The changing world of work

Here is a link to a very interesting article on the changing nature of work.  I am intrigued by what this means in terms of our understanding of what organisations are, how they will be structured and designed, and what people will be doing with their time in the next 30 years.

The article reminds me of my earlier posting from last year (No people - just screens, terminals and handsets...)

No people - just screens, terminals and handsets…

On arriving recently at the new Terminal 5 at London’s Heathrow Airport I was struck by the car hire place - no people, just screens, terminals and handsets.

And in the parking terminal, machines that will tell you where you car is parked, just swipe your picking ticket or enter your car registration.

EU passport holders have since 2006 been issued with biometric passports with microchips in them, enabling them to pass seamlessly through automatic gates at border controls.

These new developments all reduce the need to employ people who do routine and repetitive jobs involving scanning, searching, paying and recording.

Supermarkets too are able to dispense with cashiers as customers scan items from their trolleys themselves into one device and pay (cash, credit or debit cards) into another:

And scanning devices are already being introduced in South African supermarkets – here is a ‘price-checking’ scanner at Checkers in Emmarentia:

Increasingly banks will exchange ‘brick and mortar’ branch networks for apps and cellphone-enabled technology as the safest and most secure customer offering, and banks of the future will look very different.

In case you think these developments are a long-way off for South Africa, here is the FNB branch in Hyde Park Shopping Centre:

I imagine that if banks and supermarkets in Europe are replacing recurrent employment costs with expenditure on technology then it is only going to be a short time before it happens here as well.  My local Checkers supermarket in Emmarentia employs probably well over 100 people, and we have no social contract in this country that says we need to preserve these jobs because of the social benefits of the incomes of the employees to them and their families, and of course our wider society.

These changes will not just impact on service sectors of the economy.  In mining, too, there are new developments that will enable remote-controlled mining, in which the rock face can be drilled by machines controlled from the surface:

  

What is driving these changes?

A nanometer is very small – a billionth of a meter long.  The world’s smallest microchip, unveiled in 2010, is just about nine nanometers in length.  Scientists are experimenting with ‘stacking’ microchips so as to be able to make faster and better cellphones (and military technology).  The problem is that they get very hot, so now they exploring how to use tiny amounts of fluid to keep them cool.

Microchips are unlikely to get much smaller, so now the innovation space is more concerned with how to expand their use.  More and more devices will become available with a multitude of uses that will change our lives.  And it is happening already.

We face the loss of perhaps hundreds of thousands of relatively low-paid, repetitive and relatively unskilled jobs as a result of new technologies in a short number of years – unless we can think very creatively and create a new social dispensation that has buy-in and active support from government, business and trade unions to address this question.  Currently there is little indication that this is understood by government and the trade union movement.

Government plans to create new jobs will be undermined by the impact of this technological transformation.  New jobs will have to be created in sectors that require skilled knowledge workers, in sectors such as tourism, beneficiation, information technology and so on.  Opportunities exist, arising from developments such as the Square Kilometer Array, chemical industry beneficiation etc, but these opportunities will critically require skilled people.  The loss of large numbers of relatively unskilled and low paid jobs cannot be countered easily and speedily by new job creation without a new and significant skills development plan coupled with an imaginative economic development strategy that has buy-in from all social partners.  The current National Development Plan may not be enough, especially in the context of our current conflictive political discourse.

more on Open Doors

The appointment of Justice Edwin Cameron as a judge of the Constitutional Court is very much to be welcomed, and is also an example of an Open Doors approach (see my last blog). Justice Cameron is eminently qualified from a legal perspective, but is also an interesting choice because of his openness about his sexuality and his HIV status – he has been living openly with HIV for some years. This means that he brings an important human rights perspective to his new role, and strengthens confidence in the Constitutional Court as an institution that is able not only to defend the Constitution but also to articulate and stimulate our emerging human rights culture in South Africa.

