Maybe I’m just cynical, but whenever I see that a job posting seeks people who are “continually learning,” I think that the companies are looking for candidates/employees who strive not for learning but for ways to make themselves more valuable to the company.
When I was working for a government contracting company, the company had an initiative for people to learn a no-code/low-code tool called Pega. The company set up working/study groups for employees who wanted to get the certification. BUT: You could not go through any of the learning modules on company time. That’s billing time, employee, and if you’re not making billable hours for the company, you’re worthless. Many people were excited to get certified in Pega, which is one of those technologies which solely exist because different departments in the government have bought it at some point. So Pega certification is mostly irrelevant in the real world, and it’s most likely becoming less relevant as time passes and the new hotness (AI!) comes along to soak up all the government contracting money. I started a bit of the program, and then I realized how daft the technology was, and I tailed off on it.
Ah, gentle reader: You might know I am a continual learner. I just finished a course on Ancient Egypt. I’ve started an audio course on Ancient Greek Philosophy. I’ve picked up the Durants’ The Life of Greece again (and I’ve actually reached the spot covered by the audio course for a little reinforcement and seeing how the names are spelled). I read poetry, philosophy, biographies of poets, and oh so many pieces of genre fiction. And although this might make me more interesting (but probably not) and it might give me broader perspective to apply to business problems (it does), that’s not what they meant.
