Notice: Function wpdb::prepare was called incorrectly. The query argument of wpdb::prepare() must have a placeholder. Please see Debugging in WordPress for more information. (This message was added in version 3.9.0.) in /var/www/wp-includes/functions.php on line 5831

The (threatening) new narrative of Silicon Valley

David Nordfors

Mon Mar 23 2015 01:58:27 GMT-0400 (EDT)

I’m sensing it’s a trending narrative that Silicon Valley is

I’m sensing it’s a trending narrative that Silicon Valley is responsible for killing people’s jobs.

It’s a worrisome narrative for Silicon Valley, because it’s difficult to get out of the ‘bad guy’ narrative once it has been established. It’s just like any other reputation.

It will do players in Silicon Valley good to build more on innovation for jobs, meaningful work for all and making the Internet bring wealth to everyone, not only the few.

/D

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/18/opinions/wheeler-silicon-valley-jobs/index.html <fd12e559d044b6d6a885ba4d973f66800c83b152>

Silicon Valley to millennials: Drop dead
By David R. Wheeler

(CNN)We have no problem taking Wall Street executives to task for decisions that leave American families financially devastated, yet we give Silicon Valley billionaires a pass when they do the same thing. America needs to realize that instead of creating jobs, Silicon Valley is erasing them, leaving millennials financially stranded before their careers can get off the ground.

Silicon Valley is tossing millennials aside like yesterday's laptop.

The commonly held belief is that with hard work and a good education, a young person in America can get a good job. But despite falling unemployment, college grads age 22 to 27 are stuck in low-paying jobs that don't even require a college degree. The percentage of young people languishing in low-skill, low-paying jobs is 44%, a 20-year high <http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-06/college-grads-taking-low-wage-jobs-displace-less-educated>.

David Wheeler
Only 36% of college grads have jobs that pay at least $45,000, a sharp decline <http://www.newyorkfed.org/research/current_issues/ci20-1.pdf> from the 1990s, after adjusting for inflation. Perhaps most depressingly, the percentage of young people making below $25,000 has topped 20% <http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/30/5-facts-about-todays-college-graduates/>, worse than in 1990. In other words, those with a bachelor's diploma were better off before the digital revolution.

If this comes as a surprise, that's because images from popular culture push the idea that young college graduates are shrugging off bad employment prospects with their do-it-yourself attitude. In our collective imagination, millennials are saying, "No jobs? That's OK — I'll create my own!" And then they solve their own problems by heading to Silicon Valley with little more than an iPhone and an idea to create the next hip app that supposedly will turn them into overnight millionaires.

A fictional example of this new breed of young idealistic entrepreneur would be Mike Bean, founder of Internet behemoth Gryzzl on the show "Parks and Recreation." Played by Blake Anderson, Bean might best be described as "barefoot and pregnant with ideas." The bumbling entrepreneur conquers the world practically by accident, armed only with his digital savvy, a can-do spirit, and a penchant for invading users' privacy. You get the idea that his success came easily.

Privacy concerns aside, the Mike Beans of America are just about as rare as the Mark Zuckerbergs. In fact, the percentage of people under 30 who own private businesses has reached a 24-year low <http://www.wsj.com/articles/endangered-species-young-u-s-entrepreneurs-1420246116>. Garages across the country are not exactly humming with millennials launching tech startups.

But wait — won't the digital economy eventually lead to better jobs? After a period of adjustment, won't things get better? Unfortunately that's not the path we're on. One of the biggest misconceptions about the digital economy is that for every middle-class job rendered obsolete by technology, there's a new, equally good (or better) job created by Silicon Valley.

But exactly the opposite is happening. The digital economy is vaporizing the good jobs and replacing them with two kinds of jobs: minimum wage jobs (think Amazon warehouse employees) and so-called "sharing-economy jobs" (think Uber drivers).

The sharing-economy jobs are even worse than minimum wage jobs because they offer no stability or protections for workers. Sharing economy jobs aren't really jobs at all; they're freelance gigs.

Sure, Silicon Valley doesn't owe America jobs. But something is wrong with the picture of a handful of tech billionaires overseeing a kingdom of falling wages, decreased worker protection and zero job security.

This "winner-take-all" digital economy is not sustainable. People on both sides of the political spectrum are worried. Liberal luminary Robert Reich, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley and former secretary of labor under Bill Clinton, calls the sharing economy the "share-the-scraps <http://robertreich.org/post/109894095095>" economy. Speaking of tech companies that utilize on-demand labor, such as Uber, Instacart and Taskrabbit, he says, "The big money goes to the corporations that own the software. The scraps go to the on-demand workers."

Meanwhile, conservative columnist Ross Douthat fears a dystopian future <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/08/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-the-case-for-old-ideas.html?_r=0> in which "a rich, technologically proficient society will no longer offer meaningful occupation to many people of ordinary talents."

Put simply, Silicon Valley's utopia is the rest of America's dystopia. And those who are punished more than anyone else are recent college graduates, whose lifetime earning potential <http://www.cnbc.com/id/102413554> has already suffered an irreversible setback.

And if you think your own job is safe, think again. New research predicts that nearly half of all jobs <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/11/world/europe/after-jobs-dry-up-what-then.html> are susceptible to automation over the next two decades. This is a giant leap backward, but it's deceptively described as technological "progress." As anyone who's talked to an automated system on the phone lately can attest, "automated" usually means "worse."

What can be done? How can we fight this slide back toward the Middle Ages? If we take no action, we're headed toward a kind of digital world feudalism where there are a handful of kings, a lot of peasants and no middle class.

There's no easy fix, but we can do three things immediately. First, we can stop glorifying tech titans and start talking openly about Silicon Valley's questionable tactics and its real job creation record (i.e., just follow the numbers). Second, we can encourage more lawsuits <http://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-lyft-cases-could-help-clarify-drivers-legal-status-1426456519> against the abusive practices of "sharing-economy" powerhouses. Third, we can elect leaders who are vocal about holding Silicon Valley accountable for their power over the entire American workforce, including white-collar employees.

The fictional Gryzzl's tagline borrows some millennial slang: "Wouldn't it be tight if everyone was chill to each other?" Indeed it would. And if we want a better future for millennials and the generations after them, we need to challenge the prevailing Silicon Valley ethos before it's too late.__,_._,___


Curt Carlson

Mon Mar 23 2015 12:30:07 GMT-0400 (EDT)

One thing we know, this will not work:

"There's no easy

One thing we know, this will not work:

"There's no easy fix, but we can do three things immediately. First, we can stop glorifying tech titans and start talking openly about Silicon Valley's questionable tactics and its real job creation record (i.e., just follow the numbers). Second, we can encourage more lawsuits<http://www.wsj.com/articles/uber-lyft-cases-could-help-clarify-drivers-legal-status-1426456519> against the abusive practices of "sharing-economy" powerhouses. Third, we can elect leaders who are vocal about holding Silicon Valley accountable for their power over the entire American workforce, including white-collar employees."


Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Robert Cohen

Mon Mar 23 2015 13:29:27 GMT-0400 (EDT)

David,

Yes, that is the dominant narrative right now. There

David,

Yes, that is the dominant narrative right now. There is particular fascination with the Osborne-Frey paper from last summer that produced a v-shaped curve for the jobs that are likely to survive (it is not named explicitly in the argument. http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf .0 <http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf%20.0>

The current view is largely based on automation taking over many tasks that are defined in the current Dictionary of Occupational Titles, a Labor Department handbook that has been used since the 1950s or so. It assumes that the nature of work will not change very much and that the occupations we know today are the ones that will be with us in a few decades with barely no change. Some new occupations have been added over time, but the resulting structure of work has never really changed very dramatically. Thus, many goverments publish 10-year forecasts of jobs but few of these forecasts project any significant disruption in the type and nature of jobs.

In addition, with current books such as the Second Machine Age dominating thinking about future employment, there is little attention paid to other trends such as intelligent mobile devices, sensor networks and the next generations of the Internet and broadband.

With the Internet and broadband, there has always been a somewhat different logic that what is reflected in the Second Machine Age. Besides the new applications and uses of the Internet, there is an almost double-fold, Moore’s law like benefit for Internet growth. First, infrastructure costs – Transporting 100/1000/10 Gigs/sec — that get reflected in end-user prices have been dropping rapidly, nearly at the pace of Moore’s law — for much of the past 25 years. This makes it easier to create new apps and to offer new services based on the Internet. Second, there is a demand elasticity effect, describing how the quantity of bandwidth changes with a change in price. For the Internet, this effect is much greater than for other communications services, such as narrowband service. So in addition to the cost declines, there is an extra boost to any new pricing situation on the Internet because it tends to call forth even greater demand than might otherwise be expected.

In sum, the a expansion of the Internet as well as greater use of intelligent mobile devices are both benefitting from this new economics. Since they have such a wide range of impacts it is reasonable to expect that the industries affected will transform the way they do work, change the suppliers they use for their product and service development in the next phase of the economy and begin to transform the nature of work as we have known it until now.

