🧠 5 Quick Questions for ... economist Carl Benedikt Frey on the future of remote collaboration, productivity growth, and more
"The rise of remote work increases our interconnectedness and so also the innovating potential of our 'collective brain.'”
Carl Benedikt Frey was one of my first 5 Quick Questions participants in January of this year. In that Q&A, Frey discussed automation, the “techlash,” and more. Now, he’s back to answer my questions about the limits and benefits of remote work, what collaboration at a distance might mean for the “Great Stagnation,” and more.
Frey is the Oxford Martin Citi Fellow at Oxford University, where he teaches economics and economic history. In 2019, he authored The Technology Trap: Capital, Labor, and Power in the Age of Automation, which I highly recommend! Another great read is the analysis “Disrupting science: How remote collaboration impacts innovation,” his recent collaboration with Giorgio Presidente, also of the Oxford Martin School at the University of Oxford. From that research:
Our findings suggest that harnessing the benefits of the ICT revolution for remote collaboration similarly required complementary investments in technologies that support remote work. The COVID-19 pandemic has sparked a marked acceleration in patenting related to remote work technologies. It might well also spark a revival of disruptive science and faster productivity growth.
And here’s my exchange with the economist:
1/ I thought the internet and email meant the “death of distance” years ago. Why did that promise fail to deliver?
The value of proximity comes down to the cost of moving goods, people, and ideas. Early on, the internet dramatically reduced the cost of transmitting ideas but provided a poor substitute for face-to-face. This, if anything, reinforced agglomeration by allowing dense and productive places like New York City to export its services to the world.
2/ What workplace collaboration activities can be most easily performed remotely via Zoom, email, etc.? Where do these technologies come up short?
I think they come up short three ways. First, people are just less creative when put in front of a computer screen: a recent experiment published in Nature shows that videoconferencing narrows people’s cognitive focus, so that they generate fewer ideas.
Second, sporadic encounters and watercooler moments do not happen in the virtual world, where in the absence of the Metaverse, every meeting needs to be planned at least on one end. And such meetings are highly important to new team formation and innovation.
Third, tacit knowledge, which is harder to share and express, is still even harder to transmit at distance. Early-stage conceptual tasks are best done in-person.
3/ You recently wrote in the FT that the “2020s might finally see the end of the Great Stagnation — the idea that the west’s economies are marooned on a technological plateau.” What makes you at least modestly optimistic?
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Faster, Please! to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.