Forecasts 2012: A Roundup of Prognostications – Part 2

As it turned out, 2012 has been a bit of a whirlwind for me personally and professionally, and I failed to make the time to expeditiously write parts 2 and 3 of the 2012 predictions piece. Now, nearly halfway into the year, is no time to comment on other people’s predictions, so I’ll just link to some of those I’d been collecting, combining the proposed portion on talent management with the other portion on marketing, economics and pop culture . This should make it easier for myself or others to follow up and see how things turned out by the end of the year:

(More) Talent Management and HR

Mobile and Informal Learning: Trends for 2012  (Full Disclose: I now work as a senior analyst at Bersin and was attracted to the company partly because of the future-looking character of the firm’s research, as displayed in the previous blog, written before I started working there)

Looking to 2012: 14 HR Predictions, and Balancing the Global Workforce

2012 and the Great (Compensation) Upheaval

2012 Predictions? Easy. How about 2020 Instead?

The 5 Hardest Jobs to Fill in 2012

5 Leadership Tips for 2012

The 7 trends to the Future of Talent Management

10 Predictions for 2012: The Top Trends in Talent Management and Recruiting

Emerging HR Discipline Is Among 2012 Predictions

Future Work Skills 2020

Guiding Growth: Future Trends in Leadership Development

HR Technology Prediction for 2012: Year of the Tablet

Leadership 2012

Recruiting: The Year in Review and Predictions for 2012

Talent time-bomb explodes for HR

Top 7 HR Trends of 2012

What 2012 holds for HR

Where The Jobs Will (And Won’t) Be In 2012 

Why 2012 will be year of the artist-entrepreneur

Marketing and Customers

8 Predictions for SEO in 2012

12 Crucial Consumer Trends for 2012

The Brand Keys 12 For 12: Brand and Marketing Trends for 2012

Social Media: Five Facts to Bank On in 2012

Web Design Trends in 2012

Business and Economic

10 Cutting Edge Mobile Application Trends for 2012

10 Sustainable Business Trends Worth Knowing for 2012

12 People to Follow on Twitter in 2012

A Major Historical Trend That Predicts Recession In 2012

Manufacturing in 2012: Complexity and its Consequences

Predictions for 2012: China Steps Up

Predictions for Digital Business in 2012

Social Media Marketing and Business Trends 2012

Top economic predictions for 2012

You thought 2011 was tough?

Popular Culture

Chefs predict top menu trends for 2012

Color Trends for 2012: Balance to Preservation

Food Trends 2012: Custom French Fries and Grilled Cheese Infused Vodka

My Fearless Sports Predictions for 2012

Science Fiction’s predictions for the year 2012

Leave a Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Forecasts 2012: A Roundup of Prognostications – Part 1

Tis the season (or, rather, slightly past it) for all the predictions for the coming year. I’m a sucker for these articles and have collected many of them via my Twitter account (@TWgy) in recent weeks.  There are so many predictions out there that I’ll break this into two parts, with a bonus section on talent management trends to go for the trifecta.

So, if you’re interested in a roundup/synthesis of 2012 forecasts that looks across various industries and ideas, this blog’s for you.

An Introduction to 2012

Let’s start with the more multi-disciplinary predictions. For my my money, The Futurist remains the best source of imaginative, general-purpose forecasts, despite a being journal that still somehow seems, style-wise, a relic of the 1970s.  It’s odd  that the world’s foremost form of futurist communication remains quaint and homey, but there it is.

Anyway, its Top Ten Forecasts for 2012 and Beyond tends to be focused more on “beyond” than 2012. For example, the forecast predicts that learning will become “more social and game-based” this year and into the future. I expect that’s true, but I doubt we’ll see all the text books disappear in 2012. More likely, we’ll see some serious movement into the area of ebook textbooks as tablet computers continue to drop in price (thanks, Amazon), especially at the university level.

The Futurist also points to things such as space tourism, solar power production on the moon, and the kind of nanotechnology that will restore eyesight. Very cool but don’t bank on huge lunar solar collectors this year. Heck, I’ll be happy if we can get them on a few more rooftops and maybe on a tablet computer or two.

Author: Iztok Boncina/ESO, from Wikimedia Commons

Will More Revolutions Be Tweeted?

The Futurist also published James Lee’s blog called “Thoughts on 2012 – Markets, Technology, and Society,” in which he makes forecasts on everything from the economy (“mild recession”) to technology (“wireless everything”). I’m on board with the “wireless everything” prediction but it’s too early to tell about the economy. We’re seeing some hopeful signs with the new jobs numbers and uptick in manufacturing business, but with Europe dealing with its debt issues and even China looking soft, Lee could prove to be right. More on the economy later.

Lee also notes, “With social media, people are organizing themselves and learning about things faster than ever before. ” Yep, it’ll be interesting to see if there are anymore equivalents of “Arab Springs” in 2012. Contrary to what Gladwell said, the revolution apparently will be (and was) tweeted. In fact, 2011 was a really rotten year for that particular prediction. History has a way to doing this, but it’s seldom you get your comeuppance quite that quickly.

Normal Gets New (Again)

There’s always talk about the new normal but I’ve been hearing the phrase more these days. I take it with a grain of salt because these trends often have more to do with shifting economic trends than anything else. Nonetheless, I really like JWT’s 10 Trends for 2012 Executive Summary, which starts with the notion that the new normal includes stripping down the size of many new offerings to appeal to cost-sensitive consumers even while allowing them to “live a little.” Yes, such predictions are a bit soft, but it’s not hard to put some really hard numbers to them to see how well they play out.

Of course, some JWT predictions are just statements of fact. For example, the idea that marriage will be optional in 2012 is a trend that clearly emerged in 2011.

100 Things to Watch

JWT also produced its “100 Things to Watch in 2012,” which is an A-to-Z look (literally “Access Anywhere” to “Zink”) at stuff to track this year. Some of it is obvious (proliferation of cloud-based services), some pretty superficial (75th anniversary of The Hobbit), but all of it is entertaining and worth scanning thanks to its elegant, easy-to-view setup.  I particularly love the idea of the “flipped classroom” (see #23) but just had to roll my eyes at  “flo-yo” (#24).

Leveraging the Likes of Slacktivism and Gerontabletification

Future studies have a certain cool factor, but how do you put them to use? That is, how can businesses leverage the nexus of social, demographic and technological trends to innovate and earn some profits? Michael Schrage has some answers in Innovative Ideas to Watch in 2012. I enjoyed the sheer ethical complexity and wit associated with an idea such as co-opting slacktivism to  reach out to customers and communities. I think most of the other ideas Schrage outlines are practical ways that businesses can leverage growing trends – though I rather doubt that the fun word “gerontabletification” will catch on in a big way.

Retail 2.0 Coming to a Store Near You

I imagine it’s a form of branding and an homage to his DaVinci Institute, but I can never quite get used to the Renaissance getup of “Google’s Top Rated Futurist Speaker” Thomas Frey.  I do, however, admire the constant stream of ideas, phrases and blogs that flow out of him. The man never seems to be short of notions about the future, as is illustrated by this two-part blog on 28 Major Trends for 2012 and Beyond.

