Sections

3 Disruptive Technologies To Combat Global Warming

Anton Kroger

Climate change is arguably the biggest challenge facing the planet today. In my opinion, politicians, scientists, and energy consumers need to embrace 3 distinct disruptive technologies in order to drive change quickly enough to avert this impending global disaster.

EIA (Energy Information Agency) data tells us that the total CO2 emissions from carbon-based fuels has increased from about 21.45 billion metric tons in 1990 to 33.96 billion metric tons today. The EIA forecasts that emissions will reach 43.22 billion metric tons by 2040 if we continue what we are doing today.

Figure 1. Historical and forecasted CO2 emissions

CO2 emissions alone don’t actually tell us that much about pollution. To learn more, we need to convert the EIA figures to parts per million (PPM) .

We are at the 400 ppm mark today, and if we continue as usual we should hit 460 ppm by 2040. 400 ppm is considered by many scientists to be the maximum level that the ppm count can get to and maintain global warming averages below a 2 degC rise. Above this, the chances of capping global warming to 2 degC diminishes, as is shown in the next figure.

Figure 2. Calculated PPM curve – calibrated to the Keeling curve

So the question now is: How quickly do we need to reduce carbon emissions in order to reduce the likelihood of increased global warming?

Based on my own model and calculation, there are 3 possible scenarios, shown in Figure 3:

  1. We continue as we are today, with little change and an increasing demand for energy supplied by fossil fuels
  2. We reduce our carbon-producing footprint at a rate similar to what was created
  3. We drive a completely disruptive approach to reduce our carbon emissions

In order to reach zero emissions by 2050, we would need to reduce our carbon emissions by at least 10% year on year, which is a huge reduction.

Figure 3. Three possible outcomes for CO2 emissions

We again convert this to PPM, and Figure 4 shows that the only way is rapid disruption. Outcomes of global discussions for the most part only seem to have targets returning to the 1990 averages by mid-century, which is simply too slow. Some countries have adopted a more aggressive approach, which is good, but probably not enough to get us across the line.

Figure 4 – Three possible outcomes for CO2 emissions (PPM)

So the results are  clear: We must act very quickly. The question is what technology or combination of technologies can get us there in short timeframe. There is long-term stable nuclear, solar, wind, hydro, or of course a combination of all these, and storage is a also major part of the equation.

The challenge for governments is where to focus and what legislation or projects to back to ensure that change happens quickly enough. The problem today is that change is happening at a sustaining rate rather than a disruptive rate (Scenario 2). This means change is simply happening too slowly. We therefore need to shift our attention away from sustaining technology enhancements and look for disruptive ones.

The difference between disruptive technologies and sustaining technologies is probably best described by Clayton Christensen in his book, The Innovator’s Dilemma:

Sustaining technologies improve the performance of established products, along the dimensions of performance that mainstream customers in major markets have historically valued. Disruptive technologies bring to market a very different value proposition than had been available previously. Generally, disruptive technologies underperform established products in mainstream markets. But they have other features that a few fringe (and generally new) customers value.”

When we apply this thinking to renewable energies, there are two vital requirements that need to come together to drive a truly disruptive change:

  1. The technology needs to have new features that appeal to customers in a different way
  2. The technology needs to have a completely different revenue model or value proposition.

In my opinion, there are 3 technologies that need to come together to deliver these two vital requirements.

The first is rooftop solar.

While rooftop panels might seem like an expensive investment initially, there are some clear long-term financial benefits. Displaying them on your roof also says something valuable about you and your contribution to sustainable living.

Rooftop solar is also taking action at a macro level. It is driving us toward a distributed power model, which is completely different to the model we have today. For the first time in history, individuals have the power to decide where they get their power. This consumer-driven trend has sparked a movement not unlike the rise of the smartphone.

Consider, for example, the plot in Figure 5, which shows the drop in the price of solar PVs against the combined power being generated by solar from 2010 to 2014. The trend added 4.5 GW of power to the grid, while the price of that energy dropped by almost 500% over the 4 years. That’s the equivalent of adding about 8 large-scale power plants to the grid, the bulk of which would have been completed in 3 years or less.

Figure 5 – Cumulative global solar photovoltaic deployment and solar photovoltaic module prices 2000 to 2014

It’s probably no surprise that batteries, or power storage, is the second disrupter. Storage allows us to take advantage of the sun during the day, storing excess power for when there is less sun.

