{"id":164894,"date":"2017-08-14T13:28:58","date_gmt":"2017-08-14T17:28:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fiix.wpengine.com\/?p=164894"},"modified":"2019-09-06T13:33:30","modified_gmt":"2019-09-06T17:33:30","slug":"5-things-to-know-about-your-job-and-automation","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fiixsoftware.com\/blog\/5-things-to-know-about-your-job-and-automation\/","title":{"rendered":"5 things to know about your job and automation"},"content":{"rendered":"

If you type \u201cwill my job\u2026\u201d into Google, the top suggestions that pop up are all some variation on \u201cwill my job be taken by a robot\u201d. It\u2019s a legitimate fear these days, especially in the manufacturing sector, which has already seen significant job loss due to automation and stands to see even more<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Yes, the America labour market is vulnerable. But there are a lot of factors to consider before we throw our hands in the air and resign ourselves to serving our robot overlords.<\/p>\n

Last month, Daron Acemo\u011flu, a Professor of Economics at MIT gave a lecture titled, \u201cRobotics, AI, and the Future of Work<\/a>\u201d. In his lecture,\u00a0Acemo\u011flu<\/span> says that we have no real way of knowing whether we\u2019re heading for a period of instability for workers, or a future of unprecedented wealth and prosperity. But he does highlight a few key pieces of information that can help today\u2019s workers understand what\u2019s actually going on with jobs in the era of automation.<\/p>\n

Automation and the future of work: 5 things to know<\/h2>\n

Understand the difference between enabling and replacing technologies<\/h3>\n

Automation generally takes two forms: Enabling and replacing technology. As the name suggests, enabling technology helps us do our jobs more efficiently, by augmenting our abilities. Replacing technology, on the other hand, completely automates tasks traditionally done by humans so that we\u2019re no longer necessary.<\/p>\n

Don\u2019t fear brilliant technology, be worried about the so-so stuff<\/h3>\n

While at first blush it might seem like replacing technologies are the ones to fear, this isn\u2019t necessarily the case. These technologies do have the capacity to reduce wages, labour demand and employment, but there are knock-on effects that aren\u2019t always negative. Robots, overall, cost less than human workers. So by using robots in manufacturing, the cost of production goes down, which lowers the cost of the product itself. Lower prices generally mean people buy more, increasing demand for labour in that industry. And more demand for labour = more jobs!<\/p>\n

In this ideal scenario, brilliant technology that dramatically increases productivity should not be any cause for concern. But the reality is that there is a lot of so-so tech\u2014stuff that replaces workers but doesn\u2019t increase productivity enough to really reduce costs\u2014that we should be more worried about.<\/p>\n

We have always found ways to create jobs to offset automation…<\/h3>\n

Automation is far from a new concept and we have always created new jobs when replacing technology has displaced workers. The agriculture and textile industries<\/a> are good examples here. Yes, technology came in and replaced a lot of workers, but the productivity gains in these industries gave them room to expand, which created new jobs for people.<\/p>\n

…but external conditions don\u2019t always enable technology to enhance productivity<\/h3>\n

Technology does not exist in a bubble, and sometimes external financial, political, and social forces just don\u2019t align in the right way, which can result in a technological bottleneck.<\/p>\n

Acemo\u011flu<\/span> gives the example of cars: The technology we use in the auto industry has definitely evolved but we don\u2019t get from point A to point B any faster than we did 30 years ago. This is because traffic regulations overall haven\u2019t changed much in tandem with technology. Other factors like deteriorating infrastructure and more cars on the roads also add to the problem.<\/p>\n

In other words, as much as technology can jump forward, \u00a0the surrounding factors are often too slow to catch up. So workers are replaced by automation, but we don\u2019t see significant enough productivity gains elsewhere in society to pick up the slack.<\/p>\n

Policy can help control the impact of technology on workers<\/h3>\n

One idea that needs to be more prominent in conversations around technology and work is that we still have a say in the matter<\/em>. People control the implementation of technology, and it\u2019s up to humans to create policies that govern how replacing technologies are rolled out.<\/p>\n

\u201cWe need to start thinking about policy as an additional lever in order to increase the shared nature of the prosperity that new technologies bring,\u201d says\u00a0Acemo\u011flu<\/span>.<\/p>\n

He goes on to outline the three key facets of this policy conversation:<\/p>\n