Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Intersting article on hiring, and trying to fill jobs
67 views
Skip to first unread message
Gunner Asch
Dec 22, 2013, 3:58:59 AM12/22/13
to
http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
BY TREY POPP
On the morning of November 6, 2012, as Americans filed into voting
booths at the end of an election campaign waged largely on the issue
of jobs and the lack of them, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics
released its regular monthly report on job openings and labor
turnover.
The JOLT report is a crude measure of employment trends. Unlike the
unemployment rate or the weekly tally of jobless claims, it sheds no
light on the travails of people looking for work. But the November
edition (which reported on September data) contained a statistic bound
to madden many job seekers. It was the number of unfilled job openings
as of the last business day of the month: 3.6 million.
That total was �essentially unchanged� from the month before.
There are a number of ways to interpret, or misinterpret, that figure.
The 3.6 million jobs that were available at September�s end weren�t
just the same ones left over from August. The number of new hires was
even greater in each of those months, as was the number of
�separations.� There�s a lot of churn in the labor market.
In one sense, those 3.6 million vacancies were a positive sign. The
number of positions available had steadily climbed from its nadir in
July 2009, when there were just shy of 2.2 million. So at least
businesses seemed increasingly inclined to hire. And not just at
fast-food counters. There were some 650,000 posted opportunities in
professional and business services, well over 200,000 in
manufacturing, and nearly 600,000 in trade, transportation, and
utilities.
Yet for every one of those openings, there were still somewhere
between three and four unemployed Americans eager for work�or nearly
six, if you counted people working part-time because they couldn�t
find a full-time job. And in that light, you could forgive a
resume-scattering job hunter for perceiving something mysterious�if
not vaguely menacing�about the idea that 3.6 million jobs were,
theoretically at least, there for the taking.
In fact there is something pernicious going on, because another thing
is happening at the same time. A lot of job openings are going
unfilled, and when American employers are asked why, their most common
answer is a lack of qualified applicants.
You�ve probably heard this before. The idea that a �skills gap� is
what ails the US labor market has become so widespread as to achieve
one of the rarest conditions in contemporary American life:
embracement by both political parties. As Mitt Romney put it in a
campaign document: �One of the troubling features of the American
economy today is the mismatch between the skill set of the American
workforce and the requirements of the employment market. The gap
between the two lies at the heart of our jobs crisis.� The GOP
candidate might as well have quoted President Obama�s 2012 State of
the Union address: �I also hear from many business leaders who want to
hire in the United States but can�t find workers with the right
skills. Growing industries in science and technology have twice as
many openings as we have workers who can do the job.�
There�s just one problem with this idea, according to longtime Wharton
professor Peter Cappelli. It may largely be a myth.
Peter Cappelli
Cappelli, the George W. Taylor Professor of Management, is a
connoisseur of job-hunting stories gone wrong. One of his favorites
was related to him by someone in a company whose staffing department
failed to identify a qualified candidate for a �standard engineering
position��out of 25,000 applicants. Another comes from a software
developer who was turned down for a job that involved operating a
particular brand-name software-testing tool�despite the fact that he
had actually built just such a tool himself. Adding insult to inanity,
another time he was deemed unqualified because �I didn�t have two
years of experience using an extremely simple database report
formatting tool, the sort of thing that would require just a couple
hours for any half-decent database wrangler to master.�
Even if your own employment situation is rosy, you could probably add
similar stories of your own. Perhaps it�s a spouse in mid-career
transition who keeps running up against web-based applicant-management
systems that request irrelevant minutia like high-school GPA. It could
be a sibling flummoxed by an inflexible offer for an advanced-practice
nursing job that pays less than an entry-level RN can make doing shift
work. Or maybe you�re despairing over your daughter�s chances of
scoring an unpaid internship as a stepping stone to full-time work�in
which case, don�t read the next sentence. According to Penn Career
Services director Patricia Rose, internships have become the hottest
new items at elite prep-school fundraiser auctions, where parents are
literally buying plum summer positions for their kids.
Anecdotes like these, Cappelli says, are just the tip of an iceberg of
troubling data. In his latest book, Why Good People Can�t Get Jobs:
The Skills Gap and What Companies Can Do About It (Wharton Digital
Press, 2012), he explores America�s dysfunctional jobs market and
concludes that the skills gap�at least as it�s most commonly
formulated (�Schools aren�t giving kids the right kind of training.
The government isn�t letting in enough high-skill immigrants. The list
goes on and on�)�isn�t really to blame.
�The real culprits,� he contends, �are the employers themselves.�
Cappelli has studied labor markets, and this aspect of them in
particular, from just about every imaginable angle. In the late 1980s
he worked on the US Secretary of Labor�s Commission on Workforce
Quality and Labor Market Efficiency. In the 1990s, he co-directed the
National Center on the Educational Quality of the Workforce within the
US Department of Education. For a period during the 2000s, he was
senior advisor for employment policy to the Kingdom of Bahrain. He�s a
distinguished scholar at Singapore�s Ministry of Manpower. At Wharton,
where he has been a professor since 1985, he directs the Center for
Human Resources.
Why Good People Can�t Get Jobs is essentially a story about human
resources�how companies succeed and fail at finding and retaining
talent. The book (and the larger body of research behind it, which he
delved into in a wide-ranging conversation for this article) contains
lessons for employers, advice for job-seekers, and important
implications for policymakers.
Perhaps the best place to start is with the humans themselves. What
skills do companies really want from them, anyway? And are American
firms facilitating the acquisition of those skills�or standing in the
way?
On Skills and Schooling
The notion that America�s education system is failing to equip the
workers of tomorrow is at least as old as the seminal 1983 government
report A Nation at Risk, which memorably quipped, �If an unfriendly
foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre
educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed
it as an act of war.� Today�s CEOs regularly blame schools and
colleges for their difficulties in finding adequately prepared
employees. The complaint shows up in survey after survey, as Cappelli
shows in his book, and it is substantially more common among American
employers than their peers in most other developed and developing
economies.
But do these surveys �show that the United States is among the world
leaders in skills gaps,� Cappelli asks, �or simply in employer whining
and easy media acceptance of employer complaints?�
He thinks a body of lesser-reported studies contains the answer. �If
you look at the studies of hiring managers and what they want, they�re
not complaining about academic skills,� Cappelli says. �You hear the
business spokespeople saying this, but the actual hiring managers are
not saying this now. And in fact they�ve never, in modern times, said
that.�
In other words, there�s a disconnect between the people who actually
do the hiring and the C-suite executives who get asked about it.
�The spokespeople at the very top don�t know what�s going on,�
Cappelli argues. �But there�s a popular story that explains what�s
going on, and that story is: schools are failing.�
Cappelli reckons there are two main reasons this story has staying
power. �One reason it�s popular is that it allows you to advocate for
school reform, which sounds like a socially desirable sort of thing to
do. And so all these different groups like this story [too], because
it works for the people who like to think that they�re interested in
reforming society and improving education. What�s not to like about
that?
�It also works for employers who are saying: This is not our problem.
It�s a problem the public sector ought to solve for us. They ought to
get better at providing the things that we need, and then we don�t
have to do anything�we don�t have to train, we don�t have to adjust
our expectations.�
The problem with the story, Cappelli says, �is there�s no evidence for
any part of it.� And what�s more, it�s hurting the very companies that
espouse it.
More on that second point later. Before we get there, what are hiring
managers complaining about? For the most part, Cappelli says, work
attitudes and lack of on-the-job experience�neither of which can be
fairly laid on schools. When you dig deeper into the surveys of talent
shortages, a similar theme emerges. Cappelli notes that the top 10
hardest-to-fill jobs globally in 2011, according to a well-regarded
survey from the Manpower Group, included positions such as laborer
(�about as unskilled a job category as we can get�), production
operator (�a factory job, typically semiskilled�), technician and
skilled trade (�those skills are learned largely on the job�), and
sales rep.
Of the top 10, he reckons that engineers and accounting/finance
workers learn their skills largely in college classrooms. The same is
probably true now of IT staff�but wasn�t always, which brings us to
another of Cappelli�s insights.
The Home Depot Syndrome
In a 2011 op-ed article for The Wall Street Journal, Cappelli remarked
on a telling statistic from the Silicon Valley tech boom of the 1990s:
only 10 percent of the people in IT jobs had IT-related degrees. But a
lot of the same people would probably have a hard time landing similar
jobs today, because employers have increasingly adopted what Cappelli
calls �a Home Depot view of the hiring process, in which filling a job
vacancy is seen as akin to replacing a part in a washing machine.
�We go down to the store to get that part,� he explains, �and once we
find it, we put it in place and get the machine going again. Like a
replacement part, job requirements have very precise specifications.
Job candidates must fit them perfectly or the job won�t be filled and
business can�t operate.�
The problem with this approach, he says, is that �unlike a machine
part, no perfect fit exists between applicants and job requirements.�
In his book, Cappelli cites a series of studies by the National
Institute of Economic and Social Research in London that investigated
how companies �making almost identical products but operating in
different countries got their work done.� US firms used more engineers
and unskilled workers, for instance, than German firms, which relied
more heavily on skilled craftsmen. In other words, there are multiple
ways�and multiple kinds of employees a company might rely on�to
accomplish a given task. Narrowly drawn job criteria may be a sign
that a company is ignoring possibilities for alternative, and perhaps
even more effective, operational strategies. To the extent that they
slow down the hiring process, a company might stand to benefit from
adopting a more flexible approach to hiring.
There�s a simple lesson there. �When employers have a vacancy to
fill,� Cappelli writes, �they have many options for filling it.� That
sounds like common sense, but it runs us smack into a new reality of
the contemporary hiring process: common sense is exactly what
software-based hiring systems lack.
The Software Ate My Job Application
Remember the story about the company that couldn�t find a
garden-variety engineer out of a deluge of 25,000 applicants? Is such
a thing really possible?
More possible than you might think, Cappelli says.
If you�ve applied for a job through a web-based interface that
requests everything from your most recent job title to your Excel
proficiency to your grades in high school, you may have discovered
this the hard way. In many common applicant-screening programs, each
question functions like a gate. If your answer to any of them doesn�t
fit the precise criteria set by the company, that gate slams shut and
the software deems you unqualified. Alternatively, some systems rely
on automated keyword searches of resumes, rejecting those that don�t
produce exact matches with job descriptions that are by turns overly
detailed or hopelessly vague.
It�s easy to see the natural tendency of a hiring manager to keep
tacking on questions or keyword criteria. The most important
credentials for a software engineer, for instance, might include
Microsoft certification, proficiency with JavaScript, and so many
years of experience. But why not specify a minimum typing speed while
we�re at it, or a cut-off point for high-school GPA? All it takes is a
click.
In this manner, a company can hamstring its own applicant search
pretty quickly�even if its job posting draws 25,000 responses. �All
one needs for that to happen are 14 requirements in the model just
discussed, many fewer if some hurdles are highly specific,� Cappelli
notes. And as crazy as it sounds, mundane choices like how a
job-seeker formats his resume can also hurt his chances.
(For Cappelli�s advice on �beating� the software, see sidebar.)
Not everyone shares Cappelli�s view of software-based hiring. Gary
Truhlar WG�74 is the executive director of human resources at Penn,
which is the largest private employer in Philadelphia.
�When I first came to Penn, we would post job opportunities on seven
bulletin boards,� Truhlar recalls. �They were xeroxed, behind date,
and physically posted on bulletin boards�so if you weren�t on campus,
you didn�t know about those jobs. We would run a small subset in the
Inquirer, but that�s very expensive. So the good side of the
technology, posting on the web, is that as soon as HR knows about the
job, the world knows about the job.�
That translates into a broader and more diverse applicant pool. Job
postings at Penn frequently attract 300 or more candidates. The
dramatic expansion of applicant pools has presumably led to a more
talented workforce.
�The downside,� as Truhlar points out, �is that anybody can apply for
anything. So, Peter�s work notwithstanding, you�ll have a secretary
applying to be a vice president.�
Penn uses a web-based applicant management system to handle the
volume�but, Truhlar stresses, not one that relies on keyword searches
or binary gates that stack the deck toward rejection. �We are
concerned that applicants are not eliminated because of the system
limitations created by certain application providers,� he notes. So
the system Penn uses�called PeopleAdmin�is designed to assign scores
to applicants, not simply render them qualified or unqualified. So
even if no one scores 100, a hiring officer can use the scores as a
starting point for making more nuanced judgments.
The notion that a firm hiring engineers would let 25,000 people apply
without finding one �stretches my imagination,� Truhlar says.
�We just filled a data-security and privacy position,� he adds by way
of example. �And you can kind of do the same thing. You can say, Do
you have five years of experience in the data security business? Do
you have Microsoft certification? And that�s terrific�that�s probably
absolutely what you need. Well, then you can make the mistake of
saying, I need Microsoft x.3.7, and I need Symantec version 8.2.1�and
that�s how you get into a situation where 25,000 people didn�t
qualify. And I would say those HR people are useless, if that�s all
they�re doing is a keyword search and they can�t find anybody.�
Cappelli would agree, but perhaps go one step further by noting what
he sees as a major reason HR departments don�t succeed: the
departments themselves have been driven to the brink of extinction.
Human Resources in Bad Decline
�One of the things which is a great puzzle,� Cappelli says, �is that
50 years ago in the US, most big employers were much more
sophisticated about hiring than they are now. So they�ve actually
gotten worse at this.�
The body of knowledge about what predicts job performance goes back to
World War I, Cappelli says, �and it�s just being systematically
ignored.�
Take the case of high-school GPA. �We know something about this!� he
says. It �predicts nothing about your job performance�especially 30
years later. Why are they bothering to ask that? We know it doesn�t
work.�
He has a ready answer to that question: �the gutting of the
human-resource function�cutting people out, cutting staff out. The
people who were trained in this stuff, and used to know it, are all
gone now.�
This is arguably the product of systemic changes to the US labor
market that gained pace in the 1980s. As high unemployment rates from
the late 1970s persisted into the following decade, companies
increasingly had at their disposal a labor pool that was more
experienced than ever before.
�A generation ago you had to hire out of college and train people,�
Cappelli explains, singling out firms like IBM and General Electric,
which aimed to retain employees for life. �Nobody hopped jobs. But as
companies started to lay people off, and there were lots of skilled
people around and lots of white-collar workers, lots of managers, you
could sort of hire whoever you wanted. It wasn�t very hard. So you
maybe didn�t have to be that sophisticated at recruiting and
selection� anymore.
Some of the pressures that touched off the cycle of layoffs are well
known, like increased global competition, and the perceived need for
companies to respond more nimbly to changing consumer preferences
(which could make replacing employees seem more efficient than taking
the time to train them). But there are other salient factors that are
underappreciated. Cappelli outlined one in a 1997 volume titled
Changes at Work, in a chapter co-written with Wharton�s Michael Useem,
now the William and Jacalyn Egan Professor of Management: the growing
concentration of stock ownership among large institutional holders,
like pension funds.
Traditionally, such investors expressed dissatisfaction with a
company�s performance by simply selling their stock. But with the rise
of indexed holdings�in which funds are invested according to preset
formulas (for instance, mirroring the composition of the S&P 500)�and
the sheer size of share blocks under ownership, it became harder for
big institutional investors to shed unwanted stock positions.
Consequently, they instead began pressuring companies to change, with
a narrow focus on driving up share performance over shorter time
periods.
�Institutional holders were now quicker to insist that the company
find new strategies and structures to produce,� Cappelli and Useem
noted. �And the formulas they found concentrated on restructuring the
companies and slashing jobs. One study of share-price reactions to
company layoff announcements from 1979 to 1987 illustrates the thrust
of the investors� message for would-be restructurers. In the days
immediately following layoff announcements announced as part of
general restructurings, stock prices rose an average 4 percent.�
Concurrently, the ranks of experienced job-seekers swelled, making
decisions to fire still easier to justify, since the labor market was
flush with talent. This dynamic persists today�with a perverse twist.
Waiting for Superman
In the olden days, as Cappelli sketches them, HR departments served as
�reality testers.� Say a line manager at a big firm got permission to
hire a new worker. �He�d say, �We need somebody with an MBA for this.�
And the HR people would say, �You really need an MBA degree for that?
Are you sure? What�s important in this job?� � They�d be pushing back
a bit in terms of the job description.�
This injected a degree of flexibility into job criteria.
�Those guys are gone now,� Cappelli continues. �Now the requisition
often goes automatically to somebody who inserts it into the
applicant-tracking system. So they kind of take the wish list from the
hiring manager, who is often looking for Superman�the Purple Squirrel,
as they say in IT�something that doesn�t exist.�
Unless maybe it does, what with all the talent among the ranks of the
unemployed. When there are three or four job-seekers for every
vacancy�and some postings draw applicants by the hundred�firms have an
understandable incentive to wait for a dream candidate to show up. And
ideally, a dream candidate who expresses a low salary requirement.
In that Manpower survey, 11 percent of the employers reporting skill
shortages chalked it up to applicants unwilling to accept job offers
at the wages companies were willing to pay.
�Given what we know about the difficulty all respondents have in
recognizing problems that are actually their own fault,� Cappelli
writes, �the real percentage of employers who have difficulty hiring
because they are not offering adequate wages is likely to be much,
much higher.�
He cites the case of a parts-supply company whose inability to fill 40
machinist vacancies had been estimated to be dragging sales down by 20
percent. �The jobs reportedly paid $13 per hour, which might sound
good. But the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the average wage
for such jobs is more than $19 per hour,� Cappelli notes. �Would that
have had some effect on the companies� ability to find candidates? You
bet.�
But, again, that has little to do with a skills shortage. �A real
shortage means not being able to find appropriate candidates at
market-clearing wages,� Cappelli noted in The Wall Street Journal. In
his book he adds, �When I hear stories about the difficulty in finding
applicants, I always ask employers if they have tried raising wages,
which in many cases have not gone up in years. The response is
virtually always that they believe their wages are high enough.�
And Waiting�
As the case of that parts-supply company shows, there is often a cost
associated with letting positions remain vacant. But most of the time
it�s hard to quantify�whereas the benefit of not paying another salary
is as clear as day. That�s another source of grit in the gears of
hiring.
In one sense, you can trace it all the way back to what typically
spurs companies to post job openings in the first place. It is not, as
an economist of the rational-choice school might suppose, a
determination that a new worker will add more profit than expense to
the balance sheet. Arguments to hire, Cappelli says, �mainly come from
people complaining about overwork.�
In some cases�perhaps especially when high unemployment keeps existing
workers docile�the complaints come from a company�s own customers.
Cappelli recently came across a financial-services company whose
retail customers were actually signing petitions asking the firm to
deploy more service people.
