A new idea to fund your retirement

Dr Judith Davey

15/06/2018

Many of the (many) discussions about retirement income and about the financial aspects of retirement, talk about the “three pillars” model (originally put out by the World Bank in the 1990s), recognising that income in retirement could come from several sources. In the New Zealand context, the first pillar will be NZ Superannuation, which everyone receives at the same age, subject to residence requirement and with the same amount of money, depending on their living circumstances – living alone, living with others.

The second pillar is an occupation-based pension, based on contributions throughout working life. Workers’ contributions may be supplemented by employers’ contributions and the money invested. In NZ this is Kiwi Saver (KS), which is a relatively new scheme. It is not compulsory and it will take a while before people receive significant lump sums when they reach age 65 and their schemes mature.

The third pillar is either a private pension, arranged by individuals themselves, or income from savings – interest, dividends, possibly rents. The third pillar therefore depends on the ability of the individual to save and to invest.

As the proportion of the population over pension age (please do not say retirement age, as I will hit the roof. THERE IS NO RETIREMENT AGE IN NEW ZEALAND) increases, governments around the world are becoming more and more concerned about the cost of providing retirement incomes to older people. This has led to increases in the age of eligibility and other means of cutting back. It has also led to great “financialization” . What this means is that government policies are shifting more of the responsibility for retirement income planning to individuals. In this case, more and more, retirement income will be funded from financial market returns, subject to market fluctuations.

Our first pillar – NZS – does not fall into this category, although it may be subject to political fluctuations. Even here, the New Zealand Superannuation Fund (the so-called “Cullen fund”), which is intended to help pay for NZS as the demand grows, is invested in the international financial system and its returns cannot be guaranteed. Kiwi Saver – our second pillar- is certainly financialized. Contributions from regular wages or salaries go into investment funds run by private companies. The size of the lump sum delivered on maturity depends on the state of the financial markets over the period of investment and also on the skills of the fund managers to deliver good returns. Individual Kiwi Savers are subject to these uncertainties. They also have to be sure they have chosen the right KS scheme in the first place. Two people could have put the same amount into their KS pots but will get different pay-outs depending on the performance of their separate schemes.

To turn to the third pillar – self-funding. Could individuals do better by managing their own savings and investments to produce an adequate retirement income? Do people have adequate information and expertise to make appropriate and informed investment decisions. Not to mention enough self-discipline to save enough. This pillar does not get any subsidy from government, like KS. There is no tax relief on contributions to private schemes, which was the case in earlier times. Earnings from investments are subject to taxation. But, in this approach, people are freer to choose how they use their own resources to plan for an adequate retirement income.

There may be a fourth pillar to make our retirement income edifice more stable. I spoke about decumulation in my blogs last September. This means running down savings and investments to increase current income. Some people can trade-down to smaller/less expensive dwellings (perhaps moving into retirement villages), or take on commercial equity release schemes, mainly in the form of reverse mortgages.

Many people die with money in the bank, perhaps for a “rainy day” which never came; perhaps to provide inheritances; perhaps through inertia. But perhaps our savings could be used for a new form of retirement planning and a new source of income in later life to supplement the less reliable sources I discussed above.

In March this year I blogged about older people and entrepreneurship. Could this be a new source of retirement income? Could people develop businesses from their fifties onwards specifically to derive income from them when they retire from employment? There would be several advantages – it would allow more control over personal resources. It would provide stimulation and a way of applying accumulations of wisdom and know-how and a lifetime of building networks and contacts. It would avoid age discrimination by potential employers. The business could operate from home, allowing work to be more easily combined with caring responsibilities for relatives and grandchildren. Work at home would reduce costs. Modern technology can provide sophisticated communications and even production – 3D printers. It would be a new concept of home-work balance.

Risky, are you saying? But no more risky than seeking to create income through the volatile and uncertain financial markets, which have been called “the gaming tables of a global casino.”

What are the possibilities? Internet shopping, personal service delivery, writing and editing, small scale printing, catering, cakes for special events, bed and breakfast. The possibilities are endless. Older entrepreneurs rule!


[1] Thomas Wainwright and Ewald Kibler (2013) Beyond Financialization: older entrepreneurship and retirement planning. Journal of Economic Geography, vol.14 pp 849-864

Advertisements
Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

How business can respond to an ageing population (and perhaps save the world!)

