Tuesday, October 6, 2015
AI taking boring jobs - is this an issue?
Regulating the sharing economy
Regulating Autonomous vehicles and drone
Extract from Washington post
Self-driving cars and self-flying aircraft will revolutionize the design of cities and roads. They will vastly improve the efficiency of agriculture and public safety by providing new sources of real-time information at minimal cost and reduced human risk. And by enabling low-cost deliveries, they will further the revolution in retailing that began with the first e-commerce sites. But federal, state and local regulators are already swooning at the prospects, with a paralyzed FAA missing every deadline for integrating drones into U.S. airspace. How can we redesign the rules of the road on land, sea, and air — a body of law that has grown around the assumption that humans are inconsistent, easily distractible operators? What kind of police will we need? What kind of insurance? And how will we manage the transition from one transportation paradigm to the next, taking lessons from the clumsy shift to “horseless” vehicles a century ago?
Monday, October 5, 2015
Venture Capital in Australia: Wyatt Roy looks to unlock Superannuation Trillions...
Sunday, October 4, 2015
Taking Action to Attract High-Skilled Immigrants, Graduates, and Entrepreneurs
Dear i4j group,
with 6.1 million USD in funding, I’m about to employ 25 people and I’m relocating a 2800sqft Office. Our company will create work and opportunity for millions of people in America in the coming years.
Now Office of Homeland Security turned down my VISA, I have 30 days to appeal or leave the country.
Any advice?
For you to know more about tispr:
America wants this immigration - how can we match wants of policy to mechanics of bureaucracy?
Policy thoughts from the White House
- U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services announced more good news for job creation and economic growth: a new proposal to streamline the EB-5 visa process, designed for immigrant investors and entrepreneurs who create at least 10 U.S. jobs. Applicants can expect accelerated processing times, direct communication with specialized intake teams, and decision boards with considerable expertise.
America needs a 21st century immigration system that lives up to our heritage as a nation of laws and a nation of immigrants -- and that grows our economy..... And it seems that the President is taking action .
According to an analysis by the President’s Council of Economic Advisers, the President’s executive actions on immigration stand to boost the nation’s GDP by $90 billion to $210 billion, while shrinking the Federal deficit by $25 billion over the next ten years. These actions will also increase the productivity and wages of all American workers, not just immigrants.
Many of these economic benefits spring from the President’s actions to “make it easier and faster for high-skilled immigrants, graduates, and entrepreneurs to stay and contribute to our economy.” We need to build on our strengths -- after all, over one-quarter of all U.S.-based Nobel laureates over the past 50 years were foreign-born, and more than 40 percent of Fortune 500 companies were founded by immigrants or children of immigrants.
But for too long, our broken immigration system has made it needlessly difficult for America to attract the best and brightest talent from around the world. Highly skilled workers often have to wait years, even decades, to obtain the green cards that will allow them to fully contribute to our economy and become Americans over time. Entrepreneurs have no dedicated immigration pathway that allows them to grow their companies and create jobs here. And every year, we educate some of the world’s most talented students at our universities, only to compel them to go back to their home countries to compete against us.
Here are the key things that the President’s executive actions will do to improve the immigration system for high-skilled workers, graduates, and entrepreneurs:
Unlocking the talents of highly skilled Americans-in-waiting: Most high-skilled immigrants get started on a temporary work visa (typically the H-1B visa), and if there are no American workers qualified and available to do the job, the employer can sponsor that worker for lawful permanent residence—commonly called a “green card.” But the wait for that green card can last years, even decades, even after their application is approved. During this time the worker is effectively locked into one position at the sponsoring company. The President’s actions will make it possible for these highly skilled workers and certain spouses to obtain a portable work authorization, allowing them to accept promotions, change positions or employers, or start new companies while they and their families wait to receive their green cards, and ultimately become Americans.
Clearing the path for job-creating entrepreneurs: The President’s actions will, for the first time, clarify dedicated immigration pathways for entrepreneurs who seek to start and grow their companies here. Entrepreneurs who meet certain criteria for creating jobs, attracting investment, and generating revenue within the United States will be eligible for temporary status or a green card. More than ever before, these “startup visa” pathways will allow the world’s most promising and innovative entrepreneurs to innovate and hire here in America.