I think he’s more often right than wrong. And though he’s clearly looking well beyond 2012, a lot of his ideas are useful today.  The term “Retail 2.0,” for example, is be a bit stale (aren’t we done with version numbering yet?) but I think Frey is dead on about the challenges facing the retail world and the need to reinvent the retail experience, creating one that is as much about entertainment and engagement as it is about stocking shelves. In the short term, however, I’m pretty dubious about “retail shops that carry no inventory.”

But I am pretty bullish on alternative payment practices in 2012, one of the foundations of a new retail model. Scott Dunlap notes in “4 payment industry predictions for 2012” that “mobile payments continue to skyrocket” and that there’s going to be a “birth of alternate commerce devices.”  I think about this in terms of smart phones and electronic wallets. Dunlap writes, “I know we all can’t wait for the day that we don’t have to clip coupons and remember loyalty card numbers, and our wallet intelligently figures out how you should pay for things.”

Crowdfunding and Micro-Incomers

Some of Frey’s most compelling forecasts are of existing trends that are likely to get stronger, and I think that’s true of crowdfunding support of new business ideas, or whatever the term of art comes to be. I don’t know if Kickstarter and companies like it will be a success in reinventing the process of providing venture capital, but I’m certainly willing to bet this trend won’t go away till all the possible permutations have been checked out.

As for “micro-incomers,” well, I doubt Warren Buffet will be going this route anytime soon. Don’t expect some title wave of such folks in 2012 to get rich through their stock-photo-selling micro incomes, but it’s worth checking in on this trend every year to see how it’s advancing. That’s one of the things I like about Frey: he gives you a heads up about trends that may not change the world this year but that might just have a major impact in a decade or more.

Tech in 2012

Of course, tech is probably the number one thing people like to prognosticate about, especially in the over-exposed world of social media and smartphones/tablets. It’s impossible to stay abreast of all the details, but let’s cover some of the high points.

TV + Internet = Smart TV (or NUL)

Yes, smart TV is the most obvious tech trend of 2012, but nobody knows how it’s all going to turn out. What we do know is that it’ll be fun to watch the mad scramble.  Abby Johnson writes, “In order for 2012 to be the year for Web TVs to become mainstream, consumers will have to be educated on what they are. For this to happen, the consumer electronics companies will have to use effective marketing strategies to create a need for consumers to want connected TVs.”

“Effective” is the key word here, of course. The good news is that there’s already a grass-roots movement out there. I’ve had a TV connected to the Internet for well over a year now, and I’m nowhere near the cutting edge on the geekometer. But the mainstream kickoff is at the 2012 Consumer Electronics Show, which just started. There may be some clear winners coming out of this, but I suspect it’ll be anarchy at the start, like the swimming portion of a triathlon. Looking forward to seeing who survives.

Black Swans in the Clouds

In Vivek Wadhwa’s “Five tech predictions for 2012,” he often sticks with some safe things that many others already suspect, such as that social media, already just another staple in our lives, “will lose its sizzle,” that there will be an explosion in the inexpensive tablet market, and that voice recognition is going mainstream. More interesting is his observation that “cloud computing is advancing faster than our ability to secure systems.” Watch for Black Swans in the clouds.

David Lavenda of Fast Company also points to security issues in his “10 Bold Tech Predictions For 2012, foreseeing, “A significant failure in a popular cloud service will set the cloud movement back.”  But he sounds a bit less skeptical about social networking in general, predicting a new player emerging in the social networking space and expecting “social business” to “take off in 2012.”

Mobile But Still Snail Slow

Lavenda also predicts (boldly?) that “mobile IT will grow slowly in the enterprise.” Yeah, no kidding. Enterprises were slow with social media and are slow with mobile, even though huge swaths of their employees are on social networks and have mobile devices. It’s embarrassing  but not surprising.  Everything takes a lot of time inside corporations, and IT managers are reluctant to invest resources in devices or systems that may evaporate by next year. Still, I think there will be some cutting-edge companies that pioneer this area and derive a lot of employee productivity outcomes as a result.

In the meantime, employees will be investing in apps of their own and will download plenty of ebooks. I climbed on the ebook bandwagon years ago, but Lavenda predicts that in 2012, ” eBooks will dominate.”

Social Media Mania

Let’s face it, we’re all pretty burned out thinking about the future of social media, but that’s not preventing folks from writing an avalanche of prognostications.  From Gini Dietrich comes “8 social media trends for 2012,” in which she discusses the coming “social TV convergence” as well as the rise of “social commerce.”  Yep, I agree both of these will pick up momentum in 2012, though it’s hard to predict how soon these will become truly mainstream.

There was also David Armano’s “Six Social Media Trends for 2012,”  which points to what he calls “convergence emergence,” a trend that touches on “trans-media” experiences. That is, everything converges: entertainment, shopping, marketing, social media communication, travel, etc.  I don’t see why not. Our mobile devices make it increasingly possible and product managers are looking for every advantage they can get.

Gamification and Its Discontents

Armano also refers to “Gamification Nation.” Yes, games are all around now: our devices, our TVs, and increasingly in the school system itself. It’ll probably wear out its welcome as some point (I still have nightmares of a social studies teacher who wanted to teach everything to us via buzzer games), but this trend is still in the upswing for now.

It isn’t just about video games. Armano writes, “From levels, to leaderboards, to badges or points, rewards for participation abound.”

Similarly, Mark Schaefer states in his blog “The anti-prediction of 2012 social media predictions” that we “ain’t seen nothing yet” in the area of so-called social scoring. The king of this particular hill is apparently Klout. This is still a pretty new concept to me and I know some people hate the whole idea (or the way it’s executed), but it seems to fit into the gamification trend. The basic idea is to measure a user’s influence across their social network. I rather doubt we’ll be able to duck this trend, so I guess we’ll have to live it.

I also stumbled on a video called “8 Digital Trends Shaping the Future of Media.” To be honest, I hate most online video for the purposes of looking at trends. I can read an article in a few minutes but a video can’t be hurried along. I wish they all came with transcripts. Nonetheless, there’s some good stuff here, including (ironically enough) some nice updates on online news publishing.

Curing Health Care via “OnStar for Your Body”?

Oy, there are few subjects that dishearten me more than the high cost, inefficiency, bizarre funding and inequity of U.S. health care. Having said that, I keep hope alive that the U.S. will find a way cure its many healthcare ills. Maybe technology will help, if you believe TechCrunch‘s  “6 Big HealthTech Ideas That Will Change Medicine In 2012.”  Josh Constine notes that artificial intelligence will be increasingly assisting with diagnostics and decision support, and he also points to the fact that we’re able to get “more and more [health-related] data at lower and lower price points.”

Being an analytics geek, I particularly love this part:

I think we need to make smart dashboards like they have for fighter pilots. They would piece together data from ubiquitous sensors, like those made by GreenGoose, and Microsoft Kinect that can measure your activity around the house. It would be like the OnStar for your body that could give you clues about when you’re about to get in trouble, and it could call for help or guide you to appropriate therapy.

He also points to mobile devices that can monitor certain health indicators in real time.

