is overly systematized we give our replacement instructions to AI which may be better at checking boxes than we humans are.

When we model our work behavior to a simple inventory we should not be surprised when AI mimics it. AI is algorithmic. It uses models and arrangements of variables in a mechanized and calculated way. As we are finding out, AI can out-perform us over a growing number of jobs, especially the jobs that are like checklists. A pertinent quote by artist Robert Irwin in the Ian Leslie piece is, “Human beings living in and through structures become structures living in and through human beings.”

As we determined above, checklists certainly have their place. However, as people we need to look at our work lives as being beyond just an amalgamation of discreet work tasks and responsibilities. To be human, especially in our careers, must be more than that.

Our evolution requires innovation and novelty. It demands an expression of humanity which is an added value above any pre-arranged framework. It seeks to celebrate intuition and ingenuity and even uncertainty. The careers of tomorrow will thrive because they bring a richness of the human experience not easily cloned by a computation.

Romanticism arose in Europe toward the end of the eighteenth century in reaction to the heavy emphasis being culturally placed on rationalism, science, and industrialization. Instead Romanticism insisted on honoring art, music, literature, nature, and the intellectual capacity of the individual. It exulted human emotion and aesthetic experience. Above all, the message of Romanticism was that to be fully human required embracing the wide range of human expression and to not be limited to the mechanized worldview of materialists and rationalists.

The time may be ripe for a neo-Romanticism in the age of AI and checklists. Efficiencies have their place. But let’s not confuse them with being human.

 

 

AI and Your Career Considered

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Amper Music is an Artificial Intelligence (AI) application that can create music based on inputs from human users who may know nothing about music theory or how to play a musical instrument. Requests and conditions are submitted concerning the type of music desired for purposes such as podcast themes or home video soundtracks. Amper Music in turn generates original music.

DALL• E is an AI program that empowers human users to produce art and realistic images in a variety of modes and forms. Taking text descriptions which have been provided by users, the AI goes about creating stunning illustrations and depictions. Little to no human artistic talent is required to develop original art.

ChatGPT is a newly released open-source AI chatbot designed to yield fresh high quality written text on a wide variety of topics, including software code. Based on human user editing suggestions ChatGPT will even revise its text constructing multiple drafts until the output is just what the user wants for anything from a set of complicated directions to marketing copy.

Another chatbot called Franz Broseph was able to compete against twenty online players from around the world last year in a game of Diplomacy. The game compels participants to engage in political negotiations, form alliances, apply military strategies, and basically win a World War I simulation. Guess who came out on top? Yup, Franz Broseph.

We are no longer waiting to see when AI will revolutionize the world. The disruptive transformation is currently underway.

Note that I used the word disruptive above. Is this a good thing or not? Well, the term certainly brings to mind the late Clayton Christensen and his popularizing of the concept “disruptive innovation”. Christensen highlighted a process whereby a new product or service is introduced at the bottom rung of a market ladder. Eventually, it catches on and grows in usage displacing much if not all of the traditional competition. What Walmart did to Sears is an example.

In my judgment, it is safe to assume that the AI examples above are representative of a larger AI disruptive innovation which is in the process of rolling over the work world as we know it. Again, is this good or bad? Well, it could be both.

The manner in which writers, music composers, and artists have operated customarily is clearly threatened. AI is now a major new competitor on the block. To be sure, in the short term at least, consumers who prefer conventionally produced text, music, and art will purposefully acquire it and shun the AI-generated material. But eventually the innovations will seep into the mainstream and could very well become the new ordinary.

As the Borg in Star Trek put it, resistance is futile. AI engineers and self-learning AI itself will continue to breed one disruptive innovation after the next, simply because they can. Ethics or a concern for the greater wellbeing of humans, if it is ever considered, will not inhibit the creation of these products and services. If anything, these novelties will be presented as good for people.

Perhaps, these inventions will be good for people. Maybe “better” writing, music composition, and art will result. Possibly the shift we saw from an agrarian economy to a mechanized one during the Industrial Revolution will be an apt analogy to what we are now experiencing. Time will tell.

One thing is clear, however. A simultaneous adaptation to new practices and systems will need to occur such that the AI-fueled modernizations are integrated into the new normal while human careers can continue to flourish. Possibly first drafts of essays will be written by ChatGPT and future iterations will be the result of human edits and prompts bringing about a spectacular essay produced by an otherwise mediocre human writer.

The question I ask myself is, if partnering of machine and human does not lead to higher quality outcomes, then why are we bothering with AI?

 

 

 

 

Love Video Games? Make Gaming a Career With These 6 Tips

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Another Guest Post from contributor Leslie Campos

Photo by Michael Boskovski on Unsplash

 

Video games are an enjoyable hobby, but what if you could make gaming into a career? With the right skills and education, it might be easier than you think to build the career of your dreams. Bill Ryan Writings offers this career development advice for gamers who want to make their passion into a profession.

Plan Carefully

The video game industry involves countless careers and job paths. Since you want to make quality decisions in planning your career, explore the options carefully.

 

All types of roles support video game development, including art, technical, programming, engineering, business, and marketing positions (and many more). Consider your interests, strengths, and possible job paths.

 

Then, determine how much time and energy you can invest in education and skill development.

Build Skills

Playing video games is practically a prerequisite to building a career in the gaming industry, but it’s not the only requirement. Playing games does build many soft skills, notes ZenBusiness, but to be competitive in the job market, you also need to hone skills related to your career path.

 

For example, learning to code, use editing software, and check for bugs is crucial in video game careers. Yet the specific skills you need will depend on the role you want to work in. The good news is that many skills are ones you can build on your own.

 

For example, you can self-study to become fluent in computer programming languages and begin coding projects. Practicing various types of art and graphic design could improve your craft. Yet formal education may still be an important step in building your career.

Get a Degree

For some job opportunities, you might need more than casual skill-building to get an interview. Earning a degree in graphics, software engineering, game development, or another technology discipline could make your resume stand out.

 

Online degree programs let you study and earn a degree while working and maintaining a personal life. Choose an accredited school with competitive tuition; this could be the ticket to an affordable education and a new career path.

Network Online

Gaming, as both a hobby and a career, is popular around the world. That makes it easy to connect with people you can learn from and share ideas with. Video game communities exist for every type of game, as Game Designing outlines, and joining them can help you find opportunities and network.

 

Gaming clubs may also be a way to get feedback on your work. Sharing with a gaming group could help you polish up a project for your portfolio, increasing your odds of getting a gaming gig.

Create a Resume & Portfolio

Writing a clear, professional resume is the first step in any job search. Use the resume format that best fits your experience, whether chronological, functional, or hybrid. Include relevant keywords for the gaming industry, and highlight your skills, certificates, and education.

 

A strong resume is a must for any job search, but a portfolio levels up your application, especially in the gaming industry. But because video games or graphics are hard to insert into a resume, take time to build a portfolio site to display your work.

 

Buying a domain name and creating a website may sound like a lot of work, but it’s the best way to design a professional portfolio. If you code the website yourself, it can also serve as a portfolio piece.

Apply to Jobs

With the right skills, community, and degree, finding a job might be the easiest step in your gaming career journey. Especially if you enroll in a degree program, internships are readily available for on-the-job experience and skill-building.

 

Or, you can apply to be a video game tester, start in an entry-level quality assurance, art, or journalism job, or join a gaming company in an administrative or support role to get in the door.

 

A career in gaming might seem like an unconventional path. But for people who are passionate about video games, developing skills and even pursuing a degree will be worth the effort. The result is a professional path you will love and grow in.

American Business Needs Good Teachers

Posted on by Bill Ryan

A disturbing trend could befall the quality of job candidates available for business hiring in the not too far distant future. We are at risk of finding that the pool of potential hires may be deficient in language and mathematical processing skills and in their ability to think critically relative to past generations. Why might this be so? Simply put, the United States is now experiencing a shortage of highly qualified teachers. And there is no end in sight of this problem. 

A weakening of the teaching profession consequently leads to more students receiving less instruction and lower quality education. It is hard to imagine how a nation that is unable to educate its children adequately can expect to succeed commercially, especially in a globalized economy. Yet, this is the situation the U.S. is now facing. 

Tuan Nguyen, Chanh Lam, of Kansas State University and Pula Bruno of the University of Illinois in an August 2022 paper entitled Is There a National Teacher Shortage? revealed there are 36,000 vacant teacher openings and 163,000 teaching positions being occupied by underqualified instructors. They contend these are conservative estimates. 

Josh Bleiberg, an education professor at the University of Pittsburgh, claims the quantity of qualified teachers is falling nationwide and the few states seeing an increase in certified teachers are still not able to keep up with growing enrollments. 

One does not have to look too deeply to see why this is the case. Professor Bleiberg’s research discloses that teacher wages, when adjusted for inflation, have been mostly stagnant from 2000-2020, while student caseloads have been consistent. 

Also, during this time teachers and administrators have witnessed an expansion of accountability initiatives designed allegedly to improve teacher proficiency. Although some accountability measures are necessary, too many have been based on student test scores, leading to needless stress, system gaming, and dilution of curriculum. Making maintenance of teacher credentialing more rigorous with no corresponding compensation increase is bad business. 

The National Center for Education Statistics reports that students earning bachelor’s degrees in education has gone from 176,307 in 1970-71 to 104,008 in 2010-11 to 85,058 in 2019-20. And this decline is before the pandemic. 

We cannot underestimate how negative Covid has been for the teaching profession. The terms and conditions of teacher employment degraded overnight. Concerns about their own health and safety while trying to manage instruction remotely or in super-spreader classroom environments while also dealing with students who had experienced the loss of family members has been extremely detrimental. Many older and more experienced teachers chose early retirement rather than risk their physical and emotional health. 

Moreover, we now have the politicization of education and use of teachers as punching bags by those who claim students are being brainwashed with various culture war issues of a racial or sexual nature. Let’s throw in the risk of school shootings and we can see why a national problem exists. Given the relatively low pay, high productivity demand, health and safety risks, and politically oriented pressure it is no wonder many otherwise great teachers are saying, No Thanks! 

This is not just a problem for one industry. It is a potential loss for our economy if we have ill-prepared students growing up to become our available workforce. It is in the best interests of business to recognize the looming threat and to get on board attempting remediation. 

As a nation, we can start by accepting the value teachers provide and offering them the prestige they deserve. Teachers are much more of a resource than they are an expense. It is past time to honor them for being the assets they are. From there we can tackle issues of adequate compensation, reasonable employment conditions, and greater self-determination. 

It is for the greater good of our economy, our country, and our children that we get this right. 

Decision Making and Your Career

Posted on by Bill Ryan

The need to make quality decisions is pervasive and continuous throughout our lives. This is especially germane when it comes to the ongoing practice of our careers. All along the long-term spectrum of our careers, from our initial professional entry point through to when and how to retire, decisions need to be made to ensure our professional goals are steadily being addressed and realized. 

Over recent decades, decision making has become an identifiable psychological and operational construct. There are a variety of models and multi-step plans designed to render the decision-making process as a rational exercise, which is considered by many to be more effective than a process too invested in emotions or irrational thinking. The premise is that attaining any consequential aspiration can often be confounding and perplexing requiring application of a logical and objective method. 

Executing a career proficiently can certainly be considered among the significant goals of our lives, so it makes sense to consider an approach that fortifies how we make decisions. The range of career-related decisions we typically face involve innumerable choices such as determining areas of specialization, optimal compensation levels, acceptable stress levels, the purpose underpinning our work, a reasonable work/life balance, among many more crucial preferences we select to improve our careers. 

But before we reach for an off-the-shelf decision-making model to guide us, we need to take into consideration the premise mentioned above — by using a more rational decision-making approach, the better the outcomes will be. The truth is we are humans and not solely computational and algorithmic programs. We each enter decision making as individuals impacted by prior experience. Our singular views of reality are therefore necessarily subjective. To suggest any rational methodology will capture the only and truly best decision for everyone may be over relying on pragmatic analysis at the expense of a more viscerally human variable. 

I am not advocating for ditching all 7-step decision making plans and the like in favor of depending on gut feelings only but am proposing the better process may be a decision-making hybrid consisting of a use of logical and sequential steps that are colored and influenced by our feelings and intuitions. Skewing too much to one side or the other of this hybrid could result in low quality and ineffective outputs. 

However, both rationally-based and contemplatively-based procedures carry with them liabilities. Rational approaches assume the decision maker can clearly identify and weigh all options, alternatives, and consequences. We may try to select the choice that best finds a great solution, but we are often limited by things like lack of time, overwhelming amounts of information, conflicting opinions, and competing priorities for our attention. While rationally-based decision making processes can yield useful insights for determining the course of your career they almost always turn out to be limited to a degree. 

Integrating elements of introspection into your decision-making process means you will exercise your reflective capacity. Focus on past decisions which were successful. Extend that to your values encapsulated in rules of thumb known as heuristics. Some examples are, “Treat others as you wish to be treated”, “The customer is always right”, and “Always maintain a professional demeanor with subordinates”. 

But beware of too much reliance on just what feels right. Lurking in our feelings are biases which may warp our ability to make sound decisions. A particular liability is confirmation bias — a condition where we ignore or discount evidence that conflicts with our preconceived beliefs. This has the effect of closing off avenues which could potentially benefit our careers. 

Career-oriented decision making is part science and part art. Paying attention to how we make decisions and how that process can be improved can go a long way toward enhancing our professional selves and extending the gains enjoyed from a flourishing career. 

Reconsider Your Career

Posted on by Bill Ryan

There comes a time with all of us when we find ourselves reconsidering our career. We question why we still cling to the rationale that prompted us to settle on this career in the first place. Perhaps another bad day at work sparks doubt or your hesitation results from something deeper like a recognition of insecurity or uncertainty with the line of work you have chosen. If repeated reflections of your career role continuously point to a feeling of dissatisfaction, then it is time to act. 

The measures I am suggesting need not be sudden and radical ones like going into work tomorrow and quitting your job even though you do not have other employment lined up — although that might be an option in your case. Rather, I would like to outline a mental and emotional approach you can use to assess your situation and formulate possibilities from which future career-oriented decisions can be made. 

Unknowingly, you have already taken the first step. That is, you have acknowledged with yourself that something is wrong with your career. Stay with this insight for a while. Clarify as much as possible what is off. There could be multiple reasons behind your discontent. It will be useful for you to know as much as you can about what is not fitting. Repeating a dysfunctional pattern going forward is unhelpful and to be avoided. 