Retaining the scientists and engineers we educate here. Our universities train some of the world’s most talented students in science, technology engineering, and mathematics (STEM), but our broken immigration system compels many of them to take their skills back to their home countries. The President’s actions will strengthen and extend on-the-job training for STEM graduates from U.S. universities, giving them a limited but more reasonable period of time to fully realize their course of study.
The President has also issued a new directive to make sure that his Administration is leaving no stone unturned when it comes to modernizing our system of managing and issuing visas more effectively in order to improve the employment-based immigration system, as well as other pieces of our immigration system.
These are commonsense steps, but only Congress can finish the job. As the President acts, he’ll continue to work with Congress on a comprehensive, bipartisan bill—like the one passed by the Senate more than a year ago—that can replace these actions and fix the whole system.
“Q: What do you think? How does technology affect human relationships?”
Interesting Observation by Bryan Kramer ....
Do you reach for your smartphone as soon as you wake up to check email and respond to texts?
How often are you messaging, browsing, friending, tweeting and sharing on your phone, tablet or computer?
Are we connecting with people around the globe..:.:.. Or are we "DISCONNECTING"?
Has the immediate world has lost out full attention?
Is their a long term impact of technology on personal interactions?
I requested some input from my Facebook followers. I asked:
“Q: What do you think? How does technology affect human relationships?”
I was amazed by the overwhelming response.
Conversations Lack Context
Their is an inability to detect tone. Is the writer being sarcastic, funny, not funny, serious or joking.”
Unless you see the person’s face, hear their voice and understand the environment, you have no idea of the context surrounding the written words.
Misunderstandings, miscommunications and assumptions result, which have an impact on how we view others.
Online Contact Falls Short on Empathy - you need the personal touch
There’s an utter lack of empathy when using technology to interact with others.
“I’m so sorry your ___ died” or “I heard you lost your job; I feel for you.” Where is the compassion and solidarity with loss? It certainly does exist within the soul of the person who texted, posted or emailed this – but words alone don’t necessarily convey that personal touch.
Do you use technology to pet your dog or cat? Not likely, because they couldn’t care less. Sometimes we fail to realize that, as humans, we’re also animals that need personal touch.
Tech Overload Leads to Cocooning
Technology takes you out of the physical world impacting on the number and quality of human relationships.
Conversations through social media and email take the place of traditional interactions and discussions; eventually, a person doesn’t even need to leave the house to communicate with others – and many people won’t. The cocooning phenomenon leads to social isolation that can be crippling for some.
Online Dating - a blessing or a curse ? A case study....
“Stan” married his college sweetheart. After two months of marriage, he walked into the home office to find his wife chatting with someone on Facebook. She assured him the guy was just a friend, but Stan soon saw the person’s name all over his wife’s news feed and posts. Not long after, she traveled to meet the man – staying at his place. Their child was born within a year after the visit.
Stan sees that whole relationship as something that started and developed entirely online. He’s convinced his ex-wife’s behavior would have manifested at some point, but technology drove the two of them apart faster. Stan’s new relationship started through an online dating site, but he quickly moved it into the real world. He’s understandably not a fan of developing relationships through social media.
Key Takeaway
There are many positives of online communication - but it is important to balanceour offline and online communications with others – personally and professionally.
I guess the best approach is to make yourself available through technology only when appropriate, so that it supplements our relationships rather than replacing them.
Is this a too-dismal view of technology in human relationships? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
This post originally appeared on Bryan Kramer's blog
Saturday, October 3, 2015
40pc decrease in low skilled jobs
Low-skilled jobs could be given to robots that can mimic people’s abilities and eventually perform better and at no cost.
Friday, October 2, 2015
Saturday, September 5, 2015
The current system will go the way of the dodo
Wednesday, September 2, 2015
Why does gender Equality Exist in Leadership
Great insights by Kala Philip - General Manager BSI Learning
Since organisations in the top tier of financial performance have more women in leadership roles, why does gender inequality still exist in leadership?
