A majorly enjoyable aspect of blogging is the fact that I have complete editorial freedom. This gets me in trouble as I’ve had some complaints that some of my posts don’t necessarily follow a targeted formula. I.e. there apparently is a golden rule of ‘stay on topic’ that I apparently sometimes screw up. For the newer readers: my blog focus, or topic here is two fold, primarily my writing is about the collision between business and life, and the journey involved in setting up this effort of a blog/book/podcast. Typically I’ll post a longer thought piece in the early part of the week and a classic ‘blog post’, i.e. i’ll repost something else with some commentary towards the end of the week. I’m also now in the early -and really rough – phases of podcasting to support the efforts of this blog. Feel free to check them out, but honestly they are not anything close to a reasonable quality in these early days, just like the blog was.
Typically when I post a traditional blog, i’m commenting on commentary, i.e. classic internet blogging. In my lethargic long form project it’s different. That writing is more like my longer form pieces here in the blog. I started writing the book with the same methodology as my Masters Thesis, only with more attitude. When I say like my thesis, I’ll pick a concept, research it, and write about it as part of a greater narrative. In this case the narrative is about the professional individual contributors. So when I actually do sit down to write longer form stuff related to the book (a growing rarity as the blog grows in importance) I tend to pour over allot of scholastic articles. This stuff, academic papers and research, is so poorly written for the layman that unless you are an academic accustomed to them they are virtually unreadable. I tend not to post them here for this very reason, they are obtuse. I’m going to make an acception for this post. I’m going to write about a scholastic article about uber and the gig economy. The paper is here:
It’s amazing how much Uber is coming up in my writing, it happens again and again. It’s because Uber is the poster child for the gig economy. Yes there are a very large number of ‘gig’ based organizations facilitated by the insane adoption rate of the smart phone and ubiquitous connectivity. Ultimately the gig economy and the argument for a third class of worker is all just the next step in the great risk shift.
The real value in the article on algorithmic management is the idea that where a company would have to employ hundreds of people and dozens of managers only a few are needed now, and the management class is getting cut by 70-90%. That BA isn’t looking so great anymore.
So what does the article say? My recommendation is to read it if you wish. It may be academic and make you want to say “it’s Greek to Me” but this is one of the easier to read papers i’ve come across.
Feel free to share your thoughts in the comments.