Data-Smart City Pod

Opportunity and Equity in Workforce Development: Growing Fairly Book Talk

Episode Summary

In this episode moderator Earl Buford, president of the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning, interviews Growing Fairly co-authors Professor Stephen Goldsmith and Kate Markin Coleman as part of a recent virtual event hosted by the Kennedy School's Ash Center.

Episode Notes

In this episode Earl Buford, president of the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning, moderates a virtual book talk with Growing Fairly co-authors Professor Stephen Goldsmith and Kate Markin Coleman. They discuss supporting adult learners, skills as currency, the need for transparency workforce data, and the importance of system change.

This interview was recorded as part of a recent event hosted by the Harvard Kennedy School's Ash Center.

Music credit: Summer-Man by Ketsa

About Data-Smart City Solutions

Data-Smart City Solutions, housed at the Bloomberg Center for Cities at Harvard University, is working to catalyze the adoption of data projects on the local government level by serving as a central resource for cities interested in this emerging field. We highlight best practices, top innovators, and promising case studies while also connecting leading industry, academic, and government officials. Our research focus is the intersection of government and data, ranging from open data and predictive analytics to civic engagement technology. We seek to promote the combination of integrated, cross-agency data with community data to better discover and preemptively address civic problems. To learn more visit us online and follow us on Twitter

Episode Transcription

Betsy Gardner:

Hi, this is Betsy Gardner, senior editor at the Harvard Kennedy School and producer of the Data-Smart City Pod. We have a special episode for you today. This is a recording of the Growing Fairly virtual book talk, a recent event we hosted with the Kennedy School's Ash Center. You'll hear from co-authors Professor Stephen Goldsmith and Kate Markin Coleman and moderator Earl Buford, president of the Council for Adult and Experiential Learning.

Subscribe to our Data-Smart City Pod channel so you don't miss an episode, and thanks for listening.

Earl Buford:

Well, good afternoon, everyone. My name is Earl Buford and I'm the president for the Council on Adult and Experiential Learning. Also known as CAEL, where we partner with entities across the adult learner ecosystem to help create actionable career pathways along the journey of lifelong learning and meaningful work. So proud to be here today and look forward to having lots of fun and great information. Before we start, I want to start with a few announcements on behalf of the Ash Center. The Ash center would like to acknowledge the land on which Harvard sits as a traditional territory of Massachusetts people and a place which has long served as a site of meeting and exchange among nations. Now I'd like to briefly introduce our panelists for today's discussion on the book titled Growing Fairly. First, Stephen Goldsmith, Stephen is the direct Derek Bok professor of the practice of urban affairs at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government where he directs data smart city solutions.

He previously served as mayor of Indianapolis, deputy mayor of New York city and chair of AmeriCorps for a decade. Goldsmith has developed a reputation as one of the country's most innovative and effective local public servants in the past 25 years. He has been the subject of extensive coverage in national media for his variety of accomplishments. He is the author and co-author on eight books on cities and conducts sessions for mayors and senior local officials at heart. Also, joined by Kate Markin Coleman. Kate directs IAS advising LLC and is a former executive vice president, chief strategy, and advancement officer of the YMC of US, where she advanced innovation and effectiveness.

She spent the first of her career in the private sector, transferring to the social sector after she and her colleagues sold the FinTech firm. She studied cross-sector collaboration as a Harvard advanced leadership fellow, and is the co-author of two books that offer practical insight, how to design effective solutions to challenging urban problems. So with that, I give you Steven Goldsmith and I give you Kate Markin Coleman. So I just want to just highlight something from the book before I dive into a question or two for our authors. You mentioned in the book that they're bipartisan, they're not economists, but they met the experts for interviews and they're in research. Now we all have a chance, through this book, to meet all of the great work highlighted by the writing. So with that, I like to ask Steve and Kate, why this book and why this time?

Stephen Goldsmith:

And thank you, Earl. I'm sensitive to the fact that as I speak, you're one of the country's leading experts on not just the great accomplishments of CAEL, but on your workforce background as well. So if we make two lofty of claims, you can bring us back to reality here. So let me just say, I've been involved working in cities, advising city leaders for, oh a couple decades. Plus when we first began the book, we were addressing the question, why do cities appear to be doing so well but so many people are falling farther behind?

