How To Stay Human While Technology Shapes the World with Ja-Naé Duane and Steve Fisher

The rules that got you here may be the very thing holding you back.

Ja-Naé Duane and Steve Fisher call them super shifts, fundamental changes so significant that many of the assumptions underpinning how we work, lead, and create value are quietly becoming obsolete. Expertise, control, certainty: the frameworks that once provided stability are starting to break down. Most organisations are yet to reckon with what that actually means.

Jean Gomes and Scott Allender, leadership authors and advisors who have spent their careers working at the sharp end of organisational change, push Duane and Fisher on what this means practically for leaders who are already stretched, already uncertain, already looking for ground that holds. Together they examine why our sense of agency may be more fragile than we think, why the shift from control to co-creation is not optional, and what kind of mindset is required when the past is no longer a reliable guide.

If you sense that something fundamental has shifted but struggle to articulate what, or what to do about it, this episode is a good place to start.

Reading from Jean Gomes and Scott Allender: 

Leading In A Non-Linear World (J Gomes, Wiley, 2023) 
The Enneagram of Emotional Intelligence (S Allender, Baker Books, 2023)

Social:

Instagram           @mindseteconomypodcast
LinkedIn             The Mindset Economy Podcast
Bluesky            @mindseteconomy.bsky.social
YouTube           @TheMindsetEconomy

The Mindset Economy Podcast is researched, written and presented by Jean Gomes and Scott Allender with production by Phil Kerby. It is an Outside Consulting Ltd production.

Transcript

0:00

The idea that we're holding power or that we have agency that is ours is an illusion. How many companies right now have some type of behavioural digital twin of your data? They're predicting how you're making decisions, even without you knowing it. If we do get more agency. It's because we've decided to co create that now thinking through some of the long term future implications. So right now, some company almost certainly has a digital twin of you. It's using your data to predict how you'll make decisions before you've even made them. This is just one of the baselines that Ja-Nae Duane, a behavioural scientist at Brown at MIT, and Steve Fisher, a strategic futurist, are using to envision how our lives will look in the coming decades. What's fascinating about this conversation is the implication Okay, so let's get into how we do that. of two centuries of industrial thinking and how that shaped our mindset and our sense of value, and what we've got to do now to kind of pull that apart and remake ourselves. To get us started, can I ask both of you just introduce yourselves and your work? Well, nice to meet you guys. So Ja-Nae Duane, I am a professor over at Brown and a research fellow over at MIT. My focus happens to be I'm a behavioralist, and so what I'm really interested in is our interactions with technology, the neurological effects of those of those interactions, and then, how does that really start to shape us as humans, as we're heading into this whole new age of intelligence, as as we like to, as we like to call it, so to me, it's a really fun, exciting time to focus on human behaviour and focus on some of our systems of the future. But I'm super excited to be here with you guys. I am Steve Fisher. I am a futurist, and for those of you listening, I don't predict the future. We look at possible futures, and we help companies navigate, you know, as that future becomes the present, to be more proactive about in, you know, their choices of strategy, solutions, products, leadership. And I feel it's a very empowering type of skill set, and it also is a job. But, you know, my background is strategic foresight, but it's also product. My product, my background spans product, design, innovation, leadership, venture building and Executive Advisory work, but my a lot of what I do around futures work is I do design futures, so a lot of speculative narrative work, prototyping, you know, like, really kind of touch, taste, feel, the future and organisational foresight, which is like, really building this type of muscle into the, you know, the body of a comfort organisation, which I think is needed more than ever, and hope we can super shifts. Is a lot, you know, around that, you know, I think it really reflects, like you we talked about prior to starting the recording of the, you know, the changing role of leadership and the human aspect of it. And I think that is, it's not just about ramming process or generating PowerPoints, but I think we're in a, we're in a we'll talk about the age of intelligence. We're in a major transition. And it feels very disruptive to so to many, but yeah, that's me. I'm looking forward to it. Let's get into it. Okay? Ja-Nae, Stephen, wonderful to have you on the show. As you know, the context of the mindset economy is about helping us to understand what we're here for, what our economic and social value looks like in the future, and how we can start to adapt positively to the changes in the world that we face, not just AI and other technology, but also this increasing uncertainty that the future is bringing to us. Can you give us the big sweep of your thinking that you've summarised in your recent book, super shifts and the scope of your work. You know, we talk about trends a lot. We talk about signals, but super shifts kind of goes beyond that, and it's really above the like mega trends, if you will. It's introduces the idea that we're not just navigating trends, but there's structural forces rewriting the rules of leadership itself and just daily life, because we talk about how these shifts impact society, the organisation and the individual as a whole. And you know, they're they're just, they're systemic changes. I would say they alter like the decision velocity, which is what we're feeling because of the change with artificial intelligence and the speed in which things are really integrating in. To the to the fabric, and I want to have a chance to discuss that this is, this is a trend, a generational technology, not a, you know, it's, it's, it's, it's a little bit different than I think people perceive, but it changes our authority. And let you know, we talk about Super shifts. They change authority, legitimacy, power structures, human identity and work, you know. So I think for us, we could talk about the systems aspect of is, that's where Jean A comes in. But these super shifts cover the gamut from generational change to, you know, the world, the world mosaic, you know, in between technology and the like, there's anything I should cap on that Ja-Nae? Yeah. I mean, what I would really want listeners to understand is, as we're heading into this whole new age, it also with that comes this need for a new mindset, which I know feels very daunting to