Ageism in corporate world : It’s a Goldilocks paradox

 Those of us who have been in the IT sector for any number of years have probably observed the Goldilocks paradox at work. According to the popular fairy tale, “Goldilocks and the Three Bears,” little Goldilocks tries the three bowls of porridge and sets aside the big bow as it is ‘too hot,’ the second as ‘too cold’ and eats the porridge from the third bowl that it thinks is ‘just right.’

Tech recruiters and hiring managers are like little Goldilocks, wanting their candidates neither too young, nor too old, just the right age. The media and analysts have been focused on the high turnover in IT sector, but a closer look shows how this Goldilocks paradox is playing out – the demand is highest for those with at least a few years’ experience in a specific technology, gradually tapering off for more experienced candidates who are likely to be higher paid, hitting a glass ceiling at the top.

One of the reasons for this is the cost to company (CTC) that candidates expect. Indian IT has evolved an archaic “Years of experience and salary” formula that recruiters seem to use, with an equally obtuse number of two-hundred thousand rupees for every year of experience. By this formula, a candidate with 10 years’ experience will be expected to draw two million in annual package, while the one with 7 years can expect only 1.4 million. Negotiating an exception can be a contentious and long-drawn affair.

Ageism at the bottom of the pyramid

Recruiters and their filtering software are quick to reject graduates with little or no experience, creating a vicious cycle – young techies unable to obtain relevant experience without the first job, while most entry level jobs require experience. A viral twitter post from Sebastián Ramírez (@tiangolo), the creator of FastAPI succinctly highlights this paradox

“I saw a job post the other day. It required 4+ years of experience in FastAPI. I couldn’t apply as I only have 1.5+ years of experience since I created that thing.”

I saw a job post the other day. 👔

It required 4+ years of experience in FastAPI. 🤦

I couldn't apply as I only have 1.5+ years of experience since I created that thing. 😅

Maybe it's time to re-evaluate that "years of experience = skill level". ♻

— Sebastián Ramírez (@tiangolo) July 11, 2020

The glass ceiling at the top

At the other end, the glass-ceiling for experienced (read older) tech workers is also equally pronounced. Most recruiters are unwilling to evaluate candidates with 15 or more years’ experience creating an implicit bias against older workers. Social forums like Quora, Reddit or even LinkedIn groups frequently debate the question over such ageism with a common theme: when is a person ‘too old’ to be hired at a tech company? Are folks in their forties or fifties considered ‘too old to hire’?

Having explored a job-change while in my forties after relocating back to India a few years ago, I am probably well-qualified to answer this question. My job-search was unique in another way – unlike many of my peers out to showcase their credentials in managing ‘large,’ teams, I was essentially selling my skills as an individual contributor, albeit one who could help organizations navigate a breath of technologies.

It took me a few months of serious networking, contacting hiring managers and recruiters before I began getting calls for interviews. The feedback was simple: my peers were all “IT Director” level folks who could showcase their project or team management skills; so, I had to emphasize my business partnering skills and the knowledge of a breadth of technical skills.

The way forward – get over the conscious bias

The IT industry is maturing, especially in India, where there are over 5 million people in the IT–BPM sector. The average age of professionals has steadily been increasing over the years. By some accounts the average Indian techie is between 27 and 30 years old, which also happens to be the sweet spot where the industry is seeing a hiring frenzy.

It is time for hiring managers and recruiters to set aside their blinders and look beyond the Goldilocks paradox. Doing so will not only ease the pressure on hiring; but casting a wider net for talent will also drive a more inclusive and diverse work environment.

Originally published in  Express Computers 

Jobs in America: Offshoring Angle

As the global economy flounders, the debate over job creation rages. In America the debate is getting an additional political overture due to the heating debate over 2012 Presidential elections. Given the focus on economy and job creation, immigration and globalization is a hot-button topic a few policy makers want to entertain. While politicians and policy makers take a macro view of jobs in America, business leaders are factoring job creation into their social-outreach program. This is an angle offshoring firms also seem to be pursuing.

According to a recent Knowledge Wharton/ Network article, the big-three of Indian Offshoring are already taking focused steps towards global hiring:

Infosys: At its recent analyst meeting, Infosys revealed that by next year, it plans to increase the number of local employees at onsite client locations to 50%. Infosys, which has a total employee base of over 130,000, currently has around 27,000 employees at client locations. Of these, around one-third are local hires. With the U.S. accounting for the biggest chunk of Infosys’s revenues, the maximum local hiring will happen there.

TCS: In its annual report for 2010-2011, Tata Consultancy Services, the leading Indian IT firm, notes that protectionism in major markets is one of the key risks that the company faces. “Restrictive legislations that impede the free flow of talent in key markets could disrupt operations and hamper growth in those markets,” the report says. One of the solutions to mitigate this risk: “more local recruitment.”

Wipro: At Wipro Technologies, plans are also in the works to increase local hires at onsite locations — from around 35% currently to more than 50% over the next couple of years.

There is a steady economic activity around corporations that have been sourcing work. In anytown USA, one can still encounter IT development centers that continue to staff high-paying jobs. In addition to people working for end-client organizations, local economies are spurred by transient workers from sourcing/vendor firms. Such activities include apartment and extended-stay hotel, motel rentals, local grocery chains, supermarkets, malls and restaurants. Those on short-term visas and contracts also pay taxes that includes federal, state and local income taxes.

ps: One can als make an argument that if it were not for offshoring, similar – if not more – economic activities would continue around IT development centers and hubs; with a difference, the economic transplants would have been from out-of-state and not out-of-nation… but that is not the point here.

A few interesting articles:

• ET: Infosys targets 50% local staff overseas in onsite locations


• Knowledge@Wharton - Indian IT Firms Are Looking to Create Jobs Overseas


• WSJ Blog: HCL Looks to Boost US Workforce


• My earlier viewpoint on onsite hiring