Emphasis Added

The Vanishing Point

Rob — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 11:28:00 GMT

"I suffer from attention surplus disorder, Fraa Orolo liked to say, as if it were funny."

This line really stood out to me when I heard author Neal Stephenson read from his new book, Anathem, last Monday. Stephenson, along with William Gibson, Bruce Sterling and others, is part of the generation of "cyberpunk" authors whose vision of a wired, accelerated culture both predicted and helped shape the Internet age. Lately, however, Stephenson has turned his attention to the long view.

Anathem, which I have not yet read, involves a cloistered community of monks that only interacts with the outside world every hundred years, and thus sees the progress of civilization in a kind of exaggerated, time-lapse view that makes the fickle nature of contemporary culture seem even more ridiculous. This work follows on the heels of Stephenson's titanic Baroque Trilogy, which examined the origins of the modern age, including the rise of empirical science and the birth of banking.

It was a propos of that last point that someone asked Stephenson his thoughts on the potential end of the global finance system, given that he had written so voluminously on its beginnings. This was Monday night, after the liquidation of Lehman Brothers, the fire-sale of Merill Lynch, and a 500-point drop in the Dow Jones average, so no one laughed at the question - or at Stephenson's answer.

"It's a symptom of our collective attention deficit disorder," he said. "I mean, what does it say when banks lend out money, but then can't be bothered to figure out if the borrower can pay it back?"

Stephenson, who says he writes his fiction in longhand to give his brain a chance to participate in the editing process, has apparently become a velocity skeptic. Events give weight to his words. The downside of the immediacy, connectivity, and perpetual access to practically everything afforded by the Internet is the loss of a certain strategic perspective that only comes from patience.

The banking crisis is an illuminating example. For most of their 350 year history, global financial institutions thrived by operating at a glacial pace, based on deliberation, precedent, centralized decision-making, and painstaking processes. To keep up with the accelerated requirements and escalating expectations of their customers, financial services firms began dealing in transactions that would never have met their historical standards of prudence and transparency. I guess bankers felt that exercising caution, under the circumstances, would have been too risky.

The result today resembles a pile-up of 18-wheelers that were drag-racing on a curved road. As food for thought from a future-of-technology perspective, all the benefits promised by pervasive connectivity and the Internet have arguably made the crisis worse. Knowledge-sharing, information access and collaboration facilitated the rapid spread of bad practices, not best practices. The network effect, rather than providing resiliency to fragile systems, exposed institutions at the edge of the crisis to the risky dealings of those at the center, as even more conservative investment firms such as Vanguard, PIMCO and Franklin Advisors may be left holding the bag for Lehman's bad debts. The lack of attention paid by bankers and regulators in the age of velocity and technology-induced ADD has injected dangerous uncertainty into the global economy.

So perhaps it is time to reassess the virtues of attention surplus disorder. After all, attention may be the only commodity available in surplus in the coming months.

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit

Generational Gap Again Apparent in Political Events This Week

Rob — Thu, 25 Sep 2008 23:39:00 GMT

The generation gap was once again on full display in John McCain's response to the economic bailout negotiations this week. McCain yesterday announced that he was "suspending" his campaign and potentially skipping Friday's Presidential Debate so he could give his full attention to the policy issues being hammered out on Capitol Hill. This is a very characteristic Silent Generation approach: drop everything to focus on a linear task, a linear process.

Obama's GenX and Millennial-friendly response? Why can't McCain engage in the negotiations and attend the debate? Shouldn't a President be able to multitask?

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit

Obama Takes Aim at the Technology Age Gap

Rob — Fri, 12 Sep 2008 22:44:00 GMT

A new TV spot for Barack Obama takes on John McCain on the issue of technology literacy. Seems like dangerous territory, given that a lot of older people vote, and many are self-conscious about being behind the times with their tech skills. Personally, I would have liked to see Obama declare his support for digital literacy and programs designed to close the various digital divides, including the age gap, then welcome John McCain to join in on the program, since it looks like he might need a refresher course.

