AFRGA1 A025

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

www.afr.com | Tuesday 5 June 2018

Special Report

Jobs of the futureEdited by Jason Clout: jclout@fairfaxmedia.com.au

In partnership with ACS

SOURCE: DELOITTE*Survey of 229 businesses

Just the job

The connected workplace

C-suite collaboration

21st century careers

Data as opportunity and risk

Well-being as a driver of productivity

Citizenship and social impact

Integrating people, AI and robotics

The longevity dividend

Making rewards personal

Hybrid workforce management

90

90

89

88

86

84

75

70

66

65

38

43

31

31

49

50

23

31

24

22

Very important or importantVery ready or ready

How Australian businesses rate 10 trends in human capital in terms of importance and readiness (%)*

Fourth industrial revolution here now● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Technology Profoundchanges areoccurring rapidly.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Ian Grayson

People thinkdriverless vehiclesare something thatwill happen one day.I don’t think they’refully aware that, inSingapore, it’shappening in 2022.Jennifer Scott, ANZ (left)

Powerful technologies such as robot-ics, autonomous vehicles and machinelearning are rapidly changing theworld of work, yet many people remainunaware of the long-term implicationsthis will have for society.

Dubbed the ‘‘fourth industrial revolu-tion’’, the trend builds on the digitalrevolution of the past 30 years and willfundamentally change the roles ofworkers across every industry sector.While the end result might be uncer-tain, it is clear the impact will be pro-found.

At the recent Jobs of the Futureroundtable conducted by The Austra-lian Financial Review in conjunctionwith the Australian Computer Society(ACS), participants agreed more atten-tion needs to be placed on the ramifica-tions of the seismic changes that aretaking place. Any failure to act nowcould lead to significant societal dis-ruption in coming years.

ACS president Yohan Ramasundarasays it can be difficult for many peopleto come to terms with the immediacyof the changes that are taking place inworkplaces. Rather than seeing theshift as something happening now,they tend to consider it still to be someway off.

‘‘If it’s in the future, people will thinkthat means it’s in 10 years’ time or 50years’ time,’’ he says. ‘‘It’s just likesmoking because you don’t really seethe effects of it instantaneously or inthe short term. We need to make it realfor people.’’

Others at the roundtable agreed, cit-ing examples of where technology isalready changing the nature of jobs.Automation in areas such as account-ing is leading to large numbers of low-level jobs being replaced by machines.Similar trends are taking place in thelegal sector where case law searchesthat would once have been completed

by a junior staffer are now being com-pleted by artificial intelligence software.

ANZ’s general manager of digitaltransformation and performance, Jen-nifer Scott, says autonomous vehiclesare an example of a change that is hap-pening much more quickly than manypeople realise.

‘‘It’s pretty clear to me that peoplethink driverless vehicles are somethingthat will happen one day,’’ she says. ‘‘Idon’t think that they’re fully aware that,in Singapore, it’s happening in 2022.’’

Scott points out driverless trucks arealready being used in some Australianmines and the technology will quicklymove into use on the nation’s highways.With many thousands of people cur-rently employed as professional drivers,the flow-on impact will be massive.

Ed Husic, shadow minister forEmployment Services, Workforce Par-ticipation and the Future of Work, sayshe has noticed a shift in awareness andattitudes during his time in his currentportfolio, but acknowledges there isstill some way to go.

‘‘I’ve noticed the awareness hasincreased but I’m still nowhere nearcomfortable with the level of prepara-tion,’’ he says. ‘‘I think this spans acrossgovernment, business and the com-munity.

‘‘In terms of workforce development,and having the [necessary] structuresin place, I don’t think we are anywherethat we can be proud of [and] I thinkthat’s something we should be reallyconcerned about.’’

Greg Miller, director and co-founderof predictive analytics firm Faethm,agrees there has been a shift in thinkingabout the future of jobs that has alreadyhappened, but more still needs to bedone.

‘‘Even 12 months ago I’d walk into alarge enterprise and I’d have to start theconversation with, ‘Let me define whatI mean when I say the future of work, orthe fourth industrial revolution, orwhat these impacts are’,’’ he says. ‘‘NowI walk into those same large enter-prises, and I’m talking to the head of thefuture of work.’’

While this is encouraging, Millersays there appears to be little agree-ment on what actions need to be taken

and what the result of technologicalchange will be within many organisa-tions. While some people believe newtechnologies will create millions ofnew jobs, others fear it will make mil-lions of existing workers redundant.