I4J’s efforts are starting to fill in the details of how this might work.

Bob


Robin Chase

Mon Mar 23 2015 19:22:42 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Check out this Brookings Institute graphic about how SF top

Check out this Brookings Institute graphic about how SF top 5% income
earners compare to other cities. A really striking graphic.

http://www.businessinsider.com/san
-franciscos-top-5-of-earners-are-insanely-rich-2015-3?nr_email_referer=1&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_term=Business%20Insider%20Select&utm_campaign=BI%20Select%20%28Wednesday%20Friday%29%202015-03-20&utm_content=BISelect

San Francisco's top 5% of earners blow the rest of the country out of the
water

The Brookings Institution recently released a report
<http://www.brookings.edu/research/reports2/2015/03/city-inequality-berube-holmes>
showing
the income gap between the bottom 20% of households and the top 5% in the
fifty largest US cities.

Inadvertently, Brookings has discovered a startling statistic about San
Francisco.

Among the top fifty cities, San Francisco ranks as the second most unequal
city in the United States, trailing only Atlanta, Georgia.

The top 5% in San Francisco, however, earn 17 times what the bottom 20%
earn. The average for the top 5% in the 50 biggest US cities was 11.6 times
what the bottom 20% earned.

That massive income gap may in part lie in just how ridiculously high income is
for SanFrancisco’s top 5%. San Francisco’s top earners made at least
$423,000. As you can see in the table below, no city’s top earners come
within even $100,000 of those in SanFrancisco.

The Brookings Institution

The income gap will likely only get bigger in the coming years. Though
Brookings did not have enough data to deem it “statistically significant,”
it did find that the estimated rate of income growth for top earners in San
Francisco was more than 18%, equivalent to an increase of $66,000.

Robin

Pre-order your copy of *Peers Inc* today at Amazon
<http://www.amazon.com/Peers-Inc-Collaborative-Creating-Prosperity/dp/1610395549>
, Barnes&Noble
<http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/peers-inc-robin-chase/1120932248?ean=9781610395540>
, Indie bookstores <http://www.indiebound.org/book/9781610395540>
How People & Platforms are Inventing the Collaborative Economy &
Reinventing Capitalism


Esther Wojcicki

Mon Mar 23 2015 20:10:56 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Not a good thing for the SF Bay Area to

Not a good thing for the SF Bay Area to have stories like this.

Esther


Curt Carlson

Mon Mar 23 2015 20:31:45 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Interesting. We are the 0.1%. CA runs on $100B IPOs.

Curtis

Interesting. We are the 0.1%. CA runs on $100B IPOs.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Curt Carlson

Mon Mar 23 2015 20:32:34 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Imagine if you compared San Fran with the center of

Imagine if you compared San Fran with the center of the state.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Bobby Sain

Mon Mar 23 2015 23:38:24 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Fascinating article. I would like to see this as a

Fascinating article. I would like to see this as a side by side comparison, adjusted for regional currency, with other tech hubs in the world. For example: http://mashable.com/2013/09/17/tel-aviv-tech/

Bobby Sain
(704)740-5817
@bobbysain

This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change. Bobby Sain does not guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference.


David Nordfors

Tue Mar 24 2015 19:38:02 GMT-0400 (EDT)

OUCH "Among the top fifty cities, San Francisco ranks as

OUCH "Among the top fifty cities, San Francisco ranks as the second most unequal city in the United States, trailing only Atlanta, Georgia.”

it’s high time for the Valley gets a new story to work on. How about
“The 360 innovation economy: when innovation helps people earn well, spend well and live well”.
Catchy?

I’ve asked if the Computer History Museum might be interested in making an exhibition about the past&future of Computers and Jobs – it would be wonderful if they want to inaugurate such an exhibit at the i4j ECO conference we are doing Jan 27-28. Meeting them soon!

cheers,

D

——————–
David Nordfors, Ph.D.
CEO, IIIJ
[…]


Blumenthal, Marjory

Wed Mar 25 2015 09:00:32 GMT-0400 (EDT)

That kind of exhibit could have many dimensions or emphases…would

That kind of exhibit could have many dimensions or emphases…would love to know whether you have specific ones in mind or if, once they give you a green light, we might brainstorm together!
M

From: David Nordfors [mailto:[…]]
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 7:38 PM
To: Curtis Carlson
Cc: Esther Wojcicki; Robin Chase; Robert Cohen; […]; Bobby Sain
Subject: Re: [i4j2015] The (threatening) new narrative of Silicon Valley

OUCH "Among the top fifty cities, San Francisco ranks as the second most unequal city in the United States, trailing only Atlanta, Georgia.”

it’s high time for the Valley gets a new story to work on. How about
“The 360 innovation economy: when innovation helps people earn well, spend well and live well”.
Catchy?

I’ve asked if the Computer History Museum might be interested in making an exhibition about the past&future of Computers and Jobs – it would be wonderful if they want to inaugurate such an exhibit at the i4j ECO conference we are doing Jan 27-28. Meeting them soon!

cheers,

D

——————–
David Nordfors, Ph.D.
CEO, IIIJ
[…]

Fascinating article. I would like to see this as a side by side comparison, adjusted for regional currency, with other tech hubs in the world. For example: >http://mashable.com/2013/09/17/tel-aviv-tech/<<%3ehttp:/mashable.com/2013/09/17/tel-aviv-tech/%3c>

Bobby Sain
(704)740-5817
@bobbysain

Imagine if you compared San Fran with the center of the state.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: >www.practiceofinnovation.com<<%3ehttp:/www.practiceofinnovation.com%3c>

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."

From: Esther Wojcicki […]
Date: Monday, March 23, 2015 at 5:10 PM
To: "[…]" […]
Cc: Robert Cohen […], David Nordfors […], "[…]" […]
Subject: Re: [i4j2015] The (threatening) new narrative of Silicon Valley

Not a good thing for the SF Bay Area to have stories like this.

Esther

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Robin Chase […] wrote:
Check out this Brookings Institute graphic about how SF top 5% income earners compare to other cities. A really striking graphic.

San Francisco's top 5% of earners blow the rest of the country out of the water
The Brookings Institution recently released a report<%3ehttp:/www.brookings.edu/research/reports2/2015/03/city-inequality-berube-holmes%3c> showing the income gap between the bottom 20% of households and the top 5% in the fifty largest US cities.
Inadvertently, Brookings has discovered a startling statistic about San Francisco.
Among the top fifty cities, San Francisco ranks as the second most unequal city in the United States, trailing only Atlanta, Georgia.
The top 5% in San Francisco, however, earn 17 times what the bottom 20% earn. The average for the top 5% in the 50 biggest US cities was 11.6 times what the bottom 20% earned.
That massive income gap may in part lie in just how ridiculously high income is for SanFrancisco’s top 5%. San Francisco’s top earners made at least $423,000. As you can see in the table below, no city’s top earners come within even $100,000 of those in SanFrancisco.
The Brookings Institution

The income gap will likely only get bigger in the coming years. Though Brookings did not have enough data to deem it “statistically significant,” it did find that the estimated rate of income growth for top earners in San Francisco was more than 18%, equivalent to an increase of $66,000.

Robin

Pre-order your copy of Peers Inc today at Amazon<%3ehttp:/www.amazon.com/Peers-Inc-Collaborative-Creating-Prosperity/dp/1610395549%3c>, Barnes&Noble<%3ehttp:/www.barnesandnoble.com/w/peers-inc-robin-chase/1120932248?ean=9781610395540%3c>, Indie bookstores<%3ehttp:/www.indiebound.org/book/9781610395540%3c>
How People & Platforms are Inventing the Collaborative Economy & Reinventing Capitalism

On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 1:29 PM, Robert Cohen […] wrote:
David,

Yes, that is the dominant narrative right now. There is particular fascination with the Osborne-Frey paper from last summer that produced a v-shaped curve for the jobs that are likely to survive (it is not named explicitly in the argument. >http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf< .0<%3ehttp:/www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/downloads/academic/The_Future_of_Employment.pdf%20.0%3c>
The current view is largely based on automation taking over many tasks that are defined in the current Dictionary of Occupational Titles, a Labor Department handbook that has been used since the 1950s or so. It assumes that the nature of work will not change very much and that the occupations we know today are the ones that will be with us in a few decades with barely no change. Some new occupations have been added over time, but the resulting structure of work has never really changed very dramatically. Thus, many goverments publish 10-year forecasts of jobs but few of these forecasts project any significant disruption in the type and nature of jobs.
In addition, with current books such as the Second Machine Age dominating thinking about future employment, there is little attention paid to other trends such as intelligent mobile devices, sensor networks and the next generations of the Internet and broadband.
With the Internet and broadband, there has always been a somewhat different logic that what is reflected in the Second Machine Age. Besides the new applications and uses of the Internet, there is an almost double-fold, Moore’s law like benefit for Internet growth. First, infrastructure costs – Transporting 100/1000/10 Gigs/sec — that get reflected in end-user prices have been dropping rapidly, nearly at the pace of Moore’s law — for much of the past 25 years. This makes it easier to create new apps and to offer new services based on the Internet. Second, there is a demand elasticity effect, describing how the quantity of bandwidth changes with a change in price. For the Internet, this effect is much greater than for other communications services, such as narrowband service. So in addition to the cost declines, there is an extra boost to any new pricing situation on the Internet because it tends to call forth even greater demand than might otherwise be expected.
In sum, the a expansion of the Internet as well as greater use of intelligent mobile devices are both benefitting from this new economics. Since they have such a wide range of impacts it is reasonable to expect that the industries affected will transform the way they do work, change the suppliers they use for their product and service development in the next phase of the economy and begin to transform the nature of work as we have known it until now.
I4J’s efforts are starting to fill in the details of how this might work.
Bob

From: David Nordfors [mailto:[…]]
Sent: Monday, March 23, 2015 1:58 AM
To: […]
Subject: [i4j2015] The (threatening) new narrative of Silicon Valley

I’m sensing it’s a trending narrative that Silicon Valley is responsible for killing people’s jobs.