The prevailing approach among American companies, as Cappelli
characterizes it, has been, �Let�s just cut staff until we notice
blood. But part of the problem, too, is that the accounting systems
internally have not been sophisticated enough to notice when there is
blood.� He suggests that the development of performance metrics
capable of measuring the cost of lost opportunities, or of burnout
among existing workers trying to do two jobs at once, would redound to
the benefit of job-seekers and bottom lines alike.
Chris Ittner, the Ernst & Young Professor of Accounting at Wharton,
has a more skeptical view.
�In accounting, we don�t account well for intangible assets,
period�but with people especially,� he agrees. �Firms have a hard time
even finding out what kind of payback they get from training their
employees.�
But he deems it unlikely that American companies are suffering from a
collective failure to realize the moneymaking potential of ramping up
their payrolls. If profits in a given sector were being held down by
overly lean workforces, he suggests �there would be an arbitrage
opportunity.� In other words, you�d expect one or several companies to
accelerate hiring as a way to gain an advantage over their
competitors�and if that strategy panned out, their competitors would
likely follow suit. But there�s little evidence of that happening.
Ittner observes further that hiring is inherently risky.
�If you choose to hire, you�re stuck with that decision�because it�s
not that easy to fire people. And firms don�t want to make an
investment when there�s so much uncertainty about what will happen in
the future,� he says. �So you might be willing to accept the cost of
lost productivity or lost sales.�
A Blind Alley
In virtually every discussion about America�s jobs crisis, a familiar
solution is trotted out. If only we could get more people through
college�whether that means a bachelor�s or two-year associate�s
degree�we�d have a workforce matched to employers� needs.
On an individual basis, this advice holds water. College graduates
have substantially more success in the job market than their
less-schooled peers. (For Penn alumni, the picture is rosier still.
For a snapshot of how Quakers have been faring in recent years, see
chart). The Penn Alumni Career Network is another potentially valuable
resource: www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/pacnet.)
On a societal basis, however, there are good reasons to doubt the
efficacy of that prescription. Cappelli worries about over-education.
Citing survey data, he points out that many American workers have�and
have paid for�more education than what�s required by the jobs they are
doing. That can be viewed as a deadweight loss for the economy at
large, and it�s getting worse.
�In order to prove to an employer that you can do this job,� he
explains, �maybe you get an extra degree. So rather than two years
experience as a pharmaceutical rep, I go get a master�s degree in
pharmaceutical rep work. In Philadelphia, there�s a local business
school that has an MBA degree in pharmaceutical marketing, a highly
specific degree which you never would have seen a generation ago. And
it�s an expensive way to get the experience. It�s a time-consuming
way. And I�m sort of over-relying on academic institutions to get
this.�
From an employer�s perspective, this approach beats �growing all your
own talent,� as the IBMs and GEs of yesteryear did. After all, a
company invests in training its employees at the peril of having them
hired away by a competitor who avoids the expense. So even if it has
to pay a premium for a candidate who has an equivalent academic
credential, that makes more sense.
The problem, as Cappelli sees it, is that this dynamic has fueled an
�explosion of certifications� in the US, the majority of them provided
by for-profit organizations and vocational schools. Aside from the
incentive this creates for people to pursue more credentials than jobs
require, just to �muscle out� other job-seekers, Cappelli wonders if
there may be an underappreciated downside for the employers
themselves.
The rise of credentials as a basis for hiring �makes people more
plug-and-play,� Cappelli points out.
�You see, for example, in places like nursing and health care, where
credentials are everything now, that it makes it easier to pop new
people in and pop other people out. Maybe that�s a good thing. It does
mean for an employer, though, that everything becomes more like a
profession. And your ability to get things done differently might
become a little harder. And to get practices that are unique to you, a
little harder.
�For example, say I�m an IT person working in your company, and you�d
like me to get good at your legacy computing system. Should I do that?
What�s in it for me? It�s risky, because I�m going to spend a couple
years working on this system, and I don�t get any credential out of it
that�s useful elsewhere. So maybe I don�t even take that job�I�d much
prefer to work for less for somebody else where I get a credential at
the end, which is transferable.�
Part of the appeal of a �plug-and-play� approach to employers is the
sense that it affords them flexibility. �If we�re going to change our
products or change our strategy,� Cappelli explains, �we just get rid
of everybody, and then we�ll hire in a new group, with different
skills.�
Yet �some of this is not completely demonstrated by evidence,� he
adds. �A generation ago you would have heard companies like IBM talk
about how lifetime employment gave them flexibility�because people
internally didn�t resist changes. You would change your products, you
would retrain the people�off you go.�
Still, the rise of vocational certification leaves the brunt of the
risk on job-seekers. Cappelli has learned this the hard way, which is
perhaps ironic considering his area of expertise. When his own son
couldn�t find a job with his college degree in classics, he �looked to
one of the technical fields in health care that had been identified as
hot, where employers (the media assured) were struggling to hire,�
Cappelli writes. �He went back to school, at a community college, and
got a skills certificate in that field�only to discover that it was
not hot.�
If that fate can meet the college-educated son of a world-renowned
expert in human resources, it may be time for the rest of us to look
for another solution.
A Way Out
�The United States is at the moment the only country in the world
where the notion that employers are simply the consumers of skills is
seriously considered,� Cappelli declares in Why Good People Can�t Get
Jobs.
�The great puzzle for people outside the US in the workforce world,�
he adds in conversation, �is why we don�t have apprenticeship
programs. Every other industrial country has got them. And in the
countries that are emerging, like China, a big priority is to develop
these programs ... And we don�t have them.�
Nor are we likely to get them, he says�at least not at the national
level. One reason is the sheer scale of the US economy. �In smaller
countries in Europe,� Cappelli observes, �you could get the key
employers in a room together and say, �Okay, guys, we�ve got to step
up here.�� That�s impossible here.
But he contends that employers have a lot to gain from embracing what
you might call apprenticeship writ small.
�What employers are complaining they can�t find now are not things the
schools can deliver. They want work-based skills. They want the kinds
of things that you can�t learn in a classroom. How do you manage a
team of people? How do you implement this particular software? And we
shouldn�t expect the schools to try to do that. It�s not very
efficient. It�s much easier to teach somebody as an apprentice in the
field.�
He insists that the way forward for many employers is to relax job
requirements (or at least pry them from the vise grip of recruiting
software) and re-shoulder some of the training burden that they used
to assume�and that some firms still do, albeit in a slightly different
way.
�If you look at the consulting companies, for example, or around Penn
you look at the investment banks, they have very high rates of
turnover,� he notes. �The investment banks lose all their junior
analysts. And yet it works fine for them. Now, why is that? Because
they�re basically treating these folks as apprentices. They�re
learning a lot, but they�re learning as they are working and as they
contribute. So it�s a model of learning that�s different than the old
corporate model, where you�d start out with 18 months of classroom
training, and then after that we�d slowly give you work experience.
�At law firms, consulting firms, accounting firms, you start
contributing the day you arrive. And you�re learning as you go. So the
model can work, and you can see it all over the place in parts of the
private sector. And I think the parts that are not doing it have just
got to figure out how to incorporate that pay-as-you-go model. It�s
not rocket science.�
Similarly, he advocates tightening connections between employers and
schools by way of co-op programs and collaborations that integrate
classroom and work experience. Such arrangements in other countries,
and when they�ve been tried here, work wonders for everyone involved.
But �the constraint on building these arrangements has always been on
the employer side: how to get them to engage in these efforts when the
payoff to them is not immediate,� Cappelli writes.
�The present, debilitating disconnect between job supply and job
demand,� he adds, �suggests that the time has finally come.�
As he put it in a presentation at the 2012 World Economic Forum in
Davos, Switzerland, �The question for us � especially businesspeople,
is, What are we going to do?
�Will we stand back and expect our most important asset to simply show
up when we want it? Or are we going to get engaged in the supply chain
and try and do something to get the workers we want?�
Download this article (PDF)
Illustration by Graham Roumieu
WEB EXCLUSIVE:
A BRIEF HISTORY OF HIRING
Walter Licht on the skills gap and what
companies used to do about it.
�2013 The Pennsylvania Gazette
--
"Owning a sailboat is like marrying a nymphomaniac. You don�t want to do that
but it is great if your best friend does. That way you get all the benefits without any of the upkeep"
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
BY TREY POPP
On the morning of November 6, 2012, as Americans filed into voting
booths at the end of an election campaign waged largely on the issue
of jobs and the lack of them, the US Bureau of Labor Statistics
released its regular monthly report on job openings and labor
turnover.
The JOLT report is a crude measure of employment trends. Unlike the
unemployment rate or the weekly tally of jobless claims, it sheds no
light on the travails of people looking for work. But the November
edition (which reported on September data) contained a statistic bound
to madden many job seekers. It was the number of unfilled job openings
as of the last business day of the month: 3.6 million.
That total was �essentially unchanged� from the month before.
There are a number of ways to interpret, or misinterpret, that figure.
The 3.6 million jobs that were available at September�s end weren�t
just the same ones left over from August. The number of new hires was
even greater in each of those months, as was the number of
�separations.� There�s a lot of churn in the labor market.
In one sense, those 3.6 million vacancies were a positive sign. The
number of positions available had steadily climbed from its nadir in
July 2009, when there were just shy of 2.2 million. So at least
businesses seemed increasingly inclined to hire. And not just at
fast-food counters. There were some 650,000 posted opportunities in
professional and business services, well over 200,000 in
manufacturing, and nearly 600,000 in trade, transportation, and
utilities.
Yet for every one of those openings, there were still somewhere
between three and four unemployed Americans eager for work�or nearly
six, if you counted people working part-time because they couldn�t
find a full-time job. And in that light, you could forgive a
resume-scattering job hunter for perceiving something mysterious�if
not vaguely menacing�about the idea that 3.6 million jobs were,
theoretically at least, there for the taking.
In fact there is something pernicious going on, because another thing
is happening at the same time. A lot of job openings are going
unfilled, and when American employers are asked why, their most common
answer is a lack of qualified applicants.
You�ve probably heard this before. The idea that a �skills gap� is
what ails the US labor market has become so widespread as to achieve
one of the rarest conditions in contemporary American life:
embracement by both political parties. As Mitt Romney put it in a
campaign document: �One of the troubling features of the American
economy today is the mismatch between the skill set of the American
workforce and the requirements of the employment market. The gap
between the two lies at the heart of our jobs crisis.� The GOP
candidate might as well have quoted President Obama�s 2012 State of
the Union address: �I also hear from many business leaders who want to
hire in the United States but can�t find workers with the right
skills. Growing industries in science and technology have twice as
many openings as we have workers who can do the job.�
There�s just one problem with this idea, according to longtime Wharton
professor Peter Cappelli. It may largely be a myth.
Peter Cappelli
Cappelli, the George W. Taylor Professor of Management, is a
connoisseur of job-hunting stories gone wrong. One of his favorites
was related to him by someone in a company whose staffing department
failed to identify a qualified candidate for a �standard engineering
position��out of 25,000 applicants. Another comes from a software
developer who was turned down for a job that involved operating a
particular brand-name software-testing tool�despite the fact that he
had actually built just such a tool himself. Adding insult to inanity,
another time he was deemed unqualified because �I didn�t have two
years of experience using an extremely simple database report
formatting tool, the sort of thing that would require just a couple
hours for any half-decent database wrangler to master.�
Even if your own employment situation is rosy, you could probably add
similar stories of your own. Perhaps it�s a spouse in mid-career
transition who keeps running up against web-based applicant-management
systems that request irrelevant minutia like high-school GPA. It could
be a sibling flummoxed by an inflexible offer for an advanced-practice
nursing job that pays less than an entry-level RN can make doing shift
work. Or maybe you�re despairing over your daughter�s chances of
scoring an unpaid internship as a stepping stone to full-time work�in
which case, don�t read the next sentence. According to Penn Career
Services director Patricia Rose, internships have become the hottest
new items at elite prep-school fundraiser auctions, where parents are
literally buying plum summer positions for their kids.
Anecdotes like these, Cappelli says, are just the tip of an iceberg of
troubling data. In his latest book, Why Good People Can�t Get Jobs:
The Skills Gap and What Companies Can Do About It (Wharton Digital
Press, 2012), he explores America�s dysfunctional jobs market and
concludes that the skills gap�at least as it�s most commonly
formulated (�Schools aren�t giving kids the right kind of training.
The government isn�t letting in enough high-skill immigrants. The list
goes on and on�)�isn�t really to blame.
�The real culprits,� he contends, �are the employers themselves.�
Cappelli has studied labor markets, and this aspect of them in
particular, from just about every imaginable angle. In the late 1980s
he worked on the US Secretary of Labor�s Commission on Workforce
Quality and Labor Market Efficiency. In the 1990s, he co-directed the
National Center on the Educational Quality of the Workforce within the
US Department of Education. For a period during the 2000s, he was
senior advisor for employment policy to the Kingdom of Bahrain. He�s a
distinguished scholar at Singapore�s Ministry of Manpower. At Wharton,
where he has been a professor since 1985, he directs the Center for
Human Resources.
Why Good People Can�t Get Jobs is essentially a story about human
resources�how companies succeed and fail at finding and retaining
talent. The book (and the larger body of research behind it, which he
delved into in a wide-ranging conversation for this article) contains
lessons for employers, advice for job-seekers, and important
implications for policymakers.
Perhaps the best place to start is with the humans themselves. What
skills do companies really want from them, anyway? And are American
firms facilitating the acquisition of those skills�or standing in the
way?
On Skills and Schooling
The notion that America�s education system is failing to equip the
workers of tomorrow is at least as old as the seminal 1983 government
report A Nation at Risk, which memorably quipped, �If an unfriendly
foreign power had attempted to impose on America the mediocre
educational performance that exists today, we might well have viewed
it as an act of war.� Today�s CEOs regularly blame schools and
colleges for their difficulties in finding adequately prepared
employees. The complaint shows up in survey after survey, as Cappelli
shows in his book, and it is substantially more common among American
employers than their peers in most other developed and developing
economies.
But do these surveys �show that the United States is among the world
leaders in skills gaps,� Cappelli asks, �or simply in employer whining
and easy media acceptance of employer complaints?�
He thinks a body of lesser-reported studies contains the answer. �If
you look at the studies of hiring managers and what they want, they�re
not complaining about academic skills,� Cappelli says. �You hear the
business spokespeople saying this, but the actual hiring managers are
not saying this now. And in fact they�ve never, in modern times, said
that.�
In other words, there�s a disconnect between the people who actually
do the hiring and the C-suite executives who get asked about it.
�The spokespeople at the very top don�t know what�s going on,�
Cappelli argues. �But there�s a popular story that explains what�s
going on, and that story is: schools are failing.�
Cappelli reckons there are two main reasons this story has staying
power. �One reason it�s popular is that it allows you to advocate for
school reform, which sounds like a socially desirable sort of thing to
do. And so all these different groups like this story [too], because
it works for the people who like to think that they�re interested in
reforming society and improving education. What�s not to like about
that?
�It also works for employers who are saying: This is not our problem.
It�s a problem the public sector ought to solve for us. They ought to
get better at providing the things that we need, and then we don�t
have to do anything�we don�t have to train, we don�t have to adjust
our expectations.�
The problem with the story, Cappelli says, �is there�s no evidence for
any part of it.� And what�s more, it�s hurting the very companies that
espouse it.
More on that second point later. Before we get there, what are hiring
managers complaining about? For the most part, Cappelli says, work
attitudes and lack of on-the-job experience�neither of which can be
fairly laid on schools. When you dig deeper into the surveys of talent
shortages, a similar theme emerges. Cappelli notes that the top 10
hardest-to-fill jobs globally in 2011, according to a well-regarded
survey from the Manpower Group, included positions such as laborer
(�about as unskilled a job category as we can get�), production
operator (�a factory job, typically semiskilled�), technician and
skilled trade (�those skills are learned largely on the job�), and
sales rep.
Of the top 10, he reckons that engineers and accounting/finance
workers learn their skills largely in college classrooms. The same is
probably true now of IT staff�but wasn�t always, which brings us to
another of Cappelli�s insights.
The Home Depot Syndrome
In a 2011 op-ed article for The Wall Street Journal, Cappelli remarked
on a telling statistic from the Silicon Valley tech boom of the 1990s:
only 10 percent of the people in IT jobs had IT-related degrees. But a
lot of the same people would probably have a hard time landing similar
jobs today, because employers have increasingly adopted what Cappelli
calls �a Home Depot view of the hiring process, in which filling a job
vacancy is seen as akin to replacing a part in a washing machine.
�We go down to the store to get that part,� he explains, �and once we
find it, we put it in place and get the machine going again. Like a
replacement part, job requirements have very precise specifications.
Job candidates must fit them perfectly or the job won�t be filled and
business can�t operate.�
The problem with this approach, he says, is that �unlike a machine
part, no perfect fit exists between applicants and job requirements.�
In his book, Cappelli cites a series of studies by the National
Institute of Economic and Social Research in London that investigated
how companies �making almost identical products but operating in
different countries got their work done.� US firms used more engineers
and unskilled workers, for instance, than German firms, which relied
more heavily on skilled craftsmen. In other words, there are multiple
ways�and multiple kinds of employees a company might rely on�to
accomplish a given task. Narrowly drawn job criteria may be a sign
that a company is ignoring possibilities for alternative, and perhaps
even more effective, operational strategies. To the extent that they
slow down the hiring process, a company might stand to benefit from
adopting a more flexible approach to hiring.
There�s a simple lesson there. �When employers have a vacancy to
fill,� Cappelli writes, �they have many options for filling it.� That
sounds like common sense, but it runs us smack into a new reality of
the contemporary hiring process: common sense is exactly what
software-based hiring systems lack.
The Software Ate My Job Application
Remember the story about the company that couldn�t find a
garden-variety engineer out of a deluge of 25,000 applicants? Is such
a thing really possible?
More possible than you might think, Cappelli says.
If you�ve applied for a job through a web-based interface that
requests everything from your most recent job title to your Excel
proficiency to your grades in high school, you may have discovered
this the hard way. In many common applicant-screening programs, each
question functions like a gate. If your answer to any of them doesn�t
fit the precise criteria set by the company, that gate slams shut and
the software deems you unqualified. Alternatively, some systems rely
on automated keyword searches of resumes, rejecting those that don�t
produce exact matches with job descriptions that are by turns overly
detailed or hopelessly vague.
It�s easy to see the natural tendency of a hiring manager to keep
tacking on questions or keyword criteria. The most important
credentials for a software engineer, for instance, might include
Microsoft certification, proficiency with JavaScript, and so many
years of experience. But why not specify a minimum typing speed while
we�re at it, or a cut-off point for high-school GPA? All it takes is a
click.
