How long will your work skills last? Can you develop new skills every 12 to 18 months and what is the return on that investment?
Will universities and vocational education providers keep up as technology transforms job functions and traditional learning approaches?
![The concept of a career is being shaken to its core.](/web/20170317084144im_/http://www.canberratimes.com.au/content/dam/images/g/u/2/0/5/g/image.related.articleLeadwide.620x349.guyoem.png/1489553671276.jpg)
Will large employers need to develop internal, online universities that curate content from a range of sources?
I considered these and other questions after reading Deloitte's Global Human Capital Trends 2017 report. "Real-time" learning and careers was second of 10 key trends, up from fifth place a year earlier.
"The concept of a career is being shaken to its core," wrote Deloitte. "Employees now enjoy the prospect of 60-year careers. Yet at the same time, the half-life of skills is rapidly falling. These new realities are forcing companies to rethink how they manage careers and deliver always-on learning and development (L&D;) opportunities."
I doubt all employees "enjoy" 60-year careers. But Deloitte's broad argument of technology sparking radical change in learning and careers makes sense.
Deloitte says the half-life of a learned skill is five years and notes research showing software engineers, for example, must redevelop their skills every 12 to 18 months, a trend that is spreading to other occupations.
The result: employers expecting staff to reinvent themselves as they move from role to role, or organisation to organisation. And growth in on-demand L&D; systems that enable employees to cherry-pick training modules for "just-in-time" learning.
I see three implications from this trend:
1. Traditional university teaching models will struggle
This column has long argued for university learning to be spread out rather than condensed into a few years, so that students can better tailor their subjects to career needs.
Years of study upfront and tens of thousands of dollars in course fees – a model that has barely changed for decades – makes less sense when technology is forcing skills redevelopment, in shorter cycles, across more professions.
Proponents of this model will argue university learning helps students adapt to constant change and that some professions (medicine, for example) require years of study upfront. Also, many core skills taught in degrees last a lifetime. All valid arguments, but there is a downside to too much learning upfront – and not enough along the way – as technology redefines the labour market.
Spending years at universities and never touching a textbook again will not cut it in the digital economy.
For a start, can university lecturers, many of whom are more incentivised for research than teaching, keep up with a labour market that requires new skills development every 18 months in some fields? Can cumbersome university course-accreditation systems keep up when significant changes in content are required every year or two?
There is a risk that some universities are – or will – teach skills that are less relevant in the new machine age. And that students will pay thousands of dollars for skills that have shorter shelf life and a fading return on investment.
Surely it makes more sense for students, in fields such as business, to develop a relationship with their university over 10 years rather than three, learning subjects as needed and alternating between work and study as career circumstances dictates.
2. Australian corporates will need to lift their L&D; game
Those that have outsourced too much training to universities or other providers will learn a painful lesson: success in the new machine age will require agile L&D; platforms that are company owned. Anything else will be too slow.
L&D; exemplars will produce real-time content for staff, not rely on boring online training modules that have not changed for years. They will become L&D; content providers, editors, curators and publishers, working in faster content cycles.
Some US companies, for example, produce their own L&D; content online, curate content from other providers and develop multiple L&D; content channels. They become an online corporate university of sorts, having hundreds of evolving L&D; content pieces for staff.
Imagine if more Australian corporates become genuine L&D; content producers. Rather than rely on a handful of subject experts, they put the onus on all staff to share knowledge and pass on training insights, via online content, to their peers.
A manager, for example, who finishes a client assignment creates a five-minute video on what his or peers can learn from the work. The content is shot at the company's in-house production studio and available online for staff within days of the job ending.
Instead of relying on static L&D; content, the company produces shorter, faster content pieces that help staff adapt to fast-moving trends and creates a culture of continuous learning and shared knowledge.
3. Employees will need clear strategies for on-demand learning
Spending years at universities and never touching a textbook again will not cut it in the digital economy. Young workers will need a plan to upgrade their skills every 18 months or so and consider the most cost-effective ways to do so.
For some that will involve more part-time study to complement their full-time degree. Others will return to university or vocational education during career breaks as work becomes more project based and study can be crammed into breaks between jobs.
Savvy young workers will look for micro-learning opportunities, nano-degrees and other short courses that provide a blast of learning and wider career choices. They will prefer employers who excel at helping employees reinvent careers through on-demand learning.
Recording and valuing this learning will be a challenge. Unlike university or vocational education, much of this on-demand L&D; content will not have the same recognition or value in the eyes of employers.
For all the challenges, an ability to learn new skills quickly – and adapt to a fast-changing, uncertain labour market – will be more valuable than ever. It could be the difference between employees and corporates that prosper in the new machine age and those that become roadkill because they could not learn new skills soon enough.
0 comments
New User? Sign up