It’s a worrisome narrative for Silicon Valley, because it’s difficult to get out of the ‘bad guy’ narrative once it has been established. It’s just like any other reputation.

It will do players in Silicon Valley good to build more on innovation for jobs, meaningful work for all and making the Internet bring wealth to everyone, not only the few.

/D

Silicon Valley to millennials: Drop dead
By David R. Wheeler

(CNN)We have no problem taking Wall Street executives to task for decisions that leave American families financially devastated, yet we give Silicon Valley billionaires a pass when they do the same thing. America needs to realize that instead of creating jobs, Silicon Valley is erasing them, leaving millennials financially stranded before their careers can get off the ground.
Silicon Valley is tossing millennials aside like yesterday's laptop.
The commonly held belief is that with hard work and a good education, a young person in America can get a good job. But despite falling unemployment, college grads age 22 to 27 are stuck in low-paying jobs that don't even require a college degree. The percentage of young people languishing in low-skill, low-paying jobs is 44%, a 20-year high<%3ehttp:/www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-03-06/college-grads-taking-low-wage-jobs-displace-less-educated%3c>.

David Wheeler
Only 36% of college grads have jobs that pay at least $45,000, a sharp decline<%3ehttp:/www.newyorkfed.org/research/current_issues/ci20-1.pdf%3c> from the 1990s, after adjusting for inflation. Perhaps most depressingly, the percentage of young people making below $25,000 has topped 20%<%3ehttp:/www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/05/30/5-facts-about-todays-college-graduates/%3c>, worse than in 1990. In other words, those with a bachelor's diploma were better off before the digital revolution.
If this comes as a surprise, that's because images from popular culture push the idea that young college graduates are shrugging off bad employment prospects with their do-it-yourself attitude. In our collective imagination, millennials are saying, "No jobs? That's OK — I'll create my own!" And then they solve their own problems by heading to Silicon Valley with little more than an iPhone and an idea to create the next hip app that supposedly will turn them into overnight millionaires.
A fictional example of this new breed of young idealistic entrepreneur would be Mike Bean, founder of Internet behemoth Gryzzl on the show "Parks and Recreation." Played by Blake Anderson, Bean might best be described as "barefoot and pregnant with ideas." The bumbling entrepreneur conquers the world practically by accident, armed only with his digital savvy, a can-do spirit, and a penchant for invading users' privacy. You get the idea that his success came easily.
Privacy concerns aside, the Mike Beans of America are just about as rare as the Mark Zuckerbergs. In fact, the percentage of people under 30 who own private businesses has reached a 24-year low<%3ehttp:/www.wsj.com/articles/endangered-species-young-u-s-entrepreneurs-1420246116%3c>. Garages across the country are not exactly humming with millennials launching tech startups.
But wait — won't the digital economy eventually lead to better jobs? After a period of adjustment, won't things get better? Unfortunately that's not the path we're on. One of the biggest misconceptions about the digital economy is that for every middle-class job rendered obsolete by technology, there's a new, equally good (or better) job created by Silicon Valley.
But exactly the opposite is happening. The digital economy is vaporizing the good jobs and replacing them with two kinds of jobs: minimum wage jobs (think Amazon warehouse employees) and so-called "sharing-economy jobs" (think Uber drivers).
The sharing-economy jobs are even worse than minimum wage jobs because they offer no stability or protections for workers. Sharing economy jobs aren't really jobs at all; they're freelance gigs.
Sure, Silicon Valley doesn't owe America jobs. But something is wrong with the picture of a handful of tech billionaires overseeing a kingdom of falling wages, decreased worker protection and zero job security.
This "winner-take-all" digital economy is not sustainable. People on both sides of the political spectrum are worried. Liberal luminary Robert Reich, a professor at the University of California at Berkeley and former secretary of labor under Bill Clinton, calls the sharing economy the "share-the-scraps<%3ehttp:/robertreich.org/post/109894095095%3c>" economy. Speaking of tech companies that utilize on-demand labor, such as Uber, Instacart and Taskrabbit, he says, "The big money goes to the corporations that own the software. The scraps go to the on-demand workers."
Meanwhile, conservative columnist Ross Douthat fears a dystopian future<%3ehttp:/www.nytimes.com/2015/03/08/opinion/sunday/ross-douthat-the-case-for-old-ideas.html?_r=0%3c> in which "a rich, technologically proficient society will no longer offer meaningful occupation to many people of ordinary talents."
Put simply, Silicon Valley's utopia is the rest of America's dystopia. And those who are punished more than anyone else are recent college graduates, whose lifetime earning potential<%3ehttp:/www.cnbc.com/id/102413554%3c> has already suffered an irreversible setback.
And if you think your own job is safe, think again. New research predicts that nearly half of all jobs<%3ehttp:/www.nytimes.com/2015/03/11/world/europe/after-jobs-dry-up-what-then.html%3c> are susceptible to automation over the next two decades. This is a giant leap backward, but it's deceptively described as technological "progress." As anyone who's talked to an automated system on the phone lately can attest, "automated" usually means "worse."
What can be done? How can we fight this slide back toward the Middle Ages? If we take no action, we're headed toward a kind of digital world feudalism where there are a handful of kings, a lot of peasants and no middle class.
There's no easy fix, but we can do three things immediately. First, we can stop glorifying tech titans and start talking openly about Silicon Valley's questionable tactics and its real job creation record (i.e., just follow the numbers). Second, we can encourage more lawsuits<%3ehttp:/www.wsj.com/articles/uber-lyft-cases-could-help-clarify-drivers-legal-status-1426456519%3c> against the abusive practices of "sharing-economy" powerhouses. Third, we can elect leaders who are vocal about holding Silicon Valley accountable for their power over the entire American workforce, including white-collar employees.
The fictional Gryzzl's tagline borrows some millennial slang: "Wouldn't it be tight if everyone was chill to each other?" Indeed it would. And if we want a better future for millennials and the generations after them, we need to challenge the prevailing Silicon Valley ethos before it's too late.__,_._,___
Visit this group at >http://groups.google.com/a/i4jsummit.org/group/i4j2015/<<%3ehttp:/groups.google.com/a/i4jsummit.org/group/i4j2015/%3c>.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to […].
To post to this group, send email to […].
Visit this group at >1b7f3bc8a067223fbf68ceb5d65e85521e929d16<<%3ehttp:/4be768d80be45d37b0e835ef6fe3e2e1ca96f1e5>.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "i4j Mountain View 2015" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to […].
To post to this group, send email to […].
Visit this group at >1b7f3bc8a067223fbf68ceb5d65e85521e929d16<<%3ehttp:/4be768d80be45d37b0e835ef6fe3e2e1ca96f1e5>.


Esther Wojcicki

Creative Commons<%3ehttp:/www.creativecommons.org/%3c>,Vice Chair,
Learning Matters<%3ehttp:/www.learningmatters.tv/%3c>, C<%3ehttp:/www.21stcenturyliterature.org/%3c>hair,
Palo Alto High Journalism<%3ehttp:/thecampanile.net/%3c>, Founder
HuffingtonPost, Blogger<%3ehttp:/www.huffingtonpost.com/esther-wojcicki/%3c>


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "i4j Mountain View 2015" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to […].
To post to this group, send email to […].
Visit this group at >1b7f3bc8a067223fbf68ceb5d65e85521e929d16<<%3ehttp:/4be768d80be45d37b0e835ef6fe3e2e1ca96f1e5>.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "i4j Mountain View 2015" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to […].
To post to this group, send email to […].
Visit this group at >1b7f3bc8a067223fbf68ceb5d65e85521e929d16<<%3ehttp:/4be768d80be45d37b0e835ef6fe3e2e1ca96f1e5>.


You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "i4j Mountain View 2015" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to […].
To post to this group, send email to […].
Visit this group at >1b7f3bc8a067223fbf68ceb5d65e85521e929d16<<%3ehttp:/4be768d80be45d37b0e835ef6fe3e2e1ca96f1e5>.


