FEBRUARY 2001

Workforce Issues
Affecting Older Professionals

by George F. McClure

Abstract

Older workers are generally valued for their knowledge, experience, loyalty, and dependability. However, there is a perception that they are not as likely as younger workers to keep current on new developments in their field. This paper reports the results of a telephone survey exploring in detail attitudes toward older workers as compared with their juniors. The survey was conducted in the spring, 2000.

Survey Design

In December 1999, IEEE-USA commissioned Mathew Greenwald & Associates, a full-service survey research firm based in Washington DC, to conduct two separate surveys. One survey targeted IEEE members who are employed in a supervisory capacity and human resources personnel in high tech companies that employ IEEE members. The other was directed at IEEE members who are currently employed in the high-tech sector of the nation's economy.

For the purposes of this research, the high-tech sector includes the following industries: aerospace and avionics; biomedical technology; computer and telecommunications (both services and equipment manufacturing); computers and computer components, computer software and data processing services; electrical and electronics equipment manufacturing; and semiconductor manufacturing.

Advice and guidance on issues to be explored, questions to be asked, the interpretation of survey findings and assistance in the development of conclusions and recommendations was provided by an advisory committee made up of representatives from IEEE-USA's Workforce and Career Maintenance and Development Committees and nationally known consultants specializing in employment problems facing older workers.

The questionnaires used in the study were developed by Mathew Greenwald & Associates, in cooperation with IEEE-USA's Older Workers Survey Advisory Committee. Survey respondents were drawn from four separate random samples obtained from IEEE's membership records, supplemented by a sample of human resources personnel purchased from Survey Sampling.

Telephone interviews, lasting an average of 15 minutes each, were conducted by National Research LLC with employed IEEE members, engineering supervisors (members of IEEE's Engineering Management Society) and human resources personnel at high tech companies that employ IEEE members. These interviews were conducted between March and May of this year.

The Engineering Supervisor/HR Personnel survey included a total of 139 interviews with supervisors and 86 interviews with human resources personnel. The Employed Engineer survey included 108 interviews with IEEE members under age 45 and 294 interviews with IEEE members age 45 and above.

The margin of error is plus or minus approximately eight percentage points for supervisors; 11 percentage points for HR personnel; nine percentage points for IEEE members under age 45; and six percentage points for IEEE members age 45 and above. Comparisons discussed in the report are significant at the 95% confidence level.

 
Labor Market Difficulties Facing Older Engineers

In spite of a growing demand for engineers and computer scientists since the mid-1990' s, many mid-career and older engineers are reporting difficulty finding and retaining jobs in the high tech sector of the nation's economy.

Older workers often find themselves at a competitive disadvantage with younger workers in securing access to needed training and promotion or transfer to new job assignments. Those leaving a job, whether voluntarily or due to a downsizing or a corporate reorganization, often struggle to find employment at comparable wages and benefits and are more likely than their younger counterparts to have to change professions or leave the labor force entirely. Such difficulties could become even more frequent and prominent as the " Baby Boom " generation begins to approach retirement age. (AARP, Valuing Older Workers. 1995)

Purposes of the Study

Rather than continuing to rely on anecdotal evidence of what some observers contend is discriminatory treatment in the recruitment, hiring, utilization and retention of older workers, IEEE-USA decided to conduct objective survey research in order to assess employer and employee perceptions about the strengths and weaknesses of older engineers in a rapidly changing, technology-driven and increasingly competitive global economy.

In the absence of quantitative data on the costs and benefits of employing older workers compared with those associated with their younger colleagues, employment policies and practices often become the product of subjective assessments by engineering supervisors and human resources personnel. Hence the importance of gauging perceptions about the value of older engineers in today's high tech workforce.

IEEE-USA was also interested in obtaining information that would facilitate comparisons between perceptions about the continuing employability of older engineers and older workers generally. Detailed information about the perceived strengths and weaknesses of employees aged 50 and over relative to younger workers has already been collected and published by AARP.