As cool as all this is, however, don’t get hopes up too high for 2012.  Forbes has some gloomy predictions, such as that “medical devices will face an even tougher environment” and that “health information technology will stall.” Ah yes, that’s the system we’re all familiar with. But there is a bit of good news: the prediction that India will finally rid itself of polio.

Watson Did My Homework, But Siri Presented It

Education technology is an increasingly large topic that can’t be done justice here, especially with MIT expanding its free online courses and even promising to offer certificates in areas where people demonstrate mastery. But “IT Trends to Watch in 2012” is a good place to start if you’re looking for how educational tech might change in 2012.  Among the subjects covered are alternative academic publishing via online systems, the application of augmented reality in education, and the topic of gamification yet again.

One particularly interesting subject is plagiarism. John Moravec is quoted as saying:

Advancements in intelligent applications (such as Siri) and artificial intelligence (such as IBM’s Watson) are leading to a near future where software can automatically research and generate original academic works and suggest questions for future research. We will need to rethink plagiarism and academic ethics as we reconsider our relationships with technologies that augment how we think.

This could be especially fascinating, not just as we consider what is and isn’t plagiarism but what is and isn’t creativity, research, and even academic thinking.

Yep, There’s an App for Your Bot

I’m still trying to wrap my head around the idea of robot apps, but Frank Tobe wonders if this is their year. In “Is 2012 The Year That Robot Applications Take Root?,” he states, “At present there are three significantly different approaches to an app store for robots (although additional ‘stores’ are in the planning stage and many existing stores are making arrangements to expand beyond their own boundaries…”

This is a trend that is still incubating and seems directed mostly at developers, but it widens your expectations about the nature of apps and the kinds of consumer machines that may be humming under your Christmas tree in a few years.

Lightbulb as Killer App in 2012 – “And Beyond”

Speaking of apps, one Scientific American piece calls 2012 the “Year of the Lightbulb,” a golden era when “lightbulbs will be required to meet new energy efficiency standards ..[s]o the old 100-watt lightbulb will have to produce the same light using just 72 watts.”

Doesn’t sound too sexy, perhaps, but this article also made me think of a Harald Haas and his vision of having wireless data stream from every light bulb. Yes, weird, like a magic trick. And this is one time when it pays to watch the video. So, expect to see a serious gain in lighting efficiency in 2012 but, in the beyond, be on the lookout for wireless data from your lighting fixtures, adding a whole other twist to the notion of home improvement.

A Little Further Out

Looking a little beyond 2012, Chris Ciaccia wrote about “5 Tech Trends for the Next 5 Years: IBM.” I just like to think about the products and concepts others are currently working on, including people-powered devices (sometimes integrated with clothing), using biometric data for online security, sensors that can “read the mind,” and junk mail that is so (frighteningly?) personalized that it’s no longer junk to you.

Science in 2012

Are You There, Higgs?

We could speculate about new scientific developments at length but let’s get down to the real question of 2012. Will we or won’t locate the elusive Higgs particle? As Ann Finkbeiner writes in “Predictions for 2012: Now or Never for the Standard Model of Physics,”

As they collide more and more particles, and detect more and more promising signatures, physicists will become increasingly sure that they’ve detected a Higgs. By this summer, they will be 95 percent confident, but for physicists that’s not good enough. By the end of this year, they will be dead certain one way or the other.

So, if they don’t find it, our view of the universe will be altered and become even more mysterious than it already is. Stay tuned.

Life on Mars? Another Earth?

It’s hard to top the Higgs to-exist-or-not-to-exist drama, but some other cool things will be happening as well 2012, and at least one may give Higgs a run for its money. The Nature article by Richard Van Noorden called “New year, new science” covers a few of them, including the arrival of the methane-sniffing vehicle Curiosity on Mars. It just might be able to tell us if the methane there is coming from geological processes from microbial martian life. Discovery of life on another planet? Yep, that would top Higgs in a few circles. Van Hoordon also raises the specter of finding “a true extrasolar twin for Earth, with just the right size and orbit around a Sun-like star to be habitable.”

The First Frankenstein Genome

You can argue that the first Frankenstein genome was already created in 2010 when the first synthetic genome was created. But that was a duplicate of an existing genome. This time around, they could make something truly original, something that isn’t a copy and has never existed until we created it from scratch. “Sweet mystery of life,” indeed.

Talent Management in 2012

I’ve spent the majority of my working life as a subject matter expert in areas related to talent management, but I’ve also stepped away from it for a while, partly just to get some perspective on the field. I’m going to give it short shrift here but expect to come back soon with a blog focused solely on talent management in 2012.

By far my favorite report on talent management in 2012 is Bersin’s “Strategic Human Resources and Talent Management: Predictions for 2012 – Driving Organizational Performance Amidst an Imbalanced Global Workforce.” You can get the whole report as a free download, but it was also pretty well covered in a shorter piece called “Looking to 2012: 14 HR Predictions, and Balancing the Global Workforce.”

Engagement Sure Loves Hogging the Limelight

Some of the Bersin trends are deja vu all over again, including “Employee engagement takes center stage.” If you’ve been in this business, you know that engagement just won’t get off the damned stage over the last few years. Even worse, employees don’t seem to be any more engaged than they were. Something’s wrong with this picture, but we’ll address it in a future blog.

Split Personalities and Going Glocal

A newer trend is what Josh Bersin has called the global workforce imbalance in the area of talent acquisitions. That is, it’s been tough to retain employees in high-growth countries like China and India, but it’s been easier in the US and Europe where growth has been slow or nil.  Global corporations are simultaneously dealing with wildly different challenges in the recruitment function today, and they’ve got to figure out good ways of managing this split personality.

How to deal? Well, there’s always going glocal, a word and concept that has been around a while but remains major challenge: “Organizations have to think about their workforces in a global way, build global tools and best practices, yet empower local managers and HR teams to act locally.”  Easier said than done, my friend. But no less important for being difficult.

Shared Headaches for Recruiters

If they’re scarce in the U.S., they’re really scarce. So one thing that recruiters the world over might have in common this year is the search for software engineers, Web developers, experts in creative design and user experience, product managers, marketers, and analytics gurus. At least, that’s what I’m getting out of “The 5 Hardest Jobs to Fill in 2012,” and most of these make sense based on anecdotes I’ve heard.

Of course, such predictions are almost sure to simultaneously reassure and to piss off folks who have been unemployed in those areas for months at a time. If you’re one them, sorry. The truth is, there’s almost no job security for anyone anymore. At least in the U.S., that’s a trend that hardly needs mentioning.

Up Next

Look for Part II a little later on, when I’ll cover marketing and customers, geopolitics,  economics, popular culture, and companies to follow in 2012. If you’d like me to look for forecasts in other areas, please just leave a comment or shoot me a note. Thanks!

4 Comments

Filed under analytics, change management, future, talent management, Trendwatching, Uncategorized, workforce planning

Scenarios for a Buffed Up “Weak AI”

Considering its name, weak artificial intelligence (AI)  has done a surprising amount of heavy lifting lately – and it promises to do even more in the  near future.