David Nordfors

Wed Mar 25 2015 17:22:42 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Marjory – if Marguerite likes the idea, I’ll invite her

Marjory – if Marguerite likes the idea, I’ll invite her to the SIGgy Bootcamp May 2-3. It’s a good time to brainstorm about it. A SIG about such an exhibition can be very good.

If anyone has any ideas, please let me know – then I can bring it up when I meet her on April 13 or perhaps in an email ahead of that meeting.

/D

——————–
David Nordfors, Ph.D.
CEO, IIIJ
[…]


Stephen Denning

Wed Mar 25 2015 19:51:00 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Hi David,

I agree with you that a better narrative than

Hi David,

I agree with you that a better narrative than "Silicon Valley kills jobs,"
would be: "The innovation economy: where innovation helps people earn well,
spend well and live well”.

An exhibition on that theme would be great. But if that's the narrative, it
would be helpful if the exhibition was not just about the history of
computers and jobs, but about the history of innovation and jobs.

All businesses use computers. An exhibition on the history of computers
could miss the point

What's distinctive about Silicon Valley is the innovation in the use of
computers to draw on the talents of those doing the work to create products
and services that delight customers because they are better, faster,
cheaper, smaller, lighter, more convenient and more personalized and so on.

Ideally the exhibition would highlight what has enabled all this
innovation, namely, the shift from the moribund 20th Century vertical
management structures aimed at preserving the status quo (still pervasive
in big organizations) to the emerging horizontal management practices of
the 21st Century aimed at creating the future.

I am not sure exactly how to present this in an exhibition, but I am
thinking that this should be the goal.

Best
Steve

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
<http://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/>
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com


Curt Carlson

Wed Mar 25 2015 20:38:20 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Silicon Valley is about creating change.

The paradox is we are

Silicon Valley is about creating change.

The paradox is we are entering an age of abundance of products and services, more people will get out of poverty than at any time in history, the world’s population will drop dramatically, and, in the limit, we are not sure there is a role for most (any?) people. Overall most things should dramatically improve, including the environment.

The wild card is bio-engineering of people. Seems inevitable and scary. See what people do with body “art” today just to be different. But it is hard to believe that exponential bio-improvement technology can keep up with exponential IT. The best we could do is become hybrids, but that only pushes out the date of obsolescence a bit more. Are we to become Morlocks or Eloi? Whatever we think it will be, essentially by definition, different!

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014

Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


David Nordfors

Wed Mar 25 2015 23:04:44 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Steve – excellent points! I’ll bring those up with Marguerite

Steve – excellent points! I’ll bring those up with Marguerite for sure! Marguerite – check out her bio and you will see that your pitch might very well resonate with her 🙂 http://www.computerhistory.org/staff/Marguerite%20Gong,Hancock/ <d66373cfafed19546e86e8da3f5c7612abb24223> I won’t be surprised if she buys it, and she is also the best one to interface it with the CHM existing narrative. Right now, they are showing a bunch of machines and the visitors can learn how these machines were important. The CHM will take a step into the future when they focus on a societal issue, applying the perspective of IT to it.

Curt – bio-engineering of people is scary stuff. Is humanity mature enough? I remember reading a science fiction short story about the olympic games in the future. The US and the Soviet Union are competing for the gold medals and have genetically engineered their athletes. The punchline of the story is that the russians created a boxer who’s head is below his belt.

I’m copying Johnny Boston, who is doing a movie on transhumanism 🙂 Johnny – what u say?

/D

——————–
David Nordfors, Ph.D.
CEO, IIIJ
[…]


Curt Carlson

Thu Mar 26 2015 12:50:19 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Maybe we are being much too pessimistic about the creativity

Maybe we are being much too pessimistic about the creativity and initiative of individuals to create jobs. It is after all the global innovation economy. For sure one issue is failed economic policy — i.e., politics.

Look at Singapore. No water, energy, natural resources, land, or agriculture and, starting from less than zero 50 years ago, a thriving economy today with a GDP per capita 30% above America on a parity basis. How did they do it?—basic economics, business, human incentives, etc. They just do what works, but that is not the game with politics.

PM Yew is the only leader I can think of that started out as sole ruler and created an infrastructure based on best practices to eventually create a prosperous democracy. Anyone else? Below may be another example of what people can do when unburdened.

http://www.spectator.co.uk/features/9475222/the-coalitions-jobs-record-is-miraculous-why-wont-they-talk-about-it/


Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Curt Carlson

Thu Mar 26 2015 13:01:26 GMT-0400 (EDT)

David, This was the first Soviet prototype for the ultimate

David, This was the first Soviet prototype for the ultimate boxer. As you say, they improved this after a bit.

[cid:6365798E-497B-46F4-8A28-0280FFA271FE]


Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Leah Belsky

Thu Mar 26 2015 13:08:33 GMT-0400 (EDT)

I actually feel quite uncomfortable about the idea of trying

I actually feel quite uncomfortable about the idea of trying to help
"reframe" the negative, encroaching narrative on killing jobs if it's not
actually connected to a more actionable effort to build consciousness or
change behavior re: job creation in the valley.

is there an element of the 'innovation for jobs' mobilization that can be
boiled down to actionable steps or a scorecard that those companies who
care about the topic can take (ie. akin to efforts around sustainability or
climate change before this).

– what type of jobs does your company create? to what extent do effectively
match employees capabilities and talents with their roles? (these are
overly simple examples… but just examples)

I'd want to incentivize people to care about the topic though before we
help spiffing up the narrative.


Leah Belsky, Kaltura Inc
Learn Capital

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:50 PM, Curt Carlson <
[…] wrote:


Nick Ellis

Thu Mar 26 2015 13:28:06 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Leah, I hear you – one potential actionable step on

Leah, I hear you – one potential actionable step on how to encourage wage
equality for women is outlined here:
http://singularityhub.com/2015/03/26/putting-america-gainfully-back-to-work/

There's still a lot of work to be done to increase corporate accountability
and transparency, both in the Valley and further afield, as well as retool
the gears of government *writ large*.

At the end of the day, this is a systems problem (public, private, and
third-sector all have to work together), so identifying the levers we can
push to realize the change we want to see in the world will be key to
successfully "disrupting unemployment."

Nick


Nick Ellis
415 699 8187 (mobile)


Stephen Denning

Fri Mar 27 2015 10:14:19 GMT-0400 (EDT)

I would share Leah's discomfort with re-framing the negative narrative

I would share Leah's discomfort with re-framing the negative narrative of
Silicon Valley's impact of jobs into a new (hopefully more positive)
narrative if the new narrative were not to be based on economic realities
of what is actually happening.

The new narrative would need to refrain for instance from sugar-coating the
reality that many jobs are indeed being eliminated by technology that
enables better, faster, cheaper, lighter, more personalized and more
convenient products and services for customers. Arguably this process is
still in its early stages and will continue no matter what efforts are made
by firms in Silicon Valley to create jobs.

It should also recognize that the nature and scale of the new employment
(W2 and 1099) that will emerge in this new world is still an open question.
There is room for hope, but there are many uncertainties.

It could also be helpful if the framers of the new narrative looked beyond
Silicon Valley and saw how other sectors were being affected by the same
pressures.

For instance, the fast fashion industry is going through a similar
transition. In this case, it's foreign firms, like Zara and H&M, that are
crushing US firms, who don't seem able or willing to adapt to the new
realities. They are locked into obsolete management models and thinking:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2015/03/13/how-agile-and-zara-are-transforming-the-us-fashion-industry/

That's the counter-factual to the story of Silicon Valley. If Silicon
Valley didn't exist, we would all be using the equivalents of Google, Apple
and so on, but the products would be coming from other countries, and there
would be even fewer US jobs than there are now.

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
<http://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/>
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com


Vint Cerf

Fri Mar 27 2015 10:39:14 GMT-0400 (EDT)

think about technology that enables us to do things for

think about technology that enables us to do things for ourselves that we
once relied on others to do.

v

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 10:14 AM, Stephen Denning […]
wrote:


Curt Carlson

Fri Mar 27 2015 11:32:55 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Yes, in the end we all pump our own gas

Yes, in the end we all pump our own gas – and we prefer the control.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

"Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Curt Carlson

Fri Mar 27 2015 12:14:55 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Well said. I also agree with John that AI always

Well said. I also agree with John that AI always turns out to be 100x harder than most think, but it is improving exponentially and at some point it will get there. When we did Siri it was the result of 10 years of R&D and venture incubation. Siri is still a relatively primitive technology but already it is good enough (in its many forms) to eliminate millions of jobs. Adam Cheyer, Siri’s original CTO, is off creating the next generation of Siri, which I expect will be impressive. Bit by bit.