many people. And I would actually argue it's because we have almost this ecological memory, or this historic ancestral memory that we've taken from the past 200 years that have really been built around this industrial age, thinking about what work means, thinking about What economic value means, what does it mean to provide value to society? And what's really fascinating, and I know also jarring for folks, is that we are moving into this whole new age where we need to think differently, where we have the opportunity to reimagine what it means to create value, what it means to have purpose, what it means to contribute to society. And to me, we're not having enough of those conversations. So I love, I love the the, you know, the idea that we can have a bit of that conversation starting today. Yeah, let's spend some time here. Because you describe this age you're referring to, I believe, as the age of intelligence, and you describe it as, you know, well, you've defined it as, sort of the blurring of lines between, sort of, you know, between human and machine and sort of artificial and natural. And you talk about it, which I found really interesting around the ages and eras, theory of change, right? This sort of 200 year arc where there's sort of these sort of 50 Year eras. I'd love to learn more about that, and I think our audience would as well. Could we, could we start there? Spend a bit of time there? Yeah, this is a social theory I've been working on for a while. Jean and I, you know, have, you know, kind of collaborated on this. The whole concept of it is that, you know, when you look at cycles and patterns and changes, it's like, you know, kind of history rhymes. It doesn't repeat. So in the future space, there's a thing called macro history. Historians like macro history. I don't even know that was a thing a couple years ago, was like, oh, that's what I do. So you look at large spans of history, and when you look at social theorists like Toynbee or Spangler, they look at like the kind of growth and the decay, you know, the kind of the the cycles of history and the things that change and we go through. And I started to see a pattern. And I looked at like, you know, in like Strauss and Howe, for example, looks at generational theory. They look, you know, they're the ones that coined, you know, millennials and things like that. And they looked at every 70 to 90 years as a generational change. When you look at ages and eras, I went back through about 1000 years of history, you know. And I think you could easily identify, like, the last one was, we call it the age of engines. That was the Industrial Revolution. For you know, me, had go by many terms, but that one to kind of keep it close to, like, you know, at least historical reference, is that, you know, that power source there was, like, mechanical and industrial energy, right? The intelligence was human expertise, but it was a lot of hierarchy, right? The leadership model was a lot of command and control, right? And that that took a lot of you know, think of Taylorism Fordism, the things that our high schools and university systems are. Our school system here in the United States is designed for, you know, came about in the mid 1800s it was designed for one thing, to get children literate today and to work on a farm or a factory like by 1314, so higher education wasn't like it was a rare thing, you know, rare earth thing. But the thing is, with the age of intelligence, and we break it into 450 year periods, because you have this kind of awakening, rise, right? And then you have kind of, and we look at the phases of the day, so you have, like, the the dawn, the day, the dusk and the dark, and that they're not like clean like one day. It's one way one day is another. So we're kind of in the in this the end of the we're in the the end of the dark period for the the machines period, but we're at the. At the dawn, and it is. It's rough. It's a rough it's a physical sensations. It's like everything you probably feel those listening you probably so many of you feel like something's just it just feels off in the world, because we're going through this, and we're just living through things so viscerally, and the rate of change is so much. But like with the age of intelligence, the power source is now like cognitive systems, AI, data networks, right? The intelligence we're using is going to be distributed. It's going to be hybrid, you know, human machine, brain connected, interface. It's radical, right? Leadership models can be different. It's gonna be more sense making more adaptation, coherence, type, and then the strategy is non linear. And the constraint, you know that, but that's where, you know Jean a can definitely talk about some of the system changes. So it's like, we're also looking at intelligence as a factor of going from scarcity to abundance. You know, authority is not everyone you know looks at the institutions. It's no longer guaranteed, and stability is no longer the default. So it's, it's important to note that I will stop right there, because there's a lot of questions, I'm sure, but like, that's that's a very marked change of what we're kind of experiencing, the transition of, does that kind of help clarify it does. And I think when people talk about abundance and that huge potential opening up, it's also met with uncertainty as to, are we really prepared to be able to cope with these things, because, from a leadership and political stance, it seems like we find it very difficult to do anything other than allow a very small number of people to accumulate tremendous power and wealth around these things, which means that we stand looking not just at the fear of obsolescence, but also that society will become a very unpleasant environment to be in as a result of these things. So the abundance message that comes from a lot of Silicon Valley thinkers, well, the nice parts of it, at least, are exciting, but there's a dark side to it as well. So I'm really interested. Do you think there is the potential for the sunlit uplands, or are we walking into something more unpalatable Jean I love the fact that you've touched on this as someone who works with some of those folks in out in the valley, and it's very much the message that gets touted ends up being that positive framing without the conversation of great. How do we get there? What does that look like? How do we actually set ourselves up for success, so that if we are to have that abundance, that we also have a society that's prepared for it, and when you don't have those conversations, and you don't talk about the dark side or even those unintended consequences that may come along with that, to me, you're creating a vacuum. And so I think that it's conversations now to start to frame up, what do we if we can achieve abundance, what does that look like? How do we make sure that it does provide a more equitable future versus one that creates more disparity? And no matter