## Apprenticeships First, I want to define what I’m calling an Apprenticeship. I am going to define it as opposed to traditional hiring and in specific both to hiring a skilled worker and hiring a green worker and training them into a role. Because I feel that an apprenticeship is distinct from both those things. An apprentice is fairly green. They may have experience in the field enough to know it’s what they want to do, but they should not have nearly as much experience as the master in the relationship. The terms Master/Mentor will be used interchangeably. However, as we get into the discussion of the actual apprenticeship model, I will also designate a separate mentor position that is available for a master who is maintaining a number of apprentices greater than that which they can manage themselves. ### Purpose An Apprentice is green, and they are goal-oriented. The point of the apprenticeship is something specific, and that is specified with a term contract. The contract format I am proposing is a three-month contract followed by a two-year apprenticeship. After the initial three month trial, options for additional single or multi-year stints depend on the nature of the work that the master, mentor, and apprentice are doing together. In this contract, there is an explicit bargain. The bargain is that in exchange for the apprentice working for the master at a reduced but livable rate for an extended contract, they will be taught a specific craft and provided with the resources to learn it. So, they would be able to obtain a skilled position in the field at the end of the apprenticeship. For something like Entrepreneurship, it may take more than two years, an apprenticeship may last up to 10 years. However, the first two years are the “True Apprenticeship”. After that, the apprentice would be more aptly called a Journeyman - somebody who is capable in their craft, but not necessarily at the level of a real master, and certainly not with the same pedigree and portfolio yet. So, the goal of an apprenticeship - for the apprentice - is self-growth. While the Master has safety in investing the time and resources in the apprentice to build up and train them. Education is therefore foundational to the apprenticeship agreement, and the master has to be ready to teach. ### Structure In too many ways to count, this differs from hiring someone that is skilled for the position. Though, in my experience, it is my belief that an apprentice within six months of hire - if they are going to be successful - should be able to take on a skilled position, and you will be paying a much lower rate in the process. A skilled worker is much faster to start than a green worker that you are training up, but they are nowhere near as motivated as a green worker. And in either case, they are not making the bargain that the apprentices are. They are simply getting a job in exchange for finance, rather than knowledge. In South Africa Talent we have successfully trained apprentices in BDR and other outreach roles. We are currently developing apprenticeship programs for writers, content marketers, and a number of different business automation and code related subset. Based on our current understanding of the training and modeling required, we believe that it takes roughly three months before an apprentice is of real value to an organization from a cash flow standpoint. As we are an agency, we have a different viewpoint on our ability to train apprentices and their viability. So, on month four, they start making money for the business, and on month six, they are fully profitable and competitive with skilled team members. **** The cost savings between the various styles of hiring is quite significant over that six-month window with the apprentice outpacing a skilled worker when they go cash flow positive. The lower cost to employees is key. South Africa Talent dedicated 25% of an apprentices’ time to training and learning and education at the beginning and then gradually weaned that down to 10% over time. **** We also assign a mentor to allow them to learn and become part of the workforce, faster at a higher level. They learn more while training, so you can think of it as raising the trajectory so that the entire arc is higher in the distance and further in the process. In this example. The area under the ark would be the value created by the apprentice. So, as you raise the trajectory it increases the area underneath. The Apprentice is cost-effective against simply hiring somebody skilled or who is perhaps a VA and in general low or other digital workers. The more specialized apprentice is cost-effective. The cost savings against skilled hire are probably 30% - 40% more. Let us get into some numbers. If we’re hiring South Africans. We are generally looking at a rate that puts us, including education and mentorship costs around $2500 - if the employee can start generating revenue, from day one. **** If they can’t, it’s safer to set aside about $5000 for someone in a country of similar purchasing power. **** That’s still quite a bit less than a team member in the US. ### **Digital** When it comes to Digital Apprenticeship programs, it is important to have someone that is motivated, because you do not have that person standing behind you, feeding you every step of the way. If they are not self-motivated, the chances of an Apprentice to successfully complete their training or even 3-month contracts are slim. ### **Why Apprenticeships Fail** People leave Apprenticeships for all sorts of reasons. We can’t control them. There may be contracts in place, but they are largely unenforceable overseas - at least it is not worth the effort without scale. If I was running 30 Apprenticeships, using a contract like that would make a lot more sense. However, if you are working with one Apprentice, it is just an empty threat. Anyone I would want as an Apprentice would be smart enough to know that. Occasionally there will be an Apprentice that leaves. Sometimes they don’t have good long term reasoning to accept the bargain or to understand that you would be willing to match fair market value for them if it came to a competing offer. This is a good indicator of whether or not they would be a good fit long term. Let them leave. In my experience, most people leave in the first few months. This is due to the fact that there are people who do not see this as a long-term opportunity, to begin with. In those situations, I spend a lot less time training somebody in ways that either aren’t repeatable. In most cases, I’ll grind someone for one to three months before I see them starting to really learn and grasp some of the more complex concepts. At that point, I’ll start putting them on a dedicated training path. Until they’ve gone through that first grind, and have shown that they are of value to me and that they understand complexities, or even rate work. One of our former Apprentices did not really understand the value of learning how to do Outreach, they never understood that code has to be designed to solve a business case, and you need to start there. I had them work on a task that could be easily automated. After three months, they started learning to code, then right as they were automating the task, they decided to leave. They did not learn the lesson that I thought they would start. ## Podcast360 and GMs as Apprentices ## Will's Entrepreneur Apprentices