It ain't necessarily so!
REH
Keith Hudson wrote:
> Happy New Year to all FWers. (I'm assuming that Futurework is operational
> now!) Here's something I wrote over the break and which will appear in a
> new type of Internet encyclopedia starting in about a month
> (<www.calus.org>)
>
> ---------------------
>
> THE STRUCTURE OF FUTURE WORK AND ITS CONSEQUENCES
> Keith Hudson
>
> The structure of future employment will not be compatible with the
> distribution of talent
>
> ----------------------
>
> In human history there have been four distinctly different types of
> economies, each requiring different working structures, or intellectual
> inputs. The four phases are: 1. Hunter-Gatherer; 2. Peasant Agriculture; 3.
> Manufacturing Industry; 4. Post-industrial Service Society.
>
> 1. Hunter-gatherer. Homo sapiens emerged from primate origins several
> million years ago and became indistinguishably human at about 50,000 years
> ago. Most of man's food was collected by the females, but topped up with
> animal protein from the hunting expeditions of the males. Their daily life
> was perilous because predators could easily attack their primitive camps
> and hunting groups, and the unintelligent or incapable would be easily
> culled. By definition, the normal genetic distribution of abilities that
> man's predecessors had evolved over millions of years precisely matched the
> 'job structure' of early man. For our purposes, this genetic distribution
> may be considered to be a diamond shape in which the abilities of the broad
> mass of the population lie across the widest part of the diamond, with
> decreasingly fewer people of much higher or lower abilities occupying the
> top and and bottom parts of the shape.
>
> 2. Peasant Agriculture: From the time when man had finally extinguished
> most slow-moving large game at around 10,000BC, he had to resort
> increasingly to settled agriculture. Generally, this required far less
> intelligence than hunting. However, the ability to store cereals and the
> development of metal products (including coinage) which then followed meant
> that wealth could be passed on within families and, from then onwards,
> society became dynastic and intensely hierarchical. The various civil and
> religious authorites ensured that the peasantry were well and truly
> conditioned to accept their role and not to develop their inborn abilities.
> While suppresion of this sort could be maintained for quite a long time
> within a hierarchical society it could not be maintained for ever. The bad
> fit between the distribution of abilities and the nature of
> work/opportunities and the subsequent tensions have been the cause of
> repeated strife and savagery in every agricultural civilisation from about
> 5,000BC until the present day.
>
> 3. Manufacturing Industry. The first successful long-term development of
> manufacturing industry from about 1700 onwards in Europe meant that the
> uneducated peasants were forced off the land and into the factories. Here,
> a higher skill level was necessary and many new skills had to be acquired.
> In addition, the industrial society required a considerable extension in
> the number of professional and academic jobs, and there were huge
> opportunities for able and enterprising individuals. The pyramidal
> structure of jobs of the previous agricultural era would no longer do. The
> requirements of industrial society were much more akin to the
> diamond-shaped distribution of abilities and, generally speaking,
> industrial societies have been somewhat more peaceful than the wars and
> revolutions that characterise peasant societies.
>
> 4. Post-Industrial Service society. Since about the middle of the 20th
> century, the types of industry which needed large numbers of workers of
> average abilities have seriously declined. Automation, plus an even faster
> growth of brand new service occupations, means that people with high
> abilities are at a premium. At the same time, there is a considerable
> dumbing down of many traditional service jobs. The job structure in the
> developed countries is thus rapidly becoming more akin to an hourglass
> rather than a pyramid or a diamond. The shape of an hour-glass is very
> different from that of the diamond. The mismatch betwen abilities and
> requirements will undoubtedly lead to renewed civil problems in developed
> countries and, as some aver, a widening gulf between two parts of the human
> population.
> ________________________________________________________________________
>
> Keith Hudson, General Editor, Handlo Music, http://www.handlo.com
> 6 Upper Camden Place, Bath BA1 5HX, England
> Tel: +44 1225 312622; Fax: +44 1225 447727; mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ________________________________________________________________________
