I like this. It’s a list of 10 tensions that will evolve during the course of the next decade. It’s not mine though. It’s from Ross Dawson used with permission.

1. Optimism – Fear

Many companies and workers are now daring to be optimistic as they put 2009 behind them, look forward to opportunities, and worry about getting left behind if things improve rapidly. Yet with the shock of the onset of the financial crisis still fresh, any optimism is subject to being shattered, resulting in wild swings in confidence.

2. Institutional work — Independent work

While many lost their jobs in 2009, sparking a rise in home-based work such as direct selling, many others gave up self-employment to return to the workforce. Over the long term more people are making the shift to work independently, by desire or necessity. However the temptations of self-employment can be replaced by desire for a steady pay packet, pulling people both ways.

3. Hyperconnected — Disconnected

The mobile Internet will explode with Google Phone and Android adding to iPhone’s success. For many work and play will happen wherever they happen to be. Others will reject the always-connected world, while some are being left behind due to the cost. The gulf between the hyperconnected and disconnected will increase.

4. Openness – Privacy

Young and old are getting used to sharing thoughts, photos, videos and more with the world at large — there is an inevitable and powerful trend to more openness and sharing. Yet the backlash is strong, with some choosing to pull out of social networks, pushing for greater privacy legislation, and crying out against pervasive government surveillance.

5. Youth — Experience

In the workplace there will be a premium placed on switched-on young people, who have high expectations of reward for their contribution. Yet many organizations are trying to work out how they will survive the loss through retirement of the massive contingent who have decades of experience. Many companies will not manage the generational tensions well.

6. Death of Media — Birth of Media

Literally hundreds of newspapers around the world have shut their doors in 2009. Broadcast TV is struggling. Advertising has slumped. Yet as traditional media staggers, a new world of mobile media, social media, video everywhere, and new business models are opening a new era in which media is at the center of the economy.

7. Immigration — Borders

Virtually every developed country is facing a natural population decrease with dire implications for fiscal policy and the economy. The tension between immigration, backed by the business community who want to drive growth, and borders, by those fearing social fragmentation and ecological impact, is becoming a key issue in almost every wealthy country.

8. Climate Activists — Climate Doubters

The gulf is widening between those who believe everything we can do to avert disastrous climate change may not be enough, and those who don’t believe or don’t care. The chasm will yawn wider between countries, between companies, and between individuals.

9. Innovation — Copying

In a global economy in which almost everything is a commodity, the only source of real value is innovation. However every innovation is copied almost instantaneously, all content flows outside commercial channels, and it is sometimes hard to distinguish between the original and the copy. The faster the pace of copying, the greater the drive to innovation.

10. Me – Everyone

In 2010 people who were born after the creation of the World Wide Web will first join the workforce. The nub of generational change today is about the tension between personal opportunity and expectations, and acting with the greater good in mind. How well can people focus both on their own well-being and that of society and the planet?
Anything I’d add? Sure. I’d add: Global-Local , East-West, Young-Old, Physical-Virtual, Fast-Slow?
Link to the original post on Ross’s blog is in comments…

Trend #1 – Globalization unraveling

This is a very tricky one. It is likely that the global financial crisis is now over in most parts of the world (OK, maybe not in the UK and a few other fragile economies like Greece) and that growth will return to previous levels. Surging demand will result in higher oil prices and resources shortages, while government debt will push up inflation* and interest rates. In short, globalization will accelerate once again, albeit with a few billion rather disgruntled and jittery people at its core. Only perhaps it won’t. Maybe what will happen is that developing nations will embrace globalization whilst developed nations will resist it. Hence, a ‘new normal’ where globalization occurs within a context of localism and protectionism.

Could globalization ever stop? It’s not probable but it is possible.  It happened once before, starting with the outbreak of WW1 and consolidated by the Great Depression of the late 1920s and early 1930s. The most likely scenario, in my view, is that despite getting the global economy back on track, nationalist sentiments will take over and certain things will collapse back into national boundaries.

This is partly because people will be worried about the level of connectivity and complexity (hence risk) that is still built into the global financial system and partly because a few people have got an eye on what a booming global population, together with shifting consumption habits, means for raw materials.

Resource nationalism is hardly a new idea. It refers to governments shifting control of key resources away from foreign and private interests but it could also mean governments refusing to sell certain resources (e.g. farm land, rare earth minerals and gas perhaps?) to other nations, regardless of price, citing national security reasons.

Implications? Expect borders to become less permeable. Also expect anti-Chinese sentiments to increase and expect G20 relations with China to deteriorate once China becomes the World’s #1 economy (somewhere between 2020 and 2025).** Expect a shift in free trade too.  Free trade is an excellent way for a dominant power to fortify its position, but once power is lost things can reverse quite quickly.