For sure these technologies will create great workplace disruption. Whether we create enough jobs is an open question. To me one of the major issues is whether our politics can adapt fast enough and make decisions that promote “abundance” over “scarcity.” Most politicians are scarcity thinkers who are more interested in cutting up the pie than baking new ones.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Stephen Denning

Fri Mar 27 2015 13:08:31 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Hi Curt,

It's true that "Most politicians are scarcity thinkers who

Hi Curt,

It's true that "Most politicians are scarcity thinkers who are more
interested in cutting up the pie than baking new ones."

One reason for that, though, is that the real economic pie has been getting
steadily smaller, despite the apparent gains flowing from financial
engineering and cheap government money. So there is a natural tendency to
try to get a bigger slice of a smaller pie.

Although it's fashionable to blame the politicians for everything, the
primary responsibility for this decades-long economic debacle lies less
with the politicians, and more with the captains of industry and hedge fund
activists, who have also become "more interested in cutting up the pie than
baking new ones."

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
<http://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/>
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Curt Carlson <
[…] wrote:


Curt Carlson

Fri Mar 27 2015 13:47:59 GMT-0400 (EDT)

You need to say more about this (PS the chart

You need to say more about this (PS the chart did not come through). For sure politicians are not alone in causing problems. I have spent my professional life working with some of the biggest companies down to endless start ups. I have no love for financial manipulation – much of the time it does not create real value. But if we look at all the "regular" senior executives I find that most of them are struggling to keep up in the global innovation economy. The lifetime of the Top 500 is down to less than 20 years. Creating major new innovations is just not that common a skill. Mostly founders have it and then, when they go, things too often get in trouble. Microsoft spends almost $10B a year on R&D and the company has been flat for ~20 years. Likewise politicians have little understanding of value creation. Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore was remarkable that way, and he proved how potent positive policies can be economically. He just asked what works, and then tried to do it even better. No magic. If Singapore, with almost none of the US's advantages, can create a GDP per capita 20-30% higher (parity) than us, why can't we do better? I think we can-a lot better.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

"Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Robin Chase

Fri Mar 27 2015 14:05:53 GMT-0400 (EDT)

While we are talking graphs and increasingly small slices of

While we are talking graphs and increasingly small slices of pie, it feels
like more graphs should make an appearance. As Curt mentions, longevity on
the S&P 500 lists is plummeting.

Yet the masters of those companies, are experiencing these rewards:

​I also think it is true that innovation no longer will come from within a
legacy organization, but rather from the world outside. Unilever, P&G,
GSK, the DoD all are now opening themselves up to outside input for
innovation through challenges or open data/research/assets.

Robin

Robin

Pre-order your copy of *Peers Inc* today at Amazon
<http://www.amazon.com/Peers-Inc-Collaborative-Creating-Prosperity/dp/1610395549>
, Barnes&Noble
<http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/peers-inc-robin-chase/1120932248?ean=9781610395540>
, Indie bookstores <http://www.indiebound.org/book/9781610395540>
How People & Platforms are Inventing the Collaborative Economy &
Reinventing Capitalism

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Curt Carlson […]


Stephen Denning

Fri Mar 27 2015 14:07:01 GMT-0400 (EDT)

My apologies for the chart not coming through. It comes

My apologies for the chart not coming through. It comes from Deloitte's
Shift Index and can be view here:
http://blogs-images.forbes.com/stevedenning/files/2014/07/shift-index-roa-640pixels1.jpg.

I discussed it, along with some of the many arguments why I agree with you
that we can and must do better.
https://i4j.info/2015/02/jobs-and-the-w-2-economy/

I agree that "if we look at all the "regular” senior executives I find that
most of them are struggling to keep up in the global innovation economy.
The lifetime of the Top 500 is down to less than 20 years."

However I am not sure that we should be looking at the problem solely as
one of the rarity of skills at innovation.

What we do know is that the prevailing management practices in big
corporations are obsolete and virtually guarantee that we won't have much
innovation. They were never designed to do that. They were aimed at
protecting the status quo. The people who now end up in the C-suite are
those who are good at that.

We have seen that corporations do a lot better at innovation when they put
in place those management practices that have a track record of creating
innovation.

It is at least plausible that many more corporations would do a lot better
at innovation if they put in place those same management practices.

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
<http://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/>
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Curt Carlson […]


Curt Carlson

Fri Mar 27 2015 17:10:47 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Steve, Thanks. That is a great article.

The shift index chart

Steve, Thanks. That is a great article.

The shift index chart is amazing. It feels like there are many reasons for it, including outdated government policies. From what I see in companies, it is also because the competition is unrelentingly brutal (e.g., see Samsung versus Apple, etc.). The shift chart is the complement chart to the declining lifetimes of big companies. Big companies are generally not good at innovation although they try hard. The old models don’t work today (e.g., most big central labs).

I have only found a handful of companies that have an innovation process that can be described by middle management. By definition, if they can’t describe it, there really isn’t one. Some positive examples are Apple, SRI, IDEO, Gore, 3-M (parts), Google (parts) … Who else?

You end with, "A more intelligent scenario would be for major corporations to change the way they are being managed and master the skills of the Creative Economy. I believe that we should be mobilizing efforts to generate the latter scenario.“

I completely agree with this and it is what I too focus on (PS I prefer Innovation Economy because creativity is only one input to innovative success.). It is what I mean by applying innovation best practices or what we call The Fundamentals of Innovation. It is management. Creating an organization like that is a bear—almost impossible. It took me over a decade at SRI with only 2,300 R&D staff and I was 100% committed to it as the only path forward. I had 16 years as CEO. If I were a typical 5 year CEO it could not have happened.

Today’s students are being better trained for this world and many are now developing the innovation skills needed (e.g., Aalto U, d.school, ..). But that is a long hall. Companies will continue to decline. People can’t learn these new ways of working fast enough. If totally committed, just the unlearning takes five years.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


David Nordfors

Fri Mar 27 2015 17:53:50 GMT-0400 (EDT)

I agree with Steve and Leah that a new Silicon

I agree with Steve and Leah that a new Silicon Valley narrative must be more than sugar coating – spinning an angle and living a lie will only make things worse.

But when I speak about a new narrative, I mean a new essence.

Silicon Valley, like any other concept, must have a name so that people can refer to it and a narrative so that people relate to it. In most narratives, innovators are business people and technologists. In the Silicon Valley narrative, innovators are gladiators and dragon slayers. Unemployment is the next dragon to slay. That’s the story I’m selling here, hoping you can relate to it and take a stake and role in that story, whether you are from the Valley, U.S. or any other place in the world.

The Silicon Valley is producing some stories I don’t like, and I think we all agree on this. The inequality in SF is a telling example of that. Some stories about Silicon Valley fit better into the “corporate America” narrative, they have nothing to do with dragon slaying. Fortunately, I also hear stories like SamaUSA https://i4j.info/2015/03/how-to-future-proof-the-workforce/ which I think in many ways is closer to what I feel Silicon Valley’s narrative. In a way, that’s back to the roots. I’m very frustrated by kids in my sons high school committing suicide because they aren’t getting straight As. The police have posted an officer at the railway crossing to stop them from jumping in front of the train, literally – I am not exaggerating. But the Silicon Valley narrative was not about getting top scores, it was about creativity, playfulness and well-intending mischief – the stuff that dragon slayers have been made of since the beginning of times.

I’m suggesting that Silicon Valley should approach itself and take hold of its narrative. A collective psychotherapy, if you wish. Should be wholesome. If Silicon Valley doesn’t manage it’s own narrative others will, like has happened to Israel (where I lived so I can tell you about it).

cheers

/D

——————–
David Nordfors, Ph.D.
CEO, IIIJ
[…]


Hagel, John (US – San Francisco)

Sat Mar 28 2015 09:33:48 GMT-0400 (EDT)

For those of you who are interested in the broader

For those of you who are interested in the broader report that the chart came from – it can be accessed here http://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/center-for-the-edge/topics/deloitte-shift-index-series.html Our discussion of ROA trends is captured in the report on Success or Struggle: ROA as a True Measure of Business Performance (link available on the web page cited above. We publish our Shift Index on a bi-annual basis. John

John Hagel
Director
Deloitte Consulting LLP

Co-Chairman
Center for the Edge

Tel: +1 415 932 5578
Fax: +1 877 481 3123
www.deloitte.com<http://www.deloitte.com/>

Deloitte Consulting LLP
101 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105

Executive Assistant – Carrie Howell
Tel: +1 408 704 2703
E-mail: […]

Have you read
The Power of Pull?
[Book Power of Pull dust jacket 050911]

From: Stephen Denning [mailto:[…]]
Sent: Friday, March 27, 2015 11:07 AM
To: Curt Carlson
Cc: Leah Belsky; David Nordfors; Blumenthal, Marjory; Esther Wojcicki; Robin Chase; Robert Cohen; […]; Bobby Sain; Johnny Boston
Subject: Re: [i4j2015] The (threatening) new narrative of Silicon Valley

My apologies for the chart not coming through. It comes from Deloitte's Shift Index and can be view here: http://blogs-images.forbes.com/stevedenning/files/2014/07/shift-index-roa-640pixels1.jpg.
I discussed it, along with some of the many arguments why I agree with you that we can and must do better. https://i4j.info/2015/02/jobs-and-the-w-2-economy/

I agree that "if we look at all the "regular” senior executives I find that most of them are struggling to keep up in the global innovation economy. The lifetime of the Top 500 is down to less than 20 years."

