COUNCIL OF HIGHER EDUCATION (YÖK) - THE PROFESSIONS OF THE FUTURE AND EDUCATION
PLANNING PANEL SPEECH TEXT
5 NOVEMBER 2019
Before discussing the professions of the future, we need to define the concept of “the future”. Which professions will come to the fore in the future is not a process that will unfold in the same way in every country. Just as not every society develops at the same level in technology and digital transformation, it would likewise not be correct to make a uniform definition in terms of cultural and social needs. The clock of history does not point to the same hour in every society. To call this outright “backwardness” leads us to a mistaken classification. For the cultural and social codes of each society determine its industry, its understanding of production and its tradition; the sectors that are indispensable for that society, in other words its level of specialization. To give an example here, the “call centre analysis” carried out by the Banks Association of Türkiye yields quite interesting results. More than half of customers still do not prefer to speak with a digital voice recording and demand to be connected directly to a customer representative. Another point in the same analysis is also interesting: more than %60 of the complaints customers make to customer representatives were of the form: “Why can I not reach you directly?” or “I want to speak with a human being, the digital voice keeps directing me to the wrong place.” Of course the variables of age and education level are important here; however, the behavioural codes of the people of our country still hold that one-to-one conversations are a more effective way of solving problems.
We are now establishing the MÜSİAD Call Centre. The reason is quite clear: when our members submit their applications or complaints, they take the human factor as their basis.
There is another point as well: a rise in the level of education certainly makes adaptation to digital transformation easier; but this time the sense of loneliness and lack of belonging that comes from drifting away from social values leaves individuals face to face with far greater asocial personality problems.
In short, while defining the concepts of “transformation and need”, carrying out planning independently of society and of social codes may lead us into difficulty regarding sustainability in the future.
After this general assessment we can hold our consultations on the professions of the future and on vocational planning. That is, we must first know our society well and properly plan our general visions, such as “where do we want to be in the future?” and “which piece of the global puzzle does Türkiye want to correspond to in the future?” Education and vocational training are of course very important, but on what basis, that is, according to which parameters, will we do this? Where will we
position ourselves so that we may guide our generations accordingly in terms of professional fields?
Finally, there is one more matter: do we know our young people, their talents and which fields the incoming generation is more inclined towards? In other words, do we have a “talent management” assessment study? All these are questions we must answer at the very beginning of the road. Otherwise, if we do not define our fundamental paradigms correctly, we will once again keep going round in a vicious circle.
Just as with the enormous increase in graduates of the “business administration department or faculty”, which we once preferred because its return was high and its cost low, in the future we may well find ourselves facing the problem of employing other occupational groups that we may never be able to make use of.
1. IDENTIFICATION OF PROBLEMS AND NEEDS ANALYSIS
Without restricting what the future may bring, professions should be defined on the basis of core disciplines with a transfer-oriented (transferable skills) approach, and Türkiye’s socio-economic infrastructure should be shaped accordingly. When assessing the professions of the future, the variables of the period must be analysed well, and vocational training, together with what comes before and after it, must be assessed on a common denominator.
Needs analysis is not merely a matter of where the state wishes to see itself; the difference between “education” and “vocational training” must be set out clearly. Universities, colleges or high schools are of course institutions established for the purpose of vocational training, but that the young people who graduate from them have genuinely received an education —
would it be right to say so? Just as job and profession are separate concepts, profession and education likewise contain equally separate definitions. For instance, management is not a profession but a job. Yet the majority of graduating young people appear before us in a state of finding no job good enough, imagining that after a year or two they will be able to reach the position of “manager”.
This is also why they cannot give a clear answer to the question “What is your profession?” Management is a job, indeed a position. It is a form of assignment gained not only through professional knowledge but also through adaptation to corporate culture, respect for ethical values, merit and institutional loyalty, a long process of in-house training and, of course, experience.
