Introduction
This paper discusses the issues presented in the article called “The robots are coming – for as many as 800 million jobs”. As the technology of machine learning and artificial intelligence swiftly develops, many business owners and corporations are eagerly pondering the possible ways of automation in their operations. Cost reduction, increase in both effectiveness and efficiency, and enhancements in quality are only some of the expected benefits of automation. However, although many consider only the advantages of robotics and artificial intelligence, employees in certain industries are beginning to worry.
The primary fear is that substantial automation may lead to a profession’s disappearance. McKinsey’s report discussed in the above article informs that 800 million workers are at risk of losing their jobs. That is almost 15% of the entire population of our world. To mitigate potential adverse consequences of automation, workers in risk groups should learn new skills. It is also expected that, while the technology may be disruptive, robotics and automation will create new jobs. Therefore, employees with professions that will undoubtedly be automated need to start receiving training to be able to transition to their new roles successfully.
Concepts and Issues Presented in the Article
The article presents the key findings made by McKinsey and that were presented in their report. Some several topics and issues are worth mentioning. The article starts by stating that robotics and automation will increase productivity. This finding is consistent with the opinion of Linden (2017), who argues that automation was able to increase the effectiveness of journalists rather than replacing them entirely. Doctors, lawyers, and engineers are expected to benefit from the advancements in robotics and artificial intelligence because automation will eliminate the need to do cumbersome work, thus increasing the speed of delivery.
However, it should be noted that an increase in productivity is dependent on the job type, geography, and the business environment (Bloom et al, 2019). There is also a cost factor that should be considered – some activities are almost impossible to automate despite the perceived benefits.
The second issue presented in the article is the number of jobs that will be eliminated as a result of automation. McKinsey’s report gives the approximate number – 800 million jobs (McKinsey Global Institute, 2017). This number represents around 30% of the total global workforce (McKinsey Global Institute, 2017). The article states that the impact will vary for different countries and different industries, but the potential magnitude of the problem is alarming.
The majority of jobs that will be affected are the predictable ones, do not change dynamically, and are repetitive. Some of the examples are assembly line work, item packaging, and food preparation (McKinsey Global Institute, 2017). It is currently challenging to automate unpredictable physical labor, such as construction or animal care (McKinsey Global Institute, 2017). Therefore, it is possible to conclude that jobs that will be affected the most are repetitive and often low-wage professions.
McKinsey’s report also made the following finding – at least one-third of activities can be automated in 60% of jobs. These numbers tell about the potential influence of robotics and automation in areas that are not utterly predictive and repetitive. Also, as with the number of affected employees, the ratio significantly depends on the type of activity, country, and industry. For instance, in developing countries, the impact will be more substantial (McKinsey Global Institute, 2017).
However, there are contrasting opinions – Arntz et al. (2017) insist that automation potentials are considerably overestimated. Also, 75% of jobs in a single occupation are claimed to be not automatable (Arntz et al., 2017). It is not yet possible to say which opinion is correct. The presence of a variety of contrasting thoughts, however, gives hope about a low level of negative impact from robotics and automation.
There is one positive outlook discussed in the article – although automation may result in many people losing their jobs, the technology will also create new occupations for those workers to fulfill. Many scholars and experts agree with this opinion because there is statistical evidence proving this viewpoint. For instance, agriculture was significantly affected by the advancements in technology between 1850 and 2015 – more than half of jobs in the industry were eliminated (McKinsey Global Institute, 2017).
However, during the same period, more jobs were created in healthcare, financial services, wholesale and retail trade, professional services, education, and government (McKinsey Global Institute, 2017). Therefore, because of the consistency in findings and predictions, it is rational to believe that the global economy is capable of supplying the affected workers with the required number of new jobs.
Importance of the Presented Issues
The first topic of the discussed article is that robots will increase productivity. There are several critical points to be derived from this statement. First, it is vital to note the original intentions behind the developments in the field of machine learning, artificial intelligence, and robotics. Increasing productivity will allow humankind to solve more complex tasks, such as decoding the human genome, or achieving less environmental pollution (Bloom et al., 2019).
This goal should also be used when bringing automation to new areas of human activity. However, there is also a negative perception that can be elicited from the statement. Increasing productivity also means bringing down costs, which may be more critical to business owners (Aaronson & Phelan, 2019). Driven by financial greed, corporations may reach new extremes in maximization of their profits (Arntz et al., 2016). It means that automation may increase the economic gap between people living in poverty and the wealthiest people in the world.
It is critical to keep the number 800 million in mind because it tells people about what should be done by the governments and other parties in the economy to mitigate adverse effects. According to Bloom et al. (2019), the majority of affected workers will be from developing countries where there are not many opportunities to gain new skills and move to new occupations. It is going to be extremely challenging to create the required number of jobs to accommodate changes that will result from automation. Researchers state that it will be impossible to reach sustainable development goals should countries fail to create around 734 million jobs by 2030 (Bloom et al., 2019). The challenge of job creation is also expected to be worsened by demographic shifts (Bloom et al., 2019). Therefore, it is critical to start thinking of potential solutions before automation reaches a high level of advancement.
It is vital to understand what types of jobs will be affected by automation to be able to design correct preventive measures. According to McKinsey Global Institute (2017), more than 1/3 of tasks can be automated in 60% of jobs. These findings mean that more than half of the occupations will be more or less affected by developments in artificial intelligence and robotics. More than half of the global workforce will have to attend courses or go through reskilling programs to be able to take on new job responsibilities (Estlund, 2018).
Related government departments will need to design education programs in such a way as to meet the market demands. The issue is critical because the magnitude of its influence is high. Heterogeneity of activities within jobs, however, can serve as a factor that limits the possibility of automation (Arntz et al., 2017). It means that diverse occupations will be less susceptible to automation, decreasing the number of affected employees.
