#TheWeekInCareers - Episode 74

Welcome to #TheWeekinCareers! If you are a first-time reader (and congratulations if so, you are now part of a 3900+ strong community!), this newsletter is my attempt at summarising some of the key #Careers-related news from across the #Careersphere each week, along with some of the talking points I feel are worthy of further debate amongst the #Careers community! So, without further ado, on to the news!

I enjoyed writing last week's inaugural instalment of 'The Soapbox' (and reading the insightful comments from readers that followed) so much, that I've decided to bring it back again for this week's newsletter - this time around, I'm going to be focusing on the damage that can be caused by judging the career decisions of others, with nods to Jim Bright 's excellent recent piece in the Sydney Morning Herald on overstating the significance of individual career decisions, and the recent discourse in the UK regarding 'low-value degree courses' and who gets to choose what a 'successful' educational outcome looks like. I'm also bringing back an old #TheWeekInCareers favourite for today's newsletter, as #LMICorner makes its return - this instalment features a nifty new tool from the ONS, focusing on graduate/non-graduate mobility, suggestions for utilising AI as a labour market research tool (of sorts) and more!

All this PLUS another jam-packed #BestOfTheRest to digest with your weekend coffee (or beverage of choice) - dig in, at your leisure...

I hope you enjoy this week's newsletter and thank you as always for continuing to subscribe, read, comment on and support #TheWeekInCareers! ??

The Soapbox: The Tyranny of 'Good Career Decisions'...??

As noted in the introduction to this week's newsletter, my 2nd entry for The Soapbox was inspired by a recent article from Jim Bright in The Sydney Morning Herald on the fallacy of the 'perfect career move' (more on this later...), along with the deeply troubling news we've seen in the UK over the last week regarding funding cuts for arts courses (and the widening participation organisation, Uni Connect), alongside the now somewhat predictable narrative regarding 'low-value courses' that has accompanied this announcement:

Fortunately for the careers community, the venerable Charlie Ball was on hand to respond to the overly simplistic and wildly generalising post from MP Neil O'Brien seen above, noting the issues inherent with relying on one study/dataset to draw sweeping conclusions concerning the 'value' of degrees, notwithstanding the litany of other reasonable concerns/arguments made by both Charlie and other commenters in the Twitter/X thread (ranging from concerns regarding the long-term impact to the creative arts sector in the UK if this report influences policy, to more fundamental grievances regarding how we attribute 'value' to someone's education or career choices - many of these broader benefits of higher education from 2013 still hold true today, IMO!):

There's an awful lot to unpack from this thread, that has already been accomplished far more eloquently via the linked post above, but needless to say reading this post reminded me once again just how narrowly many individuals visualise the concept of 'career' (even folks like MPs, who have often had somewhat squiggly career paths themselves) and what 'success' should look like in this arena. In the case of the IFS data referenced above, what it doesn't take into account (by their own admission) is the earnings of graduates once they go past the age of 30 (as Charlie rightly notes in his response, these individuals still have 35+ years of working life ahead of them, if earnings is the sole metric you are seeking to measure!) or the nuances of career progression within particular industries; for example, some industries (such as some of the sectors within the Creative Arts; Culture & Heritage, Radio, Design etc.) simply don't have the volume of high-paying graduate roles that industries like Tech, Engineering and Finance possess, and so in many cases the trajectory for graduates in these industries is likely to look substantially different (including a greater reliance on self-employment and freelance work, in the case of creative industries graduates).

And this is all without reflecting on the nature of what we even mean when we talk about 'career success', a topic I wrote about at length during the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly in regard to the absurdity of trying to generalise 'success' or meaningfulness in relation to other people's career journeys:

As Jan Tegze noted in a recent LinkedIn blog (see below), salary is only ever one part of the equation when it comes to calculating your happiness in work (and life!), so for MPs (or any other individuals) to hold up financial returns as the primary metric for assessing whether a career decision (such as whether to study a particular degree) has been 'successful' does not seem to tally with the lived experience of many individuals, particularly when the data is only captured part of the way through someone's career:

Coming back to the creative industries, my conversations with creative arts graduates via our Hud Grad Club podcast at The University of Huddersfield have provided me with a litany of examples of career stories that demonstrate why it's simply impossible to predict how an individual's career may unfold - for example:

?? Phil Delves - Phil graduated in Music Technology and spoke in depth on the podcast about how his degree prepared him for the uncertainty of his graduate career, which has led to him establishing a successful professional identity as a writer, presenter, designer and social media specialist in the world of football shirt design:

