McWilliams Sparks Off A Debate on Labour Market Mismatch

In a recent article, "A little less accountancy and a little more carpentry is what we all need", David McWilliams has sparked off a debate on occupational mismatch. McWilliams paints a very vivid picture of corporate drudgery, where expectations for exciting work are often unmet, and sometimes financial rewards also fall short of what people expect. "Thousands of our graduates leave university, many qualified to do nothing, and they find themselves in a corporate cul de sac. Rather than being independent, they are trapped, funnelled into institutions that immediately close off rather than expand their options".

This, of course, points to a problem that is fast being conceived of as "mismatch" in the economics literature i.e. students pursue a certain course of study for a number of years, then end up in a job where what they have studied is completely irrelevant to their occupation. I have thought about various angles on the problem, such as:

- Can financial satisfaction compensate for labour market mismatch?
- Is financial satisfaction less likely with labour market mismatch?
- Is it possible to avoid labour market mismatch?
- Do occupational preferences evolve over time?
- Do we need a much better career guidance system?

A series of comments on McWilliam's article are pasted below. This takes up a large amount of space, but the comments are so insightful, I thought people would appreciate getting to read them. Of course, interpretation of what the comments mean is subjective, but I definitely see a theme of regret amongst those individuals who have not pursued their occupational preference, whether they knew what their preference was at the start of their occupational pursuits or not. The themes running throughout these comments have really made me appreciate the importance of the research that I have planned - to evaluate occupational preferences and decision-making, as nothing can be more frustrating than a lifetime's regret.


"I come from PhD land, those idiots sucked in by the apparent kudos of being a Dr, except we are a fopish herd of vocational Dr’s ie we don’t get paid properly. Post Docs is this country pay just above the minimum wage, there are no pensions or benefits, yes you can work in industry (in America) but there are few opportunities in this country. My advice is simple, don’t invest your life capital in anything that the government recommends, run far away (very far) from anything those idiots suggest. I have solved my situation by moving away from ’science’ and into industry but not research; the PhD helped but is not worth loosing 4 yrs of your youth (unless you are rich and enjoy witless conversations)"


"I completely agree with Restless in what he said. The only reason for pursuing a post-graduate education is purely for the appreciation of knowledge, not for making a career. I spent 4 years earning my BSc in Physics and another 2 years earning my MSc in Medical Physics. When I graduated, there was pretty much only one company that could have provided me work relevant to my studies, they weren’t hiring though, so I ended up becoming a store manager at Aldi. Don’t get me wrong, I love the job; it’s challenging in it’s own right. I would dearly have loved to have pursued a career in my degree subject though".


"Great article David. I have a primary degree and two postgrad degrees (including a ’silver bullet’ MBA). I am pretty sure that somebody without a degree could do my job as well if not better. The effort it took to do the Leaving Cert and then an engineering degree was far in excess of anything I have been confronted with at work. I earn good money but I have zero satisfaction with what I do, I am already focusing everything on making sure that my children don’t end up like me. My view is that a university education should be about expanding your intellectual horizons so the American collegiate model is the way to go. How can a 16 or 17 year old possibly know that they really want to be a lawyer or an electronic engineer?"


"When I think back on many of the biggest decisions in my life, I feel now that there was always a huge burden of restraint which limited my choices, mostly unecessarily. Whether it be chosing a career, buying a house, or other. In that sense, our society is in real need of another “opening up”. We need a kind of human emancipation to liberate us from our self-imposed intellectual chains. (The German philosopher, Habermas, has written about this, but much of his writing is extremely obscure and I have never had the guts to take him on). This doesn’t mean tear down society in some form of revolution. Merely retrain people to think for themselves. And camaign for a more open minded approach. We hear so much about flexibility these days, but always in a very narrow economic sense. Real flexility would be truly liberating".


"Good point. I filled in my CAO form in Jan 1991. I was 17. I chose my preferred course and therefore career - engineering. Not only did I know very little about what life as an engineer really entailed, but I didn’t come close to realising that my choice would one of the most significant I would take for the rest of my life. If I had had three extra years, or possibly even two, I would have made an entirely different choice. I attended a small school which at the time had practically no career guidance. But even if there had been such guidance, it is doubtful if I could have fully comprehended its significance at that age... Those who are in careers that are well chosen after mature reflection are going to prosper. Their productivity will be much higher. Their level of innovation will be higher, and so on. Socially too, this must have consequences. If people are more fulfilled (and probably richer!) there will be a knock on effect. I wonder if any sociologist has ever studied this".


To conclude, I don't think a sociologist has studied this topic. Some economists have begun the task. This one is going to get to devote a PhD to it.