economy | Paul Wallbank - Communications Professional

Digital vagrancy

The term digital vagrant might be appropriate for the businesses and people left behind in a connected world.

One of the joys of writing on and analysing trends IT industry trends is the never ending source of buzzwords and phrases that vendors invent.

Today is a good day with a release from security software vendor AVG coining the term ‘Digital Vagrant’.

Underlying the idea of digital vagrancy is an abandoned underclass who, overwhelmed by technology, are ignored and neglected in a connected society. As the AVG media release describes;

Users who are left behind to wander around in an online world that largely ignores them are nothing more than the digital equivalent of vagrants – people who are left to cope in a world that has become too overwhelming.

‘Digital Vagrant’ joins other wonderful ‘digital’ labels; digital immigrant, digital native and digital sharecropper come to mind.

It’s tempting to think that digital vagrancy is what eventually happens to poor exploited digital sharecroppers – those who’ve donated their free labour to help the likes of Mia Freedman, Chris Anderson and Ariana Huffington to build their media empires.

Should that be the case, there’s going to be many digital vagrants.

On more serious note, AVG does have a point in that both individuals and businesses that scorn technology risk being left behind in society that’s becoming increasingly connected.

Society and business are going through a change similar to that of a century ago where the motor car, trucks and tractors radically changed industries and the economy.

Those farmers and businesspeople who stuck with horse drawn equipment slowly became irrelevant and went broke.

A similar process is happening now as a new wave of technology is changing business and society.

The question for all of us is do we want to be left behind in a connected society?

Beggar image courtesy of apujol through sxc.hu

Peak employment and the political challenge

The current angst about employment in an age of automation is a political, not technological, problem

This week’s edition of The Economist asks about the Future of Employment and where the jobs are in a society where work is increasingly done by machines.

For the Economist the conclusion is that the future of employment is ‘complex’ and observes economists and politicians haven’t given enough thought to the effects of the changing workplace and the dislocation of many workers.

Much of the Economist’s story is based around the ideas of professors at MIT Erik Brynjolfsson and Andrew McAfee in their upcoming book “The Second Machine Age”.

The race with the machines

Professor Brynjolfsson gives his view at TED 2013 in the key to growth? Race with the machines, a presentation countered by Robert Gordon in the ‘death of innovation, the end of growth’ and followed by an excellent debate between the two.

Brynjolfsson cites the dilemma of bookkeepers being displaced by software applications such as Intuit Turbotax as an example of where service sector staff are being displaced.

“How can a skilled worker compete with a $39 piece of software?” Brynjolfsson asks.

“She can’t. Today millions of Americans do have cheaper, faster, more accurate tax preparations and the founders of Intuit have done very well for themselves. But 17% of tax preparers no longer have jobs.

“That is a microcosm of what’s happening not just in software and services, but in media and music, in finance, manufacturing, in retailing and trade. In short, in every industry.”

The great decoupling

Brynjolfsson’s key point is that workers’ wages have been decoupled from productivity and that the workforce isn’t sharing the rewards of improved practices and increased wealth.

That is certainly true over the last forty years, however that may not be a technological effect, but the business consequences of liberalising the financial sector which has seen massive pay increases to the banking industry and managerial classes that has been way out of kilter with the rest of the workforce.

It may well be the current golden era of high executive salaries is a transition effect of an evolving economy, albeit one where our grandchildren will puzzle over an era where a failed executive can receive a $100 million payout on being fired.

As The Economist points out technological change itself tends to create new jobs that make up for those displaced in old industries, this is a view supported by GE’s Chief Economist Marco Annunziata.

The main problem that Brynjolfsson identifies is the medium term issue of dislocated workers finding themselves out of work with superseded skills and, as The Economist point out, it’s clear the developed world’s political leaders haven’t though through the consequences of that transition.

In almost every sense, the current crisis of confidence about employment prospects is more a political and social problem rather than technological.

Helping displaced workers is going to be the greatest challenge for today’s generation of business and political leaders, the real question is are they up to that task?

Who pays for the internet of things?

Our assumptions about where the money will be made from the internet of things may turn out not be so.

“If there’s one number I’d like you to remember, it’s 19 trillion.” Cisco CEO John Chambers told the 2014 International CES during his keynote speech earlier this week.

Chambers was referring to the economic value of the Internet of Things or machine to machine technologies as they get rolled out across society, but who pays for the connectivity?