Judith Davey
1/06/2018

bike

As I observe NZ society in its adaptation to population ageing, I take a special interest in business enterprises which have sprung up in response to this world-changing  trend. The private sector has done a lot better than many areas of government in recognising the implications.

  • Driving Miss Daisy started up in Havelock North in 2008, building on an idea from Canada. It now needs no introduction and has franchises operating in most main centres.
  • Since 2000 Elder Family Matters has provided a range of services for older people in their own homes, ranging from companionship to palliative care – “Our purpose is to enable healthy and happy elders and their families living as they wish to live.” They operate in the Greater Wellington region and Palmerston North.

These are two examples and I am sure that others are emerging. However, while trawling through the literature for my research on older entrepreneurs (see blog of March this year), I found a wonderful example from Indiana, USA , which combines entrepreneurship and product development to suit older people[1].

Pedego is a company, founded in 2008, which makes bicycles and is USA’s leading brand of electric bike. Most of its distribution is through independently owned branded stores usually launched by people in their 50s and older. They encountered the bikes as consumers and came to corporate Pedego’s rescue in the early days, when it was struggling for lack of distribution.

The 50-plus age group also makes up Pedego’s primary market, many returning to two wheels for the first time in decades. The entrepreneurs built their bikes to accommodate older bodies.  The spirit was willing, the flesh, perhaps, not so much. Electric bikes acted as “psychic training wheels”. “A lot of customers had bad hips, ankles, hearts, whatever,” says Pedego’s CFO. “If their hip starts to hurt, they can just use the throttle. So they are willing to venture out and do things because they know they have the ability to get home.”

They realised that the then-existing electric bikes didn’t cater to that audience. Most came in black and positioned riders to lean forward. Older customers wanted colours and to sit upright. They also wanted models they could mount easily. So they hired a computer-aided-design professional.

At first, bike stores shunned the product. “”They think electric bikes are cheating.” For a while, the founders sold bikes to their friends, who in turn sold them to their friends through parties—not the usual business model. But then a customer asked if he could open his own branded Pedego store and now they receive about 400 inquiries a year. The average customers are a 58-year-old man and 57-year-old woman; some customers are as old as 95. Often they were introduced to electric bikes while hiring them on holiday. One enterprising store owner, with previous marketing experience, rigged up a simulator to train people on the bikes and an indoor track for test rides in poor weather. Others organise regular group bike rides.

The secret appears to be that older customers trust someone who looks like them more than they’ll trust the Lycra-clad enthusiasts who haunt traditional bike shops. When they see the store owners still going strong – out there riding and enjoying life – they get “a sense of hope”. Says a 61-year-old owner, “I can say to a customer, ‘Look, I had my knee replaced.’ And the guy says, ‘Oh, I had my hip replaced. We talk about aches and pains, hills and headwinds.”

At a recent dealers meeting, two new products were introduced – an adult tricycle (I would certainly be in for one of those) and a vehicle for people with disabilities. So the innovation continues along with the health, social and environmental benefits, which I am sure my blog-readers will have noticed from this example.

 

[1] Leigh Buchanan, Editor-at-large, Inc. magazine – Boomers Are Ditching Retirement for Entrepreneurship: And They’re Killing It. March 9, 2017.

 

Posted in transport | 1 Comment

More about the cause of “wrap rage” Why don’t manufacturers make more accessible packaging?

Judith Davey
18/05/2018

This is a good question. There are many reasons why making packaging usable by a wide range of people must be good for manufacturers. On her blog, Becky Taylor says – “Designing packaging that allows for universal usage therefore makes good sense from a strategic standpoint, but even without this economic incentive I believe that brands also have a responsibility to ensure that their products are accessible to all” .

Developing accessible packaging is an investment for manufacturers, as satisfied customers can result in increased profits and a well-respected brand identity. A product that is known for being easy to use and accessible for people with impairments is likely to be favoured by consumers who have difficulties with packaging. With an ageing population, this group is sure to increase . “It’s great for customer satisfaction and ultimately, improving sales. The market for easy-open products is huge”. So what is stopping them?

Are there any signs of a response?

Some commentators suggest that the packaging industry is very set in its ways and not ready for change. There is often an assumption that making packaging easier to open is going be very difficult or automatically very expensive. Manufacturers may be committed to a certain pack format which they believe is needed for consumer recognition. Another barrier may be regulatory requirements, for reasons of security (as with medication). Rules about labelling, or which compel suppliers to put a lot of information in a small space may make things difficult for people with less than perfect eyesight.