View Video
Format: ???
Duration: --:--

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit

Generation Blend Amazon Review translated

Rob — Wed, 10 Sep 2008 20:50:00 GMT

Recently someone named H.J. van der Klis was kind enough to write a (generally positive) review of Generation Blend on Amazon.com. However, the review is in Dutch. For anyone who might be interested, here is what it says (translation by Willem Heesbeen):

Salkowitz geeft in het boek antwoorden op de vraag hoe technologie van invloed is op de verschillende nu levende generaties (leeftijdscohorten) en in hoeverre the best of breed van zowel de technologie als mensen te combineren zijn in aandachtsgebieden als werving, retentie, training, management, en dergelijke.

In his book, Salkowitz provides answers to the broader question; how is technology influencing the different currently living generations. Further more, he presents ways to find beneficial combinations of technology and people in areas such as recruiting, training, management, retention, etc.

De kloof tussen de extremen digibeet en NetGen is het resultaat van een conflict tussen mensen en technologie waar het gaat om verwachtingen, prioriteiten, begrip van werk en wereld. Hoe lastig kan het zijn een vertegenwoordiger van een generatie boven je te vertellen wat er nu zo zinvol is aan blogs, online sociale netwerken, enzo? En wat snap ik van tieners die huiswerk, Last.fm, MSN en online games pijnloos kunnen combineren?

The devide between veterans and newcomers [NetGen] is the result of a conflict between people and technology where expectations, priorities and views on work and life in general show hardly any similarities. How difficult can it be to explain to a member of an earlier generation what in the world makes blogging, social networking, etc. so important? Vise-versa, what is my grasp on teenagers who can effortlessly combine homework, online radio,games and MSN?

Wil je er in een zakelijke setting wat mee, roept Salkowitz je op serieus naar vijf vragen te kijken:

Bridging the gap in a professional setting, Salkowitz suggests thoroughly assessing the topic by answering 5 questions:

1. leg je helder de voordelen van technologie uit?
Are the benefits of technology clear and clearly communicated?

2. stel je technologie ten dienste van de bedrijfsvoering?
Is technology aligned to business operations?

3. is technologie toegankelijk voor verschillende stijlen van werken?
Is technology adaptable to different work styles and habits?

4. ondersteunt je bedrijfscultuur je strategische keuzes op het vlak van technologie?
Does your company culture support your technology strategies and choices?

5. bouw je bruggen of werp je muren op?
Are you building bridges or walls?

Toegespitst op kennismanagement is het succes van web 2.0 technologieën afhankelijk van het gemak dat oudere kennisdragers ervaren in zowel de technische als culturele context. Specifieke training en direct adresseren van zorgpunten die leven bij de betreffende generatiegenoten helpt dit te vergroten. Babyboomers en Generatie X-genoten kunnen het tempo en intensiteit van productiviteit, innovatie en reactiesnelheid vergroten. Ze hebben allerhande (technologische) mogelijkheden daarvoor. Hun dagelijkse handel en wandel, culturele aanpassingen kan generaties verbinden, mits ze hun waarden en prioriteiten inbrengen op de werkvloer en laten doorwerken in technologiekeuzes en strategie. Anders wordt technologie een centrifuge, die jongeren van ouderen scheidt. Overigens, zo stelt de schrijver, is deze scheiding een tijdelijk fenomeen. Immers, over een generatie kun je niet meer spreken van een groep vóór en na de sterke opkomst van automatisering. Ongetwijfeld zullen dan nieuwe technologische doorbraken ditto uitdagingen met zich meebrengen. Kennis en het willen leren helpt mensen verder. Oude ideeën worden vervangen door nieuwe en de praktijk past zich aan aan de gewijzigde inzichten. Op generationblend.com kun je met de schrijver verder interactie hebben over zijn en jouw standpunten over dit onderwerp.

Applied to knowledge management, the success of Web 2.0 technologies depends largely on the ease, older knowledge workers experience in both the technical and the cultural aspect within the organizational context. Specific training and directly addressing key concerns, felt and articulated within certain generational cohorts, help to facilitate successful adaptation.

