I found this article interesting because it touches on diversity of men and women in the work force. International trade with other countries has increased so much in the last 30 years, understanding and training is very much a necessity to keep up with our ever changing economy in order to stay competitive. I agree with the article that motivating and developing a diverse group of men and women would improve efficiency and achieve growth with any company, but that is not what's happening. Companies have the experienced employees, but they are not using them. Instead, the individuals that's needed to be or should have been motivated and developed, they are the ones that are being forced into retirement or simply being let go because it is assumed that the "older group" are not good enough or open enough to change. I have always believed that there should be some sort of rotation of knowledge from one generation to the next. Go to college and graduate. Get a job with a good company. Start at the bottom, learn the ropes, and work your way up the ranks, absorbing knowledge along the way to stay current all the time. Then as they get closer to retirement, they are the new leaders of the company, passing the information onto the next group or generation of college grads as they go through the same steps, and so on and so on. Respect and loyalty are dying attributes. The natural evolution in corporate ameria doesn't exist anymore. Wisdom will always trumps youth. Having babies telling elders what to do wouldn't work in the real world, so what makes you think it would work in the corporate arena. There will always be problems and or difficulty in finding or keeping experienced talent if companies insist in getting rid of the employees that matter. Again, as always, just sharing my thoughts.
So my question is, do you agree or disagree with John Ryans ideas on growth strategies and leadership development plans? And if not, what would you do to encourage change?