However I am not sure that we should be looking at the problem solely as one of the rarity of skills at innovation.

What we do know is that the prevailing management practices in big corporations are obsolete and virtually guarantee that we won't have much innovation. They were never designed to do that. They were aimed at protecting the status quo. The people who now end up in the C-suite are those who are good at that.

We have seen that corporations do a lot better at innovation when they put in place those management practices that have a track record of creating innovation.

It is at least plausible that many more corporations would do a lot better at innovation if they put in place those same management practices.

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com<http://stevedenning.com/>
You need to say more about this (PS the chart did not come through). For sure politicians are not alone in causing problems. I have spent my professional life working with some of the biggest companies down to endless start ups. I have no love for financial manipulation — much of the time it does not create real value. But if we look at all the "regular” senior executives I find that most of them are struggling to keep up in the global innovation economy. The lifetime of the Top 500 is down to less than 20 years. Creating major new innovations is just not that common a skill. Mostly founders have it and then, when they go, things too often get in trouble. Microsoft spends almost $10B a year on R&D and the company has been flat for ~20 years. Likewise politicians have little understanding of value creation. Lee Kuan Yew in Singapore was remarkable that way, and he proved how potent positive policies can be economically. He just asked what works, and then tried to do it even better. No magic. If Singapore, with almost none of the US’s advantages, can create a GDP per capita 20-30% higher (parity) than us, why can’t we do better? I think we can—a lot better.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com<https://www.practiceofinnovation.com>

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential information intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law. If you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message and any disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of any action based on it, by you is strictly prohibited.

v.E.1

From: Stephen Denning […]
Date: Friday, March 27, 2015 at 10:08 AM
To: C Carlson […]
Cc: Leah Belsky […], David Nordfors […], "Blumenthal, Marjory" […], Esther Wojcicki […], "[…]" […], Robert Cohen […], "[…]" […], Bobby Sain […], Johnny Boston […]
Subject: Re: [i4j2015] The (threatening) new narrative of Silicon Valley

Hi Curt,

It's true that "Most politicians are scarcity thinkers who are more interested in cutting up the pie than baking new ones."
One reason for that, though, is that the real economic pie has been getting steadily smaller, despite the apparent gains flowing from financial engineering and cheap government money. So there is a natural tendency to try to get a bigger slice of a smaller pie.
[http://blogs-images.forbes.com/stevedenning/files/2012/12/Shift-Index-ROA1.jpg]

Although it's fashionable to blame the politicians for everything, the primary responsibility for this decades-long economic debacle lies less with the politicians, and more with the captains of industry and hedge fund activists, who have also become "more interested in cutting up the pie than baking new ones."

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: 2661466ffebd32402ba47e82da795f3781c29a6f
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
b398788c090cd6a7eec04585229106014f0f4cd9
Twitter: 132586dfe8dde4032e25ab770c42437315daa4a3
Email: […]
Web: feb9b19ad80379b3fa7e0b78a73fbfd25fa87a8b<3c24c5ce160d1888fb5ab405f9cadadf72930867>

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 12:14 PM, Curt Carlson […] wrote:
Well said. I also agree with John that AI always turns out to be 100x harder than most think, but it is improving exponentially and at some point it will get there. When we did Siri it was the result of 10 years of R&D and venture incubation. Siri is still a relatively primitive technology but already it is good enough (in its many forms) to eliminate millions of jobs. Adam Cheyer, Siri’s original CTO, is off creating the next generation of Siri, which I expect will be impressive. Bit by bit.

For sure these technologies will create great workplace disruption. Whether we create enough jobs is an open question. To me one of the major issues is whether our politics can adapt fast enough and make decisions that promote “abundance” over “scarcity.” Most politicians are scarcity thinkers who are more interested in cutting up the pie than baking new ones.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: 705a544f9a1ef124c57c409a3b25c39ea4b3c81d<3bd158e584bfda8b62b90914cdd6a67e0b650335>

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/a/i4jsummit.org/group/i4j2015/.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to […].
To post to this group, send email to […].
Visit this group at 1b7f3bc8a067223fbf68ceb5d65e85521e929d16.


Bobby Sain

Sat Mar 28 2015 10:02:41 GMT-0400 (EDT)

David,

Let's assume the pressure posed towards these kids in Silicon

David,

Let's assume the pressure posed towards these kids in Silicon Valley is based on the ultra driven entrepreneurial mentality of the area; the youth is surrounded by incredible wealth and they want to mimic the success of their peer's friends and family.

Perhaps these kids believe that high marks in school creates high success in life, perfecting different facets along the way of what they consider "success" but not seeing the value in the outcome.

Could their lack in creative problem solving and their devaluing of the overall process be the culprit? I believe so. Considering SF has the largest wealth disparity in the nation, one could assume that the system itself isn't to blame but the interpretation of the purpose by those that can't grasp creative imagination and empathetic innovation.

Silicon Valley's billionaires and other high net-worth individuals are not money grubbing wealth mongers, at least not the ones I've encountered (nor those that have been heavily studied see http://www.pwc.com/us/en/self-made-billionaire-effect/index.jhtml ) . These people have immense compassion for improving the human condition. It just so happens that there is an amazing amount of wealth to be made in improving quality of life on a large scale.

Maybe the narrative shouldn't be on the geographic location, but on the strength of improving the human condition; San Francisco has the good fortune of being the epicenter for such improvements and innovations.

-Bobby


Bobby Sain

This message (including any attachments) is confidential and may be privileged. If you have received it by mistake please notify the sender by return e-mail and delete this message from your system. Any unauthorized use or dissemination of this message in whole or in part is strictly prohibited. Please note that e-mails are susceptible to change. Bobby Sain does not guarantee that the integrity of this communication has been maintained nor that this communication is free of viruses, interceptions or interference.


Stephen Denning

Sat Mar 28 2015 10:30:28 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Hi Bobby

I agree very much with your suggestion: "Maybe the

Hi Bobby

I agree very much with your suggestion: "Maybe the narrative shouldn't be
on the geographic location, but on the strength of improving the human
condition."

The story of Silicon Valley should be the story of an idea, not the story
of a place–the idea of continuous innovation that adds value to people's
lives.

By framing the Silicon Valley story as an idea, a person or a firm that
fully reflects this narrative idea, and continues to reflect it, could be
celebrated as "part of the real Silicon Valley story."

By contrast, those people and firms that are physically located in Silicon
Valley but don't fully reflect the narrative, or that have stopped fully
reflecting it, could be considered "not part of the real Silicon Valley
story."

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
<http://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/>
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com


Stephen Denning

Sat Mar 28 2015 16:36:59 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Hi Curt,

You write, “I have only found a handful of

Hi Curt,

You write, “I have only found a handful of companies that have an
innovation process that *can be described by middle management… *Some
positive examples are Apple, SRI, IDEO, Gore, 3-M (parts), Google (parts) …
Who else?”

To answer your question “Who else?”, I would suggest that the following as
companies with an innovation process (a) that can be described by middle
management, and (b) that is also generally supported by the top management:

Autodesk, Spotify, autos (Tesla, Magna International, Toyota), financial
firms (PENSCO Trust, Umpqua Bank, Ally, Discover), consulting firms
(Agile42, SolutionsIQ, NOSE, Menlo Innovations), gaming companies (Riot
Games, Valve), fashion firms (Zara, H&M, LVMH), Uber, WL Gore & Associates,
AirBnB, Amazon, Zappos, Twitter, Etsy, Whole Foods Markets, Unilever, Vinci
Group, Haier Group and Thedacare.

This is also a very much longer list of firms with *islands of innovation
within the firm*, where (a) there is an innovation process that can be
described by middle management, but (b) the innovation process appears to
be only partially supported by the top management, or in some cases is not
supported at all. You suggest Google and 3-M as examples. I would argue
that this list also includes:

Citibank, GE, Intel, Microsoft, SWIFT, Adobe, Ticketmaster, IBM, Adobe,
Salesforce, Philips, Dell, Disney, Morning Star, Chubb Insurance, Harman
Kardon, National Geographic, Facebook, LinkedIn, Media Saturn, Costco,
Ford, GM, Chrysler, Deutsche Telekom, BB&T, Dun & Bradstreet, Carlyle
Group, C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc., DSM, Ericsson, FMR Solutions,
Motorola, Shipping Newport News, Sungard, The Starr Conspiracy, Time
Warner, Unum, Wiley, Dish Network, International Airlines Group, Air
Liquide, Tesco, Adecco, Inter Ikea Group, UPS, among many others..