what, we will always have unintended consequences that will create disparity in some way. But if we can start to have those conversations now, if we can even talk about and, you know, not to spend too much time on technology, but even AI safety, right like this is a conversation I don't hear enough of we are building. We're building towards the use of these technologies without really thinking through the repercussions of what that might look like. So to have those conversations now affords us the opportunity to have a more abundant future that many more folks can then really enjoy and benefit from. And out of all of these difficult conversations, which of the most urgent Do you feel? How much time do we have? No I'm only kidding. So I would say that the AI safety one is absolutely one that needs to to be addressed. I would also say that if we're thinking about mindset and we're thinking about value creation, new forms of economic models as we move into the future, as well as thinking through and talking about defining work. Versus defining purpose, because many individuals have myself included. So this is absolutely something that I think about a lot. How do I redefine who I am without tying it to the work that I do, which is what I grew up learning how to just learning how to perceive myself and the value in which I create. So to me, those are some of my top ones. Steve, how about you? Do you have different ones? The urgent conversation needs to be around energy, because you know, you are going to see one of the space one of the areas I work in is in the space economy. You're going to start, you're seeing, you're going to see data centres in space. I know it sounds weird. It's like, you know, but think about all, there's all the data up there, if you need to move it down, terrestrially for or computing power for AI, how do you power that? You know, small nuclear reactors, everyone, like, gets the most. The big reactors are from technology from like the 70s. Stuff is a lot more stable and it's a lot more clean. And I think we have to figure out the energy problem we are really going to run into it, because if we need any everything that we're doing is going to require the compute require the computing power. So I think if we don't, if we don't solve the energy issue, we're we're going to hit a wall, and it's nothing, nothing else is going to to matter. So hopefully, with quantum technology and actual AI, we can actually solve the energy problem. So it'll be its own solution maker. But so I know Elon Musk wants to put his quantum computers on the moon because it's a more stable environment, but I'm wondering about the underlying challenge here is that our identity is going to be, and is always has been, nested within an economic system, and so where there's a massive aggregation of wealth and power to this small number of people. Does the abundance just accelerate that even further? Because when everything's free, we must be paying something, and we may not see that we're paying for our interactions like we do with AI, or we may be paying with our affiliation, or we may be just paying with power by giving it away. So I'm interested in your long term thinking about the consequences of that. Well, the thing is, we pay with power now, right? So I think that that's a really great point. It's fascinating to me to see and be in conversations where individuals feel like they will be able to control technology. And I would argue that some of the conversations we need to have are when we think about power and the loss of power. How do we live a symbiotic relationship with AI and other technologies in a way that allows us to thrive, but knowing that there will come a time where we are not in control, and what does that look like? So I feel like we're in this new arms race, if you will, but we're not really thinking through what those outcomes are and what the future holds. If we don't start to think through that symbiotic relationship with with AI. What do we do when we're all augmented and or many people are augmented in some way or another? Like, we're seeing this with amputees right now, where AI is obviously embedded inside of their prosthetics. Like, that's a really great example we have. You know, we have computer to human interactions, brain interactions right now, and human to human interactions as we're thinking about brain interfacing. So my, my point is, is that there's this whole and we, we highlight this in the book, there's this whole subculture of augmentation. Even as we head into space, we are going to need some of that augmentation, that machine augmentation. And so how do we start to identify systems? Have these conversations now that can allow us to, from a collective perspective, design new systems of the future so that it isn't just, you know, a zero sum game or so that it isn't that a. Again, just certain individuals hold power for a certain amount of time. Because no matter what, the idea that we're holding power or that we have agency that is ours and ours alone is something. It's an illusion. It doesn't exist. I mean, how many companies right now have some type of digital twin of your data, a behavioural digital twin of your data, and so they're predicting how you're making decisions, even without you knowing it. So to me, power is very much something that is an illusion, and if we do get more agency, it's because we've decided to co create that now thinking through some of the long term future implications. So what are some of the biggest sort of mindset shifts and sort of ways that we need you mentioned embracing the power of collective intelligence as one of the ways forward. So tell us more about that, because you talk about losing, you know, control of the technology. I could almost hear our audience getting quite afraid with that sense. And so let's spend some time with that, for those of you listening or watching, and then I'll pass it over to Steve. I don't want you to be fearful. I don't think that. I think there's a lot of opportunity here, I would push people to think even in their day to day. Now, how can you create a positive sum outcome when you're either doing deals for work or if you're negotiating something as you're thinking through resources. We don't need to have an own everything, and we have been conditioned to think that it is a zero sum game, but it doesn't need to be that. And so how can we think about all the stakeholders that are involved, including nature, as we're making some of those decisions? That's one big thing that and how do we design our systems, either in your personal life or within your work or within your company, that can think through all the stakeholders within either within your your value chain or or, you know, any touch point that you might have. The other piece that I would then say is for individuals, really, my recommendation is to have an anti fragile mindset, because we're really moving into more ambiguity. And so