In this manner, a company can hamstring its own applicant search
pretty quickly�even if its job posting draws 25,000 responses. �All
one needs for that to happen are 14 requirements in the model just
discussed, many fewer if some hurdles are highly specific,� Cappelli
notes. And as crazy as it sounds, mundane choices like how a
job-seeker formats his resume can also hurt his chances.
(For Cappelli�s advice on �beating� the software, see sidebar.)
Not everyone shares Cappelli�s view of software-based hiring. Gary
Truhlar WG�74 is the executive director of human resources at Penn,
which is the largest private employer in Philadelphia.
�When I first came to Penn, we would post job opportunities on seven
bulletin boards,� Truhlar recalls. �They were xeroxed, behind date,
and physically posted on bulletin boards�so if you weren�t on campus,
you didn�t know about those jobs. We would run a small subset in the
Inquirer, but that�s very expensive. So the good side of the
technology, posting on the web, is that as soon as HR knows about the
job, the world knows about the job.�
That translates into a broader and more diverse applicant pool. Job
postings at Penn frequently attract 300 or more candidates. The
dramatic expansion of applicant pools has presumably led to a more
talented workforce.
�The downside,� as Truhlar points out, �is that anybody can apply for
anything. So, Peter�s work notwithstanding, you�ll have a secretary
applying to be a vice president.�
Penn uses a web-based applicant management system to handle the
volume�but, Truhlar stresses, not one that relies on keyword searches
or binary gates that stack the deck toward rejection. �We are
concerned that applicants are not eliminated because of the system
limitations created by certain application providers,� he notes. So
the system Penn uses�called PeopleAdmin�is designed to assign scores
to applicants, not simply render them qualified or unqualified. So
even if no one scores 100, a hiring officer can use the scores as a
starting point for making more nuanced judgments.
The notion that a firm hiring engineers would let 25,000 people apply
without finding one �stretches my imagination,� Truhlar says.
�We just filled a data-security and privacy position,� he adds by way
of example. �And you can kind of do the same thing. You can say, Do
you have five years of experience in the data security business? Do
you have Microsoft certification? And that�s terrific�that�s probably
absolutely what you need. Well, then you can make the mistake of
saying, I need Microsoft x.3.7, and I need Symantec version 8.2.1�and
that�s how you get into a situation where 25,000 people didn�t
qualify. And I would say those HR people are useless, if that�s all
they�re doing is a keyword search and they can�t find anybody.�
Cappelli would agree, but perhaps go one step further by noting what
he sees as a major reason HR departments don�t succeed: the
departments themselves have been driven to the brink of extinction.
Human Resources in Bad Decline
�One of the things which is a great puzzle,� Cappelli says, �is that
50 years ago in the US, most big employers were much more
sophisticated about hiring than they are now. So they�ve actually
gotten worse at this.�
The body of knowledge about what predicts job performance goes back to
World War I, Cappelli says, �and it�s just being systematically
ignored.�
Take the case of high-school GPA. �We know something about this!� he
says. It �predicts nothing about your job performance�especially 30
years later. Why are they bothering to ask that? We know it doesn�t
work.�
He has a ready answer to that question: �the gutting of the
human-resource function�cutting people out, cutting staff out. The
people who were trained in this stuff, and used to know it, are all
gone now.�
This is arguably the product of systemic changes to the US labor
market that gained pace in the 1980s. As high unemployment rates from
the late 1970s persisted into the following decade, companies
increasingly had at their disposal a labor pool that was more
experienced than ever before.
�A generation ago you had to hire out of college and train people,�
Cappelli explains, singling out firms like IBM and General Electric,
which aimed to retain employees for life. �Nobody hopped jobs. But as
companies started to lay people off, and there were lots of skilled
people around and lots of white-collar workers, lots of managers, you
could sort of hire whoever you wanted. It wasn�t very hard. So you
maybe didn�t have to be that sophisticated at recruiting and
selection� anymore.
Some of the pressures that touched off the cycle of layoffs are well
known, like increased global competition, and the perceived need for
companies to respond more nimbly to changing consumer preferences
(which could make replacing employees seem more efficient than taking
the time to train them). But there are other salient factors that are
underappreciated. Cappelli outlined one in a 1997 volume titled
Changes at Work, in a chapter co-written with Wharton�s Michael Useem,
now the William and Jacalyn Egan Professor of Management: the growing
concentration of stock ownership among large institutional holders,
like pension funds.
Traditionally, such investors expressed dissatisfaction with a
company�s performance by simply selling their stock. But with the rise
of indexed holdings�in which funds are invested according to preset
formulas (for instance, mirroring the composition of the S&P 500)�and
the sheer size of share blocks under ownership, it became harder for
big institutional investors to shed unwanted stock positions.
Consequently, they instead began pressuring companies to change, with
a narrow focus on driving up share performance over shorter time
periods.
�Institutional holders were now quicker to insist that the company
find new strategies and structures to produce,� Cappelli and Useem
noted. �And the formulas they found concentrated on restructuring the
companies and slashing jobs. One study of share-price reactions to
company layoff announcements from 1979 to 1987 illustrates the thrust
of the investors� message for would-be restructurers. In the days
immediately following layoff announcements announced as part of
general restructurings, stock prices rose an average 4 percent.�
Concurrently, the ranks of experienced job-seekers swelled, making
decisions to fire still easier to justify, since the labor market was
flush with talent. This dynamic persists today�with a perverse twist.
Waiting for Superman
In the olden days, as Cappelli sketches them, HR departments served as
�reality testers.� Say a line manager at a big firm got permission to
hire a new worker. �He�d say, �We need somebody with an MBA for this.�
And the HR people would say, �You really need an MBA degree for that?
Are you sure? What�s important in this job?� � They�d be pushing back
a bit in terms of the job description.�
This injected a degree of flexibility into job criteria.
�Those guys are gone now,� Cappelli continues. �Now the requisition
often goes automatically to somebody who inserts it into the
applicant-tracking system. So they kind of take the wish list from the
hiring manager, who is often looking for Superman�the Purple Squirrel,
as they say in IT�something that doesn�t exist.�
Unless maybe it does, what with all the talent among the ranks of the
unemployed. When there are three or four job-seekers for every
vacancy�and some postings draw applicants by the hundred�firms have an
understandable incentive to wait for a dream candidate to show up. And
ideally, a dream candidate who expresses a low salary requirement.
In that Manpower survey, 11 percent of the employers reporting skill
shortages chalked it up to applicants unwilling to accept job offers
at the wages companies were willing to pay.
�Given what we know about the difficulty all respondents have in
recognizing problems that are actually their own fault,� Cappelli
writes, �the real percentage of employers who have difficulty hiring
because they are not offering adequate wages is likely to be much,
much higher.�
He cites the case of a parts-supply company whose inability to fill 40
machinist vacancies had been estimated to be dragging sales down by 20
percent. �The jobs reportedly paid $13 per hour, which might sound
good. But the Bureau of Labor Statistics reports that the average wage
for such jobs is more than $19 per hour,� Cappelli notes. �Would that
have had some effect on the companies� ability to find candidates? You
bet.�
But, again, that has little to do with a skills shortage. �A real
shortage means not being able to find appropriate candidates at
market-clearing wages,� Cappelli noted in The Wall Street Journal. In
his book he adds, �When I hear stories about the difficulty in finding
applicants, I always ask employers if they have tried raising wages,
which in many cases have not gone up in years. The response is
virtually always that they believe their wages are high enough.�
And Waiting�
As the case of that parts-supply company shows, there is often a cost
associated with letting positions remain vacant. But most of the time
it�s hard to quantify�whereas the benefit of not paying another salary
is as clear as day. That�s another source of grit in the gears of
hiring.
In one sense, you can trace it all the way back to what typically
spurs companies to post job openings in the first place. It is not, as
an economist of the rational-choice school might suppose, a
determination that a new worker will add more profit than expense to
the balance sheet. Arguments to hire, Cappelli says, �mainly come from
people complaining about overwork.�
In some cases�perhaps especially when high unemployment keeps existing
workers docile�the complaints come from a company�s own customers.
Cappelli recently came across a financial-services company whose
retail customers were actually signing petitions asking the firm to
deploy more service people.
The prevailing approach among American companies, as Cappelli
characterizes it, has been, �Let�s just cut staff until we notice
blood. But part of the problem, too, is that the accounting systems
internally have not been sophisticated enough to notice when there is
blood.� He suggests that the development of performance metrics
capable of measuring the cost of lost opportunities, or of burnout
among existing workers trying to do two jobs at once, would redound to
the benefit of job-seekers and bottom lines alike.
Chris Ittner, the Ernst & Young Professor of Accounting at Wharton,
has a more skeptical view.
�In accounting, we don�t account well for intangible assets,
period�but with people especially,� he agrees. �Firms have a hard time
even finding out what kind of payback they get from training their
employees.�
But he deems it unlikely that American companies are suffering from a
collective failure to realize the moneymaking potential of ramping up
their payrolls. If profits in a given sector were being held down by
overly lean workforces, he suggests �there would be an arbitrage
opportunity.� In other words, you�d expect one or several companies to
accelerate hiring as a way to gain an advantage over their
competitors�and if that strategy panned out, their competitors would
likely follow suit. But there�s little evidence of that happening.
Ittner observes further that hiring is inherently risky.
�If you choose to hire, you�re stuck with that decision�because it�s
not that easy to fire people. And firms don�t want to make an
investment when there�s so much uncertainty about what will happen in
the future,� he says. �So you might be willing to accept the cost of
lost productivity or lost sales.�
A Blind Alley
In virtually every discussion about America�s jobs crisis, a familiar
solution is trotted out. If only we could get more people through
college�whether that means a bachelor�s or two-year associate�s
degree�we�d have a workforce matched to employers� needs.
On an individual basis, this advice holds water. College graduates
have substantially more success in the job market than their
less-schooled peers. (For Penn alumni, the picture is rosier still.
For a snapshot of how Quakers have been faring in recent years, see
chart). The Penn Alumni Career Network is another potentially valuable
resource: www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/pacnet.)
On a societal basis, however, there are good reasons to doubt the
efficacy of that prescription. Cappelli worries about over-education.
Citing survey data, he points out that many American workers have�and
have paid for�more education than what�s required by the jobs they are
doing. That can be viewed as a deadweight loss for the economy at
large, and it�s getting worse.
�In order to prove to an employer that you can do this job,� he
explains, �maybe you get an extra degree. So rather than two years
experience as a pharmaceutical rep, I go get a master�s degree in
pharmaceutical rep work. In Philadelphia, there�s a local business
school that has an MBA degree in pharmaceutical marketing, a highly
specific degree which you never would have seen a generation ago. And
it�s an expensive way to get the experience. It�s a time-consuming
way. And I�m sort of over-relying on academic institutions to get
this.�
From an employer�s perspective, this approach beats �growing all your
own talent,� as the IBMs and GEs of yesteryear did. After all, a
company invests in training its employees at the peril of having them
hired away by a competitor who avoids the expense. So even if it has
to pay a premium for a candidate who has an equivalent academic
credential, that makes more sense.
The problem, as Cappelli sees it, is that this dynamic has fueled an
�explosion of certifications� in the US, the majority of them provided
by for-profit organizations and vocational schools. Aside from the
incentive this creates for people to pursue more credentials than jobs
require, just to �muscle out� other job-seekers, Cappelli wonders if
there may be an underappreciated downside for the employers
themselves.
The rise of credentials as a basis for hiring �makes people more
plug-and-play,� Cappelli points out.
�You see, for example, in places like nursing and health care, where
credentials are everything now, that it makes it easier to pop new
people in and pop other people out. Maybe that�s a good thing. It does
mean for an employer, though, that everything becomes more like a
profession. And your ability to get things done differently might
become a little harder. And to get practices that are unique to you, a
little harder.
�For example, say I�m an IT person working in your company, and you�d
like me to get good at your legacy computing system. Should I do that?
What�s in it for me? It�s risky, because I�m going to spend a couple
years working on this system, and I don�t get any credential out of it
that�s useful elsewhere. So maybe I don�t even take that job�I�d much
prefer to work for less for somebody else where I get a credential at
the end, which is transferable.�
Part of the appeal of a �plug-and-play� approach to employers is the
sense that it affords them flexibility. �If we�re going to change our
products or change our strategy,� Cappelli explains, �we just get rid
of everybody, and then we�ll hire in a new group, with different
skills.�
Yet �some of this is not completely demonstrated by evidence,� he
adds. �A generation ago you would have heard companies like IBM talk
about how lifetime employment gave them flexibility�because people
internally didn�t resist changes. You would change your products, you
would retrain the people�off you go.�
Still, the rise of vocational certification leaves the brunt of the
risk on job-seekers. Cappelli has learned this the hard way, which is
perhaps ironic considering his area of expertise. When his own son
couldn�t find a job with his college degree in classics, he �looked to
one of the technical fields in health care that had been identified as
hot, where employers (the media assured) were struggling to hire,�
Cappelli writes. �He went back to school, at a community college, and
got a skills certificate in that field�only to discover that it was
not hot.�
If that fate can meet the college-educated son of a world-renowned
expert in human resources, it may be time for the rest of us to look
for another solution.
A Way Out
�The United States is at the moment the only country in the world
where the notion that employers are simply the consumers of skills is
seriously considered,� Cappelli declares in Why Good People Can�t Get
Jobs.
�The great puzzle for people outside the US in the workforce world,�
he adds in conversation, �is why we don�t have apprenticeship
programs. Every other industrial country has got them. And in the
countries that are emerging, like China, a big priority is to develop
these programs ... And we don�t have them.�
Nor are we likely to get them, he says�at least not at the national
level. One reason is the sheer scale of the US economy. �In smaller
countries in Europe,� Cappelli observes, �you could get the key
employers in a room together and say, �Okay, guys, we�ve got to step
up here.�� That�s impossible here.
But he contends that employers have a lot to gain from embracing what
you might call apprenticeship writ small.
�What employers are complaining they can�t find now are not things the
schools can deliver. They want work-based skills. They want the kinds
of things that you can�t learn in a classroom. How do you manage a
team of people? How do you implement this particular software? And we
shouldn�t expect the schools to try to do that. It�s not very
efficient. It�s much easier to teach somebody as an apprentice in the
field.�
He insists that the way forward for many employers is to relax job
requirements (or at least pry them from the vise grip of recruiting
software) and re-shoulder some of the training burden that they used
to assume�and that some firms still do, albeit in a slightly different
way.
�If you look at the consulting companies, for example, or around Penn
you look at the investment banks, they have very high rates of
turnover,� he notes. �The investment banks lose all their junior
analysts. And yet it works fine for them. Now, why is that? Because
they�re basically treating these folks as apprentices. They�re
learning a lot, but they�re learning as they are working and as they
contribute. So it�s a model of learning that�s different than the old
corporate model, where you�d start out with 18 months of classroom
training, and then after that we�d slowly give you work experience.
�At law firms, consulting firms, accounting firms, you start
contributing the day you arrive. And you�re learning as you go. So the
model can work, and you can see it all over the place in parts of the
private sector. And I think the parts that are not doing it have just
got to figure out how to incorporate that pay-as-you-go model. It�s
not rocket science.�
Similarly, he advocates tightening connections between employers and
schools by way of co-op programs and collaborations that integrate
classroom and work experience. Such arrangements in other countries,
and when they�ve been tried here, work wonders for everyone involved.
But �the constraint on building these arrangements has always been on
the employer side: how to get them to engage in these efforts when the
payoff to them is not immediate,� Cappelli writes.
�The present, debilitating disconnect between job supply and job
demand,� he adds, �suggests that the time has finally come.�
As he put it in a presentation at the 2012 World Economic Forum in
Davos, Switzerland, �The question for us � especially businesspeople,
is, What are we going to do?
�Will we stand back and expect our most important asset to simply show
up when we want it? Or are we going to get engaged in the supply chain
and try and do something to get the workers we want?�
Download this article (PDF)
Illustration by Graham Roumieu
WEB EXCLUSIVE:
A BRIEF HISTORY OF HIRING
Walter Licht on the skills gap and what
companies used to do about it.
�2013 The Pennsylvania Gazette
--
"Owning a sailboat is like marrying a nymphomaniac. You don�t want to do that
but it is great if your best friend does. That way you get all the benefits without any of the upkeep"
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
news13
Dec 22, 2013, 6:02:05 AM12/22/13
to
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:59 -0800, Gunner Asch wrote:
> http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
>
>
>
>
> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can’t
> find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can this
> be happening? Wharton’s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
Nope, just the same old shit.
> http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
>
>
>
>
> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can’t
> find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can this
> be happening? Wharton’s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
rbowman
Dec 22, 2013, 1:06:01 PM12/22/13
to
Gunner Asch wrote:
> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can’t
> find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
> this be happening? Wharton’s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
He may have some good points in the overall picture, but from personal
> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can’t
> find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
> this be happening? Wharton’s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
experience trying to hire entry level programmers, the kids aren't getting
their money's worth from the colleges. Most of the candidates who were hired
did not have a degree in the field, or in some cases any degree at all. They
had taught themselves and some had done fairly significant projects on their
own. That's what we are looking for -- people who can reach out, find the
answers about new technologies, and get the job done. They are scarcer than
Cappelli imagines.
Pete S
Dec 22, 2013, 2:07:38 PM12/22/13
to
An interesting, albeit lengthy article.
I read the whole thing, looking for the major reality that employers face
every day that makes the problem so tough:
"How do I choose a candidate who really wants to work, not just one who
wants a the biggest paycheck they can get for as little effort as possible."
If you take a random sample of 100 people, half of them will be below
average at anything you choose to analyze. If any of you reading this were
hiring a person to do a job, wouldn't you want an employee who was at least
in the upper half? So, I offer you, employers have developed "coded" ways
to eliminate applicants that avoid telling them they were in that lower half
or so.
Pete Stanaitis
---------------
I read the whole thing, looking for the major reality that employers face
every day that makes the problem so tough:
"How do I choose a candidate who really wants to work, not just one who
wants a the biggest paycheck they can get for as little effort as possible."
If you take a random sample of 100 people, half of them will be below
average at anything you choose to analyze. If any of you reading this were
hiring a person to do a job, wouldn't you want an employee who was at least
in the upper half? So, I offer you, employers have developed "coded" ways
to eliminate applicants that avoid telling them they were in that lower half
or so.
Pete Stanaitis
---------------
Pete S
Dec 22, 2013, 3:05:44 PM12/22/13
to
I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has about
10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about 35 don't
have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they are going to
have real trouble in the future".
I wonder how the automated employment programs deal with that.
Pete Stanaitis
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:bhoo0a...@mid.individual.net...
10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about 35 don't
have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they are going to
have real trouble in the future".
I wonder how the automated employment programs deal with that.
Pete Stanaitis
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:bhoo0a...@mid.individual.net...
rbowman
Dec 22, 2013, 4:15:46 PM12/22/13
to
Pete S wrote:
> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has about
> 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about 35 don't
> have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they are going to
> have real trouble in the future".