The choice of age 45 as the dividing line was made recognizing that legal protections under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 begin at 40, other studies by AARP start at age 50 (the youngest age for membership), many retirement plans permit early retirement as young as age 55, but in some jobs engineers are considered ‘over the hill’ at 35. A further breakdown could collect data in three categories, for workers aged 40-50, 50-60, and over 60.

Data were collected on gender, but were not found to be significant.

The eight industry categories chosen for the study were selected from classifications of the American Electronics Association. The members and supervisors participating in the study were all IEEE members.

Results

Supervisors generally play a major role in hiring new engineers for their department, as could be expected. Nearly 94% manage the process, alone or jointly with HR; only 6% leave the process wholly to HR. In many cases, hiring a new engineer is a two-step process, with the engineering supervisor defining the requirement to HR, who then search for candidates meeting the requirements. Such candidates’ resumes are then sent to the supervisor for review before any interviews are scheduled. After interviews, the supervisor’s choice of a candidate is then communicated to HR who make an offer and follow up with the candidate.

Promoting from within often means that the new hire will be a replacement in the junior position from which the incumbent was promoted, rather than in the senior position. Of the supervisors, 19% report that promotions from within are the rule; another 27% state this happens about half the time. It is rare in the experience of 51% of supervisors and 69% of HR personnel, occurring less often in smaller companies and more often the communications and telecommunications industries.

Because the supervisor most often has a leading role in the hiring process, the preferences, opinions, and views of supervisors will be quoted in this paper more often than those of HR personnel, although both were fully documented in the survey.

By examining opinions on four sides (supervisors, HR personnel, engineers 45 and older, and engineers under 45) the study shows some disconnects in attitudes, but agreement on many points.

Characteristics and Skills Most Looked For

When asked to identify the specific characteristics they generally look for most when hiring electrical or electronics engineers for their department or company, supervisors and HR personnel are most likely to mention technical skills or technical knowledge and experience. Among supervisors, over one-third each identify technical skills/knowledge (35%) and experience (34%). Slightly higher proportions of the HR personnel interviewed name these characteristics (38% technical skills/knowledge; 36% experience). Two in ten supervisors (21%) and one-third of HR personnel (33%) say they seek team players, while almost two in ten supervisors (19%) and one-fourth of HR personnel (24%) look for academic credentials. Other characteristics mentioned by at least one in ten in each respondent group are communication skills (18% of supervisors; 10% of HR personnel), self motivation (16% of supervisors; 10% of HR personnel), a good work ethic or hard worker (14% of supervisors; 12% of HR personnel), a specific attitude such as enthusiasm, interest or maturity (12% of supervisors; 9% of HR personnel), and honesty or integrity (11% of supervisors; 10% of HR personnel).

Technical skills and knowledge are the specific skills most looked for when hiring engineers. Among supervisors, those who work for companies with 1,000 or more full-time workers are more likely than those who work for smaller companies to say they look for technical skills and knowledge. Additionally, supervisors who report that their company usually fills positions from within the company are more likely than those who do not to identify a good work ethic or hard worker as characteristics they look for.

When asked what specific skills they generally look for most when hiring electrical or electronics engineers for their department or company, supervisors and HR personnel are most likely to mention computer skills, such as software and programming skills (30% of supervisors; 24% of HR personnel). Two in ten supervisors (20%) and HR personnel (22%) look for experience in the field or industry specific skills, one-fourth of supervisors (24%) and 14% of HR personnel look for design skills, and fewer than two in ten supervisors (19%) and HR personnel (17%) seek technical skill or technical knowledge. Over one in ten supervisors, but fewer HR personnel, say they look for communication skills (14% of supervisors; 5% of HR personnel) and problem solvers (12% of supervisors; 2% of HR personnel).