It seems that small to medium organisations may be better attuned to the need for more accessible packaging. They may have a greater scope to fundamentally redesign a product. With a multinational, the process of making a fundamental design change to a brand, especially one used nationally or globally, can be quite significant. But if you’re a small manufacturing company and somebody says, “here’s an opportunity, here’s how to redesign the product, you can just say ‘yeah’, let’s do it”. This can produce a competitive edge – “you can pick up contracts and replace existing suppliers in a market just by putting the consumer at the centre of the design process.”

Easy open packaging is a point of difference and gets away from price-only competition. Where a lot of companies are competing on more than price, winning contracts may be the rewarded for innovation.

An example I found on the internet is Ecobliss India. Its ‘easy opening’ blister packs have a special focus on “aged” customers . They aim to minimise the use of tough adhesives, use thin and easy-to-tear materials, simple instructions and opening features. They illustrate a new design for a toothbrush with an easy-to-open blister package. The design is simple; a blister presenting the product is encased in a printed cardboard card. After folding back the cardboard card, the customer can simply slide the product out of the blister. “Finally, no more cuts and puncture wounds due to jagged edges”.

“Imagine, the plight of an elderly person unable to access a special toothbrush from a blister pack and who may end up throwing away the product without using it”. Chakravarthi, managing director of Ecobliss .

Packaging Pic

What could help?

Getting feedback from consumers is crucial. Manufacturers could benefit greatly from the insights of older consumers, especially those with impairments.

Arthritis NZ’s initiative (the survey mentioned in my previous blog) is a good example of informing manufacturers. Arthritis NZ is now working with the Packaging Council and packaging companies to address accessibility for people with arthritis. Arthritis Australia has set up an Initial Scientific Review (IRS) which rates products according to their accessibility.

Perhaps what is also needed is some direct action by consumers. Boycotts of troublesome products could be considered. Not quite about accessibility, the example of older people who left all their packaging at the supermarket is worth a look.

1 http://www.mmr-research.com/blog

2 https://www.healthcarepackaging.com/article/applications/healthcare/accessibility-medical-packaging-learning-people-impairments

https://foodmag.com.au/packaging-accessibility-an-ageing-issue/

4 http://www.blisternews.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/easy-open.jpg

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Inaccessible packaging can threaten composure and life itself

Judith Davey

7/05/18

Reading through “Joint Support”, the Arthritis New Zealand newsletter, recently (March 2018), I came upon an article about a packaging survey initiated by the organisation. Although this was aimed at people of all ages who have arthritis, it got me thinking about how the challenges of packaging access will apply to many older people, with or without the condition – and I am well aware how these challenges have already confronted me!

Packaging access problems

Medical products

Requirements for safety of medical products can compromise ease of access to them.  Packaging must protect products from contamination, tampering and damage without making them too difficult to open. The physical action of opening the packaging usually requires some manual strength and dexterity. If users have impaired cognitive, visual, or physical abilities as a result of illness, disability, or old age, the task of opening packaging can be a major inconvenience, even when their independence or even their lives depend on the medication. Being unable to open packaging may make people less likely to adhere to their medication regimen and so to manage their medical conditions.

Everyday grocery items

About a third of respondents to the Arthritis NZ survey said they struggled with the pull-tab seals on plastic milk bottles, either because the tab wasn’t big enough or because they had lost grip and strength in their hands. This was top of the list of hard-to-open packaging, here and in other surveys.

blog 1blog 2

Next came child-proof lids – “push and turn” – which require strength for the push-down action and problematic when a twisting action is needed at the same time.

A third set of culprits, which I am sure most of you will have come across, are products encased in hard shrink-wrap plastic, such as tooth brushes, batteries and small tools. Users have to pull apart both sides of the casing, often held together with a strong adhesive and often without a notch indicating where to tear. How often someone end up throwing away the product without using it?

Inaccessible packaging can cause malnutrition

For older people with reduced dexterity even something seemingly trivial, like not being able to open food packaging, can be a major obstacle to eating well. This is often an issue in hospitals, particularly when there is no-one to help patients open single serve and portion-controlled food items.  A Canadian study of 132 cognitively healthy nursing home residents found that 37% were at risk of malnutrition—and food packaging was identified as one of the primary contributing factors.

Access-related injuries

Another consequence of Inaccessible packaging is increased numbers of injuries caused when people resort to the use of tools such as scissors, sharp knives, razor blades, or even hammers in order to break through packaging. An investigation carried out by “Which” magazine in the UK suggested that, over a two-year period, 25 million people hurt themselves while trying to open packaging.  Not to mention wrist strain from trying to loosen jam jar and broken teeth!