From there, attempt to visualize an ideal career position for yourself. Beware of overly restricting your imagination. Instead, allow yourself the freedom to perceive energizing possibilities in which you can express your innate talents and leverage your developing expertise. When you inevitably think about an imagined choice as, “But that is something I’ve never done before,” try to shun what might be your usual response of instant rejection and instead play with the concept as an intriguing challenge. Be open to surprising yourself. 

When brainstorming, integrate remembered examples of when you were successful. Compile your greatest hits both big and small. Look for the through line which connects these events. Is it your ability to solve stubborn problems, to be adaptive when innovation is called for, to persevere when others around you are jumping ship, to lead others even when your job title says nothing about management? There will be patterns aligned with what you are good at doing. These can be guideposts to inform you while you consider new career opportunities. 

Another avenue of thought to factor into your self-examination has to do with emerging trends. It is no secret that the world is changing. Set aside for a while your career history with its experiences and the present state of your chosen industry to forecast where your fields of interest are heading. Look for possible intersections consisting of your expertise and developing areas of growth in need of aptitude. Refreshing changes can come from leaping off your steppingstones of familiarity onto novel and steep inclines that have just enough footholds for you to master the climb. 

As fresh and exciting career potentialities take shape the time will come to assess your skillset. Are you stagnated by practicing the same tasks repeatedly? Do your imagined career possibilities call for skills you need to develop or acquire anew? Jolting yourself into expanding your capacity may prepare you for a better future but may also help you to snap you out of your current doldrums. Maybe there can even be the prospect of being able to hone new competencies while in your existing job. 

We spend way too much time with our careers to tolerate having them less than stimulating. If you are content with what you are doing, then congratulations on being part of the joyful minority. However, for the rest of you, give yourself permission to consider and act on a change to bring more purpose and fulfillment to your careers and lives. 

Instituting Workplace Flexibility

Posted on by Bill Ryan

The demand for and expectation of workplace flexibility for employees is a construct that is not going away anytime soon, if ever. The confluence of ever-developing technological means, new generational expectations, particularly by Millennials, and pandemic-related work experiences is leaving business leadership with the challenge of meeting production goals with workforces yearning for more resiliency in how they operate on the job. This phenomenon provides individual workers like you with potential opportunities, but also possible obstacles, as you pilot your careers. 

This is a time to observe how your employers assess and manage workplace flexibility as you determine if your current employment is meeting the needs of your individual career development. 

Initially, ascertain if your employer even considers workplace flexibility a talent management issue. If not, then you will have learned a fundamental quality about your employer and should consider future employment with them accordingly.  

If, on the other hand, your employer demonstrates a willingness to engage the workforce with operational practices which attempt to satisfy both employer and employee needs in a harmonious way, then attempting to participate with management fruitfully may be warranted. 

Balance and moderation should be key features of any workplace flexibility set of policies and procedures. As many businesses realize, this is easier said than done. Flexibility practices can range from employee accommodations, such as allowing for an employee to deal with personal emergencies or other nonwork-related activities to negotiating with employees as full partners in designing an alignment that takes into consideration the interests of employers and employees. Widespread empowerment that results in optimal production and ideal proficiency throughout an organization is the primary goal. 

Practices like employee accommodation, mentioned above, and another now common routine, the always-on workplace, do offer employees adaptability compared to legacy workplaces, but have inherent risks associated with them which may be counterproductive. In accommodation scenarios, managers are in the role of giving permission to employees to take time off to satisfy an employee request, if the manager sees fit to do so. A hierarchical structure is assumed. 

Also, the workforce can become bifurcated between those who more frequently need accommodation, such as women with greater child, household, and elderly parent needs and men, who in general handle these demands less. Resentments from both groups can result. 

Problems surrounding the always-on or boundaryless workplace are now becoming well publicized. This is the type of flexibility in which workers can be engaged anywhere and at any time. Work-anytime arrangements can leave employees working longer hours and carrying more stress than if they remained in traditional on-site settings and confined to well-defined start and stop times. Employers too can be disadvantaged by an always-on model. Retaining valuable talent can be difficult when workers realize their work-life balance is too disrupted and a perception sets in that employers are over-advantaged in the flexibility configuration. 

Researchers Ellen Ernst Kossek, Patricia Gettings, and Kaumudi Misra reveal that superior workplace flexibility arrangements are achieved when employers provide structures comprised of a variety of flexibility choices, related equipment, and positive performance-management mechanisms within which employees commit to organizing how they can best work. Foundational to such an agreement is an intentional diminishment of the top-down hierarchical model to one honoring trust, power sharing, accountability, and respect for the contributions of everyone within the organization. 

Upon this groundwork can spring other necessary features, including universal flexibility for all employees; unambiguous policies and procedures regarding flexibility; better enabled employees and managers; a culture that does not discourage flexibility; and continuous measuring of outcomes with agreed upon policy alterations as needed. 

Above all, there is the need for competent leadership who can embrace workplace flexibility, effectively communicate its objectives, and practice the agility required to make the model work for all. An effective workplace flexibility reorganization can both enhance competitiveness and enliven careers. 

Flextime Workplaces: An Update

Posted on by Bill Ryan

As has been widely reported over the past couple of years, workplaces, particularly in the knowledge economy, have either undergone or are being pressured to add flexibility features to their operations. The combination of Covid-related adjustments and technical innovations has resulted in a reassessment of what productivity and by extension appropriate workplace agency looks like in the modern workplace. 

A 2021 Ipsos survey revealed that globally 30% of workers would attempt to leave their jobs if required to return to the pre-pandemic office setting. Many of the ever-plugged-in younger cohort of workers see only an upside to having jobs with flextime. Benefits such as managing the complex demands of modern living, taking care of children and elderly parents, reducing commuting time, and functioning when one is most energetic and constructive during the day are among the advantages cited as desirable with pliable scheduling and task requirements. 

Flextime features are now much more present in recruiting job descriptions. Some of this is undoubtedly because of the increased demand for flexibility from a workforce that seems to be sorting itself into those oriented toward results-only vs. traditional workplaces, but also due to the uncertainty of the future. Covid has not completely gone away and with further environmental changes said to be coming from climate change, who knows what is next? Disruption is at least as likely as stability when planning operationally. 

However, workplace changes of the sort being described here need to be assessed and designed thoughtfully. It can be easy to dump on traditional workplaces as having rigid, arbitrary, and ineffectual routines, like for example, habitually scheduled staff meetings laden with fill-in blah, blah, blah. Yet, as resiliency transformations occur it can be useful to see not only what is gained, but also what is lost by such modifications. 

A case could be made that as customary practices dissolve not all the consequences may be necessarily positive. Of key importance is what it means to be professional. Parameters were established over time to separate work life from non-work life. We got used to sliding in and out of work modes with a regularity that brought predictability, certainty, and some semblance of balance. 

One negative element of blurring the distinction between work and leisure time is the always “being on” phenomenon. When flitting in and out of work mode multiple times per day, including answering supervisor emails at 8:30 pm and being ready to respond to the Amsterdam office at 6:30 am, cumulative work time can approach 10-12 hours. It begs the question of who benefits. Probably not the worker. 

Also, professional norms and protocols used in performance reviews and advancement decisions have been based on an in-person work context. Are the expected actions of workers who work from home holding up fairly to legacy achievement standards? Managers still wedded to the notion that time on task always equals productivity may be less inclined to favorably view fragmented work as effective, even if the results are of similar quality or perhaps even better than before. 

This can be especially problematic for new hires onboarded with a company practicing flextime. How well can management really get to know their direct reports when they are working remotely? Perhaps fine — or perhaps not. New workers are motivated to do well at their new jobs and are trying to navigate expectations and learn company culture digitally. Might they be ripe for various types of exploitation, such as working exceptionally long hours or having to face other unreasonable demands from management or co-workers in a flextime environment? The possibility is certainly there. 

Decentralization does have its benefits. But it also could have liabilities. As we redefine what it means to be professional in a flextime world, we need to be mindful of how to achieve efficiency in a way that rewards both management and front-line workers. This challenge is a subset of organizational agility and a crucial one going forward. 

A Coming Workforce Transformation

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Career prospects for women during the economy of the past couple of years show significant disillusionment. By the end of 2020, 140,000 jobs in the U.S. which had been held by women were lost in female-dominant industries like education, hospitality, and retail according to Business Insider. The National Women’s Law Center reported in 2021 that about two-thirds of all minimum wage jobs are held by women. Unemployment rates remain high for women of color and women with disabilities. 

The past years have also not been encouraging for professional women seeking to secure leadership positions, particularly in highly capitalized businesses. Julia Boorstin of CNBC reported in 2020 that of the 500 largest American companies only 6% of CEOs were women. Not only that, but there is this occurrence of women being placed in CEO positions of troubled companies struggling to hang on. The phenomenon is known as the “Glass Cliff” problem. If the ship cannot be quickly righted to profitability, then it can be easier for some to say how a woman was given a chance to show leadership, but it just did not work out. 

McKinsey reveals another stunning circumstance. The proportion of women in jobs declines as the amount of responsibility embedded within these jobs increases. Women make up 50.8% of the American population, but account for 47% of entry-level positions, 38% of management assignments, and 33% of senior management occupations. For every 100 men who move into management roles, there are 85 women who do so. 

The history of women in the workforce facing discrimination, unequal pay, and harassment in one form or another is a painfully long one. However, there are some other statistics which curiously suggest more positive changes may be coming for women in the workforce. 

The writer David French points to some recent education stats showing men are slipping in acquiring the schooling necessary to stay highly qualified and competitive for the good jobs, and for leadership roles particularly. For example, at the end of the 2020-2021 college academic year women comprised 59.5% of the overall student body, the highest ever, and men only 40.5%. This data is from the National Student Clearinghouse, a nonprofit research group. 

Furthermore, the 2020-2021 school year showed a decline of 1.5 million students relative to five years earlier. 71% of that drop was in men leaving U.S. colleges and universities! For a reason I cannot explain, men’s attendance has fallen such that they have become a minority cohort in higher education. Can a drop in men’s career prospects relative to women, including in leadership, be far behind? 

One does not have to look far to notice an unmistakable correlation between levels of education and career success. Acquisition of knowledge, skill, experience, contacts, and confidence are all derived from furthering one’s education. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics most recent data concerning earnings and unemployment rates by educational attainment show median weekly earnings for those holding only a high school diploma to be $781, but with an unemployment rate of 9%. The bachelor’s degree college graduate in comparison earns on average $1305 per week with an unemployment rate of 5.5%. 

To be sure, the traditional four-year college degree program model is under serious review, as it should be, by those who foot the high cost. More targeted and lower cost education and credentialing options are providing increasing competition to legacy college and university programs. That’s fine. But if men think the good jobs and leadership positions will always be waiting for them as in the past, while women are actively preparing to compete and hold those occupations for themselves at rates superior to males, then men may be in for a rude awakening soon. 

As women gain more of the good jobs and leadership roles, they are likely to open more doors for other women to participate more fully in quality education and work opportunities. As education attainment shifts more to women, so too will their employment and leadership strength. 

Career Advancement and the Management Myth

Posted on by Bill Ryan

An odd convention has fixed itself into the career psyche. It involves widespread practice that when a worker has demonstrated specialized competency and efficiency over a period of time, then the next step in that person’s career must naturally be an elevation to a management position. A causation is assumed linking proficient performance with an ability to lead direct reports. 

This assumption may be oversold, resulting in the selection of many managers who find themselves unhappy and detached from what they do best. 

Surely, there are many cases when a stellar individual contributor turns out to be an excellent manager of workers who does what they once did. As managers, they know intimately the challenges their subordinates face and having been skilled in addressing them formerly they can guide teams with heightened awareness and credibility. A once knowledgeable and experienced provider, who is also an inspiring leader, is a great combination indeed. 

Unfortunately, there are times when the “advancement” of a well-versed individual contributor to management is misplaced. During these pandemic times, it is no secret that many workers are reassessing their roles. This includes managers. It is not uncommon for some managers to feel a nostalgia for work that was more purposeful and fulfilling compared to being supervisory. They remember the satisfaction they felt at being an excellent contributor, and with reflection, may realize they like that better than being a boss. 

However, we are ingrained to think hierarchal. Once we have moved up, it is considered a disgrace to move back down. What will people think if I give up this management post and return to a job I once had? That will be seen as a demotion, right?  

Thoughts like these would discourage many managers from reversing course. If the future of one’s career is a choice between continuing in a less than satisfying management role or risking possible shame by returning to a former position, then one is very likely to feel stuck. This is not a good place to be. 

One thing helping with such a conundrum is the fresh post-pandemic attitude allowing for workers to search for more meaning in their work. Just as there is now more evidence of hiring managers being more accepting of job-hopping over the past two years when they look at resumes, there may now be greater acknowledgment of managers leaving to search for greener pastures. 

Reframing your traditional ideas about hierarchy may also help. Get out ahead of any perceived criticism or doubt from others by publicly admitting that returning to a role, which again makes possible more autonomy and the practice of mastery, is a better fit for yourself than management. It is possible to state that your career and the organization can both profit from such a move. This can be communicated in a way which is both believable and face-saving. 

Leadership, as well, can be viewed with old-fashioned limitations. Management jobs need not be the only way to lead. An individual contributor who trains and mentors colleagues through sharing of expertise and proven methodologies can have a greater leadership impact than someone who is overly consumed with analyzing productivity metrics of direct reports. By claiming you prefer to lead more by guidance and coaching than the old management job allowed for, it can help to substantiate your re-entry move. 

Then there is the possibility of retaining your management position on the hierarchy by proposing a new strategic venture that better incorporates both your individual contributor and management values. From your perch within the organization, you may be able to see more creative ways of approaching potential opportunities, which call for just the right fusion of skills you can provide. 

Greater agility does not just benefit organizations, it enhances careers as well. If you are questioning your contributions due to limitations placed on you by being a manager, the time may be right for a change. 

Career Adaptability in a Time of Economic Resilience

Posted on by Bill Ryan

As a people, we habitually want to return to normal after a sudden disruption. To seek stable ground after a storm is what we are hard-wired to do. The pent-up desire to reclaim regularity throughout this pandemic is palpable. We want so much to snap back to a 2019-era lifestyle that it may be hindering our capacity to plan for what increasingly looks like an uncertain future. 

A combination of Covid’s aversion to disappearing and more general workforce changes promote doubtfulness in the minds of many about future economic, and by extension, career directions. Questions as basic as, will my job be permanently home-based and remote, or will my job, which is centered on being face-to-face with many people, forever now to be risky? These are existential questions. 