On the other side of needs analysis stand the wishes and demands of the industrialist, that is, of the employer. The answer to the question “What do we want?” must also be clear. Employers are quite demanding on this matter. As an employer myself, I confirm this view. We have demands such as high performance, flawless work, willingness to gain experience on a low wage, respect for hierarchy within the chain of command, adaptation to corporate culture and so on. Alongside this we of course also demand manual and practical skill, quick learning, and a character that is ambitious yet not contrary to personal ethics. The employer side is of course right from its own perspective; but there is a matter we overlook: “Is our education system able to achieve a training cycle that will meet all these demands?
There is yet another problem: to what extent does the new generation carry the criteria of the previous generation — patience, contentment, contemplation, trust in God, respect and acceptance — or is it obliged to carry them? We are talking about Generation Z, are we not? Well then, how well do we, as the employer side, know this generation?
In recent months the Presidency Human Resources Office conducted a wide-ranging survey among civil servants in Türkiye and published its results. We were presented with a question set covering all the variables: age, education level, cultural differences, ethnic differences. With such a survey one would in fact expect Türkiye’s talent map to emerge; yet what emerged were the mismatches between the job and the worker, that is, between the job and the person doing it. In other words, one of our fundamental problems came to light: are we recruiting the right person for the right job? How are we training the right person for the right job?
Workplaces are in fact schools for new graduates. This is why we defined MÜSİAD as a “school”. Now we are turning it into an “academy”. That is, we are restructuring it as an academy that trains business people,
bureaucrats or technocrats. For school life is merely an institutional structure that gives our young people knowledge in a professional sense; whereas the business world should be a place that shapes those young people. Another matter is the necessity of giving our young people training in “business ethics and corporate decorum”.
2. THE ISCED STRUCTURE APPLIED IN THE TRANSITION TO THE
EUROPEAN EDUCATION SYSTEM BEING ADAPTED TO US
ISCED (International Standard Classification of Education), developed by UNESCO (the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization), was designed as a suitable instrument for the collection and compilation of education statistics and comparable indicators and for their presentation at both national and international level. ISCED provides standard concepts, definitions and classifications. First published in 1976, ISCED was revised in 1997 and has been used to this day by many countries for purposes such as determining education policies and assisting in the collection of statistical data. In 2010 UNESCO entered into a new consultation process with all stakeholders in education and shared the draft ISCED 2011 document it had prepared.
ISCED-1997 provides an advanced set of definitions and criteria aimed at ensuring international comparability in the classification of education programmes by education level and field.
In ISCED-1997 it was intended, so that it would be universal in structure, that it be applicable regardless of the level of development of the education system in the countries concerned. It was designed to serve as an instrument for compiling and presenting education statistics and indicators that are comparable both for individual countries and from country to country. However, we see that we do not have an educational system sufficiently compatible with the ISCED system to address our serious difficulties in training intermediate-level staff. In our system there is either high school and its equivalents, or vocational colleges and universities. Postgraduate and doctoral studies find their place under ISCED codes 5 and 6. Yet when the educational structures of countries such as Romania and Poland in particular, and of the former USSR countries, are examined in the OECD’s Education 2030 Report,
we see that the ISCED + c system has been carried into those systems in the form of a high school diploma equivalent to a university degree. Here we are not speaking only of gymnasium (Gimnasium) schools. What we mean is that thematic vocational high schools should be equipped with far broader powers and designed as INTERMEDIATE MODELS that, through diploma qualification examinations, meet the need for highly competent intermediate-level staff.
As MÜSİAD we have both established a “committee” on this subject and are about to complete a fairly comprehensive study. Our aim is to move somewhat away from the obligation of constantly opening universities and to restore to the concept of the high school graduate the attractiveness and competence it had in the 1960s. For the obsession with continually producing university graduates is unfortunately becoming a factor that strains us socially. Being unable to make over-motivated graduates content with a job and being unable to explain to them the importance of institutional memory leaves us, the employer side, facing a shortage of staff. Look, we are speaking here of a very serious dilemma: an employer side suffering a staff shortage against a youth unemployment rate reaching %14.
