|
As technology transforms the workplace, the need for innovation in learning and development is urgent. In a series of recent discussions, members of the Consortium of Advanced Adult Learning & Development (CAALD)—a group of learning authorities whose members include researchers, corporate and nonprofit leaders, and McKinsey experts—recently met in Boston for the second year in a row.
In a series of discussions, CAALD explored what is, and isn’t, being done to innovate in these fields. Many CAALD experts were skeptical about the ability of universities to respond rapidly enough. Some also suggested that as the workplace changes, the role of the college degree will shift as well—and that its value could even decline. Fortunately, innovation is taking place both at universities and businesses, including AT&T, edX, Microsoft, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Participants described the potential of these and other developments. And they agreed that while some companies are ready to explore new ways of developing talent, sorting through the options is complex and time consuming. The rapid growth of the gig economy creates additional challenges—and opportunities—for innovation efforts.
Here we present edited excerpts of these experts’ reflections, which build on related CAALD discussions exploring artificial intelligence and the future of work.
Inertia in higher education
Jason Palmer, general partner, New Markets Venture Partners:
Our higher-education system is 25 years behind the curve. There needs to be a new set of institutions and programs that are jointly owned and managed by corporations or industry.
Our higher-education system is 25 years behind the curve. There needs to be a new set of institutions and programs that are jointly owned and managed by corporations or industry.
Betsy Ziegler, chief innovation officer, Kellogg School of Management:
One of the flaws of the American higher-education system is that once you cross the graduation stage, we largely sever the relationship with you—with the exception of viewing you as a donor. Your connection and loyalty to the school haven’t changed but the relationship with the institution has. At Kellogg, we say, “Congratulations” and give them a discount off executive-education programs and lifelong access to the career-management center. But we do nothing with respect to “how are your skills and capabilities changing over time? And what can we do to help you meet these needs?”
One of the flaws of the American higher-education system is that once you cross the graduation stage, we largely sever the relationship with you—with the exception of viewing you as a donor. Your connection and loyalty to the school haven’t changed but the relationship with the institution has. At Kellogg, we say, “Congratulations” and give them a discount off executive-education programs and lifelong access to the career-management center. But we do nothing with respect to “how are your skills and capabilities changing over time? And what can we do to help you meet these needs?”
Misaligned incentives
Beth Davies, former director of learning and development, Tesla:
I remember talking to some community colleges that we were working with. I was asking them about creating a certificate program, say, for manufacturing engineers. And they were a bit reticent because their funding is based on completion rate.
I remember talking to some community colleges that we were working with. I was asking them about creating a certificate program, say, for manufacturing engineers. And they were a bit reticent because their funding is based on completion rate.
Lee Rubenstein, vice president of business development, edX:
Think about that—the North Star there isn’t the student, it’s the funding.
Think about that—the North Star there isn’t the student, it’s the funding.
Kris Clerkin, managing partner, Volta Learning Group:
A degree is not really a great proxy for meaningful skills. When you look at a transcript, it has a list of courses, but those don’t necessarily show skills or competencies. That said, degrees are a recognized credential; employers use them as a signal. Plus, there’s a yearning for them. It’s part of the American narrative. For me, it’s more like “let’s figure out how to do this better, in a way that works for employers and students. Let’s not throw out everything that we have, but find more flexible ways of providing recognizable value of competency more quickly, in smaller units that build to degrees.”
A degree is not really a great proxy for meaningful skills. When you look at a transcript, it has a list of courses, but those don’t necessarily show skills or competencies. That said, degrees are a recognized credential; employers use them as a signal. Plus, there’s a yearning for them. It’s part of the American narrative. For me, it’s more like “let’s figure out how to do this better, in a way that works for employers and students. Let’s not throw out everything that we have, but find more flexible ways of providing recognizable value of competency more quickly, in smaller units that build to degrees.”
Katie Coates, senior learning-solutions expert, McKinsey & Company:
I do think people want degrees. They want them because there isn’t an alternative. And they want them because they want some marker.