While electrical and electronics engineers under the age of 45 receive only an average

rating on the skill considered by supervisors to be most important--problem solving skills, engineers age 45 and over get a very strong rating on this skill. Teamwork skills, communication skills, and ability to adapt to new assignments are also considered by supervisors to be very important in comparison with other attributes. Both age groups appear to be viewed similarly with respect to teamwork skills, receiving slightly above average ratings. But while supervisors tend to believe that the older age group significantly outperforms the younger with respect to communications skills, they rate them poorly in comparison with the younger group regarding their ability to adapt to new assignments. Engineers under age 45 receive an above average rating with respect to this skill, while those age 45 and over receive a below average rating. Finally, older engineers are given above average ratings for technical knowledge and decision-making skills, while younger engineers are given somewhat poorer ratings here.

Qualities Sought by Supervisors

Supervisors tend to feel that engineers under age 45 do a better job than older engineers of keeping up with the latest developments in their field. Not surprisingly in light of their longer working career, however, supervisors rate those age 45 and over much higher with respect to directly-related professional experience. Engineers age 45 and over are also rated slightly more highly on reasonable salary requirements. Both groups are rated similarly on the relatively unimportant qualities of ability to travel for business when necessary and willingness to work long hours. Supervisors rate those age 45 and over considerably higher than younger engineers on commitment to a long-term future with the company but considerably lower on willingness to relocate if necessary.

Employees’ View of Their Own Qualities

While supervisors and HR personnel rate older and younger engineers differently on various attributes, employees under age 45 and those age 45 and over tend to rate themselves similarly when asked to score themselves on eight attributes. Both groups have above-average means of the standardized ratings for problem-solving skills and the overall quality of their work. Both groups tend to give themselves above average ratings on their ability to adapt to new assignments, but employees under age 45 give themselves a higher average rating on this attribute than do those age 45 and over. Overall, younger employees also rate themselves higher than do older respondents on their teamwork skills. Both respondent groups generally give themselves below average scores on comprehensive technical knowledge, decision-making ability, communication skills, and keeping up with the latest developments in their field .

Age At Which Characteristics Differ

Through a randomly split sample, half of supervisors and HR Personnel were asked what age best defines the point at which engineers who are older seem to possess a different set of characteristics and skills than those who are younger. The other half were asked the age that best defines the point at which engineers who are younger seem to possess a different set of characteristics and skills than those who are older. In general, respondents feel that this point occurs around age 35. Less than one in ten supervisors (7%) and HR personnel (8%) feel this point is reached before age 30. About one in seven think it occurs between the ages of 30 and 34 (16% of supervisors; 14% of HR personnel), while 37% of supervisors and 16% of HR personnel believe it happens between the ages of 35 and 39. Two in ten in each respondent group (21% each) say it occurs between the ages of 40 and 44, and 14% of supervisors and 12% of HR personnel indicate it happens at age 45 or later. Six percent of HR personnel, but no supervisors, say that there is no such point. HR personnel (21 %) are also more likely than supervisors (4%) to reply that they do not know at what point this occurs.

Although there is no statistical difference in the proportions of responses to the two versions of the questions, the means differ slightly. The average response is higher when the question is asked about the point at which engineers who are older differ from those who are younger (39 years each) than when the question is asked about the point at which engineers who are younger differ from those who are older (36 years for engineers; 35 years for HR personnel).

When those respondents who think older and younger engineers posses a different set of characteristics and skills are asked to describe how these two groups differ, the most frequently mentioned responses favor older workers over younger. Almost three in ten supervisors (28%) and two in ten HR personnel (21%) say that older engineers are more experienced. Two in ten each remark that older engineers are more loyal (19% of supervisors; 20% of HR personnel) and roughly similar proportions say older engineers are more mature and/or more stable (18% of supervisors; 26% of HR personnel).

Other mentions favorable towards older workers include the view that older engineers are more knowledgeable and/or competent (13% of supervisors; 11% of HR personnel), older are better at problem solving or decision making (13% of supervisors; 3% of HR personnel), and older have management and leadership skills (6% of supervisors; 7% of HR personnel). Responses suggesting deficiencies in older workers include that younger engineers are more technical and computer-literate (18% of supervisors; 8% of HR personnel), younger are more flexible, adapting to change and are risk-takers (12% of supervisors; 18% of HR personnel), younger are more willing to move or relocate (11% of supervisors; 7% of HR personnel), and older workers have other priorities outside of work (8% of supervisors; 10% of HR personnel).

