1. June 2016
Robots may replace us at menial tasks, but we are more likely to be moonlighting to advance our careers in the future.
The latest report from Adobe reveals that a majority (70%) of U.S. office workers report loving their jobs. In fact, they love work so much, they spend a lot of off hours thinking about it, and are likely to have a second job to help them improve the first.
This love fest stands in sharp contrast to several recent reports. According to Gallup’s most recent count, only 32.2% of respondents say they are engaged at work, while a recent study by the Marcus Buckingham Company, a management consultancy, found only 19% of U.S. employees reported being involved, enthusiastic, and committed.
Adobe’s findings, titled “Work in Progress,” were the result of surveying just over 1,000 U.S. office workers. The survey gauged their sentiments about the future of work. Read the rest of this entry »
5. May 2016
Source: The Wall Street Journal
Occupations with cognitive tasks that aren’t routine are adding the most jobs in decades.
The number of people in knowledge work jobs—that is, nonroutine cognitive occupations,has more than doubled in the last 30 years and there’s no sign of it slowing down.
In the past three decades, the number of jobs for knowledge workers has never been rising as quickly as it is right now.
As recently as the mid-1980s, you could categorize American workers into roughly three equal-sized groups of about 30 million people each. About 31 million people had nonroutine cognitive jobs, what is often called “knowledge work,” consisting of varied intellectual tasks such as professional, managerial or technical occupations. Just under 30 million people had jobs that consisted primarily of routine manual work—on assembly lines or in warehouses, doing physical tasks day after day. About 30 million people had jobs consisting of routine office work—bookkeepers, filing clerks, bank tellers and so on—work that doesn’t involve much physical activity but is highly routine and doesn’t necessarily require high levels of knowledge. A fourth, smaller group, did nonroutine manual tasks, such as many service occupations.
But over the past three decades, almost all job growth has come from the two categories of work that are nonroutine. Meanwhile, routine jobs have been under a lot of pressure, especially during periods of recession. Read the rest of this entry »
3. December 2015
3. Dezember 2015, 16:56, derstandard.at
Die Berufe Verkäuferin und Sekretärin sind laut Unternehmensberater A. T. Kearney Auslaufmodelle
Düsseldorf – Geht es nach einer Studie des Unternehmensberaters A. T. Kearney, sind 45 Prozent der heute von Menschen ausgeübten Jobs durch die Einführung von Maschinen bald überflüssig. “In zwanzig Jahren wird fast die Hälfte der heutigen Arbeitsplätze in Deutschland durch Roboter ersetzt werden, die die Jobs effizienter erledigen können”, ist Europachef Martin Sonnenschein überzeugt. Der Analyse zufolge weisen in der Bundesrepublik mehr als 300 und damit ein Viertel aller Jobprofile in den nächsten beiden Jahrzehnten ein hohes Automatisierungsrisiko auf. Der Effekt für den deutschen Arbeitsmarkt könnte drastisch sein, weil in diesen Bereichen 17,2 Millionen Männer und Frauen beschäftigt seien – das sind 45 Prozent aller Beschäftigten in unserem Nachbarland. Allerdings entfällt auch ein Beruf mit hoher Automatisierungswahrscheinlichkeit nicht zwangsläufig vollständig.