3. CREATING NEW CURRICULA FOR CONVENTIONAL
PROFESSIONS
We were very excited when opening the Business Administration Department or Faculty. Let us look briefly at its history: the origin of the word is in fact Gestion, from Latin, meaning stewardship. It always existed; in the 19th century, as it was forced to comply with the changing rules of trade, the old and weary Empire began to teach it at the Ministry of Education. Its greatest leap forward, however, came at the beginning of the 1980s, when we experienced our widest outward openings. Sensible, complete in its ranks and receptive to change, it quickly found a place for itself at the most renowned Turkish universities. It was not a department as costly as opening a faculty of medicine or engineering, with a long amortization period, requiring high investment and with a limited pool of specialist staff. It was not a department like opening a faculty of law, whose staff rests on certain established balances and has become entrenched, carrying heavy responsibility and abundant controversy. It was not a department like opening a faculty of fine arts, with vague criteria, debatable necessity and problematic originality. Faculties of language, history and geography (later renamed science and letters) were “de jure” compulsory. Opening a business administration department or a faculty of economics and administrative sciences required no great and long-standing investment beyond preparing a curriculum and finding presentable lecturers who could teach the already numerous common courses. It did not have to be a remedy for any ailment; for we were not yet in a mood to consider what our ailment was. In other words, once again we had made no planning. We would raise bright young people who, even if they did not know production,
knew trade and spoke a foreign language, and then with them we would become the world’s contract-manufacturing giant. With little capital,” put in one, take out five” logic suited us perfectly. With an exaggerated advertising policy and a glittering imitation of its counterparts in America, in those years almost every parent found their child worthy of business administration. Then things got out of hand! Business administration raised the banner of victory all on its own. The young people’s dreams were great: after a four- or five-year education with no ruler, no stethoscope, no thick textbook and no fine tuning, suited to every budget, they dreamed of the CEO positions awaiting them at large companies and were disappointed; because they disregarded the criterion of competition and the time needed to gain experience. We, as the employer side, do not want business administration graduates. And why? Because they do not come before us with a suitable curriculum. Look at what we did while training business administration graduates. Let us list it plainly so that we do not make the same mistakes in the future when designing the professions of the future:
“There is no need for him to know economics as well as an economist”
“There is no need for him to know accounting as well as a public finance specialist”
“There is no need for him to know finance as well as a mathematician”
“There is no need for him to know mathematics as well as a statistician”
“There is no need for him to know advertising as well as a communications specialist”
“There is no need for him to know contracts as well as a lawyer”
“There is no need for him to know production as well as an engineer”
“There is no need for him to know computers as well as an IT specialist”
“There is no need for him to know history as well as a political science graduate”
“There is no need for him to know definitions as well as a historian”
“There is no need for him to know people as well as a psychologist”
“There is no need for him to be as critical as a philosopher”
No, no, no! We said “let him know it superficially, that is enough…” and entrusted an infrastructural institution to someone who knows it superficially. This is what is called educational loss.
We will not be able to give up conventional professions so quickly. But it is within our power to add courses from different disciplines and branches to their curricula, or to increase compulsory
internship requirements in the field. What we mean here is not a multidisciplinary approach to education. That part will also have to be addressed. Here we are speaking only of enriching and updating traditional professional branches by taking courses from different but related disciplines. For example, young people receiving an education in economics must be reinforced with mathematics, sector-specific courses, social psychology, law and computing. Likewise, our young people studying business administration or accounting and public finance need to be enriched with training in public diplomacy, tax law, economics, finance and modelling. Another example: let us take law. It is an indispensable branch of the profession, just like medicine, is it not? But the distance of lawyers from courses such as economics, business administration and quality management, industrial production and industrial engineering unfortunately leaves them barren under market conditions. So in essence: the arrival of new professions is of course inevitable, but it is essential that existing graduates, and the young people still being educated in conventional professions while we complete our planning, also be put through curriculum updates that will prepare them for the requirements of the new age.
