Conference turris::womannotes-v2

1057.0. "Knowledge & Behavior in Career Growth" by EGYPT::SMITH (Passionate committment/reasoned faith) Tue Mar 27 1990 21:16

Posted without permisswion:

    EXTRACT FROM THE London Times January 26, 1989
    ------------------------------
    
    Barry Seward-Thompson, Principle, Digital's DECcollege, U.K.
    DTN 830-4070  @ REO
    

    "Behaviour matters more than knowledge"
    
    Behind all the public debate on education and the skills shortage,
    there is a quiet revolution in career paths, started perhaps by
    modern high-tech industry but fuelled by  the industrial regeneration
    of today. This revolution will have a big influence on both education
    and the skills shortage but ,as yet, it is too little understood
    to affect either, significantly. In particular, it will affect the
    present generation of people leaving schools , colleges and
    universities.
    
    During the next few years even the most traditional of employers
    are likely to revise their attitudes to careers. The young people
    joining the workforce can hasten this process by casting off the
    old ideas and constraints to the benefit of their own enjoyment
    and success. It is unfortunate that the present educational system
    gives teachers and advisors little opportunity to to keep updated
    and pass on ideas to the students.
    
    The traditional view of careers is based on two tenets, now
    increasingly understood to be misguided at best and misleading at
    worst. The first idea that "goodness" and "integrity" in the workplace
    means sticking at a job for many years before moving to the next
    higher job in the same line, and so on through to retirement.
    
    The second is the idea that the most important asset a worker brings
    to the job is his knowledge, and that this knowledge is his
    "transferable skill". He is thus condemned implicitly either to
    moving between jobs that require substantially the same knowledge
    or to significant retraining in order to instill a new knowledge
    base. 
        
    That these ideas are widely held is evident to anyone involved in
    recruiting. At a recent industry exhibition for undergraduates the
    three most common questions I was asked were:
    	"What subject must I be reading to join your company?"
    
    	" If I join your company, where will I be in five years time?"
    
    	" How long will it be before I become a manager?"
    
    My answers caused some surprise, required some explanation, but
    then generated enthusiasm as the implications sank in.
    
    To the first question , I answered that we would recruit someone
    into our company almost regardless of educational qualifications
    if that applicant was the right sort of person.
    
    To the second question, I answered that the individual is responsible
    for his own career, that his behavioural characteristics are his
    transferable skills; that these skills might be applicable in any
    part of the company; and that after five years, we would expect
    someone to be pursuing at least his second job opportunity within
    the company. Where that job would be is impossible for me to say
    because it depends on the choice of the individual.
    
    To the third question , I answered that it would take as long for
    a graduate to become a manager as any other 21-year-old because
    there is no logical connection between academic ability and key
    managerial skills. What was behind my answers?
    
    It is important to understand that, however much you know about
    a job, you will not be motivated and successful if it does not suit
    you as a person - that is, if it does not require you to use your
    personal behavioural strengths. Indeed, our experience shows that,
    FOR THE MAJORITY OF JOBS, THE IMPORTANT THING IS TO FIND THE RIGHT
    SORT OF PERSON.
    
    Anyone can gain knowledge quickly if motivated to do so. It takes
    a long time, if ever, to change one's behavioural strengths. So
    most of our interviewing focuses on behavioural characteristics  
    and, for key jobs, interviews will be backed up by selection events,
    at which candidates have an opportunity to to diplay those
    characteristics. Such events, sometimes lasting up to  four days,
    are also used internally to make key management appointments. I
    should add that this is an area where the armed forces are well
    ahead of industry.
    
    With this focus on behaviour, knowledge becomes a secondary
    consideration - hence the lack of interest in the graduate's subject.
    It also means that an individual is not constained in career choices
    by his current knowledge. Behavioural characteristics are transferable
    and previous experience is relevant mainly for the behavioural
    development it gives , not for the knowledge it bestowes.
    
    The employer gains from this because the process allows for the
    injection of fresh ideas and questioning into all departments, a
    necessary condition for vitality and adaptability.
    
    Characteristics of behaviour also affect management potential. There
    are behavioural qualities associatied with management positions
    and, if an individual is lacking the relevant strengths, he will
    be neither happy nor successful as a manager, regardless of his
    academic brilliance. This thinking casts doubts on the traditional
    "officers and men" approach of specific management trainee entrant
    schemes with entry based largely on academic qualifications.
    
    The other important principle to grasp is that few people can do
    a job for more than two to four years before the challenge begins
    to fade and enthusiasm begins to wane.
    
    There are of course exceptions. In the face of modern technology,
    some jobs are effectively changing totally in a two- to four-year
    timescale, thus creating a continuing challenge; and some individuals
    have an ability to keep themselves motivated and vital.
    
    But for the most of us, it is not that long before we feel that
    we have the measure of the job, that we have injected our own ideas,
    and that we can find no new challenges that are not variations of
    what we have seen before.
    
    I know that I have reached this stage when , on getting out of bed,
    I anticpate my in-tray with resignation and loathing instead of
    excitement and interest.
    
