SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the moderation-in-all-things,-including-moderation dept.
An interesting writeup on Harvard Business Publishing blog by Michael Harris, discusses what most of us have already known, but each of us have colleagues (or worse, bosses) who still don't get it:
"In early April a series of reports appeared online in the United States and the United Kingdom lamenting the "lazy French." A new labor law in France had apparently banned organizations from e-mailing their employees after 6 p.m. In fact, it turned out to be more a case of "lazy journalists" than "lazy French": as The Economist explained, the "law" was not a law at all but a labor agreement aimed at improving health among a specific group of professionals, and there wasn't even a hard curfew for digital communication.
Like all myths, however, this one revealed a set of abiding values subscribed to by the folk who perpetuated it. Brits and Americans have long suspected that the French (and others) are goofing off while they the good corporate soldiers continue to toil away. They're proud about it too. A Gallup poll, released in May, found that most U.S. workers see their constant connection with officemates as a positive. In the age of the smartphone, there's no such thing as "downtime," and we profess to be happier and more productive for it.
Are we, though? After reviewing thousands of books, articles and papers on the topic and interviewing dozens of experts in fields from neurobiology and psychology to education and literature, I don't think so. When we accept this new and permanent ambient workload checking business news in bed or responding to coworkers' emails during breakfast we may believe that we are dedicated, tireless workers. But, actually, we're mostly just getting the small, easy things done. Being busy does not equate to being effective."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 03 2014, @12:51PM
What jobs get automated first? The easy ones. As the ability to automate more difficult and complex jobs progresses, jobs for common laborers will be taken over by automation. Then, it works its way up the complexity curve. First it's the jobs the 80 IQ perform. Then the 100 IQ. In the end, what's left are only the really hard jobs, that take the really talented and smart people to perform, which by bell curve definition isn't the majority of the population.
But back to the article. Another way of thinking about all this is that with automation, the easy jobs will be taken over. This removes the ability for the always connected to busy themselves with the little/simple things, and forces them to focus on the big problems. Perhaps that will force a change in the behavior of workers and companies?