I do think people want degrees. They want them because there isn’t an alternative. And they want them because they want some marker.
In search of alternatives
Lee Rubenstein:
Leaders need to understand and value the alternative credentials that are available. If I’m an employer, I need to be saying, “Here are the 12 competencies that I need you to get. I don’t care where you get them. You don’t need to spend $200,000 in four years to go do that. You just need to show us some proof.”
Leaders need to understand and value the alternative credentials that are available. If I’m an employer, I need to be saying, “Here are the 12 competencies that I need you to get. I don’t care where you get them. You don’t need to spend $200,000 in four years to go do that. You just need to show us some proof.”
The idea that you enter at the bottom and four-plus years later you end at the top and you’re done is a fiction. It doesn’t mean anything anymore. Learners need to be able to enter at any different point along the way, take what they need, and get going to do whatever it is they wanted to do. We have to try to find a way to help alternative credentials become a currency among learners that is respected and valued by employers.
Lynda Gratton:
What we’re describing at the moment is an either/or. Either you do a degree or you do other programs. But, actually, people can do both. You simply have to say, “These are the skills that you need.”
What we’re describing at the moment is an either/or. Either you do a degree or you do other programs. But, actually, people can do both. You simply have to say, “These are the skills that you need.”
Beth Davies:
When I joined Tesla, in 2011, there were 800 employees. There were over 30,000 when I left. In five years, I think, organizations like Tesla will be saying, “Of course, we hire people with any kind of meaningful credentials, regardless of degrees. It’s a done deal.” Organizations cannot grow at rates like these and not make this change. You cannot find all of these people by only following traditional means. We’ll find the people through nontraditional means. At some point, the nut will get cracked.
When I joined Tesla, in 2011, there were 800 employees. There were over 30,000 when I left. In five years, I think, organizations like Tesla will be saying, “Of course, we hire people with any kind of meaningful credentials, regardless of degrees. It’s a done deal.” Organizations cannot grow at rates like these and not make this change. You cannot find all of these people by only following traditional means. We’ll find the people through nontraditional means. At some point, the nut will get cracked.
Innovation and Experimentation
Lee Rubenstein:
About a year ago, MIT started a new type of course sequence, on edX online, called a MicroMasters. A MicroMasters is usually a four- to five-course sequence that builds a job-skills competency that is endorsed by a corporation and backed by credit. Students who completed a MicroMasters from MIT and then applied and were accepted to the full master’s program at MIT received 50 percent off the cost and time of that MIT master’s program—in supply-chain management. And so if a company was looking for somebody with supply-chain experience, and someone came to it with an MIT MicroMasters, why would a company not value it? For the learner, that’s about a $1,500 investment, while the conventional master’s is $60,000.
About a year ago, MIT started a new type of course sequence, on edX online, called a MicroMasters. A MicroMasters is usually a four- to five-course sequence that builds a job-skills competency that is endorsed by a corporation and backed by credit. Students who completed a MicroMasters from MIT and then applied and were accepted to the full master’s program at MIT received 50 percent off the cost and time of that MIT master’s program—in supply-chain management. And so if a company was looking for somebody with supply-chain experience, and someone came to it with an MIT MicroMasters, why would a company not value it? For the learner, that’s about a $1,500 investment, while the conventional master’s is $60,000.
Lynda Gratton:
Microsoft has badges that show an employee has passed an exam or completed certification for a given skill. You can take your badges with you if you leave, too. If I were a talent-rich company, I would want to do the same.
Microsoft has badges that show an employee has passed an exam or completed certification for a given skill. You can take your badges with you if you leave, too. If I were a talent-rich company, I would want to do the same.
I think more companies are going to do this kind of “badging,” and this will be part of their recruitment and retention process. At the same time this idea of badging spreads, I also think we’re going to see more and more configurations where a business has solved part of the puzzle. LinkedIn, say, knows what skills you’ve got. And Lynda.com, the video-based learning company, has another part. You will see a lot more innovation in this space.
