The economic debate over automation generally
and artificial intelligence specifically must no longer be about whether technology will take away jobs. It has and it will continue to do so. Meanwhile other work is being created. The larger question is that given the widespread use of tech, especially mobile devices, why it is taking so long for the benefits to be more equitably distributed.
Adaptation of technology often takes as long as 40 years - and one could argue that we are 'only' 20 years into this latest wave. As Henry Ford understood as he expanded the accessibility of the automobile, success lay in the scale offered by the broadest possible ownership of his product, exemplified by its affordability to his own workforce.
The debate is currently centered on whether the the process is working but taking its time or whether more has to be done to ease the transition. Are we really worse off than our predecessors, going back to the industrial age. Or is the impact of mass communication making the public more aware of the problem? Successful companies are not waiting for answers, but are rethinking organization, compensation and strategy to actively manage rather than passively accept the result. JL
David Rotman reports in MIT Technology Review:
Apple stores have found a winning strategy by not following the
conventional logic of using automation to lower labor costs. The company has deployed an army of tech-savvy sales employees
toting digital gadgets to offer a novel shopping experience and to
profitably expand its business. "We always wanted to increase productivity. The
solution is not to hold back on innovation, but how do you keep people engaged." Machines are tools. If ownership is widely shared, people could boost productivity and
increase both earnings and leisure.