Die am meisten gefährdeten Berufe
Zu den zehn am meisten gefährdeten Berufen in Deutschland gehören demnach Büro- und Sekretariatstätigkeiten, Berufe in Verkauf und Gastronomie oder kaufmännischer und technischer Betriebswirtschaft ebenso wie Köche und Bankleute. In die Top Ten der nicht gefährdeten Berufe fallen vor allem Branchen, in denen Empathie oder emotionale Intelligenz gefordert sind – wie etwa in der Pflege, Erziehung und Sozialarbeit, aber auch bei Führungsaufgaben und in Forschung und Lehre. Als roboterresistent gelten auch viele Berufe in den MINT-Bereichen (Mathematik, Informatik, Natur- und Ingenieurwissenschaft und Technik). “Es macht keinen Sinn, solchen sich rasant wandelnden Jobprofilen nachzutrauern”, sagt der Studienverantwortliche Volker Lang. Auch bei der Einführung der Eisenbahn habe es geheißen, dass dies Kutscher und Droschkenfahrer überflüssig machen werde. Doch technologische Innovationen und Strukturwandel hätten bisher auch immer wieder neue Jobs und neuen Wohlstand mit sich gebracht. “Nach neuen Möglichkeiten suchen” Der Einzug von Robotern werde zwar große Teile der Arbeitswelt auf den Kopf stellen, betont Sonnenschein. Doch statt abzuwarten und sich von der Automatisierung überrollen zu lassen, sollte man sich mit “Mut zu Wandel und Veränderung darauf einlassen – und nach den neuen Möglichkeiten zu suchen, die sich daraus ergeben”. Die Unternehmensberatung hat im Rahmen ihrer Initiative “Deutschland 2064 – die Welt unserer Kinder” untersucht, welchen Einfluss Roboter und Automatisierung zukünftig auf unsere Arbeitswelt haben werden. Die Berechnungen, die A. T. Kearney nach eigenen Angaben in Anlehnung an die Forschungsarbeiten der Oxford-Professoren Carl Benedikt Frey und Michael Osborne für den deutschen Arbeitsmarkt durchgeführt hat, bestimmen, wie wahrscheinlich die Automatisierung in rund 1300 Berufen ist. (red, 3.12.2015) – derstandard.at/2000026900097/45-Prozent-der-heutigen-Jobs-durch-Roboter-bedroht
13. May 2015
Source: The New York Times
In retrospect, things look easy, even obvious.
Microsoft, Intel and Apple each rose to dominance as if their fates were inevitable.
Of course, it never looks so clear as it’s happening. Shelves full of books have been written about these three companies and the outsized personalities who built them — Bill Gates, Andy Grove and Steve Jobs. In a new book, David B. Yoffie, a professor at the Harvard Business School, and Michael A. Cusumano, a professor at Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Sloan School of Management, are adding to that literature by applying a strategic framework to the corporate handiwork of the three, and find common themes. They call these shared features “Strategy Rules,” which is also the title of the book.
Mr. Yoffie and Mr. Cusumano have been studying these companies for nearly three decades and have been collaborating off and on for decades.
Initially, Mr. Yoffie was a specialist in corporate strategy, while Mr. Cusumano was an expert in software development and managing product teams. “David was developing high-level strategy, and I was focused on, O.K., how do you get this stuff done,” Mr. Cusumano recalled. Read the rest of this entry »
20. July 2014
Source: The Wall Street Journal
The LinkedIn founder says you are no longer in charge of your résumé in an interconnected online world, but neither is your boss.
For a stretch of asphalt that has seen trillions of dollars of wealth creation, Sand Hill Road in Menlo Park, Calif., the Main Street of venture capital, is rather unassuming. A few bikers heading for the fog-covered hills, a Tesla passing a Prius, low-slung office buildings. One building houses Greylock Partners, where I sit in a conference room with entrepreneur Reid Hoffman, who has been in the middle of this wealth creation and now sees some of its destruction coming soon. “If companies haven’t embraced that they are operating in a networked age,” he says, “then they will probably be on their way to not surviving.”
The 47-year-old knows networks. Mr. Hoffman built his reputation by founding the business social-networking platform LinkedIn and serving as chief operating officer of the e-commerce site PayPal, both billion-dollar powerhouses. He was an early investor in YouTube, Yelp, Flickr, Zynga and, oh yes, Facebook.
He has a theory on what makes ventures work: understanding that information is no longer isolated but instantly connected to everything else. Call it the move from the information age to the network age. Mr. Hoffman thinks that the transformation is just getting started and will take out anyone who stands in the way. Read the rest of this entry »
17. January 2014
Source: The Economist
Subject: Technology and jobs: Coming to an office near you
The effect of today’s technology on tomorrow’s jobs will be immense—and no country is ready for it
INNOVATION, the elixir of progress, has always cost people their jobs. In the Industrial Revolution artisan weavers were swept aside by the mechanical loom. Over the past 30 years the digital revolution has displaced many of the mid-skill jobs that underpinned 20th-century middle-class life. Typists, ticket agents, bank tellers and many production-line jobs have been dispensed with, just as the weavers were.