When I first began to work in cities, all cities were in a tough place, then many of those cities pre COVID were doing really well. Yet, not everybody in those cities was doing well. So, what was it about the dynamic of cities, the opportunities of cities, the governance of cities or the collaboration cities that created that situation or could resolve it. So the why this book is, pre COVID and then post COVID, not exactly post COVID, but post the arrival of COVID then the book was completed and why this book was the challenges aggravated by COVID, meaning the inequities appeared to also set up the conditions susceptible for a solution. So why this book, because the moment it requires more equity and more upward mobility, and we think that pieces are in place to actually produce change.

Kate Markin Coleman:

And could I add something to that Earl? Also, the two of us in our own sectors have literally decades of leading change. And so come to this with a practitioner's eye and thought if we went out there and found organizations and programs that were working, there were lessons in those programs for the larger system.

Earl Buford:

Okay. Thank you for that added element. And again, as I said earlier, just really excited and thank you for the contribution to the field. So what question for you, Kate. When you were listening to all these great experts, these great programs, what surprised you in these kind of conversations? What stood out? What really surprised you?

Kate Markin Coleman:

Well, so two things stood out. One, and this is very positive, is that there was real convergence around the policy recommendations. When you do qualitative research, you're always a little worried that you might get an angle that isn't necessarily representative, but when you do it, and everyone starts to say the same thing, you begin to realize that there're patterns. So that's surprised and pleased me. On a personal note when Steve and I were coming up with the policy recommendations, we didn't have any quarrels on the recommendations. We may have had disagreements on the words, but not on the recommendations, which suggest to me that there's a lot of, not only consistency, but I shudder to use the word certainty around the direction that we're seeing in some of the changes in workforce development.

Earl Buford:

Stephen, what surprises in your conversations?

Stephen Goldsmith:

Well, I'm not an expert like you are in workforce boards and workforce activities, per se. As a mayor, I've been involved in workforce boards, as deputy mayor, I've been involved them. I look more at things from a governance perspective, like how to put the pieces together. And just consistent with what Kate said, I guess I would say two areas of moderate surprise.

One is that given how important this issue is, how relatively little effort there is to create a system around workforce development. People call it a workforce development system, but as you know better than maybe anybody in America, it's not really a system. It's a bunch of pieces. And given the importance of the issue and the opportunities, it's a little surprising there's not more energy behind the system side. The other thing is, I don't think it takes much to convince anybody who's working in cities about the problems of inequity. What was a little surprising, to me, is that how a skill based conversation actually provides a solution for inequity. As Kate mentioned, we do have the answers. So it was encouraging that those answers are out there and agreed upon. So that surprised me as well as the lack of system work as well.

Earl Buford:

You also talked about principles or at least it seems to be a common theme throughout the chronicles from me, the experts in your writing, how did you develop these principles in your writing? Because it really was a very consistent theme throughout each conversation. So I would love to hear from you.

Kate Markin Coleman:

Let me start and then I'll turn it over to Steve. So before COVID, shortly before, COVID, we set out, as Steve said, to identify programs and policies that would work. And so we spoke to hundreds of people, originally in person, and then virtually across the country from business, from the social sector, from government. So across the sectors, we spoke to people who ran programs, who participated in programs, who staffed programs. And from those conversations, we identified 10 principles or standards or requirements for architecting a system that creates both greater equity and is more effective. And the principles we've grouped into three categories, those that relate to people, those that relate to programs, and those that relate to the system overall. And let me briefly run through the people in the program, and then I'll turn it over to Steve to talk about the system.

So, the foundational principles are really any effort that's attempting to address workforce development issues, needs to start with the needs of the people it's designed to serve. And because those needs vary so considerably from the justice involved young adult who may need executive skills coaching to the incumbent worker who may need just some upskilling for a change in the dynamics of their job. But that range of needs is very considerable.

And because the range of needs is considerable, the number of different kinds of players that need to formally be part of the system, likewise needs to be broad with respect to programs. So while the occupational content of the programs we looked at differed, a number of them, the majority of them had certain sort of characteristics in common. I'll run through them really quickly. All of them, to the extent practical, personalized their interventions around the needs of the particular aspiring worker, whether it's determining whether it's goodness of fit or whether it's placement or whether it's how the program is configured. All of them provides supports of some sort to the learners, whether that's coaching or wraparound services or access to peer networks, all of them provide bridges to employment, internships, apprenticeships, networks with employers and all of them, to some extent, contextualize learning.