Career resilience, or the ability to navigate one’s professional life through the turbulent vicissitudes of the 21st century employment environment, is not a new topic. Remaining nimble and adept enough to reapply one’s skillset to changing situations has been advised by career professionals for years now. Of course, such advice has most often been given in the context of technological automation and cross-market globalization. 

The unsettled world of Covid, however, only adds to the urgency. Emerging variants of the virus and the patchwork way nations and regions respond to the emergency leaves Covid-fatigued people feeling discouraged that we can get past this anytime soon. Optimism rises and fades like the graphs of infection rates. As far and as wide as we can see, the economy is being buffeted by winds of Covid-generated incertitude. Career resilience becomes but a subset to the larger challenging phenomenon of economic resilience. 

The National Association of Counties identifies economic resilience as, “a community’s ability to foresee, adapt to, and leverage changing conditions to their advantage”. The U.S. Department of Commerce is more blunt in its description. Commerce questions an entity’s proficiency to endure and to rally from a severe disruption, and its ability to avoid crises in the first place. The take-away inference is that acceptance of the proverbial new normal and requisite mitigation planning is to be standard operation. 

The interests of non-entrepreneurial workers are served when employees understand the sustainability planning and related past practices of the employers for whom they work or want to work. If an employer is overly relying on luck to get them through or is in denial about change occurring, these should be warning signs. Do not let the miscalculations of others derail your career. 

What we want to see instead are signs of employers envisioning and assessing risks to their markets and assets. These are sometimes known as steady-state actions. From there they should be prepared to deploy a response strategy when crisis strikes.  

Included in this overall approach can be interventions such as sustainability budget planning; diversification efforts to reduce exposure to high risk sectors; gardening of workforces which will ride out disruptions and not quickly bail; alignments with business, government, and educational resources to keep forecasting and preparedness skills sharp and ready; and agile management capable of shifting available talent to meet unexpected needs effectively. 

Continuity planning for an organization or an individual share certain processes. Key among them is to know the weak areas. Where are the shortcomings? How can they be managed or strengthened? Which metrics apply to indicate success is being achieved? 

Another key process is in knowing the threat indicators early on. Take advantage of utilizing a natural or trained inclination to be preventative and farsighted. 

Above all, establish systems, procedures, and habits, which have resiliency built into them. Facing turmoil requires a degree of fortitude. Until Covid is somehow controlled worldwide the economic and career challenges related to the virus will continue. Confronting the menace clear-eyed and purposeful is a potent response. 

Workers Are Flexing Their Muscles

Posted on by Bill Ryan

An unmistakably big story in the 2021 career space has been about what is being dubbed “The Great Resignation” or “Turnover Tsunami”. Of course, I am referring to the throngs of workers in both the relatively high paying knowledge economy, but also in the lower income sectors, like hospitality and retail, who are leaving or not returning to their pre-pandemic fields of employment. 

A whopping 40% of the global workforce has left or is planning to leave jobs this year. The U.S. Labor Department has never seen such an acute spike in resignations in the twenty plus years it has been tracking such statistics. 

The popular media has for months now been pumping out pieces referring to the phenomenon and the suspected reasons behind it, such as higher savings rates thanks to government financial assistance, fear of catching the virus at work, insufficient childcare options for working parents, and a growing realization that a lot of hiring is now going on.  

However, the monumental reason for this employment churn appears to be a dignity factor. The Covid pandemic is allowing for a massive reassessment, and by extension, a realignment of what truly matters in one’s work and life. 

Shelter-in-place directives, social distancing, and closed office buildings, restaurants, and stores shook people’s mindsets in numerous ways. Many front-line “essential” workers who were heralded as heroes early in the pandemic are now either burnt out or tired of the abuse they get, like healthcare workers. Many well compensated workers ensconced in jobs pertaining to information flows and the means of production are bailing from positions because of the stress levels and long hours. Those on the low socioeconomic end feel abused, disrespected, and exploited and are not going to take it anymore. The number of workers and the type of worker taking the employment shift plunge are both expanding. 

This spectacle is causing economic hardships for a range of stakeholders from business owners to customers. The flux in employment is helping to fuel in part the larger pandemic-related worldwide economic convulsion. Shouldn’t we all be really concerned about this dramatic and disruptive turn of events?  

Yes, we should be, but not of fear for the interests of the wealth holders becoming suddenly inconvenienced, but in support of workers who are all in different sounding ways and from different points of view collectively saying they want and expect fair compensation, respect, and a voice in how their careers are going to develop. This brief period in history may be seen as a possible inflection point in the 21st century morphing of work and career into something different from the way it has been in the past. 

I come back to the three intrinsic motivators for professional workers eloquently described by Daniel Pink about ten years ago. Pink wrote and spoke about the need and quest for autonomy, mastery, and purpose as to what gets successful and satisfied workers out of bed in the morning. We are more motivated and driven to perform well at our jobs when we feel we have relatively free rein to innovate and produce, when we feel we are developing a skill or talent, and when we feel that what we are doing at work matters in a value sense. 

It seems to me that what many of these job searchers are looking for comes very close to what Pink is describing. Combine dignified levels of compensation with workplace cultures that honor worker autonomy, mastery, and purpose and a job can become more satisfying and sustainable. 

I get that some just want a decent job and not a career, but what makes an employee want to stay and thrive is fundamentally not very different between a highly educated contributor and an hourly employee. Dignity and respect can go a long way. 

Revitalizing Meritocracy

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Merit denotes goodness. It is a word synonymous with excellence, value, and quality. We strive to live meritorious lives, because to do so brings happiness to others and distinction to ourselves. When society thrives, it does so largely due to the actions and contributions of people displaying merit. 

There is no hotly contested debate about the virtue of merit. It is generally thought to be a desired attribute, particularly among employees. What boss would not want to have positive, reliable, and worthwhile workers on her team? And yet, another term derived from the word merit, meritocracy, seems to be under fire. 

Broadly speaking, meritocracy refers to an institutionalizing of talent, ability, and skill which when present and operational results in optimally run organizations, whether in business, government, or the nonprofit sector. Compensation and power are steered toward those individuals who best demonstrate the desired traits of a meritocracy such as intelligence, valued credentials, and solid performance. 

I always thought meritocracy was an affirmative construct, so I have been surprised to see that meritocracy has now become, counter-intuitively for me at least, a controversial concept. To see why, I decided to examine what the dispute is all about. 

Examples of meritocratic administration are historic reaching back millennia. More recently though, it turns out the word meritocracy was originally coined and used derogatorily in 1958 by a British politician who was criticizing the British education system as overly favoring student intelligence and aptitude above other characteristics, leading to elitism. 

It was not until 1972 when Harvard sociologist Daniel Bell put a positive spin on the term by championing a combination of intelligence and energy as ideologically desirable. Today, there are many proponents and critics of meritocratic systems. Their divergent views seem to rest on differences in how one determines what is fair in an organization or institution. 

For example, Jim Whitehurst, who is now president of IBM, is bullish on meritocracy. He sees only advantage in strongly rewarding the best people with the best ideas. Establishing a culture that encourages listening and sharing and where every associate can contribute makes it easier for management to discern which inspirations result in high end gains over time. By enabling leaders to spot emerging talent and to position this ability where they can create the greatest value, followed by generous compensation for the quality influencers, is the hallmark of a highly functioning meritocracy. Keeping associates engaged and identifying in-house leadership makes for a stronger organization. 

A recent significant criticism of meritocracy was released in 2019 in the form of a book, The Meritocracy Trap by Yale law professor Daniel Markovits. He sees meritocracy as “a pretense, constructed to rationalize an unjust distribution of advantage.” According to Markovits, meritocracy has two profound liabilities — it is often an unfair system that benefits those of a certain traditional type of leadership, say white males over women or minorities, and that those seen as meritorious find their lives consumed by competition and long hours devoted to the company. Hence, the trap. In practice, not all talent really percolates to the top and if one is “lucky” enough to be among the chosen, then one’s life becomes less than satisfying. 

So, does meritocracy need reform? It depends on how “fair” is defined within an organization that purports to practice it. The style of meritocracy described by Whitehurst sounds fair to me, if and only if, the culture is truly open to high quality ideas no matter who puts them forth and that selection of those with desired aptitudes are chosen for their skills and abilities alone and not for extraneous considerations. And Markovits’ point about exploitation of expertise is also in need of monitoring, primarily by those whose careers and lifestyles are most affected. 

One thing advocates and critics alike can agree on is that merit is a virtue to be promoted and defended. We all benefit when it is. 

Questioning the Future of AI

Posted on by Bill Ryan

When I drive my E-ZPass-less car through the tollbooth on I93 in Hooksett, NH, I intentionally swing to the right to hand a dollar to the tollbooth attendant. When checking out from a shopping trip in a big box store, I prefer paying a person at a cash register rather than using the self-serve payment scan system. 

It is not that I am some sort of crotchety Luddite who shuns digital progress. I pride myself on maintaining some decent level of technical functionality as I age. But I have come to question why those who design and build our Artificial Intelligence (AI) systems are obsessed with things like automation. In fact, the more I investigate AI the more surprised I am that AI is being utilized so narrowly, unevenly, and menacingly. 

The AI movement is powerful, significant, and potentially authoritative regarding how our personal and work lives will be lived in the coming years. The scale of its reach places it in a class far beyond the technological tinkering improvements we generally see with new phone models or app developments. Machine learning is far more enigmatic than a better video camera or gaming platform. 

Momentous changes are likely in a broad range of fields from mechanics to medicine and are expected to reshape work and modify markets. Many of these transformations will be welcomed, perhaps cherished, but others perhaps should not happen at all. 

When looking at AI today it seems too much of it is focused on building systems that either automate functions, collect data, or conduct surveillance. This should be concerning. The likelihood of jobs being lost, governments and companies holding vast quantities of our personal information, and our personal freedoms becoming threatened is not some far-fetched paranoid delusion, but an ugly scenario we should work to prevent. 

There is progress and then there is degeneration. AI could give us either or both. As an analog, I think of my attitude ten to fifteen years ago about social media. Then, the crowdsourcing of unregulated input from the global community augured richer and more transparent conversations about any number of topics. Or so I thought. Today social media looks like a cesspool of disinformation and disgruntlement ushering in social breakdown. Not all innovations should be welcomed. 

In our democracy, while we still have one, the general public needs to be actively engaged in monitoring the AI powers that we have and weighing in on policies to determine what AI engineers develop. Living with a laissez-faire attitude of, ‘Well, whatever the markets come up with will be fine. Markets know best.’, can lead to costly and offensive ruptures in the very framework of society. Citizens should insist that AI be deployed in a generally advantageous manner as described by utilitarian philosophers like Jeremy Bentham — “the greatest amount of good for the greatest number”. 

Instead, it looks like AI development is being driven more by the acquisition of corporate profit and power than by what benefits society. One does not need be a wild-eyed Socialist to question whether a disruption as encompassing as AI could potentially pose hazards to society. Those who control the development and deployment of AI will have a lot of authority and say in how our economy operates and how our future day-to-day lives are experienced. Concentrations of power have traditionally been held suspect in America. Well, we have one in the making. Let’s pay attention. 

The ultimate direction AI takes does not have to be decided solely by engineers and corporate C-levels who find business in selling only surveillance and automation tools. AI could be targeted to complement and improve the work done by real people, while also creating new activities and opportunities that keep workers gainfully employed. We have a choice — let AI rule us or we rule it. Hopefully, we will choose wisely. 

The Post-Covid Office

Posted on by Bill Ryan

The knowledge economy office workplace got a sudden shake-up over the past year plus. At its peak, not that long ago, the pre-vaccinated office-based workforce (March 2020-March 2021) was functioning more from home than from the traditional office, approximately ten times more so than pre-pandemic rates. According to the University of Chicago, as recently as March 2021, 45% of work services were still being performed in home environments. 

This begs the question, is office work going to snap back to the way it was with workers committing to long hours away from family spent in bustling office buildings arrived at via thick commuting traffic? And if so, why? 

Whether or not the Covid pandemic has unwittingly ushered in a paradigm shift in how work is dispensed over the long term is yet to be determined. It will certainly be one of the interesting trends to observe over the next few years. At present, a look at some of the currently available, albeit sparse, indicators seem to show some degree of change in how work operations are conducted. And they may be with us for the foreseeable future. 

It is fair to assume most management desire a return to normal times, during which management practices they were accustomed to can be resumed. If there is to be a more permanent realignment to include more flexibility such as remote work activity it probably will not willingly come from supervisors. To dust off that old business expression from the 20th century, it will come from the rank and file. 

A Microsoft WorkLab report from earlier this year reveals some pertinent findings. Nearly three quarters of employees wish for an option to work remotely. Although remote work has its downsides, enough workers have experienced that productivity can still be maintained by way of technological means in a comfortable environment with less stress and less exhaustion. Demand for a more permanent flexible, distributive, blended, or hybrid production model has arisen among office employees, according to this report. 

Older Gen Z and younger Millennials form a cohort that may be informative here. Living and working from devices is second nature to them. It is reasonable to expect the momentum for more flexibility will come from them. If their resumes and LinkedIn profiles start showing more quantifiable accomplishments derived from working remotely, they will be communicating not only that they can do it, but that they want to be hired for positions honoring such skills. Balancing productivity with wellbeing in the modern era will only grow as a necessary calibration and younger workers are likely to show the way in the context of adaptable workstyles. 

Business need not be driven into this transformation kicking and screaming. Signs are emerging among C-levels showing a recognition of the likely changes to come. A Work Trend Index survey conducted by Edelman Data & Intelligence discloses that 66% of business leaders are contemplating refashioning office space to allow for more flexibility.  

Reasons are twofold. As implied earlier, the workforce appears to be increasingly desirable of workplace flexibility. This could likely become an incentive for luring needed talent not wanting to be bound by traditional institutional rules. 

Additionally, business is identifying some benefits as a result of the Covid-induced remote working experiment in terms of lower overhead, as reported by NPR, and increased productivity, as claimed by Harvard Business Review. 

It is likely multiple variations on a hybrid model will become established moving forward that incorporates combinations of conventional office-centric requirements with increased distributive or remote work options for employees.  

Although no one could have reasonably predicted that a congruence of modern communication technologies with a global pandemic would steer this trend, the result could ultimately be a boon for workers and their bosses. Let us hope employers give such changes serious consideration. 

Future Career Planning

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Disruptions. Unforeseen events. Misguided strategies. All of these are possible for businesses. Also, for careers. In 2020, we do not have to look very far in the past to see how the best laid business and career plans can go awry due to a surprising and unpredicted event. 