how can you, as we're getting these compounded stressors in our daily lives, how can you start to thrive when you end up having all of these unknowns that are coming at you? Because that's not going to change. It's how we interact with that and what we do with that, I think is, is really the opportunity here. Steve, how about you? I would say that we are asking leaders to solve 21st Century problems with 20th century mental models. I say that a lot because, you know, Jean a talked about identity and authority. You know, we're coming to the point where intelligence is going to stop being exclusively human. I mean, you have, obviously, animals are intelligent. Animals are more intelligent than others, but I don't see, you know, it's like leadership. It can't rely on expertise alone for legitimacy, even we're talking this, you know, this podcast is experts, right? It's like, who makes the call when AI sees patterns that we don't right? Is it who makes that final is it the human? Like, how is going with authority going to shift when the insights no longer scares. It's like it's, it's it's also moving from this mindset of, we need to move from kind of knowing to sense making. And I know it sounds like, you know, it's, you know, let's all do a little chance do some yoga, but it's, but there's a there's a feel, there's a different sensory output. And I think that's where people are kind of feeling the disconnect in their organisations. Because, you know, you hear digital transformation talked about a lot and and even this report on how much was it? 90 95% of AI initiatives are failing, you know, it's because they're trying to optimise a structure, but they're not upgrading their mindset. You know, they're trying to fix a thing, put a process, you know, agentic. It's all great, but they're not changing out. The other. Part of the transformation, kind of the belief structure that had the system in the first place. And I think that's a big part of why putting super shifts out there was like, this is all these things are changing now. It's just in one facet of life, but everywhere. So I think for us, you know, we, you know, in this futurist like, it's about trying to make the complexity navigable, you know. And I, I would offer that people that are feeling this, because I'll give an example I cite a lot, if you were a number of you were young, but I've been in technology for about 35 years. So I've been through a couple of cycles, you know, and with the internet, for example, in 1998 if you were a Windows developer, you were doing great. You were making a lot of money, doing great by 2001 if you weren't a web developer, you probably have a job, so you needed to learn new skills. But it was the time in which we had to kind of see that change, make that change, because it was that focused kind of infrastructure. This is more systemic, but it's also faster. It's almost like the half life It used to be. I was talking to a friend of mine who is looking for a new job, and he's like, there's like, before it used to be, you know, if you were under two years, maybe you weren't stable, and then he's like, he was at a job too long, and they thought nobody wanted to hire him. So what's going to be the kind of middle ground for skill building, job change? And I would leave this, and we can, you know, want to Jean to kind of chime in on this too, is it? And I don't know how much you all do talk about generations in the workplace, but for me, looking at structurally like generational cycles, three or four generations, right? What happens when people live to be 130 140 100, 200 right? What happens when that all changes, like the ways we call generational drift? This is the first Super shift. What happens if you live to be 100 like, what does it mean for career, for life, for work, right? So I think we could get into that, because AI will also help extend that and also give you more cognitive power than you might have at a certain age, which is, I think, a game changer and a way to really leverage who's listening to leverage a workforce that I think has been severely ignored and and I think underutilised. I think it's really interesting, this idea of being having an anti fragile mindset, where you become stronger, not weaker, under stress, you outline in your work the super shifts. And it'd be really great to understand a little bit more about what these are. These are and how you create the mindset shift. Because I think one thing that you say you need is an anti fragile mindset. But how do you do that? When you're thinking about creating an anti fragile mindset, either for yourself and or for your team, it's identifying where your baseline is first. So as you start to record or observe your day to day, where do you start to get uncomfortable? What makes you uncomfortable? Is it news throughout the day, within work? Is it tensions with within the team, like, what are those elements being able to record that for a few weeks will at least give you a baseline to understand where some of your triggers are that either make you comfortable and or that make you uncomfortable. And I recommend recording both as you're as you're keeping a bit of a journal, if you will, for that, but it's then from there, identifying great knowing those triggers. How can you push beyond the edge of what you think is comfortable? Is it that you are trying something new, if you are working with a team, maybe there's conflict within the team and the past has been to have those individuals avoid one another when really it might be around creating a space so that they can almost verbally grapple and work through the problems or work through the tensions that might exist so that there's an opportunity to identify if there's middle ground. There is it that you're really thriving in one area of your life, but you're ignoring a whole other area, so maybe you're really digging into work, but you're avoiding an elephant in the room at home, because those things happen all the time, so identifying, really, and keeping track of over several weeks, of where you are, what's comfortable, where those triggers are, and then creating little micro actions for yourself in every aspect. Of your life so that you're pushing yourself a bit, just a small bit, every single day. It might not seem like a lot Jean, but honestly, when you're doing this every day and you're just it's like stretching a muscle, it really is. That's what we're doing, right? But in a way that doesn't trigger this. I have to go and achieve X, Y and Z. You're just identifying where that ledge is for yourself, and then you're helping to extend it a little bit each time. What I find is that when individuals do that, they start to explore other ways in which they can increase their stressors. Maybe they take on a hobby that they've never they've never even thought that they would take on before. Maybe they're not athletic, and now they're they're really going deep into athleticism. In some