In the case of the smart home, office, factory or farm the data costs go onto the existing internet bill, but once you get out of the office or on the road then the bills start mounting up as systems start connecting to a cellular or satellite network.

Certainly the telcos see the opportunity with Ovum Research predicting telco’s M2M revenues will grow to reach US$44.8bn over the next five years.

While for logistics companies and similar businesses this will be just another cost of doing business, for many consumers being stuck with an expensive mobile data plan with their smart car might not be attractive.

As car manufacturers start to push their vehicles as being more like smartphones, suddenly the choice of network provider, compatibility with apps and operating systems starts to become a valid concern.

In that world, choosing a car on the basis of which telco it connects to is a sensible idea.

Of course it may be that consumers may not own cars by the end of the decade. The vision of companies like Zip Car and Uber is that we just call for a towncar or pick up a share car when we need one.

Certainly that vision makes sense from an economic perspective and the trends right now show that millennials are nowhere near as interested in cars as their parents and grandparents were.

As with every technological change, it’s not always obvious in the early days how things will pan out. In 1977 the founder of Digital Equipment Corporation Ken Olsen said, “there is no reason anyone would want a computer in their home.” Within 15 years he was proved very wrong.

The motor car drove western society during the Twentieth Century and to assume we’ll continue to use it the same way in the 21st is as flawed as believing a hundred years ago that we’d continue to use horse carriages the same way as previously.

So the assumptions about where money is to be made with the Internet of Things may turn out to surprise us all.

Chinese earthmovers move up the value chain

The Chinese construction equipment industry shows how the nation is moving up the value chain

After yesterday’s post on the motor industry’s relevance in the 21st Century, a related article about Chinese construction equipment appeared in The Economist.

According to CLSA – formerly Credit Lyonnais Securities Asia and itself now fully owned by Chinese investment house CITIC – the quality of Chinese construction plant is rapidly approaching that of the Japanese and US industry leaders.

The Chinese have achieved this in a short period through a combination of joint ventures and strategic takeovers and that should worry its more established competitors.

How the Chinese have moved up the value chain in construction plant is a small, but important example, of how the country is positioning itself as a higher level producer as its economy and workforce matures.

For trading partners and competitors it’s worthwhile thinking how a more affluent and higher tech China is going to affect their businesses, thinking of China as just a cheap source of low quality labour isn’t going to cut it for much longer.

Reflections on our good fortune

The UN Millennium goals are still some way off being achieved and it’s something we should all think about.

In his Christmas message, investment analyst John Mauldin quotes GaveKal’s Louis Gave on the good news in the global economy, that the UN has achieved some of its Millennium goals of alleviating global poverty.

The UN has eight goals that were set out at the beginning of the century and in a progress report issued in September, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon laid out the program’s successes.

Of the eight goals, Ban Ki-moon cites reducing poverty, increasing access to safe water, improving the lives of slum dwellers and achieving gender parity in primary schools as being successes under the plan, although there’s much room for improvement.

“The picture is mixed,” Mr. Ban said. “We can do better. The best way to prepare for the post-2015 era is to demonstrate that when the international community commits to a global partnership for development, it means it and directs its resources to where they are most needed.”

A sad statistic is that aid to the 40 poorest countries fell by 7.9% in 2012 and the Doha round of global trade talks, where the hope is trade liberalisation will help the most disadvantaged economies, remains stalled.

From a technologist’s point of view the adoption of the internet and IT is of interest with the report claiming the number of internet users in the developing world grew 12% while broadband penetration increased by a quarter.

While those numbers are encouraging, it’s hard though not to think that in the poorest countries access to more fundamental agricultural technologies and infrastructure – such as reliable electricity, water and roads – is more critical to development than the internet and ICT.

At Christmas, it’s worthwhile those of us in the affluent developed world consider how fortunate we’ve been to be born in a place and time that makes us the best fed and most comfortable humans that have ever lived.

That good fortune isn’t shared by everyone on our planet and that’s something we should be considering when we look at the consequences of our personal economic, political and technology choices.

When entrepreneurship gets old

As the baby boomers retire, the cruel reality of demographics is forcing them back into business

As part of their series on America’s aging population, Bloomberg looks at the story of 61 year old Lee Manchester who lives in a friend’s basement.