These islands of innovation are generally operating in the horizontal mode
of management that I have described elsewhere, while the top management is
often still in the vertical, top-down, command-and-control mode of the 20th
Century.

In this second group of firms, there is often considerable tension between
“the island(s) of innovation” and a top management which is focused on
quarterly earnings per share and the current stock price.

In some cases, the island of innovation is quite small. In other cases, as
at GE Health, the “island” is very large. These islands of innovation are
in constant peril from periodic cost-cutting drives from the top and they
are often starved from needed resources, particularly for large,
long-duration investments in innovation.

The two lists of firms should be seen as provisional and dynamic. Some
firms in the first list may be slipping into the second. Firms periodically
drop off the second list, when islands of innovation are abruptly crushed,
with a new CEO, a merger or a budget crunch.

The future of the Innovation Economy depends in large part on firms on the
second list advancing to the first. The islands of innovation in the second
list might be considered beachheads for the needed transition to the
Innovation Economy. The people in these islands of innovation are often
smart, dynamic, passionate, courageous and increasingly skilled in the art
of innovation.

But this is not an easy transition. As you say, it involves a great deal of
unlearning. And the stock market, activist hedge funds and C-suite
compensation policies pose considerable constraints. The transition is akin
to a Copernican revolution in management
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2013/07/11/the-copernician-revolution-in-management/>.

Overall, we get only a partial picture of what is going on if we think of
it in binary terms of innovative firms that are led by visionary founders
and those that aren’t.

We get a clearer picture by examining, case by case, what are the
management goals, practices, attitudes and values that are in place in all
or part of the firm and whether they encourage innovation or not.

I have written about these phenomena here.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2013/12/18/navigating-the-phase-change-to-the-creative-economy/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2013/05/13/the-creative-economy-can-industrial-giants-reinvent-themselves/

http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2012/06/01/ge-gets-agile/

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
<http://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/>
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Curt Carlson […]


Curt Carlson

Sat Mar 28 2015 17:51:06 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Dear Steve,
Many thanks. Excellent articles. You make great points and

Dear Steve,
Many thanks. Excellent articles. You make great points and your articles are very clear about what is going on. Have you worked directly in many of the companies you mentioned below?

I think the “islands of innovation” is the right way to think about almost all the companies we have worked with during my career. I would put the majority of the companies you list in the innovative category into the innovation island group. And yes, most islands are much more horizontal than vertical (Staff are team and initiative leaders, rather than “supervisors” — your authority depends on what you are achieving.). Previously my team was an innovation island at the Sarnoff Corporation before I became CEO at SRI. We did it independent of the other groups at Sarnoff. We developed the same approach at SRI when I joined because I had experienced how powerful it could be (my book Innovation describes how we got there—an ugly journey!). In retrospect I don’t know of another organization that took it as far as we eventually did at SRI (maybe Gore?). Tom Friedman made up Carlson’s Law of Innovation in his last book, to describe how we had pushed innovation down across the organization (“all top down is dumb").

And yes, these islands are very fragile and constantly at risk from some manager who wants to be “the boss.” As you note, these islands are growing around the world and can provide seeds for further development. But unless you are a Steve Jobs getting a large organization to behave this way is a huge challenge. He had the religion—it was non-negotionable. You have to really believe in it and know how to implement it. If you have not been that kind of value creator in the past it is rare to have the commitment to go at it 100% and stick with it. It is hard, mostly invisible work that takes years.

When I started this transformation at SRI most people had no idea how powerful “the way we work” could be so many asked us to “prove it." Others just didn’t want to work that way (almost all senior managers). And some of my Board wondered about sustainable profitability — it seemed “too soft." But over time we won the staff over and recruited people who wanted to work this way. Our results proved the case. Copernican revolution sounds a bit fancy, but it is like that. It is like TQM — generational.

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Herman Gyr

Sat Mar 28 2015 18:33:43 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Team,

I see a significant shift in interest in innovation practices

Team,

I see a significant shift in interest in innovation practices from companies as well as from countries. Three weeks ago I was invited to give a speech to Federal Councillor (Minister) Schneider-Ammann and 720 of his closest friends from the Federal Department of Economic Affairs, Education and Research, in Bern Switzerland. The topic: Innovation – what can we learn from Silicon Valley?

David recently helped to set up an office in San Francisco for the European Union specifically focused on IT innovation.

And, we are receiving an unending stream of visitors from Europe, and now increasingly from China. The world is waking up to the need for a disciplined approach to innovation – I assume you are noticing this in the number of books you are selling and talks you are giving, Curt.

Best,

H.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Herman Gyr, Ph.D.

Enterprise Development Group⎢+1 650 464 6419 ⎢ Skype: hermangyr ⎢ 930 Roble Ridge Road ⎢ Palo Alto, CA. 94306 ⎢ www.enterprisedevelop.com <http://www.enterprisedevelop.com/>


Rick Wartzman

Sat Mar 28 2015 18:44:53 GMT-0400 (EDT)

At the Drucker Institute, we are seeing the same trend:

At the Drucker Institute, we are seeing the same trend: large companies
hungry to figure out how to make innovation more systematic throughout the
entire enterprise. We work closely with different kinds of organizations on
this—manufacturers, retailers, agricultural producers, and also high-tech
companies.

We also work with them on what Peter Drucker called "planned abandonment."
Figuring out what to stop doing is an important precursor to innovation,
freeing up the resources needed to invest in tomorrow and stimulating the
search for the new.

Rick Wartzman, Executive Director
Mobile 323-896-0626 @DruckerInst <https://twitter.com/DruckerInst> @
RWartzman <https://twitter.com/RWartzman>

YESTERDAY/
TODAY/
MONDAY*

* Drucker Institute*
* What will you do on Monday that's different?

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 3:33 PM, Herman Gyr […]
wrote:


Stephen Denning

Sun Mar 29 2015 01:12:05 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Hi Curt,

I agree with you that it's legitimate to ask

Hi Curt,

I agree with you that it's legitimate to ask whether all the firms on my
first list truly go beyond "islands of innovation." Both lists should be
seen as hypotheses that are provisional and dynamic and subject to
continuing verification.

To answer your question, I have worked with, and am currently working with,
a number of the companies on both lists.

My background is as follows:

– I worked for several decades at the World Bank in various roles. Most of
the time, I was creating and leading various "islands of innovation." In my
final assignment from 1996 to 2000, I was director of knowledge management,
which involved spearheading a major strategic change in the organization.
This taught me a great deal about what's involved in changing an
organization that is entrenched in traditional management. It's no easy
task.

– after leaving the World Bank in 2000, I worked as a consultant in many of
the Fortune 500 companies <http://www.stevedenning.com/About/default.aspx>.
I tended to be recruited by the "islands of innovation." As part of this
work, I gained considerable insight into what was going on in those units
and their relationship to the top management.

– in 2010, I published The Leader's Guide To Radical Management
<http://www.amazon.com/The-Leaders-Guide-Radical-Management/dp/0470548681>,
a book which describes what management focused on continuous innovation
looks like.

– in 2011, I began writing for Forbes.com about radical management and
innovation. Since then, I have contributed over 600 articles
<http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/> on many different facets of
innovation and radical management.

– in 2012, I joined the board of directors of Scrum Alliance, an
association whose mission is to transform the world of work. It has some
375,000 members around the world and is growing at around 6,000 members a
month. These people are mainly located in tens of thousands of those
"islands of innovation." Scrum itself can be seen as a framework for
managing continuous innovation. It began in software development, but is
now spreading to many different fields.

– in 2015, on behalf of Scrum Alliance, I am leading a Learning Consortium
for the Creative Economy
<https://www.scrumalliance.org/why-scrum/learning-consortium>. It is a
group of firms, both large and small, in both US and Europe, that are
interested in learning from each other and figuring out how to make
innovation more systematic throughout the entire organization. The members
include firms on both lists. The work of the Learning Consortium will be
completed later this year and its findings will be presented at the Drucker
Forum in November 2015. More information about the Learning Consortium is
available here
<https://www.scrumalliance.org/why-scrum/learning-consortium/learning-consortium-resources>
.

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: 2661466ffebd32402ba47e82da795f3781c29a6f
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
<http://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/>
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com

On Sat, Mar 28, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Curt Carlson […]


Herman Gyr

Sun Mar 29 2015 10:54:41 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Bobby,
Here is an eye witness account of one of these

Bobby,
Here is an eye witness account of one of these "Silicon Valley kids:" http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2015/03/25/guest-opinion-the-sorrows-of-young-palo-altans
And another related article:
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2015/03/16/guest-opinion-keep-calm-and-parent-on
The conversation is becoming ever more inevitable and rich.
H.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Herman Gyr, Ph.D.