So, adult learners... I mean, I'm going to oversimplify this, but adult learners are in a rush. They have financial pressures, they have time pressures, but many learners also have issues in reading and math or English, that also need to be addressed if they want to progress in their career, they want to get a job. If you force someone to take adult basic education, before they get into occupational training, you're just demotivating them. So a number of organizations contextualize either ABE or ESL and occupational training. And we can talk if you're interested at some point in examples.

Earl Buford:

And yeah, I was especially focused on principal for supporting learners. So just wanted to mention that. Stephen, did you want to add to that?

Stephen Goldsmith:

Just a little bit. I think Kate did it nicely. So the book is organized about these 10 principles. so Kate just explained like each of those numbers represents a chapter in the book, which is not the purpose of bringing up the diagram, but you can see in the design Kate mentioned really essentially principles one through six of her description. I'd just say real briefly, Earl, when can come back to this, that putting these pieces together into a system requires the use of skills as a currency. And we can talk more about that in a little bit, what that means. Transparency that allows a learner and his or her coach to understand return on investment. I take this training course, this is what's most likely happened in my life. So that they can understand clearly what makes a difference to them.

Chapter Nine, a little different subject than today's conversation, but one that's important to all of us, particularly those of us who kind of worked in cities for so long is what is it about neighborhood redevelopment that needs to be fixed to create more opportunity. All of the stuff that CAEL does, all of the workforce investment board work is in part the result of folks growing up in neighborhoods, where there is insufficient social engagement, insufficient connection to jobs, a number of traumas that happen. So making places work in the 10, what's collaboration look like? If you had an intermediary with elected leadership, putting together the pieces of the system based on data, a foundation of data, what would that look like? So, the system pieces are like the seven through 10 on the chart.

Earl Buford:

Thank you, Stephen. You mentioned skills as currency. Could you elaborate further on that?

Stephen Goldsmith:

So Earl, this is a slide I got from Indianapolis, not in the time I was mayor, but after I was giving a talk. And you could do this in any city, but the left side of the slide is all the cool stuff happening in Indianapolis. Great place to start a business, good place for young professionals, very great livability, et cetera. The right side is all the bad stuff. Which is economic segregation, manufacturing based loss, workforce participation rate down, and most startling of all, the huge increase in number of people living in poverty. So we look at this two side economy and go, well, this looks bleak but to us it looked like an opportunity. And that opportunity means if we use a skill based foundation, meaning we're not going to have a foundation for the jobs on the left that says you have to have a two or four year college degree, if you do great.

But if you don't, there's still a role for you. How do we identify the skills of folks in that 80% of folks who are in increased poverty? What are their skills, what are discrete training programs that would augment those skills, that would qualify them for the jobs in the yellow circles? So when we say skills is a currency, we mean skills in the way employers advertise, in the way employees suggest what's on their resumes, what they're good at, and the way the community colleges and training groups configure their skilling courses. All of that is based on skills. And we believe that will open up equity for folks who have had not opportunities in the past in part, because they've been frozen out of educational opportunities.

Earl Buford:

Thank you, Stephen for the elaboration. And the number of questions piling up in the Q and A, we'll get to that shortly. But I want to ask the authors a few more questions. So Kate, you mentioned aspiring workers earlier. I also know you studied survey data about them. What did you find? What are some highlights from that?

Kate Markin Coleman:

So beyond our qualitative research, we also used research from strata education network that they had conducted quantitative research, both across the population, and then what they called aspiring workers, workers who were thinking about additional education or training. And so here's what we learned, that just more than 50% of people in this country believe that a good job is out of their reach. Now, this is 2020 data. And I looked, and I have not seen this particular survey has not, to my knowledge, been updated. And so 52% say good job is out of reach. And seven in 10 people say that something is holding them back. And what they're saying is holding them back, and this was kind of disheartening to us, is that the system is unfair for people like me. And that comment was particularly acute from Black respondents, Latino respondents, and men.

Another significant portion said they didn't have the resources to what continue education. Some were worried about their own skills or confidence, and many just simply didn't where to begin. And what was interesting is, if you think about it in terms of gating and decision making, how do you gate? So in order to get someone to move from inaction, to even considering taking more training or education, they have to believe that there will be career opportunities for them on the other side of it. To move them from what we'd call consideration to actually taking action, they have to believe that it will ease their financial burdens and that they can get over barriers like cost and flexibility. And then the last piece is if you really want to trigger that next step... so you've got them believing that their career opportunities, that it will make their lives easier. If you want to trigger that next step, they actually need information on tuition, on flexibility, on stackable skills, all those kinds of things Steve was just talking about in terms of transparency and making that information available and consumable by the user.