- Workforce participation affects leadership roles - more women work part time and casual hours than men (DDI Worldwide)
- Midcareer confidence - aspiration and confidence is low to move into top management (DDI Worldwide)
However, is it fair to ask women to take on leadership roles whilst they are working part time?
And is it also realistic for companies to provide their leaders with flexible working hours when they need them to lead and develop high performing teams?
- Providing sponsorship and development opportunities for women
- Removing the barriers to appointing more women into leadership roles
- Focusing on the middle talent pipeline - to avoid the Leaky Pipeline
- Promoting flexible working practices
- Making every manager accountable for building an inclusive culture.
- Provide flexible return to work arrangements to include:
- Working from home
- Reduced work load after returning to work
- Access to phone and computer to keep in touch with the team during leave
- Future Leaders Program - which fast tracks high performers with access to senior leaders as mentors. If the gender ratio is not equal for this group, the company has to rethink its choices.
- Challenge the organisational culture. Just because somebody is working three days a week, male or female, why can they not be promoted?
If there aren’t part time leaders in your organisation, then why not?
If there aren’t flexible working arrangements in your organisation, then why not?
Tuesday, September 1, 2015
What can we learn from the Japanese
Thursday, August 27, 2015
Venture Capital in Australia: NICTA NAD CSIRO merge to create one of the largest...
Leaders need to change from commanders to communicators
Are music festivals and doofs - a social experiment - solving the need for jobs? A precursor to the new kibbutz?
Wednesday, August 26, 2015
How Institutions can change into an Innovation Entity
On the other hand, as an optimist, I believe it is possible for existing institutions to transform themselves, but not through the classic top down, "big bang" approach to transformation that has proven to have a very high failure rate. Instead, I have been a proponent of a different approach to large scale organizational change that I call "scaling edges" - http://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/center-for-the-edge/articles/scaling-edges-methodology-to-create-growth.html A few of our existing institutions will be able to navigate through the changes using this approach.
Thanks for the heads up on Dans ted Talk
Social Media disrupting the Established Economy
David
Innovation and economics - radical innovation needs radical change
A question by Curt Carlson
I can’t imagine that a society where 85% of the people don’t work would be a good thing. Work is at the heart of being human — ones identity and self worth depend on it. It seems unstable and likely to collapse from terrible policies that the 85% would impose on the 15%. How do you think about that?
Response by Jordan Greenhall
The key to creating an effective innovative economy is to get legacy systems and legacy habits out of the way while making people feel secure that their needs will still be met!
This can be done only with effective communication, connecting and collaboration!
Changing the mindset and creating an innovative economy starts with education - and changing the way our education system links in with our economic institutions.
These linkages make it nearly impossible to radically innovate in jobs without also radically innovating in education.
Human beings don't need work. They need more fundamental things like agency, creativity, community, a sense of material safety, etc. Mileage will vary, but my go to here is Max Neef on human needs.
As it turns out, our civilization model has pushed a great number of these needs into "work". Increasingly so over the past four centuries. Indeed, a big cause of the modern ennui is the fact that work is a poor satisfier for many of the needs that are being piled upon it. Even really creative work, but particularly the kind of stuff that usually goes under the heading "work".
Now, clearly, we can not simply delete work. 85% of the population "just sitting around" is a disaster. What we must do is innovate entirely new satisfiers. Optimally satisfiers that meet human needs much more effectively than our legacy approaches and do so much more efficiently. Neef calls the best of these "synergistic satisfiers".
Obviously a challenge for the ages, but my sense is that we are very well positioned to meet it. To me, the hard part is doing it in the face of and in the midst of the broad institutional dysfunction that is characteristic of the current environment.
For example, take education. When nearly every child, teacher and parent is fully tapped day in and day out by the legacy system, there isn't a lot of room for innovation. Let alone radical innovation.
But, if by some circumstance, the entire educational system shut down all at once and, as a consequence, got out of the way; we would develop a dozen new models that are at least as effective in months. And in a year we'd be well on our way to a set of satisfiers that are 10x more effective.
In general, a move like this is unwise. New is usually a dangerous choice. But as i believe that a decomposition of the legacy system is coming one way or another..... To create a radicL innovative economy one needs radical innovative ideas and action!