Programmers, and I used that as a generic grouping for the fancier sounding
> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has about
> 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about 35 don't
> have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they are going to
> have real trouble in the future".
titles like 'software engineer', 'IT professional' and so forth, are
notorious for a lack of social skills.
My most painful interview was with a guy who had completely blown a
telephone interview with another manager. He looked good on paper though, so
we brought him in for a face to face. Another manager and I sat there for
about a half hour throwing out leading questions hoping for more than more
than two words in reply and it never happened.
Stormin Mormon
Dec 22, 2013, 4:20:31 PM12/22/13
to
I've heard that the text messaging generation
lacks people skills. KWIM? LOL; OMG. UR2QT!
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
lacks people skills. KWIM? LOL; OMG. UR2QT!
.
Christopher A. Young
Learn about Jesus
www.lds.org
.
Gunner Asch
Dec 22, 2013, 4:33:56 PM12/22/13
to
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 11:06:01 -0700, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
wrote:
And HR wouldnt hire your best guys because they have no degrees...or
"minimal" degrees.
Ive been involved in hiring and fireing a significant number of people
over the years..and when they come in and start spewing off their
degrees..Ill make sure they actually can do Stuff. Far too many have
degrees..and little or no ability or knowledge of the job.
wrote:
"minimal" degrees.
Ive been involved in hiring and fireing a significant number of people
over the years..and when they come in and start spewing off their
degrees..Ill make sure they actually can do Stuff. Far too many have
degrees..and little or no ability or knowledge of the job.
Gunner Asch
Dec 22, 2013, 4:35:43 PM12/22/13
to
actually do the job.
Jim Wilkins
Dec 22, 2013, 5:37:21 PM12/22/13
to
"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
news:bhp346...@mid.individual.net...
horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
BeamMeUpScotty
Dec 22, 2013, 6:41:36 PM12/22/13
to
On 12/22/2013 4:33 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 11:06:01 -0700, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Gunner Asch wrote:
>>
>>> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 11:06:01 -0700, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Gunner Asch wrote:
>>
>>> find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
>>> this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
>>
>> He may have some good points in the overall picture, but from personal
>> experience trying to hire entry level programmers, the kids aren't getting
>> their money's worth from the colleges. Most of the candidates who were hired
>> did not have a degree in the field, or in some cases any degree at all. They
>> had taught themselves and some had done fairly significant projects on their
>> own. That's what we are looking for -- people who can reach out, find the
>> answers about new technologies, and get the job done. They are scarcer than
>> Cappelli imagines.
>>
>>
> And HR wouldnt hire your best guys because they have no degrees...or
> "minimal" degrees.
Because college is a cult and you only help the other cult members.
>> He may have some good points in the overall picture, but from personal
>> experience trying to hire entry level programmers, the kids aren't getting
>> their money's worth from the colleges. Most of the candidates who were hired
>> did not have a degree in the field, or in some cases any degree at all. They
>> had taught themselves and some had done fairly significant projects on their
>> own. That's what we are looking for -- people who can reach out, find the
>> answers about new technologies, and get the job done. They are scarcer than
>> Cappelli imagines.
>>
>>
> And HR wouldnt hire your best guys because they have no degrees...or
> "minimal" degrees.
BeamMeUpScotty
Dec 22, 2013, 6:44:28 PM12/22/13
to
do the job?
Jim Wilkins
Dec 22, 2013, 7:34:26 PM12/22/13
to
"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in
message news:YMKtu.78021$9X3....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
That may be true, but a college degree demonstrates a level of
perseverance that many people lack.
message news:YMKtu.78021$9X3....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
perseverance that many people lack.
news13
Dec 22, 2013, 8:38:08 PM12/22/13
to
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 18:44:28 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> Are you hiring entertainment for the Christmas party or someone that can
> do the job?
That explains a few people I've had to work with. Funny, it is something
> Are you hiring entertainment for the Christmas party or someone that can
> do the job?
I encountered in my career early, but it was my supervisor that was the
entertainment.
Steve from Colorado
Dec 22, 2013, 9:08:10 PM12/22/13
to
On 12/22/2013 1:05 PM, Pete S wrote:
> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has
> about 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about
> 35 don't have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they
> are going to have real trouble in the future".
>
> I wonder how the automated employment programs deal with that.
>
> Pete Stanaitis
I suppose that "social skills" are a very subjective thing. I don't get
> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has
> about 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about
> 35 don't have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they
> are going to have real trouble in the future".
>
> I wonder how the automated employment programs deal with that.
>
> Pete Stanaitis
the impression that people under the age of 35 are mostly boorish rubes,
do you?
--
Political correctness does not legislate tolerance; it only organizes
hatred. Jacques Barzu
rbowman
Dec 22, 2013, 9:15:19 PM12/22/13
to
BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> Are you hiring entertainment for the Christmas party or someone that can
> do the job?
Doing the job implies communication, however rudimentary, with other
> Are you hiring entertainment for the Christmas party or someone that can
> do the job?
programmers, the project managers who are refining the client's
requirements, and the quality assurance people. It doesn't have to be
verbose, eloquent, or witty but 'yes' amd 'no' doesn't get it.
There is also the comfort level of the other employees. Again, you don't
expect everyone to be best buddies but there is a point where people can get
nervous.
rbowman
Dec 22, 2013, 9:21:20 PM12/22/13
to
news13 wrote:
> That explains a few people I've had to work with. Funny, it is something
> I encountered in my career early, but it was my supervisor that was the
> entertainment.
I worked for one company where the founder found the old helium trick
> That explains a few people I've had to work with. Funny, it is something
> I encountered in my career early, but it was my supervisor that was the
> entertainment.
amusing. The core of the company was composed of Ph.D level chemists and
some of them lived up to the nutty professor stereotype.
rbowman
Dec 22, 2013, 9:32:24 PM12/22/13
to
Jim Wilkins wrote:
> That may be true, but a college degree demonstrates a level of
> perseverance that many people lack.
The most important thing about having a degree is you can say how useless it
> That may be true, but a college degree demonstrates a level of
> perseverance that many people lack.
is and nobody can accuse you of sour grapes. I really shouldn't say useless.
I did learn some things I have used in later life and more that I've never
had occasion to use.
Gunner Asch
Dec 22, 2013, 10:34:20 PM12/22/13
to
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 14:15:46 -0700, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
wrote:
One of my friends is a programmer..and by all accounts..a very good
one. He ran the computer system at Cal State Tustin for several
years..until he broke down and started living in his van....
wrote:
one. He ran the computer system at Cal State Tustin for several
years..until he broke down and started living in his van....
Gunner Asch
Dec 22, 2013, 10:43:35 PM12/22/13
to
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 19:08:10 -0700, Steve from Colorado
<Steve_de...@cocks.net> wrote:
>On 12/22/2013 1:05 PM, Pete S wrote:
>> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has
>> about 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about
>> 35 don't have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they
>> are going to have real trouble in the future".
>>
>> I wonder how the automated employment programs deal with that.
>>
>> Pete Stanaitis
>
>I suppose that "social skills" are a very subjective thing. I don't get
>the impression that people under the age of 35 are mostly boorish rubes,
>do you?
Id say it was down around the 25 yr old level at the oldest. By the
<Steve_de...@cocks.net> wrote:
>On 12/22/2013 1:05 PM, Pete S wrote:
>> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has
>> about 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about
>> 35 don't have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they
>> are going to have real trouble in the future".
>>
>> I wonder how the automated employment programs deal with that.
>>
>> Pete Stanaitis
>
>I suppose that "social skills" are a very subjective thing. I don't get
>the impression that people under the age of 35 are mostly boorish rubes,
>do you?
time they hit 26..they are turning into self centered pricks..which
they grow out of in another 5-8 yrs...mostly. Thats after the first
couple kids dropped out of the womb and they suddenly have other
things to amuse... besides themselves
Gunner
Gunner Asch
Dec 22, 2013, 10:44:16 PM12/22/13
to
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 18:41:36 -0500, BeamMeUpScotty
<ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote:
>On 12/22/2013 4:33 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 11:06:01 -0700, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>
>>>> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
<ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote:
>On 12/22/2013 4:33 PM, Gunner Asch wrote:
>> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 11:06:01 -0700, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Gunner Asch wrote:
>>>
>>>> find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
>>>> this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
>>>
>>> He may have some good points in the overall picture, but from personal
>>> experience trying to hire entry level programmers, the kids aren't getting
>>> their money's worth from the colleges. Most of the candidates who were hired
>>> did not have a degree in the field, or in some cases any degree at all. They
>>> had taught themselves and some had done fairly significant projects on their
>>> own. That's what we are looking for -- people who can reach out, find the
>>> answers about new technologies, and get the job done. They are scarcer than
>>> Cappelli imagines.
>>>
>>>
>> And HR wouldnt hire your best guys because they have no degrees...or
>> "minimal" degrees.
>
>Because college is a cult and you only help the other cult members.
>
Some truth to that indeed.
>>> He may have some good points in the overall picture, but from personal
>>> experience trying to hire entry level programmers, the kids aren't getting
>>> their money's worth from the colleges. Most of the candidates who were hired
>>> did not have a degree in the field, or in some cases any degree at all. They
>>> had taught themselves and some had done fairly significant projects on their
>>> own. That's what we are looking for -- people who can reach out, find the
>>> answers about new technologies, and get the job done. They are scarcer than
>>> Cappelli imagines.
>>>
>>>
>> And HR wouldnt hire your best guys because they have no degrees...or
>> "minimal" degrees.
>
>Because college is a cult and you only help the other cult members.
>
Gunner Asch
Dec 22, 2013, 10:45:55 PM12/22/13
to
Ive known any number of those who suffer from forms of retardation who
would make that easily. With a smile on their faces.
Im not sure however..that Id hire them for tasks beyond pushing a
broom.
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 12:35:16 AM12/23/13
to
Gunner Asch wrote:
> One of my friends is a programmer..and by all accounts..a very good
> one. He ran the computer system at Cal State Tustin for several
> years..until he broke down and started living in his van....
I lived in my pickup for a while. It wasn't a breakdown I just wanted to do
> One of my friends is a programmer..and by all accounts..a very good
> one. He ran the computer system at Cal State Tustin for several
> years..until he broke down and started living in his van....
something different for a while. NH was getting a little crowded and I
wanted to see the west. I got back east often enough when I was trucking to
remind me why I didn't want to go back to live.
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 12:38:51 AM12/23/13
to
Gunner Asch wrote:
> Some truth to that indeed.
That old boy stuff used to be true for the Ivy League colleges but I don't
> Some truth to that indeed.
know if it's as much so today.
BeamMeUpScotty
Dec 23, 2013, 12:59:06 AM12/23/13
to
"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in
message news:YMKtu.78021$9X3....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
message news:YMKtu.78021$9X3....@en-nntp-03.dc1.easynews.com...
That may be true, but a college degree demonstrates a level of
perseverance that many people lack.
And the ability to eat shit is a marketable skill.
perseverance that many people lack.
BeamMeUpScotty
Dec 23, 2013, 12:59:48 AM12/23/13
to
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 4:24:34 AM12/23/13
to
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:59 -0800, Gunner Asch
<gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
>
>As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
>find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
>this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
>
>BY TREY POPP
>As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
>find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
>this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
>
>
<snip>
==========================
Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
A white collar version of Vinnie's observations.
Another aspect that was touched on, is the people doing the
hiring don't know what/who they want or why, and in the
current climate are terrified of making a mistake, so look
for reasons not to hire, rather that to hire and possibly
make a mistake.
American management is still number one in at least one
area, that is making excuses. Nothing is ever their fault
or responsibility. One question that should be asked is
what did you do with the trained and qualified people you
used to have?
It will never happen, but it would be nice if the next time
one of the overpaid gasbags is ranting on about the lack of
good help to a Congressional committee, they would be forced
to reveal how many applications they have had for each of
the "unfillable" positions and why these weren't employed.
A statest response would be to require all Fortune 1000
companies to file open position requisitions with the
government by DOT [dictionary of occupational titles] or
O*NET code, and if the position isn't filled in 30 days by
the companies own efforts, they are supplied with a list of
candidates from the local area that meet the DOT/O*NET and
other written requirements. If the company still can't make
up their mind in another 30 days, they are assigned a new
employee, from the list, unless they can objectively
justify a licit reason why none of the candidates is
suitable. I.e. too black, too short, too female, too young,
too old are not licit reasons, and other requirements such
as speaking Urdu or Mandarin must have some relationship to
the position.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary_of_Occupational_Titles
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_Information_Network
http://www.occupationalinfo.org/
If employees are to be standardized replacements, then
standardized nomenclature should be used, i.e. the
DOT/O*NET. It seems to work in the armed forces using MOS
classifications.
Gunner Asch
Dec 23, 2013, 5:45:13 AM12/23/13
to
Gunner
mike
Dec 23, 2013, 6:12:36 AM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 1:24 AM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:59 -0800, Gunner Asch
> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
>>
>> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:59 -0800, Gunner Asch
> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
>>
>> find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
>> this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
If you believe in the Peter Principle, which I do,
Virtually everybody is underqualified for the position they have.
Do you really want the government to force you to hire someone
based on their inflated resume?
All employers want superior people. Problem is that half of
us are below average, and average is way below what is needed
to compete.
Jim Wilkins
Dec 23, 2013, 7:19:20 AM12/23/13
to
"BeamMeUpScotty" <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> wrote in
message news:xjQtu.239663$rp1.1...@en-nntp-13.dc1.easynews.com...
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0089941/quotes
"And if you could do that, if you could do that, you could be
president of Chase Manhattan..."
message news:xjQtu.239663$rp1.1...@en-nntp-13.dc1.easynews.com...
"And if you could do that, if you could do that, you could be
president of Chase Manhattan..."
Stormin Mormon
Dec 23, 2013, 10:01:07 AM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 6:12 AM, mike wrote:
> If you believe in the Peter Principle, which I do,
> Virtually everybody is underqualified for the position they have.
>
> Do you really want the government to force you to hire someone
> based on their inflated resume?
>
> All employers want superior people. Problem is that half of
> us are below average, and average is way below what is needed
> to compete.
And you'd likely remember J. Lawrence Peter's
> If you believe in the Peter Principle, which I do,
> Virtually everybody is underqualified for the position they have.
>
> Do you really want the government to force you to hire someone
> based on their inflated resume?
>
> All employers want superior people. Problem is that half of
> us are below average, and average is way below what is needed
> to compete.
"Maturity quotient" where the observer would
calculate the percent of the employed who had
reached their level of incompetence.
I think in the US Gov, the MQ is rather high.
--
Joe Gwinn
Dec 23, 2013, 10:22:39 AM12/23/13
to
In article <ncufb9lrs2g8ikekv...@4ax.com>, F. George
courses. One involved business downturns and shrinking the company.
We made sure to have a proportional shrink in HR functions, because
obviously HR would have less to do. Always good to remind them that
they too have skin in the game.
Won't work. Employers are not stupid. They simply won't publish the
job opening, precisely to avoid letting the Gov usurp private
employment decisions. Hiring will revert to the traditional
friend-of-a-friend approach.
Do you remember "intractable structural unemployment" in Europe from a
decade or two ago? It was intractable because it had become almost
impossible to reduce manpower, so companies had become *very* reluctant
to hire - it was literally easier to divorce your spouse than to let an
employee go. Reluctance to hire was the perfectly rational response.
Joe Gwinn
McDuffee <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:59 -0800, Gunner Asch
> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
> >
> >As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
> >find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
> >this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
> >
> >BY TREY POPP
> >
> <snip>
>
> ==========================
>
> Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
> does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
> it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
> the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
Back when I was a line manager, we took various how-to-be-a-manager
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:59 -0800, Gunner Asch
> <gunne...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
> >
> >As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can�t
> >find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can
> >this be happening? Wharton�s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
> >
> >BY TREY POPP
> >
> <snip>
>
> ==========================
>
> Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
> does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
> it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
> the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
courses. One involved business downturns and shrinking the company.
We made sure to have a proportional shrink in HR functions, because
obviously HR would have less to do. Always good to remind them that
they too have skin in the game.
job opening, precisely to avoid letting the Gov usurp private
employment decisions. Hiring will revert to the traditional
friend-of-a-friend approach.
Do you remember "intractable structural unemployment" in Europe from a
decade or two ago? It was intractable because it had become almost
impossible to reduce manpower, so companies had become *very* reluctant
to hire - it was literally easier to divorce your spouse than to let an
employee go. Reluctance to hire was the perfectly rational response.
Joe Gwinn
Jeff M
Dec 23, 2013, 11:19:02 AM12/23/13
to
On 12/22/2013 3:20 PM, Stormin Mormon wrote:
> I've heard that the text messaging generation
> lacks people skills. KWIM? LOL; OMG. UR2QT!
Good one! Made me laugh.
--
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in
moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification
for selfishness.” - John Kenneth Galbraith
> I've heard that the text messaging generation
> lacks people skills. KWIM? LOL; OMG. UR2QT!
Good one! Made me laugh.
--
“The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in
moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification
for selfishness.” - John Kenneth Galbraith
Jeff M
Dec 23, 2013, 11:20:11 AM12/23/13
to
--
�The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in
moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification
for selfishness.� - John Kenneth Galbraith
Jeff M
Dec 23, 2013, 11:30:34 AM12/23/13
to
all, despite lacking a college degree, then?
pyotr filipivich
Dec 23, 2013, 11:53:07 AM12/23/13
to
"Jim Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> on Sun, 22 Dec 2013 19:34:26
-0500 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
The same used to be said of High School Diplomas. Now, the
majority of Bachelor Degrees are like a High School Diploma - not a
proof of ability or even of tenacity, but a sign that they could show
up often enough not to get 'failed'.
>
--
pyotr filipivich.
Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
-0500 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
majority of Bachelor Degrees are like a High School Diploma - not a
proof of ability or even of tenacity, but a sign that they could show
up often enough not to get 'failed'.
>
--
pyotr filipivich.
Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 12:19:43 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:12:36 -0800, mike
<ham...@netzero.net> wrote:
> Do you really want the government to force you to hire someone based on their inflated resume?
Operationally how is this any different than allowing HR to
<ham...@netzero.net> wrote:
> Do you really want the government to force you to hire someone based on their inflated resume?
"muddle through," and hire off the same inflated
resumes/vita? This would at least get the jobs filled and
people back to work.
Don't want to have your employees assigned? Then hire on
your own in a reasonable time frame or don't claim a opening
where one does not exist. [skills/labor banking]
Can't find people to meet your job requirements? Then
reengineer/restructure the job and change the requirements.
Why design a product that requires 500ksi yield material and
then p*** and moan when you can't find any?
