Our Role as Networked Individuals

Generation X, Y, Z… We are running out of words to describe the upcoming working generations. But do we still live in a world where our educational background and our professional career define our lives? A few years ago this question would be sheer rhetoric; however, today it is the axis upon which the majority of individuals structure their everyday life and their future.

As any other generation did before, so does the contemporary one need to powerfully establish its existence and raise its voice via it’s own revolution. This scream becomes louder as we come to realize that it is the first time in history that “the sons risk living worse than their fathers did”. Quite oxymoron that in an epoch of extensive scientific research, innovation, technological evolution and obvious efforts towards sustainability and development, the individual contribution tends to decline.

However, last year, social unrest effectively called upon the masses to actively participate in politics and what started as a disorganised, mainly moral and largely theoretical protest against wars or injustice has now become a well-targeted, globally embraced movement. People have never had such influence on their future as they do now and they are not willing to give it away. What is the future of these movements? Are the rules of politics bending, or even changing as a consequence?

In a different level, it is evident that technology has knocked down the barriers of communication, information and most importantly: knowledge. What used to be a privilege is now a “click” away. Obtaining education, achieving collective intelligence and exchanging ideas is simpler, faster and cheaper than ever –if not to say free. Breakthroughs such as Wikipedia, YouTube, Google and Skype have changed the way people think and live. Will the exchange of cultures through the exchange of ideas define the course of the 21st century? What about those who do not have the means to keep up? In the era of communication, no mouth should remain closed and no mind should remain shallow.

Ideas. This is the key to unlock our future. As Plato would love to acknowledge, they are now wondering through every notebook, smart phone and e-book. Nowadays, all one needs to make a change is simply materialize his idea. Through the advance of technology, creation is not stopped due to lack of capital. Now more than ever, in a time where the concept of collective intelligence has come back in the center of the stage, we have the tools to embrace it and give solutions to common problems, thus achieving personal realization and social well being. Will it be the beginning of a new way of thinking, a collective intelligence with no social, racial or political boundaries? Living in a world where the breach between ideas and tools is closing day by day, shouldn’t personal and collective ventures be a daily achievement?

One parameter not to be diminished is contact at a personal level. Actually, the most important deals have been signed around a lunch table with a handshake and a toast. Is it still important to keep the human contact in the game? Are we sacrificing the contact with reality and people in our seek for technological advance?

Our times are rich in opportunities. It is on our hands to take advantage of them. How can we transmit this concept? What to do to incentivise others? How to convince them that “the better they do, the better I do” and vice versa? Is it possible to succeed in isolation? Does the solution lie within Networks? What will become of those afraid of change, who cannot tune to the upcoming paradigm?

Organizations: Catching-up with new paradigms

At this particular moment, companies and organizations find themselves immersed in a critical context when having to formulate strategies, access resources and take the appropriate actions. The origins of this turning point are found in the economic, political, environmental and social level simultaneously and are intensified by the technological advances and the growing global connection.

The engine of one of the paradigm shifts is the so called Generation Y, composed by young people born between 1980 and the year 2000. The young individuals, potential employees and idea generators, are known for prioritizing their personal projects and for bringing a change to their working preferences. In this context current leaders, most still belonging to the Baby Boom generation, face the challenge of capturing and understanding the new breed of young people entering the business market. Given that this generation will prevail in the upcoming years it is essential to repair the short-circuit in communication and find a way for the generations to cooperate harmonically. Therefore, how should current leaders respond? Should the young individuals adapt to the companies or should the companies adapt to them? What company-employee social contract should be established under this situation? Should turnover be avoided or could its benefits be found? It is necessary to act in order to respond to this new social dynamic.