Also expect rage to increase. In the US, 1 in 8 mortgages are in delinquency or foreclosure. Add rising unemployment (one person every 7.5 seconds in the US), declining real wages, runaway executive compensation, simmering discontent with President Obama – and a few million guns in the US – and things could turn very nasty indeed. In particular, watch for companies stressing local heritage and connections and also for the extreme right manipulating popular rage for political advantage.

—
* The jury seems to be still out on this. What is significant currently is a lack of inflation, so perhaps some countries (UK, US?) will slide into a deflationary spiral instead?

** Unless complications within the Chinese system lead to a systemic collapse

Ten or twenty years ago companies outsourced various activities to developing economies because of cost. Now the opposite is occurring. Companies (critically their customers, but increasingly their employees) are starting to question the high cost of low prices — specifically what are the social, ethical and environmental policies behind what they buy.

Having looked into these issues, many people don’t like what’s happening and they are starting to insist that things are made closer to home (in most cases at home) where they have more control. Hence the emergence of terms such as re-sourcing or industrial repatriation.

Examples? Steif, the German toy company, recently moved its production facilities away from China back to Germany because, in the words of Steif’s CEO, “Money isn’t everything.”

Prediction: Expect to see more companies (starting with companies operating in the luxury market or high-end segments) moving call centres, R&D facilities, design centres and then factories back home.

Links: Localism,provenance,authenticity,CSR, nationalism,de-globalisation.

Trend #3. Flight to the Physical

Digitalisation has recently reshaped entire industries, including music, photography and publishing. It is also creating a ‘new normal’ in society generally. Thanks to digitalisation we are now constantly connected and expect to get whatever we want whenever we want it, which is usually now. And we expect to personalise everything too. But there are some significant downsides emerging. One issue is that of overall experience. No virtual experience can possibly match its physical equivalent and people are slowly starting to realise this. For example, it was widely predicted that DVD stores would eventually go out of business — replaced by instant downloads or next day delivery in the mail. Similarly, people forecast that going to the cinema would soon die out because it would be cheaper and more convenient to rent a film for the night. Perhaps you could even have a film delivered by motorcycle and have your dinner picked up at the same time.

But all this rather misses the point. Browsing thousands of movie titles online is all very well but spending half an hour in a well-run video store is somehow more satisfying. Accidental encounters with other customers, or serendipitous conversations with passionate staff, are both richer experiences than sitting in front of a PC or fiddling with a mobile phone. The same is true with public libraries. The prediction that libraries will one day disappear due to a combination of Google + e-books misses one rather vital point. Physical libraries contain books but that’s not the only reason people visit. Libraries are an experience that is the sum of the physical space (usually quiet and safe) + books + information + people + trust + events.

Another example of the flight to the physical is the survival of vinyl. In Australia, vinyl records — and record shops — are making a comeback. In Japan sales of fountain pens are doing well. So too are sales of ‘wet film’ for 35mm photography. Part of all this is undoubtedly to do with nostalgia — or being seen to be ‘different’ – but there is something much deeper going on here too. Humans are inherently social. We crave interaction with other people and we desire sensation, especially interaction with aesthetically pleasing physical objects. Perhaps this is why we are starting to see a reaction against the soullessness of digital products and services.

Implications? The more that everyday life becomes digital and virtual the more you can expect some people (tactilists perhaps?) to crave the opposite. Moreover, if people continue to be anxious about the future there will be a continued interest in holding physical assets that can be touched. Think of real estate and physical gold as two examples.

Trend # 4. Unsupervised adults

First it was unsupervised children. The thought that it was unsafe for children to play alone outside. But it appears that battery-farmed children are merely the beginning. Collectively, we are now so afraid of the unknown that adults (primarily men) are now seen as predatory until proven innocent – i.e. adults cannot be trusted and need supervision.For example, last summer I took my two boys, aged 8 and 6, to an outdoor swimming pool outside London. They got changed and we all walked over to the pool. They jumped in and I walked* over to a row of chairs a few feet away from them. In what seemed like a nanosecond a lifeguard appeared and informed me that I would have to move for “child protection reasons.” Apparently, being a man, I might be a risk. This was slightly odd. The only children in the swimming pool were my own kids. Presumably this was because, being an English summer, most parents had done a personal risk assessment and concluded that the water temperature in the outdoor pool might be a health and safety risk.This precautionary principle is now being applied to schools. Anyone wanting to physically enter a school (a parent with kids at school for instance) will have to undergo police checks to ensure that they are not a threat. What’s next — compulsory video monitoring inside every home in the country? Why not? If you weren’t doing anything wrong how could you object?** George Orwell is turning in his grave. I can see him with my live, government approved, security webcam.