Earl Buford:

So really important data points here. So then transparency here, why is it so important to have the ability to pull that data, but be very transparent in the work? What'd you find there, Stephen or Kate?

Stephen Goldsmith:

So if Kate mentioned that half of the individuals don't think there's much opportunity for them, then it's not because they're irrational. It's because many of them are rational. Most of them are rational. The system is stacked. They can't get to work very easily. Childcare is difficult to do. They may be discriminated on the basis of race or location, or just fill in the blank, there's all of those opposite.

And then it's not so clear that even a free two-year college is not really free for many of the reasons that Kate said. So you've faced these challenges. It costs you money not to work and to take your kids somewhere, et cetera. So by transparency in data, if I enroll in this course, and if I spend a thousand dollars for this 12 week course, what happens to me at the end, based on people like me who have graduated from that course? What jobs do they get and for how much money. So transparency... and that may require a coach or navigator to actually help the person make that decision. It may, even with transparency, may be very difficult to discern. But by transparency, what do you mean? Transparency into what is customer centric. What does a consumer of learning and training and education, what can she, or he know before they take their first step?

Earl Buford:

Appreciate that. And I'll enhance that by saying, from there's like three different systems level to think about from the transparency of the data out there. There's obviously the individual, you mentioned one thing really important, Steve. And that was, if I go through this, if I go through this free college here, or this investment and this training, is it going to meet my economic goals? Is there a job lined up or is there a chance of a job? I call it winning the workforce lottery. Can I win this lottery? So that's one thing, but on the practitioner side of it, how are you getting to that point? So it's one thing to work with employers. It's another thing to know what are the demographics of career progression within your region, within your state, and how does that all come together on behalf of a learner?

And then there's another piece here where it's the educational side. How do their own data requirements match up with the needs of said employers, said industry so that they can meaningfully put enough talent together to meet the said demand. So it's all those systems working together. And that was the beauty of this book. And I think about the Atlanta story, matching the Houston story, and it's really about folks coming together and make sure their systems work and putting their egos at the door on behalf of the economy and also on behalf of workers and learners. So I think it's a good one to launch into the collaborative nature in this book. And I just referenced the Atlanta story and the Houston story and the critical need for comprehensive regional support. So just talk about how everyone's talking about collaboration. So all the folks that you researched and discussed, what's your take on collaboration, what it takes to make collaboration work based on these stories?

Kate Markin Coleman:

Well, so Earl, if I mind, I'm going to start with sort of a more mechanical definition of how we're defining a collaboration that's directed at workforce development. And then let's turn over to Stephen, maybe show how that comes alive in a couple of examples. So we actually adopted a fairly formal definition of collaboration. In other words, we're not talking about a loose Confederation of organizations who are going to do stuff together. We are talking about a group of organizations that are convened by a local leader, often a mayor, and who get beyond the convening stage, because a lot of them get to the convening stage and then they don't get any further than that, who assign an intermediary often a nonprofit to coordinate the activity of the different players and who agree on common goals and a common agenda very frequently, in Atlanta for instance, determined by the data analysis of the skilling situation in the city.

So common goal, common objectives, and then some number of formal, not ad hoc cooperative activities. So in other words, actual agreements where you have an employer training, intermediate, a community college with a described path or with required apprenticeship programs and also built in feedback loops. And this comes to the transparency thing as well, which is the employer speaking to the training intermediary, whether that trainer is a community college or a nonprofit to say what is and is not working, what is producing the skills or what are the skills needed in the training? So that's our sort of formal definition of what constitutes a collaboration.

Stephen Goldsmith:

Yeah. Just quickly, so Earl mentioned the Atlanta project, which Harvard did with UNCF United Negro College Fund in the mayor's office in Atlanta. And it said, how do we use data in a system wide cross-sector collaboration to create more upward mobility, particularly for workers of color. And we don't have to stare at this very long, but this is just the logos of some of the players who were brought to the table. It'll remind you of how many stakeholders there are in a region who have interlocking pieces of the solution, two and four year colleges, chamber of commerce, K12 schools, charter schools, et cetera. So that's just an idea of the number of players. And obviously there's probably two or three times that many in any city as well. So Kate and I both may want to comment on this.