We could conclude, well that’s life. No one ever guaranteed us long-term certainty. This is true. Unannounced and unintended curve balls are part of life’s churn, but that does not mean we cannot proactively prepare for sudden changes and develop an agility which may result in competitive advantages and success despite unanticipated perturbations. 

Many of us still operate by a model which views the most difficult parts of executing a career as first determining which career path to follow, followed by education and training, landing the great job, retaining employment, and staying current with best practices. As important as these features are, I would encourage the addition of at least one more — enhancing your ability to foretell where your career may be headed and what hazards may ambush your planning. 

Regarding our careers, it is wise to allocate time and energy to a style of future planning which embeds intentional forecasting of trends and movements that carry the potential for threat and disruption. Although no one can definitively predict the future, by practicing the formation of projections over time we can hone our capacity to more accurately make predictions, test our hypotheses, and peer ever deeper into what makes our professions tick. Sharpening our prognostication skill could be the difference between thriving or losing in today’s turbulent economy. 

Preparing for the future requires at the outset a shift in attitude and a challenging of our assumptions. Here are some basic conjectures I encourage shaking up. The good times do not roll forever. Luck can only carry you just so far. The world is more dynamic than static. That said, alter the way you plan for tomorrow. Future planning should not be confined to assessing the present and then looking forward. Rather, determine as best you can the most likely future prediction and plan backwards from there. 

Interpreting the future is a matter of creating a vision. This vision displays greater resolution the more in-depth is our knowledge of our profession, including the proclivities of markets and customers. Vision is not certitude, but an estimation of what is possible. 

The more we know the closer we get to refining our analysis. Therefore, structured ongoing learning is the core activity to practice. By looking at every angle of our profession, including the influences and disorders impacting our lines of work along with practice in making and reviewing our predictions, we better refine our ability to forecast. 

When estimating the direction of our professions, assume opportunities will always be out there. Become your own agent of change and a magnet for locating these possibilities. How best to proceed? Smart organizations deploy a strategic method known as scenario planning. It involves forecasting and integrating a large degree of flexibility into long-term planning. Scenario planning assumes adaptation is necessary for survival. 

The same mindset applies to our careers. In general, this process involves merging known facts about the future, such as demographics, geographic limitations, cultural characteristics, government structures, etc. with social, economic, political, technical, and environmental trends. From this blend we can formulate simulations that function as prototype strategies. 

For example, is it feasible to think climate related disruptions may manifest in novel ways over the next three decades prompting potentially sudden market fluctuations? Are you confident the U.S. has learned its lesson about pandemic preparedness and is ready for the next such assault? 

Developing a heuristic approach to prepare for uncertainty may very well be the necessary system to best weather whatever the future is going to throw at us next. 

Employment and the 2020 Election

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Here we go again. Time for another national election to choose a new Congress and a new president. The feeling in the air is that this election is more urgent and consequential than our garden variety face-offs, particularly at the presidential level. This choice of president is viewed as fundamentally determinative of the direction of the country and with starker contrast than most such contests. Or so both Republicans and Democrats claim. Great attention is being paid to this election and hopefully significant participation will be realized, which together should lead to a substantive and declarative outcome — like it or not. 

Typically, “It’s the economy, stupid!”. This time the sense is, “It’s the culture, stupid!”. Without getting into the developmental concerns related to our civilization’s maturation or lack thereof, economic claims, projections, and promises will likely continue to drive much of the partisan discussion. 

Are we Americans going to orient ourselves toward the past in an attempt to retain economic successes driven by tried-and-true practices previously delivered by legacy-styled business operatives or are we instead going to innovate and design for a paradigm-shifting economic future characterized by increasing competition, transformation, and multiculturalism? The decision we make will have consequences for the vitality of the economy going forward and for the quality of the employment it will spawn. 

Conventional wisdom states that if the economy is sufficiently robust, then vigorous employment will take care of itself. Indeed, high employment levels are intrinsic to a strong economy. Widespread employment matters. So, it is worth examining the economic approaches both parties are offering to see who is most prepared to fashion a jobs-rich environment over the next four years. Here is my broad summary of the selection before us. 

Donald Trump has shown us his economic priorities through past performance, which included low unemployment rates. Given that Republicans did not present a party platform this year we have to assume they are thinking ‘steady as she goes’. 

The Trump administration’s economic focus has been on individual and corporate tax cuts, deregulation targeted primarily to the energy and financial sectors, trade protectionism, immigration restriction, and rejection of a federal role in providing universal healthcare. In recent months there have also been attempts to resurrect the economy from the devastation of the Covid-19 pandemic by promoting a reopening or ‘get back to normal’ agenda. 

Joe Biden, despite pressure from the Democratic Party’s left flank, is not proposing sweeping or revolutionary changes to the economy, but does advance ambitious federal interventions, nevertheless. Principally, he is centered on reinvigorating America’s middle class by encouraging greater inclusivity across lines of race and levels of education with less income inequality and a reclamation of optimism born of opportunity. 

He wants to expand Obamacare, impose a more progressive tax code, eliminate middle class student debt, raise the federal minimum wage, encourage low-carbon manufacturing, combat climate change, and much more. Biden/Harris also have a 7-point detailed plan to defeat Covid and plan for future such threats. 

Both the incumbent and the challenger want full employment. Which ideology is likely to produce this universally desired outcome? Excluding all other factors which will influence who gets my vote, I see the following as salient with regards to employment. 

The past 150 years have generated great economic advancements resulting in profound improvements in the lives of many millions, both as consumers and as producers. We have learned a lot about how to engender wealth and to provide life enhancing products and services. There are lessons from the past worth carrying on. 

But the past is gone. What we must look forward to is the future with all its uncertainty and ambiguity. Meeting this challenge requires a mindset that sees more opportunity than threat from the future. I think it is this frame of mind that impresses me more than candidate tactics and positions. Durable, but resilient employment will best come from an outlook that sees the world as it really is and that enthusiastically leans into the contest. 

A Case for Working Class Unions

Posted on by Bill Ryan

We have heard in recent years the oft used terms wealth inequality and its subset income or wage inequality. Quantifiable evidence showing a multi-decade trend toward wealth inequality has been presented by left-leaning economists and think tanks fueling in large part the political activism of the left wing of the Democratic Party. An example of this type of data was released by the Urban Institute showing how in 1963 families at the top of the wealth distribution had six times the wealth of families in the middle, whereas by 2016 the rich families had twelve times the wealth of those in the middle. 

Currently, the Covid-19 pandemic is starkly revealing what can reasonably be seen as another economic misfortune of those on the lower end of the wealth spectrum. Many of the essential frontline workers, such as janitors, grocery store employees, health care workers, and childcare workers, among others, are those who have jobs that cannot be done via Zoom, email, and phone from home. They are at higher risk for contracting the virus given the in-person customer-facing demands of their work. This increased hazard in combination with relatively low pay for workers providing services we all need during these tough times bolsters an argument that this cohort deserves more respect and economic clout. 

It is hard to ignore how the decline of labor unions correlates rather neatly with the rise in wealth inequality. Many believe it is not just correlation we are seeing, but causation. The loss of a collective voice from the working class due to the long-standing chorus of anti-unionism has led to not only their diminished political leverage, but also to a drop in their living standards relative to more affluent sectors. Perhaps the income disparity argument is now poised to go beyond just a claim supported by longitudinal data and charts to one of fundamental fairness for workers who are crucial, especially during a national emergency. 

Now can be a time to talk about structural reforms that benefit the working class. The overarching goal should be to reorient the economic system such that everyone, no matter where they live on the wealth spectrum, can live healthy and safe lives while contributing to the common welfare of the country. This will mean examining and improving macro norms governing compensation, health care, the environment, safety regulations, family-friendly working hours, immigration, workplace grievances, and race relations. 

Increasing the power of low-income stakeholders need not be seen as a zero-sum redistribution simply for the sake of rebalancing a ledger. Instead, by empowering these workers we restore and reinvigorate a united voice among working people thereby enhancing overall prosperity and a strengthening of democracy.  

Working in concert to fortify one’s economic interests is widespread among the ‘Haves’. Chambers of Commerce, business associations, and national trade organizations fill this need for business owners and management. Why shouldn’t working people also be given capabilities to drive policy decisions through collective action? 

Unions fill this role. Many of the worker and social protections now codified into law which we enjoy today began as union initiatives. Social Security, child labor laws, antidiscrimination laws, workplace safety laws, unemployment insurance, minimum wage, 40-hour work week, and workers’ comp laws are just some of the now commonplace benefits realized because worker unions conceived, supported, and fought for these standards. 

It is unlikely we will snap back to the exact same economy we had before the pandemic. In the future we may look back on several social changes the virus will have jolted us into. Hopefully, one of these modifications will be a reckoning for how the working class portion of essential workers is to be treated and prioritized. A resurgence of unions for these workers is justified and past due. 

Hospitality, Crisis and Promise

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Such wreckage. Such devastation. Such uncertainty. The Covid-19 pandemic has disrupted the present, shattered futures, and taken lives. In a quick couple of months life, as we have known it has been turned upside down. There is much to despair about this shock to our previously well-constructed world. Looking for hope can seem unattainable, especially for those whose careers, livelihoods, and businesses have been heavily damaged. 

I especially mourn for what is happening to the hospitality industry. Restaurants, hotels, resorts, amusement parks, theaters, concerts, sporting events and the like are where we go to refresh and rewind by enjoying time with friends and family, interacting with others, and being treated warmly by caring staffs. 

Hospitality is in many ways one of the most human of all career choices. Here is where your value is largely determined by how well you engage with others and how well you make others feel. Being socially distant is aversive to hospitality. It is like trying to paint landscapes with only two colors. The genial experience is catastrophically abridged when we are apart. 

Hospitality was to be the great redeemer for a world becoming increasingly technical, remote, and isolated. At its core, hospitality resisted the forces of automation and outsourcing, which is transforming so many other lines of work. It benefited from an economy relatively flush with disposable income. This industry really has made the world a better place to live. And now we ask ourselves, what happens to us all if our capacity to be social beings is painfully curtailed for the long term? 

In the US it is unlikely we will see the government stepping in to support hospitality for more than several months. Projections point to the second half of 2021 before a widely distributed and effective vaccine is put into place. Therefore, social distancing is expected to be among the chief tactics we have available to mitigate outbreaks during our slow build up to herd immunity. 

Then there is the very real fear people have about mingling as before. Think of the questions we could have while in crowds, such as who among these people is asymptomatic and carrying the virus? Why is that person coughing? Is it right to hug or shake hands with this friend anymore? How can I keep my glasses from fogging when wearing this darn mask? Many may and probably will opt for staying home. 

There are no easy answers or quick fixes for hospitality. That said, two broad ideas come to mind that may point to some sort of solution for the future of those whose hospitality jobs are evaporating. 

This is a time for hospitality professionals to reflect on their skills and the value they bring to the public. My advice is to inventory what it is about your engagements with people that activate your energy and bring deep satisfaction. Then think about other more employable areas where these talents can be expressed. For example, healthcare related services benefit from a workforce rich in soft hospitable skills infused with those of the technical expertise providers. Sales and customer services also are enhanced by those who can deliver personal, attentive, and solution-oriented care and advice. Think about it. There are many fields in which a hospitable mindset and presentation can find a home. 

Secondly, now is a time for the entrepreneurial, innovative, resourceful, and ingenious among us to design and develop novel ways of offering hospitality contributions that have not been tried before. The pent-up public demand is certainly there. Necessity is still the mother of invention. Let us please be pleasantly surprised by having creative hospitality professionals discover new and refreshing ways of building community, strengthening social interaction, and giving us respite from these stressful times, all while maintaining safe and prudent distancing measures. 

Times were dark in the economy ten years ago and they are even darker now. But if we are lucky, it may be our friends in hospitality who can shine a light when we most need it. 

Distributive Work Gets A Boost

Posted on by Bill Ryan

One of the significant consequences foisted upon the economy during the Covid-19 outbreak has been the rapid scaling of work completed outside of the office, i.e., at home. What is commonly known as remote work, now increasingly being referred to as distributive work, has been increasing over the past twenty years or so. But in its short history it never has experienced a shot of practice like it is getting now. 

My guess is that distributive work is conventionally thought of across most businesses as secondary in its productive impact relative to being onsite, not unlike the way online courses have tried shaking off their reputation of being course lite. However, the severity of social distancing to break the chain of virus transmission is forcing the knowledge economy to rely on high quality distributive work to stay alive as never before. Indeed, it is in the knowledge economy, comprised of smart and skilled workers producing goods and services worldwide, where distributive work holds its greatest promise. 

It may be useful to know the thoughts of someone who has pioneered and cultivated distributive work for years and is now a leading voice in the movement. Matt Mullenweg was one of the founding developers of WordPress, the digital content management system, and founder of the diversified internet company Automattic with ~1200 employees distributed over 70 countries. He continues to not only evangelize distributive work but leads a set of companies that practice it daily. 

He is also convinced distributive work need not be just an off-the-shelf option management reaches for during times of disruption, but a model of productivity capable of surpassing the performance of traditional office-setting work. 

Mullenweg promotes worker autonomy as key to motivation and efficiency and is much more concerned with worker output than input. While retaining some in-person collaboration, but in a much more reduced and targeted manner, he recognizes the impediments of cramming a lot of people onto a single site. A myriad of distractions such as office politics, intrusive co-workers and managers, long off-topic chats with co-workers, shared facilitates, a narrow set of expected in-house behaviors, and a feeling of having little control over likes and dislikes from the office temperature to the smell of someone’s lunch can all negatively factor into the worker feeling a lack of autonomy. 

With that in mind he identifies five levels of distributive work from low to high effectiveness. To quickly summarize: 

  • Level 1, which is now old-school, has workers using telephone and email offsite to augment their work, but with the belief that the “real” work is done at the office. 
  • Level 2 is an attempt to recreate the office elsewhere by use of VPN and conferencing software to supplement voice and email. Most business is still mired in levels 1 and 2. 
  • Level 3 demonstrates an intentional effort to adopt the best software and equipment available to share knowledge seamlessly and transparently across the organization. This can include good lighting, microphones, and communication tools like Zoom, Slack, and P2. 
  • Level 4 places a premium on asynchronous and written communication, meaning to move away from an over-reliance on live interactions. The goal here is to improve the quality of decision making even if its pace is slowed. 
  • Level 5 is where production capability is shown to be measurably improved over traditional work methods. 

Mullenweg contends the manufacturing factory model of all employees looking busy at the same time and in the same place does not always translate well into the cognitive economy. By valuing quantifiable and qualitative output primarily and providing workers with the means necessary to cooperatively join forces across distance the “workplace” can be not only redefined but rendered more fruitful. 

