Nowadays when we look around the world, many of us are disillusioned and can easily become pessimistic about our futures. But the last thing we want to do is rob our children of their faith in humanity or the optimism we need to fuel positive change. However, we do need to look at our worldview or values and whether they are consistent with building a future that inspires young people.
Recently I have been hearing a lot of very smart people saying that the way to improve the economy is by producing individuals with more advanced degrees. They are telling us that what we need is more PhDs. I think that most professions, parents, people would like to believe if there were more like them, the world would be in less of a mess. That is a very self-affirming view of life but unfortunately it actually may be aggravating the problems we have.
The desire for greater efficiency has resulted in more technological solutions that may increase profit for owners (or shareholders – absentee owners) of companies, but often does not contribute to greater job creation or even the local economy. Putting more people to work in Canada at jobs that pay more than the minimum wage, broadening the tax base, and allowing people (who are not interested or do not have the temperament to essentially become academics) to take a sense of pride in their work should be seen as important goals.
It is highly unlikely that most people in our country, province or city will earn advanced degrees. Approx. 20% of our young people still drops out of high school. We are also seeing a decrease in interest by young men who want to go to college or university. And now we are considering building an economic system that will further exclude and marginalize most people. This cannot do anything but breed greater division and conflict.
It would seem an archaic and counterproductive notion to recommend or promote labor-intensive industries that would simply require literate people with some education. But looking at the issue objectively, this does seem the most logical strategy. The reason we have moved away from this direction and toward high tech systems and processes is to create greater profitability and easier manageability for an elite group that benefit from such an economic system. It requires much greater skill and talent to manage a human driven organization than to design efficient systems largely devoid of human participation. We preach cooperative learning, working as a team, and the importance of communication and motivation. We seem to intellectually understand that we must embrace diversity and create more inclusive environments. But do these priorities really translate to the economic systems we have created?
Instead of creating products and businesses largely supported by technologically driven systems, why don’t we apply our brightest minds to creating processes that require the participation of large numbers of people in various capacities. I am not suggesting excluding technology all together but not making it a goal in itself. Yes, the cost might increase slightly. But if many more people are employed and feel secure in their jobs, more products will be sold and they would be willing to pay slightly more for the products they buy.
The real challenge is whether we can produce managers with the skill to create organizations that can successfully recruit, train, motivate, oversee and be genuinely accountable for high levels of production quality and customer service. We have become better at automating than training, engineering a system than actually working cooperatively, and creating new channels for communication rather than relating to each other. In the end, it may be efficient according to the criteria developed by an elite, but it is not a model for creating an economic system that values diversity, inclusion or sustainability.
Sustainability requires environmental, economic, social, and political systems to complement each other – harmonizing goals. Little progress can be made if we cannot agree to move in the same direction. This may seem overly idealistic and simplistic, but if we want to energize the next generation, we must construct a reality where they see opportunity, possibility, and dignity for most of them.
Recently I have been hearing a lot of very smart people saying that the way to improve the economy is by producing individuals with more advanced degrees. They are telling us that what we need is more PhDs. I think that most professions, parents, people would like to believe if there were more like them, the world would be in less of a mess. That is a very self-affirming view of life but unfortunately it actually may be aggravating the problems we have.
The desire for greater efficiency has resulted in more technological solutions that may increase profit for owners (or shareholders – absentee owners) of companies, but often does not contribute to greater job creation or even the local economy. Putting more people to work in Canada at jobs that pay more than the minimum wage, broadening the tax base, and allowing people (who are not interested or do not have the temperament to essentially become academics) to take a sense of pride in their work should be seen as important goals.
It is highly unlikely that most people in our country, province or city will earn advanced degrees. Approx. 20% of our young people still drops out of high school. We are also seeing a decrease in interest by young men who want to go to college or university. And now we are considering building an economic system that will further exclude and marginalize most people. This cannot do anything but breed greater division and conflict.
It would seem an archaic and counterproductive notion to recommend or promote labor-intensive industries that would simply require literate people with some education. But looking at the issue objectively, this does seem the most logical strategy. The reason we have moved away from this direction and toward high tech systems and processes is to create greater profitability and easier manageability for an elite group that benefit from such an economic system. It requires much greater skill and talent to manage a human driven organization than to design efficient systems largely devoid of human participation. We preach cooperative learning, working as a team, and the importance of communication and motivation. We seem to intellectually understand that we must embrace diversity and create more inclusive environments. But do these priorities really translate to the economic systems we have created?
Instead of creating products and businesses largely supported by technologically driven systems, why don’t we apply our brightest minds to creating processes that require the participation of large numbers of people in various capacities. I am not suggesting excluding technology all together but not making it a goal in itself. Yes, the cost might increase slightly. But if many more people are employed and feel secure in their jobs, more products will be sold and they would be willing to pay slightly more for the products they buy.
The real challenge is whether we can produce managers with the skill to create organizations that can successfully recruit, train, motivate, oversee and be genuinely accountable for high levels of production quality and customer service. We have become better at automating than training, engineering a system than actually working cooperatively, and creating new channels for communication rather than relating to each other. In the end, it may be efficient according to the criteria developed by an elite, but it is not a model for creating an economic system that values diversity, inclusion or sustainability.
Sustainability requires environmental, economic, social, and political systems to complement each other – harmonizing goals. Little progress can be made if we cannot agree to move in the same direction. This may seem overly idealistic and simplistic, but if we want to energize the next generation, we must construct a reality where they see opportunity, possibility, and dignity for most of them.
RSS Feed