way, I also find that for others, they sometimes will then start to create a space for not only the team, but also their organisation, so that it almost creates this rippling effect. And what I find is that, particularly with inside companies, when that space is created, and we look at AI adoption as as an example of this, that adoption and one of the reasons, not all the reasons, because there's a several of them in which we've already talked about a few. One of the reasons why this adoption is failing, and failing as hard as it is, is because of of culture, right of behaviour. How are we working with these systems? Are these systems being set up in a way that help everyone understand where their role is or how it has been adapted many times there's not space for those conversations, and some people have fear of technology. So again, that's another area where you can really push not only yourself, but also members of your team to almost embrace that fear and even start to explore what that adaptation might look like together. Do you find that organisations need to get more, get clearer on, sort of the purpose for how they're going to use AI and technologies? And I mean, because I think in some ways, I feel like you mentioned 1998 and I'm thinking about, you know, internet cafes, and everybody's running to get online, to check their email, and they don't really even know why they're doing it. They're just doing it because they can, right? And so, and I feel like there's this, at least in my observation, in some ways, AI, kind of feels similar, where people aren't really even sure what to do with it, but everybody's trying to race there. So, you know, I'm interested in your perspective on that. Like, is, is there needs to be a greater sort of articulation of why we're doing this and what we're doing it for. I think there's a lot of FOMO. I think it's always been, you know, even in the investing community, you know, when somebody gets really, like, into, you know, like when timing comes, like, if you wanted to pitch a room, a room rental service, now you might be a little late to the game. So it's like you have to hit the timing of things. And then what happens is, when somebody is investing in that, everyone wants to get in on it, it's the same thing. It's like when you start to see one thing pop up, you don't want to be feel left behind, but at the same time, there's that race, and you don't even sometimes know why you doing it, and it takes time to kind of have more clarity in that I totally understand, you know, that analogy, like internet cafes and, you know, everyone had to have an E commerce site, or, you know, everyone was going to get rid all the brick and mortar stuff was going to go away. You know, it's like, you know, it's just like everyone, then they go to this extreme of, like, this distance, this fanciful notion of change, and then the reality set in of, like, you know, what it really takes to make that and everyone kind of settles into some sort of equilibrium to that. I think we're, I think we're in this. I think we're still in the hype cycle of AI. I think what, what's eventually going to happen next year is it'll really, truly go through a trial of disillusionment. Because I think a lot of people are going to rethink their budgets of what these transformations have done and what they haven't done, and the reality is going to set in of what the limitations it's just like the web tech, web technology, or social media, is like, it could do certain things well, but people's expectations, I think, won't be met for a long, long time. And there'll be cases of where it does work, and people will adopt that, and it'll slowly start to plateau. Productivity will start to kind of emerge as we march towards some sort of AGI, I think, in the next couple of years. But that's where super shifts come in, because it's all powering there's all these, these things, not just AI, but just everything else is going on in society, everything that's happening with, you know, are we the centre? Are these systems being more centralised or decentralised? Like, will we have real interface with technology, like, you know, brain computing interfaces. Or is that like, you know, they talked about the mobile revolution for like, 20 years, until the iPhone came out. It's like, when will, you know, what will those things? It's it's the awareness of it. But then, what is the reality of it? You're listening to the mindset economy. Be sure to subscribe on your favourite platform and leave us a rating and a review. What would be really nice, actually, and I know that especially futurists hate this question. Anyway, here we go, the organisers, listening hard here for an answer. What do you think the world looks like, and what do you think the workplace looks like in five or 10 years time, I'm going to give you my BS answer. It like Star Trek. It's going to be everyone's going to get along. It's going to be no need for money. Okay? No, here's the thing, I as much as I would love that utopian I'm protopian, so as much as I might read dystopian fiction or, you know, I believe the best individuals give or take them, you know, but humanity as a whole, we are a resilient race. You know. We've been here a long time, you know, probably more civilizations than we probably even know about. But we've been through a lot of change, and we've rose through that. When you think about that, though we as far as we know, the we are the most intelligent species on the planet we have, you know, but if you I always joke about if aliens came to visit, which they probably already have, but they are, they're already here, but they're looking at us like a science experiment, like we're like a backwater planet that engages into tribal warfare. I mean, if you really look at it from the macro sense, but human nature itself. You know, we're we're greedy bunch, we're tribal. We like to form our I don't think that behaviour so much changes when I look at workplaces and future of work. What's been fascinating to me the two there's two things that have in the last decade. So covid accelerated, remote work. We thought it was like 10 years away, because generationally, culturally, it wouldn't really be adapt, adapted. We were forced into that thinking that it's going to be a remote work utopia. And then everyone that had Commercial Real Estate Investments demanded a return to Office, also as a way to self select people from, you know, leaving their job, but the return that, that kind of shift back to RTO, I think the smart ones will use, you know, any like any technology, will use it to adapt the right teams. I think teams will become more flexible. I think they'll become more hybrid in their their nature. I think the proximity, just like video calls or cell phones, kind of change distance. I think we'll continue to shorten that distance. I think that people will actually, this newer generation will actually force a disconnect, like I see so