As a species, humanity used to kick sand in the face of “weak AI” and publicly disparage it. We made a show of beating our chests, claiming that it had nothing on us, the king of the intellectual beach. And, at first, weak AI really was indeed an anemic little dude (assuming metaphorical maleness) that could barely tie us at tic-tac-toe.  But, undeterred, it continued working out in its proverbial garage until it developed a pretty darn nice set of abs.

It started giving us a good little game of checkers, beating most of the brawnier human checker players sitting on the pier.  Then it moved on to chess, finally kicking sand into the face of the reigning world champion. Humanity  pouted a bit after that but didn’t worry much. Weak AI was still weak, dammit.  The rest was all high-tech smoke and mirrors.

Just let it try to do the hard stuff, we thought, such as human language games that require imagination and word play. No way weak AI could, for example, beat humans at something as artful as, say, a game of Jeopardy.  But, then it did, beating the best players in the world.

Source: Wikimedia image

Still, it’s not really thinking, right? Just cause it can whup us at some of our favorite intellectual pastimes means nothing, nothing at all.

Weak AI was still too stupid to do something as basic as drive a car along a road, something any 16 year old can do.  No, wait, cancel that. An AI system recently won a competition by autonomously navigating 55 miles in an urban environment, obeying laws and avoiding hazards.

Well, then it can’t do other stuff, such as diagnose illness or perform legal discovery processes or come up with its own scientific hypothesis and then test it….until it did all those things.  Okay, so maybe weak AI is nifty and powerful in its own way, but it’s still not nearly as powerful as we are, right? Right?

Yes, right, calm down, already, Humanity. You can still look in your magic mirror and be declared the “brainiest of of them all.”

Nonetheless, you’d have be especially weak-minded not to see a trend line here. So, let’s say weak AI continues to buff up without developing into the kind of self-conscious, boot-strapping, unpredictable, Singularity-spawning “strong AI” (think Ahnold in The Terminator)  that many humans fear and some are determined to create.

Give Me That Job, Bro

Nothing says “I’m not a wuss” better than job stealing and, by that standard, weak AI is getting to be a brute.  Sure, machines have been stealing some jobs and creating others for centuries. But weak AI isn’t stealing them from farm hands of factory workers like its forebears. It’s increasingly taking them from the skilled and brainy. There’s no doubt that these technologies are creating new jobs and opportunities as well, but the bottom line is that these dislocations are real.

I’ve covered some of this territory in other blogs, such as The Automated Journalist, “Cyberhuman Resource” Challenges in Today’s Workplace, and Will Watson Put Your Job in Jeopardy?, so there’s no need to go into specifics here.  Let’s just focus on how these trends might turn out from a socioeconomic point of view over the next couple of decades. In researching ideas, I’ve been reading books (such as Race Against the Machine) and articles (such as “Difference Engine: Luddite Legacy”) while having conversations in various discussion groups. Here’s how it boils down in four scenarios.

Weak AI at Work in the Year 2031

Twenty years out is an eternity in the world of technology but a shortish period in the worlds of jobs and education. That makes these types of scenarios especially tricky, but let’s lay them out and see what we get.

Scenario One: Marry Your AI

In the year 2131, jobs are back and better than ever after a number of economic crises and market dislocations.  It took some adjustment time, but humanity finally figured out how to use the best new AI technologies and raise productivity without having a negative impact on employment.

Two decades ago, more economists and sociologists recognized that the combination of new technologies, global job markets and mediocre skill levels were reducing employment rates and stagnating median incomes in too many nations.  Corporate philanthropists started pouring money into new education enterprises, trying to harness the same technologies that seemed to be causing dislocations.

Perhaps most important was creation of Vigore University, an very inexpensive and, in some cases, free university that was started in the United States but quickly became a global entity.

“Vigore was the first truly viral university. Today we have more students than the top 30 traditional universities combined,” notes its dean of students. “Using virtual learning techniques and decentralized campuses, we provide a great education to anyone who is willing to put in the work. And we back those educations with gold-standard credentials.”

Vigore works with corporations of all kinds not only to provide them with the skilled labor they need but to help them foresee the labor they will need in the future.

“The idea isn’t just to provide knowledgeable employees,” says the dean, “but to ensure those employees know how to leverage the best technologies available to do their jobs better.  One of our mottos is, ‘Marry your AI.’”

By this, he means that every student is encouraged to develop her or his own customized AI that resides on the Web in powerful cloud applications but can be accessed through today’s nearly ubiquitous wireless devices, from the gaudiest of today’s goth “borg headgear” to the most seamless tablets, earpieces, gloves and other wearables.

“Whatever the fashion,” says the dean, “the idea is for all students to fully leverage their AIs to improve both the speed and quality of their work. Medical students must be adept at using the best diagnostic software, for example.  Budding sociologists must be adept at having their AIs collect and analyze data from many sources in order to test their hypotheses. Our AIs now know our quirks, our strengths and our weaknesses, and they live not just on our heads and in our pockets but on the cloud, where their amazing computational power comes from. They are not just our auxiliary brains. In many ways, they’re our better halves.”

Largely as a result of Vigore and its imitators, employers finally have enough skilled labor to innovate and grow in ways that were hard to do 20 years earlier. High-tech business formation is also at an all-time high, as everything from quantum computing to nanoprogramming finally finds investment capital, practical applications, and enough affordable labor to make such knowledge-intensive enterprises pay off.

“With the rise in skills,” says Vigore’s dean, “we have a rise in the proportion of people who can take proper advantage of the ever more powerful technologies. It’s a new, smarter world, and the labor force is finally catching up to it.”

Scenario Two: End Work

The so-called living wage is, for all intents and purposes, a fait accompli.

Back in 1973, the total U.S. GDP was just $1.4 trillion. By 2010, despite an ongoing economic downturn, the number was up to $14.6 trillion (or from $4,912.8 billion to 13,088 billion in 2005 dollars).  Hardly anyone even noticed at the time but, as job growth remained too slow, more and more citizen started to eye these numbers.

“The 99 percenters got everyone thinking about income disparities,” says one Stanford sociologist. “At first the argument was about how much to tax the rich, who had benefited the most from GDP growth, in order to balance budgets. But even as that growth continued, wages continued to stagnate and then decline partly because more work – both in the manufacturing and service sectors – was being done by increasingly sophisticated machines, decreasing the demand for traditional labor.

“Teaching, health care, journalism, law – they all went through technological transformations that left fewer people working in those occupations, and yet relatively few middle-class income new jobs were created in turn. Today, virtually all factories are lights out facilities, retail increasingly occurs online, and new systems are dramatically raising the productivity of education and healthcare employees, causing downsizings in industries that have historically been labor intensive.

“At the heart of all this are combinations of wireless AIs that communicate with countless other systems, automated mobile systems from cars to robots, and a combination of pattern recognition AI and sensing devices.  These systems have generated amazing productivity gains and wealth, but it has mostly gravitated toward the upper classes, who have become the domestic consumers of last resort as the middle class has diminished.”

As much as the technological changes, the socioeconomic changes have driven the need for reforms.  Even back in the year 2011, the U.S. Census showed that 1 in 2 people were poor or low-income. These trends led to a groundswell of support for political reforms aimed at what Jeremy Rifkin once called “the end of work.” The idea that gained the greatest traction was that of the “living wage,” an extension of Social Security and programs such as the Earned Income Tax Credit to the long-term unemployed and anyone who had not found a job that raised them above the poverty level.

