Work. Time for a redesign.

Editor's Notes

• #3: Today Thanks to Danny for inviting me to take part - excited to be here & meet you all. I’m going to share my thoughts / experiences of how the world of work is changing and why what this means for design what should we do about it
• #4: Drawing game
• #5: We’re all just people – full of human frailty, hopes & dreams, needs & wants. The more we connect with each other, the more we trust each other and that makes us feel happier and safer. And isn’t that partly why we come along to things like this?
• #6: Hands up who’s familiar with this acronym… For those who aren’t,  it stands for volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous.
• #7: an acronym derived from the American Military’s response to the new conditions of warfare post Cold War, particularly as they started to face new kinds of terrorist threat. Now been adopted by business communityto describe our chaotic, turbulent, and rapidly changing business environment. We’ve only got to look at any news outlet to see these conditions writ large — and look at the high street and financial papers to understand how it’s translating into business.
• #8: Hierarchy fails in the digital age not because it is illegitimate, but because it is slow and the world has become fast.
• #9: Technology is forcing change on all the institutions that support the way we live Big firms are learning that they need to network their organizations in order to stay competitive against the onslaught of nimble startups. The organisations that will survive and thrive are those that are organised for adaptability – and are digital by default.
• #10: The tension between organizations optimized for predictability and the unpredictable world they inhabit has reached a breaking point. We need a new way. Future fit orgs will be built to learn and respond rapidly through the open flow of information; encouraging experimentation and learning on rapid cycles; and organizing as a network of employees, customers, and partners motivated by shared purpose.
• #11: We’ve crossed into a new ‘Normal’ : - the advent of the internet has challenged - and overcome - established business models (from shopping to shipping) - its enabled new agile competitors to emerge - with flexible, distributed, engaged workforces. - its introduced a new ethos based on community, trust and hyper-connectivity - open source, crowd-funding, businesses that create platforms for others In the last decade, we’ve seen a revolution in technology. It’s become intelligent, adaptive and scalable. Shouldn’t we expect the same from our organizations? If our organisations are changing, how will this affect how we work?
• #12: This change in conditions gives rise to a problem - we’ve built our organisations based on an out-of-date paradigm. Most of our major institutions, including corporations, belong to an industrial era. They are machines, in which resources are used to create an output. Humans are just another resource, with each person a tiny cog, Interchangeable, replaceable. These machines have been optimised for efficiency. They create a defined output using fewer and fewer resources at lower and lower costs. But we’re no longer living in the old economy, based on industrial-era principles. That’s over. It’s not our time, or just our hands that create value for our employers – but our creativity, our ability to innovate and solve problems, our responsiveness to changing conditions.
• #13: Organisations have got a job to do. They need to move on from the industrial model to one that enables their people to bring their brains, their heart & soul to their work, not just their hands. Maslow argued that individuals needed to satisfy basic needs such as warmth, safety and security in order to then realise their own personal growth and development. The same theory can be applied to how an organisation treats and engages with their employees. Those organisations that understand how to meet people’s needs fully benefit all round – higher productivity, profitability, higher retention of staff so lower recruitment costs, lower levels of sickness and stress, higher quality work and fewer work-related accidents and higher levels of innovation.
• #14: And here’s the problem – the UK is lagging behind the other G7 nations by nearly 20%. In effect, it takes our workforce 5 days to produce what the USA, Canada, France, Germany, Italy can make in 4 days. At least we’re ahead of Japan though. And if 70% of employees aren’t particularly interested in or committed to their work then it’s no wonder.
• #15: And there are more challenges on the horizon – with warnings that the rise of artificial intelligence (AI) and robots in the workplace could cause mass unemployment and dislocated economies If machines are capable of doing almost any work humans can do, what will humans do?’ WEF estimated that 7.1 million jobs could be lost through redundancy, automation, or disintermediation, while the creation of 2.1 million new jobs, mainly in more specialised areas such as computing, math, architecture, and engineering, could partially offset some of the losses. "Without urgent and targeted action today to manage the near-term transition and build a workforce with future proof skills, governments will have to cope with ever-growing unemployment and inequality, and businesses with a shrinking consumer base," said Klaus Schwab, founder and executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, in the report. job losses can be offset by employment growth in other areas.
• #16: Dr. Michael Osborne the co-investigator of the Oxford Martin Programme on Technology and Employment on the Future of Employment at FutureFest ’15 Those jobs based on applying standard rules are at high risk of automation. We traditionally think of robots and the factory floor but algorithms count as automation too – and these can be applied to more middle class jobs too – accountants, financial advisors, estate agents, lawyers are all at risk. Those jobs that are harder to replace are those that rely on more human traits – creativity and empathy. SO those of us in creative roles and those in the caring professions are safer – choreographers and funeral attendants. Does this mean that ‘human’ work will become more highly valued – will nurses earn more than bankers…? The final tweet show suggestions for the kind of jobs we should be creating – designing and training for: Wind and solar energy engineers, nanotechnologists & infomatics nurse specialists. Let’s hope someone’s joining the dots and updating the education system to make sure we’re helping children develop the right skills… http://www.oxfordmartin.ox.ac.uk/publications/view/1314 The Future of Employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?