many people buying turntables. Again, I'm a child of the 70s, right? I'm gonna grow up with that, like people want the physical and the analogue. So I think the future of work will be a bit of using technology to accelerate but also free up the time in which to actually have more real experiences in person. Because I think people will meet purposefully more in the future of work, I think when they get together with purpose, it'll won't be it'll won't be the just have to sit in a cube and talk to people on zoom all over the world. It'll actually be real. There will come a balance where people will use this to really, I think, enrich how they work and the type of work they do. That's my that's my protopian and type of futurist outlook. I don't know if Ja-Nae has a she works a lot of these young, young minds that are coming into the workforce. So she's probably gonna have a different perspective. Yeah, well, I mean, okay, so we're talking five years out. I actually foresee a few things. Within five years, we're gonna have organisations will be smaller than they currently are, because there's going to be more use of agentic technology to substitute for individuals that they that normally an organisation would hire for with that as We think about individuals who are staying within their organisation. They may or may not be working with that organisation full time, and so they might have I see a shifting more and accelerating rather more towards portfolio careers, which is and having multiple jobs. Jobs, which was something that we saw during covid. So I actually, I think we're heading again in that direction, but with more acceptance from organisations around that, where there was definitely a big backlash. I also think that we are heading in the direction, and this really depends on how as we think about LIDAR technology and other holographic technology, as soon as we unlock that technology to be able to have digital twins within in holographic technology within the workplace, I think that's where we're really going to see a shift in what we consider future of work and collaboration, where we will move away from things like zoom and what feel very almost to D to us. But I don't know if that comes in five years. I actually think that comes in more of seven. But again, it depends on how quickly that that technology can move, we will start to see, and we are already starting to see organisations have a better pulse on their employees. And what I mean by that is, you know, organisations historically have and will continue to collect various pieces of data on their employees to then predict sediment, predict output, and we're just going to start to see that increase more so with that behavioural digital twin of, you know, of the employee, is going to create a bit of pressure, I think, around individuals as well, which is going to be different than what we're it's a different type of stress than we're feeling now, but I can absolutely see that being more robust in the next five years. I would also say that I think we're going to see people. We're going to see two camps, if you will, one, a camp of individuals that almost want things to go back to the way they used to be in work. We're seeing that. We're seeing that now, absolutely right, but I think that that's going to be exaggerated, you know, because we it's we look at even just the amount of layoffs that have occurred in tech alone this this past year, but then we're going to see people, a whole other camp, start to embrace what that looks like. That I think will actually start to shepherd in what I consider our next Renaissance. And so there's work that comes along with that, and again, it goes back to having a bit of a portfolio, career lifestyle that I think we're going to have to leverage as we're making some of these transitions, if I may, guys, I know our time, our time is on the show, but You know, might, this might be a good transition into super shifts, like what they are, because I think it links directly to that conversation. Because, you know, much of things Jean a touched upon, I completely agree with. I agree, like, five years like, you know, we wrote the, this is our second book together, you know. And we're, we're partners in life as well. And we have a eight year old, and think about him as the High School Class of 2035, it's kind of like, whoa, right? Really, what is that gonna is college gonna exist, right? Is he gonna be like, holographic classes, you know, take an air taxi to school. Like, what is like the world, you know? So I think the more, the further you go out, it's a little more there's a little more liberty and like, what's acceptable? Fight it five is a tight timeframe, I think, like Jean talked about agentic digital twin, kind of the versions of you, the portability of identity, will be important. Just like when you join a company, you sign their NDA, you sign their stuff, your work product is theirs. You keep that, yeah, you may take some stuff for your portfolio and you keep it, whatever, right. But what does it mean to like, have your whole like version of you and all the things you've learned to be able to take that digital twin with you. I think that's going to be very compelling legal battle, if you will, to do to deal with. But if you want me to kind of go through the super shifts, I think that will kind of lead us into what that is. So I think the going back to our earlier part of the conversation for listeners here is, you know, new to this is, you know, super shifts are not trends, not the mega trends. They're in that kind of a higher level vein. They're these deep, systemic changes, what they what they alter? They alter the decision, velocity, the authority and legitimacy an organisation. Or an individual might have the power structures that exist and then, like, again, you know, human identity, right? And work, right? I think the thing is, is that they're not all happening at same time. They're happening at different rates and things. They're different in different ways. But people feel these things, and this was, there's a lot of exhaustion and confusion, loss of traction going on right now, and they don't, maybe have a way to pinpoint it. And that's a lot of what we try to do with the book is kind of like, oh, that's the thing. So I think, you know, there's nine of them. The first one I mentioned, we talked about generations. Generational drift is, instead of, like the four or five, you know, generations in the workplace. What does it mean to live longer? What does that do? Generational cycles, generational identity, workplace value of people, second careers, third careers. But it really makes someone think about, how do you leverage a world like this? How do you live in a world like that, right? And thrive. The next one is techceration, which is kind of what it's kind of naturally sounds like it's technological change faster than an organisational learning cycle. That's important, because, as