After a series of riots and protests that grew ever more massive and destructive, the government was forced to act.

“The trick at the time was how to pay for such a massive social welfare program when the nation was struggling to crawl out of debt,” notes the sociologist. ” The answer was twofold. First, the initiative was sold as an economic stimulus program, since money to the lower classes will necessarily be spent, giving a boost to the overall economy. Second, the program was paid for via a series of new taxes, especially value-added and energy taxes.”

There remains considerable controversy about the “living wage.” Cost is only part of the debate. There are many concerns that it discourages people from getting new or better-paying jobs, despite all the “better pay”  incentives and restrictions. And there’s the accusation that it’s a kind of government subsidy to employers who won’t pay a living wage.

“The U.S. is now a full-fledged socialist state,” says one conservative politician. “In the end, we’ll have killed the goose that lays the golden eggs.”

“Nonsense,” says a liberal politician. “It’s still a capitalist society, but it’s one that is trying to ameliorate our economic and technological trends that erode the middle class. This seems the best, fairest way to do it, serving the needs of both the economy and U.S. citizens.”

Scenario Three: Live Cyberpunk Style

The 21st century has not been kind to the U.S. First, there was 9/11, then the seemingly interminable Great Recession, and then the so-called Global Meltdown, a time when every major wealthy nation in the world went through social and economic crises and a war between China and the U.S. looked inevitable.

Today, nearly 70% of the U.S. lives in poverty and near-poverty. Good-paying jobs are scarce. Homelessness is epidemic, but today’s high-tech poverty reminds one of a William Gibson novel. Even the most destitute can’t be without their smartphones or wearables, which are about the only lifelines they have intact. Indeed, people will desperately fight against anyone who takes away the last remnants of their technology.

Meanwhile, virtually everyone living near the poverty line has a tablet, headset or other devices. Even when they are short on food, which happens all too often, these devices are the last things they’ll pawn and the first things they’ll buy back when possible. They are communication, information, entertainment, and employment devices all rolled into one. Even the chronically underemployed often need them to find and carry out contract work.

“It’s getting about as dangerous and gritty as anything Gibson imagined,” says one journalist. “Anybody who is even middle class lives in a gated community or a neighborhood with private security. Security is growing better every day, of course, because of all the automated pattern recognition systems hooked up to countless, tiny video cameras. Privacy may be dead, but anyone with money has a good system hooked up to a great AI.”

The AIs operate nearly everything now, from cars to appliances to 3D printers. They are nannies to the kids, executive assistants to their parents, and public servants to everyone else. Meanwhile, anyone below the middle class lives in some form of growing squalor that is only made bearable by almost infinite number games, social networks, and videos out there. People huddle around these things like they’re their last hope. Even as they resent a high-tech system that has made jobs much harder to find, they can no more give up their own technologies than cut off their own limbs.

Scenario Four: Populate the Free Agent Nation

In the year 2031, things are getting spooky.

The iPhone’s AI, Siri, has greatly evolved over the last two decades and is close to passing Turing tests. She has been imitated by many other companies, and these AIs now have their own video games, movies and, in one case, a talk show.

“There’s no AI that can yet do everything a human can do,” says one MIT professor who focuses on artificial personalities, ” but there are fewer and fewer individual cognitive functions that have not been replicated in the software world, from voice recognition to the formation of theories based on facial expressions and body language. We’ve trained computers to understand us very well.”

The result has been a constant ratcheting up of the number of previously human-only jobs that some type of mechanized system can perform. It’s hard to determine just how many jobs have been lost this way within the U.S. or the number that have been created as new occupations have emerged.

What we do know is that the nation doesn’t produce as many traditional jobs as it once did, causing a rise in two other phenomena: an increase in entrepreneurship and higher levels of education. Stymied by a lackluster job market, people are simply working to create their own.  The long-promised age of the “free agent nation,” a term coined by Daniel Pink, is finally at hand.

This brings plenty of benefits, but it also means a great many business failures, and it means people are spending longer in an education system, racking up debt. Both of these phenomenon are creating growing debt levels among young people, a problem that is not new but is reaching such critical proportions that the government seems sure to intervene.

“We need entrepreneurship for sure,” says one politician. “And we need the fast acquisition of skills. What we don’t need is the kind of debt that severely penalizes people for actions that have been imperative for the economy.”

There are no easy solutions, but one proposal is to better leverage job-eliminating technologies to help entrepreneurs to create new jobs.  “It’s the ultimate use of productivity-enhancing technology,” notes the  MIT professor. “We train AIs to serve as advisers to entrepreneurs, helping them increase their chances for success while reducing unnecessary costs. It may not be the ultimate answer, but it’s time we used technology to produce what we need most, which isn’t concentrated wealth but widespread human success.”

Conclusion

The scenario I’d most like to see realized is “Scenario One: Marry Your AI” because it strikes me as the most proactive. We badly need to give our population access to high quality education as inexpensively as possible in order to thrive in the age of increasingly intelligent machines.

But the one I see as most likely is “Scenario Four: Populate the Free Agent Nation.”  I suspect that weak AI will become much more powerful even as, from a socioeconomic point of view, we drift  into greater entrepreneurship and higher levels of education because these are the best ways for individuals to survive. It is, in many ways, a more reactive version of Scenario One.

Many would like to see something along the lines of “Scenario Two: End Work,” but it doesn’t seem a strong possibility given the debt hole in which the U.S., Europe and others find themselves. Still, given enough social instability, it could occur. Certainly there are successful models, such as Sweden, that have made socialism and capitalism work well together.

Finally, there is the cyberpunk scenario. A person can wander around certain parts of cities almost anywhere in the world – wherever poor people are barely getting by and yet still brandishing precious cell phones – and easily imagine a dilapidated, warming  world filled with despair where smart technologies are key to a marginal survival.

I hope we do better than that,  but hope, as they say, is not a strategy. We’ll need a good strategy. And the sooner we develop it, the better off we’ll be.

2 Comments

Filed under artificial intelligence, computers, employment, future, incomes, knowledge worker, performance, productivity, scenarios, Trendwatching, Uncategorized, weak AI, wealth, work, workforce planning

Who Cashed Our Productivity Paychecks?

The conventional wisdom about productivity is finally going out the window – and I say good riddance, baby.

Sure, it’s still widely reported that living standards are inextricably linked to productivity.  For example,  the Economic Policy Institute notes, “The level of productivity is the single most important determinant of a country’s standard of living, with faster productivity growth leading to an increasingly better standard of living.”

That’s not too different from what the Concise Encyclopedia of Economics states: “The growth of productivity—output per unit of input—is the fundamental determinant of the growth of a country’s material standard of living.”

Which, in turn, is not too different from what the World Bank has to say: “Productivity growth is probably the single most important indicator of a country’s economic progress.”

Just one little problem, of course. The data indicates it’s not true, at least not in the ways it has usually been explained.