Baby boomers and Generation Xers, can push the speed and intensity at work, increase productivity, innovation and competitive agility. To do this, they have a multitude of [technological] tools and traits.

In daily interactions and routines, cultural adaptation can bring together and bond generations – provided, their values and priorities are applied to choices made in strategy and technology. If disregarded, technology will remain [or become] a centrifuge – distancing veterans and newcomers. On a side note, according to the author, this divide is a temporary phenomenon. Keep in mind, in a generation or two, there will no longer be a group earmarked, ‘before’ or ‘after’ the rise of technology. Old ideas are replaced by new ones and processes as well as daily routines will accommodate the newly acquired insights.

On generationblend.com you can interact with the author, further discussing his and your point of view in these matters.

Indeed you can. Thank you Mr. Van Der Klis.

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit

The Post-Boomer Election: Sarah Palin and the GenX Right

Rob — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:48:00 GMT

The nomination of Sarah Palin to round out the GOP ticket is truly a remarkable development - not because she's a woman, or from Alaska, or whatever else you might think of her. The pick of Palin, age 44, means that neither major American political party is running a Baby Boomer for either President or Vice President this year (Obama, born in 1961, is borderline in terms of birth-year but solidly GenX in historical experience; Biden, age 66, is solidly Silent, as is the elderly Senator McCain).

Think about that. Boomers are a solid plurality of the voting age population, and have been the decisive influence in the American electorate since the late 1960s. For the past 16 years, they have dominated the executive and legislative branches. Their values have defined political discourse and political tactics in the modern age. And yet here, in what should be the prime years of their leadership arc, they will go unrepresented in the Presidency for the next four years, regardless of which party wins or whether the Vice President is called upon to ascend to the Oval Office.

Sarah Palin, the neophyte governor of Alaska, is an interesting case study in early GenX leadership. While the hoary 1990s-era media stereotype of GenX focused on the ironic, alt-rock hipster - a very urban perspective -the reality of the 53-million strong GenX cohort in America is actually far more diverse. For one thing, we tend to be considerably more conservative politically than either Boomers or Millennials. We came of age during the Reagan era, when liberalism was in deep eclipse and the failures of the Democratic era were in greater evidence than its successes. Self-identification of young people with the GOP peaked in the early 90s, when GenXers were in their 20s, and party ID has remained relatively stable as we approach middle age.

Many GenX conservatives style themselves more as libertarians than hard-line right wingers, befitting the streak of self-reliance and independence that characterizes GenX across the political spectrum. Palin, from the rugged northlands of Alaska, combines this with a strident fundamentalist religiosity that some GenXers have embraced as an antidote to the feel-good spiritualism of our Boomer elders. Her approach to governance tends toward the pragmatic and transactional, as far as we can tell from the limited record. She is happy to embrace slogans of reform and fiscal discipline, and just as happy to cut deals in the interests of her state and city when the opportunities present themselves. Her prime-time debut as a major political figure last night also indicates that she relishes the GenX style of blunt, often abrasive communication and biting sarcasm.

Palin's hardcore, unvarnished GenX traits pose an interesting contrast to the more polished Obama, who packages his basically pragmatic, let's-solve-the-problem approach in more Boomer-friendly idealistic rhetoric. He offers an antidote to the rigidly-ideological and authoritarian excesses of recent Boomer leadership without calling undue attention to his own X-ish attributes, and makes a virtue of the diversity and adversity of his upbringing, which in fact fits a fairly recognizable generational experience for many fellow Xers.

This contrast has some interesting implications. Obama characteristically finesses his differences with the Boomer majority, while Palin goes for the full-on, in-your-face GenX experience. However, I wonder if it has occurred to McCain and his handlers that Boomers (and Millennials for that matter) have never shown much affection for the GenX attitude and approach. Boomer women in particular have issues with their self-styled "post-feminist" GenX counterparts, whom I have heard many older women claim, take the sacrifices of their elders for granted and threaten hard-won progress by embracing self-limiting and oppressive ideology in exchange for social and economic advancement.