While the Bloomberg story focuses on the contrast between Lee and her father who benefitted from the post World War II economic boom, the real story is Lee’s work history.

Key to her work history is her setting up a business in 1986, that business failed in the late 1980s recession and Lee ponders what might have been had she not made that investment.

Lee sometimes can’t help dreaming about the trips she’d be planning if she’d invested the $150,000 she spent to start a construction company.

This is the downside setting up your own business that those currently peddling the cult of the entrepreneur don’t mention. If the business fails, and many do, then the costs can be high in lost savings and damaged career opportunities. Being an entrepreneur is high risk, hard work.

We may well find though that more people find themselves launching businesses in their older years as the economic realities of the post baby boom era start to be felt by communities.

In many respects though Lee is ahead of the curve, the generation behind her have no expectations of a long and affluent retirement, “the government will abolish the pension about two years before I retire” is the common theme among Gen Xer and Ys.

For GenYs and Xers this attitude is realistic, the demographic sums that worked for Lee’s father are now working against them while the post war economic system that guaranteed Lew Manchester a safe job and company pension ceased to exist in the 1980s.

Had boomers like Lee been thriftier, they would have still been hurt by a shift to 401(k) accounts from pensions in the 1980s. Thirty-seven percent of the elderly in the U.S. collect pensions, which provide some guaranteed income until they die. Fewer than 10 percent of boomers collect pensions, and that number is quickly shrinking.

Lew’s generation were the lucky ones, while the boomers – particularly the early boomers born between 1945 and 55 – believe they are entitled to similar benefits as their parents, their reality is going to be a much harder and precarious existence into old age.

While Lee is paying the price for interrupting her career with a stab at running her own business, in many ways she’s better prepared for a future that is going to require people of all ages to be more entrepreneurial.

In fact, many of those baby boomers forced to become entrepreneurs may well enjoy it, “launching the business was the most fun I ever had and my way to fight a frightening medical diagnosis” says Lee.

As the reality of their financial situation dawns upon them, many of Lee’s contemporaries are going to find themselves launching businesses long after the age they thought they were going to settle into a sedate retirement – lets hope they have fun too.

Cities of Industry

Governments are beginning to recognise manufacturing is part of any advanced economy, some though are struggling to abandon the last thirty years of ideology.

The latest Decoding The New Economy interview feature Laurel Barsotti, Director of Business Development at the City of San Francisco discussing how the city refound it’s entrepreneurial mojo.

A notable point about Laurel’s interview is how she has similar views to Barcelona’s Deputy Mayor Antoni Vives about the importance of industry to San Francisco.

For some time it was an article of faith in the Anglo-Saxon world that the west had become post-industrial economy where manufacturing was something dispatched to the third world and rich white folk could live well selling each other real estate and managing their neighbours’ investment funds.

“Opening doors for each other” was how a US diplomat described this 1980s vision according to former BBC political correspondent John Cole.

It’s clear now that vision was flawed and now leaders are having to think about where manufacturing, and other industries, sit in their economic plans.

Barcelona’s and San Francisco’s governments have understood this, but others are struggling to realise this is even a problem as they hang on to dreams of running their economies on tourism, finance and flogging their decidedly ordinary college courses to foreign students.

For some political and business leaders this is a challenge to their fundamental economic beliefs. It’s going to be interesting to see how they fare in the next twenty years.

It’s only technology

We’re doing ourselves a disservice when dismissing new technology stories

“We treated Bitcoin as a tech story but now it’s become a much more serious economic story,” said a radio show compere earlier today when discussing the digital currency.

One of the great frustrations of any technologist is the pigeon holing of tech stories – the real news is somewhere else while tech and science stories are treated as oddities, usually falling into a ‘mad professor’, ‘the internet ate my granny’ or ‘look at this cool gadget’ type pieces.

Defining the world we live in

In reality, technology defines the world in which we live. It’s tech that means you have running water in the morning, food in the supermarket and the electricity or gas to cook it with.

Many of us work in jobs that were unknown a hundred years ago and even in long established roles like farming technology has changed the workplace unrecognisably.

Even if you’re a blacksmith, coach carriage driver or papyrus paper maker untouched by the last century’s developments, all of those roles came about because of earlier advances in technology.

The modern hubris

Right now we seem to be falling for the hubris that we are exceptional – the first generation ever to have our lives changed by technology.