‘‘They’re not sure where to start, [but]know it’s a problem and know theyneed to do something about it,’’ he says.‘‘Some companies have formed teams,so that puts them in the leader bracket,but now they need to go and takeaction.’’

Sandy Abrahams, executive head ofmanaged services at Avanade Austra-lia, says leadership on this issue needsto come from the senior executivemanagement within organisations, butthis is not something she is currentlyobserving.

‘‘CEOs and boards need to really lookat what it means for their businessesand really take action,’’ she says. ‘‘That’sthe biggest thing, and I’m not seeing it.It might be happening and I’m glad tohear that they’re getting some titles thatlook at the future of work, but I’m notseeing it yet.’’

When it comes to making progressand preparing people for the changesthat are occurring, roundtable parti-cipants emphasised that it will require

a long-term strategy that comprisesshort-term goals.

Dayle Stevens, divisional chiefinformation officer, PT3 and Growth,AGL Energy, says when you talk aboutemerging technologies and theirimpact on the future of work, it can bedifficult for people to imagine what thiswill mean for them in the years ahead.

She says it is a matter of explaining tothem the small steps they can take nowthat will eventually lead them into a newworking environment. ‘‘It’s not some-thing they’re going to be doing in 20years time. It is the job they’re doingtoday and what they’re going to be doingnext week. Trying to break it down and

make it simple for people so they don’tback away is really important.’’

Ramasundara also stressed theimportance of strong leadership if Aus-tralia is to survive and thrive as a coun-try during this period of rapid andfundamental change in workplaces.

‘‘Certainly, there is increased aware-ness,’’ he says. ‘‘But as a country, I thinksome people think the governmentshould be leading, or the private sectorshould be leading, or somebody else –there’s no real collaboration. Every-body really needs to come together onthis one so there is a more coordinated,collaborative means to actuallyaddress the issue.’’

AFRGA1 A026

AFRTuesday 5 June 2018TheAustralian Financial Review |www.afr.com26 Special Report Jobs of the future

Focus requiredwherewehave the leadIndustrypolicyAustralia needs toidentify its differential.

MarkEggleton

Instead of tacklingtechnology at amacro level, weactually concentrateon agricultural,health,mining oreducationaltechnology.Jennifer Scott, ANZ

Ed Husic says Australia should capitalise on its strengths. PHOTO: WAYNE TAYLOR

Oneof the great criticismsofAustralianindustrial policy is governments shouldnot be in the business of picking win-ners, but in the digital age, it might bethebestwayforward,anumberofparti-cipants suggested at the recent Jobs ofthe Future roundtable co-hosted byTheAustralian Financial Review and theAustralianComputer Society (ACS).Drawing on the example of Switzer-

land and its reputation for precisionengineering and manufacturing, ANZ’sgeneral manager, digital transforma-tion and performance, Jennifer Scott,said Australia needed to find its brandidentity and one of the best waysmightbe to concentrate on industries wherewealreadyhada strong reputation.‘‘Switzerland actually has a really

clear brand statement and I think Aus-tralia really needs to start definingwhateconomy do we want to create? Thenyou can start to think about it in thisworld of technical skills, what are theareas that we think are really import-ant?’’ she said. ‘‘What is Australia’s dif-ferential? Where do we want to win,what’s our brand? Instead of tackling

technology at amacro level, we actuallyconcentrate on agricultural, health,miningor educational technology.’’Shadowminister foremployment ser-

vices, workforce participation and thefuture of work, Ed Husic, agreed wealreadyoccupiedapositionofleadershipincertainsectorsgloballyandhesugges-ted the wheel was turning and peoplewerebeginningtosuggest ‘‘maybewedoneed to actually apply a bit of specialisa-tion inareaswhere itmattersmost’’.Husic suggested economies such as

China, Singapore and the United ArabEmirates were making deliberate deci-sions to be world leaders in AI andwhile Australia probably would notrival China on the AI front, we couldrival other countries in areaswherewealreadyhada lead.He said it came down to allocating

the right amount of resources, effort,people and capital in the right industrysectors. ‘‘It is a challenge to an ortho-doxy that has existed here since the1980s, which is we don’t pick winners,but other countries are now activelyexamining their economic strengthsand acknowledging that if they applythemselves in a particular way, theywill actually dobetter,’’ Husic said.Furthermore, ifweget it rightwecan

become powerhouses in the regionconsidering where other countries areontheirdigital journey.Forexample, indeveloping countries that have riddenthe boom in outsourcing globally over

thepast decade, increasingautomationis putting a strain on their economies,particularly in India, Vietnam, Cam-bodia and thePhilippines.In a recent presentation given by

