Re-Engineering the Career Escalator

in just over a decade the entire baby boom generation will be over 65 that means a lot of employees talent and experience heading out of the workforce unless is a change of perspective now to retain and even build that group and the ones coming behind them Lisa Taylor is co-author of the talent revolution longevity and the future of work and she's also the founder and president of the research and consulting firm challenge Factory hi Lisa it's nice to have you here right now we're gonna be talking about why we need a new approach with the book that you've written which is called the talent revolution when you say talent revolution what do you mean by that term I think when we talk about how work is changing and we think about technology we think about the technology revolution and how everything is changing I think when it comes to the world of work and the people working inside of the organization we need to recognize that there is equally a revolution that is taking place that will have just as big an impact as technology in how demographics are actually changing our world of work and who do you think should be paying attention to this the workers themselves or the people that do the hiring I think everyone needs to pay attention to it I think workers themselves feel it they feel what it feels like to be in a career in a path or in a company that no longer seems to be interested in them and yet they still have so much to give and at the same time intergenerational relationships are you know being discussed all the time but from a personal perspective of how it feels smart organizations will recognize that this isn't just dissonance this isn't just getting close to a large population being ready for retirement and how do we plan for secession and what happens through the rest of the workforce this actually is a revolution of where there are extra decades of productivity and our corporate structures are not set up to be able to maximise on the full value that our workforce can be providing us and you mentioned intergenerational what do you mean by that do you mean like for baby boomers and Millennials or so it's interesting that you say that we always go to baby boomers and Millennials and we forget those poor Gen Xers in the night so the real you know power of the word intergenerational is that it is different there's a nuance to it to multi generations so a multi generation looks at how many different generations are there in the workforce and how do we describe them this generation has this characteristic and that generation has that characteristic and from my perspective that's actually not that useful or helpful we're smart companies will be able to capitalize is in the interplay between the generations in what's been learned and the experiences that a millennial and a gen Xer and a Boomer have together and now Gen Zed coming into the workplace as well what's the intersection point that wasn't possible before that is now added value because these generations are working together as opposed to defining how can we keep them separate or distinct or understand them as if they're unique so the commonalities and where they want one knows plays off on something where someone else knows it I mean the workforce is a cycle they're a system they all work and reinforce each other and the more we serve to separate the populations in the workplace the more we derive value that can really be beneficial well you be used to refer to climbing the corporate ladder smashing that glass ceiling why is an escalator a better metaphor for how career is currently function I think the corporate ladder gives a description of how you would move up in your career in terms of level and progression a talent escalator is something that everyone is on where the ride is not so much because you're moving up through promotion and becoming more and more senior in an organization but it's the amount of time that you're spending in the organization so the talent escalator operates to say you get on to the escalator at the bottom you move up in time as you spend time in organizations and in your career as you ride that escalator and one of the key critical factors that's actually a catalyst for some of the changes that are taking place in the future of work is the fact that as you hit that fifth step on that escalator fifth floor or sixth floor of the escalator the escalators ending and you still have so much farther to go it's nowhere to go now what do you do and people are finding that they really they have a choice right they can step off this structure that they've been on employment whether they're forced off or whether they choose to come off and hope that they find their way or find another mechanism to continue to be productive engaged in working or they can ride the top step of the escalator as it disappears under the floor and every time it disappears under the floor take a step back and ride that top step as if they're on a treadmill well I want to read something from the book and around you know what happens at the end of our career sure you write every single day from now until 2031 10,000 Americans will turn 65 and will either have left the organizations they have worked for or will be under pressure to do so a present most organizations do not have career paths and talent programs that consider the value of an ageing workforce on the contrary this core hoard is often treated like a failing limb to be humanely amputated what's more since the passage of the American Social Security Law in 1935 when the average life expectancy was 61 point 7 years employees have spent their working lives accepting 65 as a finish line if 65 is no longer a finish line where should the finish line be so it's an interesting question of why we need to define a finish line in the first place so when the finish line was set at 65 as you just mentioned from the the quote from the book life expectancy was only 62 so the finish line was set beyond life expectancy and yet today we have this idea that we have to have this finish line this definition of when work is now in our past and we're moving on to a next phase and it's decades before our physical and mental health will actually require us to start to withdraw to conclude from the work force which is we're living longer because we're living longer and what I find so fascinating is people generally accept that we're living longer they'll generally accept that we're working longer but what that actually means and how do we actually re our Kotak our entire working society how do we architect it so that my kids that are teenagers are ready and prepared for careers that will take them well into their 80s as they live into their hundreds how do we do that that's an enormous challenge that's a little bit more than just saying well we're