Julia Stiglitz, vice president, Coursera:
At AT&T, they have taken all of their job categories, mapped them onto competencies, and aligned them to learning opportunities. Individuals can go onto a personalized-learning system and see if their jobs are on the decline or on the rise. They can discover jobs that they are interested in, see the associated competencies, and take advantage of learning opportunities that will enable them to make a transition. The transparency of AT&T’s system is remarkable and empowering to employees.
At AT&T, they have taken all of their job categories, mapped them onto competencies, and aligned them to learning opportunities. Individuals can go onto a personalized-learning system and see if their jobs are on the decline or on the rise. They can discover jobs that they are interested in, see the associated competencies, and take advantage of learning opportunities that will enable them to make a transition. The transparency of AT&T’s system is remarkable and empowering to employees.
In Silicon Valley, at least when people are hiring engineers, companies don’t care where they went to school. Facebook is hiring people right out of college if they can code. And we have a 14-year-old intern. All these companies care about is that people can code.
Annie McKee, senior fellow, University of Pennsylvania:
Here’s a practical suggestion. In recent years, there have been somewhere between 300,000 to 400,000 skilled manufacturing jobs going begging in the US at any given time. Pick a subset of those in a particular region, then figure out a way to teach the skills and do a test project.
Here’s a practical suggestion. In recent years, there have been somewhere between 300,000 to 400,000 skilled manufacturing jobs going begging in the US at any given time. Pick a subset of those in a particular region, then figure out a way to teach the skills and do a test project.
Learning in the gig economy
Amy Edmondson, Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management, Harvard Business School:
A more diffuse, gig economy will exponentially increase the difficulty of getting people to undertake and complete training. We know it is a huge hurdle under the best of circumstances, and it’s even harder when the learning isn’t contextualized. Coursework is hard for many people, due to time constraints or a lack of interest in traditional learning, but interacting with people or doing on-the-job tasks that develop and use math or computer skills makes learning more pragmatic and attractive. We need to figure out how to line up some of the factors that drive people toward completion and success, even when they don’t work for an organization.
A more diffuse, gig economy will exponentially increase the difficulty of getting people to undertake and complete training. We know it is a huge hurdle under the best of circumstances, and it’s even harder when the learning isn’t contextualized. Coursework is hard for many people, due to time constraints or a lack of interest in traditional learning, but interacting with people or doing on-the-job tasks that develop and use math or computer skills makes learning more pragmatic and attractive. We need to figure out how to line up some of the factors that drive people toward completion and success, even when they don’t work for an organization.
Tamara Ganc, chief learning officer, Vanguard Group:
I wonder if there is a way to intrinsically motivate the gig worker. EBay, for example, has five-star sellers. Maybe there could be some visual way to display the gig worker’s level of learning—the way they’ve kept up on their craft.
I wonder if there is a way to intrinsically motivate the gig worker. EBay, for example, has five-star sellers. Maybe there could be some visual way to display the gig worker’s level of learning—the way they’ve kept up on their craft.
Portia Wu, former assistant secretary, Employment and Training Administration, US Department of Labor:
Some models do that now, such as home healthcare and food safety. People can say, “I’m food-safety certified” or “I have 500 hours with this special-needs population, and I have done this coursework.” That can be seen in a profile, which can help their marketability. You could also have a multiemployer structure where there’s a central entity that says, “Here’s a curriculum that we’ve vetted.” The individual doesn’t have to figure it out.
Some models do that now, such as home healthcare and food safety. People can say, “I’m food-safety certified” or “I have 500 hours with this special-needs population, and I have done this coursework.” That can be seen in a profile, which can help their marketability. You could also have a multiemployer structure where there’s a central entity that says, “Here’s a curriculum that we’ve vetted.” The individual doesn’t have to figure it out.
Claudio Feser, senior partner, McKinsey & Company:
Whether it’s government or self-organized, there is a need for some form of central management of a curriculum or certification to create opportunities. People can’t do it all by themselves.
