(Image credit: iStockphoto/golero)Uncertainty about the future is always on the minds of leaders. Concern about change defines their primary role. It’s up to others to manage, set and meet goals, etc. Recent polls have shown that many leaders are most uncertain about inflation and the possible return of a pandemic. But what about potential opportunities associated with the recession of the coronavirus, opportunities associated with a “reshuffling of the deck” in the workforce caused by COVID-19 that could create opportunities for business?
Did the pandemic have a positive effect of unfreezing a labor market that saw jobs going unfilled even as people were looking for work? Has it created a pool of “new” talent—that is, prospective employees with work experience seeking new career opportunities?
The female labor force had to deal with the brunt of changes resulting from the pandemic. In the United States, for example, millions of women left the labor force during the first two months of the pandemic. According to a study by McKinsey and Leanin.org, female workforce participation dropped to its lowest level in 32 years. Most left involuntarily to care for children at home from school or relatives who had contracted the virus. Others were laid off, many for reasons we’ll probably never know. Others took advantage of the pandemic to retire early from the paid workforce. These phenomena were even more marked for women in emerging economies of the world.
"Those organizations willing and able to train new employees in large numbers will have an advantage in this kind of war for talent."
That means that we can expect a flood of capable people, mostly women, seeking work during the coming months as the pandemic recedes and their children return to school. Many are ready to learn new jobs and new skills in an economy that needs such a transition. Those organizations willing and able to train new employees in large numbers will have an advantage in this kind of war for talent.
Leaders now must now consider whether their organizations are ready to accommodate the wave of talent that we know is on the way. A personal experience, however anecdotal it is, may provide food for thought. Last month, a female acquaintance with a long work record, a positive attitude, a high level of motivation, and familiarity with managing computer-aided work decided to re-enter the work force. She was confronted with a job requiring more complex computer knowledge than she possessed. There was little or no training or coaching. After three days, she was fired for the first time in her life. It was a blow to both her pocketbook and her self-esteem.
Is there an opportunity here for organizations ready to take advantage of the talent surge? Just how prepared are employers? Are incentives and support systems for returnees to the workforce in place? Have we provided for the need for inclusion for those returning to a new organization?
"It’s like the surfer who sees the big one coming."
We may be uncertain about inflation and a resurgent pandemic, but we shouldn’t be uncertain about the wave of female talent that will be seeking work during the coming months. It’s like the surfer who sees the big one coming.
Are employers ready for a flood of “new” talent seeking work? What do you think?
Share your thoughts in the comments below.
References:
Sara Coury, Jess Huang, Ankur Kumar, Sara Prince, Alexis Krivkovich, and Lareina Yee, Women in the Workplace 2020, McKinsey & Leanin.Org, September 30, 2020, womenintheworkplace.com.
Justine Jablonski (ed.), “Seven charts that show COVID-19’s impact on women’s employment,” March 8, 2021, McKinsey, mckinsey.com.
Summing up last month's column
CEO activism triggered a debate among those responding to last month’s column, with about equal support against and in favor of such activity.
MJ Moreland’s position was typical of several when he said, “This isn’t something I’m comfortable with. I do not believe the workplace should be a forum for political discussion as it creates immediate division.” Quoting from a statement by the founders of Basecamp, he added, “These are difficult enough waters to navigate in life, but significantly more so at work. It’s become too much. It’s a major distraction. It saps our energy.”
Al Romig added, “Being ‘woke’ or ‘unwoke’ publicly may be equally harmful to the enterprise.” Dennis Waterman was more blunt: “Unless they are going to get a vote of the SHAREHOLDERS they need to shut the bleep up.”
Nancy Chorpenning joined the above discussion, saying, “That’s a pretty cynical view. If ‘corporations are people,’ do they not have civic responsibilities?”
Jon Mertz opined that CEO activism fills a void. In his words, “Today political leaders have created a void—a virtues void … Given the current environment, CEOs need to continue to speak up and serve a role of accountability.”
Patricia Caballero regards CEO activism as inevitable: “We have reached the point where CEO activism is part of our reality. Surveys show consumers expect companies to take positions on social issues important to them, and they make those positions part of their consideration set when exploring brand loyalty. So CEOs have no choice but (to) become activists to maximize shareholder value.”
This still leaves us with the question: When CEOs practice activism, who are they representing? What do you think?