• #17: One morning a few years ago I was looking in the mirror as I cleaned my teeth. My brain was noodling and I ended up adding up the number of days I’d been alive. It was 16,000(ish). It felt like a really big number and I wondered what I’d done with it all. But then it occurred to me that I might (fingers crossed) have another 16,000 days left. What will I do with them? How will I make them count. A good friend gave me this book when I told him that story and I’d totally recommend it to anyone who’s having a ‘16,000 day’ kind of moment. Because it’s important that we don’t just think about jobs – but about a life well lived. A sense that the time we put into our work has been well spent.
• #18: Let’s talk about money. Money’s weird. It doesn’t really exist – and yet it dictates all sorts of behaviour. Although we might think we work to get paid, we don’t really. It’s part of the package but once you get beyond basic needs it’s not actually the thing that motivates us. Dan Pink ‘Drive’. Incentivising tasks that require any kind of cognitive skill actually leads to worse performance. Pay rises are forgotten within 2 weeks. And the actual amount you get paid is less important than how it compares to others. The things that matter are actually closely aligned to the top of Mazlow’s pyramid the ability to direct our own lives, the sense of getting better at something that matters to us the feeling that what we’re doing is contributing to something greater than ourselves. So – we need new jobs: Jobs that use the skills that humans have and machines lack – creativity, empathy Jobs that motivate people to do their best work Jobs with purpose And we need organisations designed to enable people to do their best work
• #19: I am a designer. I believe it’s a mindset as much as a job title. It’s a way of approaching the world. So whatever work I’m doing, I approach it as a designer. Skills accrete with experience and can be applied to just about any problem. I won’t limit myself to one set of problems – I will follow my interest.
• #20: An entrepreneur can see that a good solution to a global problem will gain access to a global market. And taking a systemic approach opens the door into whole other business sectors – cars, storage, solar generation (and space travel!) Serving a higher purpose doesn’t have to be a solely altruistic enterprise – it can lead to profit too. http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-news/tech/the-next-big-things-by-the-boss-of-tesla-motors-car-november-2015/
• #21: Talking about purpose can be intimidating – especially if you’re not sure what your’s is. Does it mean you have no purpose? It’s OK to explore and journey towards something without knowing exactly where you’ll end up. I remember a board away day many years ago where we were each tasked to follow the exercises in an audio book to discover our own individual purpose. We went round the table and one by one my colleagues came out with these great one-line summaries of what they were there to do. When it got to my turn I just burst into tears because I’d done the exercise but it presumed you had no kids and mine were only little at the time – I felt like my purpose at that time was indivisible from my role as a parent. Which as a good feminist was highly distressing. And you don’t need to be inventing commercial space travel for your work to be meaningful – hospital cleaners can see the connection between their work and reduced infections, insurers can remember how their businesses were started by people looking out for each other in hard times. Most businesses were started to address a customer need, public services do just that – serve the public. There is meaning in most things if you look for it.
• #22: If the thought of purpose is all too much for you though I have an easy test for when I feel like I might be going off track. I call it the ‘give a shit’ test. If any of the answers are no – say no to the project or get a new job! Alex Kjerulf is the Chief Happiness Officer at WooHoo Inc – a Danish consultancy. He started International Quit Your crappy Job Day – it’s on March 31st. He says he started it because too many people stay for too long in jobs they hate. An estimated 20-25% of employees hate their jobs and wish they could quit tomorrow. This is bad for you. Being unhappy at work can destroy your career, your health, your family and your private life. Quitting is an option and often it’s the best option.
• #23: The world needs designers – and we can’t afford for good people to be stuck doing bad work. We need designers to be liberated to help move us forward to a better future.
• #24: We need design to be seen as strategically important. It’s easy to relegate design as unimportant, to view it as incidental. Leah Buley’s study from May 2016 asked UX pros from a variety of organisations about the state of UX where they work. In all 266 people participated, with titles ranging from UX designer to chief designer. The information they shared sheds further light on the variable state of UX today, and helps uncover what a strong UX practice currently looks like. It also pinpoints some warning signs that UX might be an underdeveloped capability – and consequently a risk factor – in an organisation. So if you’re part of a team that looks like this – and you give a shit – then it looks like you’re in a happy place. But if your team is a long way away from this – what can you do? Can you make change happen? Or is it time to visit Alex’s website?