Exhibit A: United States of America

In the U.S., productivity has been going up for many years. In fact, it’s been rising considerably faster since the year 2000 than it had for the previous three decades. Have a look at this data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics:

Productivity Change in the Nonfarm Business Sector, 1947-2010

Productivity

“Standard of living” is trickier to measure because nobody quite knows how to measure it (which is kind of weird, considering how much economists like the term).  But, let’s just assume it’s strongly related to income, something we can actually measure.  Now, what does U.S. men’s median income look like since 1973 (I picked men’s because they’ve been in the workforce more consistently since the early 1970s)? Well, have a look at data from the U.S. Census Bureau:

Let’s face it: that is one ugly line, with male income earners actually losing a little ground since 1973.  So what happened to their productivity paycheck?

The short answer is that the folks along the median just didn’t make it into the “national incentive plan.”

This is clear when you look at the work by people such as Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee of MIT. In their recent book called Race Against the Machine, they commented on a graph that showed the amazing and growing disparity between real median household income and real GDP per capita since 1975.

They called it “striking” and, when I looked it over, I just gave a Homer Simpson-like, “Doh.” Because at one point in my life I was actually mystified about where the U.S. productivity paycheck had gone. I took it on faith that productivity was creating wealth, but where was it?

I even made it a point to ask this question of economists when I met them. Sometimes I got convoluted answers about how today’s products (from light bulbs to medical devices) are of a higher quality than those of yesteryear and so equate with greater wealth and higher living standards. Sometimes I got snide remarks about government productivity data. Sometimes I just got something along the lines of, “Hey, good question.”  It stumped me. It was if I’d asked my plumber – or maybe my local hydrologist – where the water goes and he just shrugged his shoulders.

But Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee made this observation:

There have been trillions of dollars of wealth created in recent decades, but most of it went to a relatively small share of the population. In fact, economist Ed Wolff found that over 100% of all the wealth increase in America between 1983 and 2009 accrued to the top 20% of households.  The other four-fifths of the population saw a net decrease in wealth over nearly 30 years.

Ouch. So, yes, the productivity paychecks are real. And they do raise the standard of living – but not for everybody. Or even most people.

Ok, so before you peg me as some would-be socialist 99-percent rabble-rouser (not that there’s anything wrong with that), let me say that social inequities are beside the point, from my perspective. I just wanted to know where the water/money was going. If it was going to the top quintile (nothing wrong with those folks, either), so be it. At least it existed somewhere.

But it does raise another question: “Did those folks earn that paycheck, or steal it?”

If that’s incendiary phrasing, don’t blame me – or even some sly socialists slithering in the shadows. Blame  the purveyors of conventional wisdom mentioned above. The implication has always been that we all benefit from productivity increases, but, in practice, as Brynjolfsson and McAfee say, “There is no economic law that says that everyone, or even most people, automatically benefit from technological progress.”

And, this just makes sense. Let’s say a bank restructures and lets go of a couple of bank tellers for every automatic teller machine it adds.  Do the other tellers divvy up the salary of the people who were laid off minus the cost of the machines?  Not hardly. They’re just grateful to hang onto their jobs. No, the organization as a whole gets the savings (which may help explain today’s historically high corporate profits). With any luck, some of those savings go into creating new jobs.

What kind of jobs? Not teller jobs, probably. No, the money is spent on bonuses for the people who made the restructuring decisions or on the hiring of  higher-level employees who (at least in theory) bring in more revenue than they’re paid.  Multiply this dynamic many times over the course of decades, and median incomes stay flat while GDP per person (which is an average rather than a median) goes up.

So, to answer our question, “They earned it, kind of, sort of, in a way.”  The mistake we made was in thinking that the productivity paycheck was going to be divvied up among us.  It wasn’t.

Maybe you think that’s not fair.

Well, tough noogies. Free markets aren’t fair. They are, at best, somewhat logical (and maybe not even that).

But at least we now have a clue about where the water goes. That is the beginning of wisdom – and a fine antidote to fiscal fairy tales.

Leave a Comment

Filed under GDP, incomes, knowledge worker, performance, performance management, productivity, Trendwatching, Uncategorized, United States, wealth, workforce planning

Scenarios for a Pesky and Unpredictable Energy Future

Writing scenarios about energy is about as hip as writing science fiction about time travel or Moon colonies. Energy scenarios are, after all,  the “original” scenarios. They are the vanilla of ice creams, the beige of home decorating, the Ryan John Seacrest of celebrities.

Scenarios actually began, for the most part, in the energy industry because, in a crazy and shifting world, that industry has always needed to take a long-term view and make long-term investments. That’s why so many people in that industry give off a vibe that is weirdly geeky as well as stodgy and superior. It must be the cross-breeding of engineers and geologists, gutsy wildcatters, fat-cat corporate diplomats, and egg-headed forecasters.

Don’t ask me to explain my particular enthusiasm. I guess I just think it’s, well, important. Perhaps I picked up the energy bug from the study of scenarios in general and some exposure to energy companies. At any rate, I have been thinking and reading about it more lately and participating in online discussions, the latter being the mark of someone who has entered a rather alarming and perhaps incurable state of nerdiness. So, here are some my thoughts all nicely wrapped up in four scenarios. (And, yes, to you scenario snobs, I will be picking one I prefer and one I find most likely).

Scenario One:
Arctic Lichen Slow

In the year 2031, green energy still grows slowly, like some kind of arctic lichen. Thanks to China’s interest in solar, the price of panels has continued to come down, but not at the exponential rate that some folks had predicted (see last blog). Wind energy has become more mainstream, though storage technologies remain a problem. Biofuels, with the help of the U.S. military, have gotten cheaper and become a regular additive to consumer as well as military aircraft.  And engineers have done a pretty good job of making automobiles more fuel efficient, not just through better batteries but the more efficient engineering of all the other components, especially the not-yet-dead combustion engine. Most cars, after all, still run at least partly on petroleum. Many believe that we’ve already hit the dreaded “peak oil” phenomenon, but new extraction techniques have kept the pumps flowing enough to keep the price of gasoline bearable.

In fact, 76% of all energy production is still based on fossil fuels (only about 4 percentage points of improvement from 2011). Natural gas remains a denser, cheaper fuel source and the energy grid increasingly runs on it, especially in the U.S.

But with China and India and growing parts of the African continent still ramping up their economies and energy usage, there’s even more trepidation about global warming. The scientific news has not been too good in this area – in fact, there has been an ever greater amount of global hand-wringing, with many believing we’re already past a point of no return for considerable warming.

This problem has set the stage for a carbon tax that will be implemented by all G25 countries in 2032. The funds will be mostly allocated to three areas: 1) further bringing down the prices of renewable technologies to the point where they can compete with natural gas (though not robot-mined coal), 2) greater energy conservation regulations in all forms of engineering, and 3) smaller, cheaper and safer nuclear plants.

“Look,” says one energy guru, “we’ve made a lot of progress over the last 20 years in terms of bringing down the costs of renewables, but they haven’t grown that much as a percentage of all energy. Still, global warming has finally gotten bad enough – and the technology good enough – for us to make a global push. We predict that if the political coalition holds, then by 2050 we can get things down to just 60% fossil fuels and the rest nuclear and renewables.”

