Contents
We understand where the division into “humanitarians” and “techies” came from, how and why it has lost its relevance, and for which categories of workers employers are fighting today
Who came up with the idea of dividing people into humanitarians and techies?
“We become more aware of who we are when we start to make friends against someone. The more complex the world, the greater the temptation to simplify it with the help of categories,” says Olga Echevskaya, Ph.D.
The categorization of new people into groups inevitably came into human life with a change in social order and with the transition to life in cities, when a person began to be surrounded by more and more strangers. This is how our brain and social consciousness are arranged – it is important for them to systematize everything.
The British statesman and writer Charles Percy Snow linked the gap between the techies and the humanities with scientific and technological progress. Therefore, we can say that the division into the humanities and techies, most likely, appeared during the industrial revolution. When technological progress moves quickly, technical skills become more valuable. “Humanitarians have become something like a service class for techies who have created large and productive, but not human-oriented plants and factories,” explains Olga Echevskaya.
Humanitarians strike back?
When the industrial society transformed into an information society, we moved from large tasks, large plants and factories to small networks and micro-level interactions. The changes that have taken place have brought a great degree of uncertainty to life and work processes. At this level, it is no longer possible to “dehumanize” technology, so the humanitarian component in professions began to win back its positions
In the modern technological world, it has become almost impossible to remain a pure humanist or a pure techie: both need to be able to communicate (for example, with clients), so understand at least basic technical issues.
Is the division into humanists and techies generally correct?
From the point of view of scientific psychology, the radical division is fundamentally wrong, notes Sofia Mordvinkina, a psychologist at the Introvert’s Right Hemisphere educational project. However, a person may have tendencies towards a certain type of thinking. Their formation depends on many factors. Upbringing largely affects what a child will do in the future – whether he likes to put letters into words or delve into the code.
“Every person has all kinds of thinking – theoretical, practical, creative, and so on. But for some, as a result of upbringing and the influence of other factors, creativity will be more developed, and for someone – practical, ”says Mordvinkina.
Dividing people into two types is too narrow an approach, she notes, because in this division, in any case, those who are engaged in natural sciences or creativity remain behind.
Who is now more in demand for the employer?
“Today there is no unconditional priority of technical skills over the rest. Just as there is no clear life trajectory: if you solved an example well in kindergarten, it does not mean at all that you will now be doing mathematics for the rest of your life, ”says Echevskaya. Nevertheless, according to Yekaterina Kotova, managing consultant at the Hays recruiting company, employers choose technology specialists: people who create applications, portals, automated systems, and ensure data protection.
Companies pay well for such qualifications and come up with ways to keep the real pros.
This is partly due to the fact that the meaning of the work of techies is more understandable: people, companies and brands like it when the result of the work is concrete and tangible, when it can be “touched”. It is more difficult for humanitarians to achieve quantifiable and tangible results.
“But in addition to techies, employers value those who create content and know how to market products and services. Also in the top are specialists in medical technology, environmentalists, workers in high-tech industries and managers who are able to scale their business, ”says Kotova.
Multidisciplinarity – the next step?
The fact that the rigid division into humanities and techies is gradually fading away is clearly seen in the emergence of interdisciplinary approaches in specialized schools, where children are allowed to reveal themselves from different sides. The approach is gradually resonating with higher education.
“The market has already realized that an IT specialist without a hint of soft skills at all will be less in demand than one with more developed communication and teamwork skills. A good and respected engineering school today will first provide a base for soft-skills and only then will it begin to deeply immerse in the specialization,” says Olga Echevskaya.
The presence of soft skills is more valued in companies that are ready to teach, develop and promote staff. Where this is not provided for, it is enough for candidates to have hard skills – competencies in the profession. But these companies are beginning to realize the value of the personal potential of a specialist.
“Leaders and HRD (HR Directors. — Trends) want to see in applicants the ability to communicate with a wide range of contractors and build mutual understanding. They value the ability to manage time and their own productivity, developed emotional intelligence, innovativeness, and the desire to learn,” says Ekaterina Kotova.
Now it is difficult to stay productive by learning one thing: requests, technologies, requirements change rapidly and require flexibility: for example, HRD, who owns budgeting, economic analysis and forecasting, will quickly prove to the CEO the value of the project, speaking in the language of numbers and the future result. Knowledge and skills at the intersection of professions are a key feature of a modern in-demand specialist: advanced employers highly appreciate such people.
Trying to classify himself as a humanist or techie, a person, first of all, tries to determine his identity. But is it really that important to set such rigid limits? Olga Echevskaya believes that joint activities or daily habits form much stronger bonds:
“I’m good at coding” or “I’m great at writing texts” – this approach defines people better than the labels “techie” and “humanitarian”. If people work together on the same project or even use the same gadgets in everyday life, this unites them much more than the conditional classification into “physicists and lyricists,” she says.