?? Matt Freeman - Matt was another Music grad, this time from the BMus degree and after initially attempting to monetise his own music, he moved into the adjacent world of fundraising for the arts, working for organisations including the Southbank Centre, Royal Shakespeare Company and Birmingham Royal Ballet. He now works as a freelance fundraising consultant, while continuing to work on his own music:

?? Kat Taylor - Kat is a Textile Design grad who spoke at length in the podcast about her squiggly career journey from design graduate to freelance designer, which featured a significant amount of 'job crafting' and picking up new skills from roles in Sales, Copywriting, Admin and Marketing that ended up bolstering her freelance practice. If you are a fan of Kirstie's Handmade Christmas on Channel 4, you may recognise Kat from a previous episode of the show!

?? Ben Bowden - Our most recent episode of the podcast (published just this week!) contains a classic example of why it's so difficult (and arguably pointless) to confidently predict the trajectory of anyone's career. Ben is a BA Graphic Design graduate who used a dip in the job market for his field as an opportunity to set up his own digital agency, and has recently returned to working directly for a company as their Head of Marketing, embracing uncertainty and change rather than feeling constrained by these factors (see below for more on this...)

All of which brings me back to Jim Bright 's excellent recent piece in The Sydney Morning Herald and the opening line, in particular - Career decisions too frequently are built up to be momentous, but very few decisions are final. In his article, Jim brilliantly expounds on the folly of trying to make the 'perfect career decision', noting that even the most thorough individuals can only do the best with the information available to them at the point in time they are making a decision and that in many cases, advice around decision making can often be trite and deterministic (see: 'Follow your passion', 'go with your gut', 'weigh up all the pros and cons' etc.), when in reality experience tells us we can never know the outcome of any decision for certain. Coming back to the Twitter post above, which denigrates the career choices of creative arts students and graduates, we can clearly see the tyranny of this type of thinking when looking at the concept of 'career' in a generalist way (e.g. taking a simplistic analysis and applying it to everyone in a cohort/demographic), rather than in the form of the thousands of individual career journeys this data represents, each one the product of potentially hundreds of separate career decisions. And as Jim Bright astutely observes towards the end of his article, arguably the most pernicious belief regarding career decision making is the idea that once made, every decision must be followed, unflinchingly, based on our original intentions - We can remove a lot of pressure from ourselves, by recognising that any career “decision” is initially no more than a redirection, that does not have to be grimly stuck by in the face of changing circumstances.

Staying on the subject of career decision making, one of the (other) most frustrating aspects of the debate around whether individuals should study certain degree subjects or not is the elephant in the room that is obstinately ignored by all sides - the lack of high-quality guidance prospective students/apprentices/workers (particularly young people) have access to before making decisions regarding post-16 and post-18 options. Now, this is in no way a knock to the brilliant careers professionals who ply their trade in schools and colleges around the country - indeed, I used to work in this part of the sector and through my contacts in the #Careersphere I'm only too aware of some of the outstanding work that is being undertaken to help young people explore possible futures and chart a way forward after completing their mainstream or post-16 education. However, there's no hiding from a couple of key issues:

• The lack of ringfenced funding for schools to hire qualified careers professionals to deliver 1:1 guidance with students has a MASSIVE impact when it comes to facilitating more informed career decision making at this stage of education, in my experience - with school budgets already hard up, the lack of direct funding in this area has always meant that there is the potential for a 'postcode lottery' of sorts, depending on school budgets and priorities, regardless of the presence of quality frameworks like the Gatsby Benchmarks (what is accepted/resourced for Gatsby Benchmark 8, in terms of the delivery of 'Personal Guidance', does not seem to be uniform across the country, in my experience speaking with concerned careers professionals working in school settings). The truth is that regardless of how many schools across England we have signed up to Careers Hubs (and the aim is 95% by August 2024) or connect with local/national employers, even the Ofsted thematic review of career guidance identified just how vital the role of the 1:1 guidance appointment (with a qualified practitioner) is when it comes to supporting young people to make career decisions that are right for them at that point in time:

"Most useful thing from careers adviser is that I got a different perspective I wouldn’t have thought about. I already knew what colleges I wanted to go to, so the meeting was mostly for university choices and the adviser showed me the variety at universities." (Quote from a KS4 pupil, Ofsted thematic review of Career guidance, September 2023)