If technological change is the measure of a great generation then that title belongs to our great grandparents.

Those born at the beginning of last century in what we now call the developed world saw the rollout of mains electricity, telephones, the motor car, penicillin and the end of childhood mortality.

For those born in the 1890s who survived childhood, then two world wars, the Spanish Flu outbreak and the Great Depression, many lived to see a man walk on the moon. Something beyond imagination at the time of their birth.

It’s something we need to keep in perspective when we talk about today’s technological advances.

Which brings us back to ‘it’s only a tech story’ – it may well be that technology and science are discounted today because we now take the complex systems that underpin our comfortable first world lifestyles for granted.

In which case we should be paying more attention to those tech stories, as they are showing where future prosperity will come from.

Raising a citizens’ army

Will communities have to volunteer their own labour to make up for service cuts by cash strapped governments?

In the English Midlands the leader of Birmingham City Council, the wonderfully named Sir Albert Bore, recently suggested a ‘citizens army’ be raised to provide services such as libraries that are being affected by budget cuts.

Bore’s suggestion is a response to his council cutting library services in the face of community anger and legislative obligations, to assuage both pressures it’s hoped local volunteers can continue to run and maintain the threatened facilities.

The bind Albert Bore and the Birmingham City Council find themselves in is a quandary all communities and governments are facing as an aging population causes tax revenues to decline at the very time the demand for government services increases.

Faced with cuts, many groups are going to have to take matters into their own hands to keep services running. Some communities will do this well while others won’t.

It’s also going to be interesting to see how this plays over generations with baby boomers being far more likely to volunteer than their GenX or GenY kids, something probably caused by more precarious job security in the modern job market and the need for younger couples to work harder and longer than their parents to pay their rent or mortgage.

Angry baby boomers demanding the ‘government ought to do something’ may well find the onus is thrown back onto them to provide the services they believe they’re entitled to.

What is the most fascinating part of this predictable situation is how governments around the developed world have blissfully pretended that this wasn’t going to happen as their populations aged.

Perhaps the biggest citizens’ army of all will be the voters asking why the Western world’s governments and political parties ignored obvious and inevitable demographic trends for the last fifty years. That would be a question worth answering.

Walking Spaghetti Junction’s canals

What does an English motorway junction tell us about evolving trade routes and communication networks?

One of the most maligned places in Britain is Spaghetti Junction, an interchange on the M6 Motorway just north of Birmingham’s city centre in the centre of the nation.

Despite its poor reputation, Spaghetti Junction though has a story to tell — a tale of how physical trade routes change slowly with the motorway being the latest of five major junctions in the area.

Courtesy of Wikipedia — Courtesy of UK Highways Agency and Wikipedia

Immediately below the motorway are the major roads, connecting these and Birmingham were the reason for building Spaghetti Junction in the late 1960s.

Below those are the canals and it’s notable that just as Birmingham lies at the centre of Britain’s motorway network, it also formed the core of the industrial revolution’s canal network and much of the railway system.

Wikipedia describes how critical Spaghetti junction is for the nation’s infrastructure.

Underneath the motorway junction are the meeting points of local roads, the river Tame‘s confluences with the River Rea and Hockley Brook, electricity lines, gas pipelines, the Cross-City and Walsall railway lines and Salford Junction, where the Grand Union Canal, Birmingham and Fazeley Canal and Tame Valley Canal meet.

Despite it’s importance the area is dingy and it’s not a good idea to hang around too long, particularly when you have an expensive camera, but it’s worthwhile to linger for a few minutes to appreciate how important these links were to the industrial revolution.

Following the canals away from Spaghetti Junction gives a feeling of the post-industrial nature of Birmingham’s economy something that the city, like most of Britain, is still struggling with.

Eventually the canal ends in the city’s convention centre district where a tourist can get a safer, and better, appreciation of Britain’s canal system at the Gas Street Canal Basin.

While the basin is a bit twee and touristy it does also give a friendly overview of the canal network that replicates closely the railway system that replaced it and today’s roads.

How these trade routes evolve in the digital economy will be interesting, the recent PayPal survey on the new electronic spice routes illustrates how economies are changing.

Whether our descendents will wander the abandoned motorways and freeways in two hundred years and wonder at our industrial might is something we might want to ponder. Whether what replaces them is another layer of infrastructure is another question.

Are industrial hubs a thing of the past?