For those, including this newspaper, who believe that technological progress has made the world a better place, such churn is a natural part of rising prosperity. Although innovation kills some jobs, it creates new and better ones, as a more productive society becomes richer and its wealthier inhabitants demand more goods and services. A hundred years ago one in three American workers was employed on a farm. Today less than 2% of them produce far more food. The millions freed from the land were not consigned to joblessness, but found better-paid work as the economy grew more sophisticated. Today the pool of secretaries has shrunk, but there are ever more computer programmers and web designers.
Optimism remains the right starting-point, but for workers the dislocating effects of technology may make themselves evident faster than its benefits. Even if new jobs and wonderful products emerge, in the short term income gaps will widen, causing huge social dislocation and perhaps even changing politics. Technology’s impact will feel like a tornado, hitting the rich world first, but eventually sweeping through poorer countries too. No government is prepared for it. Read the rest of this entry »
26. January 2012
During Tuesday evening’s State of the Union address, President Obama honored the memory of Steve Jobs by underscoring the creative and technological engines that drive America. He also called attention to one of the necessary evils of progress: risk. “We should support … every risk-taker and entrepreneur who aspires to become the next Steve Jobs,” said the president. “After all, innovation is what America has always been about.”
By embracing risks, Steve Jobs inspired his employees, his competition, and most of all his customers, who developed a cultish attachment to his products. So it was appropriate that even as Congress was applauding Jobs’ impact on the business world, the man who arguably knew the Apple founder best – his biographer, Walter Isaacson – was at the 92nd Street Y on Manhattan’s Upper East Side telling a standing-room-only audience of 600 of insights gained during the two years he spent interviewing Jobs.
In this case, the questions were being asked by TIME managing editor Richard Stengel. Isaacson preceded Stengel as head of TIME – and had been Stengel’s boss – so the conversation included moments of nostalgia as well as some frank discussion about managerial styles. As a boss, of course, Jobs was famously prone to extreme bluntness, which was often construed as intentional meanness. Isaacson saw it a little differently. “He intuitively did not have that filter,” he explained, pointing to an example he witnessed first hand. “When the person at Whole Foods is making his smoothie and she’s taking too long, [most people] have a filter that says, ‘Don’t jump on her.’ But Steve was brutally honest.” Read the rest of this entry »
12. October 2011
Source: Technology Review By Jason Pontin
Subject: ‘I Loved What I Did’
What we can learn from the legacy and life of Steve Jobs.
Visionary: Apple chief executive Steve Jobs is silhouetted in the Apple logo at the Moscone Center in San Francisco in June 2004.
It’s tolerably well known that newspapers and magazines bank the obituaries of the ailing famous. When Steve Jobs died last Wednesday, the encomia appeared with unsurprising haste. But I had nothing prepared. Ever since Jobs announced in 2004 that he had had surgery to remove a cancerous tumor from his pancreas, editors had urged me to get something down. (Only last week, an editor at Technology Review proposed that I might review Jobs’s life as if it were a book or a tablet computer.) But I always demurred. It seemed ghoulish. Besides, I wanted Steve to live forever, because I loved him.
I had grown to love him even though our relationship (such as it was) had always been chilly. On at least two occasions, I know I pissed him off. Read the rest of this entry »
30. August 2011
Source: The Guardian
Steve Jobs rescued Apple from near oblivion and turned it into a byword for quality, production values and beauty
Steve Jobs in his Los Angeles office in 1981, five years after he co-founded Apple. Photograph: Tony Korody/Corbis
Steve Jobs’s resignation was the most discussed in corporate history. Because his illness has been public knowledge for so long, and because Wall Street and the commentariat viewed his health as being synonymous with that of his company, for years Apple share prices have fluctuated with its CEO’s temperature. If all the “Whither Apple without Jobs?” articles were laid end to end, they would cover quite a distance – but they never reached a conclusion.
Still, you could understand the hysteria. After all, he’s the man who rescued Apple from the near-death experience it underwent in the mid-1990s. When he came back in 1996, the company seemed headed for oblivion. Granted, it was a distinctive, quirky outfit, but one that had been run into the ground by mediocre executives who had no vision, no strategy – and no operating system to power its products into the future. Read the rest of this entry »