Enterprise Development Group⎢+1 650 464 6419 ⎢ Skype: hermangyr ⎢ 930 Roble Ridge Road ⎢ Palo Alto, CA. 94306 ⎢ www.enterprisedevelop.com <http://www.enterprisedevelop.com/>


Curt Carlson

Mon Mar 30 2015 19:56:11 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Dear Steve,
Yes I knew you had done a ton of

Dear Steve,
Yes I knew you had done a ton of things (although 600 articles is incredible). I asked if you had worked with the companies because we have found that almost all companies say they have an innovation process, but once inside them you find it is pretty rare to find one that is at all comprehensive. The Learning Consortium sounds interesting—we need more of that.
Best,
Curt

Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

“Our most important innovation is the way we work."


David Nordfors

Tue Mar 31 2015 20:00:35 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Bobby/Steve – YES it should be about Doing Good Innovation

Bobby/Steve – YES it should be about Doing Good Innovation and not the place to get very rich. Still, Silicon Valley is a place in the world. Places have cultures, too. So I’ll go for ‘Silicon Valley stands for innovation improving the human condition’. Plus ‘dragon slayer’. It’s disrupting markets in a good way, getting rid of the dragons.

The kids in Palo Alto are not happy with the situation. The pressure comes from parents and schools. Many kids have parents who connected to Stanford. High school is prep for college. Top colleges require top grades. Many kids of Stanford parents won’t get into Stanford. Thats tough.

——————–
David Nordfors, Ph.D.
CEO, IIIJ
[…]


Louisa Heinrich

Wed Apr 01 2015 09:25:04 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Hi David (and everyone),

Long-time reader, first time emailer. 🙂

I agree

Hi David (and everyone),

Long-time reader, first time emailer. 🙂

I agree with these kids that the way they're being educated is crazy. I
also think it's unfair to continue to propagate the notion that good grades
–> good university –> good job. While it's certainly true that a degree
from a top university will open doors, there are also growing numbers of
university graduates all over the world who are struggling to find work. At
the same time, I have deans of universities asking me and my colleagues in
the digital world what kinds of people we're looking to hire, so that they
can re-tool their curricula to match our needs. I always thought education
was about teaching us how to think – how to think critically, creatively,
laterally, productively – as a first order of business, and how to apply
that thinking as the second. But these days it feels more like a giant
global factory, churning out people with degrees that map directly to the
job titles they're supposed to be going for.

The biggest problem with this is that the world is changing so rapidly that
job titles that were around 5 years ago may not be around next year, or the
year after. Or they might mean completely different things. Surely it would
be more productive and effective to restructure our learning systems
accordingly – helping students to identify and develop skills around their
natural strengths and talents, and mitigate their weaker areas. Nobody's
brilliant at everything, so why are high school students expected to be?


Herman Gyr

Wed Apr 01 2015 10:45:39 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Welcome to the conversation, Louisa.

Re: your suggestion that we "restructure

Welcome to the conversation, Louisa.

Re: your suggestion that we "restructure our learning systems accordingly – helping students to identify and develop skills around their natural strengths and talents, and mitigate their weaker areas,” I am seeing some very interesting developments in this respect. Esther Wojcicki is a true pioneer and her book “Moonshots in Education” a must read guide to such a shift. Also, for something truly different check out: http://www.ubiquityuniversity.org <http://www.ubiquityuniversity.org/>

H.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Herman Gyr, Ph.D.

Enterprise Development Group⎢+1 650 464 6419 ⎢ Skype: hermangyr ⎢ 930 Roble Ridge Road ⎢ Palo Alto, CA. 94306 ⎢ www.enterprisedevelop.com <http://www.enterprisedevelop.com/>


Stephen Denning

Wed Apr 01 2015 10:49:14 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Hi Louisa,

You are quite right about the need to transform

Hi Louisa,

You are quite right about the need to transform thinking in the education
sector. Unfortunately education is increasingly infected with the very same
disease that is crippling industry and government: hierarchical bureaucracy.

I wrote about these educational issues, and what's involved in fixing them,
here:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2011/09/01/the-single-best-idea-
for-reforming-k-12-education/

The argument is captured in these two pictures:

http://b-i.forbesimg.com/stevedenning/files/2013/07/principles-traditional-education.jpg

http://b-i.forbesimg.com/stevedenning/files/2013/07/principles-reinvented-education.jpg

As in the industry and government, the required shift in thinking is
profound–something akin to a Copernican revolution in management thinking
<http://www.forbes.com/sites/stevedenning/2013/07/11/the-copernician-revolution-in-management/>
.

I believe it can be helpful to see the needed shift in education, not as a
set of issues peculiar to education, but rather as yet another instance a
broader set of issues that affect every aspect of society.

Steve Denning
Forbes blog: http://blogs.forbes.com/stevedenning/
The Leader's Guide to Radical Management
http://www.stevedenning.com/Books/radical-management.aspx
Twitter: http://twitter.com/stevedenning
<http://stevedenning.typepad.com/steve_denning/>
Email: […]
Web: http://stevedenning.com

On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 9:25 AM, Louisa Heinrich […]
wrote:


David Nordfors

Wed Apr 01 2015 14:19:35 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Competitiveness commits suicide: The suicide rate among high-school kids in

Competitiveness commits suicide: The suicide rate among high-school kids in Palo Alto – the unofficial capital of Silicon Valley – is 30 (thirty) times the national rate. Yes, 30 – no typo. It was said by Palo Alto Schoo District Superintendent the other day – he is now finally calling it a crisis. The suggested action: employ two mental health therapists. How about we learn to care about people and finding their unique strengths more than we care about celebrating who is best at doing the same things that everyone else is trying to do better than the others?

the comments on the article is are revealing
http://www.paloaltoonline.com/news/2015/03/31/with-a-sense-of-urgency-board-approves-mental-health-funding <42f55c91d8bedf26edeaf2f9a7352b2c6b530660>

——————–
David Nordfors, Ph.D.
CEO, IIIJ
[…]


Tatyana Kanzaveli

Wed Apr 01 2015 14:25:40 GMT-0400 (EDT)

My goal as a parent was one: what can I

My goal as a parent was one: what can I do to see my daughter happy.
Happiness comes from the intersection of a:) I love what I do; b) I have
skills to do what I like.
I was a guide – helping her to find that magic intersection.
We need to spend more time working with parents not just kids. Parents are
the real problem. My recommendation is to come up with parents educational
seminars and make sure parents participate.
Agree – an effort to help kids is also needed, but it will work only if
they come home and get support from their parents..

Tatyana Kanzaveli

CEO, Open Health Network <http://openhealth.cc> , Open Cancer Network
<http://opencancer.cc>
Featured in White House Blog
<http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/03/20/geeksgetcovered-unleashing-entrepreneurship-through-affordable-healthcare-0>
TEDxBayArea <http://www.tedxbayarea.com> organizer and licensee
500StartUps <http://500.co/about/>, Mentor
Richard Branson Centre for Entrepreneurship <http://www.bransoncentre.org/>,
Mentor

http://twitter.com/glfceo

1-650-4693243

Tatyana Kanzaveli
about.me/tkanzaveli
<http://about.me/tkanzaveli>


Esko Kilpi

Wed Apr 01 2015 17:49:02 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Dear friends,

This is perhaps a topic that we have not

Dear friends,

This is perhaps a topic that we have not yet discussed https://medium.com/@EskoKilpi/the-on-demand-economy-and-the-future-of-capitalism-32aa3911302f <e363360109b1107b02c5de80a10c6beaf39209eb>

Best wishes,

Esko

Esko Kilpi Oy Rehbinderintie 3 00150 Helsinki www.kilpi.fi <http://www.kilpi.fi/> Voice +358 400 501 800 Blog http://eskokilpi.blogging.fi Twitter @EskoKilpi Skype eskokilpi


Curt Carlson

Wed Apr 01 2015 18:38:50 GMT-0400 (EDT)

Very nice. Having a computer doing the sorting increases the

Very nice. Having a computer doing the sorting increases the competition, makes it more efficient, and increases "ownership." These are advantages. It is like being a freelance musician. You better be terrific, have an excellent network, be healthy, and be willing to work like crazy – it is very hard and most give up.

"The real problem with the on-demand labor market trend is that there is nothing new there despite the amazing technologies and great interfaces. It is a replication of the industrial model of labor, management and shareholders. The future of capitalism depends on whether firms create a much larger number of capitalists than they do today. Everybody will benefit, if, in the future, a larger number of workers think like owners and act like long-term investors. A sense of ownership could be and should be the difference between firms and markets. We should use the Internet to create the new, not to repeat the old."


Curtis R. Carlson, Ph.D.
Founder and CEO, Practice of Innovation
Former President and CEO of SRI International, 1998-2014
Website: www.practiceofinnovation.com

"Our most important innovation is the way we work."


Monique Morrow (mmorrow)

Sun Apr 19 2015 22:18:18 GMT-0400 (EDT)

"A sense of ownership could be and should be the

"A sense of ownership could be and should be the difference between firms and markets.
We should use the Internet to create the new, not to repeat the old."

This is exactly our opportunity — the "new" is multi-modal e.g creating narratives specific toeducation, economics, tech-policy, geo-political, enterprises 21st century and so on….

MM
________________________________

Post Importer