Other Specific Observations

1. The length of career experience for supervisors and HR personnel track each other remarkably well, but HR people move around more (56% less than 5 years with current company) than supervisors do (60% over 5 years with current company).
   
2. Fewer than a quarter of supervisors or HR people placed high emphasis on an academic degree, and advanced degrees were seen as even less important. Both groups saw communication skills as important, but HR thought technical knowledge was twice as critically important as supervisors did.
   
3. The fact that the HR people tended to come from larger organizations than the supervisors did could reflect the greater volume of hiring the HR people did for their organizations, and hence their views could be more heavily weighted than the supervisors’ views. But there may be a communication gap between supervisors and HR in conveying the job requirements. This leads HR to place much more emphasis than supervisors on reasonable salary requirements, keeping up with new developments in their field, willingness to work long hours, relocate if necessary, and to commit to a long-term future with the company.
   
4. Directly-related professional experience is twice as important to HR as to supervisors (critical: 12% of supervisors, 27% of HR), perhaps reflecting the problem HR types have in evaluating tangential but relevant experience. This likely leads to the ‘scanning for buzzwords’ phenomenon reported by jobseekers, with HR looking for exact matches.
   
5. The ranking of importance for characteristics in EEs was the same for supervisors and for HR: technical skills/knowledge; experience; team player; academic credentials; communication skills; self-motivated.
   
6. Job skills sought were very specific, and the top ones tracked between supervisors and HR, except that while 12% of supervisors thought problem-solving skills were valuable, only 2% of HR people mentioned problem-solving. Workers over 45 were rated significantly better at problem-solving than younger workers were. On the other hand, they were rated as less adaptable to new assignments.
   
7. The acknowledged importance of experience and knowledge would seem to favor the older job-seeking engineer, and both HR and supervisors put slightly less emphasis on reasonable salary requirements for the over-45 engineer.
   
8. Slightly more older workers did some continuing education in the past year, but almost twice as many younger workers reported 100 hours or more – perhaps pursuing a graduate degree part-time.
   
9. Older workers are less willing to move/relocate. Older workers, although less likely to have dependent children at home, are more likely to be providing hands-on day-to-day assistance to older relatives The data are not unambiguous, however; more 45 and over were offered and declined a move than under 45s did in the past 5 years. More younger workers refused to travel out-of-town on business for non-business reasons than did older workers.

• Supervisors consider three attributes to be most important in engineers-problem-solving skills, teamwork skills and communications skills, and they rate older engineers (age 45 and over) as being stronger than younger engineers in two of these areas: problem-solving and communications skills. With regard to teamwork skills, supervisors see no difference between the two age groups. HR personnel believe that the most important attributes in an engineer are technical knowledge, problem-solving skills and teamwork skills. They rate engineers age 45 and over as stronger than younger engineers on problem-solving skills and equivalent to them on technical knowledge and teamwork skills.

• At the same time, in two areas that supervisors and HR personnel consider to be above average in importance, engineers age 45 and over are rated as weaker than those under age 45-ability to adapt to new assignments and keeping up with the latest developments in the field. Although these attributes are not rated among the most important overall, engineers age 45 and over may face difficulty finding employment by those supervisors and HR personnel that consider these attributes to be especially important.

• Most supervisors and HR personnel agree there is an age that defines the point at which the set of skills possessed by older engineers is different from that possessed by younger engineers, and most believe this occurs before age 40. But when asked in what ways these two groups differ, many respond with comments that are favorable towards older engineers: older engineers are more experienced (28% supervisors; 21% HR personnel), loyal (19% supervisors; 20% HR personnel), mature (18% supervisors; 16% HR personnel), knowledgeable (13% supervisors; 11% HR personnel) and better at problem-solving (13% supervisors; 3% HR personnel). Some respondents, however, cite strengths of younger workers saying they are more technical (18% supervisors; 8% HR personnel) or more flexible (12% supervisors; 18% HR personnel).