* Running is obviously not allowed due to risk of injury and potential litigation
** I can think of several fairly serious objections to this idea

#5. Conspicuous non-consumption (developed markets only)

This is a flip side to expecting less. Expecting less is inner directed, much in the same way that true philanthropy is anonymous. You do both because you believe that what you are doing is right. What anyone else thinks (or sees) is irrelevant. But there is another side to expecting less, where using or consuming less meets an old set of selfish attitudes and behaviours.

The idea here is that some people not only want to be green or good but want others to see them doing it. It is externally directed. In some ways this is no bad thing. The more people that see a Toyota Prius (Pious?) the more other people might accept the idea of buying one for themselves. Ditto smaller cars in the US, water conservation, recycling and so on.

But there is another, more selfish side to this too. This is the flaunting-it side of social, ethical and environmental behaviour, where people are not simply content with doing their bit but want to be seen as either a trend-setter or someone that’s better than everyone else.

Again, nothing so dreadfully wrong with this in one sense except that at the extreme these people don’t actually give a damn about being good or responsible. It is ethical behaviour as a fashion statement and fashions, as we all know, change.

Predictions: Companies charging customers more to get less.

#6. Expecting less (developed markets only)

I have a bad feeling about this one. In theory ‘Enoughism’ is in full swing. We have seamlessly shifted from greed to good — from me to we — and we are now at the start of a new era in which social, environmental and ethical considerations are central to any discussion, issue or idea. There are clearly still people that believe in free market dogmas but they are looking increasingly silly. Or perhaps not.

Part of this shift from the primacy of the individual to that of the group means that the needs of others have to be taken into account. Thus, the idea that all of the world’s people should be able to share a slice of the pie. This inevitably means that some people will get more and some will get less than they have been used to. In developed economies this means buying less, consuming less and perhaps fixing or mending things rather than replacing them. It also means doing without certain things.

Books such as Enough by John Naish and How to be Free by Tom Hodgkinson tap into this ethos and there are undoubtedly a large number of people out there for whom ‘less’ is the new aspiration. But will it last? Is greed really dead or is it just resting for a while? Personally, I think it’s largely a fad.  Either it won’t last or it will only affect a small number of people. Moreover, whilst ‘Enoughist’ values become popular in developed nations, such beliefs appear rather ridiculous in other regions. Across much of Africa and Asia people many people barely have enough and in fast growing urban areas such as Dubai, Shanghai or Mumbai people can’t, it seems, get enough. Part of this is clearly a re-balancing of global consumption. But from a values point of view it is almost as though we are witnessing the desire to trade places.

Links with: Environmentalism, resource shortages, rising costs, make do and mend, frugality, no-frills, utility, declining real wages.

Conflicts with: Greed, instant gratification, culture of immediacy, individualism, sense of entitlement.

Trend #7. Digital isolation

One of the more ironic consequences of digitalisation is that the more connected we become the more isolated we feel. In short, real-world communities are breaking apart in favour of sealed off individuals. Part of the reason for this is that most of our newfound connectivity is wafer thin and it is isolation that is the recurring theme of life in the 21st Century. We have been persuaded to trade intimacy for familiarity and we are now paying the price.

For example, we know lots of people but we know them less well. We follow people on Twitter and feel that we know people but we are deluding ourselves. How can any friendship be properly maintained in 140 characters or less? It can’t. The reason that Twitter has been successful is that it gives the illusion of connection. We feel empowered because we can tell the world what we are doing (right now) but it plays straight into exhibitionist, narcissistic and voyeuristic urges.

Facebook friends are another example. Did you know that the average Facebook user has 130 friends? Great. But did you also know that research by sociologists at the University of Arizona and Duke University North Carolina (US) has found that Americans have fewer real friends? What’s a real friend? Back in 1985 the average American had three people to talk to about their problems. Now the figure is just two.

Other research suggests that the proportion of Americans who say that they have nobody whatsoever to confide in has increased from 10% to 25% over the last twelve years. This broadly supports some very recent (December 2009) research by the Samaritan’s in the UK that showed that young people are more worried about loneliness than the elderly (21% for those aged 18-24 years of age versus 8% for the 55+ age group).

Implications? Expect to see an increase in feelings of aloneness and depression. Also expect people over a certain age to drift away from social networks and digital friendships in favour of their physical equivalents. Finally, expect to see an increased amount of interest in physical gatherings, live events and the thought that life is about quality not quantity.

Links: People buying digital friends online (e.g. uSocial.net)