Now the original Yahoo article that linked to this whitepaper only seemed to focus on the potentially Orwellian aspect of some types of companies. But when I actually read it, what it described was a bit more nuanced.
To summarize, what PwC describes is actually three separate working worlds:
“Blue World” - Large megacorporations like IBM, Microsoft, (and since it’s the future…Tyrell Corporation, Wayland-Yutani, OCP) and so on. These will be characterized as places where employees will give up personal privacy and some freedoms in exchange for long-term career stability.
“Orange World” - Complex networks of contractors, vendors, consultants who give up the security of the Blue World for the freedom to trade on their professional skills and reputation. Han Solo. The crew of the Serenity. Johnny Mnemonic.
“Green World” - Companies that believe long term sustainability come before profits. Companies like Intel, Google, Whole Foods and Soylent Corporation.
Or do you think PwC has it all wrong and we’ll all be replaced by robots who will drive our flying cars in 2022?
Funny thing about that. I just left a call center where we had gotten several contracts from companies were dropping their outsourced Indian call centers in favor of outsourced American ones. One reason was so customers could better understand the people they were talking to; in some cases we were actually cheaper than the Indian call centers.
Are there any small megacorporations? And do these guys envision a change in employment law to allow corporations to mandate giving up “personal privacy and some freedoms”?
Sounds like small business, which is where much of the work is done already, and where almost all the growth is.
I don’t believe that Intel, Google and Whole Foods are any different than IBM or Microsoft. Green = Blue = Green.
Me neither. If Whole Foods is sustainable, it is because it either saves money, is part of their business plan or both. And I don’t see how anyone can say Microsoft does not support personal freedom and Intel does.
Google buys everything, randomly assigns menial tasks to keep the 99% of the population busy and employs the 1% of really smart people. Changes motto to “Do an appropriate amount of evil”.
The groupings remind me of the Barnum effect. If you can come up with some groupings that include all possible outcomes, then it sounds like you’ve hit on something by pronouncing them, even though there’s plenty of other reasonable ways to group everything.
Offering it as a future prediction is mildly novel, but not interesting.
Yes, exactly the sort of place one would expect neoliberal utopian fantasies to come from.
Are you under the impression that “neoliberal” means the same thing as “liberal” (i.e., as what “liberal” means in the context of US politics)? Neoliberalism is, broadly, about support for unfettered global, corporatist, managerial capitalism, i.e., everything that people on the political left (who get euphemistically called “liberals” in America because Americans have been brainwashed into thinking that “socialist” means “evil”) hate and despise. Of course, the US Democratic Party somehow manages to embrace neoliberalism and still attract votes fom “liberals”, but that is just because American politics is completely fucked up, and provides no real home for people of even quite mildly leftist views.
My apologies for thinking that people on this board, and who like to spend their time debating politics, were smart enough to know the difference.
It is not left-wing at all, although it can tolerate a fair degree of social progressivism (stuff like gay rights and women’s rights) so long as that does not threaten social stability or impinge on corporate economic interests.
Good for Yahoo for recognizing the Orwellian nature of all this. It is a vision of the designer boot stamping on the human face forever (but lightly, so as not to hurt too much, but just to keep you in your place).
They don’t have to assign menial tasks. All they have to do is have people follow YouTube links - that will keep them plenty busy.
Clever devils, aren’t they?
I put as much faith in PWC prediction about the future as I put into Gartner Inc’s Magic Quadrants and their predictions about emerging (fill in the blank). It’s always more heat than light.
What brilliant insight are they offering that isn’t reality already?
Huh? Companies certainly can ask you to give up privacy and freedom in exchange for a job. Here’s a list of privacy and freedoms I’ve given up for various jobs along the way:
[ul]
[li]Private browsing of the internet from work during downtime[/li][li]Freedom to engage in political activism[/li][li]Privacy in my work email[/li][li]Freedom to wear what I want to work[/li][li]Privacy of my social media pages[/li][li]Freedom to be out of cell phone range on certain weekends[/li][li]Freedom to carry a weapon to work[/li][li]Bodily privacy (by drug testing, psychological screening)[/li][/ul]
All part of the bargain. And the point is that increasingly people will choose that bargain for stable jobs at megacorps.
LOL. I actually used to be a management consultant for PwC. The only thing we were really good at predicting was what our staff were going to be doing this weekend.