• When employees are asked to relate why they encountered negative work experiences in the past five years, such as being passed over for a promotion or raise, fewer than one in ten respondents age 45 and over cite a reason related to age. However, those few respondents who mention age tend to have had a much greater number of negative experiences.

• There may be some discriminatory hiring based on age, but it is difficult to conclusively state this from the available data. Employment growth does appear to be stronger among engineers who are under age 45. Supervisors and HR personnel generally report hiring more engineers in this age group than have left the department or company. Further, roughly two in ten supervisors and HR personnel provide data indicating that proportion of new hires under age 45 exceeds the proportion of exiting engineers in this age group by 50 percentage points or more. Several factors other than age discrimination, however, could account for these differences, including the addition of new entry level positions within the department or company, the number of younger engineers in the pool of available candidates, and promotional practices within the department or company whereby the departing engineer is replaced by an internal candidate and the new hire replaces the promoted engineer. In fact, the survey results suggest that promotional practices do sometimes play a role.

• While employees under age 45 are more likely to have had one of the positive job experiences examined in the survey in the past five years, this may be the result of a natural job progression rather than age discrimination as many of these occurrences are commonly experienced more frequently at the beginning of a career. Interestingly, while employees under age 45 are more likely than those age 45 and over to have had all of the positive experiences examined in the survey during the past five years, the converse is not true. In general, both groups of employees are equally likely to have experienced the negative job outcomes. Those age 45 and over are slightly more likely to have been laid-off or downsized and given early retirement during the past five years, while those under age 45 are more likely to have been denied the opportunity to receive professional or technical training.

As shown in the summary tables below, supervisors had positive attitudes toward older engineers, who were ranked higher in six of eight characteristics. Engineers gave themselves above-average marks on four of eight traits shown, whether older or younger. However, younger engineers gave themselves even higher-than-above-average marks in adaptability and teamwork skills.

Assessments of the strengths of younger and older engineers

1. AARP/ICF Incorporated, Valuing Older Workers: A Study of Costs and Productivity, 1995, Washington, DC: American Association of Retired Persons
2. AARP, Older Workers: How Do They Measure Up? , 1994, Washington, DC: American Association of Retired Persons
3. AARP, Age Discrimination in Employment: The Worker’s View, 1998, Washington, DC: American Association of Retired Persons
4. CED, New Opportunities for Older Workers, 1999, New York: Committee for Economic Development (www.ced.org - executive summary and full report available at website)
5. AARP, American Business and Older Employees: A Summary of Findings, 2000, Washington, DC: American Association of Retired Persons (Available on website, www.aarp.org)
6. Richard D. Judy & Carole D’Amico, Workforce 2020, 1997, Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute, paperback. Five stars, back-ordered at Amazon.com. (Executive summary at www.hudson.org)
7. Susan Imel, Myths and Realities: Older Workers, 1996 (on web at www.ericacve.org/docs/olderw.htm)
8. Sara E. Rix, Update on the Older Worker: 1998 – Employment Gains Continue, Public Policy Institute, American Association of Retired Persons (Available on website, research/aarp.org/econ/dd42_worker98.html)
9. Richard W. Judy, America’s Worker Dearth: The U.S. labor market is going to stay tight, and the winners will learn to cope with it, 2000, Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute (at website, www.hudson.org/American_Outlook/articles_sm98/judy.htm)
10. Richard W. Judy, The Coming Retirement Torrent: The time to prepare a new workforce is now. 2000, Indianapolis, IN: Hudson Institute (Available on website, www.hudson.org/American_Outlook/articles_fa98/judy.htm)
11. John A. Challenger, "24 Trends Reshaping the Workplace," The Futurist, Sep.-Oct. 2000, pp. 35-41.
12. "Workplace Policy for the New Economy: The American Workplace 2000," 2000, Washington, DC: The Employment Policy Foundation (available to download in PDF at www.epf.org)

George F. McClure is co-chair of the IEEE-USA Workforce Committee and can be reached at g.mcclure@ieee.org.