• Linked to the point above, we often don't have enough careers support available for young people at the crunch point of career decision making regarding post-16 and post-18 options, particularly in the case of individuals who are finishing their A-Levels/T-Levels/BTECs and considering whether to move on to an apprenticeship, university, employment or another route (such as a Gap Year). Take for example the GCSE/BTEC/A-Level/T-Level results days in August each year - while some careers professionals are paid by schools/colleges to work on these dates and support students who might be considering Clearing for university or finalising applications for apprenticeships and job vacancies, this is not necessarily a standard offer across the board and even for the schools/colleges that offer this service, it is arguably the point in the academic year when even more resource is required, to ensure that all young people have access to an extended 1:1 guidance appointment to discuss their next moves (should they feel they need it), either on the day or once they have had time to digest their results and the implications these results can bring in relation to their post-16/18 options. Having worked a number of Results Days in my time, I acutely recall the anxiety many young people felt on this day and how valuable they reflected it was to have the opportunity to talk through their options with a qualified, impartial third party, before settling on a decision regarding their next moves.

Since working in HE, I've witnessed first-hand the knock-on impact that comes from us not funding this transition/post-16/18 career guidance support well enough, as a country (speaking on behalf of England) - for me, some of the issues that have emerged within our higher education system are not necessarily down to the quality of courses (although I certainly agree that it's fair for students to critique what they are getting from their degree, given the fees involved) but more to do with many individuals not having interrogated their decision to study a particular course before enrolling at university (or onto an apprenticeship, moving directly into full-time work etc. - the principle remains the same!) Careers services in universities meet with these individuals every year and the story is often a similar one:

"I thought the course would be interesting but I didn't really know I'd be doing _______, it's just not for me"

"I was good at ______ so got told that _____ would be a good course for me, but I'm really not enjoying it"

"I knew that ________ can get you into a good job but I'm not really motivated by anything we are learning about"

For some individuals, access to guidance early enough into their university experience can help them realise that a simple course change could make all the difference (and for many, it really does) whereas for others, taking the time to reflect with a qualified careers professional supports them to consider other options for which they feel they might be better suited, such as apprenticeships, or sometimes taking a 'Gap Year' to give themselves some breathing space from full-time education, explore different opportunities and consider their next moves. The common thread often seems to be that they no longer feel 'trapped' into sticking with their initial decision (as we know, this mentality can exist for a number of reasons, including perceived/real pressure from family/friends, a sense of pride/ego and not wanting to 'quit' something, the 'sunk cost fallacy' etc.), they 'have permission' to explore what alternative pathways might look like, and reassurance that this isn't an 'all-in' scenario (e.g. 'the first step of your career isn't the final step') - THIS is the power of good career guidance and it is exactly why this support is needed so greatly for individuals at these key points of transition.

It's hard not to ruminate that if politicians, policy makers and other key stakeholders better understood the life-changing potential of career guidance, we'd likely be talking more about the different ways we could potentially fund this support for individuals at key transition points (e.g. post-16, post-18, redundancy, career change, in-work progression, unemployment etc.), and less about the subjective merits and drawbacks of specific courses and educational pathways. If, as Jim Bright observes, the key lies not in our ability to make 'perfect' career decisions but in our attitude and approach to change, MPs in England would do well to change the record when it comes to tired arguments concerning 'University vs Apprenticeships' and focus more on how we support individuals to critically interrogate the options available to them, take ownership of their career decision making and embrace the uncertainty of their careers (and all on a lifelong basis, rather than our current patchwork model...) As to how we make this happen in reality, let's leave that for another Soapbox...

What are your thoughts on this topic? Do you concur with Jim Bright's assessment regarding the tyranny of the 'perfect' career move? Am I on the money regarding the lack of careers support in England for young people at key career transition points, or do you feel we are in a healthier position than I've made out? What was your reading of the Neil O'Brien Twitter/X post and the responses in the ensuing thread? Answers, as always, on a #TheWeekInCareers postcard...?? (or more accurately, in the comments thread at the bottom of the newsletter! ??)

#LMICorner Returns! ONS graduate mobility data, AI + more...??

It's been a while since our last #LMICorner (all the way back at the start of December last year!) and given the reference to graduate data in our lead item this week, I felt it was an appropriate time for this segment to make a comeback, particularly with the recent release of a data visualisation tool from the ONS that spotlights graduate/non-graduate mobility, which I review below. I've also provided some examples of how I've been using GenAI tools like ChatGPT to encourage clients to critically engage with labour market research, and have thrown in a link to a hidden LMI gem that provides a helpful macro view of growth industries in the UK - enjoy! ??

