Suggestions
Joseph Fuller
Joseph B. Fuller is a Professor of Management Practice in General Management at Harvard Business School and co-director of the school's Managing the Future of Work project.12 He is a 1981 graduate of Harvard Business School and teaches courses on general management decision-making and managing the future of work in Harvard's MBA and executive education programs.23
Fuller's research focuses on multiple issues related to the future of work, including:
- The skills gap
- Growth of gig work
- The care economy
- Evolution of the role of CEOs and the C-Suite1
He is also the co-founder of the Harvard Project on Workforce, which investigates issues related to upward mobility and takes a multi-disciplinary approach to understanding career navigation and skills acquisition.2
Before his academic career, Fuller was a founder and first employee of the global consulting firm Monitor Group, now Monitor-Deloitte. He served as the CEO of its commercial consulting operations until 2006 and remained a Senior Advisor until the firm's acquisition by Deloitte in 2012.12
Fuller has authored numerous business cases and published research on topics such as dividend policy, income inequality, and the skills gap.4 He is also a nonresident senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and co-host of the Managing the Future of Work podcast series.5
Highlights
Skills-based hiring has been embraced by large companies nationwide. By eliminating the requirement that job applicants hold a college degree, they hoped to increase the size and diversity of their applicant. By "tearing the paper ceiling" to borrow Opportunity@Work elegant framing, companies and activists hoped to change the composition of those hired for jobs that were once limited to college graduates.
In our new paper from Project on Managing the Future of Work Harvard Business School and our valued colleagues at The Burning Glass Institute Matt Sigelman and Alex Martin, we examine the actual impact of these policy changes. Matthew Boyle of Bloomberg captures the core of our findings. Companies are working earnestly toward their goal and removing degree requirements travels on the arc of justice. But, implementing such a policy doesn't change practice. Our analysis indicates that 3.5 % of the jobs affected by such changes ultimately went to a non-degree holders. That's almost 100,000 jobs. Progress. But it's a tiny fraction of the available jobs and many occupations continue to have degree requirements that appear gratuitous.
Unlocking more opportunities will hinge on companies moving beyond the realm of 'policy' (i.e., 'candidates for jobs no longer must hold a college degree') to 'process' (i.e., 'our process acknowledges that hiring managers will be pre-disposed to select college degree holders over other candidates not out of prejudice but because hiring is a relative process...why wouldn't they pick a degree holder out of a pool they view as equally qualified?').
We hope our analysis will provoke companies to look at their record of hiring non-degree candidates. The companies cited in our paper have several things in common. They're leaders in their sectors. They are genuinely committed to hiring more diverse workers on the basis of skills. Their leaderships' commitment to that goal is sincere. The companies we categorize as "In Name Only" or "Backsliders" are working hard to advance their employees' interests and to broaden the catchment pool from which they hire. They're not trying to hide anything or claim credit disingenuously. Nonetheless, good intentions are not desired outcomes. Given the universal prevalence of the "you can only make it in America by getting a degree" fallacy, it will take some time and a lot of determined effort to make skills-based hiring a success. #skillsbasedhiring #skillsgap #dei
It's a misnomer to say that the U.S. has a career navigation 'system.' We have a hodgepodge of federal, state and local resources. The K-12 system is completely denuded of counseling resources. While there are dozens of community colleges with sophisticated approaches to liaising with employers and helping students understand employment opportunities, they are exceptions. The vast majority lack the resources (budget and personnel) to provide the data, direction and insights that aspiring workers need. The result? The deck ends up stacked for students from poorly performing K-12 systems, that urgently need wages so accept the first job they can get (and then start the process of building a work history that condemns them to working at low wage-high turnover jobs), who lack the social assets to navigate the system. Let's stop acting like the failure to navigate the Byzantine, archaic system is somehow an expression of aspiring workers' lack of aptitude or ambition. We need to stop spending on elements of the system that is demonstrably a failure. We need to provide student access to accurate, current and comprehensible data about what jobs are available in their area, what skills they require, how to get those skills and what they pay. We need to stop treating those job seekers as a uniform 'category' and start providing surround services that address their specific needs. We need to start providing an array of compensated work-based learning pathways and reform funding mechanism to make loans and grants available for non-degree programs in CTE and lifelong Pell to support reskilling. Excited to have The Hill publish my Op Ed with Amanda Cage of National Fund for Workforce Solutions that covers our The Project on Workforce at Harvard paper, Unlocking Economic Prosperity, on career navigation. Thanks to co-authors Kerry McKittrick, Sherry Seibel Cole Wilson Ali Epstein and Vashundhara Dash. Harvard Business School
https://lnkd.in/eZkwPM7G