FWIW -- I worked in industry for 25 years, and
votech/academic for 25 years with some overlap [now retired]
and in all that time I never saw a company that was in fact
limited by employee qualifications unless the company was
trying to productize a perpetual motion machine or some
such. A few individuals were in "over their head," but in
the aggregate the business staffing was adequate if not
optimal from a technical perspective. When an organization
is mismanaged by individuals having "visions," lack of
employee qualifications is not the problem.
<snip>
>All employers want superior people.
<snip>
People in hell want ice water to.
<snip>
>Problem is that half of
>us are below average, and average is way below what is needed
>to compete.
<snip>
>us are below average, and average is way below what is needed
>to compete.
This may be correct, but if so we are all screwed.
It is no more rational to design/allow a socio-economic
system that only a decreasing minority can function/prosper
in, than it does to design a machine that you have to be 7
feet tall and able to bench press 500 lbs to be able to
operate. This is unsustainable, even for the [lucky] ones
at the far top end of the bell curve, because the rest of us
won't stand for it.
--
Unka' George
"Gold is the money of kings,
silver is the money of gentlemen,
barter is the money of peasants,
but debt is the money of slaves"
-Norm Franz, "Money and Wealth in the New Millenium"
Rudy Canoza
Dec 23, 2013, 12:46:49 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 1:24 AM, F. George McDumpster blabbered:
> A statest response would be to require all Fortune 1000
> companies to file open position requisitions with the
> government by DOT [dictionary of occupational titles] or
> O*NET code, and if the position isn't filled in 30 days by
> the companies own efforts, they are supplied with a list of
> candidates from the local area that meet the DOT/O*NET and
> other written requirements. If the company still can't make
> up their mind in another 30 days, they are assigned a new
> employee, from the list, unless they can objectively
> justify a licit reason why none of the candidates is
> suitable.
Typical left-wing totalitarianism. Fuck off, we're not going to do it
that way. It's a shitty idea.
> A statest response would be to require all Fortune 1000
> companies to file open position requisitions with the
> government by DOT [dictionary of occupational titles] or
> O*NET code, and if the position isn't filled in 30 days by
> the companies own efforts, they are supplied with a list of
> candidates from the local area that meet the DOT/O*NET and
> other written requirements. If the company still can't make
> up their mind in another 30 days, they are assigned a new
> employee, from the list, unless they can objectively
> justify a licit reason why none of the candidates is
> suitable.
that way. It's a shitty idea.
Jim Wilkins
Dec 23, 2013, 12:53:49 PM12/23/13
to
"F. George McDuffee" <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote in
message news:6fqgb9tj4hi449rr4...@4ax.com...
there wasn't enough work in a particular specialty, like optics or
vibration analysis, to support a full time expert, and they couldn't
find anyone with enough multidisciplinary cross-training to fill that
need as well as several others. Consultants weren't a completely
satisfactory solution because they too didn't see how their specialty
fit into the whole electronic + mechanical picture and didn't have
time to learn.
I tried with some success to fill that need as a tech with wide
experience, though I'm limited by a lack of theoretical engineering
knowledge. I got a degree in chemistry and then was shifted into
electronics by the Army where I picked up a great deal of practical
knowledge but not too much basic theory. I then learned some of it OJT
but there were still significant holes, like filter design.
jsw
message news:6fqgb9tj4hi449rr4...@4ax.com...
>
> FWIW -- I worked in industry for 25 years, and
> votech/academic for 25 years with some overlap [now retired]
> and in all that time I never saw a company that was in fact
> limited by employee qualifications unless the company was
> trying to productize a perpetual motion machine or some
> such. A few individuals were in "over their head," but in
> the aggregate the business staffing was adequate if not
> optimal from a technical perspective. When an organization
> is mismanaged by individuals having "visions," lack of
> employee qualifications is not the problem.
In the R&D and prototyping business I've seen several instances where
> FWIW -- I worked in industry for 25 years, and
> votech/academic for 25 years with some overlap [now retired]
> and in all that time I never saw a company that was in fact
> limited by employee qualifications unless the company was
> trying to productize a perpetual motion machine or some
> such. A few individuals were in "over their head," but in
> the aggregate the business staffing was adequate if not
> optimal from a technical perspective. When an organization
> is mismanaged by individuals having "visions," lack of
> employee qualifications is not the problem.
there wasn't enough work in a particular specialty, like optics or
vibration analysis, to support a full time expert, and they couldn't
find anyone with enough multidisciplinary cross-training to fill that
need as well as several others. Consultants weren't a completely
satisfactory solution because they too didn't see how their specialty
fit into the whole electronic + mechanical picture and didn't have
time to learn.
I tried with some success to fill that need as a tech with wide
experience, though I'm limited by a lack of theoretical engineering
knowledge. I got a degree in chemistry and then was shifted into
electronics by the Army where I picked up a great deal of practical
knowledge but not too much basic theory. I then learned some of it OJT
but there were still significant holes, like filter design.
jsw
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 12:54:00 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:22:39 -0500, Joe Gwinn
<joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:
<snip>
If nothing else, this stops management from using the lame
excuse they can't find [good] help. If you are going to use
a shortage of qualified employees as an excuse, e.g. H1B
rationalizations, you have to show you adequately advertised
the job opening.
is manpower any different than machines, materials and
facilities? You think you can make money manufacturing
something and buy machines and factories to do so, you are
stuck with them, and may have to sell at a loss when things
turn down. Same thing with labor. Such considerations
minimize "boom and bust" inhale-exhale employment, and
promote stable, real value added operations/activities.
With unemployment in Europe approaching 50% for some age
groups (mainly young, entry level), it does not appear
loosening the employment protection laws accomplished very
much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_rate
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics
http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/jobless-generation/italy-youth-unemployment-hovers-around-35-percent
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/employment_unemployment_lfs/introduction
<joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:
<snip>
>Won't work. Employers are not stupid. They simply won't publish the
>job opening, precisely to avoid letting the Gov usurp private
>employment decisions. Hiring will revert to the traditional
>friend-of-a-friend approach.
<snip>
>job opening, precisely to avoid letting the Gov usurp private
>employment decisions. Hiring will revert to the traditional
>friend-of-a-friend approach.
If nothing else, this stops management from using the lame
excuse they can't find [good] help. If you are going to use
a shortage of qualified employees as an excuse, e.g. H1B
rationalizations, you have to show you adequately advertised
the job opening.
>
>Do you remember "intractable structural unemployment" in Europe from a
>decade or two ago? It was intractable because it had become almost
>impossible to reduce manpower, so companies had become *very* reluctant
>to hire - it was literally easier to divorce your spouse than to let an
>employee go. Reluctance to hire was the perfectly rational response.
If the MBA poobahs want to turn labor into a commodity, how
>Do you remember "intractable structural unemployment" in Europe from a
>decade or two ago? It was intractable because it had become almost
>impossible to reduce manpower, so companies had become *very* reluctant
>to hire - it was literally easier to divorce your spouse than to let an
>employee go. Reluctance to hire was the perfectly rational response.
is manpower any different than machines, materials and
facilities? You think you can make money manufacturing
something and buy machines and factories to do so, you are
stuck with them, and may have to sell at a loss when things
turn down. Same thing with labor. Such considerations
minimize "boom and bust" inhale-exhale employment, and
promote stable, real value added operations/activities.
With unemployment in Europe approaching 50% for some age
groups (mainly young, entry level), it does not appear
loosening the employment protection laws accomplished very
much.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_rate
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics
http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/jobless-generation/italy-youth-unemployment-hovers-around-35-percent
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/employment_unemployment_lfs/introduction
pyotr filipivich
Dec 23, 2013, 12:57:54 PM12/23/13
to
"Jim Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> on Sun, 22 Dec 2013 17:37:21
>news:bhp346...@mid.individual.net...
>horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
Why does the inability to be "chatty" have anything to do with his
website design skills?
The lack of the ability to make small talk proves nothing. After
all, as has been demonstrated repeatedly, if the ability to talk good
meant anything, we'd have a smoothly functioning Federal Government
"Health Insurance" Website.
-0500 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>"rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
>news:bhp346...@mid.individual.net...
>> Pete S wrote:
>>
>>> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has about
>>> 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about 35 don't
>>> have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they are going to
>>> have real trouble in the future".
>>
>>
>>> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He has about
>>> 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about 35 don't
>>> have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they are going to
>>> have real trouble in the future".
>>
>> Programmers, and I used that as a generic grouping for the fancier sounding
>> titles like 'software engineer', 'IT professional' and so forth, are
>> notorious for a lack of social skills.
>>
>> My most painful interview was with a guy who had completely blown a
>> telephone interview with another manager. He looked good on paper
>> though, so we brought him in for a face to face. Another manager and I sat
>> there for about a half hour throwing out leading questions hoping for more
>> than more than two words in reply and it never happened.
>>
>Perhaps he could do the logic and math, but you have to wonder what
>> titles like 'software engineer', 'IT professional' and so forth, are
>> notorious for a lack of social skills.
>>
>> My most painful interview was with a guy who had completely blown a
>> telephone interview with another manager. He looked good on paper
>> though, so we brought him in for a face to face. Another manager and I sat
>> there for about a half hour throwing out leading questions hoping for more
>> than more than two words in reply and it never happened.
>>
>horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
Why does the inability to be "chatty" have anything to do with his
website design skills?
The lack of the ability to make small talk proves nothing. After
all, as has been demonstrated repeatedly, if the ability to talk good
meant anything, we'd have a smoothly functioning Federal Government
"Health Insurance" Website.
pyotr filipivich
Dec 23, 2013, 12:57:54 PM12/23/13
to
BeamMeUpScotty <ThenDestro...@Blackhole.nebulx.com> on Sun, 22
Dec 2013 18:44:28 -0500 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>Are you hiring entertainment for the Christmas party or someone that can
>do the job?
Bingo.
Dec 2013 18:44:28 -0500 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>do the job?
Bingo.
pyotr filipivich
Dec 23, 2013, 12:57:54 PM12/23/13
to
Rudy Canoza <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> on Mon, 23 Dec 2013
09:46:49 -0800 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
It is a half assed idea.
If the companies would list with DOT/O*NET classification that is
one thing. But if they did that, they might not have the excuse to go
whining to the Feds to get more worker visas because they couldn't
find any American workers with the prerequisite "skill set".
09:46:49 -0800 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
If the companies would list with DOT/O*NET classification that is
one thing. But if they did that, they might not have the excuse to go
whining to the Feds to get more worker visas because they couldn't
find any American workers with the prerequisite "skill set".
Rudy Canoza
Dec 23, 2013, 12:59:00 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 9:54 AM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:22:39 -0500, Joe Gwinn
> <joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> Won't work. Employers are not stupid. They simply won't publish the
>> job opening, precisely to avoid letting the Gov usurp private
>> employment decisions. Hiring will revert to the traditional
>> friend-of-a-friend approach.
> <snip>
> If nothing else, this stops management from using the lame
> excuse they can't find [good] help.
It's just a shitty, wrong idea. Just drop it.
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:22:39 -0500, Joe Gwinn
> <joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> Won't work. Employers are not stupid. They simply won't publish the
>> job opening, precisely to avoid letting the Gov usurp private
>> employment decisions. Hiring will revert to the traditional
>> friend-of-a-friend approach.
> <snip>
> If nothing else, this stops management from using the lame
> excuse they can't find [good] help.
Jeff M
Dec 23, 2013, 1:04:00 PM12/23/13
to
dilemma. It is often necessary to become a sort of expert in their
client's business in order to represent and advise them correctly, and
to do so rapidly. This is where a broad and advanced liberal arts
education, especially one that didn't ignore STEM, really pays off. It
won't make you, e.g., a qualified "optics or vibration analysis"
engineer or scientist, but it should make you able to correctly
understand what they do, and how that ties into the client's larger
concerns. I once shared an office with a patent attorney. He had some
interesting stories along this line
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 1:06:14 PM12/23/13
to
FWIW -- Actually more of a Fascist approach/methodology. In
communist economies there are no private employers, only the
state, so all employment vacancies are filled by/through the
state, as it is the only [legal] employer.
Rudy Canoza
Dec 23, 2013, 1:08:25 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 10:06 AM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 09:46:49 -0800, Rudy Canoza
> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
>> On 12/23/2013 1:24 AM, F. George McDumpster blabbered:
>>
>>> A statest response would be to require all Fortune 1000
>>> companies to file open position requisitions with the
>>> government by DOT [dictionary of occupational titles] or
>>> O*NET code, and if the position isn't filled in 30 days by
>>> the companies own efforts, they are supplied with a list of
>>> candidates from the local area that meet the DOT/O*NET and
>>> other written requirements. If the company still can't make
>>> up their mind in another 30 days, they are assigned a new
>>> employee, from the list, unless they can objectively
>>> justify a licit reason why none of the candidates is
>>> suitable.
>>
>> Typical left-wing totalitarianism. Fuck off, we're not going to do it
>> that way. It's a shitty idea.
>
> Might well be Jon, but what do you suggest?
>
> FWIW -- Actually more of a Fascist approach/methodology.
This is why sensible people talk about left-wing fascism and it isn't a
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 09:46:49 -0800, Rudy Canoza
> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
>> On 12/23/2013 1:24 AM, F. George McDumpster blabbered:
>>
>>> A statest response would be to require all Fortune 1000
>>> companies to file open position requisitions with the
>>> government by DOT [dictionary of occupational titles] or
>>> O*NET code, and if the position isn't filled in 30 days by
>>> the companies own efforts, they are supplied with a list of
>>> candidates from the local area that meet the DOT/O*NET and
>>> other written requirements. If the company still can't make
>>> up their mind in another 30 days, they are assigned a new
>>> employee, from the list, unless they can objectively
>>> justify a licit reason why none of the candidates is
>>> suitable.
>>
>> Typical left-wing totalitarianism. Fuck off, we're not going to do it
>> that way. It's a shitty idea.
>
> Might well be Jon, but what do you suggest?
>
> FWIW -- Actually more of a Fascist approach/methodology.
contradiction.
Jim Wilkins
Dec 23, 2013, 1:31:45 PM12/23/13
to
"pyotr filipivich" <ph...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:04ugb91f31ta45ndu...@4ax.com...
what other people expect in communications. A good example is the lack
of any sign of life while a computer is testing newly added memory at
bootup.
jsw
news:04ugb91f31ta45ndu...@4ax.com...
> "Jim Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> on Sun, 22 Dec 2013 17:37:21
> -0500 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>>>
> -0500 typed in misc.survivalism the following:
>>>
>>Perhaps he could do the logic and math, but you have to wonder what
>>horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
>
> Why does the inability to be "chatty" have anything to do with his
> website design skills?
>
> The lack of the ability to make small talk proves nothing. After
> all, as has been demonstrated repeatedly, if the ability to talk
> good
> meant anything, we'd have a smoothly functioning Federal Government
> "Health Insurance" Website.
> --
> pyotr filipivich.
It's not their ability to chat, but their model of (and concern for)
>>horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
>
> Why does the inability to be "chatty" have anything to do with his
> website design skills?
>
> The lack of the ability to make small talk proves nothing. After
> all, as has been demonstrated repeatedly, if the ability to talk
> good
> meant anything, we'd have a smoothly functioning Federal Government
> "Health Insurance" Website.
> --
> pyotr filipivich.
what other people expect in communications. A good example is the lack
of any sign of life while a computer is testing newly added memory at
bootup.
jsw
dpb
Dec 23, 2013, 1:47:40 PM12/23/13
to
Iff'en the candidate were as nerdy as implied and only lacking
interpersonal skills, that still doesn't _necessarily_ imply wouldn't
have a very good handle on what interacting with a machine should be
like....in fact, one could reasonably expect there's where such an
individual would shine if given the opportunity.
--
Uncle Steve
Dec 23, 2013, 1:58:48 PM12/23/13
to
On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 05:37:21PM -0500, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> "rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
> news:bhp346...@mid.individual.net...
> > Pete S wrote:
> >
> >> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He
> >> has about
> >> 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about 35
> >> don't
> >> have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they are
> >> going to
> >> have real trouble in the future".
> >
> > Programmers, and I used that as a generic grouping for the fancier
> > sounding
> > titles like 'software engineer', 'IT professional' and so forth, are
> > notorious for a lack of social skills.
> >
> > My most painful interview was with a guy who had completely blown a
> > telephone interview with another manager. He looked good on paper
> > though, so
> > we brought him in for a face to face. Another manager and I sat
> > there for
> > about a half hour throwing out leading questions hoping for more
> > than more
> > than two words in reply and it never happened.
> >
>
> "rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
> news:bhp346...@mid.individual.net...
> > Pete S wrote:
> >
> >> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He
> >> has about
> >> 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about 35
> >> don't
> >> have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they are
> >> going to
> >> have real trouble in the future".
> >
> > Programmers, and I used that as a generic grouping for the fancier
> > sounding
> > titles like 'software engineer', 'IT professional' and so forth, are
> > notorious for a lack of social skills.
> >
> > My most painful interview was with a guy who had completely blown a
> > telephone interview with another manager. He looked good on paper
> > though, so
> > we brought him in for a face to face. Another manager and I sat
> > there for
> > about a half hour throwing out leading questions hoping for more
> > than more
> > than two words in reply and it never happened.
> >
>
> Perhaps he could do the logic and math, but you have to wonder what
> horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
> horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
responsible for user interface design? Programming shops farm out
bits and pieces of any non-trivial project to a team of programmers,
none of whom are necessarily involved with the architecture of the
code or the API design. And it is quite obvious from context that the
interviewee was not being interviewed for a top-tier position.
Where do you get your assumptions?
Regards,
Uncle Steve
--
The real motto of the military/intelligence security services in the
West is "Panem et Circenses". Their bread and circuses, while the
civilian population is directed to floor of the Colosseum. "This way
to the fantastic egress!"
Steve from Colorado
Dec 23, 2013, 3:42:51 PM12/23/13
to
"black hole" stealing manufacturing production from the rest of the
planet -- resulting in 50 percent unemployment from Tunisia to Egypt to
Greece and Spain and in the Rust Belt of the USA. Ross Perot was right
about the "giant sucking sound," although he was referencing the loss of
jobs due to NAFTA, which predated GATT, the WTO, and future "free trade"
agreements that have decimated the industrial base of much of the rest
of the world outside of China.
The U.S. economy is imploding in much the way the Russian economy
imploded after the collapse of the Soviet Union -- much of it by design,
IMHO. There always seem to be a rise of billionaires (and now,
trillionaires) who become obscenely rich and arise from the carcasses of
the wealthy nations they help loot by selling off the assets to, for
example, the PRC.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_rate
> http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics
> http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/jobless-generation/italy-youth-unemployment-hovers-around-35-percent
> http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/employment_unemployment_lfs/introduction
>
>
--
hatred. Jacques Barzu
David R. Birch
Dec 23, 2013, 4:42:13 PM12/23/13
to
David
David R. Birch
Dec 23, 2013, 4:51:52 PM12/23/13
to
communicate with the people you work with. If your boss asks you about
the project you've been assigned, "it's OK" is not going to cut it. And
no one said this was about anything as simple as website design, which,
apparently, "it takes a govt" to screw up.
