“Are you also afraid of the 4th revolution?”

by bold-lichterman

Even if rejection and rejection often have their source in ignorance, fear of change or even inconsistency, it is sometimes astonishing to refuse an evolution in progress without trying to take away opportunities and understand its mechanisms. .

I thought, however, that “common sense was the most common thing in the world”. I realize that this often fails on principles and preconceived ideas.
It is a real industrial revolution that is disrupting all levels: from our way of thinking, our way of living to more innocuous actions such as booking a taxi or a hotel room. These changes, whatever may be said, were adopted by the greatest number. The success of these new players is indisputable proof of this and they would not trigger so many reactions.

But it is often easier to carry the formulas, the ideas that can be listened to well rather than to bring a critical sense open to another possible. Deconstructing what others say is very difficult because it means taking the risk of asking the right questions and getting out of this very French torpor, apparently inherited from the French Revolution.

And yet doesn’t this development on all fronts bring to the greatest number of services, goods, experiences that nothing previously offered?

Didn’t Amazon bring the possibility of reading books that a bookseller in the depths of Corrèze would not even have imagined the existence? Didn’t he push booksellers to reinvent themselves? Wikipedia has surely done more damage to these same booksellers.

The chants of this industrial revolution in progress are they not quite simply victims of this one. We can frequently read arguments like “it was better before” or “the big ones will eat the little ones”.
Some everywhere see in it the eye of a form of excessive liberalism and devouring finance. Others think that we will be enslaved to robotization and artificial intelligence that will take our jobs.

Should we then fight against this development or support it by orienting it towards more creation than destruction of value?
This reflex of refusing novelty, of confining oneself to acquired knowledge, of being afraid of losing more than of winning, strongly reminds us of those who have broken the integration machine. Primary fears motivating rejection more than openness.

Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum, warns that anyway “the transformation of the economy will only accelerate“.

Digital transformation, 3D printing, Big Data, drones, MOOCs… All of this will effectively disrupt the foundations of our society. The labor market will surely be more and more impacted with the destruction of jobs, especially in intermediation, in sectors that create the least value, such as administrative and banking sectors, in repetitive and low-intellectual positions. . They will most certainly be replaced by some form of automation, robotization.
But allowing a person to no longer process paper documents to assign them to a mission, strengthening a dedicated customer relationship for example, must be the scenario to develop.

This is a process already seen in previous industrial revolutions. Farmers came to the industrial sector, then from the industrial sector to the services. Then, large sectors will make it possible to imagine the jobs of tomorrow that do not yet exist today. Education and the social sector represent tremendous potential for value creation that is still under-explored. These sectors will also provide the opportunity to create new jobs and new forms of employment.

This CDI resulting from the Trente Glorieuses will be seen as a vestige of the previous industrial revolution. This artificial protection, less and less tenable, will give way to other opportunities and to another way of thinking about our place in society. It will be part of a vision that we do not yet have today. But increasingly weak signals appear and sometimes provoke violent reactions. Once again, events and changes in our society will be imposed on us. We will then understand the opportunities and risks. Because it is not we who are going to change the world, it is he who is going to change us. We must therefore adopt vigilance and take a distance to get out of the hot reaction in which we live daily. But vigilance should not mean systematic opposition.

However, there is something to be gained by moving up the value chain. Why not offer each of us, for example, the possibility of producing electricity and becoming this autonomous, thrifty “prosumer” that also creates value. Developing this means accelerating transformations: should EDF change its business? It is certain that a fringe will parade to also fight against this development and defend the achievements of another time.

The state has its share of responsibility because it is in fact overwhelmed by the speed with which the transformation is taking place. The French population in its majority understands perhaps better, intuitively, the interest of these changes. But the State is less and less the expression of the people. He is more the voice of corporate and lobbyist influences. The French state acts more in reaction than in anticipation. You just have to see these laws which are added to the codes without having a long-term vision. However, “to govern is to foresee; and to foresee nothing is to run to its destruction (Émile de Girardin, Universal politics, 1852) ”.

So, evolution or regression? Fear or courage? Rejection or ambition?

It is up to us all to choose.

Post originally published on Create Win.

Franck BrunetWith more than 15 years of business development, mainly on the web, Franck Brunet is passionate about innovation and strategy within high-level teams.

Today, he advises and supports companies, in France and San Francisco, in finding and addressing market opportunities, defining strategy and implementing an approach of economic intelligence and digital transition.

Photo credit: Fotolia, royalty-free stock images, vectors and videos