Serendipity35

The term FOBO appeared in something I was reading recently. It is the fear of becoming obsolete (FOBO) and it is very much a workplace fear and generally connected to aging workers and anyone who fears that they will be replaced by technology.

Of course, AI is a large part of this fear. It's not a new fear. Workers have always considered that they would be considered obsolete as they aged, especially if they did not have the skills that younger employees brought to the workplace. It has been at least two decades of hearing predictions that robots would replace workers. In fact, that was the case, though not to the levels that were sometimes predicted. Artificial intelligence is less obvious as it makes inroads into our work and outside life.

Employers and workers need to be better at recognizing the ways AI is already here and being used. Approximately four in ten Americans use Face ID to log into at least one app on their phone each day. That is about 136 million people. How many think about that as AI?

If you have an electric vehicle, A.I.-powered systems work to manage the energy output. In your gas-powered car, you very likely use an AI-powered GPS for navigation.  

One survey I saw found that just 44 percent of the global workforce believe they interact today with AI in their personal lives. But when asked if they used GPS maps and navigation, 66 percent said yes. What about predictive product/entertainment suggestions, such as in Netflix and Spotify?  50 percent said yes.  Do you use text editors or autocorrect? A yes from 47 percent. 46 percent use virtual home assistants, such as Alexa and Google Assistant. Even chatbots like ChatGPT and CoPilot - which are less hidden and more proactive for a user - had a 31 percent yes response.

Most of these are viewed as positive uses of AI, but not all uses are viewed as positive or at least are viewed as somewhat negative. One example of that category is the AI not so positive is its use in filling up newsfeeds. Each social media network - Facebook, Twitter, Instagram et al  - has its own A.I.-powered algorithm. It is constantly customizing billions of users’ feeds. You click a like button, or just pause on a post for more than a few seconds,and that information changes your feed accordingly. Plus, the algorithm is made to push certain things to users that were not suggested by your activity but by sponsors or owners. This aspect has been widely criticized since Elon Musk took over Twitter-X, but all the platforms do it to some degree.

Some common applications are both positive and negative. Take the use of artificial intelligence in airports all over the world. It is being used to screen passengers passing through security checkpoints. At least 25 airports across the U.S., including Reagan National in Washington D.C. and Los Angeles International Airport, have started using A.I.-driven facial recognition as part of a pilot project. Eventually, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) plans to expand the ID verification technology to more than 400 airports. This can speed up your passage through security which is something everyone would love to see, but what else is being done with that data, and will the algorithm flag people for the wrong reasons?

Do you want to push back on FOBO, particularly in the workplace? Some suggestions:
Continuous Learning: Stay curious and keep updating your skills. Whether it’s taking a course, attending workshops, or learning new technologies, continuous education is key.
Networking: Engage with your professional community. Networking can provide insights into industry trends and offer support and advice.
Adaptability: Embrace change and be open to new ideas. Flexibility can help you stay relevant.
Mindset Shift: Focus on your unique strengths and contributions. Everyone has something valuable to offer, and feeling obsolete often stems from undervaluing your skills.
Digital Detox: Sometimes, limiting your exposure to social media and other sources of comparison can reduce feelings of inadequacy.
Seek Feedback: Regularly seek feedback from peers, mentors, and colleagues to understand your areas of improvement and strengths.

When I was working full-time as an instructional designer, I became very concerned with making courses (especially online courses) accessible. In the early days of this century, very often the college I worked at was quite focused on making accommodations for students with special needs. That was a quick fix but not a sustainable approach.

Retrofitting online courses became part of my department's purview. Our instructional design thinking believed that access(ible) are more than making accommodations. We knew that courses that were accessible for students who had particular needs were also courses that ate probably more accessible for all the other students too. There were so many small examples of things we did. It turned out to be useful to all the students in the course.

One semester now 20 years ago, I decided to provide audio files of my short online lectures and of explanatory talk about some of the more complicated assignments. Some students told me that they would listen to them while driving in the car, or commuting on the train, or on their walks with their dogs. Most of these audio files were taken from videos that I had made often with accompanying PowerPoint slides. So the visual was lost but we all know that a good number of PowerPoint slides used for lecture or text, so not all of the visual content was needed.

The fact that students use them this way, not only convinced me to continue the practice but made me rethink what I was putting in those slides. Perhaps the truly visual presentations needed to be truly visual and not offered as audio files so that students would have to sit down and view the video version. I was rethinking my use of visuals overall.

 

The COVID-19 pandemic forced schools and corporate trainers to move their content online. Teaching and training went remote. But are remote and online learning the same thing? I see the terms used almost interchangeably.

Remote teaching, training, or learning has been done before there was an Internet to get online. Correspondence models and instructional TV/video predate the Internet. Today, we are using Skype and Zoom lectures, apps and tools but remote learning is still considered different from online learning.

I have taken classes and done training remotely that don't have many of the elements of a classroom experience. Things like reading assignments and writing assignments, assessments, collaboration on work, or full discussion boards are not used. For example, I have watched a series of history lectures that were mostly one-way experiences. I watched and although there was an opportunity to ask questions in chat or a Q&A time if you were watching live, this is not online learning.

Online learning should be more robust. It resembles more of what we consider to be "education" and would include interactive modules, assessments based on real-world scenarios, discussion forums designed to discuss and solve problems, synchronous learning sessions that involve discussions and problem-solving. There may still be live or recorded lectures, but that is not the only component.

