Malaysian Employers Federation (MEF) president Md Jafar Abdul Carim said there was no definite solution to the problem of unemployed graduates. In Jafar's view, the problem was attributed to the students' focus on getting excellent grades which has led to a situation where graduates now need assistance.
Md Jafar blamed the rat race that took place so early in a child's education. He said the school used to provide “a wholesome education” involving schoolbooks and lots of club activities which exposed the children to leadership positions and interaction. “Now, children spend hours after school in tuition classes. They also have to go for a full school day on Saturday to study past years' papers to prepare for the exams,” he said. “Schools are competing with each other to see who scores more As.”
According to Md Jafar, local graduates were also “more costly” to employ in terms of training compared to those who returned from overseas. “It takes more time to train a local graduate to reach a level where he or she can contribute to an organisation,” he said. “Foreign graduates are more focussed when it comes to taking responsibilities. They communicate better and volunteer for work. “Local graduates are more reserved and are less likely to volunteer for additional responsibilities,” he said.
Ever wondered why your graduate son or daughter is still without a job despite attending countless interviews? Are employers being too demanding in not wanting to give these young graduates a chance to enter the job market?
The Star report listed the various reasons why many graduates find it difficult to get hired after leaving college or university.
They want only the easy jobs
They think they should not be inconvenienced by their work
They do not know how to communicate, especially in English
They do not have social skills
They are just not hungry enough
The Star concluded that their attitude is a direct result of the following factors:
Over-protective parents
Too much tuition
Obsession with scoring many As
Taking things for granted
Hello Md Jafar and The Star; Are we seeing the right picture of the problem, or are we still seeing things behind a smoke screen?
In my honest observation, all the reasons as above, in particular, the views of En Md Jafar are secondary in nature, and would only be contributory to a fraction of unemployed graduates.
The facts remain that many graduates are UNEMPLOYABLE.
Two key Critical Failure Factors (CFF) are:
1. Our dysfunctional & outmoded educational system & out-dated system managers
2. Effect of Global competitiveness and the need for system Innovation & individual Creativeness
If we take a hard look into our current educational system, we can visualize that the system had remain what they are 30 years ago - doing what they had done, and thus, producing what they had produced, automatons with the old outmoded school of thoughts and knowledge, coupled with the bare facts that the current enrolled students are lacking of the basic foundation of science necessary to prepare them to absorb the doctrines and philosophies associated with the global business/commercial enterprising.
Previously, all students had to go through 2 years of Higher School Education (HSE), the equivalent of todays' STPM. The current new system of metriculation education which is only one year pre-U education is inadequate to prepare the school children to the mental and philosophical level necessary of under-graduates who would be "enabled" with a broad-based critical mindset to review, evaluate, and developing insights of global needs, networking, and competitive advantages.
In the past decades, we are in the agricultural and industrial revolutionary phase. Competition and business opportunities are largely based on sourcing cheap labours and raw materials, and producing standard quality products. The old school of education emphasizes on mass production technology, quality control based on reduce waste, less re-work, and productivity. The case studies centered on organizational references such as Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, Honda, Motorolla, HP, Compac, General Motors, Ford, General Electric, etc.
So, business school students learn about the critical success factors (CSF) of these organization and presumably, when they graduate, they would be able to apply the theories and philosophies they had learnt in Universities.
However, we are currently in the age of globalization and Hitech-information system. Speed is necessary for product development and loading them early to the marketplace to secure early leadership which is crucial and critical to enhance barriers of entry and to gain premium ROI before the competitors gets into the market. Knowledge and information of competitors and customers' needs are crucial. Organizations have to be bold, innovative and far-sighted; be able to foresee the future patterns of the global needs, patterns of global consumptions and "fashions". Global outsourcing becomes paramount. Managers and executives must speedily gather information of global availability of competitive resources and raw materials, and the organization system must be flexible and adaptive to global outsourcing. For example, if a manufacturer has information of certain raw materials or mechanical parts which can be acquired from Poland or China at 50% of their current cost, the system must be capable to tap this cost advantage within the shortest time possible before fella competitors gets them or block them off-limit.
But our universities and the lecturers are still imparting the old school of knowledge and competencies. 80% of the lecturers had no industrial experiences and had never work with Multi-National Corporations (MNCs). Textbooks and liabraries are 1960-1980 editions with only few books that are current. We are still teaching them ISO 9000, Edward Deming and Juran ideologies, Kaizen, SPC, Maslow hierarchy of needs, Hawthorne Theory, Theory X-Y-Z, etc.
