Tackling The Future Head-On

Our challenges with change

We have a love-hate relationship with change. In some cases, we welcome change with open arms, in others we resist or try to escape it. We love it when the immediate benefits are obvious to us. We hate it when it is demanding of us – when we feel it threatens our comfort, security, or way of life. When we set our eyes on the future and we want to do so in a sincere and meaningful way, not merely as an academic exercise, we need to consider our emotional response to the accelerated change we experience in the 21st century - not only our views about it.
 
From the earliest days, man had to deal with disruptions. The forces behind it were however simple and recognizable. They were mainly those of nature and hostile people competing for land and resources. Even with three industrial revolutions behind us, we could still be reasonably comfortable with our ability to reflect and learn from past experiences by identifying the cause-and-effect relationships. However, it is our shared experience today that what used to be obvious is not obvious anymore – drafting three and five-year strategic plans feels like a waste of time. It is all happening too fast, too unpredictable and complex. And yet, we cannot be self-defeating, throw our arms in the air and stop trying to apply our minds. 

Tackling the future head-on has to do with change – how we respond to it and how we are part of it. It is interesting that when you would ask an audience “do you want change?” most hands will go up. With no specifics, we assume the change will address our needs or wants – new experiences, a bit of adventure, a better, more comfortable world to live in, etc. When we are asked “do you want to change”, few if any hands go up. We assume that changing ourselves might dislodge us from our stable sense of self and we don’t want to risk that. And yet, we all want to feel we have value. We all want to feel relevant. So the obvious question is, if indeed we want the change we hope to see, who will take the lead? The pope, the president, the governing party, the CEO, or just the non-specific ‘they’? 

A hard, unsympathetic message you hear in the 4th Industry world is “disrupt or be disrupted”. The time to rely on heroes and saviors who will shield us from disruption has gone by. As the world becomes flatter, more democratized and open to diverse ideas and influences, we are required to develop our independent and critical thinking. In other words, we need to embrace self-leadership. In leading ourselves more consciously we develop our mind from a socialized mind to a self-authoring mind to a self-transforming mind (Kegan 2009). From being completely tuned in to the voices of authority figures and the collective, we develop to find our own voice and direction and to write our own success stories. We then, hopefully, develop further to being willing to also listen to others for deeper understanding with more self-reflection which enables us to recognize the filters through which we formed our earlier perceptions. To tackle the future head-on is not an ask for a few daredevils who are willing to take risks in order for the rest to follow in their footsteps. In the 21st century, it puts the magnifying glass on each one of us to be willing to develop ourselves for the challenge. 

We are not only rational beings but also emotional and spiritual. Tackling the future head-on and going through change can also mess with our emotions, values, and beliefs. In a 21st century world, we have already experienced the accessibility of information and knowledge. We have experienced interconnectivity and diversity of worldviews, cultures, belief and value systems as well as customs. We probably have become less judgmental and less defensive.
 
However, to effectively navigate the stormy waters will require us to collaborate and trust people - which is to not only open our minds but also our hearts. It will be difficult to effectively collaborate if we remain distrusting and cynical, saying one thing but thinking and believing another when we engage. Certainly, we carry the risk of being disappointed when we open our hearts to others. But in leadership, we expect to see both sides of trust: being trustworthy and being trusting. In leadership, you don’t wait for others to reach out, you reach out first. For some of us, it probably means that we have to let go of whatever keeps us in the grip of cynicism and fear. 

New technology brings change and many of us probably also have a love-hate relationship with technology. It is easy to hate it when we perceive it as something inhuman, something that ruins the beauty and purity of nature or something that makes us too dependent on it – we quickly stress when it fails us. We love it when it is a novelty, interesting and does something for us, like making life easier or our work efforts more productive. In this love-hate relationship, we are not always sure if we should keep technology at a distance or open the door to it even wider.
 
Should technology scare us? Yes and No. If, for instance, it means that it interferes negatively in our relationships, then yes, it should scare us. If it means that it facilitates connectivity and conquers poverty, aids, and cancer, then no, we should praise it. The book by Nicholas Carr, The Shallows: What the Internet Is Doing to Our Brains , articulates what many of us feel uncomfortable with – how we can be enslaved and intimidated by technology at the expense of what we value as being good for relationships, proper attention and concentration, focus and healthy living in general.
 
However, instead of asking whether technology should scare us or not, we should appreciate who is responsible for it in the first place. And it is obviously ourselves. Even though the technology we produce, such as Industry 4.0 technology, could become a threat to us in a number of ways, we should remind ourselves that we remain responsible for what we have created. In that sense, technologies are extensions of who we are and what we do with our abilities. They are amplifications of our power, but not separate living monsters to fear or fight. Where technology presents the how of change, humans presents the why. Why and for what purpose will ultimately determine our well-being and what we gain from the technology of the day. 

In a nutshell, the 4th Industrial Revolution refers to dramatic social and economic changes as a result of an array of technological breakthrough inventions impacting on all industries. It includes technologies such as the Internet of Things, Robotics, Artificial Intelligence, Augmented Reality, and Big Data. It can be described as the revolution of digitization and cyber-physical systems (a mechanism that is controlled or monitored by computer-based algorithms). This follows the technology of steam power and mechanization of the first revolution, electricity and mass production of the second and the internet and automation of the third.
 
