He talks about college and trade schools, but says nothing about on-the-job training.
Not in the original article, as the original article was really scoped to the methodologies designed to develop pre-employment training. But there was further discussion in the commentary to the post, and I offered this point with respect to my thoughts about on-the-job training:
If it's the intent of the employer to hire a green candidate, that's great! Everybody needs someplace to start, and I applaud those employers willing to take the risk. But taking the risk also means committing to the investment in developing that staff member.
Businesses no longer seem willing to invest any capital in directly educating the worker they want.
The closest we get is coordination between a college and business, where the business helps design the school's curriculum to provide the kind of skills the business wants.
I absolutely agree, and that's also significant contributing factor to this problem. If employers continue to refuse to invest in their own staff, then at some point they'll be faced with staff who are not able to meet the needs of the business, and an unnecessary dependency on external resources to meet those needs. Which, in the end, only serves to destroy the morale of the existing staff even more, as almost certainly that staff would have been preferred to be involved, to have preferred to been given the opportunity to develop those skills. On the other hand, while it would be nice for employers to encourage that sort of thing, an IT professional should not cop-out on the employer's failure to facilitate; that IT professional should go develop those skills anyway. Even if not used for the employer's benefit, it'll be a lot easier finding a new job if the technical skills are current.