Remote learning certainly has a place, especially in corporate and training situations. This can be pre-recorded content that can be used as needed, has a shelf life, and can be viewed again by users if necessary. Training on using software is a good example of content that works as remote learning. "But it's all online," you might say, "Why isn't it online learning?" Well, it is and it isn't.

Educators have long been trying to elevate engagement in online learning. It is not training. It requires a teacher or facilitator. Some elements are synchronous. Progress is monitored.

I hedged on my title for this post - "Remote Learning Is Not Necessarily Online Learning" - because fortunately, some training uses the elements that we consider to be integral to online learning. And, unfortunately, some online learning seems to be more like just remote training. And training and education have both been experimenting with hybrid models where learners and instructors can be in the same classroom working together but be extending the classroom online.

Remote learning is not inferior to online learning. It has its place in the broader "learning" experience. Remote learners sitting on their couch at home with a laptop may look the same as students taking an online course, but what is being provided to them, what they are expected to do with that content and what is the final expectations for that learning should be different. Putting a label on learning platforms is tricky, but it is important to know the differences.

 

Parody home office toy for kids watching their parents working from home - see actual toy below

 

As we move towards the winter of 2020, the pandemic is still the most dominant factor affecting work and school in America. In March of this year, the rise of COVID-19 cases forced a reimagining of work and school. I'll leave school for future posts and focus here on work. 

I could have used the title "Reimagining Work" as a title on a post in any of the 14 years that I have been writing here because we are always reimagining work and the workplace. But 2020 has also been the year of social and cultural uprisings throughout the world, a record number of hurricanes, catastrophic fires in California, dire warning about climate change, and an increasingly divided American political system. 

I saw a panel on this topic focused on reimagining the office and work-life after COVID-19. I think it's too early to say what the results will be, but it is clear that some things have been forced to change. The question is how many of those things will remain or will we return to some of what we were doing in 2019? 

Before the pandemic, it would have been safe to say that having offices were critical to productivity and creating a company culture. Estimates I found vary on how much work has moved out of offices. In April, I found that it was estimated that about 62 percent of employed Americans were working from home. Work from home was already a trend before 2020 but the number was closer to 25 percent. Prior to the pandemic, just 3.4 percent of Americans worked from home, but at the peak of the shutdown, an Upwork report in partnership with MIT found that nearly half of the U.S. workforce was working remotely. 

Will there still be competition for prime office space in major urban centers? Will companies be maintaining but downsizing their workspaces?

around the world, and many focused on solutions that were seen to promote collaboration. Densification, open-office designs, hoteling, and co-working were the battle cries. a couple of years ago. During the pandemic, many people have been surprised by how quickly and effectively technologies for videoconferencing and other forms of digital collaboration were adopted. For many, the results have been better than imagined.

According to McKinsey research, 80 percent of people questioned report that they enjoy working from home and 41 percent say that they are more productive than they had been before.

As I said, this reimagining was happening before the pandemic. In the 2017 book, Reimagining Work, the focus is on the business leader working in what the author calls a "new on-demand economy" positing that "traditional management strategies are becoming obsolete."

That obsolescence is driven from the bottom up. A skilled workforce wants much greater flexibility and more control over their work. That is not something major corporations really ever considered offering in the last century.

That flexibility began in this century with many startups and smaller companies. It's easier to turn around a small boat than it is to turn a large ship.  Some of those smaller companies - Uber, Lyft, Handy, Airbnb, Task Rabbit - have become big and the flexibility was built into their culture. Changes have already happened more broadly in the way companies recruit, develop, and train talent. As the book says, growth for a company is more than just expansion. It also means maturation, adaptation, and evolution. 

During the pandemic, employees were freed from commuting and work travel. That has given them more personal time and greater flexibility in balancing the work-life balance that has been part of attracting new employees for the past twenty years.

For employers, this shift means they can access new pools of talent without considerations of the location while saving on their real-estate costs.

I have had several jobs that were done virtually with only a few visits to the actual company offices. One of my sons started a new job during the COVID-19 summer and he has never been to the company offices. He did his interviews by videoconferencing and has met his co-workers only online and on phone calls.

I don't think total isolation from the office and co-workers is ideal, and there has been speculation about the effect these shifts will ultimately have on "office culture" - morale, company loyalty, camaraderie and other difficult to assess elements.

Almost everyone is looking to return to some reopening and return to whatever the new normal turns out to be. Though President Trump had predicted it would be "by Easter" or "when it gets warmer," no one really knows when we will return. Before a vaccine is available, the office experience of January 2020 will not return. those few offices (and schools) that have reopened require masks and have redesigned workspaces to ensure physical distancing. Companies are restricting movement to avoid typically congested areas (like elevators, break rooms, dining areas, conference rooms). The classic "hanging out at the water cooler" of the 20th century may be gone forever.

But we know that there is value in the social capital that comes from those informal conversations, meetings, and social engagements, not only with co-workers but with clients.

That panel I referenced asked questions that we don't have answers to at this time. Will corporate cultures and communities erode over time without physical interaction? Will planned and unplanned moments of collaboration become impaired? Will there be less mentorship and talent development? Has working from home succeeded only because it is viewed as temporary, not permanent?

Important questions. No answers yet.

 

MORE 

Another webinar on "Reimagining Work in the Pandemic and Beyond" from Harvard Business 

A report on "Reimagining work in the era of COVID-19"

* I used a parody home office toy as an illustration above but Fisher-Price does actually offer such a toy - but no crying baby or wine included.