A new age-old problem

Inotice that one song the UK’s living legend Sir
Paul McCartney never sings anymore is “When
I’m 64”. That’s the one with the lines: “Will you still need me, will you still feed me when I’m 64?”
As he approaches his 70th birthday, it seems pretty obvious that the recently remarried and sprightly ex-Beatle has few concerns regarding the former. And with personal wealth in excess of £500m, where the next meal will come from can be no real concern either.
Of course, 64 used to be the age around which most executives retired, but managers nowadays concede that they will have to work into their late 60s, and possibly until they are 70. Just what they will do, and how they will do it, is proving increasingly perplexing, however.
Of course, if it just meant tagging a couple of extra years on to the end of an illustrious career, that would be fine. But these days younger and younger managers are making it to board level, and as career advancement accelerates, so too does business innovation.
Not only will we all have to work longer, but the speed at which the nature of our jobs change is increasing. As career consultants like to impress on us, many of the industries graduates are moving into today did not exist 20 years ago – hedge funds, areas of biotech and healthcare and, of course, anything that involves the internet.
It is also likely that the pace of change will accelerate. Ten years from now there will be jobs that we cannot even imagine at the moment.
So what does this mean for today’s managers approaching their 50th birthdays? With corporate and state pension pots depleted in most developed countries, early retirement, it seems, is no longer an option. Instead these managers face another 20 years of work, possibly in a very different job to the one they do today.
Just as important, how will employers deal with these issues, or with reskilling their workforce?
The obvious answer has to be some kind of executive
short