Do services like Alibaba and oDesk mean industrial hubs are things of the past?

Since the beginning of civilisation, industry hubs have formed the basis of cities and regions, but is the internet removing the need for like minded businesses to group together?

Tomorrow I’m at a breakfast featuring Porter Erisman whose film Crocodile in the Yangtze tells of the rise of China’s Alibaba and the adventures of its founder, Jack Ma.

Jack Ma’s Alibaba is the eBay of manufacturing, connecting factories and buyers around the world. A visitor to the site can buy anything from childrens’ clothing to tractor gaskets, all cheaper by the container load.

The rise of Alibaba tracks the development of sites like oDesk which bring skilled workers together. It’s becoming easier for businesses of all sizes to tap global workforces and supply chains.

In the past, industrial hubs and cities have developed due to the proximity of workers, suppliers and materials. Today, it may well that with all the resources being a mouse click and a credit card away from an entrepreneur it’s no longer necessary for these hubs to develop.

Whether industrial hubs do develop in the future will depends on individual sector’s needs for natural resources, face to face contact and short supply chains, but it’s worthwhile thinking whether location remains important for modern economic development.

A difference in expectations

While the focus is on the work ethic, expectations and careers of GenY workers, could it be the group set up for the most disappointment are the baby boomers as they reach their retirement years?

Could it be the age group set up for the most disappointment in today’s economy are the baby boomers rather than GenYs?

The Wait But Why? blog has a provocative post on why Generation Y Yuppies are unhappy. It hasn’t gone down well with some prominent Gen Y writers.

Part of the reason the article offended Gen Ys like Adam Weinstein is its focus on the younger generation having an entitlement mentality and feeling ‘special’.

Were I a GenY I’d be pretty irritated at those views, particularly – as Weinstein points out – when younger folk are saddled with much greater debts and far less work security than baby boomers. Interestingly, Weinstein’s rebuttal makes almost the same points the Wait But Why blog from the opposite perspective.

A mismatch of expectations

Despite some of the provocative statements, the Wait But Why post makes a very good point about the expectations of different generations and the mismatch between what different age groups expect and the reality they encounter.

The economic boomers – the group born from 1935 to 1955 – had the good fortune to spend most of their working lives during the post World War II period that saw the Western world experience the greatest economic boom mankind has seen.

During their working lives, all but the lowest paid economic boomers became healthier, better fed and had more access to creature comforts than even royalty had a generation earlier. The average Westerner today is rich beyond the belief of our great grandparents a hundred years ago.

As the Wait But Why blog contends, the result is the boomers are the happiest, most fulfilled generation we’ve ever seen.

In contrast, GenYs are facing a far less fulfilling future in a lower growth economy that is far tougher and a society more focused on ‘user pays’, ‘cost recovery’ and outsourcing labour to the lowest cost provider than the greater good of the community.

Can boomers continue to be lucky?

While this is true of both Boomers and GenY, it’s worth questioning whether the Boomers’ happiness of exceeded expectations will continue.

Today governments are cash strapped, almost pension scheme is underfunded and the demographic time bomb of an aging population has started to be felt across the developed world.

Worse for the baby boomers is their retirement plans require their assets – primarily their homes, investment properties and small businesses – need to be sold at prices beyond what GenX and GenY buyers can afford.

A reversion to the mean in asset prices for economic boomers means a lot of them will be going back to work.

Recently I spoke to one economic boomer who had lost heavily after the global financial crisis. “No worries,” he said. “If need be I’ll get one of my old jobs back, I can still use a set square and drawing board.”

Sadly, he didn’t understand that being good at using a set square and drawing board in a modern engineering office are as useful as making horseshoes or operating an electric telegraph. Those skills, while noble, are no longer necessary.

While GenY will get on with adapting to the realities of their economic situation – they have little choice but to do so – the big challenge will be for their parents to deal with the modern economy.

A new ‘Greatest Generation’?

Perversely it’s likely the GenYs will turn out more like their grandparents who had to deal with a great depression and a massive World War.

While hopefully the GenYs won’t have to deal with either of those, they are faced with a much different economy than the one which nurtured their parents.

So the real ‘happiness deficit’ could turn out among the baby boomers in retirement at the very time in their lives they are least able to deal with it.

Hopefully the GenY workers will be compassionate on their asset rich but cash poor parents and grandparents.