Comments from the Arthritis survey

“I find my nutcracker very effective on salad dressing bottles.”

“A teaspoon can be used to open jam jars.”

“I need to use pliers on tins with pull tabs.”

 

Wrap rage

‘Wrap Rage’ is defined by Wikipedia as “the common name for heightened levels of anger or frustration resulting from the inability to open packaging”. How common is this? Not to mention public embarrassment and lack of independence by having to rely on other people (to open things – perhaps the last bastion of male “superiority”)[1].

Next time I will look at the problem from the manufacturers’ point of view.

 


[1] http://www.proportionfoods.com.au/significance-accessible-food-packaging/

 

Posted in Other | 3 Comments

Another housing option – Divide and Share

Judith Davey

20/04/2018

Making better use of existing housing could be another way to the solution of our “housing crisis”. For a long time there have been suggestions, especially by public sector landlords, that older people should move out of ”family” accommodation to smaller units more suitable to their needs, thereby freeing up larger units. At the moment, four out of every five people aged 65 plus live in small households, either alone or with a spouse/partner only.

Interest in communal dwellings seems to be growing and could be appropriate for older people as they can provide assistance and companionship. In Europe “co-housing” often serves multi-generational communities, but Abbeyfield houses are a New Zealand example of senior co-housing.

But what if larger houses were subdivided into smaller units? This is the question posed by another PhD student in the School of Architecture at Victoria University of Wellington, who I am pleased to advise and assist as I can. The research goes beyond design into the implications for energy and resource use . But here I am looking at just some of the options for subdivision and how “sharing” is viewed by older people.

Examples of division and sharing

Typical New Zealand housing types were redesigned to Lifemark standards and proposals developed for each type with various degrees of sharing. These were presented to people aged 55‐85 using an online questionnaire. Respondents were asked how much they liked the design options; whether they met their housing requirements; and what they thought about sharing space.

I am looking at just two examples here (using the scheme names from the questionnaire for convenience):

1. An early 20th century villa with a central corridor. This could be divided into two separate units with a shared entrance (Scheme B) or into two “bed-sitters” with shared living areas (Scheme E).

scheme B

scheme E
2.  A 1940-60s single storey State House. This also could be divided into two separate units with a shared entrance (Scheme C) or into two “bed-sitters” with shared living areas (Scheme F).

scheme C.jpg

 

scheme F.jpg
The survey found that while almost 80% of the respondents were interested in either of the Scheme B units in the Villa example, only 52% found either of units in the State House example (Scheme C) acceptable. People preferred the larger units and more private space. Around 75% of respondents singled out private decks as important features. The original house did not have a deck; this was the only addition in the division. Two-thirds of respondents liked an open-plan kitchen and dining area, suggesting that this arrangement might suit smaller domestic environments.
A considerable number of respondents did not favour one-bedroom units, considering the need for an extra room for visiting guests, family members and live-in carers. In some plans for subdivision extra bedrooms could be shared. Schemes E and F could accommodate two older people, one person and a long-term live-in carer, or one older person and a lodger, which could be a way of giving additional income for the house owner.

Sharing Space

The survey showed that there was not much enthusiasm for sharing spaces and features inside the dwellings, especially living/dining rooms and kitchens. But almost 60% of the respondents were interested in sharing a laundry, perhaps because such facilities are often shared in multi-unit housing and because self-service laundromats can be an option.

In terms of the age groups which the respondents might be willing to share with, the 41-64 group received the highest votes, and the next choice was 21‐40.

Findings

The research carried out to date shows that it is possible to convert typical New Zealand houses to allow ageing in place in smaller units that are easier to heat and meet Lifemark Home standards. But this might not satisfy the target client group. There was little enthusiasm for very small living units and sharing space (apart from outside space). This suggests that engaging potential users in the design process at an early stage would be a good idea.

“Converting houses into smaller units …… seems like a good idea but is not worth doing unless people want to live in them.“


 

  1. Fatemeh Yavari and Brenda Vale (2017) Sharing Space and Older New Zealanders: Preferences for the Conversion of Existing Houses. In M. A. Schnabel (ed.) Back to the Future: The Next 50 Years, (51st International Conference of the Architectural Science Architectural Science Association (ANZAScA), pp. 305–314.Yavari, F., & Vale, B. (2017). User and expert perspectives on designs for converting existing New Zealand houses to make them suitable for ageing in place, in The International Academic Forum (eds.), East Meets West: Innovation and Discovery: Proceedings of The Asian Conference on Aging & Gerontology 2017, The International Academic Forum (IAFOR), pp.1-15.

