Some say that young and energetic employees are more valuable for the company, others rauge that older people have more exrience and knowledge. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
It is essential for a company to be equipped with employees who can positively contribute to its business. Some argue that more young people should be recruited to achieve this goal while others insist on fulfilling the same task by employing older counterparts. It is however problematic to support only one party since both groups’ statements can be correct to certain extent.
Young employees’ physical strength and creativity can bring fresh perspectives to an organisation. Older people are usually conservative in terms of exploring innovative pathways or unfamiliar changes. Young people are however always eager to gain new experiences and this often helps firms generate ground-breaking ideas. For example, the marketing company I work for usually relies on university graduates’ brainstorming process when attempting to role out new products. Their imaginative thoughts and inexhaustible trials have indeed supported the company to create many unique products.
On the other hand, the experiences and qualified intellectual properties possessed by older workers are equivalently crucial for a company’s success. In fact, as is the case with my father’s company, the organisation prefers to hire mature aged workers than younger ones. This is mainly because of their belief that one’s ability to manage unexpected situations, such as safety issues or important business decisions usually come from long years of working.
The aforementioned ideas clearly substantiate that both young and older employees are able to contribute for a company’s future. It is felt that a desirable stance to demonstrate the question is to look at which area of work older or young workers can be more efficient in, rather than which age group can do better work.