Scenario Two:
Kudzu Quick

In the year 2022, a major threshold was crossed. Solar photovoltaic costs dipped below 14 cents per kWh and suddenly became just as competitive as conventional sources of energy. It had been a long road, but this represented the start of a phase change, especially given that the costs were expected to continue to sink further for another five to ten years. Going with other fuel sources started to look like a rotten investment, which meant the lower costs came even more quickly thanks to new investments.

But today, in the year 2031, it’s not all about the photovoltaics. There have been many advances since the first big influxes of investment capital into energy technologies earlier in the century.

Fuel cells, although not a new technology, have made a lot of progress as a way of cheaply storing solar energy. Most new homes in the U.S. are sold with solar panels and a collection of fuel cells for storing any energy that doesn’t go directly to the electric grid. In addition, most windows are installed with clear carbon nanotube films that can reflect and collect solar energy, depending on the needs of the home.  There’s also a big business in retrofitting older homes.

This means that a growing number of energy consumers have become energy producers or energy neutral, a situation that has made many utilities very nervous, especially after several decades of slowing usage among home owners in the U.S.

There have also been advances in wireless energy delivery. The most prevalent technologies are based on lasers and magnetically coupled resonance, allowing a wide range of wireless devices to run in households without the need for wires and plugs. But the largest benefits stem from applications that allow neighborhood homes to “share” solar energy via ad hoc, computer-controlled and wireless grids.

There are still plenty of traditional fossil fuel power plants, of course, but renewable energy is now estimated to make up 15% of energy produced in the U.S., a proportion that is expected to rise very quickly.

“We expect to the US. To hit 40% renewable energy by 2050,” says one utilities CEO. “It represents an amazing achievement. While humanity hasn’t exactly ‘solved’ its energy problems, it feels like we’re on the road to a sustainable future. As an industry, we’re now looking at other markets where we can be equally as successful, especially the transfer of information via utility infrastructures.”

  Scenario Three:
Hot and Dirty

Global warming continues to heat things up. At this point, everyone just assumes we’re going to need to deal with the repercussions of rising sea levels, greater desertification, the extinction of species, and many other problems.

But the world has bigger fish to fry. China and India and plenty of other nations continue to ramp up industrialization and they must do it on the cheap as their economies start to slow down in terms of annual growth rates. China’s government, in particular, is deeply worried about maintaining political control. It has built many nuclear plants but has given up on pouring money into solar because of declining global demand. To make up the energy difference, it continues to build coal-fired plants and has exported its expertise in this area to India.

Meanwhile, the U.S. relies primarily on natural gas, petroleum, and coal, the latter being a serious topic of political debate. The U.S. has actually started exporting natural gas to nations where air pollution  as become most abysmal, and the extraction technologies have grown better and better.

In the U.S., renewables remain stuck at the same 3% of all energy production they’ve been since the 1970s.

“Environmentalists have given up on renewables becoming price competitive in this era,” states one think-tank analyst. “Now, it’s all about trying to push natural gas and building more of the kind of small, modular nuclear plants that China has done a lot of the basic R&D on. At least in the short term, nuclear remains the best answer reducing greenhouse gases.”

Scenario Four:
Down and Dirty

Around 2020, two things happened almost simultaneously. The first was that new information threw the best global warming projections into doubt. Even the most avid believers of global warming in the scientific community regarded this as good news: that the atmosphere has a greater ability to absorb CO2 without warming than had been originally believed.

Second, a group of governments and major private investors agreed to pour billions into geoengineering technologies. They projected that within 20 years, they could absorb over 30% of the carbon that had been dumped into the atmosphere over the last 100 years.

Despite warnings from environmental groups, these two developments have, in the words of one engineer, “freed coal.” Coal is by far the most abundant and cheapest fossil fuel thanks to new robotic technologies that allow it to be mined very cheaply and safely.

Within years, problems such as acid rain and mercury poisoning returned on a global scale and new global regulations were implemented in 2029, but no one is talking about doing away with coal anymore. The “clean coal” moniker is seen everywhere.

“We’re getting down and dirty now,” says one U.S. miner. “The server farms are everywhere in the U.S. and they need juice. Plus, China manufactures just about everything now and we give them the coal to do it. India wants it too. We’re the new Middle East of coal, baby.”

In the meantime, investment in renewables has dwindled to almost nothing and nuclear plants are relatively expensive to build. Coal rules the day and contrary to previous expectations, it looks to be the fuel of the 21st century.

Verboten
Concluding Comments

Alright, this is when I’m supposed to say, “We just don’t know which of these is most likely, and planners should keep all of them in mind in order to better prepare for and react to the future.” But here’s what I really think: Scenario One is most likely at this point. We’ll move toward renewables slowly (but with increasing speed) over of the next 20 years, with natural gas and, possibly, nuclear playing roles as intervening technologies. I don’t think we’ll see anything from fusion during this time.

The scenario I’d like to see? Color me green, partly because it’s just plain more exciting. Scenario Two is where the cool new innovations will be, where humanity really shows its spunk and its can-do-it-ness, where geeks and environmentalists and venture capitalists and Chinese manufacturers all hold hands and sing “We Are the World.”

Alas, I think Scenario Three is more probable. I just read an article in the Sydney Morning Herald saying that International Energy Agency announced we only have five years “to avoid dangerous global warming of more than two degrees celsius.”  The report itself stated, “If stringent new action is not forthcoming by 2017, the energy-related infrastructure then in place will generate all the CO2 emissions allowed in the 450 Scenario up to 2035, leaving no room for additional power plants, factories and other infrastructure unless they are zero-carbon, which would be extremely costly.”

And I’m sitting here thinking, “Yeah, right. No way anybody is going to stop building new dirty plants or factories even once that threshold is crossed, not without some major political and economic repercussions.”

No, if the vast majority of the climatologists are right, then we’re going to have to settle in for some serious heat. We’re not going green or even nuclear fast enough to prevent it, from what I can tell. On the other hand, maybe the projections are just plain wrong, as much a figment of the hand-wringing liberal media as the talk radio boors would have us believe. If so, that’s good news.  Yet I doubt it. I think we’re headed toward a greener world but it’ll come later than many hope, making room for the folks nobody wants to call in yet: the dreaded geoengineers who will mess with the environment the way the Fed messes with the economy, yanking out CO2 or building solar-reflecting cloud cover or any number of other strategies.

So, welcome to the 21st century: it’ll probably be hotter and stormier and more ecologically fragile than we’d like, with insurance companies writing some serious policies for folks living on coastlines (that’d be me, by the way) and engineers trying to undo a lot of the stuff we just did. Ah well. It wouldn’t be the first time we collectively screwed up, and I’m  hoping it won’t necessarily be the last.