Whether it’s government or self-organized, there is a need for some form of central management of a curriculum or certification to create opportunities. People can’t do it all by themselves.
|
A tidal wave of change is coming that will soon make the way we work almost unrecognizable to today’s business leaders. In an age of rapidly evolving technologies, business models, demographics, and even workplace attitudes—all shifting concurrently—change is not only constant but also exponential in its pace and scope.
During a comprehensive, yearlong analysis of the global work landscape, The Boston Consulting Group identified 60 major trends propelling this tidal wave, which we’ve grouped into 12 primary forces. These forces, or megatrends, fall into four categories. The first two address changes in the demand for talent: technological and digital productivity and shifts in ways of generating business value. The second two address changes in the supply of talent: shifts in resource distribution and changing workforce cultures and values.
THE NEW AGE OF WORK
What changes will these trends bring? As companies respond to the 12 forces, we expect several key developments in the next few years.
- Companies will develop a more fluid sense of what is inside and what is outside their boundaries.
They will move beyond rigid distinctions between employees, outside suppliers, and customers, developing platforms to promote collaboration among all stakeholders. Eventually, as value chains break up into networks and platforms, the role of the organization will shift from that of a controller of resources to that of a facilitator of ecosystems and a conduit for realizing individual aspirations. - Speed and agility will be essential to competitiveness.
Many companies will look to break up entrenched departments and reporting lines, opting to organize work in smaller and more agile interdisciplinary teams. These teams will learn to work in short “sprint” cycles to produce minimal viable products and services, solicit feedback on them, and refine them through rapid iterations. Individuals will rotate among projects, training, internal incubators, and even social impact initiatives. These agile and innovative approaches, along with design thinking and other related methodologies, will soon become the norm, not just in IT (where they originated) but across functions and practices. - Companies will continually develop (and redevelop) their people, so that they are equipped to deal with the tidal wave of change.
They will also inculcate diversity, inclusion, and flexibility in their corporate DNA. They will shift from HR processes, policies, and systems to problem-solving interactions. And as flexible, cloud-based software replaces traditional documentation and controls, HR will customize its interfaces with employees to better support individual needs and desires. - The increased prevalence of digital technology and artificial intelligence will lead to new job functions and categories—but also to shortages of people with the skills needed to fill those roles.
Many companies will need to focus more on developing digital skills among their current workers or identifying and recruiting potential new hires. In addition, companies will need digital bridge builders: intermediaries between employees with specialized digital talent and those in nontech roles.
Smart leaders will monitor these changes and experiment with new ways of working that align with their company’s context and capabilities. In addition, they will define their businesses not in terms of their competitive advantages but in terms of the purpose that makes them relevant in a rapidly evolving world.
These 12 trends are complex and interrelated. To cope with them, companies need a well-thought-out strategy that can translate into concrete interventions. Those that do not develop such a strategy may soon find themselves bumping up against nimbler rivals, unable to adapt to the disruption in time.
|
Jim Collins recently joined Ryan Hawk, host of The Learning Leader Show, to discuss how to take the right risks, and, above all, how to go from good to great.
Ryan: When you first met with Peter Drucker, he said, “You seem to focus a lot on a question of how to be successful, but that is actually the wrong question. The right question is how to be useful.1” How did that moment shape you?
Jim: One day I get this phone call out of the blue from Peter, [inviting me] to Claremont, California [to] spend the day with him. At the end of the day, he issued that challenge. I feel like [he] was the ultimate zen master with a bamboo stick because he really did sit there and say, “You seem to spend a lot of time worrying if you will survive, and you will probably survive,” he very kindly told me. And then this thwack moment: “It’s the wrong question! The question is how to be useful.”
That is one of those moments that has guided what I do. I think constantly about the question of how to make myself of best use, also subject to wanting to follow the idea of simplicity.
Ryan: Another story I love is after you finish the manuscript of Good to Great and you ask yourself, “How much would someone have to pay me to not publish Good to Great?” I believe you said you crossed the $100 million threshold because you’re a teacher at heart. What was going through your mind as you’re ready for this book to get published?