The impact of all this remains to be seen. Boomers may not have a place on the stage in this year's Presidential election, but they remain the key voting bloc. How they decide between the various Xers and Silents offered up for their consideration will determine which style of leadership will predominate in post-Boomer America, at least for the next few years.

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit

Is the Millennial Workstyle Recession-Proof?

Rob — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 21:31:00 GMT

As a close watcher of generational trends in the workplace, I noted with interest that Randstad came out with its latest World of Work 2008 report, detailing changes in workplace attitudes among different demographic groups. This is one of the first good data points that we have to test whether Millennials (b.1981-2000) are as fundamentally different from previous generations in the workplace as many people (including myself) believe, or whether their well-publicized expectations around work experience and technology are simply a byproduct of a relatively strong job market, and subject to change in the event of an economic downturn. Since we are now teetering on the brink of a recession, this is a good time to see if attitudes have changed.

According to the Randstat report, 57% of Millennials in the survey say now is a good time to look for a job that pays more, down from 60% last year and 65% in 2005. A whopping 73% of Millennials now think it is a good idea to take on extra work, up from 57% in 2007. Several measures of job satisfaction are up, indicating that Millennial expectations are starting to align more closely to workplace realities.

Randstad concludes that Millennials are starting to behave more like older workers as economic pressures start to squeeze “Generation Debt,” but that conclusion is not entirely supported by their data. For example, 45% of Millennials still see this as a good time to change careers, up from last year, and the number saying that now is a good time to look for more interesting and fulfilling work is at 58%, down only slightly from 60% in 2007. Across several metrics, Millennials are tops among all cohorts surveyed in their willingness to change jobs, and the most optimistic about the prospects for getting hired elsewhere if they move on.

Personally, I am not inclined to believe that anything but a severe and extended economic downturn will impact the structural sellers market for skills and young talent that employers will face over the next decade and a half. Here’s why:

· Recessions come and go; demographics are long term. Everyone single member of the job market of 2020 has already been born. There are no more to come. So projections about the long-term labor market are fixed from the supply side (give or take changes in workforce participation rates), whereas demand is uncertain. Organizations still have to think long-term about retention, loyalty, the costs of turnover, and development of management talent, which will become especially scarce given the relatively small number of GenXers moving up to replace Boomers in higher-level responsibilities. Bottom line: there will still be competition for talented Millennials, even in a slow labor market.

· The demand is for skills, not people. Businesses that derive their competitive advantage from knowledge creation can tighten their belts only so far, because their ability to execute and innovate depends on having the right people in the right roles. Savvy Millennials offer the job market skills, not just labor.

· Millennials have already factored in expectations of turmoil. Strategically-educated Millennials have prepared for this kind of job market from birth; indeed, many of the eldest were born in the midst of the last severe recession in the US in the early 1980s. Even if finding a well-paying job becomes relatively more difficult, they may still prioritize the better job experience, recognizing that this is more critical to their long-term career growth.

· Young labor is cheap labor. Recent studies have shown organizations are paying more and more to older and older workers, perhaps as a last-ditch knowledge retention effort to stave off a crippling wave of retirements. If I'm a bottom-line-focused company looking to trim short term expenses, the large salaries and benefits of senior workers present a more tempting target for cuts than relatively low-paid junior-level workers eager to be fast-tracked into higher levels of responsibility.

Debt-ridden and inexperienced Millennials may face a recession with some anxiety and feel pressure to compromise their expectations in the short-term. However, they have many more assets to withstand a down labor market relative to most others in the economy, including the ability to move back in with parents. It may not be long before economic conditions actually sharpen demand for the skills, attitudes and productivity that young workers bring to the workplace, even at the expense of more experienced workers. The minute that scenario materializes, Millennials will integrate it into their mindset. Will that make them less picky or less demanding? I doubt it.