4. PROPERLY UNDERSTANDING THE CONCEPT OF SYSTEMS ENGINEERING AND
TRAINING THE MANAGERS OF THE FUTURE
What is meant here is not the classical systems engineering education taught at technical universities. Systems engineering at technical universities is a form of engineering that models everything from design to final production and post-production processes, and it is an intermediate discipline. What we mean here is training young people who design the system like an engineer. What is meant here is talent scouting. For these children, these young people, are among us and are quietly waiting to be discovered. To put it plainly, you cannot keep these talented children fixed in a single field. One field does not satisfy them, it is not enough for them. For my own part I say they are marathon runners by birth. We need to consider systems engineering not only in the technical field but to treat it as a management model, indeed as a manager profile. It may thus be said that yes, the manager profile of the future is the systems engineer. For they are open to transitions between disciplines, and putting them through a multidisciplinary education in fact means resolving, through one or two
people, a process that would otherwise be handled by a great many staff and might well suffer synchronization problems, in order to apply process management, crisis management and problem-solving and decision-making techniques. Systems engineers ensure that all the elements of the intended outcome come together flawlessly and functionally. They then determine the breakdown of all disciplinary activities and design the processes through which the work will be carried out. Most importantly, they ensure the coordination of design information with fixed discipline teams. We need a separate education policy and curriculum planning in order to train systems engineers.
5. RECALLING THE ENDERUN AND ARİFAN TRADITION
Since we have spoken of systems engineering, we must say with pride that it is we who presented to the world the systematics of talent management and of training key personnel for the system. Since Nizam al-Mulk, the Turkish tradition of state administration has in fact continued by selecting and classifying young people according to their talents and both instilling cultural values in them and giving them training in the administration of the state. For teaching alone is not enough. The essential point is that education be multifaceted. It is fundamental that we cultivate both values education and clear minds open to innovation. We have seen that purely academic knowledge, cut off from industrial knowledge and from the field, is in fact not sufficient. For this reason we are establishing the MÜSİAD ENDERUN and MÜSİAD ARİFAN Schools. Our aim is both to train high-quality business people and to define and plan talent management in a way compatible with the professions of the future.
6. ALSO HELPING OUR UNIVERSITY STUDENTS WITH THEIR PERSONAL
DEVELOPMENT
The university is a teaching institution; but life requires being multifaceted and active. The participation rates of our university graduates and students in NGOs are quite low. It should of course not be forgotten that this also stems from the staffing and management problems within NGO structures in Türkiye. But it is in such places that young people are seasoned, in such places that they mature. Young people taking active roles in NGOs is a simulation for their future lives.
Within the scope of YOUNG MÜSİAD we aim for young people to become acquainted with industry and the sectors at a very early age and to gain experience. To this end we have renewed the structure of YOUNG MÜSİAD so that it will be far more active and participatory. Another
matter is that young people preparing for the future take no trouble over their personal development. What are these? We are faced with a youth far removed from reading books and doing research. Reading was not a leisure-time hobby; it is a necessity. It begins at a very early age and confronts a person with the possibility that other lives may exist. That is, it leaves a person alone with themselves. A person who reads acquires the capacity to invent, develops the ability to empathize and also expresses their feelings far more easily. Unfortunately, we cannot intervene after the age of 40 with someone who did not acquire the habit of reading when young. It is impossible for a person who does not read to renew or refresh themselves. I believe that this lack of a reading habit also lies at the root of young people’s language-learning problems in Türkiye. For as they drift away from the concept of curiosity, young people imagine they are happy with the life they have. But since they also do not know how to be content, they unfortunately continue their working lives amid disappointment, with high speed and low capacity or accumulated experience. We may say an unhappy youth is coming. In short: high ambition requires high resolution!