Jim: After that meeting with Peter Drucker, I did fully commit to carving my own path. He gave me this wonderful piece of advice, "When you’re taking an entrepreneurial path, sometimes options have negative value. You should not seek an option to be able to return. You should cut off the option because it will change your behavior.”
I made sure that I had no option to return to teaching, and my wife Joanne and I describe it as our Thelma and Louise moment. Once we made that commitment, there was no turning back. Built to Last ended up being read by a lot of CEOs, and that provided some foundation. Then I said to Joanne, “We need to keep creating,” and so, we took all the resources and the good fortune that came from Built to Last and turned around and plowed it all right back into what became Good to Great, and bet again really big. We spent five years on self-funded research with fabulous members of my research team and had stumbled upon a fantastic question: Can you actually turn an established company into a great one? Can a mediocre, average, good company make a breakthrough to become a great company, or at least have a great run?
Ryan: One of the questions that I ask most people I speak with is, what are the common characteristics or virtues of leaders that sustain excellence?
Jim: I am in the process of finishing up a project which looks at the question of producing great K-12 education in our most difficult settings and environments. I’ve been looking at leaders who took schools in our most difficult settings and looking at how they ended up being able to produce great results for the kids, or at least take their schools to a positive inflection.
The unit leader is the key person. I went into the study thinking one of the big questions was going to be how [to] deal with burnout in these really tough settings. To my surprise, this just isn’t a problem for them. Year after year after year, they’re leading at a really high level.
What allows them to keep going, to keep sustaining themselves? There are two things that jump out. The first is, somewhere along the way, you have to find your personal hedgehog. The hedgehog concept is something we wrote about in Good to Great about companies. You focus the energy of the company on the intersection of three circles: what you’re deeply passionate about, what you can be the best in the world at, and what drives your economic engine. What all of these great leaders have in our schools is they somehow relatively early in their life got inside those three circles.
They found their hedgehog, and then once they’re in it, they don’t leave it. They build with it over a long period of time and it becomes a positive reinforcement loop [throughout] life.
Ryan: I’ve had Adam Grant on, and he talks about measured risk. While some entrepreneurs feel like they need to leave themselves with no other option, which is what ultimately worked for you, there are a host of people who got backup jobs, who had a side hustle until it became fully sustainable. How do you [square] those two different approaches?
Jim: Here’s the issue: If you’re going to pursue a low-odds games, the reality is that, at some point, the odds will go to zero if you don’t commit fully. You’re never going to get across the chasm in that Thelma and Louise moment if you’re basically just going to keep yourself tethered to one side. But, that doesn’t mean you’re taking an unfounded leap into the wild beyond.
Ryan: Empirical validation may be hard to define. How can people implement this into their daily life?
Jim: Validation is just looking at points of success and saying, “That worked and that worked and I can explain why.” You’re looking for tangible pieces of evidence. Maybe it’s feedback you get from a mentor, maybe it’s some specific things that you’ve done where you say, “Well, that worked better than I thought it would.” It doesn’t matter what arena you’re in, you can basically point to it.
Ryan: Jim, I know we went over a lot, I really appreciate your time. Is there anything else that you wanted to cover that I may have missed?
Jim: “If I just had three minutes with young people in the world, what would I tell them?” There’s a key concept in Good to Great about first “who,” then “what.” We live in a world that’s full of “whats” right now. “What’s your vision? What’s your strategy? What’s your direction? What’s your career?” It’s all about a bunch of “what’s.”
The thing I come away with from all of our work is to shift as many “what’s” to “who’s as possible.” The question is not what career you’re going to have or what path you’re going to take or what company you’re going to work for. Those are important questions, but they come second. The most important question is “who?” Who are you going to allow to mentor you? Who are you going to work with? Who are you going to spend your life with? Who will you let shape you?
Take care of your people, not your career. I didn’t have to have the answers to the “what’s” if I really paid attention to finding great “who’s” that would help guide me.
No comments:
Post a Comment