Looking for a humane and profitable opportunity amidst a global contagion may be difficult. Perhaps, refining distributive work is one such occasion. 

Shareholders, Stakeholders, and Careers

Posted on by Bill Ryan

When an assessment of a long-term economic operating procedure and theory becomes a key element of debate during a presidential election, then the practice in question, and its rationale, has reached a level of weighty significance. Such is the ongoing case of a possible post-neoliberal corporate economy. Neoliberalism, a commonly used term by economists referring to the late 20th century style of free market fundamentalism, is facing its biggest challenge to date. 

Going back to the mid-century writings of Milton Friedman, which focused on monetary policy, taxation, deregulation, and privatization, there has been widespread acceptance of his economic philosophy of unfettered free markets as the best way to support both a free society and national economic wellbeing. The economic low tax, low regulation, and small government principles of the Republican Party continue to be driven by the Chicago school of economics, of which Friedman was a principal contributor. 

A current widely held view, particularly by the political left, and increasingly the center, is that this neoliberal style of capitalism has led to well documented wealth inequality being blamed for much of our economic and political angst today. It is argued that despite the claim of free markets as best providing economic expansion, the benefit of such growth is limited to a small and wealthy segmented slice of the population and therefore is an inadequate model for the greater good. 

To a large degree, the public debate emerging in the presidential election race is a referendum on whether free market economic conservatism first preached by Barry Goldwater, a Republican presidential candidate in 1964, is relevant any longer when so many Americans are struggling to maintain a middle-class lifestyle. 

Shared prosperity is the new buzz term. It suggests that a system, including government and private business, should together have a more inclusive outlook about how generated wealth should be diffused across the country and citizenry. This contention goes on to state that wealth inequality is not just unfair, but contrary to robust economic growth, because most of the people who would spend broadly for goods and services are unable to do so if capital is sequestered to the richest top strata. In other words, there is a call for both social responsibility and economic invigoration. 

To take this thinking to the employment level, especially among corporations, it is enlightening to look at the production and governance paradigm used by many large businesses. Friedman advanced the notion of shareholder primacy. Shareholders assume the greatest risk through their investments and therefore should receive the largest reward. Employees and management exist to create wealth for shareholders. Plain, simple, and very hierarchical. 

It turns out however, there are other stakeholders within or close to a corporation who also have a vested interest. They include employees, management, and the ancillary businesses relying on corporate success in their communities. Marginalizing these other stakeholder groups can minimize the financial gain they receive. 

Milton Friedman once said, “Few trends could so thoroughly undermine the very foundation of our free society as the acceptance by corporate officials of a social responsibility…” (Adam Smith Institute). Extrapolating from this belief to the practice of shareholder primacy is not hard to do. Could exceptionally high executive compensation also stem from this persuasion? 

And what of your career? I hypothesize not many employees are content with simply serving shareholders. True, shareholders make possible their very jobs, but would not productivity, innovation, and morale be enhanced if there was an ethic of shared gain in corporations’ achievements? Perhaps, a more intentional perspective of collective advantage could boost profits for all involved. 

The election appears poised to devolve into a silly, “Which is better, Socialism or Capitalism?” debate. Let’s not get caught up in that bumper sticker. This is a time for a serious and measured examination by all of us to decide for whom an economy is supposed to work. 

Factor AI into Your Career Plans

Posted on by Bill Ryan

It does not matter what career field you are in, anything from finance to fashion is being and will increasingly be impacted by Artificial Intelligence or AI. Whether you believe AI will create lives of no-work luxury for us all or will end civilization as we know it, our challenge in the 21st century is to understand and participate in shaping AI’s repercussions. Therefore, when pondering your career long-game a critical planning component is to consider the impact AI will have on what you do for a living. 

So, what is AI? I like Kathryn Hume’s working definition (Director, Product & Business Development Product for Borealis AI), which is that AI is whatever computers cannot do until they can. This implies that AI is a moving target, compiling and sorting vast amounts of data one year to leveraging machine learning that promotes employment obsolescence the next. 

What once passed for AI is now integrated into standard operating procedures across many industries. Currently, we are wondering about and bracing for unexpected consequences derived from ever more sophisticated machines “thinking” like superhumans. 

AI certainly engenders anxiety. Sam Daly (Builtin.com) reports on a 2018 survey in which 72% of respondents conveyed concern for human jobs being subsumed by technology. Even Elon Musk of electric car and SpaceX fame refers to AI as more dangerous than nukes. And of course, the current US Presidential campaign includes a candidate, Andrew Yang, who showcases a universal basic income for all Americans to help offset the workforce changes and employment displacement being caused by increased automation or AI. 

Given this AI anguish, what is a career planner to do? To begin, it may help to view AI as something old-school, as in business development processes which require change management procedures aimed toward adoption of innovations which lead to competitive advantages. In other words, AI may be no more threatening than any other big change. In this case, the adjustment is in the area of human-machine collaboration. (But we did that once during the Industrial Revolution, right?) 

Also, let us not think of AI as Alien Intelligence. There is nothing otherworldly going on here despite how opaque AI may seem to the layman. AI is constructed by the design and application of algorithms, which are sets of executable instructions leading to an output. Algorithms can be written to consist of one or many criteria or inputs, ranging from if…then… statements to text, images, videos, voice, and more. As the algorithms become more complex it can be unclear which criterion establishes dominance, but this does not diminish the validity and importance of the outputs. 

The quality of the inputs determines the caliber of the results. For example, if data sets that “train” algorithms are too narrowly selected, i.e., too old or demographically skewed, then that limits the scope of the output. We can think of such algorithms as biased. When relying on AI to plan market capture strategies, for instance, this can matter a lot. 

“Decisions” made by computers can also be fickle, as in different from one day to the next, requiring retrospective pattern analysis. In short, algorithms now are good at processing relatively restricted tasks, but far from totally taking over the universe of human capabilities. 

Many professional job descriptions will change due to AI. To prepare, develop a nimble and adaptable perspective to change. Do not wait to have your job transformation be forced onto you. Get out in front of the inevitable and think, for example about how AI can be used to eliminate mundane parts of your job to free you up for more innovative endeavors.  

Influence the way AI can improve your performance and the service you provide. By thinking critically about what AI can and cannot do you have a better chance of determining your professional relevance moving forward. 

How Neurodiversity May Improve Your Workforce

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Trying to recruit and retain talented workers who can assist in producing and delivering high quality products and services, leading to business growth and enhanced profits, has always been a formidable challenge. Typically, hiring teams seek individuals who not only most closely match the letter of the job description, but who also are predicted to be a good fit for the organization. In other words, companies want employees who can execute at what has been determined over time to be an optimal level that is consistent with the firm’s performance culture. 

Let us set aside for the purpose of this piece an admittedly huge hiring consideration, talent and ability, and ask might there be an inherent and unforeseen flaw in settling for only those candidates who appear during the hiring process to be consistent with traditional workforce practices and operational structures? By limiting a hiring search to simply those foreshadowed to be team players, could organizations be potentially restricting their chances of introducing and benefiting from innovative thinkers and value-added achievers? An increasing number of talent managers and human resource departments say this conventional thinking may indeed be a liability. 

There is a largely untapped element in the general candidate pool that may deserve a closer look. This cohort is becoming known as the neurodiverse. Neurodiversity refers to those workers possessing conditions frequently labeled as disorders, including autism, dyslexia, attention deficit, and social anxiety. You might be inclined to think that these types of job candidates should be weeded out of the search process due to their disruptive potential, but others are taking a chance at reframing the common perceptions of the neurodiverse and noticing positive traits where others see possible burdens. 

So, what might be favorable attributes of co-workers who may be seen by many as idiosyncratic, standoffish, ambiguous, or just plain different? Consider for a moment an organization comprised of workers who think largely in terms of doing things the way they have always been done. Change is minimal because it is seen as disorderly and therefore unnecessary. Risk aversion and homogeneity are commonplace. Company culture and individual behaviors are driven by such values and will perform accordingly. 

Sounds like a possible recipe for competitive disaster given current market requirements for innovation and agility. Neurodiverse employees could bring fresh perspectives and abilities not typically present to the work site. 

Neurodiverse skill sets can include high levels of intelligence, pattern recognition, systemic approaches to problem solving, exacting attention, comfort with repetition, deep-dive analysis, and even customer facing. Numerous industries can use resources with these skills, particularly technical and data-oriented ones. 

Another advantage can come from workers who are not motivated by office politics and the phrasing of opinions and conclusions in a group-think manner. As hard as it may be to hear, sometimes the straightforward truth is the best information to be communicated to colleagues and management. Neurodiverse employees may be best at delivering such news. 

Of course, recruiting and positioning neurodiverse talent can present difficulties, perhaps novel ones, for human resources and other department managers. Rather than using traditional interviewing it may be useful to set up teamwork simulations, case studies, or actual problem-solving sessions to see how productively all candidates function.  

Strategically integrating personnel who may provide unique services, but also potential breaches of protocol, could require careful planning, diplomacy, and tact. Flexibility and nimbleness, characteristics in short supply in many established organizations, may need to be adopted by company culture. 

We have reached a historic point where differences among people are more accepted than in the past. In fact, this seems to be a desirable attribute of the millennial generation. Developing such an ethic could aid businesses while also fostering more humane treatment of all people. 

Thoughts on Career-Long Learning

Posted on by Bill Ryan

As has been frequently reported, the nature of work is undergoing profound changes due largely to automation, technology, artificial intelligence, and globalization. This exacerbates fears among students and workers of how to succeed in an ever-transformative economy and contributes to the current and expanding situation of a workforce not possessing the skills required by modern and future-oriented employers. 

To keep up with groundbreaking changes in employment requires an educational approach to training and learning that is flexible, relevant, and targeted to the capricious and volatile state of the economy. At present, traditional education institutions of high school and customary higher ed bachelor’s degrees appear to be lagging behind innovative industry methodologies like short-term credentialing and user-responsive professional development. Businesses recognize the value in foresight and pliable learning strategies necessary to uphold a workforce prepared for unpredictability. 

Education systems are not known for their elasticity and capacity to adjust to change. Take a typical public high school curriculum, the stage through which most American workers first pass on their way to employability. Has there been much reorganization in the basic course load or method of earning a diploma since the mid-twentieth century? I think not. This is an area where increased pressure to innovate is warranted. 

Beside a reassessment of curriculum relevance, another key concept we can hope for from high schools is that the message is getting through loud and clear to students that education does not stop with a diploma. The modern world is one in which continuous learning needs to be embraced if there is any hope for enjoying the fruits of professional mastery and robust compensation. Linking the pursuit of happiness with the pursuit of learning is a valuable lifelong lesson. 

To this end, workers will benefit from a more accommodating and welcoming world of pathways designed to prepare entry-level professionals, upskill existing workers, and assist career changers in a manner consistent with the metamorphosing economy of work. In addition to an acceptance of the importance of career-long learning is to realize credentials matter. 

From a college degree to a professional license to an industry-specific certification, possessing evidence from a reputable instructional source, in which a worker can demonstrate training and education within an area of expertise is critical to advancing one’s career. The challenge becomes how to best earn pertinent credentials in a time effective and affordable manner. 

Career, employment specialists, and economists are suggesting several practices to ease credential acquisition. Kelsey Berkowitz is a Policy Advisor for Third Way’s Economic Program and has looked closely into this issue. Among the suggestions she makes is to: 

  • Increase the amount of credential stacking that is available. In other words, design short-term credential modules that can be combined into larger certifications or degrees. This could provide highly relevant on-demand training while also providing a means for adult workers to achieve higher education goals in more easily managed steps. 
  • Develop more apprenticeship programs. Evidence exists, particularly in Europe, of the effectiveness of industry-based programs that onboard entry-level workers and within a year or two produce trained and credentialed employees committed to the profession. 
  • Recognize prior experiences related to work by offering credit. It is not unusual for individuals to gain skills and insights applicable to their current jobs from events that occurred before being hired. Examples include acquired knowledge from the military, school programs, previous jobs, or other situations where pertinent learning took place. 
  • Streamline onerous licensing mobility. Twenty-five percent of all workers today are in fields requiring a professional license. However, in too many instances licenses are not reciprocal across state lines, creating burdens to reacquire licenses for those pros relocating to a new state. 

The need for instructional and training flexibility will become increasingly necessary in order to keep a nimble and ready workforce. Let us reform learning to better address this imperative. 

A Call to Appreciate the Direct Care Workforce

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Rebecca Bryant, the president and CEO of Lakes Region Community Services, a New Hampshire social services organization, penned an impressive opinion piece in the March 1-14 issue of the New Hampshire Business Review that concretely highlighted the plight of direct support professionals, those who care for the elderly and disabled. To this cohort I would also add childcare workers. 

As a whole, this segment of the New Hampshire workforce is underpaid, under-appreciated, disrespected, and lacking in the placement of esteem they deserve as employees tasked with providing key services to needy populations. 

Why is this? Unfortunately, social services have historically been viewed as somehow less urgent or worthwhile than economic pursuits resulting in manufactured goods and services supporting commercial viability. The money has not flowed to caregivers. Since money appears to be a solid metric of worth and value the unmistakable conclusion drawn is that giving care to young children, old citizens, and the disabled just does not carry that much weight. 

Interesting. Economics is all about the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services to improve lives. How is it that the life improving work of caregivers is different? 

Many would say that the individuals who make up the direct care workforce are generally under-educated with many also coming from low income backgrounds. Thus, the thinking goes they are not meritorious or qualified enough to receive living wage compensation. The time has come for us to stop assuming there is a causal relationship between low valued work and low paid workers in the direct care context. 

We are faced with a contrarian situation of low paid workers toiling through high valued work. Even though low paid direct care services continue to attract, albeit at inadequate levels, those willing to work for low pay in order to do something they like and are good at doing is no reason to continue the practice. It is time right a wrong. 

Let us first look at the root of the problem. Direct care services are historically performed by women. Presumably, they have been drawn to this work, because of the longstanding social and cultural expectations for women to nurture others. It is fair to say that women have performed laudably with direct care services for many years. The benefit to society is immeasurable. 

However, as we know, compensatory equity has been and continues to be elusive for women. “Women’s work” has rarely if ever received reparation on par with what men make. Let’s be honest. Traditional views regarding remuneration says that an occupation primarily composed of women will not be seen as worth paying much for. 

It took men becoming teachers and nurses to spur the evolution of living wages in those fields. Regardless, it should not take a replay of that model to boost the earnings of competent and hardworking direct care service providers, whether female or male. 