gonna work a little longer so everyone just needs to stretch what they've been doing well the government Canadian government tried to address this back in 2012 when under Prime Minister Stephen Harper there was a plan to raise the age at which Canadians qualify for old age security benefits to 67 and there was a lot of pushback on this would that move have helped fix the broken talent escalator I don't think so I mean I think certainly starting to get people to recognize and realize that this finish line of age in your 60s is not appropriate I think that is something that is a good positive step I think those kinds of messages are positive I think the actual implications of taking financial supports that in the case of the OAS really serve populations that need significant support and are really counting on that benefit in a short term - all of a sudden make changes I think that's very difficult for people to react to I think what we need to be doing from a policy perspective is really taking a look to say what happens if there is actually no defined finish line how does that affect the way pensions are actually structured and the other supports that are structured who gets left behind and who actually gets advantage from that and how do we not incrementally change a system it's not a it's not a talent evolution where we incrementally each year move one year at a time how do we go back to first principles and actually spark a revolution that says what does it mean to have meaningful engaging work and a workforce that is productive and contributing to our economy for their entire actual working lifespan not a working lifespan that was defined in the 1930s is that why you see people who might I don't know take on freelance work after 65 or like what do you see happening right now yeah so within the workplace ageism is is rampant and I say that as if it's unique to the workplace but it isn't it's actually throughout our society we as individuals will make age based comments all the time you know we'll be self-deprecating we'll make a comment about our age we'll make a comment about the need for glasses all of that just reinforces that at a certain period of time we are no longer the same capable people that we used to be and it is false and from an employer perspective to these age-based myths and biases on what it older workers can and can't do or what's appropriate in terms of their engagement levels in your organization they're costly and they're based on myth so we need to be able to change not just hearts and minds from a perspective of it's a good thing to do it's actually costing our economy in productivity we'll talk more about that but I want to talk more about the language and in the talent revolution you write many mature workers may not yet have realized that the era of company control over career is coming to an end or they may think that the emerging pattern of young people taking control of their own careers does not apply to them as a result neither the company nor the individual takes any action to move forward an entire cohort is ignored while capable people mark time that they become bored or disengaged is to be expected and this is often attributed simply to aging it is unlikely that organizations recognize the career potential of this cohort when boomers themselves don't appreciate it at the very beginning of that section you use the term the phrase mature workers why did you use that term so terms are tricky when we get into this language because it is so value Laden so we've used in the book mature workers we've used older workers were actually unapologetic about using the word older workers because they are simply older than younger workers who are simply younger although what's interesting to me is what's the definition of mature and maturity and at what age do you suddenly become mature when you're older and why is that right why do we put that on to the particular cohort where we wouldn't necessarily use that for a younger cohort the the issue of language is one that is addressed in the book and it's a it's a tricky one that makes it hard to even have these kinds of conversations and something that I would never have thought of reading your book I noticed a phrase digital native and why is that problematic to use so the term digital native is one that describes the generation that grew up with technology so they grew up when the internet was actually already implemented in workplaces and they've grown up using not technology so it's problematic for two reasons the first reason is it's often used in job postings as a way to explain what companies are looking for we're looking for someone who's vibrant who's creative who's a digital native it's code that says if you're over a certain age you need not apply it actually is an example of ageism in job postings which is illegal if you were to say if you're over 32 you need not apply you would never post that and yet digital native slips through all the time so you can you can do that you can do a search and you can find out who's using that term in their postings I think the other way that it is also problematic is the assumption that only young people are digitally native I mean I grew up in the tech sector the average age on my team was in their late 40s they've been working with technology they actually invented the digital technologies that we're now saying are for youth they are just as digitally native as any 20 year old today but we don't think about it that way missing like so point being a gen Xer you mentioned the internet search tool internet search for tools to calculate the real costs of employees turned up more than eleven million results what did you discover about the reliability of these calculators in relation to the cost and value of mature employees yeah recognizing that you know some organizations have really robust departments that help them calculate the cost of their workforce and and actuaries and you know data analysts that are able to give that type of guidance and in Canada a lot of companies are small businesses where they're really looking for information on how to do things using online and other tools they may not have whole departments we wanted to go and see what tools are out there if we were to actually calculate the cost of the workforce we hear so much that older workers are more expensive than younger workers we wanted to go and see what tools are out there to help business owners and employers make decisions about that so we found that the tools and calculators that are out in the marketplace are chock full of salary of benefits of time off of you know learning of all kinds of things time to productivity when you onboard someone knew how long will it take before their actual a hundred percent up to speed we found lots of information in the calculators that help