In his book, Shaping the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Klaus Schwab makes the important point that the Fourth Industrial Revolution is much more than just a description of technologically-driven change. “We should not resign ourselves to the inevitability of default options … Debate values at all stages of innovation … The benefits include spreading prosperity more widely, reducing inequality and reversing the loss of trust that is dividing societies and polarising politics.” Ultimately, the changes need to be human-centered.
 
Indeed, “tackling the future head-on” should not be interpreted simplistically. If it is interpreted as an encouragement to seize opportunities for own success, to get ahead and win the competition, then it is still old paradigm thinking. The 4th Industry challenges and opportunities are of a global nature and can only be treated as such. As much as there are opportunities to make great advances in all industries, the world is also facing global threats of instability. Think about climate change, nuclear wars and social unrest due to high levels of inequality. The fact that the richest 1 percent owns half the world’s wealth is unsustainable and high risk. No nation can solve global existential threats on its own. No matter from where you are and what work you do, collaboration will be key in responding to 21st-century challenges.
 
The 4th Industrial Revolution will disrupt and impact all areas of our lives. In the new world of work, it is expected that many jobs of a mechanical, repetitive nature will be done by robots. It is estimated that close to 60% of current jobs have at least 30% of tasks that can be performed by computers today. Furthermore, an expected 35% of skills will change across industries as new technologies, business models and markets develop. Instead of panicking about potential job losses, our response should be to focus on the human only capabilities that will be required in the new world of work - abilities such as creative and innovative thinking and problem-solving.
 
Reskilling, “rewiring” our brains and generally re-inventing ourselves at the young age of fifty will become increasingly important to stay relevant. In addition, it will be more beneficial to think in dynamic terms about the different roles we can play at work to contribute to work organizations or society than to think of jobs in static or fixed terms. The idea of “best practices” will give way to more divergent thinking, experimentation, and creative solutions. 

The acronym VUCA refers to what we have come to known as features of our 21st Century world namely, Volatile, Uncertain, Complex and Ambiguous. When we reflect on and discuss leadership, these descriptors of the context within which we need to lead, need to be central in our thinking. Similarly, discussing our readiness for the Industry 4.0 change, forces or challenges, leadership has to be at the core of our thinking.
 
Leadership incorporates leading self, others, and change. Effective leadership requires balancing and developing all three leadership areas. In developing our leadership we hope to remain relevant and influential for our times which leads us to revisit our thinking paradigms or the lenses through which we view the world. If we recognize the patterns of our thinking as they were influenced by historical and socio-economic factors, art and the march of science, we can match them with appropriate effective patterns of thinking for the modern world and it will highlight the shifts we need to make. One such a shift is from convergent thinking to divergent thinking.
 
We use convergent thinking to analyze problems and break them down to their parts for closer inspection and conclusive judgment and decisions. It is linear and systematic. What convergent thinking doesn’t help us with is to come up with creative ideas, explore possibilities and allow ourselves the freedom to experiment. For that, we need to develop divergent thinking. Improving our divergent thinking is what would help us facing Industry 4.0. It helps us to see the connections between things, to be flexible, not obsessed with what is best, but take creative risks. In an Industry 4.0 environment, we are challenged to replace the need for the perfection of knowing with the willingness to seize the unknown. Thinking about our education systems, the shift needed is to have universities as the birthplaces of ideas, not degrees to show how much I know … we can always quote google instead.
 
To lead effectively in a VUCA world you will find it helpful to be more curious than convinced, more responsive than standardized and more passionate than diligent. In a global study done by IBM, creativity, integrity and global thinking were identified as the top 3 leadership qualities for the new world of work. Schwab emphasizes systems leadership and explains that it is about a shared vision of change and actions that include all stakeholders of the global society. Ultimately it needs to shift the structures of our social and economic systems in order to deliver sustainable benefits to all citizens, including for future generations. The scale, complexity, and urgency of the challenges facing the world today call for leadership and action that are both responsive and responsible.
 
An old African proverb states, “If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.” Industry 4.0 brings a sense of urgency. And it is justified if we apply the principle of global thinking for relevancy. However, our sense of urgency should help us focus on how to connect, collaborate and co-innovate, not on frantic actions to save my own skin. It will be counter-productive and short-sighted to make use of technologies just because we can. We might go fast for a while but it will not sustain us. We, therefore, need to follow the advice to integrate our ethics and values in our decision making and do it together. Do not only ask if something is feasible, ask for what purpose.
 
From the above it is clear that your commitment to the following will serve you well in tackling the future head-on:

Gerhard Van Rensburg founded New Era Leadership and worked as a leadership and executive coach, development facilitator and academic supervisor since 2002. He holds a doctorate in leadership and organizational structures. He is currently an associate of The Da Vinci Institute for Technology Management. Since 2015 Gerhard is the director of the Future Leaders Africa and faculty member of the Oil & Gas Knowledge Sharing Training Institute. Connect Gerhard Van Rensburg