Papers available at:
http://papers.iafor.org/wp-content/uploads/papers/agen2017/AGEN2017_35621.pdf
http://anzasca.net/paper/sharing-space-and-older-new-zealanders-preferences-for-the-conversion-of-existing-houses/

2. These diagrams are included here with the permission of the authors, but are subject to copyright.

Posted in Housing and community environment | 4 Comments

Ageing in place – design for wellbeing

Judith Davey

6/04/2018

I have written quite a bit about housing in my blogs – using home equity to supplement retirement incomes; calling for a wider range of housing choices and the implications of more older people renting. But I have not delved far into detailed housing design issues.

So I was delighted last year to find three female PhD students in the School of Architecture at Victoria University who were interested in housing for older people. I have been doing my best to help and advise them and have been even more thrilled to see them presenting papers at conferences and publishing their work. With their agreement, I am using some of their findings in my next two blogs (one student has subsequently withdrawn).

One study looks in detail at older people with high care needs living in senior rental housing. This involved detailed documentation of the physical environment, followed by interviews with and observations of the residents and their caregivers. It identified design requirements which could improve quality of life, bearing in mind individual preferences and impairments.

Space for movement

Many older people with mobility problems require walking frames or trolleys to provide support, or hold onto walls and fixtures to keep their balance, when moving around indoors.

Conventional hinged doors, especially with different threshold levels, are difficult for people using these aids to manipulate. Sliding doors, that do not require much strength to open, are better. Doors take up valuable space even though they help to maintain privacy and retain heat. Movement could be eased by removing interior doors between lounges, kitchens, bathrooms and laundries.

Keeping the place tidy

This is important to help people feel that they are in control of their lives. To ensure that they can find things and put them away requires shelves within reach. The kitchens observed in local‐authority housing generally had cupboards/shelves that were impractical for their intended users.

Floor coverings which are easy to keep clean are important for people who are unsteady or whose hands shake.

Visitors

As well as having an environment which is presentable for visitors, older people in the study had a better sense of control when they could see visitors coming. This might require a view of the doorway or driveway from their sitting space, especially for people who found getting up difficult. In this case they could remain seated, call out a greeting and an invitation to ‘come in.’

Privacy

Privacy concerns are particularly important in grouped dwellings where many people pass by. Some residents shut their curtains because ‘people can easily look inside’. Windows need to be positioned to provide residents outside views, but limit views from the outside to the inside.

This is particularly important in cases where there are privacy needs related to incontinence, where toileting needs occur in the lounge as well as in the bedroom through the use of a commode, or other device.

Care

Assistance with showering is the most common personal care requirement and the experience of showering has a high impact on quality of life. Many older people want to do as much as possible themselves during showering to keep their independence and privacy. Many pensioner rentals do not have accessible bathrooms, especially for wheelchair users or those reliant on walker frames. A lack of space, or inflexible design, makes it difficult for caregivers to assist as there is rarely enough space for two people in the bathroom. Keeping wet and dry spaces separate is difficult; wet-area showers can be problematic as water can spread over the floor, increasing the risk of falling. In particular, bathroom design may make this difficult when room for undressing, drying and dressing is inadequate. As one caregiver said:

”She leaves her walker out there [out of the bathroom], because there’s not a lot of space. … And once she’s dry we’ll bring her walker back through with her clothes, and squeeze in where we can and manoeuvre around that. … The clothes that we take off her or that we put back on her, she normally has them all on her walker. … we leave that out there because there just not really enough space, you know, with the water and everything”.

Many respondents wished to be out of sight of their caregivers when they didn’t need assistance. “He never let me in [the bathroom], he’s a bit shy.” Having grab handles, handrails and other fixtures that can be held by the older person with both hands increases their safety and thereby their independence and privacy.

Comfort

Being warm is important when showering and drying. Running the hot water before people entered the shower or turning on a heater well ahead helped warm up an unheated bathroom. A caregiver said:

“I go to one man and he won’t have a shower and what they need is like a wall heater in the bathroom to maybe turn that on, get the room warm first and then they might consider going in the shower.”

