Friday, May 24, 2013

Redefining Work in the Knowledge Era


As the knowledge, web-based economy replaced the industrial economy, new frameworks evolved to redefine work, business strategy, and market opportunity.  Where the industrial economy was dominated by hierarchical command and control organizational structures, competition for scare resources, and the acquisition of physical infrastructure, the emerging knowledge economy reshapes these traditional economic assumptions.  Rather than hierarchical organizational structures, the knowledge, web-based economy values collaboration, networks, teamwork and access to information.  Similarly, the knowledge economy transitioned from a reliance on scare resources such as land, labor and capital to a new boundless, open and renewable resource:  information.  The knowledge economy shifted the business model from physically defined locations to vast, evolving global networks.  Organizations became adaptive, intelligent and self-regulating.  The impact of this global economic shift changed the nature of our work and our responsibility as leaders (Friedman, 2007). 

In the industrial age, the assembly line shaped the nature of work.  People honed a specific skill and repeated the task in a routine manner each day.  In contrast, today our work is “de-routinized” (Gartner, 2010).  Analysts argue, “the core value that people add is not the processes that can be automated, but in non-routine processes, uniquely human, analytical, or interactive contributions that result in words such as discovery, innovation, teaming, leading selling and learning” (Gartner, 2010).  Ideally, the knowledge economy values risk-taking, creativity, and a worker’s ability to learn and develop new skill sets. Successful knowledge era workers embrace flexibility, continual learning, and high performance work teams. 

Today’s workforce is more aptly described as a global ecosystem of skills and talents prepared to seize opportunities for emerging companies.  Teams of people, rather than single individuals, grapple with different challenges and opportunities on a daily basis.  People build off the ideas and lessons learned by others.  Collaborative knowledge is leveraged to enhance learning and strengthen the organization’s effectiveness.  Social networks facilitate global connectivity.  Friedman suggests that “the best companies are the best collaborators” (2007, p. 457).  Therefore, organizational leaders prepared to embrace the new model of work in a flattened world may more readily reap the benefits of the knowledge economy by developing organizational cultures committed to continual learning, team work, collaborative technologies, and institutional agility (Husband, N.D.).

To develop cultures prepared to embrace these attributes, leaders must first model such behaviors themselves.  They must model continual learning and foster strategic conversations with leadership teams about emerging trends.  Leaders must act to facilitate the transfer of knowledge between all levels of the organization.  Embracing horizontal structures that reward collaboration strengthens organizational effectiveness.  Moreover, leaders must also examine the viability of strategic partnerships and outsourcing as strategies for enhancing the organization’s pool of available resources.  Friedman asserts that strategic partnerships are not mere cost-saving measures, rather they enhance innovation and strengthen organizational outcomes. 

Perhaps it is ironic that the traditional citadel of knowledge creation – the university – finds difficulty in understanding its evolving role in a knowledge economy.  Arguably, the traditional university environment remains relatively similar to the university environment of four-hundred years ago.  Agrarian-oriented semester systems supported by traditional lecture-oriented classes remain the hallmark of most undergraduate education.  However, the emergence of the web-based economy of the past decade forced many institutions to rethink the traditional framework for the delivery of education.  This class, for example, models new pedagogical approaches delivered without the constraint of time, distance, or location.  Students engage in facilitated dialogues, cross-pollinating their knowledge base through interactions with class members who possess distinct and different skill sets.  As a university leader, my goal remains focused on facilitating through professional development, mentorships, partnerships and new interdisciplinary taskforces a redefined framework for both the content and delivery of a university education.  Agility and adaptability must define our organizational structure and culture in order to seize emerging opportunities.  Requiring the adoption of new technologies for communication and collaboration enhances the effectiveness of new teaching pedagogies and improves the vitality of the strategic conversations shaping our institutional strategic plan.  Furthermore, our institution is close to signing an agreement to collaborate with an international university in the developing world to deliver targeted adult education in areas of healthcare, basic communication, and small business management to meet specific and emerging needs within their regional economies.  These partnerships strengthen our faculty and students global connection to people from around the world, while simultaneously improving the educational base and economic opportunities of people in the developing world.  A knowledge-oriented economy fueled by a participatory, open and evolving web has dramatically altered our traditional models of work. 

Friedman, T. (2007). The World is Flat (3rd ed.) New York: Picador.

Gartner. (2010, August 4).  Gartner says the world of work will witness 10 changes during the next 10 years.  Retrieved from http://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/1416513

Husband, J. (N.D.) What is Wirearchy? Retrieved from http://wirearchy.com/what-is-wirearchy/

 

4 comments:

  1. Your collaboration with an international university fits this new world that we are currently discussing...very cool!

    As you know, my team at VCU spent the last week with 20 faculty having a conversation about online teaching. When we debriefed on Friday, they all said that it had been transformational - that they came in thinking they would learn some tools for teaching, but they left reconceptualizing the whole notion of teaching. We will now work with these 20 over the next 6 months to develop their courses...but this conversation up front is critical to success...and this is our fourth cohort in four years.

    I note this to support that I totally agree with your comment about strategic development and mentorship enroute new processes for delivery and new content. I hope this course experience is of help!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Britt,
      I am very intrigued by your process of educating online faculty. We use a six week module in which we take students through a simulated on-line class experience that helps them discover the learning transformation that occurs with various online pedagogies. However, one of the critiques is that students miss informal interaction opportunities with others taking the online course. The idea of bringing them together (since we are all at the same institution), and allow them to explore and collaborate in person has some intriguing possibilities. While we were trying to mimic the online learning environment, perhaps we need to consider how to provide a reasonable ramp up to the transformation that occurs in online learning. Thanks for sharing!

      Delete
  2. To: Emerging Trends in Higher Education
    From: NotSocrates

    Nice overview of how work is changing based upon technology and the web. I think you summarized it correctly when you said that to be successful knowledge era workers must embrace flexibility, continual learning and high performance teams. I sometimes wonder if when we say teams, we mean work groups which require teaming. I say this because so much of the today’s work is done by ad hoc teams that form around one task, and then disappear. Maybe it’s a distinction without a difference – nonetheless, I wonder if there really isn’t a difference. The reason I mention it is that there are significant differences between how you develop standing teams and how you develop the skills which are used in ad hoc workgroups.

    I think it is interesting that the traditional educational institutions are having the same problems as our organization is – trying to understand its role in a knowledge economy. As I see it, the key is to ask -- what is the value proposition for my organization? What really does separate us and make us different from others, and how do we provide value for those we serve? For my institution (a non-traditional educational institution), and many others I would presume, I think it is important to think about what we provide beyond the traditional classroom learning. We should think about how we engage learners between, not just within the classroom. For traditional, bricks and mortar institutions, a great deal of learning that goes on there has nothing to do with the subject matter a student studies. I would think that how an institution fosters the overall learning of these students will be one of the keys to future success, and to determining an effective value proposition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great point. When I am referring to teams, I am truly referring to ad hoc work groups that emerge and coalesce around a particular task. It appears that this sort of organizing appears to be an effective strategy for addressing complex issues that arise within the organization. As well, you make an excellent observation that determining the value proposition will enhance the overall success of the institution.

      Delete