Robotics and automation, like any other technology in the history of human occupation, have the capability of creating new jobs. This idea is supported by many researchers that specialize in automation and its potential consequences. For instance, McKinsey Global Institute (2017) provides statistical information showing the number of new jobs that were created as a result of a particular technology. It is vital to bear this information in mind because it means that automation while having the potential to act disruptively, may create new opportunities. For instance, before the emergence of machine learning, many activities related to video editing, such as face identification, were done manually.
However, as technology advanced, the need for video editing professionals that carry out repetitive actions declined. At the same time, the demand for machine learning specialists increased, creating new jobs in software development, statistics, and education. Therefore, the opinion that automation will not only take away responsibilities but also create new ones is justified.
Recommendations and Implications
The government must make sure that workers are ready for the technological shift. Therefore, it should take measures for mitigating the adverse effects of automation. One of the critical factors of achieving these goals is ensuring that employees have access to the required information before automation reaches the required levels of development. The government should be responsible for increasing public awareness about the implications of robotics and automation, and about how each worker might be affected.
Public awareness is vital because people should have the opportunity to plan. Failure to deliver the expected information to people will result in shock when workers start to lose their jobs immediately. This unfavorable outcome will lead to public unrest, high unemployment rates, and unpredictable economic fluctuations. The list of indirect results includes an increase in crime rates, a rise in poverty, and a decrease in sales, which in turn will lead to a reduction of profit for wholesalers and retailers.
After increasing public awareness and supplying people with relevant information, the government should ensure that people in risk groups have access to affordable education and reskilling programs. It is apparent that as the number of affected rises, there is going to be an increase in demand for training opportunities. The basic rule of supply and demand states that as the demand rises, the price goes up.
Therefore, the government should ensure that all affected workers have equal and affordable access to education opportunities (Latham & Humberd, 2018). Failure to achieve these objectives will not only result in high unemployment rates but also a high number of unfilled positions – as discussed previously, automation will create new jobs in other sectors of the economy. These adverse consequences may lead to an economic crisis in the country. One way of making reskilling programs affordable is through the use of online platforms – delivering online courses is cheaper than conducting in-person training and has the potential to reach a higher percentage of the population.
Protecting the interests of its citizens is one of the most significant tasks of any government. As stated previously, automation increases productivity, but it is not the only reason why companies are investing tremendous amounts of financial resources in machine learning and artificial intelligence. Complexities related to human resources, including law and compensation, are incentivizing companies to explore the topic of automation (Estlund, 2018).
Machines are less susceptible to exhaustion, and current regulations do not demand payment for them. While increasing public awareness and providing reskilling opportunities are for mitigation of consequences, there is a preventative mechanism that may disincentivize companies from working on automation. The government may issue a law demanding private organizations to protect their employees from the implications of robotics and automation. For instance, new tax law may require corporations to pay a certain amount of tax for their robots. The issue, however, is that mechanisms for supervising companies’ automation activities do not exist. Furthermore, there are no tools and frameworks to measure and classify automation.
The UAE economy was primarily based on oil, but there is a shift from a natural resources-based economy to human capital. Had the economy of the UAE been still based on oil, there would have been no risks related to automation, because many of the oil-producing companies rely on the services of foreign contractors. However, due to the government initiative called Emiratisation, more and more native citizens are being hired by companies.
Therefore, the public should know about the possible consequences of automation and robotics, and the topic of increasing public awareness can be considered relevant in the UAE. Many researchers state that the UAE has transformed itself from an oil country to a state that is more focused on knowledge and science (Alfaki & Ahmed, 2017). The country has a sufficient amount of resources to provide relevant training to all affected workers. There are currently no regulations that supervise companies’ activities in the field of automation. It seems impractical to design such a law because most UAE citizens take managerial positions that are too challenging to automate.
Conclusion
Automation is coming inevitably and is going to affect hundreds of millions of workers. Almost 1 billion workers are going to lose their jobs and will be forced to switch occupations, if not industries. Because more than half of the positions will be partially automated, at least half of the global workforce will have to adjust their responsibilities and complement the difference by taking on new duties. Despite these unfavorable effects, automation is expected to result in the creation of other jobs that will require people to pass reskilling programs. To mitigate the adverse impacts of automation and robotics, the government should work on increasing public awareness and providing the affected employees with affordable training. In the context of the UAE, both of these goals are relevant.
References
Aaronson, D., & Phelan, B. J. (2019). Does automation always lead to a decline in low-wage jobs? Chicago Fed Letter, 2019(413), 1-5.
Alfaki, I., & Ahmed, A. (2017). From oil to knowledge: Transforming the United Arab Emirates into a knowledge-based economy. Routledge.
Arntz, M., Gregory, T., & Zierahn, U. (2016). The risk of automation for jobs in OECD countries. OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, 189, 1-34.
Arntz, M., Gregory, T., & Zierahn, U. (2017). Revisiting the risk of automation. Economics Letters, 159, 157-160.
Bloom, D. E., McKenna, M. J., & Prettner, K. (2019). Global employment and decent jobs, 2010–2030: The forces of demography and automation. International Social Security Review, 72(3), 43-78.
Estlund, C. (2018). What should we do after work? Automation and employment law. Yale Law Journal, 128, 254-326.
Latham, S., & Humberd, B. (2018). Four ways jobs will respond to automation. MIT Sloan Management Review, 60(1), 11-14.
Linden, C. G. (2017). Decades of Automation in the Newsroom: Why are there still so many jobs in journalism? Digital Journalism, 5(2), 123-140.
McKinsey Global Institute. (2017). Jobs lost, jobs gained: What the future of work will mean for jobs, skills, and wages?. Web.