Batteries like solar PV’s are also on a disruptive price curve, meaning that the year on year price decline is making them noticably cheaper every day.

So that is great for consumers living in suburbia with plenty roof space and sunlight, but how does it help apartment-dwellers whose only option is to buy power from the grid?

Peer-to-peer trading is the third important disrupter. This essentially cuts out the retailer and allows individuals to trade directly with each other. To make peer-to-peer trading a reality we need to bring together smart grids and network-based trading. The smart grid conversation is well underway, and some companies are starting to look at leveraging blockchain technology to allow peer-to-peer trading.

Peer-to-peer trading would allow city dwellers to partake in the digital energy revolution by buying excess power from the cheapest provider on the grid. What is interesting here is that the longer peer-to-peer trading takes to implement, the more pressure there will be on large power facilities when it does happen. As more users make the jump to rooftop solar (potentially going off the grid), fewer people remain on the grid to pay for the infrastructure. With demand dropping, costs are likely to go up, further fuelling the move to rooftop solar.

This ultimately means more and more solar PVs, which will likely lead to a huge energy glut in the market. When peer-to-peer trading eventually does kick in, large power facilities will need to compete with plenty cheap home- grown solar. (We see a similar phenomenon with AirBnB, where hotels are now competing with individuals who have a much lower cost base).

Electricity generation contributes only about 70% of CO2 emissions, so it’s not the only major contributor to the carbon footprint. The second-largest contributor to CO2 emissions is the transportation sector. With a potential electricity glut driven by the abundance of solar power, storage, and peer-to-peer trading, it follows naturally that electric cars will soon become much cheaper to run than their carbon-consuming alternatives.

This will likely happen more quickly in urban environments, with long-range travel taking a little longer. In fact, we are already seeing similar rapid price declines in the transportation sector, where the cost of electric cars is dropping and the variety of options is increasing dramatically. Electric cars also don’t face the challenge of a network to supply “electric fuel,” unlike competitors such as hydrogen-powered cars.

The final dimension to consider is how all this plays out in third-world countries. Today non-OECD countries, which predominantly represent the poorer countries, account for about 60% of global emissions.

At the rate at which solar and battery prices are dropping, it won’t be long before we see a massive jump in the uptake of individualised power generation in emerging countries. A decentralised power model will leapfrog the traditional grid model, reducing not only the cost of power but also the time required to provide power in remote places from years to literally days. We saw a similar trend when cellular phones emerged, with networks and adoption proliferating even in high-poverty areas.

In conclusion, it is my opinion that unless governments and lawmakers support rapid reduction of CO2 emissions by getting behind energy disruption, supporting a decentralised solar model, and adopting new laws that facilitate peer-to-peer trading and accelerate smart grid technology, we will fail as a society to stop global warming. Unfortunately, I don’t see sustaining technologies like nuclear, wind, and large-scale solar as sufficient, because they don’t make the leap from sustaining incremental improvement to disruptive change.

A decentralised power model supported by power storage and peer-to-peer trading, all linked via a smart grid, will enable the economic drivers necessary to change how we generate and buy power. There is nothing like a financial incentive to ultimately unite consumers toward the common cause of reducing the threat of climate change.

Companies like SAP are helping their customers not only transform their business models to adapt to this massive energy change but also to optimise and save energy at the same time. For more information, click here. To learn more about what SAP is doing with blockchain technologies, click here.

Comments

Anton Kroger

About Anton Kroger

Anton Kroger is an Energy and Natural Resources industry solution specialist for SAP based in Australia. Anton has worked in the resources sector for 16 years and has field operations and management experience, both locally in Australia and internationally. He now works with Energy and Natural resources companies across Australia and New Zealand to help them run better, more innovatively and imagine new ways of doing business. He is an advocate for clean energy and resources and believes that innovation is critical to the future of this industry. Anton believes that despite the disruption taking place in the industry today there is still a lot of opportunity for existing companies in the future.

It’s Time To Replace The Aging Roadway Infrastructure

Megan Ray Nichols

Rhode Island is one of the smallest states in the U.S., yet more than 56% of its bridges are deficient. Its roads aren’t any better. According to estimates, the state’s neglected roads cost drivers $637 a year in vehicle repairs, making it just one example of why the U.S. received a D+ grade in the American Society of Civil Engineers’ 2017 U.S. infrastructure report card. The report scored bridges with a C+, while roads earned a D.

