This blog posting represents the views of the author, David Fosberry. Those opinions may change over time. They do not constitute an expert legal or financial opinion.
If you have comments on this blog posting, please email me .
The Opinion Blog is organised by threads, so each post is identified by a thread number ("Major" index) and a post number ("Minor" index). If you want to view the index of blogs, click here to download it as an Excel spreadsheet.
Click here to see the whole Opinion Blog.
To view, save, share or refer to a particular blog post, use the link in that post (below/right, where it says "Show only this post").
Posted on 29th September 2022 |
Show only this post Show all posts in this thread (Jobs). |
This article on the BBC reports on how digital literacy has become a requirement for the majority of jobs. The thing that surprises me about the article is how the author, Alex Christian, seems to be so shocked by the facts. Computers are now everywhere, from office jobs where skills in using word processors and spreadsheets are essential, to car mechanics using diagnostic computers, to the operators of checkout tills (now all computer-based), to the people restocking supermarket shelves. The pervasiveness of computers didn't happen overnight, so why is the author surprised? There are some figures in the article: " By 2019, a UK government report showed digital skills were required in at least 82% of online advertised vacancies." The actual figure may well be higher, since, for some jobs, the need for digital literacy is implicit, and therefore not always explicitly stated in the advert. Computers make most jobs more efficient and more accurate, and free workers from labour intensive and boring tasks, so I see the use of computers as a good thing, especially since many younger people can't do basic mental arithmetic anymore. Schools are clearly to blame for the lack of digital literacy amongst the workforce. There is no consistent and concerted effort to teach students digital literacy. Where computer skills are taught at schools, they are often focused on programming, rather than how to use a spreadsheet, a database or an Internet search engine, so they do not prepare the students for work. There is an irony here: as computers become more prevalent at home, at work and at school, many things including school work become easier, which means students learn less, and leave school with fewer of the skills they need to use computers at work and in private life. This just puts more pressure on the people developing and buying computer systems to make them smarter, so that dumber people can use them. The end of that road is workplaces with almost no human staff; we will have dumbed ourselves out of our jobs. |
Posted on 2nd October 2022 |
Show only this post Show all posts in this thread (Jobs). |
This article on Tech.co reports on how Microsoft is telling companies that they should “re-recruit” and "re-onboard" employees to prevent them from job-hopping and quiet quitting. At first glance it appears that Microsoft are suggesting that staff be fired and then re-employed (a technique being increasingly used to reduce salaries and change contracts), but, in fact, that is not what is being suggested. The idea is that, for staff to be effective and motivated, especially in the era of remote and hybrid work, they need their skills boosted with more training. Whilst this, in principle, sounds OK, it shows that Microsoft does not really understand staff motivation. There is a well established theory of staff motivation, unfortunately not widely applied, which divides motivating factors into positive and negative motivators. Positive motivators are things that are essential for workers to do their jobs: adequate salary, an office (with adequate heating/air-conditioning), a computer or other work tools and the necessary training to do the job. Negative motivators are not things that will demotivate staff if they are absent, but rather non-essential things that will not motivate staff unless all the positive motivators are satisfied: a break room, an office newsletter, work social events and team-building activities. A company car is only a positive motivator in jobs where a car is essential, like travelling salesmen and civil engineers. Companies are wasting their money if they spend on negative motivators without first investing in all the positive motivators. Job-specific training is generally classified as a positive motivator, when given at the start of employment, because it is usually essentially for the job. When given later, however, it is a negative motivator, because the employee clearly knows how to do the job, having already been doing it. Just because an employer labels it “re-recruiting” or "re-onboarding" does not change the employees' perception of the training as non-essential. What all this means is that the strategy of branding retraining as “re-recruiting” or "re-onboarding" will not motivate staff, which is what Microsoft believes it will do. It is time for Microsoft managers to go back to school themselves, before mandating it for staff. |