The Work Force is Backwards.
There are two issues with the workforce (generally speaking in an office/business type envoironment) that are backwards, work life cycle and experience. One issue might not be as backwards but something that is not executed correctly.
Work life cycle, how I will define it, is the time span and stages an individual experiences throughout his work life. Obviously, the cycle starts when you first start working which generally has an age span of somewhere from the teens to mid 20s. The cycle ends when you retire and is usually around the age of 65. What is in between does not really matter for this…”finding”, but it usually entails finding a career, building on your career, etc. etc. there are a lot of variables that can be implemented in the middle of the cycle.
So why is the retirement age 65? This is an interesting question, sit and think about it for a little before you read on…………….Well what it seems like to me is that the government (or companies or they both have come to this conclusion) that you have served your time in the work force and have contributed enough to the society/economy. In actuality, this is strictly my opinion, I think they chose this age because this is the approximate age where ones productivity decreases and overall efficiency of human functions (such as thinking, reflexes, strength, etc etc) decreases. Metaphorically, think of it as a battery. When you first start out your are very energetic, but over the years the workforce wears you out, drains you, and you are no longer efficient to the companies needs / the economy. You must be replaced, and why not, it seems the most logical to replace you with someone that is fully “charged”. Oh no, this is not the reason at all Roberth, we feel that you have worked your share and now you should relax……….RIGHT!
Ok, so you are retired now and you can relax and do what you want to do…at the AGE OF 65. Wow, thanks, I cannot wait to go travel the world and backpack and be adventurous and…wait I am 65. Let me get this straight, I am supposed to enjoy my life of not working at an age where your body is reaching an end, haha fantastic.
That shit is backwards, I would much rather have leisurely time from the beginning through the middle of my work life cycle where I am at an age that I can enjoy to do whatever I want to do. Travel the world, backpack, cave diving, whatever…where my age will support my chosen activities. At 65 you cannot enjoy any of these…well you MIGHT (being the operative word) but not to its fullest potential. Basically you reach that point where you are jailed by your age. This is just MAD backwards to me and I do have a solution that I am theorizing about but that will come in a later post.
The second issue, experience. Generally the way you work you way up into executive and management positions is by having A LOT of work experience before hand and generally some sort of higher education. The general thought behind this is that you have experienced numerous situations and multiple parts of the business that you will inherently bring into the new position. Because of this all this experience you will be more qualified and understand how to make better decisions. I can see this being relevant to SOME extent but now to the extent and emphasis the workforce places on it. This type of thinking is flawed. Just because you have a lot of experience this does not automatically transfer over to you being able to think correctly or make optimal decision or that you will be able to think outside of your box. Someone who have better critical thinking skills and less experience could outperform (by a significant amount) someone who has more experience and less critical thinking skills.
Let me give you an example, a new manager was hired recently where I work. It was quite obvious he was hired based on his experience and his “knowledge” about certain marketing venues. Here is the thing though, to him he knows what worked at the previous company he worked for and now he automatically assumes that if it worked there it will work here. Sorry, but that is not the issue, you have to be able to think differently about what you are doing when you are at a new company and take numerous things into consideration, branding, company culture, demographic, etc. I like to call his type of thinking “copy and paste” thinking, which is a ridiculous way of thinking, actually it really is not thinking.
Another example, on the good side. Puma’s CEO, in my opinion a true visionary. Think about what this guy has done for the company. Puma was ridiculously struggling at one point where they almost disappeared. Look what has happened now with Puma they have exploded. This guy came in and reinvented the brand, he had a vision where he wanted to take the brand, how he wanted to brand it, why it would be successful, and decided to think outside of the box for their product design (which was lacking before he came). Now their shoe designs rival that of Nikes. Anyway, do you think that the paper pushing job, or the data entry job, or whatever other job he had to add to his experience made him be able to make those decisions? On the whole I think you would find not. It is probably more because he had the skills to be able to think how to reinvent this company successfully.
All in all, I disagree with the whole notion that you need to have 5,10,15, or whatever works experience to fill a position. I think in some instance a certain level of experience is required but not how much most companies require, not by a LONG shot.
