What Happens to Younger Workers When Older Workers Don’t Retire

在交响乐团的世界里，双簧管吹奏者的职位一直以来都很稀缺。年轻的双簧管吹奏者等待顶尖乐团的职位开放，但不少首席双簧管吹奏家在坚守岗位几十年后就是不退休。我们不知道有多少年轻吹奏家最终放弃，改变职业，还是在低级别职位上苦干多年。但在21世纪初期，很多资深双簧管吹奏家开始退休，高级职位出现空缺，次级职位随之开放并逐级出现松动。双簧管吹奏家的晋升突然间成为可能。某位年轻有为的吹奏家将这一时刻形容为“上天的恩赐”。

For years in the world of symphony orchestras, available positions for oboe talent were scarce. Young oboists waited for chairs at top orchestras to open up, but many principal oboists who had held their positions for decades simply weren’t retiring. It’s impossible to know how many younger players gave up, changed professions, or lingered in the lower ranks bitterly for years. In the early 2000s, however, many of the senior oboists began to retire. Those departures freed up spots at the top, which freed up spots below that, and so on. Advancement for oboists was suddenly possible. One promising young oboist described the moment as a “gift from heaven.”

双簧管吹奏家的困局很好地说明了大量员工决定退休后依然留在劳动力市场，这是当前经济中正出现的越来越普遍的情况。组织的“名额限制”（slot constraints）让年长员工守着“铁饭碗”，将高潜力年轻人才拒之门外，导致人才需求也出现或繁荣或萧条的交替循环。这一问题会造成代际冲突，我们在研究中将该过程称为“职业溢出”（career spillovers）。

The oboists’ dilemma is a tidy model for what’s beginning to happen more broadly across entire economies, as many workers decide to stay in the workforce past retirement age. These “slot constraints” in organizations hold back high-potential younger workers as older ones stick around, and create boom-and-bust cycles of talent demand. The problem can create intergenerational conflict, through what we refer to in our research as “career spillovers.”

内部和外部力量交缠，最终在公司内部导致溢出问题。从内部看，如果公司为员工提供升迁机会的能力（我们称之为“职业空间”）有限，员工必须以牺牲同事的利益为代价才能获得升迁的话，就会出现溢出问题。这可能意味着，当年长员工延迟退休，年轻员工的职业升迁就会停滞。我们之前研究过这一课题，当前研究继续在调查延迟退休的量化影响。

Intertwined internal and external forces cause spillovers within a firm. Internally, spillovers occur when a firm is limited in its ability to provide advancement opportunities for its employees — what we call “career capacity” — so that one employee’s advancement comes at the cost of her coworkers’. This can mean that when older workers delay their retirement, younger workers’ career advancement stalls. We have studied these issues in the past, and our current research continues to investigate the quantitative impacts of delayed retirement.

与此同时，行业状况和宏观经济趋势等外在力量决定了公司的职业空间。没有订单的公司无法实现增长，而如果公司无法增长，就不能创造职业晋升机会。这会形成恶性循环。考虑到年轻的公司往往增长速度快于成熟企业，职业溢出问题在成熟企业中对员工的影响最大。人才会从增长较慢的公司跳到增长更快、职业空间更大的企业，这又增加了成熟企业寻求新增长的难度。

At the same time, external forces — industry conditions and macroeconomic trends — shape a firm’s career capacity. When orders aren’t coming in, the business can’t grow; if the business isn’t growing, it can’t create career advancement opportunities. This creates a vicious cycle. Since younger firms tend to grow more quickly than mature firms, the spillover effect is felt most deeply in mature firms. The slower-growing firms then lose talent to faster-growing ones where career capacity is less diminished, thus making it even harder for mature firms to compete for new growth.

公共政策和人口数据的变化加剧了企业职业空间受限的困局。在宏观经济层面，多数高收入国家人口年龄的中位数增加，也就是说，年长员工人数不断增加。年长员工往往在组织中居高职，在职场打拼的最后几年里也不太可能换工作。退休不断延迟，既是因为别无选择，也因为多数国家迫于预算压力，延长了退休年龄。

The changes in public policy and the inexorable demographic data compound the challenge of limited career capacity. At the macroeconomic level, most high-income countries have seen an increase in the median age of their populations, which translates to more older workers. Older employees often occupy higher-level positions in their organizations and tend to have lower turnover rates during their last few years in the workplace. Retirement is taking place later and later, both out of choice and because most countries have increased their retirement age due to budgetary pressures.

一想到公司对增长和方向的战略决策，我们通常就将注意力放在商业机会等外部因素上，而不去考虑公司职业空间等内部力量对自身前途的影响。但越来越多证据表明，忽视职业晋升或不能提供相关机会，会导致员工流失，特别是高潜力人才会选择离开。沃顿商学院教授彼得·卡佩利（Peter Cappelli）在其2008年出版的《按需供才》（Talent on Demand）一书中强调，“对晋升机会的不满是人才选择去其他地方工作的最重要诱因之一。”

When we think about a firm’s strategic decisions regarding growth and direction, we typically focus on external factors like business opportunities, rather than considering how an internal force like a firm’s career capacity can affect its fortunes. An increasing volume of evidence, however, shows that neglecting career advancement, or being unable to provide it, can lead to employee attrition, especially among high-potential workers. In his 2008 book Talent on Demand, Wharton professor Peter Cappelli emphasized that “[f]rustration with advancement opportunities is one of the most important factors pushing individuals to leave for jobs elsewhere.”

