The Future of Work: It’s a Saucerful of Secrets

The future of work is a mystery, not a puzzle. Not only don’t we have enough information about the future of work, but we may not even have the tools to help us frame the problem correctly.

There is a lot of prophesying about the ‘future of work’. The speculation ranges from doomsayers foretelling massive reductions in employment (40 percent or 5 million jobs in Australia will disappear over the next 10 to 15 years) to future-proofing solutions (all children will need ‘digital literacy’).

The future of work provides insight into a class of problems that we often struggle to resolve as individuals, managers, and leaders. Gregory Treverton identifies the problem as the difference between a puzzle and a mystery.

“Puzzles can be solved, they have answers. But a mystery offers no such comfort”.

The future of work is a mystery, not a puzzle. Not only don’t we have enough information about the future of work, but we may not even have the tools to help us frame the problem correctly. We are uncertain.

So, we build models to frame and filter our observations, acquire data, and forecast. We shift from the best of our knowledge to the world of probabilities and possibilities.

In doing so, we seek the answers to two central questions about the future of work: the first is a question of timing, ‘When will it happen?’; and the second, is a question of effect, ‘what will be the consequences?’. Together, answers to these questions inform our response.

But our forecasts are either too vague…

Regrettably, our models are always incomplete. They provide us with information that is either too vague or too specific. We can only make good decisions when our forecasts are clear regarding timing, intent, or the cost of acting (or not acting). We can’t make good decisions based on generalities. Those looking to ‘future-proof’ the workforce against the anticipated shocks and stresses of technology often rest on too general forecasts.

Skilling provides us with a good example. The public and private sectors are investing in developing competencies in digital skills. The argument is that the workforce will be better prepared to transition into a machine-rich workplace with a stronger foundation in digital skills. Similarly, there are calls for middle managers to focus on ‘soft skills’ or ‘emotional intelligence’ as future-proofing management to better lead the organisation through change. In most cases, the evidence for this investment is weak. The skills sought are general in character and are core to today’s working environment as much as they are for tomorrow. How accurately can we forecast the skills requirement of the future when we only have the merest grip on the capabilities of emerging technology?

The counterargument is that humans are, and have always been, consummate tool users. Indeed, tool use is central to the history of human evolution and culture. As we have developed tools, we also developed new norms, practices, and ways of behaving. A solid argument exists to give the workforce the space to adapt and evolve the skills they need rather than driving a top-down (most likely wrong) investment in workforce capability development.

It is not in our paternalist management mindset to allow that evolution. We need the illusion of control and the fulfilment that accompanies the action.

or our forecasts are too specific…

Alternatively, our forecasts can be too specific.

We seek precision and certainty by employing ‘algorithms’ and ‘big data’. Numbers (particularly lots) give us a sense of certainty rooted in science and method. Specific forecasts feed our inner management rationalists. We feel in control. We have the definitive evidence we need to act. Unfortunately, our models, forecasts, algorithms, and data are always incomplete. Organisations and the workforce have too many variables, too much feedback, and too much noise. For our wonderful models to work, we need to leave stuff out.

Organisations are containers for a workforce for a complex web of social interactions. Worse still, the container is not fixed. The contents can and do change the shape of the container. These are not variables that easily lend themselves to being tallied up and moved about. And then, to complicate matters, the workforce can resist change, it can alter the path of change, and can belligerently fight back.

The specificity of our forecasts tries to gloss over our knowledge gaps. For example, forecasts that ‘x percent of jobs will disappear’ from the labour market or ‘x% of occupations will be redundant in x years’ indicate that we must act now to avert inevitable disaster. This is speculation rather than a forecast.

Not having enough information is normal…

We don’t know enough about how the circumstances of people, work, and organisations change to make accurate enough forecasts to inform our decisions. And we need to remind ourselves that not having that information is normal.

The future of work is a saucer that will always be full of secrets. Change and risk will only be revealed to us through partial truths. The job of leaders is to work with these partial truths to position the organisation and its people to capitalise on opportunities as they arise. This requires attentiveness to a much shorter time horizon and close contact with the boundaries where people, work, organisation, and technology are meeting. Most of all, it requires persistent attention to how that great shock absorber of change—the workforce—is adapting and evolving. The principles that will shape the future of work are not ‘out there’. The shape of the change, the adaptation, and the evolution are already happening for those paying attention.