Those stakeholders have their individual missions, but their missions need to bolt together in a way that provides equity and fairness and upward mobility for individuals in their communities. And this is another area Earl, where I think you're more of an expert than we are, which is if you're sitting in the middle, maybe you're in a workforce board, maybe you're in a nonprofit, but let's say that the region wants to bring those players together.

Well, they need to bring them together on a platform of data. So there needs to be an intermediary in the center, who's using data analytics to identify opportunities, to identify inequities, to identify what skills a worker has, how does she get more skills and where does that lead her to identify the growing sector jobs, to figure out how you go from a service worker in a restaurant to customer service business on up? And so we have suggested that collaboration means all the things Kate said, plus intentionally managing the region's economy in order to provide the critical pieces that configure together. Some of these are nonprofit parties that need to do wraparound services, some are workforce investment board, some are training. And then obviously you have a government and employers as well. So that's kind of what we mean by both collaboration and regional organization. 

Earl Buford:

Yeah, Steve, I just want to mention as well that Kate said earlier that her response would be on mechanics. Not only was it on mechanics, but it was also on the reality of how this needs to work. And what I found in my work and variety of studies, but also in reading your work. So that was really pleasing to see that, and I wanted to make sure the listeners understand that this book really highlights those key things that you can do and past successes, but also a framework to think about.

And Stephen just also a highlight that would be with the Atlanta work. And the really key here is the discussion of intermediaries in the space. And sometimes there may be intermediaries, you may have a workforce system, a workforce board that has all the right support and the right resources to lead certain conversations. And they bring in another intermediary partner to bring in higher education or training or a variety of things. So there's no set way to do it. But I think what we're talking about here are the successful models that you can implement in your local areas, in the regional area. So, that for me, was the most appealing. It's almost like a guidebook, so it's appreciated.

Kate Markin Coleman:

The only thing that I want to add, and this is one of my soap box issues, so I apologize in advance for it, is that we really have to think expansively about what's we're talking about when we talk about skilling so that we think expansively about who's party to the collaboration. So a couple weeks ago, I went to visit a program here in Chicago, Revolution Workshop. And they work with young adults, justice involved, and it's a pre-app apprenticeship program. But what they talked about is... I said, so where do you get referrals from?

So, some of them come from the justice system, but others come from homeless shelters, from drug programs, from a variety of places. And the point that this fellow who runs the program was making to me is that, he may not know how to work with a kid who's involved with drugs or someone who's just been homeless, but the homeless shelter knows how to work with them and get that person to the point where they are able, ready, willing, and able to participate in his pre apprenticeship program. Which means that homeless shelter, and again I'm stretching it to make a point, may also be a part of the workforce development system.

Earl Buford:

Just one more question. Our Q and A questions are starting to grow. So we should probably think about them. So after all your work, are you optimistic about the process for these systems coming together or changing systems?

Stephen Goldsmith:

Well, I'm cautiously optimistic for two reasons. One is that the peculiar nature of the current labor situation seems opportunistically good. And I've been mayor with a number of people, looking for jobs, greatly exceeded the number of jobs available. And so to me, it seems like you have a number of jobs that are unfilled, that our public policy and governance processes ought to be able to help folks get to those jobs. So, I'm optimistic because I view this economic situation as partially positive. The second reason I'm optimistic and Kate and I talked about this a lot and she referenced it earlier, is the following.

This feels to me like a subject where there should be broad support. If you're in an urban area and you've been discriminated against, or you can't even get to work and you don't have any job training and then obviously you're supportive of a system that's more equitable. But I know if you're in the suburbs and you have an economy with X hundred thousand open jobs, then it's in your best interest, not only in your enlightened self-interest, it says, this is an equitably and moral thing for you to do, folks who live in the city, but it's also in your enlightened self-interest.

Your gross regional product will go up if those jobs are filled. So this should be an optimistic point where our narrative stretches across parties and classes and economies and races. And we already have the will and the ability since we know that we have the... Kate already mentioned there's agreement on what works, let's just go do it.

Kate Markin Coleman:

So I'm optimistic because the volume of conversation around skill based hiring versus over reliance on two and four year degrees is substantially higher than I have ever heard it. And so that suggests that we're in an environment where there's receptivity to this kind of thinking. So that's one thing. We're seeing stuff in the corporate sector, IBM, Prudential, Accenture, who are looking at their job descriptions with an eye towards which really need a degree and which can be filled with someone with the requisite skills. And then my last thing is the good jobs challenge, which is this half billion dollar program on workforce development is again, we don't know what will happen with it, but the pieces are absolutely right. It's built on collaboration across sectors. It has provision of wraparound services. So all of a sudden the conversation and the energy is moving in the direction of a lot of the changes I think we need to see.

