Why Companies Aren't Getting the Employees They Need (2014, analysis, interviews)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I believe that the real culprits are the employers themselves.
With an abundance of workers to choose from, employers are demanding more of job candidates than ever before. They want prospective workers to be able to fill a role right away, without any training or ramp-up time.
In other words, to get a job, you have to have that job already. It's a Catch-22 situation for workers—and it's hurting companies and the economy. To get America's job engine revving again, companies need to stop pinning so much of the blame on our nation's education system. They need to drop the idea of finding perfect candidates and look for people who could do the job with a bit of training and practice.
There are plenty of ways to get workers up to speed without investing too much time and money, such as putting new employees on extended probationary periods and relying more on internal hires, who know the ropes better than outsiders would. It's a fundamental change from business as usual. But the way we're doing things now just isn't working.
Some of the complaints about skill shortages boil down to the fact that employers can't get candidates to accept jobs at the wages offered. That's an affordability problem, not a skills. And make no mistake: There are plenty of people out there who could step into jobs with just a bit of training so the real shortage is a training shortage from companies.
Unfortunately, American companies don't seem to do training anymore.
Yes, this has been discussed in other threads. With the minimum wage going up in several states, employers want people with more experience so they feel they're getting what they pay for. I don't see companies blaming the education system, and every time I ask for articles on this, nobody provides them. Perhaps you can?
I think companies are getting the people they need, but they're not looking for people without previous experience. If you have any articles about companies not getting the people they seek, please link to those, as I haven't seen them.
Let me add my 2 cents. In a major financial services company in NYC, we have an issue with hiring because of... diversity. In top and senior management, we have a vast majority of White managers... so now, we need to hire senior "diversity" people but everyone is not diverse: those who count are Black, Latino or women, regardless of citizenship. So that's the new headache for hiring besides talent. And you can believe me when I say that despite all the statistics in schools, we do not meet those people that often in interviews so when they're available, it's a serious question...
Yes, this has been discussed in other threads. With the minimum wage going up in several states, employers want people with more experience so they feel they're getting what they pay for. I don't see companies blaming the education system, and every time I ask for articles on this, nobody provides them. Perhaps you can?
I think companies are getting the people they need, but they're not looking for people without previous experience. If you have any articles about companies not getting the people they seek, please link to those, as I haven't seen them.
Not meaning to pander to wall street (where I work ) but it is true that there is a disconnect between secondary education, higher education and the industry. An ideal model for me would be like the pro soccer youth academies where talented kids regardless of economic status are at a young age made to apprentice with the pros. If only we can make our schools work that way. I heard there are high schools in the Silicon Valley that have linkages with the tech companies.
I like the analysis, it can be applied to many countries. Yes, parents' involvement is key and critically important. When culturally so (as for families from Asian descent or the Establishment), it still shows success stories at least in school. Overall, education should always be a priority for a nation and a cut in the budget is not the right move for the future.
In other words, to get a job, you have to have that job already. It's a Catch-22 situation for workers—and it's hurting companies and the economy. To get America's job engine revving again, companies need to stop pinning so much of the blame on our nation's education system. They need to drop the idea of finding perfect candidates and look for people who could do the job with a bit of training and practice. ...
Unfortunately, American companies don't seem to do training anymore.
Your conclusion is good, but I don't see much merit in the implications you claim with regard to hiring new employees. Employers need to stop pinching pennies with regard to the professional staff of the employees they already have, not hire people who aren't qualified to do the work that they need done.
It is very much natural to expect when you're buying something that what you're buying is whole. If I buy a television, I don't want to have to develop it into something that displays red, green and blue, but rather I want it to arrive that way. By the same token, if I want a media room, I am willing to invest money in my den to develop it into a media room.
I understand the underlying theory: if companies are not willing to provide higher pay and better benefits, it surely means they do not need high skill employees that much.
While that holds true in theory, I'm kind of circumspect. What if the company simply considers the candidate asks too much for a position? Well, both the company and the candidates could play the "Let's see who can wait longer" game and if the company is stable enough, they are always going to win as they have more means.
Is that unfair? Maybe. Is that realistic? Certainly. I discuss a lot with hiring managers and conducted interviews as well, and for us, the shortage is real in the sense that those you would eventually go for ask too much (never had this case personally but I do hear that sometimes from other hiring managers), and those you do not want are not worth. Then either another company who can afford this wanted person gets him, or it's not the case and he's on his own. Either way, it's his choice.
Anyway in our case, we end up promoting existing employees from the organization.
Your conclusion is good, but I don't see much merit in the implications you claim with regard to hiring new employees. Employers need to stop pinching pennies with regard to the professional staff of the employees they already have, not hire people who aren't qualified to do the work that they need done.
It is very much natural to expect when you're buying something that what you're buying is whole. If I buy a television, I don't want to have to develop it into something that displays red, green and blue, but rather I want it to arrive that way. By the same token, if I want a media room, I am willing to invest money in my den to develop it into a media room.
I beg to differ. A person is not an object. When we hire, we can hire junior as long as they're ready to learn and to commit with us (the latter is the difficult part). There is no commitment because the relationship between employers and employees is going through a total metamorphose in the last decade.
But it's always going to be cheaper to get a junior person and train him than hire a senior person and see how it goes out. And since it's all a matter of cost at some point...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
) but it is true that there is a disconnect between secondary education, higher education and the industry. An ideal model for me would be like the pro soccer youth academies where talented kids regardless of economic status are at a young age made to apprentice with the pros. If only we can make our schools work that way. I heard there are high schools in the Silicon Valley that have linkages with the tech companies.
