Thanks David. In this post we were seeking to capture the directions of travel/approaches we are seeing emerge and describing them. Where there is a large upskilling/reskilling requirement the state invariably plays a key role in funding nationwide programmes. The role of 'experts' is also necessary though when it comes to defining standards and qualifications as these are key parts of the infrastructure of any functioning labour market. Happy to discuss.
It seems this Green Edge article is leaving too much up to 'the experts' in allocating jobs using elite-defined skills and competencies. People are not units of production. Numerous motivators go into the decision of someone to try a job requiring skills and competencies different from those already developed. A hiring manager or equivalent will make better decisions on which person to engage, and an individual will use a variety of motivations to decide whether to take on the risk of doing anything, especially tasks the individual hasn't already specifically mastered (which means just about any task), than will any bureaucrat. In that light, the most efficient means of getting the right people working green jobs is to let the market of ideas, skills, and other motivators including money, sort things out.
It does not need to be occupation or skills or competences the system (and AI/ML competency management capabilities can handle this) should cope with all the needs, perspectives (8 perspective in competency management not just occupations also responsibility, performance, compliance etc.) and elements and facets of competency. We need to understand the impact on tasks from digitalisation & net zero and transformation of work (craft, standardised and systemised) as well defined in Susskinds book 'The Future of Professions'.
Thanks David. In this post we were seeking to capture the directions of travel/approaches we are seeing emerge and describing them. Where there is a large upskilling/reskilling requirement the state invariably plays a key role in funding nationwide programmes. The role of 'experts' is also necessary though when it comes to defining standards and qualifications as these are key parts of the infrastructure of any functioning labour market. Happy to discuss.
Good point Debbie - suggest we pick-up on this when we speak soon.
It seems this Green Edge article is leaving too much up to 'the experts' in allocating jobs using elite-defined skills and competencies. People are not units of production. Numerous motivators go into the decision of someone to try a job requiring skills and competencies different from those already developed. A hiring manager or equivalent will make better decisions on which person to engage, and an individual will use a variety of motivations to decide whether to take on the risk of doing anything, especially tasks the individual hasn't already specifically mastered (which means just about any task), than will any bureaucrat. In that light, the most efficient means of getting the right people working green jobs is to let the market of ideas, skills, and other motivators including money, sort things out.
It does not need to be occupation or skills or competences the system (and AI/ML competency management capabilities can handle this) should cope with all the needs, perspectives (8 perspective in competency management not just occupations also responsibility, performance, compliance etc.) and elements and facets of competency. We need to understand the impact on tasks from digitalisation & net zero and transformation of work (craft, standardised and systemised) as well defined in Susskinds book 'The Future of Professions'.