David
Jim Wilkins
Dec 23, 2013, 5:37:36 PM12/23/13
to
"Uncle Steve" <stev...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:3e9489b3c5...@gmail.com...
> Uncle Steve
Experience, trying to use and update programs only the programmer (who
quit) could understand.
Windows 7 has several examples:
http://windowsforums.org/topic/4620-change-power-plan-in-windows-7-registry/
"HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\ControlPanel\NameSpace\{025A5937-A6BE-4686-A844-36FE4BEC8B6D}"
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc748940%28WS.10%29.aspx
The GUI version changes settings but they soon revert to the defaults.
7 Media Center is another that you change by editing the Registry.
http://community.mediabrowser.tv/permalinks/4971/registry-tweaks-for-media-center
This is what happens when you let programmers speak to users in their
own native language.
js
news:3e9489b3c5...@gmail.com...
Experience, trying to use and update programs only the programmer (who
quit) could understand.
Windows 7 has several examples:
http://windowsforums.org/topic/4620-change-power-plan-in-windows-7-registry/
"HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\ControlPanel\NameSpace\{025A5937-A6BE-4686-A844-36FE4BEC8B6D}"
http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc748940%28WS.10%29.aspx
The GUI version changes settings but they soon revert to the defaults.
7 Media Center is another that you change by editing the Registry.
http://community.mediabrowser.tv/permalinks/4971/registry-tweaks-for-media-center
This is what happens when you let programmers speak to users in their
own native language.
js
BeamMeUpScotty
Dec 23, 2013, 5:54:11 PM12/23/13
to
security.
It has been said that if you trade your freedom for security, that you
will have neither.
*Rumination*
#11 - A little Liberalism like a little alcohol, can be a good thing but
when either Liberalism or alcohol takes control, they become self
destructive.
Rudy Canoza
Dec 23, 2013, 6:29:18 PM12/23/13
to
Joe Gwinn
Dec 23, 2013, 6:55:24 PM12/23/13
to
In article <4ksgb95n6en173j8k...@4ax.com>, F. George
remember, in all kinds of weather.
There is also an inherent difference in objectives here. In the late
1960s, I asked one of my better EE professors why they taught us so
much theory and so little of what was actually being used in industry
at the time. His answer was quite succinct - the stuff actually used
today would be obsolete in a few years, but the theory would endure for
an entire career.
So, the companies wanted short-term knowledge (so the new employee
could "hit the ground running"), but the theory is the better
investment from the employee's perspective.
> >Do you remember "intractable structural unemployment" in Europe from a
> >decade or two ago? It was intractable because it had become almost
> >impossible to reduce manpower, so companies had become *very* reluctant
> >to hire - it was literally easier to divorce your spouse than to let an
> >employee go. Reluctance to hire was the perfectly rational response.
>
> If the MBA poobahs want to turn labor into a commodity, how
> is manpower any different than machines, materials and
> facilities? You think you can make money manufacturing
> something and buy machines and factories to do so, you are
> stuck with them, and may have to sell at a loss when things
> turn down. Same thing with labor. Such considerations
> minimize "boom and bust" inhale-exhale employment, and
> promote stable, real value added operations/activities.
Yes, they do want labor to be a commodity, and always have. Life is a
lot easier if employees are interchangeable. And at least in
engineering they are always getting their nose rubbed in it, for all
the good it does us - they keep trying.
> With unemployment in Europe approaching 50% for some age
> groups (mainly young, entry level), it does not appear
> loosening the employment protection laws accomplished very
> much.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_rate>
>
> <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics>
>
> <http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/jobless-generation/italy-youth-unemployment-hovers-around-35-percent>
>
> <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/employment_unemployment_lfs/introduction>
Well, the average for the EU is 11%. Are you referring to Greece?
The one to watch is Germany, by far the largest economy in Europe, with
5% unemployment. Germany did make the needed reforms, the Hartz
Reforms, to great effect. Sarkozy in France (with 11% unemployment)
was recommending that France do the same thing, but it didn't happen
because Sarkozy lost the next election. I recall reading in the papers
that people in France are still considering the option, because we
cannot have Germany doing better than France, but have no idea if
anything will happen.
..<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartz_concept>
More generally, countries whose economic growth rate does not exceed
their population growth rate are soon in trouble.
Joe Gwinn
McDuffee <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:22:39 -0500, Joe Gwinn
> <joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >Won't work. Employers are not stupid. They simply won't publish the
> >job opening, precisely to avoid letting the Gov usurp private
> >employment decisions. Hiring will revert to the traditional
> >friend-of-a-friend approach.
> <snip>
> If nothing else, this stops management from using the lame
> excuse they can't find [good] help. If you are going to use
> a shortage of qualified employees as an excuse, e.g. H1B
> rationalizations, you have to show you adequately advertised
> the job opening.
No, it won't. They have been complaining about this as long as I can
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 10:22:39 -0500, Joe Gwinn
> <joeg...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> >Won't work. Employers are not stupid. They simply won't publish the
> >job opening, precisely to avoid letting the Gov usurp private
> >employment decisions. Hiring will revert to the traditional
> >friend-of-a-friend approach.
> <snip>
> If nothing else, this stops management from using the lame
> excuse they can't find [good] help. If you are going to use
> a shortage of qualified employees as an excuse, e.g. H1B
> rationalizations, you have to show you adequately advertised
> the job opening.
remember, in all kinds of weather.
There is also an inherent difference in objectives here. In the late
1960s, I asked one of my better EE professors why they taught us so
much theory and so little of what was actually being used in industry
at the time. His answer was quite succinct - the stuff actually used
today would be obsolete in a few years, but the theory would endure for
an entire career.
So, the companies wanted short-term knowledge (so the new employee
could "hit the ground running"), but the theory is the better
investment from the employee's perspective.
> >Do you remember "intractable structural unemployment" in Europe from a
> >decade or two ago? It was intractable because it had become almost
> >impossible to reduce manpower, so companies had become *very* reluctant
> >to hire - it was literally easier to divorce your spouse than to let an
> >employee go. Reluctance to hire was the perfectly rational response.
>
> If the MBA poobahs want to turn labor into a commodity, how
> is manpower any different than machines, materials and
> facilities? You think you can make money manufacturing
> something and buy machines and factories to do so, you are
> stuck with them, and may have to sell at a loss when things
> turn down. Same thing with labor. Such considerations
> minimize "boom and bust" inhale-exhale employment, and
> promote stable, real value added operations/activities.
lot easier if employees are interchangeable. And at least in
engineering they are always getting their nose rubbed in it, for all
the good it does us - they keep trying.
> With unemployment in Europe approaching 50% for some age
> groups (mainly young, entry level), it does not appear
> loosening the employment protection laws accomplished very
> much.
>
> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_rate>
>
> <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Unemployment_statistics>
>
> <http://www.marketplace.org/topics/world/jobless-generation/italy-youth-unemployment-hovers-around-35-percent>
>
> <http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/employment_unemployment_lfs/introduction>
The one to watch is Germany, by far the largest economy in Europe, with
5% unemployment. Germany did make the needed reforms, the Hartz
Reforms, to great effect. Sarkozy in France (with 11% unemployment)
was recommending that France do the same thing, but it didn't happen
because Sarkozy lost the next election. I recall reading in the papers
that people in France are still considering the option, because we
cannot have Germany doing better than France, but have no idea if
anything will happen.
..<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hartz_concept>
More generally, countries whose economic growth rate does not exceed
their population growth rate are soon in trouble.
Joe Gwinn
dpb
Dec 23, 2013, 7:30:48 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 5:55 PM, Joe Gwinn wrote:
...
> There is also an inherent difference in objectives here. In the late
> 1960s, I asked one of my better EE professors why they taught us so
> much theory and so little of what was actually being used in industry
> at the time. His answer was quite succinct - the stuff actually used
> today would be obsolete in a few years, but the theory would endure for
> an entire career.
>
> So, the companies wanted short-term knowledge (so the new employee
> could "hit the ground running"), but the theory is the better
> investment from the employee's perspective.
>
...
It's also by far the better investment for the company as well.
--
...
> There is also an inherent difference in objectives here. In the late
> 1960s, I asked one of my better EE professors why they taught us so
> much theory and so little of what was actually being used in industry
> at the time. His answer was quite succinct - the stuff actually used
> today would be obsolete in a few years, but the theory would endure for
> an entire career.
>
> So, the companies wanted short-term knowledge (so the new employee
> could "hit the ground running"), but the theory is the better
> investment from the employee's perspective.
>
It's also by far the better investment for the company as well.
--
Frank
Dec 23, 2013, 7:37:29 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/22/2013 6:02 AM, news13 wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:59 -0800, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>> http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can’t
>
> Nope, just the same old shit.
>
As would be expected from an academic source, verbose but don't say
diddly.
> On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 00:58:59 -0800, Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>> http://www.upenn.edu/gazette/0113/feature2_1.html
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> As America strives to regain its economic footing, good people can’t
>> find work even while companies struggle to find employees. How can this
>> be happening? Wharton’s Peter Cappelli has a provocative answer.
>
> Nope, just the same old shit.
>
As would be expected from an academic source, verbose but don't say
diddly.
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 8:42:42 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:30:48 -0600, dpb <no...@non.net>
wrote:
Indeed, but this again conflates/confuses the company with
its management. In the last analysis the
company/corporation is a trope like mother nature or father
time. The decisions are made by real people with personal
agendas, which may or may not include the best interests of
the owners/stockholders in either the short or long term.
In too many cases the decisions are made based on what will
jack up earning and the stock price for the quarter so
management can cash out rather than the long-term viability
of the company and stockholders/stakeholders such as the
employees and community.
wrote:
its management. In the last analysis the
company/corporation is a trope like mother nature or father
time. The decisions are made by real people with personal
agendas, which may or may not include the best interests of
the owners/stockholders in either the short or long term.
In too many cases the decisions are made based on what will
jack up earning and the stock price for the quarter so
management can cash out rather than the long-term viability
of the company and stockholders/stakeholders such as the
employees and community.
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 8:53:10 PM12/23/13
to
Follow-up to my own post
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:24:34 -0600, F. George McDuffee
<gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
<snip>
>Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
>does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
>it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
>the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
<snip>
Several people have emailed me off list to point out that
with the ACA/Obamacare, HR is losing one of their major
functions which is the administration of the company health
insurance, which would reinforce the tendency to "dog it" in
filling positions so they don't work themselves out of a
job, and join the other people in the unemployment office
lines.
Anyone have an accurate estimate of how much of the HR
workload will be eliminated by ACA replacement of employer
funded medical insurance?
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:24:34 -0600, F. George McDuffee
<gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
<snip>
>Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
>does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
>it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
>the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
<snip>
Several people have emailed me off list to point out that
with the ACA/Obamacare, HR is losing one of their major
functions which is the administration of the company health
insurance, which would reinforce the tendency to "dog it" in
filling positions so they don't work themselves out of a
job, and join the other people in the unemployment office
lines.
Anyone have an accurate estimate of how much of the HR
workload will be eliminated by ACA replacement of employer
funded medical insurance?
news13
Dec 23, 2013, 8:56:12 PM12/23/13
to
David R. Birch
Dec 23, 2013, 8:57:47 PM12/23/13
to
buzzwords all you've said is that you don't like it.
You said you weren't going to do it that way. What way are you going to
do it?
Which is better, an imperfect idea that might work, or what you offer,
no idea at all?
David
Rudy Canoza
Dec 23, 2013, 9:10:18 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 5:42 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:30:48 -0600, dpb <no...@non.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/23/2013 5:55 PM, Joe Gwinn wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> There is also an inherent difference in objectives here. In the late
>>> 1960s, I asked one of my better EE professors why they taught us so
>>> much theory and so little of what was actually being used in industry
>>> at the time. His answer was quite succinct - the stuff actually used
>>> today would be obsolete in a few years, but the theory would endure for
>>> an entire career.
>>>
>>> So, the companies wanted short-term knowledge (so the new employee
>>> could "hit the ground running"), but the theory is the better
>>> investment from the employee's perspective.
>>>
>> ...
>>
>> It's also by far the better investment for the company as well.
>
> Indeed, but this again conflates/confuses the company with
> its management. In the last analysis the
> company/corporation is a trope like mother nature or father
> time.
No, it isn't, you doddering nitwit. "The firm" in microeconomic
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:30:48 -0600, dpb <no...@non.net>
> wrote:
>
>> On 12/23/2013 5:55 PM, Joe Gwinn wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> There is also an inherent difference in objectives here. In the late
>>> 1960s, I asked one of my better EE professors why they taught us so
>>> much theory and so little of what was actually being used in industry
>>> at the time. His answer was quite succinct - the stuff actually used
>>> today would be obsolete in a few years, but the theory would endure for
>>> an entire career.
>>>
>>> So, the companies wanted short-term knowledge (so the new employee
>>> could "hit the ground running"), but the theory is the better
>>> investment from the employee's perspective.
>>>
>> ...
>>
>> It's also by far the better investment for the company as well.
>
> Indeed, but this again conflates/confuses the company with
> its management. In the last analysis the
> company/corporation is a trope like mother nature or father
> time.
analysis is an abstraction, but *a* firm that actually hires and fires
employees certainly is not.
> The decisions are made by real people with personal
> agendas, which may or may not include the best interests of
> the owners/stockholders in either the short or long term.
maximized profit, just as the theory of the firm predicts.
news13
Dec 23, 2013, 9:30:36 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 09:57:54 -0800, pyotr filipivich wrote:
> Why does the inability to be "chatty" have anything to do with his
> website design skills?
In website design there are literally hundreds of thousands of website
> Why does the inability to be "chatty" have anything to do with his
> website design skills?
designers, so the jobs are going to go to those who can communicate.
> The lack of the ability to make small talk proves nothing.
your ability to effectively communicate with your boss/supervisor/co-
worker is.
If "small talk" is on the agenda, then you are wasting your time as the
wanted candidte has been pre chosen.
Jeff M
Dec 23, 2013, 9:39:21 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 7:53 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> Follow-up to my own post
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:24:34 -0600, F. George McDuffee
> <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
>> does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
>> it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
>> the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
> <snip>
>
> Several people have emailed me off list to point out that
> with the ACA/Obamacare, HR is losing one of their major
> functions which is the administration of the company health
> insurance, which would reinforce the tendency to "dog it" in
> filling positions so they don't work themselves out of a
> job, and join the other people in the unemployment office
> lines.
>
> Anyone have an accurate estimate of how much of the HR
> workload will be eliminated by ACA replacement of employer
> funded medical insurance?
Almost all full-coverage, employer-paid, tax-subsidized medical plans
> Follow-up to my own post
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:24:34 -0600, F. George McDuffee
> <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
>> does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
>> it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
>> the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
> <snip>
>
> Several people have emailed me off list to point out that
> with the ACA/Obamacare, HR is losing one of their major
> functions which is the administration of the company health
> insurance, which would reinforce the tendency to "dog it" in
> filling positions so they don't work themselves out of a
> job, and join the other people in the unemployment office
> lines.
>
> Anyone have an accurate estimate of how much of the HR
> workload will be eliminated by ACA replacement of employer
> funded medical insurance?
already meet ACA requirements, and employers are still free to negotiate
with their existing provider or competitors, so very little should change.
Rudy Canoza
Dec 23, 2013, 9:46:39 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 5:53 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> Follow-up to my own post
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:24:34 -0600, F. George McDuffee
> <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
>> does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
>> it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
>> the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
> <snip>
>
> Several people have emailed me off list to point out that
> with the ACA/Obamacare, HR is losing one of their major
> functions which is the administration of the company health
> insurance,
That's bullshit. They're not losing that at all.
> Follow-up to my own post
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:24:34 -0600, F. George McDuffee
> <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
> <snip>
>> Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
>> does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
>> it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
>> the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
> <snip>
>
> Several people have emailed me off list to point out that
> with the ACA/Obamacare, HR is losing one of their major
> functions which is the administration of the company health
> insurance,
news13
Dec 23, 2013, 9:50:15 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 12:04:00 -0600, Jeff M wrote:
> Attorneys with business/commercial/industrial clientele face a similar
> dilemma. It is often necessary to become a sort of expert in their
> client's business in order to represent and advise them correctly, and
> to do so rapidly.
Any parasite knows that. The rich pickings go to the first to arrive.
> Attorneys with business/commercial/industrial clientele face a similar
> dilemma. It is often necessary to become a sort of expert in their
> client's business in order to represent and advise them correctly, and
> to do so rapidly.
Rudy Canoza
Dec 23, 2013, 9:50:12 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 5:57 PM, David R. Birch wrote:
> On 12/23/2013 5:29 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>> On 12/23/2013 1:42 PM, David R. Birch wrote:
>>> On 12/23/2013 11:46 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> Typical left-wing totalitarianism. Fuck off, we're not going to do it
>>>> that way. It's a shitty idea.
>>>
>>> And your better idea is...?
>>
>> Why do I have to have a better idea in order to criticize his shitty
>> idea?
>
> You haven't criticized his idea,
I did. I said his idea of forcing employers to coordinate hiring with
> On 12/23/2013 5:29 PM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>> On 12/23/2013 1:42 PM, David R. Birch wrote:
>>> On 12/23/2013 11:46 AM, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> Typical left-wing totalitarianism. Fuck off, we're not going to do it
>>>> that way. It's a shitty idea.
>>>
>>> And your better idea is...?
>>
>> Why do I have to have a better idea in order to criticize his shitty
>> idea?
>
> You haven't criticized his idea,
the government, and then to have take whomever the government sends if
you don't hire someone from the original list, is a shitty idea. It is
a shitty idea.
You're not anywhere close to as intelligent as you pretend to think you are.
Rudy Canoza
Dec 23, 2013, 9:53:04 PM12/23/13
to
On 12/23/2013 6:39 PM, Jeff M wrote:
> On 12/23/2013 7:53 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
>> Follow-up to my own post
>>
>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:24:34 -0600, F. George McDuffee
>> <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
>>> does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
>>> it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
>>> the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
>> <snip>
>>
>> Several people have emailed me off list to point out that
>> with the ACA/Obamacare, HR is losing one of their major
>> functions which is the administration of the company health
>> insurance, which would reinforce the tendency to "dog it" in
>> filling positions so they don't work themselves out of a
>> job, and join the other people in the unemployment office
>> lines.