Earl Buford:

Well said. I'll just add my optimisms. One is just the great work you've produced. But in addition to that, and we're starting to hear a lot of collaborative partners coming together. We mentioned systems earlier and players. Also, even funders are starting to think about whether it's abundant funding model or co-creative model, what are we going to call it? Those conversations are happening. Also, optimistic talking to you some really smart forward thinking presidents, university institutional presidents, around the country who are thinking about the economic goals of their students. It's not just, we're bringing you in to educate you. We're here to skill you, we're to educate you, but we're also here to make sure that your goals are in congruence with your degree or your training or certificate. So there should be a job at the end of it, or at least the relationship with. We call it link and learning and work, well education and work should come together.

So those things make me really optimistic. And at the local level we talk about workforce systems. You talk about education system. We mentioned that, but also more neighborhood based and customer centric ideas are starting to come together. So Steve, you mentioned earlier, there's an opportunity. There's an opportunity in the crisis we're dealing with. So there's more openings than talent at the time, at the moment. So we have to work together. We don't really have much of a choice. And so those are the five optimistic reasons I have.

And I really appreciate your work supporting that. Now with that said, we have about 15 questions today we'll try to answer. I don't think we can do all that in 20 minutes, but we're going to do our best. And so I'm going to choose some of the earlier questions and get into some of the ones that are live. The first question, how can you best scale successful local programs for broader populations or larger geographic areas? Now, Steve, if you want to touch base on that again, on the system side, I think you've elaborated on that, but if there's anything else to add, here's a good chance. And Kate, from the organizational side, I would appreciate that.

Stephen Goldsmith:

The efforts need to really be consistent with our region's economy. A state's too big and the city's too small. So we need to do is to think about these as regional issues. That's the unit of analysis if you will, that we focused on. Secondly and after Kate comes, maybe you could help here. So even a high quality workforce investment board, such as the one you used to lead, needs the help of elected officials, either the elected mayor of the largest city or the county executive to say, "We're going to collaborate team. We're going to come together. We're going to come around data. We're going to use this intermediary and we're going to make sure that we produce these services in a way that makes sense." So I think that the answer requires data and leadership around a region for the pieces to come together.

Earl Buford:

Yeah, that's spot on. I'll elaborate then I'll give Kate the opportunity. As I think most of know I've had the pleasure of running two different workforce systems in two different communities. And what's interesting about the two, one had a strong mayor led workforce system, but really in partnership with the business community, the other one was a city county collaboration with the business community. But the common theme was the local electants and the business people being working together. And also having the local backing and local flexibility, to do some things that are outside of the traditional workforce investment act in the past, or that's currently to really say, "You know what? This is only going to do so much for so many people in our region, and we have other needs." So that's where that blended idea I mentioned earlier comes into play, and we're looking for philanthropy and corporate giving and really looking at a meaningful strategy and a stronger local plan that brings all those players together.

Kate Markin Coleman:

So let me try to ask the scaling question with respect to programs and I'm going to answer it in a couple of ways without saying, "We need more money." I just sort of said it, but I'm not saying it. So I actually would rephrase the question. And I think in the rephrasing the question is part of the answer, which is how do we scale the characteristics of programs that are effective rather than thinking about scaling the program. And one of the ways that we do it, there's an organization, it's through... well, one of the ways we do it is through networks of similarly situated or focused organizations. So there's a great organization in Boston called Empath, and they do goal directed coaching for economic mobility, and they have created a network and they share their IP with that network. So the players in the network don't do exactly the same thing, but as they incorporate the learnings from what Empath has brought in terms of brain science and behavioral science to their interventions, all of a sudden you expand the reach, but it does a couple of other things.

The network concept of like organizations does, so it's an outward pushing of IP, but in the process of bringing together those organizations, you're able to harvest information on what works and then begin to develop a point of view on what program attributes are fixed, i.e., they drive outcomes in which are flexible and can be adjusted for the population or the geography or the particular slice of the world the organization addresses.

And then finally it allows you to think in terms of implementation pathways, because an organization isn't always ready to implement change, unless it does A, B, C, and D first. So I won't go into that in detail. I think the other way, and it's very similar, but it's using a different kind of network. So we have existing government interventions or programs. And to the extent that they incorporate the attributes of things that we know work in other programs. So there's a demonstration project called MyGoals Houston and Baltimore, working with people in public housing or subsidized housing. And it also uses goal directed coaching that bills on executive skill functioning for the purpose of moving people towards their financial independence or their economic, their job goals. So those are network ways of scaling what works as opposed to the program itself.

