>> MIM Speaks
MATCHING UP MANPOWER NEEDS.
MAY 26, 1996 -
THE STAR
WHEN Prime Minister Datuk Seri Dr Mahathir Mohamad unveiled
Vision 2020 on Feb 28, 1991 he said that one way forward was
"the challenge of establishing a scientific and progressive
society, A society that is innovative and forwardlooking, one
that is not only a consumer of technology, but also a
contributor to the scientific and technological civilization
of the future."
Five years have passed, but action on the ground is not rising
significantly enough to respond to the challenge.
Let us make no bones about the crucial contributor af science
and 'technology to our future well-being. Vision 2020 is
premised on a growing contribution of higher-end manufacturing
and the service sector to drive our wealth creation ability to
generate a GDP of RM920 billion in 2020, eight times the RM115
billion achieved-for-1990.
We are looking at high potential industries such as
electronics and electrical equipment, biotechnology and
advanced materials'(such as super conductors), and over the
period, labour-intensive,.assemblytype operations which
attract low technology and low skills will be phased out.
Installing high value technological processes requires that we
have a sufficiently well-positioned workforce to accept,
operate and master the new technology.
Manning the work stations with a labour force not acquainted
with science and technology will simply pose a gap too wide to
bridge.
We will have to be looking at engineers and
technically-oriented staff to receive the new technology, not
at school-leavers.
Projections of technical manpower requirements suggest that
demand will continue to outstrip supply for years to come.
Local universities, institutions of higher learning and
private colleges are simply not responding vigorously enough
to meet the kind of manpower required in the years to come.
The revamping of the school curriculum to give more attention
to mathematics and science is most welcome, but much more
needs to be done.
The misalignment of education and industry needs is quite
universal. At a recent meeting of university vice-chancellors
in Malta, the observation was made that universities still
tend to allocate resources to less pressing fields of
education, partly by perceived force5 of student demand for
the humanities and liberal education.
Even at our local universities the demand for admission into
artsbased faculties Far exceeds the demand for admission into
science and engineering faculties.
In response to this consumer behavior, the bulk of private
collages have focused on chalk and talk disciplines of
accounting, business studies, economics, law and management.
On economic grounds this orientation is more attractive for
the college against the much higher investment cost of
providing studies in science and technology.
Future supply of technology biased manpower is not the only
cause for concern. The current inventory of engineers and
technical personnel is dwindling as many are moving away from
technical work into management.
It is quite normal for engineers to leave the profession after
five to 10 years to become managers and corporate directors.
With the increasing rate of change, engineering knowledge
rapidly becomes obsolete, and it will demand a true
professional to update and keep abreast of his profession.
The root of the problem lies in the public perception that it
is corporate life that rewards best in terms of financial
returns, status, authority and lifestyles.
And it befalls the engineering and technical group to have to
roll up sleeves to do the less glamorous job of sweating out
in the sun, dealing with machinery or toiling with his hands.
There was a time not too long ago when the grievance among
engineering graduates after pursuing a tough course of study
lasting four years was to have to report to a junior who- has
completed three years of easier study!
Our past economic prosperity has, indeed, offered the good
life to our lawyers, managers and accountants. These were the
people we needed most to handle our plantations and import
substitution industries. But our future no longer rests on
these sectors, some of which are of the "sunset" type.
As we turn to high technology industries, it will be the turn
of our engineers and scientists to stake the claim for the
good life through the immense opportunities that our passage
towards Vision 2020' offers.
There are three sour›es of influence on the decision to opt
for study in the science stream-parents, teachers and
counsellors, and the student and his/her peers.
Parents do exert an enormous pressure the career direction of
children; the traditional preference for medicine and law is
still very much in evidence.
Counselling support for school children is still basic and the
announcement that all schools will have access to one or more
counsellors is most timely.
Peer pressure is more acute in the choice of a university and
discipline at tertiary level.
There is need to work on a broad front in rerouting the career
direction of our young.
Much more promotional work on a sustainable basis aimed at the
three sources of influence should be programmed for.
The message that needs to be communicated is that our
industrial structure will change and that the change expected
will demand new talents and new skills which will be the new
opportunities of the future.
Educational and training institutions involved in technical
type programmes should be encouraged by fiscal and other
incentives.
The German-Malaysian Institute in Cheras is a useful model
based on the'dual system of vocational education that is so
successful in maintaining Germany's technological edge to this
day. The system is driven by a collaborative relationship
between industry, government and a training organisation. It
is an alternative, not an inferior, educational route to the
development of highly skilled technical personnel.
Learning is vocational-biased, and theory and practice moves
in parallel. Because students are actually contributing to
work performance, they are also paid an allowance.
For too long our educational system has placed a premium on
academic achievements. In line with this, we have been
allocating resources to the creation and support of
universities disproportionate to the urgent need for more
polytechnics and vocational schools.
What is of more concern is that, for the universities there is
also the disproportionate allocation of resources for
non-science and nontechnology disciplines.
The mismatch between manpower development and the future needs
of' industry needs to be resolved if we are to have confidence
in achieving the expectations of Vision 2020. We have to shift
from a bias for rhetoric to a bias for action.
|
