by Carrie Mayne, Economist
Lately we have been fielding some very challenging questions about our
occupational projections. Those questions, to put it bluntly, are about
the accuracy of the projections. Here’s an example: “Your projections say
there should be 1,030 openings this year for carpenters. Are your calculators
broken, or are you just completely out of touch with the realities of today’s
economy?” No, our calculators aren’t broken and no, we’re not out of
touch. But apparently some explanation is in order.
The first thing to
clear up is the misinterpretation of the data. What the projections data
actually say is that between 2006 and 2016 we expect to see an average of 1,030
openings per year for carpenters. Meaning, in some years Utah could see more
than 1,030 openings and in others less, but over the ten-year period the average
should be about 1,030. Averages are intentionally used to report the projection
model’s results because the model is not designed to estimate the exact
employment each year.
At this point, you may be asking yourself why that
wouldn’t be the goal of the model. To answer that, a quick overview of how the
model works is in order. Essentially, the model uses economic trends from the
past, along with what is currently known about the economy, to estimate the
growth of an occupation over a ten-year period. Amassing all that economic data
gives us an abundance of information to work with, but it does not account for
everything in the economy that could affect the demand for workers. When an
economic variable can’t be measured, we can’t include it in the model and
therefore it won’t be reflected in the results. Natural disasters are a good
example of events that can have a profound effect on the economy, but can’t be
predicted in either timing or scope. Because we can’t predict such events, there
is no way for the model to pinpoint the exact employment demand in any
occupation.
Thus, we take what data we do have, which indeed accounts for a large
majority of what generally affects the economy and the demand for workers, and
we project a trend line into the future—in this case to 2016. Notice it’s a
trend line, and not a trend curve. Does the economy move in a straight
line? Of course not; it cycles. (The term often used is “the business
cycle”; you are undoubtedly aware that we are currently in the contractionary
portion of a cycle.) The projected trend line represents the average, and should
cross through the curved line that will represent the cycles of the economy that
occur up to 2016.
Another important point to keep in mind is that we
don’t sit on these projections until 2016. We update them every two years. Next
year when we prepare the 2008-2018 projections we will have new data (i.e. more
data on the recession) that will be incorporated into the model.
Should the fact that the openings data is not meant to be precise, or the fact that the projections will change every two years, lead to the conclusion that the data is too confusing or inaccurate to be used in career decision making? Definitely not. It just needs to be used correctly. The right thing to do is not think of the numbers in absolute terms. Instead, focus on the comparison to other occupations, or the same occupation in different regions, or even the total number of workers in the economy. Also, remember that the projections are long-term. The data is not intended to be used for short-term planning or decision-making.
If your question is about what you should do today, you won’t find the answer in the projections. However, if you’re doing long-term career planning, the projections are a powerful piece of information to use in that process.
You can find the projections data for individual occupations by going
to:
http://jobs.utah.gov/jsp/wi/utalmis/gotoOccinfo.do
Or
for a full list of occupations, go to:
http://jobs.utah.gov/opencms/wi/pubs/publicat.html
Choose
a region under the Job Trends bullet.
