In the second half of the May webinar, futurist Nikolas Badminton addressed the fact that Canada’s digital readiness has been slipping over the years. Our technical skills have been tested, particularly during the COVID-19 pandemic, and proven that we must invest in that area. As the tech sector grows in Canada, it’s important to have an eye for how companies can evolve in that space, but also encourage the next generation to get involved in the fields of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM).
To improve on this area, more companies need to become “bionic businesses,” something many of the world’s largest corporations already are. While they have deep pockets, it can be achieved on a small scale too by looking at three dimensions of a bionic business: tracking and employing behavioural data; understanding cognitive behaviours to “create smartness” within a business; and the networks within and without a business for knowledge sharing. Though “bionic” can illicit the response that machines will take over for humans in the workplace, Badminton said the future is more about coexistence. It's already happening to an extent with the shift to remote work.
A culture of experimentation and innovation is the key to strategic foresight, and “failure is a new mantra,” Badminton said. Companies must look, not 10 years down the road, but 15, 20, 25 and 100 years down the road, and apply solid principles to their approach, such as equity and putting humanity before technology. We should ask: “What's the idea that I can bring to bear today to the management that could fundamentally change the world?” Futurism requires a shift in mindset from “what is” to “what if,” said Badminton, and taking brave steps forward into a future where everyone has a role.
GB: How do you see ethical and legal environments evolving to define and regulate the way artificial intelligence is developed?
NB: This is a big part of the conversation. Data and privacy surveillance need to be very carefully considered in work and consumer environments. What can we do with the data? How can we give control of that data back to the consumers? These are very serious questions we need to ask ourselves. We have to understand the individuals out in the world—if they're working with us or they're generating data as part of our platforms—they should own that data. We need to work towards that goal. Once we do that, we can understand some ethical frameworks around the application of that data. Then we can push the boundaries of what is really acceptable, what works within regulations and compliance.
In terms of legal use, the challenge we have is that technology moves faster than regulation. Companies don't care about boundaries at the beginning, but consumers and government bodies are starting to step up and say, hey, we need to pay attention. For example, Denmark has an ambassador to Silicon Valley who helps the country understand how quickly those companies are moving so that they can bring ideas of innovations back into Denmark, and Denmark can move at the same pace as the technology companies.
GB: When we're looking at the future of our currencies, what do you think the future of our cryptocurrency is going to be?
NB: It’s an asset class. Let’s not mistake this for a currency. As a futurist, I'm supposed to be bullish on Bitcoin and Ethereum and all these new cryptocurrencies, the idea of decentralization and the blockchain. Right now, we’re in a completely unregulated cryptocurrency world. I think we'll end up in a world where there'll be places where you can buy vehicles, you can buy houses, you can live your life with cryptocurrency as an asset class, that you can liberate money from. I think there'll be a lot of places where you can't. That's deeply unpopular in the foresight and futurism world, and certainly in the crypto world. Do I hold some crypto? Yes. I wanted to understand how it worked, and it's good. I think it's going to change the world in terms of making the central banks look at new kinds of technologies and how they can work.
But cryptocurrency is not the big disruptor. The big disruptor is when companies like Google, Facebook and Amazon step up and they say they are creating their own currency, and we can earn wages in it, spend it on their platforms and use it in our daily life. There's something called Gresham's law. That's when a bad currency—a currency created by someone other than a central bank—becomes as valuable, if not more valuable, than a fiat currency, like the Canadian dollar or the U.S. dollar. That's a future that you have to look out for, and that's a little bit more dangerous than cryptocurrencies.
GB: What advice would you give to companies that redesign their approach to strategic planning?
NB: There are two things: speed and vision. How quickly are you learning from your consumers and learning how things are changing? How quickly does it take for you to pivot and to come up with new products or think about improving operations? This comes down to vision as well. Do you know where your company is going to be in 25 years? I ask this to all of my clients, and half of them say they may not be here in 25 years, and that's hugely worrying to me. If you don't know where you're going, where do you point the rudder of the boat?
I like to give the example of Disney Plus. Disney Plus did five years of growth in eight months last year. Disney realized that their theme parks and physical locations were not going to be the core of their business. They’re moved to a digital-first model. What would have happened if they thought customers were going to go back to their theme parks and will be the central part of the experience? They would have failed. They would have lost a huge amount of money. A lot of companies are starting to see this new world as digital-first and thinking differently about human relationships. That's what we need to do with speed and vision.
DISCLAIMER:
This article is intended for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or an opinion on any issue. The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the individuals involved. It should not be regarded as comprehensive or a substitute for professional advice.
Any companies/people mentioned in this article were done so by the speakers and don’t represent the opinions of American Express.