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit

Brad Brooks Show

Rob — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 23:10:00 GMT

Sunday evening, 8-9pm Pacific, I'll be a guest on the Brad Brooks Show on CKNW 880, Vancouver, BC.This has been on my calendar for a while and I have to say I have really been looking forward to it.

In other news, I was just signed up as a blogger on the Internet Evolution site, one of the great destinations on the web for discussion of the social implications of new technology. First post should be appearing Tuesday.

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit

The Shape of Things to Come

Rob — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 15:31:00 GMT

Sorry for the recent low levels of blog activity. In addition to the usual summer doldrums, I've been wrapping up a bunch of projects and tooling up for a busy fall season of writing and speaking.

For the past couple of weeks, I have been focused on revising and extending the text of Listening to the Future: Insights from the New World of Work, a collection of white papers that I co-wrote with Dan Rasmus at Microsoft, previously issued as a special-order edition from Wiley. Now Wiley plans to issue a trade edition with about 50% new content, including a series of new papers on the "new world of business" that are only just going through final review and approval. The retail edition is scheduled to ship around November 1, which is right around the corner, publishing-wise, so Dan and I are scrambling to whip the manuscript into shape.

Here's a quick preview from my draft of the introduction (likely to undergo substantial alteration as Dan and I hash through it), which gives a flavor of the theme and direction of the rest of the book.

People Make the Future
Earlier stages of the information age saw the implementation of large-scale enterprise systems to gather system data and automate business processes. While these kinds of systems still deliver value, we believe that the majority of benefits have already been realized and further refinements of their capabilities will provide only marginal gains. The real action in enterprise computing is now happening at the micro level, in the routine tasks that information workers perform dozens of times per day, which have never been cost-effective to automate through the development of “big IT” solutions. Today, the most powerful dynamics driving the transformation of work and business are at the intersection of people and technology: the systems that connect people to information, processes and one another. These are areas where end-user demand, grass-roots adoption and the wide availability of consumer-grade applications of unproven quality and business value collide with the imperatives of business and IT to provide consistent, secure processes and high levels of measurable productivity. This is also where new work-related technologies and practices rub up against the established workstyles and values of workers and managers, or challenge the prevailing organizational culture.
The influence of social computing and mass collaboration is already making its way into enterprise from the consumer marketplace. This is having a turbulent effect on work practices and culture as work becomes more collaborative and transparent, and the expectations of sophisticated “digital natives” clash with more traditional approaches to work. Blogs, wikis, instant messaging, interactive multimedia, subscription-based content, remote and mobile computing, social networks, content filtering, mashups, and all the other accoutrements of the Web 2.0/Enterprise 2.0 toolset are redistributing power from centralized hierarchies to the network, changing the way decisions are made, and affecting every process in the workplace.
These types of technologies are fundamentally different from previous waves of ICT in that they depend intimately on human knowledge and human participation. Introducing a user-created content repository or a collaborative extranet for partners is not like re-tooling an assembly line. To get the most out of the next wave of ICT investments, organizations need to look much more closely at the relationship between people, process and information and make sure they have all the bases covered – not just the application capabilities or the infrastructure. Unless you surround the introduction of the technology with a whole variety of adaptations to the management structure and culture, the technology alone is unlikely to generate the expected benefits for the organization.
Because people are at the center of the next wave of technologies, the attitudes and values that people bring with them into the workforce from their outside lives, their national backgrounds, their generational experience, the consumer culture, and all the other complexities of the modern world have the potential to deeply affect their performance as workers and managers. The complexities of the new world of work and business therefore encompass all the complexities of the world at large. Our holistic approach to mapping out a set of futures and a set of questions for organizations may seem unusual, but we feel it is the only way to get a clear picture of the challenges ahead.

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit

61 is the New 20

Rob — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:07:00 GMT

...at least according to a bouncer at a bar in Olympia, Washington, who turned away Christine Gregoire, Washington's 61-year old governor, when she could not produce an ID showing she was of legal drinking age. That's some Boomer mojo right there!

Share this post: del.icio.us | digg | reddit