International Monetary Fund man-aging director Christine Lagarde in theUS on global trade, she said: ‘‘Increas-ing automation is making it easier forcompanies to repatriate some of theiroperations–effectively, reversingsomeof the ‘outsourcing’ and ‘offshoring’ ofthe past twodecades’’.For many of the business processing

companies innations,suchasIndia, thisincreasing automation is destroyingparts of their developing economies.

Roundtable participant Greg Miller,director and co-founder of workforceanalytics firm Faethm, suggested low-level jobs such as those performed bybusiness process companies in Indiahadbeenearly casualties in themove toautomationand theywere ‘‘really strug-gling, and it’s crushing that economy’’.He said the good news for Australia

was these countries now presented anopportunity for Australia. ‘‘For exam-ple, most of these economies haven’tautomated their farms yet, whereasyou don’t see any people on our farms.It’s an opportunity where we could goand be the service provider. If we lookatour tradingpartners in the regionwe

can assist them on their journey.’’ Forexample, in Bangladesh, where auto-mation of the textile industry couldwreakhavocwith its economy,Austra-lian educational exports could assistthem retool their workforce and agri-cultural technology could help themmove from a boom-and-bust industryreliant onmonsoonal rains to one thatismore sustainable.Importantly, our educational and

agricultural technology exports help toaddressoneof thehugechallengescon-fronting the region. InternationalLabor Organisation figures indicateroughly 140 million people across fivesouth-east Asian countries (or roughlyhalf of the salaried workforce) will beaffected by automation, and Australiapickingwinners herewill not only be afuture boon to our own economy butthe region as awhole.

Sandy Abrahams emphasised the importance of continuous learning for people already in the workforce. PHOTO: WAYNE TAYLOR

Education systemneeds reinventionLearning STEMprogramsare ‘barelyscratching the surface’.

MarkEggleton

Digital curriculumshould be embeddedin everythingstudents do.

Australia needs to reinvent its educa-tion systems for the digital age and thisis not just about adding a few moreSTEM courses in schools or teachingevery child how to code. This was theconsensus among participants at therecent Jobs of the Future roundtableco-hosted by The Australian FinancialReview and the Australian ComputerSociety (ACS).Yet while business and government

continue to make these grand pro-clamations about reinventing educa-tion, roundtable participant GregMiller wondered aloud whether hehas made a dent in furthering thefuture of education in eight years ofworking with education ministers aswell as schools at all levels.Miller, who is the director and co-

founder of analytics firm Faethm, saidwhile Australia had an array of STEMprogrammes in schools, he believedonly about 10 per cent of studentswerereally gaining any long-termbenefit.Part of the problem was schools

might have a digital curriculum whichhadtakena long timeto formulatebut itwas a formal course. While it might begreat a school offered a robotics class,the sad fact was a specialised classmissedthepoint.Hesaid itwasgreat forthe 10 per cent who loved technologybut STEM learningwas ‘‘barely scratch-ing the surface’’ when it came to theother 90per cent of students.Miller said the digital curriculum

needed to be embedded ‘‘in the Englishclass, in the maths class and in the sci-ence class’’.

‘‘It should be embedded in every-thing they do and we’re nowhere nearthat curriculumyet,’’ he said.Miller’s point was also raised in a

recent speech delivered in the UnitedStates by InternationalMonetary Fundmanaging director Christine Lagardewho said, ‘‘all countries need to rein-vent their education systems for thedigital age’’.‘‘This is not just about adding a few

more coding lessons. It is about foster-ing critical thinking, independentproblem-solving, and lifelong learningthat canhelp people adapt to change. Itis about investing in human capital,’’Lagarde said.She also said thedigital economywas

putting further pressure on thosework-erswhowere lesswellequippedtocom-pete – whether in advanced, emergingordevelopingeconomies.It was a point raised by ANZ’s gen-

eral manager of digital transformationand performance, Jennifer Scott, whomentioned the dangers of a bifurcatedsociety. She worried that an alreadystratified society might become moreso if educational opportunities werenot presented equally to all.Scott warned of continual bifurca-

