Week 4 Blog - The Changing Nature of Today’s Workplace
There are endless
possibilities for what the future of technology and the internet can be used for and how it
can impact the nature of today’s workplace. According to Weinberger (2014), the
problem with our current method for addressing the future is that we are
typically inaccurate with anticipating what information will one day be useful
for society, and these possibilities continue to narrow the closer we move
toward it. However, whereas ‘old data’ (e.g., books and encyclopedias) limited
the amount of information that could be included, improvements in technology and the internet has now enabled
the rise of ‘big data’ and the inclusiveness of all information to be published
and filtered through without having to remove any of it (Weinberger, 2014). In
other words, big data avoids the inherent problems that old data presented in
having to anticipate and narrow what information might be valuable in
the future because big data’s “when in doubt, include everything” disposition
helps us to understand what information is valuable as it
continues to organically emerge and evolve. This notion echoes the concept and
benefits of ‘wirearchy’, described by Husband (2014) as an emerging organizing
principle generating social and economic value through its “two-way flow of power
and authority, based on knowledge, trust, credibility and a focus on results,
enabled by interconnected people and technology”. Wirearchy is changing the
nature in which work is carried out in today’s workplace, as it provides the
opportunity and power for people to effectively connect, collaborate, and take
responsibility with regard to information rather than having to rely on
traditional systems of hierarchy and status (Husband, 2014). It requires that
everyone - regardless of whether you are a leader, manger, employee, or citizen
– be more mindful of the changing nature of the workplace and aware of the
accompanying responsibilities these changes have as it applies to the open and
public dissemination of information (Husband, 2014).
Filtering, Remixing, & Interacting
Many of the implications
about the changing nature of today’s workplace are shared in Kelley’s (2016)
description of the verbs filtering, remixing, and interacting. According to
Kelley (2016), filtering focuses on content and is aimed at human attention. The
hope is that big data, or technology’s ability to filter, may one day help us
in learning more about who we are and what we want (Kelley, 2016). Kelley
(2016) also asserts that we continue to value access over ownership and that
we currently live in an era whereby growth occurs not from new resources but
from a rearrangement of what already exists. In other words, remixing
demonstrates how wirearchy, or the ability to connect to others through
networks, can assist in transforming existing information into something more valuable.
Lastly, Kelley (2016) asserts that we will continue to expand upon what we are
able to interact with, and those things that are not capable of interaction
will soon be rendered broken and useless. Interactivity will therefore force ourselves
to cultivate and improve the necessary skills, coordination, experience, and
education in tandem with the improvements in technology and the internet that are
causing a shift in the nature of work within the workplace.
Propositions and Observations of a Changing Workforce
As part of the readings
this week, Prince (2019), Schawbel (2017), and Davies, Fidler, and Gorbis
(2011) caution that we must be prepared and ready for an uncertain future of
work as the nature of today’s workplace continues to change. I believe these
authors not only indicate several noteworthy potential drivers that are causing
this shift in the workplace, but also provide several insightful
suggestions on what needs to occur to accommodate for these changes and how
these changes should unfold. I especially appreciate these authors’ emphasis on human development and the cultivation of work skills.
Prince (2019) proposes
the need for a new focus in education whereby institutions should begin to
align with foundational skills and important practices that will
endure in the future of work rather than on specific content or task-related skills.
Prince (2019) suggests one way in which this can occur at the post-secondary
level of education is to develop a networked approach for learners to have
access to a variety of learning experiences and interactions with different
experts within different disciplines. I observe this to already be occurring
frequently, as faculty and staff at several master’s level programs in sport
and exercise psychology are connecting students to experts in different fields
via skype during regularly scheduled classroom time to engage in dialogue over
complexities associated with relevant and specific real-work issues occurring
within real-work settings.
Schawbel (2018) proposes
that organizations will also begin to prioritize mental health more. I observe
this to also be occurring within my own organization as HR’s initiatives continue
to expand each year, providing more wellness initiatives that assist in
preventing employee burnout (i.e., flexibility with working hours and time off)
as well as programs that assist in easing financial burdens (i.e., increasing
the amount of tuition reimbursement). Davies, Fidler, and Gorbis (2011) suggest
sense-making, social intelligence, cross-cultural competency, and new-media
literacy will be important working skills to develop for the future workforce
and my organization appears to also be active in this pursuit by
providing professional development workshops for employees conducted by third-party agencies on many of these areas.
Summary
Despite all of these propositions about the changing nature of the workplace and my current
observations, I still believe it would be wise to view all of these notions
with a grain of salt as Weinberger (2014) reminds us that we tend to be largely
inaccurate as a society when attempting to anticipate what will be useful in
the future. This does not mean, however, that these assertions about the future are not
worth considering, and I see many of these ideas already occurring and having an
impact in my line of work. However, only time will confirm whether these speculations about the changing nature of work for the future were on point or not and whether the recommendations to accommodate change actually proved to make
a meaningful difference going forward.