There are two reasons for a balancing of resources to occur. Firstly, we should recognize that high quality care directed to those among us who are not or can no longer be high producers is virtuous and enriches lives. This alone should diminish any resistance to fair pay. That said, there is another factor to consider: unequivocal changes already underway to reshape the nature of employment are ushering in a reevaluation of what it means to “work”. 

Many jobs will be refashioned and eliminated as automation and artificial intelligence increasingly impact the economy. Labor directed to personal care may emerge as progressively appreciated employment. A paradigm shift recognition of the value added to society by direct care givers may finally remediate this excessive pay disparity. This transformation in attitude is needed. 

In a state ranked third for the percentage of the population growing old you would think New Hampshire would be intentionally reaching out to strengthen its direct care workforce. We have a chance now to show the country how fair pay for our direct care providers can be accomplished. 

Entrepreneurism’s Evolving Promise

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Entrepreneurism has a strong and positive brand…and it should. Its contribution to the growth of the economy and by extension to the betterment of lives is immeasurable. Counting the total costs of national goods and services only begins to calculate the value of entrepreneurial activity. 

A harder metric to identify, but no less important, is the qualitative significance of longer, healthier, and happier lives we collectively enjoy due to the innovation, risk taking, and intelligence of successful entrepreneurs. 

It could be said that the popular image of the entrepreneur is the self-confident driven performer productively balancing inspiration and perspiration, flawlessly timing the market, persevering with a laser-like focus, and venturing forward willingly into uncertainty, all leading to the realization of sweet success and generous profits as a just reward. We value that illustration. It is reassuring. It goes a long way to shaping our national and cultural identity. 

It is known too that start-ups with an eye toward growth furnish boosts in hiring, strengthened competition, and improved productivity by injecting fresh products, services, and business designs into new markets. 

Given the near universal gains we receive from entrepreneurism what possible improvements can be expected from the practice? Well, I can suggest one. A quarter in which we desperately need entrepreneurs’ creative problem solving is in the promotion of shared prosperity. The time is right for an entrepreneurism that cares less about concentrated wealth and more about dispersing capital, particularly to key stakeholders such as employees and citizens of communities in which businesses operate. 

We do not need corporate social responsibility manifestos to get there, just energetic, aware, and engaged business owners who choose to direct their talents toward providing a greater degree of distributed benefits over the more common asset consolidation we more typically associate with entrepreneurs. An alternative form of enthusiasm and sense of reward can be derived from constructing enterprises that intentionally advance expanded economic growth and strong job creation among the greatest number possible. 

The political pressure to confront wealth inequality is growing and looks to be a key issue in the upcoming election season. If the current trajectory of wealth amassing does not change, then the call for government intervention will only increase. Some or most governmental intercessions will undoubtedly be seen as interference and obstruction among many in business. Encouraging executives both young and old to integrate into a shared prosperity ethic may mitigate policy making coercion. 

It is not as if entrepreneurs and business leaders have not practiced this approach before. It has been widely reported that the period from the end of World War II until the 1970s was more economically stable due largely in part to the relative lack of discrepancy between management and rank & file. Granted this was a time of strong unions and more widespread political endorsement of income flattening approaches by government. However, one cannot help but wonder if the shared sacrifice evident during the war spurred a nationwide value system whereby wealth distribution was more easily realized. Can we care for each other similarly now? 

Perhaps the most endearing gift entrepreneurs give us is tangible creativity. They model and encourage thinking, which develops into options from which consumers can select the most solution-oriented or life augmenting potentialities. This has historically sparked human progress. It continues to do so.  

Given the current and ever-present range of problems in the world calling for answers and resources we look to the influencers, thought leaders, and groundbreakers to develop and implement transformative strategies, services, and products. 

Purposely including and addressing those Americans being left behind by a shifting and segregating economy could turn out to not only be nationally unifying, but also good business. 

The State Experiencing an Economic Revival

Posted on by Bill Ryan

In rural 19th century Sutton, New Hampshire population declined following the sheep boom in the late 1840s as farmers abandoned their farms in search of better land in places like Ohio and Indiana. Sutton was not alone. Rural living was proving to be too difficult for many New Hampshire residents of small towns. Young women, if they could, were among those who traveled to Lowell, Massachusetts to work in textile mills and live in boarding houses. This was seen as a step up and better than a life of struggle on desolate unproductive farms. 

At America’s Credit Union Museum on the west side of Manchester is a turn of the last century photograph of hardscrabble young boys posing not in front of their school, but rather beside one of the Amoskeag Manufacturing Company’s mills in which they worked. Injuries, death, and child labor among both boys and girls, were common then. The closing of the mills in 1935 hit the Manchester economy hard as did the closing of the Nashua Manufacturing Company in Nashua and the Brown Company paper mill in Berlin, both of which occurred in the 1940s. 

During the summer of 1987 Allied Leather Corp. of Penacook, NH announced it was closing, putting 300 out of work. The New York owners referred to the “tight labor market” and “continuing problems” treating the tannery’s waste. The company had been fined the year before for moving chemicals without a permit. Most of the employees were on their summer vacation when the news of their job losses broke. Plans were made for combining the tannery’s operations with other plants in New York and Pennsylvania. 

New Hampshire has many such economic hardship tales from its 230 years of statehood. When I was young in the 1960s and 1970s, and from Massachusetts, we would hear of the poor people in New Hampshire or “Cow Hampshire” as it was disparagingly called. The people were known as tough, conservative, and independent, but hardly prosperous. 

So, it caught my eye when U.S. News and World Report released its rankings of the Best States for Opportunity this fall. And guess who came out on top, Numero Uno, King of the Hill, #1 out of 50…you guessed it, New Hampshire! To quote them, “New Hampshire, which enjoys among the highest median household incomes in the nation, stood out as No. 1 for opportunity.” 

Let us take a moment to soak this in. Yes, we are surrounded by rancor, political polarization, culture wars, stagnant wages, opioids, automation, globalization, white nationalism, and on and on, but here on this rocky, thinned soiled, forested, mountainous, tick infested, small patch of America we are in the estimation of one journalistic source, with a methodology to back up their claim, the best state in the nation for opportunity. Wow! 

What happened? Some fun facts may help to explain why New Hampshire is now enjoying the most prosperous time in its history. Advanced manufacturing, technology, professional services, healthcare, and of course tourism are strong economic sectors here. Median household income in 2016 was $70,936. Given that the national average that year was $57, 617, we are not doing too badly. 

No personal income or sales tax probably helps, but that has been the case for a long time. Lots of retirees like it here. In fact, we are among the top 3 states with lots of old people. During the Great Recession and its aftermath 246,000 people moved away, but another 247,000 moved in. 

I cannot say exactly what has been New Hampshire’s secret success sauce, but one obvious observation is that modernity is being kind to the state. Somehow, we seem to be converting economic, social, and demographic changes into prosperity. Despite all the bad sky-is-falling news we are bombarded with daily this is a cause for all 1.3 million of us in NH to celebrate. 

A Reason for Employment Inequality

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Much is made of the dearth of economic opportunity and income equality across the U.S. workforce. Though a perennial issue, the conventional wisdom these days more than most appears to be that there are segments of the American population for whom high paying jobs are elusive or non-existent. This belief persists despite the lowest unemployment rate we have seen in nearly twenty years. 

The primary reason, we are told, for this situation boils down to the fact that an automated, globalized, and corporate-led economy produces winners and losers — a somewhat different set of winners and losers apparently than the more nationally-based economy of yesteryear. 

Inequality, or even the perception of it, tends to raise the hackles of key constituencies such as left-leaning individuals and nowadays working class folks who find that many low to mid-skilled jobs are evaporating. These groups agree there is a fundamental unfairness to inequality, and they are inspired to fight against it, sometimes in dramatically different ways, whenever possible. 

One element of inequality that I do not see getting too much attention however pertains to the number of people with a college education vs. those without one. As we look over the last half century or so we can see that this is a significant economic phenomenon. Indeed, the discrepancy between those with and without higher education impacts a variety of inequality factors, including not just income, but housing, community makeups, cultural upbringing, socioeconomics, and social status. 

The number of working-aged Americans with college degrees is steadily rising and now is at or slightly above 40% according to the Lumina Foundation. That is ten times the number compared to a hundred plus years ago when Andrew Carnegie, of all people, claimed college was irrelevant and even damaging. Despite the high cost of college, projections are that attendance will continue to grow another 15% by 2025 (Inside Higher Ed). 

Bruce Cain, a Stanford University political scientist, points out that people with knowledge-based characteristics attributed to being college educated, such as professionally oriented behaviors, digital familiarity, an understanding of financial services, and innovative inclinations, tend to congregate residentially and in employment. In today’s world the “Haves” are most often the ones with a college education, and they like to stick with and hire others of their own kind. It is easy to see how this can appear unequal. 

Many Baby Boomers were raised with the notion that getting a college education would lead to greater economic gain. Although the message is more nuanced these days the central point remains the same. One unintended consequence of this virtue is that it also leads to economic inequality and resentment among those not sharing in the bounty. This acrimony can sometimes be heard among those who have taken an anti-intellectual / anti-education stance, such as when expressing skepticism (to put it politely) regarding the viewpoints of the “elites” and the “establishment”. 

Addressing this imbalance requires initially a level of respect and acknowledgement that we all have something of value to offer. Working toward an economic system that honors and tries to achieve an opportunity-for-all ethic could arise from such a belief. Those who benefit from the hard work and commitment of pursuing higher education can assist those for whom college has not been a viable option through assistance measures designed to encourage greater and more affordable college attendance. 

And for those not choosing to pursue higher ed? The means of providing employment training, entrepreneurial support, and apprenticeship alternatives, along with other opportunity options, could be made more available. Full employment across all socioeconomic groups should always be our collective objective. 

Sharing prosperity across all segments of a pluralistic society is a great challenge. Perhaps we need to see more committed action from those who have succeeded, many of whom profess liberal leanings, to drive opportunity-for-all programs so that no one’s economic prospects are left behind. 

The Age of Mobility

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Mobility has become something of a buzz word these days, particularly in the context of one’s economic and employment condition. Increasingly we see movement among people, whether in terms of place, jobs, education, or social groups as more common, at least among a growing segment of the population. 

There has always been the phenomenon of socioeconomic mobility, the upward or downward movement of economic status with its resulting standard of living levels. As Americans, we pride ourselves on having created a meritocratic system, in which ability and talent rather than simply inherited wealth and privilege, can lead to upward mobility. And ingrained in that potential is of course the risk of failure and descent. 

The mobility I am emphasizing, however, goes beyond this more historic form. It is a mobility that in part defines the changing nature of career and economic success in an evolving economy. It is mobility that is encouraged and motivated by discovering and acquiring that increasingly elusive premium known as opportunity. 

If the work you want to do is more likely to be found in Los Angeles, then you leave your home in New Hampshire. If hiring is more robust in accounting, then you do not follow your parents’ careers as teachers. If the variety of diverse lifestyle and work choices within a multicultural neighborhood is more appealing, then you leave your mostly white and Protestant hometown. If your impetus is to develop truly innovative and groundbreaking services, then you don’t follow the path of anyone else. 

As one prepares for adulthood and career there appears to be a fundamental choice to be made — opt for a career characterized more by features of mobility or more by tradition. Throughout much of our history we were content to stay close to where we were born and to do work, whether in or out of the home, that was done by our parents. We continued family farming, worked in the same paper mill as our father and grandfather, raised children full time at home, and provided goods and services for families much like ours in the area. There were social and economic benefits, in short the opportunity, to carry on these traditions. That continuity still has appeal for many, but perhaps for a decreasing number of people. 

Economic opportunity now is seen by an expanding number of people as requiring mobility. For home grown and newly arrived Americans the ticket to a broader range of career options is education. It may be difficult to know exactly what the right thing is to study at first, but a belief is widely accepted that continuing education beyond high school and indeed throughout one’s working years is necessary to keep one economically viable and marketable. Similarly, is the understanding that one’s career now has an inherent mobility with many twists, turns, and iterations. (For example, most CEOs did not major in business administration, but rather in subjects like history, political science, and communications, according to Investopedia). 

Immigrants continue to serve as examples of assertive mobility. Sure, the attraction of the US has long been there for those from abroad who have wanted to put America’s socioeconomic upward mobility reputation and principles to the test. Indeed, that continues to happen. But many of today’s immigrants to America also know that to achieve a decent or higher standard of living they need to more intelligently hunt for and snag opportunity. The word is that opportunity will not be handed to them. Immigrants disrupted their lives intentionally, leaving much of their past and what is familiar behind. Their energy, enthusiasm, and drive are worth paying attention to and perhaps emulating as much now as ever. 

Hopefully, we can make our world friendly and prosperous for those with inclinations toward both mobility and tradition. Collectively, we should not have to conclude one way of life survives and the other does not. Yet, the trend toward mobility is mobilized and gathering steam. No matter how you choose to engage your career and livelihood your relationship with mobility must be considered. 

Consider a Career in Gaming

Posted on by Bill Ryan

I recently conversed with an old friend who was transitioning into retirement from a lifelong career as a golf course owner and superintendent. He shared with me his observation of a decline in the golf business in recent years not only at his course, but at others in his region (South Coast Massachusetts), and indeed nationally. 

Not being a golfer myself I did a little research and found that the industry is either thriving or declining depending on who you talk to. PGA officials point to statistics that paint a rosy picture of the game’s future, but other sources, such as The Economist for instance, show years of net golf course closures since 2006 and a drop of five million players since the game’s participant high point. 

In the case of my friend there was an unmistakable reduction in players at his course. I asked why this was the case thinking that recreational activity in general seems robust. His unscientific conclusion is that younger game players are choosing online gaming over golf. 

Online or digital gaming is big business. In looking at sources that track gaming data I found the following: Worldwide revenues in 2017 reaching $109B this year with 42% coming from mobile gaming (Newzoo); $18.4B of those revenues are being generated in the U.S. alone (Statista); and in May 2017, 9% year-over-year market growth was measured (SuperData Research). Unless you live in a cave, it is obvious anecdotally that lots of people enjoy spending lots of time gaming on devices. 

To try getting a better understanding of this phenomenon and how it relates to current and future careers I spoke with Ryan Smith, a New Hampshire-based game programmer, consultant, and game design instructor. Before our conversation, my image of a video gamer was restricted to adolescent boys in front of a console tethered to the family television. Ryan, who has been a gamer all his life and who earned a degree in game design from SNHU, has considerable background in this field both technically and culturally. 