    The danger comes when one stays in a job past that point. For the
    individual, it leads to boredom, stress and mental stagnation.
    Performance appears to deteriorate because enthusiasm disappears
    and motivation is no longer there to respond to change. If this
    is prolonged, the individual can find it difficult to respond to
    new challenges they are offered. The employer too loses through
    having a demotivated and stale employee who, if a manager , can
    also adversely affect the performance of many others.
    
    The solution of moving jobs, difficult in a knowledge-based career
    structure, is relatively easy in an organisation that focusses
    on behavioural characteristics because a large number of sideways
    moves are then possible. As well as creating new challenges for
    the individual, these moves build the breadth of experience of the
    whole organisation and generates positive energy and motivation
    to succeed.
    
    A wider understanding of this adaptibility would go a long way towards
    reducing the skill shortage, particularly through the redeployment
    of the unemployed and redundant.
    
    With this in mind, the school leaver or graduate should realize
    that the new industrial world is going to look on job movement as
    a positive sign that the individual is not stagnant; that there
    is no reason why career options should be limited by one's current
    knowledge-base; and that  knowledge, while always a positive and
    broadening acquisition, is not of itself a transferable skill -
    although the process of acquiring it is.

    Oh, heaven!  Where do I sign up?
    
    Where do I sign my management up?
    
    How can we effect this change in attitude?
    
    Karen

    .0 is an excellent description of my experience in the software market. 
    From my first jobs on, I got hired because the interviewers got the
    feeling that I was a "programmer type", not because of academic
    credentials.  As I gained experience, I didn't get new jobs because of
    the specific experience I had but because I had proven through that
    experience that I was indeed a "programmer type".  And the two-to-four
    year cycle before moving to a different flavor of basically the same
    food matches my experience and the experiences of my friends - in urban
    areas, it's too widespread to be a stigma anymore.
    
    Naturally, not all businesses work this way.  In particular, "sideways
    moves" are hard to do without switching companies, unless you work for
    a company like, say, Digital.
    
    To tie this into =wn=, though, there's something that's always bothered
    me about it.  There's no way to measure "emotional compatibility" for a
    job, so people rely on stereotypes.  I'm a baby-faced, skinny, pale,
    excitable dude with some training in logical thinking and some verbal
    skills - great for that software engineer slot!  A plump middle-aged
    black man or a shy almost-but-not-quite-dressed-for-success woman "just
    isn't the type", although they may have the same skills as me or skills
    that might be more important to the success of the job.
    
    I've seen this problem overcome when the managers themselves are
    "non-stereotypical" and thus find it easier to discard clich�s through
    use of empathy.  But it's more work than just hiring the first clich�.
    
    Ray

    The other thing, which I've personally noticed but which may not be
    a good generalization, is that people who are good BS artists tend to
    be able to move around much more than the more conservative, honest
    types.  Unless you overstep the BS and they call you...
    
    Its been my experience that there are more male BS artists of this type
    than women, who seem for whatever reason to be more low-key.

    I accept your concern about stereotyping but my experience suggests
    that the right selection methods can overcome this problem/prejudice
    to a great extent. In the UK, "Targeted Selection" interviewing
    is widely used and I have been surprised to discover how often my
    final selection has been driven by the process in opposition to
    my gut reaction. Obviously, it is not the whole answer but it goes
    a long way towards it.
    Regards
    Barry
    

    Karen, your reaction saddens me not least because it is a very
    reasonable and widespread reaction driven, no doubt, by the Digital
    you see around you. There is nothing in that article which is not
    subscribed to - in theory at least - by our senior management. So
    what is the problem?
        To my mind, there are several factors.
    First, we have a high proportion of managers who have not been with
    Digital long and who have not imbued Digital's true philosophies
    - partly because it takes time and partly because we are criminally
    negligent in our failure to pass on the message. They continue in
    the narrow ways that they learned in education (joke!) and more
    traditional employment.
    Second, most senior managers find it difficult to understand how
    different Digital is now because of its size; they do not realise
    that concerted effort is now needed to develop cultural attitudes
    that quickly spread by osmosis when we were smaller. Thus the effort
    is not made.
    But third is something we can all do something about - that is push
    back and up. While I accept that it takes considerable self-confidence
    to do it, my experience over several years suggests that when dumb
    and narrow decisions are taken by middle and junior management,
    careful push back via the open door or whatever has always resulted
    in Digital agreeing to do the right thing. In other words, DEC has
    followed the "FIRST RULE". We tend to sit and accept second rate
    management when action on our part could correct it.
    
    There is another problem which is the fact that Digital is far from
    homogenous and some groups have very narrow attitudes while others
    are far-thinking and broad-minded. But I know of many areas that
    are the latter. Perhaps you should be seeking to transfer!!!!!!
    
    Yours (with apologies for the pontification)
    
    Barry
    
    P.S. I am the PrincipAL (not PrincipLE!) of the U.K DECollege (not
    DECcollege)!