Beyond the implications for our Constitution, his appointment is also an expression of tolerance and an embracing of diversity in public life that sends a wider message. How many judges, or other high public officials, around the world have ever been able to declare their HIV status, let alone done so in a country where this does not hold back their promotion. We should celebrate his appointment for what it means for South Africa at the start of 2009, and hope that the ANC government in the run up to and beyond the upcoming election can continue to promote diversity, openness and transparency in its governance of the country and its tolerance of differing and even opposing opinions.

Of course, the Open Doors scenario is about much more then political tolerance. It is the Shell scenario that appears to offer the best prospects for enhanced economic growth over the next 15 years. As such, it is useful to think about it as a template for democracy and development, whilst also engaging critically with the insights we gain from the Open Doors perspective in addressing South Africa’s challenges.

We tend to take for granted the idea that economic growth needs to be pursued almost at any cost. We know, from what happened with the power crisis last year, that a growing economy needs to be fuelled with oil, water and electricity, so we immediately need to think about how we create a sustainable growing economy – one that addresses both the demand and supply side of the economic equation. The Open Doors scenario is the one that places the greatest demand on oil reserves as rapid economic growth, particularly in the developing world, means that millions more people buy cars and seek middle class lifestyles.

In consequence, if we seek to create the open and accountable society envisaged in the Open Doors scenario, we need also to focus on issues of sustainability and think creatively about strategies to address energy needs. And the issue of poverty, and the associated consequences, risks falling from the agenda. I will share further thoughts in future posts. Meanwhile, a happy new year!

Social capital and building our society

The World Values Survey, mentioned in my previous post, paints a grim picture about levels of trust in South Africa. However, this survey probably does not give the full story. The Survey asks a simple question:

“Generally speaking would you say that most people can be trusted, or that you can’t be too careful when dealing with people?”

with the following response options:

1. Most people can’t be trusted
2. You can’t be too careful when dealing with people
3. Don’t know

Tracy Jooste’s article (also mentioned in my previous post) suggests that one of the difficulties with this question is that it offers no positive response options, and she argues that trust is a situational concept that cannot easily be measured in a general sense. A more nuanced approach is called for. While people may give a negative response to a generalised question, if you ask them about particular engagements (eg. with neighbours, members of their community etc) you may find different responses.

Social capital exists in trusting relationships between people in their interactions in communities, organisations and society in general. It is increasingly recognised worldwide as a valuable form of capital, (although the value of it is harder to measure than financial or physical capital).

South African economist JP Landman has argued in Business Day that social capital is one of four factors that can lay the basis for sound economic development of the country. The four factors he identifies are: a growing economy; ‘re-creating’ social capital; strengthening institutions, and enforcing rules (I guess with underpinned by the concept of the rule of law).

I especially like one of his comments: "It's nice to live in a society where people are getting richer, but it's also nice to live in a society that's getting nicer".

Realising the full potential of stimulating social capital development requires a new focus. Currently, we as a country put huge resources into human capital development – essentially training people in specific skills to be able to meet the skills shortages in the country. In relative terms, we put practically nothing into creating social capital. Increasingly there is evidence showing that stimulating social capital can bring returns by way of increased innovation, creativity and smart thinking – all badly needed if we are to be able to solve complex problems in this country and the continent.

Affirmative action going backwards?

The latest Employment Equity Commission Report (2007/8) makes disturbing reading. The Report indicates progress being made at normalising the demographics of the South African workplace through the implementation of employment equity plans in companies employing 50 people or more.

While progress in bringing in previously disadvantaged people to senior levels is still slow, there is worse news at the middle Professionally Qualified & Middle Management levels.

At these levels the representation of black people generally showed a decrease of 8.7% from 50.0% to 41.3%. The representation of white people increased by 8% from 49.2% to 57.2% over the same period.

As these are the levels from which the next cadre of senior managers are recruited, the indications are not good for creating a more representative senior manager level in the short-medium term. It makes one wonder what is actually happening in companies if the reported numbers are going in the wrong direction?

While this is not good news, it does make one wonder about all the whinging from white people who claim that they cannot get jobs due to reverse discrimination.