One out of five American working men and women are now unemployed or under-employed. And yet, with 3.4 million jobs currently standing open, it's not as if the land of opportunity has closed up shop. Yes, of course, there's much to be done to strengthen the economy so those 3.4 million jobs become 6.8 million and more. But, the proximate problem isn't a lack of employment, it's a shortfall in the skills and knowledge of American workers.
What's caused this deficit? The "economic singularity." Vernor Vinge, the academician and science fiction writer, coined the term "technological singularity" to denote that point in time when machines would become smarter than humans. The economic singularity, therefore, is that moment when the workers in companies based overseas become smarter than the workers in companies based here. And, sadly, we have passed that demarcation point.
America's companies no longer compete with cheaper labor in the global economy; they compete with smarter labor. On the manufacturing floor and in the office cubicle, America's foreign-based competitors have upped their game. If we expect to continue as the world's economic leader, therefore, we must do the same.
Accomplishing that effort is clearly within our means. There is a broad range of solutions that could potentially upgrade the capabilities and thus the performance of America's workforce. All will fail, however, if we don't first shore up the weaknesses in our developmental infrastructure. It's as dilapidated as our highways and bridges.
A good place to start is in academia. We have to plug the yawning hole in the higher education we give our workers. With some notable exceptions, for the last 75 years, America's universities and its four-year and community colleges have been graduating "career idiot savants." They've taught their students a lot about a particular field of study and absolutely nothing about how to make a career in that field. Why? Because most faulty members feel that the body of knowledge and set of skills involved in career self-management isn't rigorous enough to be included in the curriculum.
Contrast that view with the situation in China. Today, every college student in that country must take -- as a requirement of graduation -- a year-long course called Personal Mastery. It teaches the principles and practices of effective career self-management.
What's that entail? Such critical competencies as how to set near- and long-term career goals; how to deal with the frustrations and disappointments that occur from time-to-time in a career; and, most importantly, how to avoid obsolescence in an era that is producing new knowledge at a breathtaking rate.
Where can the nation turn to resolve this dilemma? Every institution of higher learning has a career center, placement office or similar resource. They are under-budgeted, understaffed and under-prioritized, but they are filled with talent. They can be the corner stone for a national initiative to give students both the academic and the career preparation they need and deserve in today's global economy. The goal is not to teach students how to write a resume or conduct a job search -- that will happen, of course -- but to give them "career security," the ability always to be employed and always by an employer of their choice.
These offices will need more priority and support to execute such a mission, but they have the expertise to fill the developmental gap in U.S. higher education and to do so effectively. More importantly, they offer the only viable long-term solution to our workforce skills deficit -- teaching students how to take responsibility for the health of their own careers.
As potent as that initiative would be, however, it is not sufficient by itself. We must, in addition, fill the crack caused by the short-term vision in our skill remediation efforts. Currently, the U.S. Department of Labor and its affiliated state agencies provide financial and programmatic support to upgrade the qualifications of persons in transition. Typically, they rely on community colleges, four-year academic institutions and commercial education and training vendors to provide unemployed workers with the skills to start out in a new field of work -- one with better career prospects.
While that strategy is helpful in getting people back to work, it does nothing at all to ensure they continue working. As a result, we are now seeing more and more cases of "unemployment recidivism." The people who have been trained come back for retraining 12, 18 or 24 months later because the skills they originally gained have become obsolete.
Thankfully, there is a "shovel-ready" solution to this situation, as well. As pointed out in The A+ Solution, a forthcoming book by John Bell and Christine Smith, the country's 80,000-plus professional societies offer an astonishing array of credible and current educational programs. These resources are specifically designed for occupational development; they transfer state-of-the-art skills and knowledge to individuals in a specific field, regardless of their employment status. In effect, they extend the preparation provided by formal academic institutions.
The tragedy is that these educational programs are not being utilized to their fullest capacity. Participation is seldom subsidized by employers and, with household income in decline, it's also more than many individuals can afford on their own. As a consequence, only a small fraction of the workforce currently benefits from the instruction.
How can access to such educational resources be made more inclusive? By changing the eligibility criteria Federal agencies use for program reimbursement and grants and by promoting the availability and relevance of society-based training to local workforce investment boards. No new bureaucracy or massive investment is required. In addition to their initial skills training program, people in transition would simply be given a credit toward a society-based educational program they could take in the future to keep their skills current.
The workforce skills deficit is a proximate threat to both our individual and collective well-being. While the need to redress the situation is urgent, however, we must first attend to the structural weaknesses that could undermine the effectiveness of any solution we implement. And, the best way to accomplish that repair work is with two under-utilized, yet potent national assets -- the career centers of our academic institutions and the educational programs of our professional societies.
Peter Weddle is the author or editor of over two dozen books on employment and the American workplace. His most recent book, A Multitude of Hope: A Novel About Rediscovering the American Dream, was published this year. For more information, visit www.AMultitudeofHope.com.
Peter S. Goodman: Latest Jobs Report Underscores Unemployment Crisis
I'd like something beyond the author's declaration before I'm prepared to believe this. Got proof from a credible source?
I work for a construction firm that does some specialized work and currently have close to ten job openings (great careers) on our website many going unfilled due to the specialized nature of the roles. Mamy other firms need similar skills and knowledge from their workforce but yet the folks who are trained and educated to do this type of work are few and far between! Why is this?? Who can help educated and train to fill this void? Some of the suggestions in this article are a good first step!
You have provided nothing by way of evidence beyond personal experience and a defense of the author's personal experience with other employment professionals, who, if jobs were easily available--would not be often needed or consulted themselves.
How do I know? Real demand, the kind that cannot be put off, would solve the problem. Workers, if necessary, would be trained by employers, as always used to be the case. Problem is, demand is low, and jobs continue to be exported. Rather than acknowledge this, the current trope of the employer spokesmodels has been to blame the worker for the lack of robust markets and the policy of job export.
As for " Why is this?? Who can help educate and train to fill this void?", again, on the job training. But of course, first employers would have to stop exporting jobs and invest in their own native workforce for mutual benefit. And these days, all the benefits seem to go one way. Hint: not the workers' way.
You say real demand would solve the problem but I do have real demand (jobs) but do not have the qualified folks to always fill our needs. Yes we train folks but if they are tied up on other projects and we win new bids (the nature of our business) we often have only a short time to staff projects once they are won and have no time to train folks on the speciific skillsets needed. I see demand as high, specialized needs as high thus the disparity with no time to train in my world. We do not export jobs!
I agree OJT is great but not always possible. That is where as the author stated associations, schools, groups, etc must do a better job of preparing a real world work force.
Employment professionals play a key role in locating and training talent especially when the market is a frutiful one!