?? Graduate and Non-Graduate Mobility, ONS-style...

As mentioned above, the past few weeks saw the Office for National Statistics drop a brand-new data visualisation tool, which tests the generalisation that individuals with more education are more likely to move away from their hometown. To do this, the ONS have explored 'which English towns and cities (built-up areas) retain and attract people with higher levels of education, and which tend to lose them', which they have done by using data related to all state-school pupils in England who sat their GCSEs between the 2007-2008 and 2010-2011 school years, and then proceeded to check which of these individuals went on to complete a degree or other post-16 qualification (L3-L5) and whether, in the 2018-2019 academic year, those people lived in the same town that they were living in when they sat their GCSEs. As David Kernohan notes in the Wonkhe article below, this has led to some really interesting regional and national 'storytelling' regarding the migration of graduates and non-graduates, even if the 'built-up areas' aspect of the data/tool means that we are unable to access what would have been equally valuable data regarding more rural and isolated parts of the country:

As Charlie Ball has pointed out, there are still issues with the dataset (apparently, Lancaster was conspicuously missing a university until Charlie's recent intervention!) but a cursory glance at the data for your nearest town/city (or anywhere you care to search) via the tool below does leave you with some fascinating takeaways - for example, I've often noticed anecdotally that many graduates from Sheffield (my nearest city) who'd been through their mainstream education locally tended to stay in the area after completing their studies, but the data (which demonstrates a significant net gain of graduates for Sheffield, in the timeframe the data is taken from) helps to paint a clear picture that Sheffield does a good job of retaining a significant majority of both its graduates and qualified non-graduates (e.g. L3-L5). I'm still exploring all of the data the tool throws back, but even a quick experiment allows you to see what this information could tell you about particular areas and their attractiveness to younger workers (and where they are gravitating to if they are not sticking around - in Sheffield for example, those graduates who left the Yorkshire region tended to end up in London, while for qualified non-graduates this tended to be the East Midlands, possibly due to the Engineering opportunities there).

You can access the data visualisation tool from the ONS using the link below - have a play and see what you think! ??

?? LM(A)I...

Understandably, many careers professionals have been fairly cautious when it comes to utilising GenAI tools like ChatGPT, Gemini, Bing Copilot and Claude to support with LMI-related aspects of their work, in part due to the capacity for inaccuracy and even misinformation we are still witnessing in these Large Language Models. However, I've recently been playing around with using GenAI as a learning tool for helping students and graduates think more critically about how they search for and engage with labour market information, and wanted to share two examples to gauge the thoughts of the #Careers community in terms of whether we think this sort of approach could be valuable, or whether it might be a bit gimmicky. The caveat to the examples I'll share is that I would never encourage any clients I work with to use this as the 'single point of truth' when it comes to LMI but more as a starting point for exploring the labour market.

My first example demonstrates what I feel can be one of the massive benefits of using GenAI tools as a 'springboard' for career research - the ability to summarise information and provide a quick 'starting point' which individuals can then use to take their research further, using more established resources. The video below demonstrates a prompt that I have used to help students and graduates develop an overview of a particular industry/sector area, as a way to identify where gaps might exist in their knowledge and prompt further discussion (typically in a 1:1 or group session) about how they might be able to fill these knowledge gaps and what sources could help with this (e.g. general careers sites, industry news, professional bodies, informational interviews etc.). Have a look and see what you think!

My second example is based more around the concept of 'Informational Interviewing' (or in other words, a careers conversation), a practice careers professionals regularly encourage their clients to explore but one that can feel quite daunting, if you are doing it for the first time. To help individuals consider what they might want to ask/prep for an informational interview, I created a prompt for ChatGPT that puts the AI in the role of a professional in whichever industry the user specifies - based on the questions the user asks, the AI then responds as if they were a professional in that industry, answering in as human way as possible and helping the user to consider what follow-up questions they might wish to ask. I'm still tinkering with the tone/responses that the AI generates (they still have the tendency to come across as a overly formal and a little robotic!) but I do feel this has the potential to be a helpful learning tool for those new to the practice of informational interviewing, so please take a look at the video below and let me know what you think!

?? Best of British (*and Northern Ireland)...