like I said, that adaptability from Windows developer to web developer type we had time these organisational learning cycles, they can't keep up like they that's, that's where it's faster. So it's like, how do you deal with that? It's like, it's about getting out of the system and, you know, eliminating the decision fatigue. The next one is, we talk about a lot is in telefusion, so in televisions that were the and we talked about, like, you know, we've been the exclusively, like the human higher part of the food chain of intelligence, not to count dolphins. Don't know. But when you think about that, leadership can no longer rely on the expertise alone for legitimacy, and we have to have there's a there's a fusion with those systems, and who will wield that the next one's acceleration. I'll try a little cover. It's the pace of technological change, like I said, it's faster, and then the learning cycles. Reality remix, I have some some notes here is like, you know, there's a collapse of boundary between the physical the digital. It's like virtual reality. XR, you know, all that, but that's also what Jean alluded to with some of the presence things, how do you function and work? I think those will be a real impactful way. I think there's someone's going to leapfrog zoom and all these other ones and come up with some type of presence system. They tried it with meta and VR, but it's not there yet. I talked about, you know, we talked about power flow. This is not just power it's an energy that's a separate one. But this is about distributed systems. We talked about, like the platforms that you talked about, some of those people like owning all of it, I think we're going to have a lot more erosion of authority. So it's going to be a fight for that. Eco awakening is very much the environmental part of it, planetary systems level responsibility for us. I think more people will have that into consideration, because it's just about stewardship. It's not about global warming, global cooling, you know, this or that, but it's about, you know, stewardship of the planet. I mean, yeah, we want to be a multi planetary species, but not everybody's gonna live on Mars. So world mosaic is this. It's kind of one of my favourites, because it's like this. It sounds kind of fluffy and stuff this, like feel, but it's, but it's about, this is where, like, this one size fits all, leadership is finally breaking, like you just the command and control you it's, it's changed, you know, holacracy or whatever, but it's changing how we are, and the cultural intelligence, right, becomes a core, um, and then my last one, which is, you know, the real like radical is, like bio Nexus. I don't have the authority to talk on this, but I've done enough research on the biology part of it, and Ja-Nae did a lot more on the neuroscience. And I'd love to hear your thoughts on this as a neuroscientist. It's the convergence of biology and technology. It's like, reshape health, reshape longevity, right cognition, because that goes to the generational drift of living longer, but also having cognitive, you know, having the cognitive strength to function. And it was all probably been touched by dementia or some other sort of cognitive degrade in one of our in relatives, right? So that, that kind of, they all kind of come together. They all kind of, you know, and there's, there's, I was, yeah, I mean, our energy systems are going to change as well. So as I was listening to you, I was just wondering more about the mindset shifts for us to embrace all these sort of shifts that need to happen. You talked about the anti fragile mindset build, which I think was so important. What are some of the sort of other mindset shifts you think we need to embrace for all these sort of possible futures and what and what are you most excited about? I you know, you think about the possibilities. What has you most excited? I have a few. So for me, I really, I know this will scare some folks, but I'm actually really excited to continue. Having conversations with individuals around what is real, because as we blend is we look at like reality remix, and we move between virtual and physical. And what our perception of real even the future of identity, right? So if, if you when we go into virtual worlds, even you know, our son likes to to game, and we end up having an avatar, and we might behave in a way that we might not behave at home or behave at work. The thing is, is that we then end up having almost like these micro tribes, if you will, as we head into these different these different realms or worlds. And the question then becomes, of all of these personas, which ones feel more like your real self? And is it that you feel that a world that you're interacting with, maybe friends, you know, a group of friends, and you've never met before, and you know you might be a giraffe with purple, purple hair, but you feel that that is a more real identity for you versus the skin that you have now, or you know how you how you see or perceive yourself out, out in The world. So it's fascinating to have those conversations now, and I I look forward to continuing to have those conversations, because it makes people question self and question what, not only what's real, but what's important. What do you value? Why do you value that? So I'm excited for those. And to be frank, I'm really excited to also explore new forms of economic value. What are there ways in which we're creating new ways in which we're creating economic value. And, you know, do we get to replace Adam Smith's version of the world at some point, which I think we do, but I don't think that's coming anytime soon, but that's that does get me that. And I'm not saying we're heading into Star Trek either, but it does get me excited to to at least think about and ponder. So how about you? Steve, Well, first thing in order for the Star Trek world universe to happen, we have to have a global thermal nuclear war, for everyone to kind of be broken of their acquisition of wealth, and for the Vulcans to arrive. Yeah, let's bypass that and for our warp drive signature to be recognised as they pass on by Trekkies, yeah. So I would, you know that he reports. I you know you took, you stole my post capitalism one Jean, because I talked about that a lot too. Is that there's everyone talks about, quote, unquote, late stage capitalism. What does that mean? What's a late stage? What stage are? What, you know, what's and it's like, it's like, we talk about age of engines, and now to the age of intelligence, okay, what's after that? Socialism? Yeah, that hasn't really worked out too well. Um, but it's like, it's kind of like remaking movies. It's like, you might as well just, you know, let the other one just be the classic and just leave it alone. So we do need a new set of structures. If you take away, this is what is wild to me. If you take away the need for all these workers who's going to buy your stuff, like, who's right? If