7. HOW SHOULD A UNIVERSITY BE MANAGED
Up to now we have always looked at the young people’s side of education and vocational training. But what should the institution itself be like? This too is a separate problem. In Türkiye there are in fact two types of university: the state university and the foundation university. We are unfortunately unable to see the concept of the private university being properly operated. If the criteria and parameters of both for management, appointment and curriculum determination are almost identical, is their only difference that one of them has a board of trustees? We are still very far from a conception of the university that is company-specific, that is, that responds directly to the needs of industry. Another problem: must every university open every branch? We were quite hopeful when thematic universities began to be opened. For this brings with it a high level of specialization and internship opportunities. At the same time we think it gains us both intermediate-level staff and managers in determining strategies specific to the business world. Thematic universities were unfortunately founded in our country with the logic of the “boutique hotel”. Of course, establishing and positioning places with enormous budgets and unlimited campus facilities are investments of very great cost. It is difficult for a single company to shoulder them alone. But were we obliged to establish a university? Look, having ample campus facilities and not being spread across scattered buildings directly affects the quality of
graduates. Today Türkiye has become acquainted with the concept of the “apartment-block university”, and this has unfortunately brought with it a loss of prestige. What is a boutique university or a thematic university? They are places that bring certain branches together and train personnel towards a precise target with multidisciplinary curricula spanning those branches. And so they should be. Moreover, managing a university is not limited to possessing academic maturity alone. In the end a university, just like a company or an institution, consists of many offices and departments. Yet our rectors are academics specialized in a particular field. In other words, administrative management must be closely supervised, and every university must be able to generate its own budget and funds in order to be less of a burden on the state. This in turn comes from planning and implementing far more functional project development and business development activities. Here, either university management must also be supported by professional administrators, that is, a vice-president status must be introduced, or the powers and responsibilities of the office of the secretary general must be redefined in the form of an administrative vice-president. We must also address the management problems of universities separately.
8. ACADEMIA, INDUSTRY AND PUBLIC SECTOR PARTNERSHIPS
The three sectors cannot be separated from one another, yet these three sectors share three common problems: Synchronization, Communication and Accreditation. Academia, the public sector and industry are unable to act in a synchronized manner. That is, they cannot clearly set out their own areas of contribution in a joint project. They do not understand one another’s troubles or one another’s language. They are not accredited internationally to the same degree as their counterparts abroad. In the end, the establishment of such a structure at national level is essential. As MÜSİAD we established the Academia-Public Sector-Industry Cooperation and Project Monitoring Committee for this purpose. Our goal is to make these three sectors work together in harmony in the fields of project development, funding, staff training, legislative development and supervision, and to produce productive results. Thanks to our active presence at 311 locations as MÜSİAD, we have protocols at rectorate and deanship level with more than 100 universities. We are now shaping these protocols, together with new ones, so that they become the occasion for entirely new projects. This too is a result of our Renewal process.
CONCLUSION:
In summary, able to turn towards many different lines of work;
- Education based not on knowledge but on transfer (transferable skills)
- A multidisciplinary approach based on core disciplines
- Curricula in which the course load is reduced and interaction is increased
- Acceleration of adaptation to the needs of the digital world
- The establishment of dynamically structured systems in institutions
- Individuals integrated with the global world
- Visionary individuals who have trained themselves not to compete with the local but to compete with the global must be raised.
And for this;
1. Quality people must be kept in Türkiye:
Being able to keep qualified people in Türkiye is just as important as training them. When planning the professions of the future, the environments in which young people who have completed their education can work in Türkiye, the business world, the state and academic environments, must also be taken into account. For however variable and demanding the professions of the future are, the young individuals of the future are equally demanding.
It is for this reason that a great many young people who have graduated from quality universities such as Boğaziçi, OTDÜ, Bilkent and Galatasaray today do not prefer to work or live in Türkiye.
2. Creating job opportunities in Türkiye that will produce technology:
Another dimension is that the greatest reason why many capable young people in Türkiye study MEDICINE is that being a doctor in Türkiye is prestigious and highly remunerated. The private sectors turning towards technology production will bring forth professions in Türkiye capable of producing technology. Depending on the opportunities it offers, people will turn in that direction. There must be technology companies and pharmaceutical companies in which doctors can work, and these job descriptions must become attractive to people.
Abdurrahman KAAN
President of MÜSİAD