Response by David Michaelis
Innovaton and Economics
Kiely Katz talks about the need to shift to a people based economy in order to maintain and sustain jobs in an innovation driven economy. A radical mindset change is needed
A successful shift to a more sustainable employment model needs to involve significant changes in traditional mindsets, attitudes and behaviours. Embedding behaviour change is notoriously difficult. The more deeply embedded the behaviour, the more difficult to shift.
We have worked within the similar operating norm for a very long time. Work is not “life” but the thing people do to “make a living”. For 9 hours every day. Those lucky enough to be employed spend more time with their work colleagues that with their loved ones. Employers expect employees to wear a cloak of the “professional persona” during working hours. Most expect employees to stick rigidly within the confines of their role. Stepping outside these rigid “job” walls, even to share knowledge to help colleagues, is often regarded as disruptive behaviour: and thus a massive chunk of skills, knowledge and experience are kept locked firmly away to avoid upsetting the status quo. Frustrating and bad for productivity - but “that just the way things are.
A shift to a ‘people centred economy” has to start by understanding what makes people tick.
Lets look at this norm through the lens of the the way the brain is wired.
People are most receptive to change (and most productive) when they are in “reward” mode. In this mode, we do our best, most creative thinking, we are open to collaboration and feel secure enough to try new things.
There are six key triggers to this reward state:
Respect: People feel that their opinions are valid. They feel part of decision making processes and that their voices are heard.
Certainty: When there are no unexpected surprises. As an example, Zappos make all of their live data open to everyone across the whole organisation all the time. Nothing is hidden. Everyone knows what is happening. There are no board room secrets.
Autonomy: They don’t want to be watched and micromanaged. People are most productive and most collaborative when they are trusted to do the right thing - especially as part of a community working toward a shared vision.
Connectedness: We are social creatures. We are at our best when we part of connected communities - where we feel safe to share, to give, to be involved. We are most empowered when we are connected by a shared vision or collective mission.
Fairness: People like to know how and why decisions are made.
Empathy: Even a message saying that leadership understands that change is not easy for anyone makes an enormous difference to how change is adopted.
Check back to standard current organisational operating systems.
Employees are expected to keep their opinions to themselves and to tow the line. Leaders see knowledge as power and keep it locked away from prying eyes. Most leaders find the idea of employee autonomy uncomfortable and most workers are accustomed to doing as they are told without question. Sharing and cross silo collaboration is not incentivised, if tolerated. Decisions are made behind closed doors and delivered with not even a nod to the people most affected by them.
The gap between organisational norms and more engaged, and therefore more sustainable, operating systems is enormous. Travelling between one and the other will involve significant change.
Therein lies the rub.
When presented with any kind of significant change, or anything that feels different to the norm, the brain triggers a threat “fight or flight” response. We become distracted as we try to figure out how that threat will affect us.
Faced with change, people start to see threats even where there are no threats. People are less able to focus or think clearly. Memory and decision making is impaired, the field of focus narrows. They become more emotional and stressed, which further impacts ability to perform.
Unfortunately, the threat response is contagious. When one person starts to behave in a defensive way, the people around them react to the change in their behaviour.
While we considering how to innovate employment through the use of technology, we should not underestimate the challenge of introducing and embedding organisational and systemic change. Throughout the brainstorming process we should imagine what kind of frameworks could support organisations and cities (leaders and employees) through the pain on change into a new more sustainable norm.
Access to affordable and pervasive data, neuroscience, social physics and behavioural psychology provide us with an unprecedented understanding of how humans make decisions, what drives action and how behaviour change can be “nudged.” This research should be kept front of mind as we are plotting
Thursday, August 20, 2015
Can innovation disrupt unemployment?
6:00pm: Registration and Refreshments
6:30pm: Opening Remarks with Adiba Barney SVForum CEO and David Nordfors, I4J CEO
6:45pm: Keynote Speaker: John Hagel, Center for the Edge @ Deloitte
7:00pm: Panel Discussion, moderated by Robin Farmanfarmain, President, I4JEco Summit
7:50pm: Q&A
8:00pm: Networking
8:30pm: Program Concludes