Ryan began by sharing that digital gaming is now an entertainment industry double in size to the movie and music industries combined. Increasingly, women and older players are indulging in digital gaming. Gaming devices are grouped into PCs, consoles, and mobile categories with the first two losing market share to mobile.  

As interesting as these facts are, what I really wanted was a sense of what motivated players to play. Not being a gamer myself, I was curious about what is so appealing about this pastime to produce such a high level of engagement. 

According to Ryan, the attraction rests in otherworldly immersion where one can live out dreams and fantasies not possible in reality. There exists a level of interactive control, instant gratification, and risk taking that is not possible in ordinary day to day life. This leads to an expressive activity that is more stimulating and satisfying than the passive receptivity one gets from watching movies or listening to music — and it would seem more provocative than trying to refine a physical skill such as golfing. This type of engrossment is centered around action themes, stories, and scenarios, but is so enthralling apparently as to become a unique experience not found in more traditional amusements. 

The industry is trending toward more social, networked, and global gaming experiences with platforms known as Massively Multiplayer Online or MMOs and identity/community simulations. The other game changer, if you will, is the introduction of Virtual Reality (VR), a technological sensation that places a player more realistically into an imaginary environment. 

There are benefits to gaming aside from entertainment says Ryan. Discipline, motivation, eye-hand coordination, faster decision making, brain training and yes, even social skills can be enhanced through gaming. 

Digital gaming is a classic case of a newly disruptive industry changing a traditional landscape and presenting new employment opportunities not previously available. Despite the playfulness implied in gaming, a market this big must be taken seriously. 

Educating for Impending Careers

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Many of us in the United States were educated as children and young adults so that we could succeed both as citizens sustaining our democratic way of life and as productive workers able to sustain ourselves and our families economically. For the most part, the combination of public and private K–12 schools and higher education universities and colleges has served us quite well. We are by and large a well-educated and constructive populace. 

But can we rely on the old-school methodologies to sustain us for a world of work that will be characterized as mercurial and erratic calling for agility, adaptability, and rapid evolution? There is reason to think not. An economy that is experiencing increased speed and transformation will not be well served by an educational structure and model designed to prepare students for a relatively static and predictable work world. 

Let us examine the existing paradigm that traditionally and currently defines most American high schools and colleges. There are two patterns at play based on the concepts of liberal education and career-focused education. By the time a student reaches high school they select or have selected for them one of these persuasions or the other. 

Liberal (or liberal arts) education refers to an approach that encourages a broad and diverse exposure to fundamental and diverse subject matter with the goal being to educate a student for a complex world requiring a variety of perspectives, skills, and areas of knowledge. When and if college is reached, the student fits into this mix a concentrated focus in one or more disciplines. 

A career-focused or vocational path on the other hand focuses much more on preparing the student for a relevant job that is in demand in the workforce. Breadth gives way to depth in that a craft or skillset demonstrably employable is chosen, studied, and eventually mastered by the student. 

To be clear, I am not suggesting that there is anything fundamentally wrong with these models. My concern is in the traditional modes of delivery of the designs. We are still under the assumption that a high school diploma and/or college degree program that terminates upon graduation is enough to provide a student for a lifetime career. It used to be. However, projections are that it will not be enough going forward. 

The workplace and its career needs are becoming increasingly digitized and globalized, resulting in an urgency for malleable, resilient, and entrepreneurial workers to address the ever-vibrant economic demands across the planet. To maintain these attributes workers will need to accept and embrace continuous lifelong learning, upskilling, and training to keep up and stay ahead. Schooling will never end. In fact, it will become an integral and ongoing part of any advantageous job worth having for most people. 

We will likely see a time when liberal and career-focused methods become more of an as-needed hybrid with a greater proliferation of skill and knowledge-based certification and training programs not necessarily tied to slow moving traditional education settings. Students, employees, and educators will begin migrating more intentionally into online, virtual, and yes, brick & mortar learning facilities that offer the highest quality, data driven, short and long-term instruction essential to the requirements of the emerging economy. 

As an educator myself with 31 years in public schools and 5 years as a part time college adjunct I can say with some certainty that this industry will not on its own move in this direction without a lot of resistance. There are many entrenched interests compelled to resist such changes.  

A more responsive and pragmatic instructional delivery will likely arise from a combination of innovative educators and demanding students and employees requiring relevant reactive instruction. We can all begin by getting our heads around the concept of lifelong learning. I predict it will be far more energizing and efficient and much less stuck and draining. 

The Continued Evolution of LinkedIn

Posted on by Bill Ryan

The professional, business, and employment social media online platform LinkedIn is at it again, but in a bigger way this time. As individuals who regularly use LinkedIn to source talent, post jobs, display professional profiles, or network with other users we know that LinkedIn frequently tinkers with the interface to “improve” usability. It has always been a dynamic and growing service and one must assume they are doing something right with $3B+ in annual revenue and 460+ million user accounts worldwide. Not bad for a novel concept that first went live in 2003. 

The latest big set of changes has been rolling out for the past couple of months following the completed acquisition of LinkedIn by Microsoft in December 2016. Time will tell of course if this will be a good move for both parties. Let us hope this deal does not go the way of doomed Microsoft ventures like Nokia’s handset and aQuantive software. However, given the financial heft and prominent position in the digital services market Microsoft enjoys it is reasonable to expect that this takeover will boost LinkedIn’s standing and influence in the career and employment services space. 

Without getting into the weeds of all the many new minute interaction changes of the website, and there are enough, so that a new learning curve has appeared to get familiar with the site, it nevertheless appears to someone like me that I am increasingly finding LinkedIn to be my digital place to go to work. And I am not alone, Logging into LinkedIn.com is becoming my virtual commute to a real job. 

As in a traditional workplace there are those I work with frequently and closely on a project, those I know remotely, and those I am reaching out to as potential sources of value and opportunity. It is in these areas of taking connectivity among professional people to a more functional, transparent, and far-reaching level where LinkedIn holds great promise. 

The effects of globalization have thankfully become a hotly debated issue politically, but in the world of e-commerce impacted as it is by the powers of social media and crowd sourcing, the players are not waiting around for slow moving governments to set the rules. Global inter-connectivity and commerce is just starting to get ramped-up via international platforms like LinkedIn. It looks like we are heading into a world in which small-scaled and remote outreaches among millions of entrepreneurs, freelancers, microbusinesses, and small businesses across the planet can be exchanged 24/7. 

LinkedIn, and now by extension Microsoft, are betting on this proliferation of e-business, so much so that there is a mission to “economically graph” the world through its site. What does this mean? As Jeff Weiner, LinkedIn’s CEO puts it, they are committed to digitally mapping the global economy by building a profile for every member of the international workforce and for every company in the world. 

Further they intend to digitally list every available job in real refreshed time, list every skill needed to perform those jobs, and identify every school or training facility providing the skill instruction needed to perform these jobs. Facilitating an efficient, timely, and rich flow of information that connects these dots completes the goal. 

Given this infrastructure the potential for enriching current employment, business development, and career needs while also fulfilling the talent requirements for the innumerable jobs of the future seems highly likely. 

An expansive vision of the possibilities e-commerce and e-networking can deliver should be embraced. Many new careers can be made from leveraging a dynamic global economy. Engaging in international business does not any longer have to just be reserved for large multi-national corporations. If one can get a higher quality business or career solution from New Zealand rather than from New Hampshire no matter where in the world one lives, we should expect that to be the new normal and compete appropriately. 

The Challenge of Working Class Employment

Posted on by Bill Ryan

The recent presidential election has put the demands and anger of the working class front and center in America’s attention. The economic and cultural influences brought on by encroaching globalization and automation are changing employment — and by extension many people’s lives, in ways that are deeply unsettling and unpredictable. 

The short-term fix appears to be an electorate choosing a new president who has a penchant for, shall we say, over-promising what he can do about the situation. If these promises are combined with under-delivering in the creation of jobs for this cohort over the next few years, then we will likely be playing out another struggle for what, if anything, the government can do about employment during the 2020 election. 

I hesitate to look to the professional class for solutions to the employment and lifestyle anxiety being felt by the working class. Ultimately, this more economically disadvantaged group needs leadership to help them assess and adapt to the new world order that is increasingly being driven by globalization and automation. 

Neither political party is adequately providing the needed tough love leadership and straight talk to the working class. We hear plenty about nostalgia for the good old days or that the real problem was due to hoarding by the rich, but when has anyone acknowledged that world markets are moving toward knowledge-based economies that call for fundamental changes in the way workers plan for employment? Unfortunately, we never hear it. 

We are witnessing large-scale worker displacement. I for one do not see an end in sight. So, when contemplating the best course of action for those who have chosen to curtail their education at the high school level and work in traditional industries it is difficult to see a quick and easy fix. 

To say everyone should go to college is over-simplistic. To say we should reverse the march of time is unrealistic. This country has a serious problem on its hands and if nothing else the presidential election of 2016 has given us substance for a serious debate about where we go from here. 

One thing is clear — employment will continue to go to those with skills and expertise that are marketable. Increasingly, these jobs will be technical and specialized and require considerable education and training. However, not everyone is going to be driven to be a maven in some area. It still should be okay that some people just want a half-way decent job with reasonable compensation and not be looking to set the world on fire with their careers. The question becomes how should an individual with limited education and a strong desire to work in a traditional or straightforward job plan for their future? 

I was recently drawn to the November 2016 New Hampshire Economic Conditions issue published by the state’s Employment Security department’s Economic and Labor Market Information Bureau. Their feature story looks at both “Specialized” and “Baseline” skills most in demand in New Hampshire’s labor markets as derived from an analysis of online job postings. What struck me when reading this report is that it is a window, albeit a small one, into a way of measuring what employers want, in other words what is marketable. And given the context of this piece it is the baseline skills I’m most interested in, since as the qualifier suggests these are skills that do not require a lot of education. 

The most frequently listed baseline skills were communication, writing, multi-tasking, time management, detail orientation, planning, and being organized. Nothing too earth- shattering here. These are the kinds of things someone can do that are desired in the workplace and do not require sophisticated preparation. Perhaps, identifying the basic old-school abilities is where the working class should look to begin or restore their marketability in an uncertain world. 

Let us keep this conversation going. The people showed they are willing to overlook a lot of things in a new president in order to be heard. So, what should they be hearing? 

Workforce Shortages and Your Career

Posted on by Bill Ryan

I guess it is a sign of improvement when a new problem can be seen as less egregious than a previously harder to solve problem. For much of the past eight years we have concerned ourselves with getting people back to work — any work. To a large extent that has happened. Unemployment rates and the number of workers who can say they have a job are back to pre-recession levels. So now we have the “luxury” of concentrating on a replacement problem. That is the issue of workforce and labor shortages. 

U.S. employers are struggling to find qualified workers in several fields, resulting in business expansion difficulties and by extension national economic constraints. It does not sound as bad as the employment bounce-back the recession threw at us, and it should not be. However, if left unsolved it could become another factor reducing our global competitiveness and economic growth, spurring calls for talent immigration, automation, and offshoring. 

At an individual level, the college student trying to select a major; the college graduate attempting to launch a career; the established professional looking to make a career transition; and the entrepreneur seeking lucrative opportunities, are among those who may benefit from an analysis of where the workforce shortages currently exist and where employment projections are anticipated. Although such knowledge and considerations are not necessarily paramount determiners of one’s career development, they are worth investigating to see if an alignment exists between these trends and one’s enduring or potential value proposition. 

There are several reasons for the decline in qualified workers with demographics being the big one. The aging of Baby Boomers is naturally leading to more retirements. Domestically, there are not enough replacements for these retirees. Ten years ago, 400,000 workers retired per year . That number has risen to 1.2 million today. 

Also, the older population creates increased demand in fields such as healthcare where more workers are needed than in the past. For example, physical therapists, occupational therapists, and even doctors are already in short supply and are still expected to be in the future. 

However, it is not just in healthcare where shortages exist. To be honest it does not appear that labor deficits are confined to just several industries, but rather that it is a more widespread phenomenon. Even declining industries, such as manufacturing, are experiencing acute scarcities. 

Of course, not having enough workers trained with specific skillsets compounds the problem, but largely it is coming down to some basic math. Our bench is not populated enough to fill the number of vacating positions. 

This should be good news for working-aged people. It suggests there could potentially be many fields and openings to pick from. Other benefits over time should include rising wages and continuously improving working conditions designed to retain talent. 

To best position yourself to take advantage of this general opportunity some other trend lines should be considered. The Bureau of Labor Statistics foresees service sector jobs capturing 95% of newly created positions between now and 2024. Healthcare as mentioned above, and social assistance jobs together will become the largest area of employment, surpassing government and business services jobs. 

Technical occupations will also grow in number and demand will increase looking forward. Automation will eliminate some jobs to be sure, but more likely is that technology will transform jobs that still need a person involved. The energy, transportation, and data analysis sectors are among those in need of technically trained people who can interact with and leverage technology productively. 

I do not want to treat too lightly the menace workforce shortages can have economically and socially. It is a serious issue, especially for some businesses poised to grow and expand. Yet, compared to the recessionary years, I see more opportunity here than threat for the existing workforce. This allows new workforce entries to ensure they are selecting careers that can best fit their skillsets. 

Being What You Were Meant to Be

Posted on by Bill Ryan

In general, career competitiveness is likely to get, well, more competitive in the coming years. There are several factors indicating that to secure and retain a truly meaningful and satisfying career each of us will need to manage stiffer headwinds. We may not be able to change the wind velocity or direction, but we can adjust our sails. 

What headwinds am I referring to? Well, as anyone who has read my pieces before knows the two principal factors impacting the future of work in the U.S. and around the world are globalization and automation. These alone are introducing a host of competitive actors, both living and non-living. Being able to offer more employment value than other people around the planet, and more than the machines which are getting better at reproducing routine and now even sophisticated tasks, makes for a tough challenge. 

Beyond the gales emanating from an increasingly integrated and technology-based economy are those of our own making. We all tend to make unforced errors that result in establishing the right career more difficult. These are the impediments we throw in front of ourselves that come from flawed thinking and behavior patterns residing deep in our psyches. And with career competition expanding due to forces beyond our control, let us at least agree it is wise to confront the missteps we tend to cause ourselves. 

Who among us cannot identify imperfect responses of our own making, many of which are based in the way we make decisions? Perhaps, we are too impatient and restless wanting quick resolutions to problems and clarity to uncertainty before the best course of action has been adequately determined. 