you build these robots that can hang drywall, 24/7, and you don't need and they don't get hurt. Like, who's going to go out and buy, you know, your power tools, like, who's going to there's a point that which there, and this is where they don't, I don't think they see it, because they don't care, but it's some do. But I think the ones in charge are are struggling because they are pushing, because there's this mass competition to move away from it. I think that there will be some sort of UBI. I'm worried about a perpetual underclass being created. And look, it's happy. It helps people be part of work. I mean, I've had, you know, use it as well. It's like, it's the systems are there. I don't, don't say they shouldn't be, but it's like, what are you going to do when there's not an acquisition of wealth, right, and that, or there's a way for people to make money? I think that we're going to have to address those things. I think we're going to have to figure it out. Well, there's gonna be a lot of social experiments in the next decade, but I think by 2040 we're going to be at a new place with capitalism won't go away. But I think there's going to be other forms or other systems that are going to start to kind of emerge in that because a lot of other things will be kind of have some equilibrium in that way. I would say the thing that the one that excites me the most is, as much as I like, you know, connecting with, you know, the hive mind. I think one of the things that would be wild for me with brain computing interfaces or being able to connect is to for, like, peace negotiations, if you're able to understand what it's like to be that that refugee in a camp, or that person who's in a civil war on the other side, to be able to go have negotiations and understand truly, to walk in someone else's shoes. I think that's a very powerful notion. But I think for me as it's just what it means to work and be a productive part of society, and what real value means and purpose, instead of the BS jobs that I think are kind of going away, I think that's the benefit of it, but there will be the opportunity. What really excites me is, like digital twins, being able to have, you know, a lot of things that your access, that you don't have to spend time with. And I think the reality remix super shift is my I'm most excited about because if I can create new types of presence and ways to be connected to people that I can't do physically, I think that's really, really hugely important for connection, and just in addition to the physical Of course. So as we bring this to a close, you've opened up another conversation in terms of the moral dimensions of all of this and the philosophical underpinnings of what good society looks like. We don't have time, necessarily to get into that in depth, but I'd like you to finish with your thoughts on how, as say, a 25 year old, I can start to think about my career in this age of intelligence with just a few thoughts from both of you in terms of what I should be thinking about. What would you suggest I need to think through in some of the big life choices facing me right now? So I would say, think critically. Think right now our systems, our educational systems, are set up to have you regurgitate information, rather than have you be a bit autodidactic, and to guide you as you are learning yourself and to critically think through even your own actions in Your day to day. It's amazing to me how students that I interact with don't even realise their own interactions with technology are changing how their brain functions and what that looks like, and so being present with oneself and wanting to learn and learning for the sake of learning, so that you can build again, thinking of them almost as muscles. Build up those muscles so that as tools change, because tools will change. As they change, you're able to critically think. You know how to adapt. You know how to be resilient in the face of of that change, but also to be a bit conscientious, to really consider all of the stakeholders that may be involved so that you can create positive sum outcomes throughout the world and help us to create a whole new way of existing, especially as we're going to live to 130 now. So we need them to look already too tired to live to 130 I don't think I can make it. Yeah, that's the thing. It's like, you know, I'm like, Okay, if I do 130 I'm gonna let go make wine. I'm gonna do, you know, I'm gonna write sci fi. Like, it's just, like, it's a question of but I would say, for the young people, my two thought is, I'm listening Jean a like, the two thoughts that I've told people is that the the entry level job has changed. Everyone says there's no entry level jobs. It's because the entry level job is level job is levelled it's levelled up. There's a new bar. It's like you're an accountant. You're not gonna your entry level job is not an abacus. Okay? You got to know how to use the systems. So I think it's about understanding what is needed to get into a job. Now, even in just two years ago, I think the second thing is, if you can't find the experience, make it in. You know, volunteer with a startup. Get some experience. You got to get stuff on the resume. If you have a family member's got a business intern, do something. Get the get the experience. Because nobody likes to be first. I see so many people. People trying to just get a job, and they just have the experience, they don't show, like, just make your own company, and if it fails, it fails, like, just but get out there and create the show that you can create value, and show it clearly articulated in that resume, in that thing that might, they might just see a piece of paper of you, and that that those two things, those I hope, would help reset the framing for a lot of people. Well, Ja-Nae, Steven, thank you for this wonderful contribution to the mindset economy conversation. It's been a real pleasure, and hope we can continue it at some point, looking forward to it. Scott Jean, thanks for having us. Thank you so one of the big things that came out of that conversation, for me was the many organisations are asking their people to solve 21st Century problems with 20th century mental models. And if we're going to succeed in the future economy, we've got to think about what is irreducibly human in terms of our source of competitive advantage? Yeah, what's fascinating to me, Jean is the resistance. And I think the resistance may come from familiarity. It's what we know to do. And Jean a introduces a point about building on an anti fragile mindset that I think is worth reflecting on. It doesn't start with just building resilience or just trying to make significant change all at once. It starts with honestly, mapping where you get uncomfortable, and then doing something small about it every single day. And that's a practice that feels really important. Yeah, I agree. Okay, so be sure to join us next time folks as we explore the mindset economy.