organizations make decision around those costs we didn't see anything in those calculators that valued the experience of having done something before the efficiency of being able to use past experience to apply it the ability to mobilize and animate and encourage others around you to have a really positive culture because you loved the culture that you've been working in and you're a brand ambassador for it all of the things that actually capture the value of older workers are not captured in those cost calculators you've mentioned the word myths a couple time and what you just mentioned about older employees being more costly what are some of other myths between hiring older people than younger people sure in the book we explore five myths one of them is older workers being more costly but the others look at the myth that older workers are less productive the myth that there's an actual best-before date before for workers in terms of their engagement the myth that older workers there's no return on investment in training and in continuing to develop older workers and the myth that there is a difference in the way that you should manage performance by generation that it's appropriate to have performance management for younger workers but older workers should really just be left to coast as a kindness those are really the five myths that are driving all kinds of strategic decisions inside of organizations and they're not based on what the data shows and they're affecting many many many people you mentioned an internet meme that states our employees are our greatest asset and the source in a meme it says every CEO everywhere every CEO when you hear that it sounds nice but what do you see as problematic about that yeah so the intention of our employees being our greatest asset is a good one but the accounting is wrong so if you think about what an asset actually is an asset is something that you acquire for a price you depreciate it over time and eventually at the end of its useful life you write it off for nothing so in that context our employees are not assets we do not look to acquire them depreciate them too Glennis them and then write them off for nothing in fact smart employers will recognize that employees are equity there a value source that you invest in they grow in that investment over time and in fact that it return on investment continues even after they've left your organization I've worked for other companies and my connection with those companies through my LinkedIn profile through the way that I'm introduced in different places I'm still delivering value back through brand recognition to those organizations I haven't worked there in 20 years so we need to take a different perspective on what the employee lifecycle actually means and where is the value in the relationship between the employer and employee and it is not based on managing our employees as assets in the book you have this graph that I thought was really interesting and for anyone listening to the podcast the title is career time lines have changed and you're suggesting that we now have an additional phase in our career that you call legacy careers and that would be I guess between 50 and 75 whatever legacy careers yeah so the actual date or how old you are when you enter into the legacy career period is less important than to recognize that we have different stages of our career they're tied to life stages there's good psychological career development principles behind how a person moves through their life stages because we're now living for decades longer it doesn't mean that midlife used to be 20 years and now we have a 50 year midlife there's actually a new segment of time that has come in between midlife and old age and that pushing back of life stage and the creation of a new life stage affects everything that we do it affects how we work and the relationship that we have to work in career and so we've named that new stage of career legacy career because what we're seeing is individuals that are at that stage whether it's at 45 at 50 at 55 at 72 people get to it at different points in time but what they're looking for is they're looking to return to work that has meaning they're looking to spend less I'm managing people and more time doing things that are with their hands and with their original skill back to delivering on what they really love to be doing and they want to know that their work is lit creating lasting long-term value that's really what they're looking for and that's the legacy career period so it's not a specific job but it's about something that they're doing - that was part of their career or something completely new it can be both I mean it's a 20 to 30 year segment of time it is enough time that someone can take what did they learn through their foundational career what did they learn through their mid-career what do they want to keep with them when they look at how they want to apply their work in the world going forward and what are they done with it's ok to say I've been an accountant for 25 years and I am done with that and to look out into the world and say the world of work has really changed what is it that are my skills my needs what I care about and where the market is that I actually want to craft something that is the next chapter in my story but not necessarily the same old strand of like transferable skills right a bit of it okay are you what is constructive dismissal and how does it complicate the job of finding the ideal career path for mature workers so constructive dismissal is a legal construct and I'll say I'm not a lawyer but constructive dismissal is a legal construct that basically means that employers can't change the fundamental aspects of your job they can't reduce your hours they can't significantly change your ships they can't reduce your salary or your benefits they also can't change the perception or the status that your job has they can't change your title without recognizing that they've now changed your job so much that it's as if they have let you go so constructive dismissal is a term that is used when those kinds of things have happened employees have experienced it and now they will sue their employers for constructive dismissal or they're in a situation of constructive dismissal where the job has changed so much that it's actually not the same job as it used to be and how does that impact mature workers with mature workers where there's an interesting intersection point is there certainly are examples of actual constructive dismissal that takes place all the time where the interesting new disk comes into play is if you think about the conditions that I just talked about that someone's seeking their legacy career is interested in managing fewer people attending fewer meetings maybe having more flexibility in time not working the hours that