Earl Buford:

Thank you, Kate for that. There was a question that asked about increased automation and robot processing, bringing that together with something I'd done in undocumented workers and some of the lower skill needs in service industry.

I'm paraphrasing the question because it's a fairly long question, but really what it gets into is the need for an approach by employers around upskilling and reskilling and company workers, and then also utilizing... there's a workforce system or local intermediaries on the back filling side. So we even talked about that and the book touches on that, but I wanted to address that question because it's come up a couple times in the latest Q and A and also past questions. So I think there's an opportunity and more employers are talking about the need for upscaling and reskilling and compass strategies as a way to start to grow. But then also looking at ways to bring in new talent, whether it's, like I said, entry level, back filling, or creating new classifications. I just wanted to bring it up because that has come up before and we didn't get a chance to elaborate on that.

Kate Markin Coleman:

So I'm not sure when IBM started, but essentially IBM... and I alluded to this earlier. So someone put a hand up if I'm repeating myself. IBM essentially went through all of their job descriptions and looked at each of them and made a decision about where a two or a four year degree was truly necessary and where it was not. And so now the statistic that they have shared is that slightly better than... let's call it 50% of their job postings in North America do not require a college degree of some sort. Well that opens the pipeline significantly and gets people into mid tech mid-skill jobs in that organization without the burden of having to get a degree.

Stephen Goldsmith:

So then Earl, if you took that example, and then you used it to answer the person's question, you could look at it in a couple of different ways. One is that increased automation of routine jobs is going to displace a lot of workers, being that those robotics jobs will create more mid-skill jobs themselves. So where we already have a vacancy and opening.

We know that if every college graduate took a mid-skill or high skill job, we still would have openings today, even without the additional jobs. So if you look at the IBM story, then you would say, "As a system, how do you set it up in a way that identifies skills that creates an individualized learning record." If you will. I can hear my skills that provides badges or some way to identify additional skills, training courses taken that allows an employer to look at the personalized learning record of the learner and her augmented skills that are stackable skills, and then provide a job for that person. So how do you get them into the x-ray technician job where the case may be? And so Kate's answer about what IBM did, obviously a company at great scale, provides the component answers on what a system needs to do.

Earl Buford:

And I'll just add to that, that president of CAEL is partnering with IBM on their skills build rolled out. And obviously the idea was to enhance skills and also negotiate and articulate where those badges led to within certain employers and certain industries. So we're really excited to be a part of that. So I'm glad you mentioned that as well. So I'll read it aloud. One of the challenges for workforce development are the large numbers that are not completing high school or graduating high school without good skills... good skills and learning ability, excuse me. Without fixing the leaky and equitable K-12 education system, the workforce system will continue to be incapable addressing the needs of that of all those failed by the K-12 system. Really, I think it's a statement and comment that workforce systems are under the pressure because of inequalities and education in certain communities.

So, we're working from behind. Right in the eight ball in some situations. So that's why I mentioned earlier, but with the upskilling question, the idea that more employers are now looking at and educating and growing their own, creating their own talent is so important because then we can really tie whether it's our community college work or our neighborhood based training work to some of the direct items that are entry level and not quite middle skill yet.

So that's where, back to Stephen's point about locally elected officials taking a lead on relationships with their chamber and their civic associations and leading these conversations. But also what I find is missing in that is there's not enough coordination between the CEOs and the college presidents and their institutions. And so it goes back to the systems' work we talked about earlier and putting their eagles aside to do what's best for their local area or region. So I just wanted to bring that point there. And it's going to be hard to fix a K-12 system if we don't have those other things in place yet. So it's a longer conversation for another day, but I just wanted touch on that.

Stephen Goldsmith:

You know Earl, you're absolutely correct as is the question. If you don't have quality education for folks, then the workforce board, no matter how effective they are, they're kind of a band aid. I do think it's worth though, a footnote that I don't think we want to wait until the K-12 system furnishes equitable education in order to address the issue. And in the book, we talk about bridges, bridges from high school to employment, co-op programs, apprentice programs, how to do contextualized learning. We use the story of companies coming into the 11th and 12th grade to actually recruit workers into apprentice programs. There's examples of IT apprentice programs. I mean, one of the other bridges that we talk about in the book, because they are a way not to take the place of a high-quality K-12 situation, but to still help those who are in the 11th and 12th and difficult surroundings have an opportunity.