tion if the people furthest away fromtechnology now, such as many serviceand vocational trades, fall furtherbehind and the impact thatmight haveon their children.For Avanade Australia’s executive

head of managed services, SandyAbrahams, the key was ensuring Aus-tralia’s children have ‘‘the qualities theywill need to continue to learn in thefuture’’.She said understanding technology

was one aspect but also having themindset to understand and solve prob-lems. Moreover, she emphasised theimportance of continuous learning forpeople already in theworkforce.‘‘Peopleunderstand if theydon’t con-

tinue to learn or rotate skills, theymight be left without a job, especiallywhen the full impact of artificial intelli-gence and automation work their wayfurther intoworkplaces.’’Dayle Stevens, AGL Energy’s divi-

sional chiefinformation officer, PT3and growth, suggested education wasclearly going to change and she washeartened by what she was seeingalreadywithher ownchildren.‘‘It is not just all about reading, writ-

ing and arithmetic,’’ she said. ‘‘It isabout leadership skills and collabora-tion skills, communication and creativ-ity. It is actually quite innovative, Ithink, and it’s about keeping people’soptions open. Keeping them interestedand helping people understand thatwhat you learn now isn’t the endproduct. It’s about being able to adapt,deal with ambiguity and be curiousabout what is happening in the worldso that you can continuously adaptyourself towhatever the future ofworkmight be.’’

Fellow participant Robert Hillard,managing partner consulting atDeloitte Australia, highlighted that thehuge change in educationwouldbe feltdeeply as we transition to a systemmore befitting thedigital age.He said one of the tensions in our

modern education system was its ori-gins in an industrial age and that it hadnot actually changedas yet.‘‘Our system was designed to create

obedient workers for a defined careerpath and one of the reasons why thereis a natural tension at the moment inhow much we invest [in education] is

there’s a natural inefficiency in the sec-tor,’’ Hillard said. ‘‘If you can addressthe inefficiency in educationandcreategreaterflexibility, you immediately freeupa lotof resources tobeapplied indif-ferentways.’’One way to better apply resources

was to future-proof the workforce bymakingacommitment to lifelong learn-ingwhichgoeswell beyondschools andinto tertiary andvocational learning.Unfortunately, most organisations’

corporate learning and developmentteams are completely understaffed, soit is the universities and TAFE collegeswho will bear the burden. Yet they donothave thecapabilitiesas theyare stillgeared for vocational training ormultiple-year degrees.ForMiller, the best bet is the TAFEs

anduniversities comingupwith a cur-riculumthatfits theskills gap thatpeo-ple need. But that will take a majorchange in how governments, educa-tional institutions and businesseswork together.

AFRGA1 A027

AFR Tuesday 5 June 2018www.afr.com | TheAustralian Financial Review 27Special ReportJobs of the future

It is important to focus on the positive impact that AI will have in the workplace, says Dayle Stevens. PHOTO: WAYNE TAYLOR

AI replaces andcreates roles atthe same timeEmployment It’s earlydays, but implicationsare substantial.

IanGrayson

It’s about havingconstructivedialogue aboutautomation.Greg Miller, director and co-founderof analytic company Faethm.

Of all the technologies shaping thefuture of jobs and the workplace,experts agree one of the most signific-ant is artificial intelligence.Benefiting from billions of dollars in

investment by companies around theworld, AI is poised to replace manyexisting positions and create othersthat havenot previously existed.Participants at the recent Jobs of the

Future roundtable, conducted by TheAustralian Financial Review in partner-ship with the Australian ComputerSociety (ACS), discussed the extent towhich AI will have an impact withinworkplaces. They recognised that,while it is still veryearlydays, the impli-cations for the future are substantial.At one end of the spectrum, some

people fearAIwill result inasignificantreduction in the number of jobs avail-able. As tasks traditionally completedby staff become automated, there willbe fewer opportunities for humans.Other observers, however, take a dif-

ferent view. Rather than AI removinghumans from jobs, they believe thetechnologywill augmentwhat they are

able to achieve. For example, ratherthan an accountant having to spendhours reconciling transactions, theycan instead spend their time providingbusiness advice to clients.‘‘It’s about having constructive dia-

logue about automation,’’ says GregMiller, director and co-founder of ana-lytic company Faethm. ‘‘We tell our cli-ents that you’ve got to be looking atautomation to stay competitive. Butthere are also a number of roles thatare going to be augmented by thesetechnologies for a productivity gain.’’Miller says that in workplaces of the

future there are essentially going to bethree categories of jobs. There will bethose people who work ‘‘for’’ themachines, those who work ‘‘on’’ themachines, and those who work ‘‘with’’themachines.‘‘If you are able to design automation

in such a way that more and more ofthose jobs are working with themachines, then their ability to do thingsfor their stakeholders, their customersand their people grows,’’ he says.Participants discussed a trial of AI

technology in a hospital designed toimprove patient care. When a patientpresses a nurse call button, the call isanswered by AI software which canassess the type of request being madeand assign the most appropriate staffmember. Rather than replacingnurses, AI is making them more effi-cient and effective.

Dayle Stevens, divisional chiefinformation officer, PT3 and Growth,AGL Energy, says it is important tofocus on the positive impact thatAIwillhave in the workplace rather thanbecome stressed about its ability toreplace humans. She points to Austra-lian technologystart-upMedCorpTech-nologies which is working on devicesthat can monitor a patient’s core tem-perature and relay that data to a doctor.In this way, serious infections can bedetected earlier allowing treatment tobeundertaken.‘‘This is a really good use case for

where [AI] makes a big difference inpeople’s lives,’’ shesays. ‘‘It’s aboutfind-ing the right places to use that techno-logy,where toapply it, andwhere it canbe enforced for good.’’

ACS president Yohan Ramasundarasays the potential of AI should be seeninapositive context, but also cautionedthat it should be viewed in a similarway tofire.‘‘You can use fire to light a room and

make itbright, or youcanuse thefire toburn the house down,’’ he says. ‘‘Over-all, I think the more ‘human’ skills ofhumanswill be the ones that are going

to be in more demand. That’s becauseeverything that’s machine learnable isgoing to be doneby themachines.’’Sandy Abrahams, executive head of

managed services at Avanade Austra-lia, says the group of workers who aremost likely to feel disruption as a resultof AI are those in lower-skilled rolesundertaking repetitious processes.‘‘Some people just want to do these

jobs,’’ she says. ‘‘They want to do amundane process that they don’t haveto think about, and gohome and spendtheir time with their family. I’m wor-ried about those people, and the rami-fications of them and the social impacton that demographic.‘‘I’m worried there’s going to be a

whole lot of people left by the waysidewhodon’t have a job as a result of this.’’

Global change demands unique local responses

YohanRamasundara:Local, state andfederalgovernmentsmust worktogether. PHOTO:WAYNE TAYLOR

Workforce Actionurged now to get aheadof the potential issues.

JamesSherbon

Howwe change thewaywe structureworkwithin theconcept of a full-timejob creates someopportunities.Dayle Stevens, AGL Energy

Australia must confront its ownunique set of challenges and devise itsown solutions when it comes to devel-oping the future ofwork.That is the consensus among parti-

cipants at the recent Jobs of the Futureroundtable co-hosted by The Austra-lian Financial Review and the Austra-lianComputer Society (ACS).Importantly, the director and co-

founder of analytics firm Faethm,Greg Miller, said we need to moveaway from the ‘‘future of work as atagline and maybe refer to it as thenowofwork’’.‘‘A lot of these technologies are in

place today and are impacting jobstoday so maybe this notion ofit beingthe future is doing it a disservicebecauseweneedpeople to act nowandget ahead of the potential skills down-side so they’re ready for the impact ofchange.’’ACS president Yohan Ramasundara

agreedwehave to start acting nowandwhile we need to take a global view itcertainly has to be localised. ‘‘It’s aglobal issue but we need to have local,state and federal governmentsworkingtogether to create customised localsolutionswhenitcomes to the futureofwork,’’ Ramasundara said.Oneparticular issue thatneeds tobe

addressed is the idea of the gig econ-omy and how Australia creates astronger safety net for those peopleincreasingly working in the gig econ-omy.According to Australian Bureau of

Statistics figures on local businessreleased earlier this year, the size of thegig economy is rising rapidly especiallyin service industries such as urbantransport and food delivery but at thesame time it is also an area of the econ-omy experiencing the most exits aswell.So while businesses might like the

idea of having a permanently itinerant

workforce that can be switched on andoff, people in general want a full-timejob. What’s required is a rethinking ofwhat a full-time job might look likebecause asAvanadeAustralia’s execut-ive head of managed services, SandyAbrahams, said, there are a lot of soci-etal factors linked to full-time employ-ment suchas amortgagewith a bank.Divisional chiefinformation officer,

PT3 and Growth, at AGL Energy DayleStevens suggested one solution for thefuture could be one employer giving

people lots of opportunities and notjust theonecareerpath toget tomasterthe whole time. ‘‘How we change theway we structure work within theconcept of a full-time job creates someopportunities,’’ she said.Deloitte’smanaging partner consult-

ing, Robert Hillard, agreed we aregoing to see this more portfolioapproach, ‘‘and the really smart busi-ness is going to actually offer that full-life experience’’.

For Hillard the key is companies canprovide the one thing most peoplecrave and that’s the working capitalwhich ensures people get paid everymonth. What the gig economy does isfree up working capital because busi-ness does not have the on-costs ofemployees but what it also does ismake people feel insecure. Theymightbe earning the same amount of moneyas a full-time job but they are worriedabout next month’s mortgage and feel

insecure.What forward-thinking com-panies need to do is to provide peoplewith a bit of both.‘‘The best of both worlds, they are

going to apply the working capitalbehind you so you have job securityand they’re also going to provide thefull range of experience, and perhapssome shared risk. So shared upside oninvention and innovation and that’sgoing to require whole new ways ofthinking about labour.’’

AFRGA1 A028

AFRTuesday 5 June 2018The Australian Financial Review | www.afr.com

28 Special Report Jobs of the future

Deloitte’s Robert Hillard says it is only now that we have an opportunity to get the regulatory step right. PHOTO: WAYNE TAYLOR

Retrofittingregulationof the internet

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Government Rapidtechnological changedemands attention.

● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ● ●

Mark Eggleton

Back in the 1990s when the web was atthe beginning of its journey to omni-science, we tended to be more focusedon its infinite possibilities.

Rather than formulate regulatoryground rules like we do with everyother industry, ranging from our foodquality to aviation, we embraced itsunfettered growth.

It is only now after almost weekly pri-vacy scandals mixed with occasionallyalarmist predictions about what auto-mation and artificial intelligence mightbe capable of in the future that we arefinally asking for a little regulation.

For recent participants at the Jobs ofthe Future roundtable co-hosted by TheAustralian Financial Review and theAustralian Computer Society (ACS), thebig question was how we now retrofit

regulation to an industry and techno-logy that touches every facet of our lives.

Deloitte Australia managing partnerconsulting Robert Hillard suggested wemissed the regulatory step back in the1990s and it is only now that we have anopportunity to get that step right.

Shadow minister for the digital econ-omy and the future of work, Ed Husic,suggested if we are going to better regu-late what’s happening we need to boostthe knowledge of regulators so theyknow what they are dealing with andcan capably deal with the pace of tech-nological change.

He suggested business self-regulating has not really worked in thepast as players beyond governmenttend to act in their own interests.

What participants generally agreedupon was governments need to bettersupport those affected by technologywhether that be by more training oreven funding to allow people to train.

For Husic, rather than always askingwhat government or the individualshould do, more should also be askedof business. He asked whether businesswould take its traditional approach,

which has been to question the benefitsof employee education because theyask ‘‘why should I train someone up,and then have them taken by someoneelse?’’ ‘‘There is an actual benefit inhaving government work with busi-ness in terms of skills development, notjust to meet skill shortages we knowexist now, but to actually put people ona pathway of skills acquisition that willget them into sustainable employ-ment,’’ Husic said.

Furthermore, he said it is important

governments acknowledge change iscoming and let people know ‘‘we aregoing to work through this and this iswhat we’re going to do’’.

‘‘I think government leading thisinvestment in human capital will bekey to being able to send the signal or tobe able to build assurance in thebroader community, that there issomething there in place.

‘‘There’s a game plan and peoplehave been brought together to work onit in a very collaborative way.’’

Fellow participant and divisionalchief information officer, PT3 & Growthat AGL Energy Dayle Stevens said busi-ness and government need to workmore closely to create the right attitudeamong people at risk of losing their jobswhen it comes to continuous learning.

For Greg Miller, the director and co-founder of Faethm, governmentsshould start by building a program thatidentifies ‘‘those folks jobs that are atrisk and get them on a path to futureskills and rediscovery’’.