By Matthew Heimer
Ideas carry more weight in
corporate boardrooms once they show up in the Harvard Business Review, the
journal of that august CEO factory, the Harvard Business School. So it’s
noteworthy that the HBR blog recently gave some space to an editorial by David
Bloom and David Canning, economics professors at the Harvard School of Public
Health, called “How
Companies Must Adapt for an Aging Workforce.” (Hat tip to the Wall
Street Journal’s At Work blog, which recently referenced the article, as
well.) Their message: Businesses that don’t move fast to accommodate their most
mature and seasoned workers in the talent pool will be at a huge competitive
disadvantage.
It’s widely known, of course that
the average age of the industrialized Western workforce has been steadily
growing. But Bloom and Canning believe that most of today’s businesses
underestimate, and are under-prepared for, just how far that trend will extend.
“In the near future, employees in significantly growing numbers will likely be
able to work productively into their eighth or even ninth decade,” they write.
(One hopes that the septa- and octogenarians will be working by choice, not
because they’re broke.)
Preparing for that older workforce
will mean a host of adjustments, say the Harvard profs—not just familiar ones,
like flexible scheduling that lets older workers arrange a semi-retirement, but
a wider rethinking of health-care benefits and pay. “Wellness programs produce
healthier employees at all ages,” they explain, while “on-site clinics save
workers time and focus care on prevention and early disease detection, which
also lowers costs.”
And folks who stay in the workforce
can’t expect their pay to automatically keep climbing all the way to the end of
their careers. “Seniority-based pay sometimes exceeds performance at the latter
stages of the life cycle,” Bloom and Canning write, unsentimentally. “Bringing
pay and performance (properly assessed) into closer conformity would likely
ease corporate norms surrounding age at retirement.” In other words, the young
guy down the hall might not take your job; but if you aren’t measurably better
than he is, he’ll get paid more than you.
It's great to know that this issue is getting some serious attention from the academic world. The competitive disadavantage arguement for positive age discrimination is the one that's most likely to get the attention of the key decision makers in business and that can only be a good thing. We've got a very long way to go, but I think this is great news.
ReplyDelete