The under-graduates learns nothing and knows nothing why Malaysian Airline failed; why Bank Islam lost $700 million this year; why the financial liberalization and financial derivitives can cause regional financial collapse; how Renong was moulded into a billion-dollar corporation and why Renong collapse under a pile of debts and had to be rescued, downsized and restructured, why Motorolla is no more the market leader in cell-phones and the emergence of PDAs and 3G, why HP-Compac strategic M&A failed, and why Proton will soon die a natural death. We teach them nothing about the potential impact and effect of China economic expansion, and the strategies of Thailand to become Asia's hub for automobil and strategic control of automobil marketshare. We teach them nothing about critical failure factors of our own corporations and of others such as Enron, WorldCom, Chrysler, Rover, etc.
To make matter worse, the under-graduates are weak in English, and are spoon-fed in their assignments and dissertations. They are even given tips of probable examination questions and are guided. If necessary, the system may lower down its passing marks to enable them to graduate and get high scores. Most of the graduates do not understand research methodologies, have limited resources for literature research, and unable to conduct critical analysis and formulate prospective conclusion. Apart from that, the research subject will lie on the university shelf and remain a dead research. There is no continuity of research on the same subject, no matter how prospective the research knowledge can be. To add to the woes, the Malaysian public and private sector corporations do not support any of these researches or researchers. R & D in universities are largely sponsored by the government and the budget allocation is miniature in size. Proton, PNB, Sime, MAS, YTL, Khazanah would not use our Malaysian University of Technology in their R & D because they are contented that they are best served with their organizational resources. At such, our Universities research are not market-driven, and any new product developed are not tested and promoted. The universities R & D are largely show-piece to parade the image and to procure recognition that we have R & D within our U-system.
So, did we have a problem? Answer: NO!
Because, the system managers and ministers do not have the profound knowledge of the fundamental problem. What they see of the problem is contemporary in nature, and as was described by Md Jafar and The Star. As can be observed, even the vice-chancellor of MU is happy that University Malaya is still rank No. 169 within the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) World University Ranking for Top 200.
Keep it up! Remember, Malaysia Boleh!
If we take a hard look into our current educational system, we can visualize that the system had remain what they are 30 years ago - doing what they had done, and thus, producing what they had produced, automatons with the old outmoded school of thoughts and knowledge, coupled with the bare facts that the current enrolled students are lacking of the basic foundation of science necessary to prepare them to absorb the doctrines and philosophies associated with the global business/commercial enterprising.
Previously, all students had to go through 2 years of Higher School Education (HSE), the equivalent of todays' STPM. The current new system of metriculation education which is only one year pre-U education is inadequate to prepare the school children to the mental and philosophical level necessary of under-graduates who would be "enabled" with a broad-based critical mindset to review, evaluate, and developing insights of global needs, networking, and competitive advantages.
In the past decades, we are in the agricultural and industrial revolutionary phase. Competition and business opportunities are largely based on sourcing cheap labours and raw materials, and producing standard quality products. The old school of education emphasizes on mass production technology, quality control based on reduce waste, less re-work, and productivity. The case studies centered on organizational references such as Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, Honda, Motorolla, HP, Compac, General Motors, Ford, General Electric, etc.
So, business school students learn about the critical success factors (CSF) of these organization and presumably, when they graduate, they would be able to apply the theories and philosophies they had learnt in Universities.
However, we are currently in the age of globalization and Hitech-information system. Speed is necessary for product development and loading them early to the marketplace to secure early leadership which is crucial and critical to enhance barriers of entry and to gain premium ROI before the competitors gets into the market. Knowledge and information of competitors and customers' needs are crucial. Organizations have to be bold, innovative and far-sighted; be able to foresee the future patterns of the global needs, patterns of global consumptions and "fashions". Global outsourcing becomes paramount. Managers and executives must speedily gather information of global availability of competitive resources and raw materials, and the organization system must be flexible and adaptive to global outsourcing. For example, if a manufacturer has information of certain raw materials or mechanical parts which can be acquired from Poland or China at 50% of their current cost, the system must be capable to tap this cost advantage within the shortest time possible before fella competitors gets them or block them off-limit.
But our universities and the lecturers are still imparting the old school of knowledge and competencies. 80% of the lecturers had no industrial experiences and had never work with Multi-National Corporations (MNCs). Textbooks and liabraries are 1960-1980 editions with only few books that are current. We are still teaching them ISO 9000, Edward Deming and Juran ideologies, Kaizen, SPC, Maslow hierarchy of needs, Hawthorne Theory, Theory X-Y-Z, etc.