Another major challenge companies face is the need to comprehend, exploit and work efficiently with the new role of technology in the business sector. A clear example is the fundamental role it plays in talent seeking in a highly competitive context. Platforms such as LinkedIn or ExecTweets allow the connection of profiles at a global level. Will this 2.0 Selection method replace the traditional one? What are the benefits and the difficulties for the company and for the user? Furthermore, with the arrival of the Age of Knowledge, knowledge itself has been democratized and many companies have begun the process of uploading their information to the web for it to be shared. In this manner, the company is allowing the interaction between brand and consumer, acknowledging and appreciating this last one as an opinion agent. Given this phenomenon, how do companies manage all the information coming from the different countries and align it to their strategy? Is this a new way to create value? Is one-to-one interaction necessary? Is this interaction a double-edged sword?

Due to the changes being experimented, the Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) also acquire a fundamental value. They emphasize on aspects that are neglected by other social actors and progressively move forward complementing actions is aspects like education, poverty, environment and public politics. Additionally, the NGOs already are ineludible ethic regulators of the companies in areas such as gender discrimination or environmental damage. And what’s more, they have the possibility to quickly and massively disseminate corporate irresponsibilities through tools like the Internet. As a consequence, does the company focus on its image and become dependent on the effectiveness of the NGOs’ diffusion actions? It is vital to define the relationship between these two entities.

Partially due to the boom and the drive of the social ventures, the transcending force operating from the global market and the increasing consciousness on the impacts that the companies’ operations generate on the surroundings, the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) is an area of growing importance in the companies. What other factors are promoting this global phenomenon? In a context ruled by multinational companies, how should they act to achieve local objectives without falling for “taking an applying” standardized programs? Can or should actions be homogenized at a global level? Is the CSR a source for the creation of value in a globalized world? Are business ethics and morals relevant for sustainable development?

There are companies and organizations that work on related issues but do not find a way to coordinate their actions. How can we benefit from globalization in order to work in a collaborative fashion? Is it possible to create global networks with the objective of making the most of the human capital and the resources? How do we act to accomplish synergy?

Revisiting Concepts: Government and Regions

We live in fleeting times, in which long-term planning is lost in the daily life. This is a great challenge for the governments which have the obligation to adapt to a present of continuous change and an unpredictable future. This conflict is caused by the increase of information sources: there are more variables, more data, more information, more actors, and this growth seems to accelerate, indicating that this challenge will be even greater for future generations.

How are the governments’ roles redefined? They have been in charge of the macroeconomic management of the country’s resources. However, since a shortage is foreseen in the future, now the governments must not only manage, but they must also act. What is going to be done regarding the predicted increase in the prices of water, oil, electricity? What about the intangible resources, such as human resources? Many European countries are experiencing population aging, and many underdeveloped countries count with a limited portion of educated people. These are just examples of the infinite situations that arise all over the world. Therefore, it is important for governments to consider how they can cope with a world that is increasingly becoming more competitive and changing if they do not have sufficient resources. It is essential that they review their policies and take concrete actions to promote the efficient use of resources and encourage their growth. The problem lies in defining what these actions are.

In some cases, the management of resources is not only one country’s issue and it is treated on a regional level, when countries work together to improve their situation. For example, through productive integration, treaties between nations aim to face global competitiveness by stimulating their domestic production. The remaining step is to think deeply about how projects and treaties of the sort can achieve effective integration, benefiting all parties.

There was a significant tendency during the twentieth century towards regional integration, a trend that led to the creation of the UN and regional blocks. These last ones generally have a strictly commercial purpose since they offer their members benefits in international trade. Have these blocks really evolved, reflecting the deep changes experienced by the member states’ societies? What measures should be taken to achieve an adequate adaptation?

As regional blocks progress they tend to a deeper integration, involving for example, common laws. Such phenomenon is reflected in the Mercosur's rates policies or in the monetary integration of the European Union. This trend may be considered favorable by some member states because it may allow a further growth of their economies. However, the increasing complexity of these blocks or the explosion of a crisis may raise doubts. Is the cost-benefit ratio justifiable to all the countries belonging to the same regional bloc? Is it equitable? Is it favorable that different societies are governed by the same rules? Is it appropriate for decisions to be taken by various countries? Is it the best option?

In these exponential times, nations consider various options regarding which are the best policies to be adopted. From the time of the early Greek philosophers raises the question that today political leaders have to deal with urgently: what do we do?