by CHRC | Feb 26, 2020 | Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, Labor Markets
The Economist claims that in a recent lecture, an esteemed economist at The University of Chicago asserted that “the decision to participate in a market is not simply about maximizing utility given a set of tastes and constraints.”
Underpinning much of what is taught and believed about economics at U of C is that all people are rational actors. But like Adam Smith, who understood that the invisible hand of efficient markets would only work within a system of moral actors, Marianne Bertrand’s research has uncovered that the labor market for women isn’t efficient within a system of societal biases.
To understand more about what Bertrand’s data reveals about the contributors to gender gaps in the labor markets Read More Here
by CHRC | Feb 26, 2020 | Labor Markets
The Economist claims that in a recent lecture, an esteemed economist at The University of Chicago asserted that “the decision to participate in a market is not simply about maximizing utility given a set of tastes and constraints.”
Underpinning much of what is taught and believed about economics at U of C is that all people are rational actors. But like Adam Smith, who understood that the invisible hand of efficient markets would only work within a system of moral actors, Marianne Bertrand’s research has uncovered that the labor market for women isn’t efficient within a system of societal biases.
To understand more about what Bertrand’s data reveals about the contributors to gender gaps in the labor markets Read More Here
by CHRC | Feb 19, 2020 | Human Capital
Today, everyone is convinced that STEM is the only path forward, and certainly the only path into the sciences. But what if you heard the tale of a young man who found his (milky) way to becoming an astrophysicist while studying Ancient Greek?
Not just any astronomer, but one whose research helped a NASA lunar vehicle navigate.
This past October, I tripped over this Krista Tippett interview with Dr. George Coyne, S.J. and a fellow Jesuit astronomer, who also studied Ancient Greek. I found it fascinating, and upon hearing of Fr. Coyne’s death on February 11, I had to revisit it.
Coyne’s “stumbling” into astronomy caught my attention because of another unusual journey I heard firsthand. On a flight a few years ago, my seatmate was a world class physicist who had started college as an English major. The university, however, made her take an intro to science course, in which she had NO interest. Yet there, she found poetry in physics, and the world gained someone who could unlock the great mysteries of math, as well as words. Yet in both her case and that of George Coyne, they were able to translate complex math and science into terms that the rest of us could understand—because they both had well rounded backgrounds.
If we continue to push today’s young people to study only what is practical, and deemed useful for this decade, or even millennium, from what universes might they be kept? Read More Here
by CHRC | Feb 12, 2020 | Big Data, Labor Markets
Why do analysts reach for the wrong pair of glasses the minute that the monthly job numbers are released? Maybe they have a rare form of myopia that prevents them from seeing that the greatest part of our labor force works in the service industry and focusing their attention on those implications.
I have been pouring over the statistics, articles, and analyses since Friday’s job numbers were released. Such excitement that a warm January led to gains in the Construction sector! Construction only makes up 5% of the U.S. workforce. Now, compare that percentage with the 11% of the workforce that jobs in Leisure and Hospitality comprises. Of course, analysts also singled out Manufacturing, concerned that this industry lost 12,000 jobs during the month. This trend is hardly surprising; it is one that started before the Great Recession of 2008 and continues; yet today manufacturing only employs about 8% of America’s workforce.
What catches our eye? In order to stay competitive, companies need to ignore the 3.1% the press plays up and instead pay attention to what type of employees, in what industries, with what skills, are demanding wage increases between 3.7% and 14%.
Charts that put the picture into focus:
- The number of candidates per job opening, broken out by industry. The JOLTS report, the most recent released yesterday by the BLS. Read More Here
- Individual Wage Growth between the median and the 75th percentile analysis per the Atlanta Fed. Read More Here
Perhaps the analysts drinking their cappuccinos need to get a little less excited about who is manufacturing the fancy espresso machine and pay a little more attention to the talents and current wage demands of the barista who foamed their milk. Read More Here
by CHRC | Feb 5, 2020 | Leadership, Performance Reviews, Work Place
We are just finishing our holiday puzzle. You know that puzzle that you do as a family so that you have a legitimate excuse to sit around for hours at a time in your holiday pajamas? Well someone (me) had a brilliant idea this year of selecting a 1,000 piece puzzle of the Sistine Chapel. Pazzo!
I think most people have strategies for doing puzzles: find the four corners first, then segregate out the edge pieces, and once the structure is completed, then start looking for colors or patterns. Most of us are set in our way of solving puzzles. Our family has traditionally had its roles set. My husband and son have extraordinary spatial development skills—and we have overly relied on these. I might have been staring at a section forever, desperate for a piece in one area, and my husband would come, stand over my shoulder, nonchalantly pick up the one piece I’d been searching for, and silently snap it into a gaping hole. Infuriating—yet this skill completes the puzzle at a much faster pace.
This year the tables were turned. Once the perimeter was finished, our traditional go-to guy’s secret weapon was of no use. Why? Because Michelangelo’s genius required color recognition to solve this puzzle, and no spatial development skill was going to help. My spatial development genius husband is very challenged when it comes to nuances in color.
Our son returned to college, our daughter (quite smartly) refused to help, and every time my husband wandered back to try again, frustration took over. I think I must have changed tactics five different times and employed entirely new ones. There was no one way to solve this puzzle.
This really made me think about the way we approach problem-solving at work. How often do we have a project or problem and our first response is to ask the office go-to guy? How often would the go-to guy admit this is a problem he can’t solve? That he’s never done a 1,000 piece puzzle before or that he is terrible at color recognition? How often does a boss or colleague tell the go-to guy that he doesn’t have what it takes to solve THIS problem? It’s time to recognize that sometimes, someone who has traditionally never been the strongest player for the typical problems tackled, just might have the required skill set to lead the team in solving a new puzzle.
I think there’s a lot of food for thought that anyone in an organization or leading a team should ponder. Anyone in the midst of performance reviews should definitely be thinking about team members as a collection of all of their strengths and perceived weaknesses. You could be overvaluing one person’s spatial development while overlooking someone else’s color recognition—an ability that someday might be the key to solving the team’s biggest challenge.