>>
>> Anyone have an accurate estimate of how much of the HR
>> workload will be eliminated by ACA replacement of employer
>> funded medical insurance?
>
> Almost all full-coverage, employer-paid, tax-subsidized medical plans
> already meet ACA requirements, and employers are still free to negotiate
> with their existing provider or competitors, so very little should change.
That's right. Firms above 50 employees are still required to offer
> On 12/23/2013 7:53 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
>> Follow-up to my own post
>>
>> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 03:24:34 -0600, F. George McDuffee
>> <gmcd...@mcduffee-associates.us> wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> Article and responses raise some good points, but one that
>>> does not seem to have been considered is that HR is "dogging
>>> it" to keep their jobs. Consider what would happen if all
>>> the open jobs were filled. Layoffs in the HR department.
>> <snip>
>>
>> Several people have emailed me off list to point out that
>> with the ACA/Obamacare, HR is losing one of their major
>> functions which is the administration of the company health
>> insurance, which would reinforce the tendency to "dog it" in
>> filling positions so they don't work themselves out of a
>> job, and join the other people in the unemployment office
>> lines.
>>
>> Anyone have an accurate estimate of how much of the HR
>> workload will be eliminated by ACA replacement of employer
>> funded medical insurance?
>
> Almost all full-coverage, employer-paid, tax-subsidized medical plans
> already meet ACA requirements, and employers are still free to negotiate
> with their existing provider or competitors, so very little should change.
health care coverage, and the same people currently tasked with
selecting plans and running the firms' enrollment processes will still
be needed to do that.
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 10:15:13 PM12/23/13
to
F. George McDuffee wrote:
> Anyone have an accurate estimate of how much of the HR
> workload will be eliminated by ACA replacement of employer
> funded medical insurance?
The company I work for offers a health isurance plan, as well as a flex
> Anyone have an accurate estimate of how much of the HR
> workload will be eliminated by ACA replacement of employer
> funded medical insurance?
benefits plan and an Aflac supplemental. The selection and negotiation is
done by volunteers from the different departments and managers are not
eligible to sit on the committee.
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 10:18:17 PM12/23/13
to
F. George McDuffee wrote:
> Can't find people to meet your job requirements? Then
> reengineer/restructure the job and change the requirements.
It's rather difficult to restructure a programming position to be anything
else. Hiring Visual Basic programmers is as close as you can come to
unskilled labor.
> Can't find people to meet your job requirements? Then
> reengineer/restructure the job and change the requirements.
It's rather difficult to restructure a programming position to be anything
else. Hiring Visual Basic programmers is as close as you can come to
unskilled labor.
Message has been deleted
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 10:23:13 PM12/23/13
to
Jeff M wrote:
>> Because college is a cult and you only help the other cult members.
>
> Never been to one, it seems.
>
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-23/secret-handshakes-greet-frat-
brothers-on-wall-street.html
http://tinyurl.com/kqg3dhl
Apparently the old Animal House Secret Handshake still works in some
circles.
>> Because college is a cult and you only help the other cult members.
>
> Never been to one, it seems.
>
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-23/secret-handshakes-greet-frat-
brothers-on-wall-street.html
http://tinyurl.com/kqg3dhl
Apparently the old Animal House Secret Handshake still works in some
circles.
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 10:29:48 PM12/23/13
to
distro pruned -- following NGs eliminated
alt.religion.christian,alt.california,or.politics,alt.politics.democrats,talk.politics.guns,can.politics,
rec.bicycles.tech,misc.survivalism,tx.guns
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:10:18 -0800, Rudy Canoza
<LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
<snip>
Non sequitur
Mother Teresa worked at a corporation? Need the data
showing the total compensation of the decision makers. It
might well be that by ignoring the best long-term self
interests of the stockholders/stakeholders/firm management
maximized their own profit, e.g. they took the money and
ran, and the management of the firms that survived had lower
compensation than their peers.
http://www.motherteresa.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa
As for the reality of a company/corporation, please post a
picture of one. Just as real as Santa, the Easter Bunny,
the Great Pumpkin, etc. All of them are tropes, most of
them with a "Wizard of Oz" type, e.g. Chainsaw Al Dunlap,
pulling the levers behind the scenes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_J._Dunlap
<snip>
Reports of the methods Dunlap used to inflate revenues led
the board to review Dunlap's practices in June 1998. It
turned out that Dunlap had sold retailers far more
merchandise than they could handle. With the stores
hopelessly overstocked, unsold inventory piled up in
Sunbeam's warehouses. As a result, Sunbeam faced losses of
as much as $60 million in the second quarter of 1998. The
company's comptroller also told the board that Dunlap had
told him to push the limits of accounting principles. On
June 13, Dunlap was fired. The shareholder suit against
Dunlap dragged on until 2002, when he agreed to pay $15
million to settle the allegations.[4][5]
In 2001, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Dunlap,
alleging that he had engineered a massive accounting fraud.
Also named in the suit were four other former Sunbeam
executives and the lead partner for Sunbeam's account with
Arthur Andersen LLP. An SEC investigation revealed that
Dunlap and others had created the impression of a greater
loss in 1996 in order to make it look like the company had
experienced a dramatic turnaround in 1997. By the SEC's
estimate, at least $60 million of Sunbeam's 1997 earnings
were fraudulent. He also offered incentives for retailers to
sell products that would have otherwise been sold later in
the year, a practice known as "channel stuffing". The SEC
also argued that the purchases of Coleman, Signature and
First Alert were made to conceal Sunbeam's growing problems.
Sunbeam never recovered from the scandal, and was forced
into bankruptcy in 2002.[3]
<snip>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTro82HVIi0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npFKStNMHeE
alt.religion.christian,alt.california,or.politics,alt.politics.democrats,talk.politics.guns,can.politics,
rec.bicycles.tech,misc.survivalism,tx.guns
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:10:18 -0800, Rudy Canoza
<LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
<snip>
>> The decisions are made by real people with personal
>> agendas, which may or may not include the best interests of
>> the owners/stockholders in either the short or long term.
>
>As Alchian showed, those firms that survive are, in fact, the ones that
>maximized profit, just as the theory of the firm predicts.
<snip>
>> agendas, which may or may not include the best interests of
>> the owners/stockholders in either the short or long term.
>
>As Alchian showed, those firms that survive are, in fact, the ones that
>maximized profit, just as the theory of the firm predicts.
Non sequitur
Mother Teresa worked at a corporation? Need the data
showing the total compensation of the decision makers. It
might well be that by ignoring the best long-term self
interests of the stockholders/stakeholders/firm management
maximized their own profit, e.g. they took the money and
ran, and the management of the firms that survived had lower
compensation than their peers.
http://www.motherteresa.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mother_Teresa
As for the reality of a company/corporation, please post a
picture of one. Just as real as Santa, the Easter Bunny,
the Great Pumpkin, etc. All of them are tropes, most of
them with a "Wizard of Oz" type, e.g. Chainsaw Al Dunlap,
pulling the levers behind the scenes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_J._Dunlap
<snip>
Reports of the methods Dunlap used to inflate revenues led
the board to review Dunlap's practices in June 1998. It
turned out that Dunlap had sold retailers far more
merchandise than they could handle. With the stores
hopelessly overstocked, unsold inventory piled up in
Sunbeam's warehouses. As a result, Sunbeam faced losses of
as much as $60 million in the second quarter of 1998. The
company's comptroller also told the board that Dunlap had
told him to push the limits of accounting principles. On
June 13, Dunlap was fired. The shareholder suit against
Dunlap dragged on until 2002, when he agreed to pay $15
million to settle the allegations.[4][5]
In 2001, the Securities and Exchange Commission sued Dunlap,
alleging that he had engineered a massive accounting fraud.
Also named in the suit were four other former Sunbeam
executives and the lead partner for Sunbeam's account with
Arthur Andersen LLP. An SEC investigation revealed that
Dunlap and others had created the impression of a greater
loss in 1996 in order to make it look like the company had
experienced a dramatic turnaround in 1997. By the SEC's
estimate, at least $60 million of Sunbeam's 1997 earnings
were fraudulent. He also offered incentives for retailers to
sell products that would have otherwise been sold later in
the year, a practice known as "channel stuffing". The SEC
also argued that the purchases of Coleman, Signature and
First Alert were made to conceal Sunbeam's growing problems.
Sunbeam never recovered from the scandal, and was forced
into bankruptcy in 2002.[3]
<snip>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTro82HVIi0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npFKStNMHeE
Gunner Asch
Dec 23, 2013, 10:33:26 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:55:24 -0500, Joe Gwinn <joeg...@comcast.net>
And a lot of it depends on if the growth rate comes from Turd World
people coming in from the Middle East or other hotbeds of utter
ignorance.
--
"Owning a sailboat is like marrying a nymphomaniac. You don�t want to do that
but it is great if your best friend does. That way you get all the benefits without any of the upkeep"
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
people coming in from the Middle East or other hotbeds of utter
ignorance.
--
"Owning a sailboat is like marrying a nymphomaniac. You don�t want to do that
but it is great if your best friend does. That way you get all the benefits without any of the upkeep"
---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 10:34:13 PM12/23/13
to
F. George McDuffee wrote:
> If nothing else, this stops management from using the lame
> excuse they can't find [good] help. If you are going to use
> a shortage of qualified employees as an excuse, e.g. H1B
> rationalizations, you have to show you adequately advertised
> the job opening.
The corporations that used to advertise in the Boston Globe back when people
> If nothing else, this stops management from using the lame
> excuse they can't find [good] help. If you are going to use
> a shortage of qualified employees as an excuse, e.g. H1B
> rationalizations, you have to show you adequately advertised
> the job opening.
still read newspapers had it down to a science. Require an advanced degree,
5 years experience with a technology that was 3 years old, and offer a
princely salary equivalent to a manager at Chuck E. Cheese's. When nobody
applies, get your H-1B authorization.
In the '80s, Irwin Feerst ran for president of the IEEE on premise that the
association might have an interest in the matter. He lost by a small margin,
with the entrenched powers maintaining the Institute's role was to run
conferences and publish glossy magazines. I saw no reason to keep up my
membership.
Winston_Smith
Dec 23, 2013, 10:46:57 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 20:18:17 -0700, rbowman wrote:
>It's rather difficult to restructure a programming position to be anything
>else. Hiring Visual Basic programmers is as close as you can come to
>unskilled labor.
http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/top10.html
>It's rather difficult to restructure a programming position to be anything
>else. Hiring Visual Basic programmers is as close as you can come to
>unskilled labor.
The top ten reasons Eternal Damnation is better than Windows Software
Development
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 10:49:44 PM12/23/13
to
pyotr filipivich wrote:
> The same used to be said of High School Diplomas. Now, the
> majority of Bachelor Degrees are like a High School Diploma - not a
> proof of ability or even of tenacity, but a sign that they could show
> up often enough not to get 'failed'.
>
After that idiot logged on to the Harvard WiFi to email a bomb threat
because he thought he might fail the final, one professor remarked that it
was almost impossible to fail. I would imagine they took the professor out
to the woodshed after they got through handcuffing the student.
When I was in school, about one third of the freshman class made it out the
other side. In an era of nosebleed tuitions a suspicious mind would think it
wouldn't make good economic sense to flunk out suckers, er, students.
> The same used to be said of High School Diplomas. Now, the
> majority of Bachelor Degrees are like a High School Diploma - not a
> proof of ability or even of tenacity, but a sign that they could show
> up often enough not to get 'failed'.
>
After that idiot logged on to the Harvard WiFi to email a bomb threat
because he thought he might fail the final, one professor remarked that it
was almost impossible to fail. I would imagine they took the professor out
to the woodshed after they got through handcuffing the student.
When I was in school, about one third of the freshman class made it out the
other side. In an era of nosebleed tuitions a suspicious mind would think it
wouldn't make good economic sense to flunk out suckers, er, students.
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 11:00:29 PM12/23/13
to
On Sun, 22 Dec 2013 22:38:51 -0700, rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>> Some truth to that indeed.
>
>That old boy stuff used to be true for the Ivy League colleges but I don't
>know if it's as much so today.
FYI
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/the-fraternity-path-to-finance-4uzsum5kRouZDyNOLN70Kw.html
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>Gunner Asch wrote:
>
>> Some truth to that indeed.
>
>That old boy stuff used to be true for the Ivy League colleges but I don't
>know if it's as much so today.
FYI
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/the-fraternity-path-to-finance-4uzsum5kRouZDyNOLN70Kw.html
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 11:03:09 PM12/23/13
to
pyotr filipivich wrote:
> Why does the inability to be "chatty" have anything to do with his
> website design skills?
In the example I referred to, it was well beyond not chatty to the point
> Why does the inability to be "chatty" have anything to do with his
> website design skills?
where we were wondering if we were dealing with Aspergers or HFA. The
present staff, including myself, aren't going to win any awards for chatty.
The QA department is down the hall and they are always laughing, discussing
vide game strategies, going out to lunch together and so forth. The
programmers mostly quietly do their own thing. However when I'm trying to
get someone to open up about their interests and experience, I do need more
than 'yes' or 'no'.
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 11:18:05 PM12/23/13
to
Uncle Steve wrote:
> Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
> responsible for user interface design? Programming shops farm out
> bits and pieces of any non-trivial project to a team of programmers,
> none of whom are necessarily involved with the architecture of the
> code or the API design. And it is quite obvious from context that the
> interviewee was not being interviewed for a top-tier position.
Actually, in our shop, the programmer owns the project. There is input from
the clients and sales staff and third party APIs that constrain the design
but there is a lot of freedom and responsibility. I say 'programmer' but
that doesn't imply the peon status the title has in a large corporation. New
hires aren't completely thrown in the deep end of the pool but after a few
months of maintenance programming to familiarize them with the code base the
training wheels come off and they're tasked with significant projects.
You gte into huge shops where the responsibility is spread so thin nobody
has a personal stake in the project, and you get the Obamacare website.
> Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
> responsible for user interface design? Programming shops farm out
> bits and pieces of any non-trivial project to a team of programmers,
> none of whom are necessarily involved with the architecture of the
> code or the API design. And it is quite obvious from context that the
> interviewee was not being interviewed for a top-tier position.
Actually, in our shop, the programmer owns the project. There is input from
the clients and sales staff and third party APIs that constrain the design
but there is a lot of freedom and responsibility. I say 'programmer' but
that doesn't imply the peon status the title has in a large corporation. New
hires aren't completely thrown in the deep end of the pool but after a few
months of maintenance programming to familiarize them with the code base the
training wheels come off and they're tasked with significant projects.
You gte into huge shops where the responsibility is spread so thin nobody
has a personal stake in the project, and you get the Obamacare website.
rbowman
Dec 23, 2013, 11:21:27 PM12/23/13
to
Jim Wilkins wrote:
> This is what happens when you let programmers speak to users in their
> own native language.
It probably wasn't the programmers, but Windows 8 is what happens when you
develope your brilliant idea in a vacuum. Or even more apropos, the Surface
RT.
> This is what happens when you let programmers speak to users in their
> own native language.
It probably wasn't the programmers, but Windows 8 is what happens when you
develope your brilliant idea in a vacuum. Or even more apropos, the Surface
RT.
F. George McDuffee
Dec 23, 2013, 11:43:55 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 20:18:17 -0700, rbowman
While this is a popular myth with programmers, the old saw
Q: How do you eat an elephant?
A: One byte at a time.
still applies.
Break the project down into modules, sub-modules,
sub-sub-modules, etc. with a standard data format between
modules, one way in and one way out of a module, which in
theory should perform one and only one function.
When you break the program down far enough even entry level
coders should be able to cope. You do need one journeyman
systems analyst to identify the modules (the WBS [work
breakdown structure]), and act as a project manager, both to
integrate/test the modules, and to prevent mission creep due
to "enhancement" requests without change notices and
charges.
FWIW -- ADA was specifically developed for this type of
climate/environment.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_%28programming_language%29
<snip>
Notable features of Ada include: strong typing, modularity
mechanisms (packages), run-time checking, parallel
processing (tasks, synchronous Message passing, protected
objects, and nondeterministic select statements), exception
handling, and generics. Ada 95 added support for
object-oriented programming, including dynamic dispatch.
<snip>
http://groups.engin.umd.umich.edu/CIS/course.des/cis400/ada/ada.html
http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Ada_%28programming_language%29.html
Q: While the website healthcare.gov uses HTML/HTML5 and
Java script (it has to work with the browsers), does anyone
know what language(s) the back end of this kludge, that
interfaces with the insurance companies, IRS, etc. and
determines eligibility is written in?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/09/healthcare-gov-was-originally-built-in-a-garage/
http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/bitwise/2013/10/healthcare_gov_problems_what_5_million_lines_of_code_really_means.html
Also CPM/PERT should have been in use from day one to track
progress or the lack thereof and the critical path time.
Uncle Steve
Dec 23, 2013, 11:47:17 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 09:18:05PM -0700, rbowman wrote:
> Uncle Steve wrote:
>
> > Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
> > responsible for user interface design? Programming shops farm out
> > bits and pieces of any non-trivial project to a team of programmers,
> > none of whom are necessarily involved with the architecture of the
> > code or the API design. And it is quite obvious from context that the
> > interviewee was not being interviewed for a top-tier position.
> Actually, in our shop, the programmer owns the project. There is input from
> the clients and sales staff and third party APIs that constrain the design
> but there is a lot of freedom and responsibility. I say 'programmer' but
> that doesn't imply the peon status the title has in a large corporation. New
> hires aren't completely thrown in the deep end of the pool but after a few
> months of maintenance programming to familiarize them with the code base the
> training wheels come off and they're tasked with significant projects.
That doesn't still doesn't imply that your programmers are responsible
> Uncle Steve wrote:
>
> > Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
> > responsible for user interface design? Programming shops farm out
> > bits and pieces of any non-trivial project to a team of programmers,
> > none of whom are necessarily involved with the architecture of the
> > code or the API design. And it is quite obvious from context that the
> > interviewee was not being interviewed for a top-tier position.
> Actually, in our shop, the programmer owns the project. There is input from
> the clients and sales staff and third party APIs that constrain the design
> but there is a lot of freedom and responsibility. I say 'programmer' but
> that doesn't imply the peon status the title has in a large corporation. New
> hires aren't completely thrown in the deep end of the pool but after a few
> months of maintenance programming to familiarize them with the code base the
> training wheels come off and they're tasked with significant projects.
for making architectural decisions all on their lonesome, which was in
turn the implication of Mr. Wilkins' comment. I presume you have
coding standards and perhaps a style guide?
> You gte into huge shops where the responsibility is spread so thin nobody
> has a personal stake in the project, and you get the Obamacare website.
Regards,
Uncle Steve
--
The real motto of the military/intelligence security services in the
West is "Panem et Circenses". Their bread and circuses, while the
civilian population is directed to floor of the Colosseum. "This way
to the fantastic egress!"