Stress also affects the way we decide, and it usually does so in a way that quickly mitigates temporarily the stress at the expense of a better longer-term outcome. Any actions that take us away from a carefully planned and systematic approach to making the big decisions in our lives, such as choosing and setting courses for a career, will weaken our competitiveness. 

Decision making can be thought of as a process with sequential steps to be followed. It begins with clearly identifying the decision to be made, then gathering necessary information, spotting alternatives, assessing evidence, selecting options, acting, and reviewing the chosen conclusion. Doing this well requires discipline and strength of mind, but the higher quality decision making that can emerge better positions us for career competition we will face. 

The practice of reflection also can play a powerful role in navigating through uncharted waters. The Benedictine nun, author, and speaker Joan Chittister is quoted as saying, “Find the thing that stirs your heart and make room for it. Life is about the development of self to the point of unbridled joy.”   

The same can be said about our careers. As we reflect on what matters most to us and what jobs need to be done in the world, then we can best merge the two to find our career choice. Our way to realizing our career becomes more apparent. 

The signs of how we should work have always been there. They began in childhood and have followed us through maturity. How we perceive and become aware of things, people, events, and ideas followed by the conclusions we make about these phenomena shape who we become as people and as career professionals. 

The interests we cultivate, the values we hold dear, the motivations that propel us, and the skills we develop lead to a unique set of criteria that form the foundation of our value proposition. In other words, they make us competitive. Reflect on what that is for you. 

We can look ahead and fear the storm clouds, or we can accept the adverse winds as a call to action to improve our competitiveness and to be the professionals we were meant to be. 

The Growth of Cognitive Careers

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Economies, and by extension careers, reward those human characteristics most in demand. When muscular strength was most in need during times dominated by agriculture and mechanical ability became required to operate and maintain machinery during the industrial age, those abilities were rewarded and revered leading to employment for those possessing such skills. 

The age we have now entered, particularly since the invention of the microprocessor, is one around which cognitive competency or intelligence is highly honored. High paying and stimulating jobs are increasingly going to the smartest among us and there is no end in sight of this trend. 

Historically, there has always been a need for intelligent people, but the correlation between cognitive ability and compensation was never as strong as it is today. One could have been an astute lawyer, financial planner, or mathematician at the turn of the 20th century, but the economy just did not reward those people at the levels that can be done today. We have created a much more complex economy requiring well-informed, inventive, and knowledgeable people who can navigate and derive value from what is for many of us a puzzling network of esoteric information in so many areas. The employment landscape for people with certain kinds of cognitive capacity is flourishing. 

For years we have heard about high unemployment rates and at the same time we have heard there is not enough talent to hire for hard to fill positions. The jobs that are vacant seek individuals with know-how in management, engineering, data analysis, and many other areas where information processing, creativity, and workforce resourcefulness is called for. 

Professionalism is deepening across fields that include medicine/healthcare, law, higher education, the sciences, the military, advanced manufacturing, and finance. Routine and relatively low-skilled operations will not bring competitive advantages to these career categories. Only accelerated thinking will. 

As a result, we are seeing the growth of an educated class. According to the U.S. Census Bureau only 4.6% of the U.S. population had attained bachelor’s degrees or higher in 1940. Today it is 32%. As this educated class continues to earn at relatively robust rates it appears to create an impression of inequality and disenfranchisement, such as we see being exploited in our current presidential election. 

However, meeting the cognitive demands of a more intricate and perplexing economy requires educated people. Blaming success is not enough to improve the lot of us all. Directing one’s individual energies to where the expertise is most needed will. 

The number of us prepared to optimally function in the globalized cognitive economy is not enough if we are to continue being among the world’s leaders in innovation, business, and social transformation. Without relatively easy access to higher education for those with the potential to take the most advantage of this opportunity means we all lose. Let us agree that lifelong learning is essential for each one of us and entry into a college experience that challenges and pushes us to maximize our cerebral capacity benefits us personally and collectively. 

However, the expense of higher education is too high and makes going to college prohibitive for too many Americans. The cost of college has risen too much and too fast. To put this cost hike into perspective the New York Times’ Economix blog shows that since 1985 the cost of general consumer items has jumped 200+%, gasoline prices have risen approximately 300%, and medical care 350%. But college tuition and fees — 575%! Are you kidding me? How is this in our best interests? This destructive level of inflation needs to be controlled. Our long-term economic development relies on it. 

Equality of opportunity is a virtue and should be the basis of much of our public policy. Opportunity is stifled when only the rich can afford to go to college. Opening the doors to higher education invites more participation in cognitive careers and expands the education class to more inclusiveness. 

The Employment Challenge of the White, Blue-Collar Worker

Posted on by Bill Ryan

So, here we are amid the 2016 Presidential race, an election cycle that is likely to go down in American history as one of the most unusual and unpredictable contests ever for selecting our next president. A chief factor contributing to the volatility of this election concerns a rarely seen and powerful reaction coming from a cohort that has been with us for well over a hundred years — the racially white, economically middle class, high school-only educated worker, once commonly referred to as the blue-collar worker. 

The anxiety, fear, uncertainty, and anger of this significant electoral group has shaken up and defined this cycle’s race in a way that most of us, including the political pundits who follow this stuff for a living, did not see coming. This class angst has led to the rapid rise of at least two presidential candidates, who were not expected to be major players when they entered the fray and is driving much of the conversation among all of those still contending for the big prize. 

There are concrete and measurable reasons for the white, blue-collar worker to be apprehensive and they fall across economic, racial/ethnic, demographic, and educational domains. Technology is eliminating many low and mid-skilled jobs. Globalization is increasing competition. Whites are seeing minorities increase in numbers and power sharing. Having less than a college degree puts one at a greater employment disadvantage. When members of this contingent, particularly males, see that their fathers had an easier time achieving the middle class dream than they can, then a deep demoralization sets in. 

A report by two economists that received much attention at the end of last year showed that death rates for white, less-educated Americans aged 45–54 have increased since 1999. Drug/alcohol-related deaths and suicide are propelling this boost. Clearly, something is amiss, and it appears to have reached a breaking point with this election. 

The social and economic causal conditions mentioned are colossal and not reversible. Oversimplified diagnoses coupled with over-promising, which is what presidential candidates largely seem to be offering, will not allay the real fear people are feeling. Strong leadership that empathically acknowledges the discomfort, unease, and confusion people are feeling is a start. But rather than offering unrealistic and bombastic “solutions” it needs to be recognized that as a country we need to rally around outcomes that do not pit one class, race, or ethnic group against another, but instead meet these complex challenges with national resolve. 

In a word, jobs are at the crux of this issue. It is reasonable to ask, what is the white, blue-collar worker with only a high school education to do? To begin answering this I go way back to Aristotle who said that in order to achieve true happiness we must depend on ourselves. Of course, collective action politically and economically is important, but most fundamentally each of must assess on our own the world we are now in and determine for ourselves the best course of action to take for sustainable employment given the daunting headwinds we face. This takes clear, critical, and reflective thinking, resulting in high quality decision making. 

Each of us needs to think of ourselves as an entrepreneur. No, we are not all going to start businesses, but we are going to be approaching our careers similarly by developing, organizing, and managing the enterprise of “myself”. This involves initiative, risk, and when done well, reward. A good entrepreneur finds opportunities from among many distractions, they are innovative when conventional approaches do not work, and they are organized and productive in meeting their goals. Does being like an entrepreneur require a college degree? For many yes, for others no. 

There is a lot of need in the world. We are far from saturating all the actual and potential jobs that are or will be available. Triggering an action with an uncertain outcome is not easy and it is fraught with unpredictability, but our careers depend on it — even for the white, blue-collar worker. 

The State of Careers in New Hampshire

Posted on by Bill Ryan

The 2014 In Review: Recovery report recently released by the New Hampshire Employment Security Department and the Economic and Labor Market Information Bureau is a very detailed and informative analysis of New Hampshire’s post -recession economy.

In addition to being concerned about the economic health of my state as a citizen, I am also intrigued by the report’s implications for the careers of all New Hampshire workers. I have read the report in an attempt to identify some useful indicators in determining the current and future status of career development opportunities for the state’s workforce. What follows are my career-related takeaways from 2014 In Review: Recovery:

There are several labor market-related indicators used to view the economic health of New Hampshire. The ones I think that can be used to derive the desired career information are Unemployment and Current Employment Statistics; Employment by Supersector (broad employment-industry categories); Average Hourly Earnings; Business Employment Dynamics; and Population. When taken together a picture emerges of a state with career promise for many, but within a limited number of industries and a long-term pattern of slow economic growth.

News flash! Unemployment rates rose during the Great Recession! So where are we now? The seasonally adjusted unemployment rate for this past March in New Hampshire was 3.9%, which was eighth in the nation. We are essentially tied with Vermont in having the lowest rates in New England. Nationally, the rate in March was 5.5%. Statistically, eighth out of fifty does not sound too bad. Anecdotally, the “Help Wanted” sign are reappearing in business windows state-wide.

This sounds like good news, but if we dig into the data deeper we see some sobering facts. New Hampshire has a shrinking labor force that appears to be influencing the unemployment rate. As an aging state we are experiencing a trend of fewer people participating in the workforce. This fact, combined with low rates of in-migration and limited entrepreneurial expansion, is resulting in slow economic growth. To be sure there are a few bright spots, such as in advanced manufacturing, but this is not translating into being a game changer.

In looking at employment by Supersector we see that the four most robust categories of hiring are in Trade, Transportation, and Utilities; Education and Health Services; Professional and Business Services; and Leisure and Hospitality. Among the hiring laggards are Manufacturing and Construction. When we examine earnings in these Supersectors there have been increases in Education and Health Services and in Trade, Transportation, and Utilities. Pay reductions occurred in Manufacturing and Professional/Business Services. Leisure and Hospitality held steady.

Viewing current hiring in the context of near-term economic and demographic trends, including steady or declining population growth, a low level of in-migration, relative high levels of well-off retiree disposable cash, and a listing as sixth nationally in median household income tells me hiring tendencies are not likely to change dramatically. If you intend to live for a while in New Hampshire, plan your careers accordingly. We do not have an economic climate that is significantly attracting many skilled workers from other states or countries. Therefore, competition for jobs is likely to come from other NH residents.

Taken together, all of this news may suggest that careers oriented toward a graying population, such as in certain types of retail and niche services given this population’s spending capacity, financial management and wealth preservation wishes, leisure and hospitality, and of course healthcare needs should be considered.

Beyond that, Professional and Business Services hiring has recovered well from the recession. New Hampshire businesses still need accountants, HR professionals, operations managers, and technicians among many other business service pros. Career areas to watch out for include those feeling downward pressure from an aging population, such as public school teachers facing declining enrollments and construction workers encountering curtailed building expansion.

A direction that would be encouraging to see turned around is our level of entrepreneurship. More creative ideas and risk-taking on the part of individuals willing to start businesses targeted to improving the lives of New Hampshire residents just might enhance our standard of living and boost economic growth simultaneously. Now there is a career option!

 

 

 

Preparing Your Career for a Binary Star Economy

Posted on by Bill Ryan

Career Development is as fluid a field of study and method of personal improvement as can be found anywhere. Its progressive elasticity and growing erratic nature are due to the changing state of the world of work. In an environment that requires continual improvement, adaptability, and thorough planning as does ours, long-term career design can be a difficult and uncertain endeavor. 

As discovered by ancient mariners when navigating vast and strange oceans, it helps to have a North Star to serve as a beacon and guide. As we each seek to chart an unclear and enigmatic career development landscape for purposes of changing existing careers or determining new ones, we too can benefit from a North Star. However, Binary Star may be the more apt metaphor — a system consisting of two stars orbiting around their common center of mass. This is because the duality we must now regularly consider are the two interdependent powerhouses known as globalization and automation. 

The future of work appears to be heavily influenced, if not governed, by these two harbingers. In tandem, globalization and automation are in a process of modifying the way we live, and therefore how we work. The expanding utilization of technology combined with the spreading integration of people, businesses, and governments around the world is altering economic history in a way that has not happened since the Industrial Revolution. 

As paradigm shifting as the change from hand work to mass production was a hundred plus years ago, we are now witnessing a transformation just as groundbreaking, if not more. When people like Ray Kurzweil, the 67-year-old Director of Engineering at Google, predicts that by 2029 computers will be able to perform all tasks humans can now do, only better, then I pay attention — and you should too. 

It is not just the prognostications of one man that matter (and he has some doozies), but the unmistakable short and long-term trend lines indicating rapid proliferation in new and disruptive technologies and business models (think Airbnb, Uber, SaaS, MOOCS) and increased activity in what the International Monetary Fund refers to as the four basic aspects of globalization: international transactions; capital movements; migrations of people; and knowledge dissemination. 

Ask yourself, how well do your career plans hitch themselves to the forces of globalization and automation? It is wise to look for some connection. Enough current work is already being made redundant and new ways of organizing work tasks are in the process of being discovered. If I was as prescient as I wish I could be, I would now present a neat and tidy list of specific and guaranteed jobs of the future. But alas, I am not that farsighted. Nevertheless, here is what I think will help in preparing for the Brave New World and strengthen our decision making as we move forward. 

Paramount is the need to remain optimistic in the face of uncertainty. Pessimism and hand wringing will not fortify us against ambiguity. Those who will find success are those with a positive attitude allowing themselves to see and grasp an opportunity others do not or cannot. 

We also need to get back to having big ideas. The Hoover Dam, the Golden State Bridge, and the Empire State Building were all built during the Great Depression. Winning World War II, constructing the Interstate Highway System, and launching six crewed moon landings followed. Today we are all in a twist about whether to extend health insurance to the uninsured and whether to fund bridge repairs. Big problems exist that need substantial solutions. Let us find our lost courage to make grand proposals and realize lofty outcomes. 

Free thinking of the type that stimulates innovation and entrepreneurship also needs to be encouraged. This has always been America’s strong suit and it demands continuation, if not invigorating, in an ever-competitive global economy. Our schools for one can do a better job of transitioning from the mechanized industrial-aged model to one more consistent with a broad-minded enterprising ethos. 

Business dedicated to sharing, rather than old fashioned consumption and disposal of resources is becoming fashionable — and profitable. Making money by sharing homes, cars, locally grown foods, breweries, office spaces, etc. is becoming increasingly common. Disruptive of legacy business models to be sure, but isn’t that the way it is going these days? From an ecological viewpoint, an economy that utilizes resources in common with others may in part reverse the throw-away trend of the last half century. 

Reframing our attitudes and ways of thinking about the binary impact globalization and automation is having on our economy, careers, and ways of life may be the best approach we can profitably take away from this economic conversion.