Last week, the Belgian Government published its new list of bottleneck professions. This list includes no fewer than 188 professions—21 more than last year. It’s no surprise that more and more employers are struggling to fill their vacancies. The reason? A growing shortage of talent, or so the ManpowerGroup concludes in the 13th edition of its global survey on talent shortages.

A talent shortage… while so much talent remains unemployed. Does this unemployed talent not count as talent? Or is it not yet talent? And was it ever considered talent? Must this unemployed talent first be developed (or redeveloped) to fit into existing vacancies? Upgrading talent is certainly commendable, often worthwhile, and successful—but it is not a one-size-fits-all solution for all unemployed talent.

It Can Be Done Differently

The unemployed talent currently on the sidelines does not fit into the open vacancies. However, this doesn’t mean there is no work for them. The problem is that the work is often performed by the wrong people—those who don’t enjoy it and are paid too much for it. This results in a waste of talent, both within and outside organizations. The solution? Create suitable jobs through smart work redesign.

Seeing Is Believing?

No problem. Here are a few real-life examples: Let’s start with an example from education. Administrative staff often have a variety of repetitive logistical, administrative, and organizational tasks (e.g., preparing participant folders for study days or setting up meeting rooms). By removing these tasks from their workload and bundling them, a new role was created: support facility staff.

A similar case comes from the process industry. The company struggled to fill vacancies for process operators. By removing a logistical task (transporting ball bearings using carts) from the operators’ job descriptions and bundling it into a single role, a new position was created: assistant operator.

Both roles—support facility staff and assistant operator—were tailored to low-skilled talent. Additionally, these roles brought another advantage: they reduced the workload for existing employees, who no longer had to deal with these basic or unexpected tasks. This allowed them to focus more on their core duties, increasing job satisfaction.

A Final Example

Samira, a Syrian engineer, applied for a job matching her educational background. Her limited knowledge of Dutch had been a barrier for many employers who rejected her as an engineer. But one employer approached things differently. By focusing on her skills, they hired her for a tailored role comprising tasks suited to her level of thinking, working, and language proficiency. The less fitting tasks were removed from the role and redistributed among colleagues. The result? The employer filled their vacancy and gained a loyal employee.

Two Approaches, One Outcome

The first two examples focus on creating jobs suitable for specific target groups, while the last centers on tailoring a job for an individual. The first method is known as Inclusive Job Design, and the latter as Job Carving. Though the approaches differ, the result is the same: a suitable job for willing talent that would otherwise remain unemployed. This transforms that talent from a perceived problem into part of the solution.

bart@mooiwerkmakers.be