Due to limited funding from state and federal governments, roads with poor conditions are rampant throughout the United States, with 23 states having more than 50% of their roads graded as deficient. Of those states, six have more than 70% of their roads in disrepair.

According to estimates, more than 3 trillion miles were traveled on U.S. roadways in 2016. Overall vehicle travel has also increased, putting even more pressure on a weakened infrastructure. Higher travel rates, weather, and weather treatments like de-icing chemicals all contribute to a road’s aging. It’s the overall lack of maintenance, however, that eventually makes roads deficient.

Meanwhile, bridges marked as deficient are still used for travel. In fact, 188 million trips were made across structurally unsound bridges in 2016, according to the American Society of Civil Engineers. Bridges, which degrade from weather, chemicals, and repeated travel, also break down because of low-quality materials used in their initial construction. Age is a particularly significant factor for bridges: most are designed to last between 50 to 100 years, and nearly four out of 10 bridges in the U.S. are now 50 years or older.

How bridges and roads are inspected

Inspections of roads and bridges confirm the urgent need for repairs and maintenance. Commercial divers often inspect bridges, because wear and tear occurs beneath the water’s surface as well as above it. Divers look for erosion from sand and sediment, along with cracks from stress or signs of an eventual break. However, this method can be expensive and ineffective due to limited visibility and concerns about safety and security.

New technology, such as acoustic imaging and remotely operated vehicles, helps divers focus their efforts. The sonar technology of underwater drones also alerts teams to potential obstructions or dangers divers might otherwise miss due to poor visibility.

Drones can also provide live video feeds, allowing crews to assess and analyze visuals, which divers can use as a reference. Teams can then order any necessary parts or materials to start repairs more quickly and effectively. Underwater drones can also assist during repairs, providing workers on land with a live video stream to monitor the dive team’s safety and progress.

Road inspections are often completed with machine testing and computer-analyzed video of roadways. Computers analyzing these videos log cracks and surface wear to develop pavement condition reports, which workers can compare to previous years. Machines such as miniature trailers are used to test a road’s friction, smoothness, and pavement structure. Some travelers notice factors such as road smoothness and friction, or how much their tires are sticking to the pavement.

Pavement structure is an important test because it shows if a road can handle the weight and volume of its daily traffic. When the structure fails, it can cause potholes. Machine testing contributes to computer-analyzed databases offering information about specific areas prone to wear.

Inspections and technology are crucial to developing maintenance and repair plans for bridges and roads throughout the U.S., but how to fund these repairs is an unanswered question.

How will state and federal governments replace bridges and roads?

Federal and state governments’ primary source of funding to replace and repair U.S. bridges and roads is, of course, taxes. The federal gas tax, which was passed in 1932, was designed to fund the maintenance, repair, and construction of U.S. infrastructure. Fast-forward 85 years, and lawmakers have increased this tax only 10 times. Today, the federal gas tax is 18.4 cents per gallon, and its last increase was more than 20 years ago. Rhode Island and at least 17 other states, however, have begun to increase their taxes to support infrastructure.

Private investment is another possible solution to address crumbling U.S. bridges and roads, an option that is being considered by the Trump Administration. Building America’s Future, a bipartisan coalition, is directed toward earning infrastructure investments from outside sources, as tolls are not an option for all of America’s bridges and roads.

How the U.S. government will proceed with repairs to bridges and roads is still to be determined. The American Society of Civil Engineers estimates the cost of repairing U.S. roads and bridges at $836 billion and $123 billion, respectively. And that cost will only increase, as strained budgets continue to prevent regular preventative maintenance that could have helped prevent the country’s current infrastructure crisis in the first place.

For more on how technology innovation can help solve societal problems, see Devices For The Digital Economy: Frugal Innovation.

Image source: Pixabay 

Comments

Megan Ray Nichols

About Megan Ray Nichols

Megan Ray Nichols is a freelance science writer and the editor of "Schooled By Science." She enjoys researching the latest advances in technology and writes regularly for Datafloq, Colocation American, and Vision Times. You can follow Megan on Twitter.

Devices for the Digital Economy: Frugal Innovation

Danielle Beurteaux

Basic Utilities

Millions of people around the world still lack consistent access to the basics of modern life. They also lack resources to build conventional infrastructure in order to obtain essentials such as water and a consistent supply of electricity. Enter frugal innovation—a process for simplifying complex technologies so they are less expensive to produce and operate. Two startups have devised affordable systems that give people access to essential utilities.