I have often said that the greatest challenge for an ageing population in New Zealand is providing housing for older people with high care needs to live at home in the community – to “age in place.” Not to mention provision of the care services to go with the housing. There will be individual differences but the needs of independence and privacy, safety and comfort are basic to the quality of life for older people. Let’s hope that these research findings will resonate with designers and planners for the future.

 


 

  1. Yukiko Kuboshima, Jacqueline McIntosh and Geoff Thomas. (2017). Implications for the design of rental housing for the elderly that improves their quality of life. In M Schnabel (Ed.), 51st International Conference of the Architectural Science Association (pp. 783–792.). Wellington, New Zealand.
  2. Yukiko Kuboshima, Jacqueline McIntosh and Geoff Thomas. Bathroom Design for Assisted Showering that Improves the Quality of Life of the Elderly. (Under review for journal publication)
Posted in Housing and community environment | 7 Comments

Older people as entrepreneurs

Judith Davey
23/03/2018

If we look at synonyms for “entrepreneur” we get words like “tycoon”, “magnate”, “mogul” and “capitalist”. As I said in my last blog, my definition is simply a person who starts up a new enterprise in the private sector, usually, but not always, with the goal of making money. Entrepreneurship comes very close to self-employment. Following the definition in the literature, I am looking at people aged 50 plus.

What are the motives of older entrepreneurs?

Writing in a book published in 2009, Rogoff talks about those who “have to” and those who “want to”. The former are people who find that labour market conditions or discrimination prevent them from getting the job they want as employees. An example would be an immigrant who may have been well qualified in her own country, but who is obliged to take up a low level position.

The “want to” group are moved by wishing to use their skills and abilities in the way they see them; to make a contribution to society and to maximise their work satisfaction. Entrepreneurship is also a way of keeping up a professional presence, knowledge and contacts.

Let’s look at these motivations in more detail.

Following the dream

This may be something which has arisen from their previous career. Or it may be a totally different idea which has come into their minds. An example would be an amateur chef who hopes to open a restaurant.

Managing family and time commitments

If people cannot get the employment conditions, or employment locations, which suit their circumstances, then self-employment, where they are in control of these conditions, may be the answer.

Being your own boss

For many people this arises from dissatisfaction in their previous work. Autonomy brings enjoyment and satisfaction and sometimes the ability to accomplish a political or social purpose – setting up social services, education or health care for a special social or ethnic group.

Downsides of entrepreneurship

Rogoff mentions some less positive aspects of entrepreneurship in later life. One is lack of time to fully develop a new enterprise – less time to recover any losses or to re-build a career if an enterprise does not work out. Older entrepreneurs may find it more difficult to adopt long-term development plans, especially if they still have dependants or if they intend to build up an enterprise and sell it on for profit. There are some ways of getting around these draw-backs, such as partnering with others, purchasing existing businesses or franchises.

Entrepreneurship usually requires capital, but this does not necessarily mean financial capital. Older people have often accumulated rich stores of human, social and cultural capital. In any case, financial requirements may not be large for many service enterprises- gardening, home and pet care.

I have been thinking about how these motives fit with my own experience. I have been an entrepreneur/self- employed (but never a mogul or a tycoon!) at three stages in my life:

  1. When I was in India during my “gap year” (although the term had not been invented then), I started up classes for children coming up to secondary education age who were going back to the UK. Most of them had had their primary education overseas and so were not familiar with pounds, shillings and pence or imperial weights and measures. They needed coaching for the transition or to cope with exams such as the “11 Plus”.
  2. At the time when I had my first child there was little in the way of child-care. So, with another woman in the same situation, I started a contract research business – we were “consultants” in the days before everybody was! We shared the work and the child-care and organised both to suit ourselves.
  3. When I left my full-time job at Victoria University I reverted to taking up research and policy analysis contracts as and when it suited me, avoiding overloading my time and avoiding too much administrative responsibility.

 

Future opportunities for later life entrepreneurs

Rogoff is optimistic about the future for older entrepreneurs. Rapidly developing technology has made business ownership and operation more accessible. A lot of work can be done on-line from one’s own home. A long career in a large company is no longer seen as ideal, or as secure. Small enterprises are more flexible and contribute more to job creation. Watch this space!

 

 

 


Rogoff, Edward (2009) The Issues and Opportunities of Entrepreneurship after Age 50. Chapter 6 in Czaja, S. and Sharit, J (editors) Aging and Work. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.

Posted in Paid and unpaid work (includes volunteering) | 2 Comments