How to Strengthen the Workforce in an Age of Longevity
November 10, 2022
Globally, the working-age population is expected to decline by 10% by 2060, and in some countries, such as Greece and Japan, the decline could be as great as 35%. A decline in working-age populations, coupled with an increase in older populations, those above 65, could severely strain pension programs. According to one estimate, pension programs across the world, considered in aggregate, could have a deficit of $400 trillion by 2050.
One possible solution is to encourage people to work later in life. Now, some longevity researchers are advocating for what they call “60-year careers”—or 20 years longer than the current 40-year norm.
Such long careers may also be necessary because lifespans are growing. In the U.S., Germany, and Japan, among other countries, more than 50% of children who were born in 2007 will likely live beyond 100, according to Lynda Gratton and Andrew Scott, professors at London Business School and authors of The 100-Year Life: Livng and Working in an Age of Longevity. Similarly, the World Economic Forum reports that, in developed countries, most children born in 2000 or later can expect to live past 100.
As 100-year lives become more common, careers may need to lengthen since most people do not save enough over a 40-year career (ages 25 – 65) to pay for a 35-year retirement (ages 65 – 100). Moreover, in a 100-year life, people may want to work longer. Delaying retirement has been associated with better health—especially lower levels of cognitive decline—and a sense of social connection and purpose.
To support longer working lives, experts have suggested broad changes to work and education, to help people thrive throughout—and navigate—major life transitions. An awareness of these changes may help colleges, universities, and workplaces plan for a future of longevity.
Changing work rhythms and intensity throughout the lifespan
If people work later in life, some experts suggest we must change the rhythms and intensity of work. We may not need—nor want—to work full-time throughout an entire 60-year career. And we may need more support for intermittent periods of leave, when people to tend life responsibilities, such as caring for a child or parent.
“The way we work is not great at all in this country,” remarked Laura Carstensen, founding director of the Stanford Center on Longevity, about the U.S. in a recent interview with The Washington Post. “What we do is we work way too hard in the middle of life, and then we work very little toward the end of life.”
According to Carstensen, the rhythms of our current work lives were set in our cultural past, when “life expectancy was 50, and that was only a century ago.” It’s time for them to be updated.
“What I’d like to see us do,” Carstensen added, “is to work many more years and fewer days in the week and hours in the day.”
Similarly, Gratton and Scott challenge the assumption that life progresses neatly through three phases: education, work, and retirement. Instead, they argue, life will have many more than three stages. Over a 60-year career, technologies and industries change, as do individuals motivations. As a result, an individual will go through multiple career transitions, each likely requiring education and reskilling.
“It is impossible that a single shot of education, administered in childhood and early adulthood, will be able to support a sustained, 60-year career,” write Gratton and Scott. “If you factor in the projected rates of technological change, either your skills will become redundant, or your industry obsolete. That means that everyone will have at some point in their life to make a number of major reinvestments in their skills.”
Redesigning education for longevity
Schools and workplace training programs may need to change too, to support age diversity and longevity. With a report titled The New Map for Life, the Stanford Center on Longevity (SCL) has offered one of the most comprehensive proposals for rethinking education for an era of longevity. Like Gratton and Scott, the SCL argues that education in the future should not be front-loaded, but spread throughout the lifespan, so that learners can access education as they need it.
“People can bypass the outdated, three-chapter life course of education, work, and retirement,” the SCL report states, “in favor several shorter, more flexible intervals dedicated to learning, working, caregiving, and leisure that can be woven as needed into life’s journey.”
But for such a model to work, there will need to be more on- and off-ramps to education, according to the SCL, to accommodate adult learners going through major life events and transitions.
“We must make it easier,” states the report, “to get over and around the barriers to higher education that too often limit a person’s chances to get back on course after a job loss, health challenge, or financial setback.”
Among the proposals to make school more accessible to a greater age range, the SCL calls for a “loop” model of education, in which students can “loop in and out” of school, as their life circumstances change. A loop model would be self-paced, allowing students to complete courses as quickly, or slowly, as their lives allow. The SCL also calls for competency-based education that gives students transferrable skills and credentials, which employers demand and recognize.
Such changes in education are not necessarily specific to longer lives. However, some colleges and universities are trying to make school more accessible for older students, who are looking for career change in later life.
In the US many states have begun offering tuition waivers for state residents over a certain age, sometimes as young as 50, to attend public colleges and universities. Some of these programs allow the waiver to be used to earn credit, while other states only allow auditing. The American Association of Retired Persons maintains a list of these educational benefits.
Other groups have made goals and standards for age-friendly” universities. The Age-Friend University (AFU) Global Network is a leader in sharing best practices for age inclusivity among member universities. AFU member universities pledge “to recognize the range of educational needs of older adults” and “to promote intergenerational learning,” among other principles. The AFU Global Network includes over a hundred universities across the world.
Midlife transition programs
Universities are also reaching out to older students by creating “midlife transition programs,” which often target professionals who wish to move from commercial to social enterprises. A recognized early example of such programs is Harvard’s Advanced Leadership Initiative (ALI), created in 2009. ALI is a one-year immersion program that targets “highly accomplished, experienced leaders who want to apply their talents to solve significant social problems.” Other universities—including Stanford, Notre Dame, the University of Minnesota, and the University of Texas—offer similar programs.
Universities have also begun collaborating and sharing practices for midlife transition programs through The Nexel Collaborative, an alliance of colleges and universities sponsored by the nonprofit Community Initiatives and the Hewlett Foundation.
Regardless of which stage of your career, it’s clear that metrics are changing and work-life demand may increase for newer generations. Those workers will need to plan for a longer career arc and possibly more growth, education, and expanded expectations for fluctuating market demands. It will be critical for workers to utilize professional development to remain employable for a longer period of time.
Back to All News & Research