Kate Markin Coleman:

Well, there were a couple of them. One, was Trio Electric, which is a private sector company, which has created a program in partnership with the high schools where the kids are both taking classes and getting occupational skill training onsite environment, a working lab for the kinds of skills that they need to build for this company.

I think that contextualized learning is a band aid Earl, on this one, but it's where you're making up for what people didn't get in high school. It's not sustainable long term. Obviously you're going to have to deal with the underlying places. One of the decisions that we made when we did this book, because obviously the issues around economic mobility are so complex and there isn't just one cause, there are multiple causes that we couldn't address absolutely everything. What federal policy should be around taxation or earned income tax and what we should do with childcare and what we should do with education, except to acknowledge that there is a role for the leaders involved in workforce development to advocate for the kind of changes, sort of systems changes that allow long term to address some of the underlying causes that have gotten us where we are.

Earl Buford:

Thank you, Kate for that. So I'm just really excited again, I said earlier about this great work you two put together here and really telling the story of who's out there and who's doing what. And so there is lots of optimism and there is an opportunity in things that are happening now for systems collaboration, looking at inequities, and also not just looking at them and thinking about them, but doing something about that. So I applaud our bipartisan friends here who took the chance to work together on this and taking it from two different approaches. And I'm sure the listeners are, one enjoyed the conversation today, but also if they haven't had a chance to read the book yet, that they're going to go out and do that right now, because I really think it's a how to guide on who's doing what and how to move forward in your local queries, if not at a scale nationally. So just really excited and thank you for the opportunity to allow me to moderate today's conversation.

Stephen Goldsmith:

If we think about how to bring everything together, it's a highly effective workforce board. It's high level city leadership. It's every two and four year college at a collaborative table trying to design their solutions and plan for the future. And you asked earlier why we're optimistic. One reason is we see what happens when it works.

Kate Markin Coleman:

So, I'm going to do something really, not in the usual way. Steve, I'm going to ask you a question instead of giving a closing thought. No, because there's a really good question here in the chat that I'm seeing and you were a mayor. And so I want to ask it of you as sort of our closing thought, which is that there's a lead into it. The questioner is talking about whether one could create an atlas of skill complexity to map out where skills are provided. I'm not going to go into that, but the question is, do we have data to answer a mayor when they say what's the lowest hanging fruit based on what current services and programs are on the ground today?

Stephen Goldsmith:

Well, you can answer that question in two ways. I'll do one and Earl can do the other. Which is you can do it on a case by case basis, which is we're 10,000 childcare seats low, our bus system doesn't get people to the right work. So as a mayor, you can think about how to make the social capital and neighborhoods work better.

You can figure out how to make places safe and easy for people to get to work. That's one set of things. Another set of things is you can say, "we need a skill taxonomy in this region." We need to be using the same words and talking about the same set of skills in order to create these upward pipelines. We need to be visualizing the inequities and visualizing the opportunities. A mayor can lead that. A mayor has a loud voice, but she doesn't have a lot of money and is not the owner of the workforce effort. She's the owner of the economic development effort, not the workforce effort. So Earl, over to you for the end of Kate's question. You were a workforce board member, what did you want from your mayor?

Earl Buford:

Yeah. And you've perfectly set up and that's the collaboration between the economic development work and the city planning and your workforce system and your workforce response, because then you can truly put a local plan together that says, not only we're going to solve this work in this sector. We're looking at multiple sectors, multiple factors of the economy, and the comprehensive plan to focus on that. Then the next thing that the mayors can do and some do, is also talking to their corporate citizenry, philanthropy as well about their roles and their investment in workforce development. How do we pull this all together? That's worked for me in two cities, and I've seen it work in other cities.

Stephen Goldsmith:

Good being with you today. Thanks for your time, Earl.

Earl Buford:

Thank you for having me. I'm honored. Thank you.

 

Betsy Gardner:

If you liked this podcast, please visit our us at datasmartcities.org, or follow us @datasmartcities on Twitter. And remember to subscribe at the new Data-Smart City Podcast channel on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen. This podcast was produced by me, Betsy Gardner, and hosted by Professor Steve Goldsmith. We're proud to be the central resource for cities interested in the intersection of government, data, and innovation. Thanks for listening.