这种不满也可能引发代际冲突。确实，毕马威2013年的调查发现，“46%的人都认为，只有年长员工退休，年轻员工才能获得真正的晋升机会。”出现这种情况，对所有参与调查的人来说都很不幸，而且在过去几年中一切又恶化了。

This frustration can lead to intergenerational conflict. Indeed, a KPMG survey carried out in 2013 found that “46 percent of people agreed with the proposition that older members of staff should retire so that younger workers could have a genuine chance of promotion.” This situation is unfortunate for everyone involved and has only gotten worse over the last few years.

这个棘手的问题是：在当前人口形势下，年长员工似乎不会离开工作岗位，即便年轻员工希望他们离开，因此公司不得不扩大职业空间。尽管目前还没有简单可行的解决方案，但我们的研究给出了一些可能有效的方案。

The wicked problem is this: Firms need to expand career capacity in the face of demographics that suggest older workers aren’t going anywhere even as younger workers want them to move on. While there are no silver-bullet solutions, our research points to some approaches that may be effective.

促进高层人员流动。如果公司限制高层员工的在职时间，公司就会出现晋升的空间。举例来说，交响乐团可以将首位双簧管吹奏家的任期限制在15年以内。强制退休政策也能促进人员流动；近些年来，我们看到律所、咨询和会计公司为扩大职业空间，越来越多地选择强制性买断合伙人股权。员工排序（stack ranking）等强制性促进人员流动的政策也能起到同样的作用。

Encourage turnover at the top. If firms limit the amount of time higher-ranked employees can stay in their positions, advancement is engineered into the firm. An orchestra, for example, might limit the tenure of first oboists to no more than 15 years. Mandatory-retirement policies encourage turnover, as well; in recent years, we’ve seen increases in forced partner buyouts in law, consulting, and accounting firms as a way to expand career capacity. Other forced-turnover policies such as stack ranking can serve a similar role.

上述策略有一明显缺点：有价值的人才可能会被迫离开。其他漏洞还包括，通过强制性的任期限制减小工作稳定性，可能导致工作从一开始就失去吸引力；虽然年轻员工希望年长员工别挡住他们的路，但也不希望同样的政策用在自己身上。员工排序可能破坏员工相互帮助的激励机制，这也是为何诸如通用电气和微软等知名公司都停止使用该措施了。多年来，对强制性退休政策的不公平使用，给了公司歧视年长员工的借口，所以多个国家都废除了这些政策。

The obvious drawback to these strategies is that they may involve forcing out valuable talent. They have other pitfalls as well. For example, decreased job security through mandatory term limits may make jobs less desirable in the first place; while younger workers want older workers to get out of their way, they likely won’t want those same policies applied to their own situation. Stack ranking can undermine incentives employees have to help each other, which is why many prominent firms such as General Electric and Microsoft have stopped using it. And for many years, the uneven application of mandatory-retirement policies gave firms cover to discriminate against older workers, which led several countries to abolish them altogether.

尽管非自愿离职对员工来说很艰难，但如果公司有协助他们离职后发展的方案，员工就不会感到太痛苦了。若公司帮离职员工找到其他有吸引力的工作机会，就能确保自身高级职位即便稳定性稍差，也不会失去吸引力了——这在麦肯锡等顶尖管理咨询公司中非常常见。

While involuntary departures can be hard on employees, they can be made less painful if firms find ways to facilitate post-departure careers. If the company can find attractive opportunities elsewhere for workers when they leave — a practice that is common in top management consulting firms such as McKinsey & Company, for example — they can ensure that high-level jobs remain attractive even if they are less secure.

扩大等级体系。相比强迫资深艺术家放弃职位，你可以增加更多双簧管吹奏家。扩大职业空间，或者说增加最高级职位数量，可以在不失去既有人才的前提下创造晋升机会。

Expand the hierarchy. Instead of forcing people out of chairs, add more oboists. Expanding career capacity — putting more positions at the top — creates advancement opportunities without losing what’s already there.

但这也许会造成组织人浮于事，引发一系列新问题。一个典型案例就是美国军队中的“大佬遍地”（brass creep）现象：冷战末期，高级军官的相对人数猛增。某篇讲述这一现象的文章指出，“二战期间，每位海军上将管辖30艘海军舰艇。现在海军里上将比舰艇还多。”除了人力成本高之外，人浮于事还可能导致决策速度变缓、质量变差：谁都是领导的话，就没有领导了。

This may, however, create top-heavy organizations with a new set of problems. A prominent example of this is the “brass creep” phenomenon in the U.S. military, in which the relative number of high-ranking officers spiked at the end of the Cold War. As one article on the phenomenon noted, “In World War II, there were 30 Navy ships for every admiral. Now, the Navy has more admirals than ships.” In addition to being expensive, having too many cooks in the kitchen can lead to slower and worse decisions: When everyone is in charge, no one is in charge.