References
Davies, A., Fidler, D., &
Gorbis, M. (2011). Future work skills 2020. Institute for the Future. Retrieved
from: http://www.iftf.org/uploads/media/SR-1382A_UPRI_future_work_skills_sm.pdf
Husband, J. (November 24,
2014). What is wirearchy? LinkedIn. Retrieved from: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/20141124231801-69412-what-is-wirearchy/
Kelley, K. (2016). The
inevitable: Understanding the 12 technological forces that will shape our
future. New York: NY: Penguin Random House LLC
Prince, K. (February 17,
2019). Preparing all learners for an uncertain future of work. Getting
Smart. Retrieved from: https://www.gettingsmart.com/2019/02/preparing-all-learners-for-an-uncertain-future-of-work/
Schawbel, D. (November 1, 2018).
10 workplace trends you’ll see in 2018. Forbes. Retrieved from: https://www.forbes.com/sites/danschawbel/2017/11/01/10-workplace-trends-youll-see-in-2018/#547232de4bf2
Weinberger, D. (October 22,
2014). The power of the internet. YouTube. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iPXmEh24KXA&feature=youtu.be
The Weinberger commentary on the need to predict/guess (known as Research and Development if done well) on future needs is a reminder that part of the paradigm of work which will or should shift is in the area of having permission to fail (sometimes, not all the time). Grading or judging work based solely on outcomes may inhibit the creativity by producing some fear of repercussions. Allowing (and appropriately budgeting for) a level or run rate of failure, managing a portfolio of in-process futuristic projects, etc., should be a part of the picture of a workplace and workforce that can make innovation come to pass.
ReplyDeleteWeinberger is a rich resource, and I appreciated the way you analyzed the material and explained the connections to the other resources. For example, Weinberger's caution about the accuracy of predictions contrasts with Davies, Fidler, and Gorbis' thoughts about the work skills of 2020. We can reasonably evaluate the accuracy of Davies et al. now that we are 45 days from their future.
ReplyDeleteIn the opening paragraph, I was struck by the atheoretical nature of big data. Social scientists emphasize the difference between correlation and causation. The classic example is the correlation between ice cream sales and violent crime. If we include all data and discover this correlation, putting more police officers on the streets when ice cream sales rise might decrease violent crime, but we won't know why it works. And will have a limited ability to improve the intervention in the future. Absent a theoretical mechanism of action, each relationship in the data is discovered post hoc and initiates a reaction.
Davies, Fidler, and Gorbis discussed transdisciplinary work and superstructed organizations. Their thoughts about the diverse teams that will be required to create value may be very accurate. A combination of big data sifting and data-relationship theory may be necessary to realize the potential of extreme computation, big data, and hyper connectedness.
I’m glad you brought up the notion of interaction. The internet has allowed for us to interact with others all over the world from the comfort of our homes/offices. It has allowed for organizations to be more family-friendly and support the notion of telework (working from home).
ReplyDeleteBut interaction through web-based means also has its drawbacks. It allows drug cartels to communicate and successfully transport drugs from one country to another. It allows criminals to import illegal contraband into this country. It allows sex offenders to communicate with minors and create, upload, and download sexually explicit child pornography.
So, while the world is changing through technology, the world is not ready for the ongoing legal activity that is caused through the use of technology.
The interesting thing about Weingerger's comments about the encyclopedia and big data is that filtering is more prevalent than ever before. Encyclopedia Brittanica was filtering information when they decided what to put in their texts. Now, everything online is being filtered--consciously or unconsciously--and even though the data is out there somewhere, one might never know the filtering is happening. Is this new version of filtering more or less concerning than the old version? Because there is more information out there than can ever be consumed, filtering seems to be a vital component of learning and navigating the technological world. Choosing the right filtering method and service seems to be key to getting good, accurate information in every arena.
ReplyDeleteI'm with you regarding the "grain of salt" approach. I've been thinking about your workplace and wondering where you might find the balance point for the use of technology in training your players. I shouldn't presume that it is there, so is there a balance point?
ReplyDeleteTo your point on the need "...to develop a networked approach for learners to have access to a variety of learning experiences and interactions with different experts within different disciplines."
ReplyDeleteIn my Masters of Ed course on Social Media, in Week 2 I have students search out "experts" in their various disciplines and begin following them on Twitter, then at the end of the week, summarize their lessons learned. What tends to happen is that throughout the next ten weeks, people will begin sharing links from these experts that apply to the weekly topic, even though that is not a requirement. I have had previous students one to two years later still sharing in our class hashtag.