We finish the latest #LMICorner with a slightly left-field recommendation, given that it refers to a website from the Department for Business and Trade that is principally targeted at organisations looking to invest in UK PLC. Nonetheless, I've found the site below extremely useful when discussing the topic of labour market information/intelligence with students and graduates (particularly international students/grads who may not be as familiar with the industry landscape in the UK), as it surfaces some of the key sectors in the UK (including some of our specialist areas, such as Biotech and the Creative Industries) and provides a range of case studies for each sector, showcasing cutting-edge projects and companies from around the country involved in these areas of industry. Although some of the language on the site is understandably targeted at external organisations who might be looking to set up shop in the UK, the site itself is super easy to navigate and contains some really valuable macro information regarding key/growing industries across the country, which could help jobseekers or career changers to build a clearer picture of where opportunities might be in their region or further afield - check it out! ??

I'm always keen to spotlight any LMI tools, reports or resources that CDPs have found particularly illuminating as part of future editions of #LMICorner, so if you have any recommendations, please don't hesitate to drop me a line! ??

The Best of the Rest: My Hot Picks from the wider?#Careersphere???

?? Redesigning Retirement - First up this week, an excellent piece in the Harvard Business Review regarding the vital role that older workers play within the workforce and the importance of employers recognising how they can better utilise talented individuals within this demographic to solve challenges around talent gaps. The article is US-centric but contains lots of valuable insights that are just as applicable in the UK and other countries with an aging population/workforce, including how companies might redesign the nature of employment for workers over the age of 65, and the importance of identifying the talents that older workers bring to the workplace, while challenging lazy stereotypes about the perceived barriers or limitations related to hiring from this demographic. Well worth a read this weekend!

???? How silos stop you in your job and hold your career back - Up next, another fantastic episode of the Squiggly Careers Podcast from Helen Tupper and Sarah Ellis at Amazing If - anyone who has worked in a large organisation (or any organisation, for that matter) will be familiar with the potentially ruinous effect of 'siloes' (e.g. work/projects existing in specific bubbles, with limited connectivity and communication across an organisation or between business functions) and in the pod, Helen and Sarah expand on this topic, identifying why siloes are not only bad for business but also bad for your career development, and what you can do to break through the silo barrier, including supporting with cross-functional events and getting involved with side projects at work that allow you to explore different areas of the business.

?? The Assembly - With thanks to Liane Hambly (she/her) for bringing this to my attention, this week I sat down to watch The Assembly, a half-hour TV special (available on BBC iPlayer) that saw actor and director Michael Sheen grilled by a group of 35 interviewers, all of whom are autistic, neurodivergent or learning disabled. The resulting programme (in celebration of Autism Acceptance Week) is warm, humorous and uplifting, with the dialogue emerging from the questions posed by the interviewers a great example of why transparency and authenticity can often lead to much more interesting and illuminating answers than the usual interview schtick Hollywood actors are often subjected to. Michael Sheen is also fantastic throughout, putting on a masterclass in how to work with people and demonstrating empathy, patience and unconditional positive regard with all of the interviewers he speaks with - this is 30 minutes of TV you will not regret tuning in for this weekend!

?? What was your first job? - Next up, a lovely LinkedIn post and comment thread from Laurie Stewart ?? , who reflects on her first job as a paper girl in Liverpool and why it can be important not to forget our humble beginnings when it comes to our career journeys. The subsequent comments thread features a treasure trove of interesting 'first jobs', from Dairy Farmer and Bingo Attendant to Bouncy Castle Inflater! What was your first job and what did you learn from the experience?

?? #LadiInFinland - We finish this week's newsletter with a shout-out to Ladi Mohammed-Chapman?? , who has been undertaking a fantastic public service for careers professionals during her recent trip to learn about the Finnish education and careers system, via sharing her reflections, insights and answers to some of the questions posed to her by careers professionals in the UK before she embarked on her voyage of discovery! If you're interested in what the life of a careers professional in Finland is like or are simply curious about their much-vaunted project-based learning approach to education, give Ladi Mohammed-Chapman?? a follow on LinkedIn and check out the great series of posts she has been sharing over the past week!

I'm always keen to hear what people think of this weekly newsletter format (e.g. Is it helpful? Does it add value to what is already out there on LinkedIn? What might make it better/more digestible?) so please do drop me a DM if you have any thoughts!

See you in the #Careersphere next week for?Episode 75! ??