在不制造混乱的情况下，创造更多高级职位的方法之一是制定岗位轮换政策，让员工轮流担任领导职务。这貌似异想天开，但中国电信巨头华为已经成功实行了这一政策：“三位副董事长轮流担任代理CEO，任期为六个月”。

One approach to creating more positions at the top without creating chaos is to set up a job rotation policy whereby workers can take turns being in the leadership position. While this approach may seem unorthodox, it has been pursued by the successful Chinese telecom giant Huawei, where “three deputy chairmen act as the rotating and acting CEO for a tenure of six months.”

规划增长。理想情况下，企业和行业可以通过增长扩大职业空间。创建更多交响乐团！彼得·德鲁克（Peter Drucker）1977年对Callahan Associates的著名案例研究描述了一家通过发展连锁店来实现增长的公司。Callahan Associates最开始是一家连锁超市，后来连续开了多家花店，接下来分别是家政服务连锁店和连锁贺卡店。公司之所以这样行动，是因为CEO比尔·卡拉翰（Bill Callahan）“深信公司必须要扩张，才能给员工晋升机会”，而且“这意味着每六七年就要果断进入新的业务领域”。

Plan for growth. Ideally, firms and industries can create career capacity through growth. Form more orchestras! Peter Drucker’s famous case study on Callahan Associates in 1977 described a firm that engineered growth by becoming a chain of chains. It started out as a supermarket chain, then developed a chain of garden centers, then home-service centers, and then greeting card stores. It did so because the CEO, Bill Callahan, “deeply believed that the company had to expand to give people promotion opportunities,” and “this meant going purposefully into new businesses every six or seven years.”

虽然这一策略可创造更多职业机会，但也可能带来非同寻常或有风险的机会，而这对外部人士和投资者来说并不划算。如果不反思或被动执行该策略，这就会成为组织的毒瘤。要采用这种增长方式，组织就必须认真考虑雇用新人并为其提供充实、有干劲工作的长期成本。该方法意味着放弃短期盈利机会——这种思维模式在德鲁克写作的20世纪70年代更深入人心一些。当然，公司仍要追求增长——任何旨在创造机会的策略都会涵盖这一部分。职业空间挑战也许是迫使老牌企业转换新思维方式，从而实现增长的契机之一。

While this strategy expands career opportunities, it may also mean pursuing unusual or risky opportunities, and it can appear unprofitable to outsiders and investors. If left unchecked or pursued in a reactive manner, it can become a cancer on the organization. Engaging in this type of growth requires thinking carefully about the long-term costs of hiring someone and providing them with a fulfilling and motivating career. This approach may mean forgoing profitable short-run opportunities — a mindset that may have been more palatable when Drucker was writing in the 1970s than it is today. Still, companies pursue growth, and it will be part of any strategy aimed at increasing opportunities. The career capacity challenge could be one way to jolt an old firm into the kind of new thinking it needs in order to grow.

经营一家成功企业要求组织在利用外部机会和管理职业机会之间，找到正确的平衡点。我们的研究表明，在很多情况下，激励员工的最有效方法是基于职业发展的激励机制。如果公司对职业机会管理不当，那么业绩在短期（因为职业溢出和代际冲突）和长期（因为代际冲突会让公司很难吸引到新人）都会受损。正如本文所讲，公司有多种方法扩大职业空间并减少代际冲突，即便使用这些方法都是有代价的。公司应权衡利弊，避免仅依赖其中一种方法。只要综合运用上述所有解决方案的全面、缜密的策略才具有最大效力。

Running a successful organization requires striking the right balance between taking advantage of external opportunities and managing career opportunities. Our research has shown that in many situations the best way to motivate workers is through career-based incentives. When career opportunities are mismanaged, the performance of the firm suffers both in the short run, because of career spillovers and intergenerational conflicts, and in the long run, because such conflicts may make it difficult for the firm to attract new talent. As we’ve shown here, there are ways for firms to expand their career capacity and reduce these conflicts, although all of these approaches have costs as well. Firms should compare the costs and benefits and not rely on any single approach. An integrative and thoughtful strategy that combines all of these solutions can be the most effective.

尼古拉·比安奇（Nicola Bianchi） 李晋（Jin Li） 迈克尔·鲍威尔（Michael Powell）|文

尼古拉·比安奇是西北大学凯洛格商学院战略学助理教授。李晋是香港大学管理学、战略学和经济学教授。迈克尔·鲍威尔是西北大学凯洛格商学院战略学副教授。

刘筱薇 | 译   刘铮筝 | 校   钮键军| 编辑

原文参见《哈佛商业评论》中文版2019年4月刊。