What is the answer to solving future skills challenges? Simon Reichwald at Connectr Talent Technology and Chris Shirley at QinetiQ explore the dilemma and possible solutions.
We all hear and read about future skills needs, from skills identification to the necessary actions to address the gap, and so much more.
With the fast pace of change and if hard skills only have a life expectancy of two and a half years (according to Boston Consulting Group) is our focus in the wrong place?
Are we better to look for what Arctic Shores call ‘Skill-enablers’ – ie what traits do people possess to demonstrate the ability to learn new skills, the determination to focus on or overcome challenges and problems, and interact effectively with others?
In essence, is it more about behaviours than skills? And are there other dynamics at play?
A. The two ends of age demographics
The first is young people. We will see an increase in 18-year-olds in England up to 2030, that peaks in 2026 for Scotland and Ireland.
On the surface this means we have a few years of bumper outputs, but universities are struggling financially as international students decline and the real-term value of tuition fees continues to depreciate, despite the recently announced rise in fees. That means in less than 10 years-time the number of graduates available will begin to decline again – less supply means higher employment costs.
The other end is an ageing workforce (which should not always be seen as a bad thing!). In the next 10 years more experience will leave industry than ever before – and there are not the numbers to replace that experience unless we do things differently.
AI and automation have a massive role to play here, however there is a challenge around how we transfer and distribute the knowledge, experience, skills and behaviours to the current and future workforce.
B. Higher education
The financial challenges of higher education could mean universities are forced to cut courses. Whilst currently STEM courses seem to be relatively safe, if demand drops then engineering and maths courses may become scarcer. In an increasingly uncertain financial world without a change in policy towards tuition fees (much more than the recent increase), a key pipeline into areas of skills shortage may be constrained.
As demand for skills increases and supply is reduced the knock-on effect is that graduate programmes are becoming more competitive and therefore more expensive both in terms of employment costs and the programmes themselves.
If firms begin to question the ROI, which is notoriously difficult to measure, of early careers programmes, coupled with a reduced supply of skills, industry may begin to accumulate a skills debt that will be difficult to pay off in the future.
C. Apprenticeships
The apprenticeship levy, to date, is being used as a tool to address the upskilling and reskilling of existing employees, as well as to build the knowledge, skills and behaviours in those new to a sector or role, be those new starters, young people, returners, ex-Military, or the over 50s etc.
However, there is pressure on the duration of apprenticeships and requirement for 20% of an employees’ time to be spent ‘off the job’, and of course the recent government announcements in the October Budget to the Levy.
This uncertainty on the levy, driven by the Budget announcements (with not much detail) may lead to some firms pulling back from apprentices, while they await to see what those changes are.
What is the answer to solving future skills challenges?
When firms talk about future skills challenges, is it more a fear of the future – not having all the skills they believe they will need, without being clear on exactly what those skills are? Is it more a fear of spiralling costs to hire and retain? These are questions that firms need to ask themselves.
So, what is the answer?
1. Skill-enablers – the ability to learn future skills (whatever they are)
If it is about skill-enablers, then perhaps we need to seek out ‘enabler’ behaviours in our new and existing talent. Then provide skills development programmes for core parts of the organisation (like Nationwide are doing), which are open to all and have very clear outputs – namely roles to fill at the end of it.
2. More effective knowledge transfer
Firms will have employees who have these much-needed knowledge and skills – what Thales call the ‘marvellous middle’, or in theory are coming to the end of their working life but don’t want to or can’t afford to retire. Employers have a window of opportunity with this group, as they will also have employees who want to learn, progress and make themselves constantly employable. Perhaps, the issue is not a lack of future skills, but that firms don’t yet know how to transfer the skills, knowledge and behaviours, they have, efficiently and effectively, at scale.
And if that is the case, what role do mentoring programmes have to play for that sharing? Connectr Talent Technology found that ‘mentoring in the moment of need’ (short term mentoring around a key skill or behaviour) has higher levels of engagement and impact than longer term mentoring. Firms across all sectors – like the Phoenix Group, Admiral Insurance, Tandem Bank, Ogier – seek to grow such programmes, developing those skills and sharing that knowledge more widely.
3. More collaboration
In a competitive market, is the pain caused by a skills gap painful enough for it to be addressed through sector collaboration? Sector level programmes can provide easier access to opportunities throughout the supply chain, retaining skills and experience to a sector, rather than losing them to other sectors. My experience with the skills for a sustainable skyline taskforce, led by the City of London Corporation, and the new virtual hub launching on 11 December, demonstrate the benefits of sector collaboration.
Like all big challenges, there is typically no one silver bullet. While we need to keep developing skills, we perhaps also need to focus on behaviours and finding ways to share the great skills we already have.
You may also be interested in…
0 Comments