7 Comments

Filed under energy, fuel cell, future, nuclear, power plants, scenarios, solar, Trendwatching, Uncategorized

The Rise of Energy Innovation

Energy has been a relatively stodgy industry for decades, with much of the innovation going into new ways of extracting fossil fuels out of the ground. But Technology Review‘s Christopher Mims recently wrote a piece called “Why the Next Steve Jobs Will Be in Energy, Not Computers.” He got lambasted in the online comments section, but I think he’s onto something. Of course, the energy industry will continue to look a lot different from the computer industry because of the physics involved but, nonetheless, here are seven reasons there will likely be a lot of innovation in this area in coming decades:

  1. The Markets: As the price of fossil fuels rise, the incentive to innovate also rises. Here’s a look at oil prices over time: As the price differentials close between energy produced with new technologies versus older technologies, innovation should rise everywhere from green energies to nuclear to energy storage techniques.
  2. China and Germany:These economic powerhouses are already making serious plays to position themselves as the future owners of the “green energy” technology revolution. China is also doing research into new models of nuclear reactors. If these nations derive economic benefits from these investments, other nations must eventually follow.
  3. Silicon Valley: There is a growing number of green startups in Silicon Valley and this just wouldn’t be the case if a lot of very smart people didn’t see the potential for serious profits. Yes, there are disasters such as Solyndra, but such failures must be part of the process. Count on some major hiccups but continued innovation from this direction.
  4. New financial models: Consider the case of Bloom Energy, which is offering 10-year contracts for metered electricity at 5% to 20% below the grid rate in California.
  5. Fuel cells and miniature power plants: Fuel cells are starting to come into their own. A lot of basic innovation is already done. Now it’s a matter of perfecting and marketing a relatively mature technology. There’s also the idea of miniature natural-gas-powered power plants. You can make a case that these two technologies are to the grid what PCs were to mainframes back in the days when Apple started. That is, there’s a way to make something that was centralized and immobile more decentralized and mobile. The comparisons aren’t exact but they’re interesting, especially if some folks are right about things such as “swarm power.”
  6. Innovations in energy infrastructures: Consider what’s happening in Germany in terms of trying to build up a hydrogen-friendly infrastructure.  Or consider attempts in Israel to build battery-switching stations.
  7. Exponential curves? It’s always a danger in citing inventor Ray Kurzweil because he has extreme ideas and people will peg you as one of the Singularity True Believers. I’m not one of those folks but sometimes he says things that are too interesting to ignore. For example, he’s said, “Solar panels are coming down dramatically in cost per watt. And as a result of that, the total amount of solar energy is growing, not linearly, but exponentially. It’s doubling every 2 years and has been for 20 years. And again, it’s a very smooth curve.” Thanks to this trend, he thinks that solar, in tandem with nanotechnology, will power most of the world in just a couple of decades. I doubt it’ll be that simple, but it’s true that solar costs have come down fast thanks to China’s entry into the market and new manufacturing techniques. There’s been, for example, a 70% decline in solar panel prices just over the last 2 years. What’s more, other people such as Ramez Naam writing in Scientific American suggest that a version of Moore’s Law may actually apply to solar.

Okay, I’m not betting the farm on exponential growth curves or even a Steve Jobs of energy, but I do think some very interesting things will happen and am, frankly, looking forward to my hydrogen-powered tablet computer.

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Double-Dip Recession Scenarios for Your Organization

Like most people, I hate to consider the prospect of a double-dip recession. There’s been a lot of pain and suffering over the last several years and I shudder to think things are going to get worse again.

It’s as if we’re all part of a large tribe that wandered into an economic bog. Some people disappeared entirely, some came through it just fine, but a majority emerged in various stages of trepidation, exhaustion, or even injury.

Now it appears the tribe may not have crawled out after all. Perhaps we only scampered up onto some more solid ground for a short while and are approaching another quagmire.

If that’s true, then what’s next?  Profits at large corporations have risen, partly because they’ve figured out how to do more with less. But that doesn’t mean there are a lot more cuts to make. Many if not most workforces are already lean because employers have been reluctant to hire. As a result, many employees are working long, stressful hours. And small businesses are suffering narrower profit margins.

Unemployment is still at 9.1% in the U.S. As for employees themselves, here’s how the New York Times put it:

Employees have always received more than half the total national income, until now. In 2010, the percentage of national income devoted to wages and salaries fell to 49.9 percent, and it slipped a little more to 49.6 percent in the first quarter of this year. That continued decline may help explain the economic worries of many Americans who have jobs but still fear they are falling behind.

Whether another recession hits or we simply limp along at slow rates of economic growth, employers are going to have some hard choices to make. Below are four scenarios showing how this could play out at individual organizations over the next year or more:


Scenario One: Burnout City

In this scenario, a company that suffers through a double-dip recession makes an explicit or tacit strategic decision to focus solely on costs and revenues. As a consequence, it pushes existing employees harder and looks for other efficiencies while instituting stress-inducing events such as restructurings and layoffs. The result can be an extended period of employee burnout that, ironically, affects loyal and conscientious employees most. They are the ones who put forward 110% for years on end, but this extended work effort can ultimately place a strain on everything from team relationships to overall engagement. In this situation, trust in leadership is eroded and political infighting occurs. This creates morale problems that feed on themselves.

Scenario Two: The Performance Priority

In this scenario, an organization decides it can’t focus solely on revenues because it must maintain a positive corporate culture in very difficult circumstances. What this requires above all else is a prioritization of performance management and planning.  That is, the organization needs a clear picture of how well individuals and teams are performing. To achieve this, it creates or maintains a performance management system that is accurate and trusted by employees as well as managers. When performance data is in, the organization identifies areas where, if performance were boosted, it would have the maximum positive impact on revenues and culture. Once this is accomplished, leadership creates development, management and incentive plans that focus on these areas, but it does so in such a way as to create excitement about new opportunities for learning, career growth, and potential rewards.

Scenario Three: Soliciting Salespeople

In this scenario, there is no double-dip recession but the recovery continues to be slow as Europe continues to work through its debt problem and unemployment remains high in the U.S. The executive team of the single-minded organization knows it needs to boost revenues and that ROI is best served by hiring seasoned sales and member-services employees, the latter focusing on upselling.

This strategy can, in fact, help improve the financial status of the organization over the short-term but it can also create stress on other parts of the organization as product demand rises but the ability to meet that demand remains the same. This puts pressure on the organization to prioritize or increase efficiencies. Service organizations may be especially hard hit because it is not easy to generate the same economies of scale prevalent in manufacturing organizations. The result is added work stress on service- or product-delivery employees, which results in divisiveness among different functions. Combined with salary freezes and a lack of rewards for people who are working longer hours to meet demand, this can lead to a fractured corporate culture.

Scenario Four: Capacity Planning and New Hiring

In this scenario, there is also slow growth but the managerial approach is different. Rather than focusing only on sales-related hires, management engages in capacity planning in order to learn more about:

  1. current hours worked and productivity per exempt employee
  2. stresses and bottlenecks in the current organization
  3. the capacity for meeting customer needs in other areas if more sales personnel are added
  4. the expected ROI associated with each new hire

By studying capacity, the organization will be better able to make good hires without sacrificing quality or creating a resentful and divided culture.

Conclusion

Now is the time to consider these issues. The next few months will tell if we are in the grip of a double-dip recession or if we will continue our slow-growth trajectory. Companies should be prepared either way. I prefer the “mixed emphasis” scenarios because I think they will lead to more sustainable success over a period of years, but I expect there will be plenty of cases of “single-minded focus” occurring, especially if another recession hits.

2 Comments

Filed under change management, future, leadership, talent management, Trendwatching, Uncategorized, workforce planning