I went to an interesting presentation last night at Henley Management College. It was done by a representative of the Global Marketing Network (GMN). Whilst the presentations theme was - the goals of GMN to assist in the spreading of good marketing practice. The interesting side topic that developed was the value of academic learning versus work experience, or in last nights terms practice knowledge.
This then evolved into a discussion around how to capture practice knowledge and share it with others. This is a topic for another day.
One of the quotes used, indicated that in the UK, recruitment professionals are finding it difficult to place graduates as the companies are looking for experience. This raises a number of interesting points:
- Is the value provided by a degree of no benefit to either the graduate or the employer?
- If there is value, what is it?
- How can practice knowledge be captured given that the practitioners often rely on trial and error and sometimes cannot qualify why they do something in a specific way.
- Is experience really key in a world where the next trend is being driven by those willing to change fastest and either create or adaptive to new disruptive technologies.
Harold Jarche in his article Life in perpetual Beta says "Work is learning and learning is the work."
If we agree this to be true of the modern work environment ( I do agree with this). Then at some point we have to 'learn how to learn'. I think we can agree, that most school education systems around the world today encourage regurgitation of textbook knowledge, rather than the ability to think independently analyse and create new concepts!
I believe that for many people the only time in their lives where they are actively encouraged to question the status quo, is during their time at university. This is where they truly ‘learn to learn’!
This is obviously a generalisation and many people will grow up, either through nature or nurture, continually challenging their surroundings.
An interesting comment made by one of the fellow attendees - indicated that in his organisation they tended to hire non-graduates, but when the time came for advancement, graduates are hired from outside the organisation.
Is this just “lazy” management, who do not want to spend the time training people but want the skills immediately available? They then realise that those practically skilled, but junior people, do not have the ability to learn and question. They become incapable of then acquiring the skills necessary, to manage, lead or reach higher levels of problem solving.
In such cases it is often viewed as intellectual snobbery, by the those with degrees. While this could be the case in many instances, it could also be a case of not having acquired the abilities of learning and solving.
A key point for me, is that all workplaces require a multitude of skills. Some positions require tasks, which do not ask for problem solving of vague concepts but more hard skills. Others will require more ability to absorb concepts and find solutions.
While some industries and positions will perhaps benefit more from youth and the most current skill sets (IT and Marketing being ones that come to mind), many require the experience of the industry along with the trial and error associated with success. Retail and logistics often require real, on the ground knowledge of what works and what does not in specific cases.
As an aside - it seems that marketing is turning into an technology job as digital and social marketing gain traction.
I do however believe, that in many cases industries believe that they are completely unique and people from outside of that industry do not know what is required. My experience in many industries, is that this is not the case. Yes, there will be some nuances particular to that industry but a large portion of what companies do is the same or similar.
Give me someone smart and innovative, who is willing to learn and you can achieve much, regardless of age or experience!
I look forward to hearing your opinion!