• #25: Because it is ubiquitous. Technology mediates most of the functions of daily life, so designers who understand technology and behaviour have a role beyond screen-based media. To take a business online requires an understanding of the business operations and the ability to engineer organisational change to fit with a 24/7, agile, iterative environment. UX is easy to dismiss if its seen as just about websites, marketing and internal tools. Where it’s more highly valued teams work across a much broader remit - across multiple technologies, channels, devices and touchpoints. Across different types of contexts, from basic web and mobile design to emerging digital channels and – in about a third of cases – service design. This is my plea for you to not be unconsciously limited by your current role – designers have skills that are applicable in lots of different contexts, the boundaries are fluid and the opportunities boundless.
• #26: Because/… interactions happen all around us, all the time. And everything can be made better (which is kind of my shorthand for what I think design is). At the moment I’m working in communities to explore how the places we live can be improved to make them easier, nicer places to be. In particular I’m interested in how towns can provide spaces that help build creative clusters. And I approach it as a designer. I know I can’t know about everything in depth, so I use highly collaborative and participative approaches and work in partnership with experts whenever necessary.
• #27: I love this guy – I’ve been following his blog forever – and this quote is one that’s always stuck in my mind. It shifts the onus back onto the designer, rather than presuming a behaviour is innate, or the people aberrant in some way. I believe this is as true of a city street as it is of an online shopping basket. Studies show that streets lined with lots of small shops, populated with windows and doorways, cause people to walk more slowly and have more time for interactions with other people. Streets with long, continuous facades have the opposite effect – people walk much faster and have fewer interactions. And where there are fewer interactions there is less of a sense of community, higher feelings of alienation and higher likelihood of vandalism and street crime. So planners and architects can be seen to have created an environment that encourages unwanted behaviours. It can also be applied to the business world - It’s certainly true of the tech start-up model. Too many companies are putting too much effort and money into creating digital litter – apps that track your girlfriends periods, nappies with a pee sensor that tweets (check out ‘The top 10 worst apps of all time’ on the Indy if you don’t believe me). Incubators, angels and accelerators encourage entrepreneurs to view success as high growth, high investment and a big sale. And this is what gets celebrated in the press. But where’s the long term value in that? Where’s the social benefit?
• #28: I was interested to see Zach Klein’s talk at the Do Lectures, telling his story about the sale of Vimeo. Seller’s regret the day after the sale. http://www.thedolectures.com/zach-klein-build-the-company-that-you-wouldnt-sell/#.WBvZOhKLRE4 “At the age of 23, Zach sold his company Vimeo. But as soon as he sold his company, he wanted nothing more than to have those wings again. He missed it. He realised he wanted to keep flying. Zach humbly offers advise on what he's doing now (DIY.org) and the lessons he's learned that have informed his own company. Why doing something valuable that solves worthy challenges, contributes to culture, standing up for what's important, and behaving as if your company is going to be here 100 years from now, matters.” Why are ‘lifestyle’ businesses dismissed so readily? Why is fast, high growth and a big sale to be celebrated?
• #29: I’m going to tell you a bit about my journey My working life began in 1991. I remember getting my first email account and not knowing how it worked. I remember my first mobile phone. But technology has had a massive impact on my life – from starting out as an interaction designer to helping organisations transform themselves in the face of digital disruption. In 2014 NixonMcInnes, the consultancy I worked for for 9 years went through its own radical transformation. In response I decided to give myself a year to experiment with how I work. I realised I’d become disillusioned with the work I was doing – that it wasn’t helping me make the changes I wanted to see in the world. I knew I wanted to use my experience in a different field but I wasn’t sure what that was. So I set up PurposeLab and used Otto Scharmer’s Theory U as a framework to explore and experiment to find the work that has most meaning to me. I ended up creating a set of prototypes that have now evolved into a new practice. Still based in participative design and problem solving, but operating in an entirely new field. To do this I had to rework my relationship to money – I realised that what I earnt represented seniority, status and progression. But that outside of a company I no longer needed any confirmation of that. So I worked out what income my family really needed and set that as my base level. So long as I make that, I’m OK. I also gave myself some rules for my experiment: I won’t make any decisions based purely on money I will use my values to make decisions I won’t work alone I will live this ‘out loud’ and openly share what I’m doing and what I’m learning
• #30: I combine consultancy work for paying clients with self initiated projects. Mostly the projects are unfunded – but its these that have lead me into the new areas that are now turning into paid work. At one point I was feeling really stressed because I was stupidly busy but I had no money. So I made this little model and plotted all my projects on it. I found the reason – just about everything I was doing was in the bottom right quadrant. So that helped me let some stuff go and try to move the more compelling projects up into an offer I could market. The most difficult bit was deciding about the pirate pot – which is when I cam up with the give a shit test. Even if I need the money its just not worth doing bad work – it uses up time and energy that’s better used getting the work you do want.
• #32: The macro VUCA conditions provide us with great opportunities as well as challenges. We can take this as a chance to change the way our organisations work, to change the way we work inside - or outside - of those organisations and that can help us reconnect to the places we live in ways that makes us happier and our communities healthier. We are the system - the system of our community emerges from the choices we take & the relationships we choose to operate from.
• #33: thepurposelab.uk