We have been conditioned to deliver shrink-wrapped solutions…

We have been conditioned to deliver solutions readily packaged for consumption with warning labels about the limitations of our knowledge hidden in the fine print.

Sometimes, what is outside our modelling and forecasting is the most relevant information we need to decide. But it is hard to see past the weight of data. A number delivered with the force and precision of an algorithm (and associated charts) has a weighty presence in the room. It is intellectually and socially challenging to see past it.

We crave the allure of a single measure that so neatly simplifies the issues, reduces the risk, and removes the burden of deciding. A measure that takes away the pressure to think and allows us to focus on acting. The number, the measure, and the algorithm will put us back in control.

It’s an illusion.

When we take this path, we imbue our forecasts about the future of work with the sense that they are nearly perfect. They are not. In most cases, they are mostly wrong.

So, should we just give up?

We shouldn’t just give up on models and forecasts; we must approach them knowingly and with our eyes wide open. Our models and forecasts about the future of work can be informative; they are a stimulus to thinking and help us see the shadowy outlines of change.

If we accept that we don’t know what path the risk will take because we don’t have enough information, we are well-placed to use our models and forecasts best. Our position is even stronger if we accept that we will never have enough information.

The human parts of our organisations are notoriously difficult to move quickly. There is real weight in the history, structure, process, and capability that shape performance. We shape them over time; it is more difficult to batter them into new forms.

The biggest challenge for all leaders will be to stay alert to the signals of long-term change while reducing the noise surrounding the future of work. While we wait, we must resist adding more complexity to our forecasts. More complexity rarely changes our understanding of the problem.

Eleven thoughts on how to proceed…

1.      Leaders need to develop a feeling for organisational and workforce risk. My experience is that leaders don’t have a strong feel for these types of risks. The future of work is a ‘social risk’. There is a need to feel what is making the organisation/workforce more fragile and what is supporting your intention. It is always interdependent and messy. Leaders have been trained to navigate technical risk but often have little sense of social risk.

2.      Make sure the complex is made simple but not simplistic. The future of work is a challenge, but there is a need to stay focused on the core issues and ignore those who might be exhibiting ‘Henny Penny’ (‘Chicken Little’ for those in the US) characteristics. This is about shaping organisations and workforces to meet new demands and capitalise on new opportunities over time. This is a continuous process.

3.      Don’t put undue pressure on workforce models, modelling, and data to deliver THE answer. People data is among the most varied available. It takes skill and experience to interpret and is rarely expressed as a single actionable number.

4.      Look beyond what it says on the side of the ‘future of work’ packet. Take the time to understand the limitations of forecasting and question the assumptions on which the conclusions are based.

5.      Look to the shadows of forecasts. When something not in the forecast shows up in real life, it is important. Pay close attention to that. And all the important stuff is happening at the boundaries. Work out where the boundaries where people, work, organisation and technology are meeting, and watch those closely.

6.      Accept that insight can come from a smaller scale. Not everything that is relevant or important is BIG. We have become conditioned to the idea that ‘big data’ gives us certainty. This is utter, as the British would say, bollocks. Understanding scale is critical to making sense of challenges (and opportunities) the future of work will bring. Important changes will happen at small scales. Small numbers can be important.

7.      Know in your heart-of-hearts you are going to decide anyway. All leadership decisions are based on incomplete information and involve risk. Accept that and move on. Not having enough information is normal.

8.      Learn to distinguish ignorance from inactivity. This is a life lesson. It is alright not to know something if you continuously seek to learn and understand. It is another thing to be a martyr to caution (to quote Pink Floyd).

9.      Models and forecasts are useful, but only if they are continually updated as new information becomes available. The future of work is a complicated multi-dimensional problem, so stay up to date on the path it is taking.

10.   You are a leader, but you are not in control. The future of work is like a volcanic eruption with all the devastation that might follow such an event. You are not in control; you are responding as best you can. Your judgment and resilience will be tested.

11.   Stay close to the problem and focus on the risk. Identify your real concerns about the future of work that keep you awake at night. They will be specific to you, your people, your organisation, and your industry. Stay focused on those. As a leader and manager, your job is to maintain the illusion of continuity while stewarding others along the path of change.

Sources

Gregory F. Treverton, Risks and Riddles: The Soviet Union was a puzzle. Al Qaeda is a mystery. Why we need to know the difference, June 2007, https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/risks-and-riddles-154744750/.