The under-graduates learns nothing and knows nothing why Malaysian Airline failed; why Bank Islam lost $700 million this year; why the financial liberalization and financial derivitives can cause regional financial collapse; how Renong was moulded into a billion-dollar corporation and why Renong collapse under a pile of debts and had to be rescued, downsized and restructured, why Motorolla is no more the market leader in cell-phones and the emergence of PDAs and 3G, why HP-Compac strategic M&A failed, and why Proton will soon die a natural death. We teach them nothing about the potential impact and effect of China economic expansion, and the strategies of Thailand to become Asia's hub for automobil and strategic control of automobil marketshare. We teach them nothing about critical failure factors of our own corporations and of others such as Enron, WorldCom, Chrysler, Rover, etc.
To make matter worse, the under-graduates are weak in English, and are spoon-fed in their assignments and dissertations. They are even given tips of probable examination questions and are guided. If necessary, the system may lower down its passing marks to enable them to graduate and get high scores. Most of the graduates do not understand research methodologies, have limited resources for literature research, and unable to conduct critical analysis and formulate prospective conclusion. Apart from that, the research subject will lie on the university shelf and remain a dead research. There is no continuity of research on the same subject, no matter how prospective the research knowledge can be. To add to the woes, the Malaysian public and private sector corporations do not support any of these researches or researchers. R & D in universities are largely sponsored by the government and the budget allocation is miniature in size. Proton, PNB, Sime, MAS, YTL, Khazanah would not use our Malaysian University of Technology in their R & D because they are contented that they are best served with their organizational resources. At such, our Universities research are not market-driven, and any new product developed are not tested and promoted. The universities R & D are largely show-piece to parade the image and to procure recognition that we have R & D within our U-system.
So, did we have a problem? Answer: NO!
Because, the system managers and ministers do not have the profound knowledge of the fundamental problem. What they see of the problem is contemporary in nature, and as was described by Md Jafar and The Star. As can be observed, even the vice-chancellor of MU is happy that University Malaya is still rank No. 169 within the Times Higher Education Supplement (THES) World University Ranking for Top 200.
Keep it up! Remember, Malaysia Boleh!
4 comments:
Yes. I blame the stupid teaching quality of many young and inexperience lecturers in the system today.
God knows how much I suffered because of these insufferable and idiotic teachers/lecturers.
They are the bottom of the rubbish pile of choice and I pity the students that end up with them
Ever thought that maybe character could be the problem too? That these student expect stuff to be handed to them on a silver platter? That they have no foresight, personality, etc?
Education can only do so much for you. Ultimately, it is what you make of it that makes you stand apart from the rest.
From my experience, most Malaysian students, even the brightest, tend to be rather introverted and timid in classroom discussions. They lack initiative and often the only thing they know how to do is score well on tests and hand in coursework on time. For my generation, it's too early to tell, but among my peers, I think those who go the farthest will be those who are most vocal in classroom discussions and unafraid to speak their minds. I myself used to be timid and lacking in initiative, but I am shaping up (no thanks to the education system). Interestingly, this new initiative and ridding of shyness only began really introducing itself after I left the school system. A year ago, I couldn't even dare to ask the clerk at a public library if my family's library cards were ready. Today, I am far less anxious about such situations than I used to be - I'm a lot more at ease about striking up a conversation with a near total stranger - although there is still much to be improved on. Incidentally, it may just be me, but those who are most vocal in class discussions also tend to score the highest (top 3 in the whole form). The next tier (top 10) tends to include more introverts. Wanna' bet the gap between the introverts and extroverts will widen a whole lot more as these students graduate and start looking for jobs? (Another coincidence: Most of these top students I know are seriously considering leaving the country or are about to.)
meiteoh,
I do not agree that character contributes to 60,000 unemployed graduates, nor because the student expects to be handed over in a silver platter. Expectations is always preceded by presumptions which means, if you know it had been given before, then you will expect it to be given again. As an illustration, the Chinese and Indian students knows that their parents will have to pay for their studies and it will be difficult to get a scholarship. Therefore, parents will have planned their savings for the child's education long before they get to universities.
Another aspect is employment. Since these students are funded by their parents, and they knew within them that their parents have high expectations on them, plus the fact that it would be difficult to get into govt service, they would consciously seek job opportunities even before they graduate, whilst privileged citizens would be more relax and cool as they believe the system will seek to adapt and adopt them. If that didn't happen, then they can go to UMNO in particular those representatives that are racially-biased extrovert and their plight would be taken care of. Similarly, MCA and MIC representatives do the same too but with less influence and unlikely to move the system. This is largely attributed to the Barisan System of govt - all men are equal but some are more equal.
Post a Comment