Uncle Steve
Dec 23, 2013, 11:55:43 PM12/23/13
to
On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 05:37:36PM -0500, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> "Uncle Steve" <stev...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3e9489b3c5...@gmail.com...
> > On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 05:37:21PM -0500, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> >> "rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
> >> news:bhp346...@mid.individual.net...
> >> > Pete S wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He
> >> >> has about
> >> >> 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about
> >> >> 35
> >> >> don't
> >> >> have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they
> >> >> are
> >> >> going to
> >> >> have real trouble in the future".
> >> >
> >> > Programmers, and I used that as a generic grouping for the
> >> > fancier
> >> > sounding
> >> > titles like 'software engineer', 'IT professional' and so forth,
> >> > are
> >> > notorious for a lack of social skills.
> >> >
> >> > My most painful interview was with a guy who had completely blown
> >> > a
> >> > telephone interview with another manager. He looked good on paper
> >> > though, so
> >> > we brought him in for a face to face. Another manager and I sat
> >> > there for
> >> > about a half hour throwing out leading questions hoping for more
> >> > than more
> >> > than two words in reply and it never happened.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Perhaps he could do the logic and math, but you have to wonder what
> >> horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
> > Uncle Steve
>
> Experience, trying to use and update programs only the programmer (who
> quit) could understand.
Decent documentation is still something of a mythological creature to
many programmers. I loathe reading most GPL code for the reason that
is is all too often byzantine and peculiar, and comes with no
explanation for the design decions made during its development.
> Windows 7 has several examples:
> http://windowsforums.org/topic/4620-change-power-plan-in-windows-7-registry/
> "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\ControlPanel\NameSpace\{025A5937-A6BE-4686-A844-36FE4BEC8B6D}"
>
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc748940%28WS.10%29.aspx
> The GUI version changes settings but they soon revert to the defaults.
>
> 7 Media Center is another that you change by editing the Registry.
> http://community.mediabrowser.tv/permalinks/4971/registry-tweaks-for-media-center
> This is what happens when you let programmers speak to users in their
> own native language.
There are solutions to these problems but it takes effort and skill to
implement them. My read of the Windows programming platform is that
it encourages poor coding practices. U**X is not much better, and
sometimes I wonder if the POSIX standards committee are not foreign
spies bent on crippling the industry.
> "Uncle Steve" <stev...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:3e9489b3c5...@gmail.com...
> > On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 05:37:21PM -0500, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> >> "rbowman" <bow...@montana.com> wrote in message
> >> news:bhp346...@mid.individual.net...
> >> > Pete S wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> I have a nephew-in-law who runs an internet sales operation. He
> >> >> has about
> >> >> 10 people on the phones. He says that people younger than about
> >> >> 35
> >> >> don't
> >> >> have much in the way of social skills at all. He says: "they
> >> >> are
> >> >> going to
> >> >> have real trouble in the future".
> >> >
> >> > Programmers, and I used that as a generic grouping for the
> >> > fancier
> >> > sounding
> >> > titles like 'software engineer', 'IT professional' and so forth,
> >> > are
> >> > notorious for a lack of social skills.
> >> >
> >> > My most painful interview was with a guy who had completely blown
> >> > a
> >> > telephone interview with another manager. He looked good on paper
> >> > though, so
> >> > we brought him in for a face to face. Another manager and I sat
> >> > there for
> >> > about a half hour throwing out leading questions hoping for more
> >> > than more
> >> > than two words in reply and it never happened.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Perhaps he could do the logic and math, but you have to wonder what
> >> horrorshow of a user interface he might create.
> >
> > Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
> > responsible for user interface design? Programming shops farm out
> > bits and pieces of any non-trivial project to a team of programmers,
> > none of whom are necessarily involved with the architecture of the
> > code or the API design. And it is quite obvious from context that
> > the
> > interviewee was not being interviewed for a top-tier position.
> >
> > Where do you get your assumptions?
> > Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
> > responsible for user interface design? Programming shops farm out
> > bits and pieces of any non-trivial project to a team of programmers,
> > none of whom are necessarily involved with the architecture of the
> > code or the API design. And it is quite obvious from context that
> > the
> > interviewee was not being interviewed for a top-tier position.
> >
> > Uncle Steve
>
> Experience, trying to use and update programs only the programmer (who
> quit) could understand.
Decent documentation is still something of a mythological creature to
many programmers. I loathe reading most GPL code for the reason that
is is all too often byzantine and peculiar, and comes with no
explanation for the design decions made during its development.
> Windows 7 has several examples:
> http://windowsforums.org/topic/4620-change-power-plan-in-windows-7-registry/
> "HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\ControlPanel\NameSpace\{025A5937-A6BE-4686-A844-36FE4BEC8B6D}"
>
> http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc748940%28WS.10%29.aspx
> The GUI version changes settings but they soon revert to the defaults.
>
> 7 Media Center is another that you change by editing the Registry.
> http://community.mediabrowser.tv/permalinks/4971/registry-tweaks-for-media-center
> This is what happens when you let programmers speak to users in their
> own native language.
implement them. My read of the Windows programming platform is that
it encourages poor coding practices. U**X is not much better, and
sometimes I wonder if the POSIX standards committee are not foreign
spies bent on crippling the industry.
pyotr filipivich
Dec 24, 2013, 12:16:19 AM12/24/13
to
rbowman <bow...@montana.com> on Mon, 23 Dec 2013 20:49:44 -0700 typed
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
In Academia - what is success but an arbitrary construct left over
from patriarchal society, long dead and no longer applicable to the
modern world?
Nowadays, they are meant to collect and disburse as much money (in the
form of "Financial Aid") as possible, and indoctrinate the "students"
so that they will not question the system.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
>pyotr filipivich wrote:
>
>> The same used to be said of High School Diplomas. Now, the
>> majority of Bachelor Degrees are like a High School Diploma - not a
>> proof of ability or even of tenacity, but a sign that they could show
>> up often enough not to get 'failed'.
>>
>
>After that idiot logged on to the Harvard WiFi to email a bomb threat
>because he thought he might fail the final, one professor remarked that it
>was almost impossible to fail. I would imagine they took the professor out
>to the woodshed after they got through handcuffing the student.
In the real world, it is possible to fail.
>
>> The same used to be said of High School Diplomas. Now, the
>> majority of Bachelor Degrees are like a High School Diploma - not a
>> proof of ability or even of tenacity, but a sign that they could show
>> up often enough not to get 'failed'.
>>
>
>After that idiot logged on to the Harvard WiFi to email a bomb threat
>because he thought he might fail the final, one professor remarked that it
>was almost impossible to fail. I would imagine they took the professor out
>to the woodshed after they got through handcuffing the student.
In Academia - what is success but an arbitrary construct left over
from patriarchal society, long dead and no longer applicable to the
modern world?
>
>When I was in school, about one third of the freshman class made it out the
>other side. In an era of nosebleed tuitions a suspicious mind would think it
>wouldn't make good economic sense to flunk out suckers, er, students.
Once upon a time Universities existed to educate young men.
>When I was in school, about one third of the freshman class made it out the
>other side. In an era of nosebleed tuitions a suspicious mind would think it
>wouldn't make good economic sense to flunk out suckers, er, students.
Nowadays, they are meant to collect and disburse as much money (in the
form of "Financial Aid") as possible, and indoctrinate the "students"
so that they will not question the system.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."
rbowman
Dec 24, 2013, 12:32:56 AM12/24/13
to
F. George McDuffee wrote:
> FWIW -- ADA was specifically developed for this type of
> climate/environment.
I remember when people were falling all over themselves trying to find a
> FWIW -- ADA was specifically developed for this type of
> climate/environment.
working Ada compiler so they could learn the language. I didn't bother. I
worked on one DoD project in the '80s and swore I'd never do that again.
F. George McDuffee
Dec 24, 2013, 12:34:09 AM12/24/13
to
On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 13:58:48 -0500, Uncle Steve
<stev...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
Another example of reinventing the wheel. Proper screen
design/layout was exhaustively researched by the military
and several standards developed. Problem is marketing /
artistes want bling and not functional user interface. [You
want GTA5, then buy GTA5.]
http://www.hf.tc.faa.gov/hfds/hfds_pdfs/dot_faa_tc_07_11.pdf
http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm094957.htm
http://www.public.navy.mil/navsafecen/Pages/acquisition/ergonomics.aspx
http://www.files.nickdarnell.com/hfe_design_guide.pdf?
Re: programming style again no need to reinvent the wheel.
examples of pretty printers/beautifiers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prettyprint
http://download.aminst.net/mania/query.php?q=%22pretty+printers%22+c+download&ti1=200000&ti2=6&ti3=2013-12-24T05%3A21%3A32.317975%2B00%3A00
http://www.softpanorama.org/Utilities/beautifiers.shtml
examples of style manuals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_style
http://www.javaranch.com/style.jsp
http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.xml
http://www.adaic.org/resources/add_content/docs/95style/html/cover.html
enjoy
FWIW -- what ever language(s) you program in, most likely
there are several style guides and beautifiers on thee web
downloadable for free.
<stev...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
>responsible for user interface design?
<snip>
>responsible for user interface design?
Another example of reinventing the wheel. Proper screen
design/layout was exhaustively researched by the military
and several standards developed. Problem is marketing /
artistes want bling and not functional user interface. [You
want GTA5, then buy GTA5.]
http://www.hf.tc.faa.gov/hfds/hfds_pdfs/dot_faa_tc_07_11.pdf
http://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/deviceregulationandguidance/guidancedocuments/ucm094957.htm
http://www.public.navy.mil/navsafecen/Pages/acquisition/ergonomics.aspx
http://www.files.nickdarnell.com/hfe_design_guide.pdf?
Re: programming style again no need to reinvent the wheel.
examples of pretty printers/beautifiers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prettyprint
http://download.aminst.net/mania/query.php?q=%22pretty+printers%22+c+download&ti1=200000&ti2=6&ti3=2013-12-24T05%3A21%3A32.317975%2B00%3A00
http://www.softpanorama.org/Utilities/beautifiers.shtml
examples of style manuals
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_style
http://www.javaranch.com/style.jsp
http://google-styleguide.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cppguide.xml
http://www.adaic.org/resources/add_content/docs/95style/html/cover.html
enjoy
FWIW -- what ever language(s) you program in, most likely
there are several style guides and beautifiers on thee web
downloadable for free.
rbowman
Dec 24, 2013, 12:39:32 AM12/24/13
to
Winston_Smith wrote:
> http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/top10.html
> The top ten reasons Eternal Damnation is better than Windows Software
> Development
Ayup. I hate to admit it but I'm becoming fond of C#. VC++ is like doing a
> http://www.fourmilab.ch/documents/top10.html
> The top ten reasons Eternal Damnation is better than Windows Software
> Development
root canal on a pissed off crocodile. Stroustrup must cry when he sees what
M$ and a bunch of academics have done with the language. I've been meaning
to read his latest book.
pyotr filipivich
Dec 24, 2013, 12:40:11 AM12/24/13
to
rbowman <bow...@montana.com> on Mon, 23 Dec 2013 21:03:09 -0700 typed
in misc.survivalism the following:
Did you ask for a "portfolio"?
--
pyotr filipivich.
Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
in misc.survivalism the following:
--
pyotr filipivich.
Just about the time you finally see light at the end of the tunnel,
you find out it's a Government Project to build more tunnel.
rbowman
Dec 24, 2013, 12:43:51 AM12/24/13
to
pyotr filipivich wrote:
> Once upon a time Universities existed to educate young men.
> Nowadays, they are meant to collect and disburse as much money (in the
> form of "Financial Aid") as possible, and indoctrinate the "students"
> so that they will not question the system.
I get the usual alumni begging emails. Somehow the fact the the president,
> Once upon a time Universities existed to educate young men.
> Nowadays, they are meant to collect and disburse as much money (in the
> form of "Financial Aid") as possible, and indoctrinate the "students"
> so that they will not question the system.
Shirley Ann Jackson, is one of the highest paid university presidents in the
country really tingles my generosity nerve.
rbowman
Dec 24, 2013, 12:50:07 AM12/24/13
to
Uncle Steve wrote:
> That doesn't still doesn't imply that your programmers are responsible
> for making architectural decisions all on their lonesome, which was in
> turn the implication of Mr. Wilkins' comment. I presume you have
> coding standards and perhaps a style guide?
Coding standards: It works.
> That doesn't still doesn't imply that your programmers are responsible
> for making architectural decisions all on their lonesome, which was in
> turn the implication of Mr. Wilkins' comment. I presume you have
> coding standards and perhaps a style guide?
Style guide: It doesn't look like dog puke. When in Rome, do as the Romans
did.
Languages: Whatever. I favor the ones that start with C, and I don't mean
COBOL.
F. George McDuffee
Dec 24, 2013, 12:53:58 AM12/24/13
to
One of the nicest words in English is free...
http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuada/
http://libre.adacore.com/
{windows and Linux versions, may have a mac in there also}
Most likely too heavy duty for the typical hacker, but ideal
for huge, highly modularized projects.
Fantasy -- single function module requirements and
intermodule i/o data formats published on open source sites
and the healthcare.gov back end is created by mass volunteer
efforts using ADA.
rbowman
Dec 24, 2013, 1:05:24 AM12/24/13
to
Uncle Steve wrote:
> U**X is not much better, and
> sometimes I wonder if the POSIX standards committee are not foreign
> spies bent on crippling the industry.
There is a certain degree of perversion:
> U**X is not much better, and
> sometimes I wonder if the POSIX standards committee are not foreign
> spies bent on crippling the industry.
size_t fwrite(const void *ptr, size_t size, size_t nmemb, FILE *stream);
int fprintf(FILE *stream, const char *format, ...);
ssize_t write(int fd, const void *buf, size_t count);
It's not my encroaching senility; I gave up trying to remember the parameter
orders a long time ago. 'man' is my friend.
Then there are Pthreads... Combine that with the mostly thread unsafe
libraries and you have Deadlocks'r'Us.
Rudy Canoza
Dec 24, 2013, 1:31:26 AM12/24/13
to
[followups vandalism by unethical racist shitbag looter repaired]
On 12/23/2013 7:29 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> distro pruned -- following NGs eliminated
> alt.religion.christian,alt.california,or.politics,alt.politics.democrats,talk.politics.guns,can.politics,
> rec.bicycles.tech,misc.survivalism,tx.guns
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:10:18 -0800, Rudy Canoza
> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>>> The decisions are made by real people with personal
>>> agendas, which may or may not include the best interests of
>>> the owners/stockholders in either the short or long term.
>>
>> As Alchian showed, those firms that survive are, in fact, the ones that
>> maximized profit, just as the theory of the firm predicts.
> <snip>
>
> Non sequitur
It isn't. You don't even know what the term means.
You bullshitted about managers not having incentives aligned with the
owners. There are contractual features to correct that. The firms that
succeed and survive will be those whose managers acted in such a way so
as to maximize profits.
You don't know economics - not a bit of it.
> Mother Teresa worked at a corporation?
non sequitur
On 12/23/2013 7:29 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> distro pruned -- following NGs eliminated
> alt.religion.christian,alt.california,or.politics,alt.politics.democrats,talk.politics.guns,can.politics,
> rec.bicycles.tech,misc.survivalism,tx.guns
>
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 18:10:18 -0800, Rudy Canoza
> <LaLaLa...@philhendrie.con> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>>> The decisions are made by real people with personal
>>> agendas, which may or may not include the best interests of
>>> the owners/stockholders in either the short or long term.
>>
>> As Alchian showed, those firms that survive are, in fact, the ones that
>> maximized profit, just as the theory of the firm predicts.
> <snip>
>
> Non sequitur
You bullshitted about managers not having incentives aligned with the
owners. There are contractual features to correct that. The firms that
succeed and survive will be those whose managers acted in such a way so
as to maximize profits.
You don't know economics - not a bit of it.
> Mother Teresa worked at a corporation?
Rudy Canoza
Dec 24, 2013, 1:33:44 AM12/24/13
to
On 12/23/2013 9:34 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 13:58:48 -0500, Uncle Steve
> <stev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
>> responsible for user interface design?
> <snip>
>
> Another example of reinventing the wheel.
non sequitur
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 13:58:48 -0500, Uncle Steve
> <stev...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip>
>> Why on God's good Earth would you assume a programmer would be
>> responsible for user interface design?
> <snip>
>
> Another example of reinventing the wheel.
Rudy Canoza
Dec 24, 2013, 1:35:05 AM12/24/13
to
On 12/23/2013 9:53 PM, F. George McDuffee wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 22:32:56 -0700, rbowman
> <bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> F. George McDuffee wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW -- ADA was specifically developed for this type of
>>> climate/environment.
>>
>> I remember when people were falling all over themselves trying to find a
>> working Ada compiler so they could learn the language. I didn't bother. I
>> worked on one DoD project in the '80s and swore I'd never do that again.
> ===============
>
> One of the nicest words in English is free...
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuada/
> http://libre.adacore.com/
> {windows and Linux versions, may have a mac in there also}
>
> Most likely too heavy duty for the typical hacker, but ideal
> for huge, highly modularized projects.
>
> Fantasy -- single function module requirements and
> intermodule i/o data formats published on open source sites
> and the healthcare.gov back end is created by mass volunteer
> efforts using ADA.
You never designed, programmed or managed the implementation of a
> On Mon, 23 Dec 2013 22:32:56 -0700, rbowman
> <bow...@montana.com> wrote:
>
>> F. George McDuffee wrote:
>>
>>> FWIW -- ADA was specifically developed for this type of
>>> climate/environment.
>>
>> I remember when people were falling all over themselves trying to find a
>> working Ada compiler so they could learn the language. I didn't bother. I
>> worked on one DoD project in the '80s and swore I'd never do that again.
> ===============
>
> One of the nicest words in English is free...
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/gnuada/
> http://libre.adacore.com/
> {windows and Linux versions, may have a mac in there also}
>
> Most likely too heavy duty for the typical hacker, but ideal
> for huge, highly modularized projects.
>
> Fantasy -- single function module requirements and
> intermodule i/o data formats published on open source sites
> and the healthcare.gov back end is created by mass volunteer
> efforts using ADA.
software project in your life.
Michael A. Terrell
Dec 24, 2013, 3:02:01 AM12/24/13
to
wage. :)
--
Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to
have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
Michael A. Terrell
Dec 24, 2013, 3:12:55 AM12/24/13
to
'87. The pay was a salary of < $13,000 a year for an engineering
position responsible for maintaining all their transmitters. I moved to
Florida, instead. More money and about half the cost of living. I
would have had to share an apartment with four or five people to survive
on the insult offered by the Federal Government to work in D.C. It was
considered the worst place to work for VOA, and absolutely impossible to
get a transfer to another station.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages