In the past, 30 or 40 years ago, people were saying: in the future, with all the new technologies, we will work 20 hours a week and all the rest of our time will be spend on leisure.
In fact, 30 or 40 years later, people are doing twice the work they were doing with the same time. The new technologies permit us to do much more things in much less time. Some people will tell me that it is not the case, but I would say that if it is not, at least the quality is greater.
The problem is that with these new technologies and these new working techniques follow new dynamics. Well, if we can do more in less time, then why the situation is not as expected decades ago? Because new geo-demo-politico-dynamics are emerging at the same time. The world is changing, everything goes faster and faster. New democracies are emerging, new populations want their part of the cake, information is democratizing with the evolution of the Internet, etc. We have to learn, to assess, and to act quickly to be able to cope with this new and constantly changing world.
It is in that vision that new products and technologies emerge every week. Most of these products try to help you to cope with these new dynamics. They try to automatically assess your environment, they try to help you to find relevant things in the constant incoming flow of information, and they try to make things easier for you: but the result seems that it will only help you to do much more things with the same time.
Is it our human nature to works endlessly? Is it our social structure that is pushing us in that direction? Is it the result of cultural interactions? Why do we use that saved time only to try to do more things?
Technorati: work | technologies | society | culture | future | leisure | time |
6 thoughts on “I save time with new technologies: the result is that I do more things with that time.”
To answer you last question:
Because if we don’t, other people will. We would lose opportunities and slowly become irrelevant. Other people would do better products or services in a more affordable manner. Slowing down to 20 hours a week would only work if, while doing it, a company can still deliver better products or services than it’s competitors who are working 40 hours a week.
My 0.02$ CDN.
(Oh, while we’re talking about that… I would **LOVE** to work only 20 hours a week! I would have time to write, paint, play with my kid, etc. That would be great.)
Exactly what I wanted to ear 🙂
It is what I had in mind when I wrote: “New democracies are emerging, new populations want their part of the cake”. Think China… think India… these people want to and have faith. It is exactly why the carpet is slicing under our feet: because they work 50, 60 or 70 hours a week and we are not ready to.
Always a pleasure to have your 0.02$ CDN 🙂
You know something…. In India in the software companies and that too during the deliverables the whole team would sometimes work for more than 100 hrs a week.
And you were talking about working for 20 hrs/ week, but i have seen guys who worked for more than 20 hours / day during the last few days of the deliverables.
And here is my 0.02 RS (Rupee the Indian Currency) 🙂
And a bit of Trivia here in India 0.02 RS = 2 P (Paise)
Exactly and it is our problem: people here, at least in Quebec, are not willing to do that. Our society changed in the last decades and people are not willing to work that way anymore… at least, until we can afford it I think. I predict that all that mentality will change in the next decades considering the emergeance of contries like India and China are too competitive for us… so people will stop blubbing and restart to work as our ancestors does…
The USA is already Socialistic enough. I believe rather than “get tougher” in work hard (to compete with China and India) most will instead turn to government so that they can be “taken care of”.
Thanks for joining the conversation. I agree with you. This is the problem, and an even bigger here, in the French province of Canada (Quebec). The only things people rely on here is the government. I do not know if it is for historical reasons, or anything else, but it is a sad fact. The results is that we are probably one of the more poorer province/state in north America (and that despite the fact that we are saw as an innovative society by Canadians and other countries around the world). Will the situation change? Probably as problems will appear.