they used to work shifting the way that they do work to have more flexibility for a different type of life cycle for those that are in more senior positions some of that is a pulling back on hours of work on salary on title on status within the organization because we don't have a career path that says it's actually okay for your career to move through the entire lifecycle that we actually have with our longer working lives so employers are afraid to have conversations with employees as they get closer to the traditional age of retirement because they're afraid that any discussion about a shift in career could trigger a constructive dismissal situation this is such an interesting conversation we only have a few more minutes and I want to get a few more questions in we frequently hear about freelance workers as being you know the future of work what did your research for this book tell you about the growth of the freelance sector so that's an interesting comment on the importance of looking at data so data that's coming out of Canada out of the u.s. out of Western economies in Europe are actually showing that in studies in census studies and in studies that have counted how many workers are currently in a contractor or freelance model over the last 20 years the size of the freelance market has actually stayed flat in Canada it's significant it's in significantly declined so just by a tiny tiny bit since 20 years ago so there's a lot of discussion that takes place about freelancers there studies that have come out that have said you know by 2022 50% of the American market is going to be in a freelancer contract arrangement the data is not showing that though so I think the interesting piece that we need to dig into there is to get a little more understanding of how do freelance models fit into the future of work and specifically there is a difference between the freelancer model and precarious employment and those things are typically pulled together there not the same really because I thought that we usually hear that there you know people just interchange them how are they different so precarious employment is putting workers in situations where they don't have predictability of of where they're going of how they're going to continue to be able to sustain their own employment it's you know cluding together jobs based on multiple all precarious contracts that don't have cohesion across the board that sounds like freelance work isn't it but freelance work if you think about traditionally the way freelancers have worked we've had people working in a freelance model for a very very long time they're still able to sustain long term contracts they're able to predict what's going to happen to them one year to the next they develop relationships what we need to see and we're actually starting to see it is brokerages that help freelancers that are being pushed into a freelance model who don't have the business development skills or the relationship skills to sustain a stable freelance business that's not their business they've been pushed into this work arrangement and are now having to be both a skill provider or a subject matter expert and the business developer that's where we run into this intersection point and there are new platforms that are coming out that are saying to freelancers we'll help you take care of finding work you need to do good work and so we can really get out of this cycle where being a freelancer has to be precarious it doesn't is there any I'm sure there's people watching our mature workers walking watching right now and they might be concerned about their upcoming retirement what would you say to those people I think that you know to those people I would say that the real issue to kind of grapple with a little bit as one of identity anyone that some encroaching upon retirement has thought about themselves and the contribution they make the work that they do and the company they work for or the industry they work in for a long time it's been part of how they introduce themselves and how they think about themselves and so I think in addition to all the new models of working and all the different opportunities and what could you do and for some people the fear that there are no opportunities in addition to that whole dialogue there's a deeper dialog of recognizing that this move is not a small one and it affects the core of how you think about yourself and how can you start to put yourself in situations that you see an active productive forward-facing way to move forward as opposed to moving forward with something that you can only say I used to work in broadcasting hmm what's the way that you want to be introducing yourself moving forward how can you get some good guidance and advice to be able to marry that with where there are actual market opportunities and how can you make that story true for yourself in the future on TV there are many ways that retirement is portrayed what do you think of the ways that it's portrayed there actually was a study in the u.s. that was done probably three years ago now that took a look at commercials and how it portrays different aspects of retirement and it found that there was a dichotomy either sad lonely decrepit people that were in all kinds of situations that were quite downtrodden or affluent on the beach living the high life kind of portrayal which kind of said if you do it right this is what you should be that actually in in focus group testing found people to feel pretty bad about themselves because that's not necessarily reality either I think the way we portray retirement is really one of those two directions and the truth of the matter is it's just a new segment of life there's ups and there's downs there's winners and there's losers in every revolution including the talent revolution and what we need to be focusing on is what are realistic portrayal so that we don't have people making jokes about what it would be like if someone worked into their 70s with someone who's 70 right next to them and is you know killing it on the apps that they're using on their phone well at least so this has been such an insightful insightful conversation thank you so much for being here and thank you for writing the book it's my pleasure we appreciate it the agenda in the summer with namkyu Anika is brought to you by the chartered professional accountants of Ontario CPA Ontario is a regulator an educator a thought leader and an advocate we protect the public we advance our profession we guide our CPAs we are CPA Ontario and by viewers like you thank you

Channel: The Agenda with Steve Paikin

Views: 1,076

Rating: 3.5555556 out of 5

Keywords: The Agenda with Steve Paikin, current affairs, analysis, debate, politics, policy, work-life, generations

Id: vVr4Qp6c2O4

Length: 26min 59sec (1619 seconds)

Published: Thu Aug 22 2019