Waterpoint Data Transmitter

About 780 million people, mainly in rural locations, don’t have indoor plumbing. Instead, they rely on hand pumps to access groundwater. Sooner or later, these hand pumps break and often aren’t fixed due to lack of parts and know-how. By some estimates, one-third of pumps aren’t functioning at any given time.

OxWater, a startup launched from Oxford University, has a solution that incorporates basic cell phone technology. The Waterpoint Data Transmitter is a monitoring device that communities deploy to track pump usage. If a pump stops working, a local, trained repair team receives a notification to fix it. The device also provides predictions of which pumps are likely to break and reports low water levels. A pilot project in Kenya showed a dramatic reduction in repair times, from an average of 37 days down to just two.

Quad

Solar power has become an important technology for people living in off-the-grid rural environments. But once the sun goes down, or during spells of cloudy days, the solar panels may not generate enough electricity. That often means a return to inefficient and unsafe solutions, such as kerosene lamps for lighting.

Azuri Technologies has developed a simple, independent system that enables solar users to adapt the amount of power they use according to the amount of energy they generate. The Quad is a small wall-mounted unit that’s wired to a solar panel that comes with a USB port for mobile phone charging. The system uses the company’s HomeSmart technology to monitor local weather patterns and learn consumers’ energy usage. Then, based on available energy, it automatically regulates the amount of power used for lighting (by, for example, adjusting brightness) and battery charging.

A 5-watt system costs about US$156, which users can pay off weekly using a mobile money account. Once they own the unit, they can generate power at no cost. Since its launch in Kenya in 2011, 90,000 Quads have been purchased in 12 African countries.

Digital Rescue

Preventing disasters and delivering aid when they do hit are difficult in isolated locations, where there aren’t enough services that enable quick reaction. Complexity and cost can also keep aid from reaching its targets. These startups are using frugal technology in imaginative ways to issue alerts of impending problems and deliver help to people in need.

Pouncer

Disaster relief is an uphill race against the clock. Whether responding to a natural disaster, war, or famine, aid workers must assemble and deliver supplies, navigate around natural obstacles, avoid thieves, and stay safe. Windhorse Aerospace has developed POUNCER, a disposable drone, to address these problems.

Designed for takeoff from a C-130 Hercules military transport plane and guided using a built-in GPS, POUNCER can be launched from up to 40 kilometers from its destination, with a landing accuracy of within 7 meters. The drone can carry enough food and water rations for 50 people. What’s more, every part is reusable and disposable. For example, the frame, which has a 3-meter wingspan, can be used for shelter or burned for fuel (Windhorse is meanwhile looking to develop an edible frame). Because the entire unit is designed for on-site use, there’s also no cost or peril involved in recovering it from the disaster area.

Lumkani

Many of the world’s poor live in shacks that are built very close together, and they lack electricity. As a result, they rely heavily on open flames for light, heat, and cooking, creating a high risk of fire. But conventional smoke detectors can’t be relied on in places that are already smoky. One devastating fire in Cape Town, South Africa, prompted a group of local university students to design a fire detection device specifically for these environments.

The Lumkani detector is a small wall-mounted unit that runs on batteries and, instead of being triggered by smoke, detects fires by monitoring temperature increases. The detectors use basic radio frequency technology to link all units within a 60-meter radius to a mesh network, which enables early warning alerts for the surrounding inhabitants. The $7 device also stores GPS coordinates, sends warning texts to residents, and can self-monitor the operating health of the whole linked system. Lumkani is working on a way to send real-time data to local emergency response units.

Data at the Digital Frontier

Do you own the land you’re farming? When will the next rainstorm hit? These are basic questions, but for some people living in emerging economies, they’re not so easy to answer. Startups are using clever designs and simple interfaces to provide the information that rural communities need to thrive.

FarmSeal

For millions of small landowners around the world, verifying a legal claim to their land is a complex, expensive, and practically insurmountable process. And without documentation that proves that they own their land, protecting their property rights is nearly impossible, as is getting loans to expand their land holdings and businesses.

Landmapp, based in Amsterdam and operating in Ghana, has developed a mobile platform to make mapping and filing claims accessible to small landowners. The company educates farmers about property rights and then, for a small fee, uses its own platform to record and legally validate land ownership. Landmapp uses geospatial technology and cloud data on a tablet, meaning they don’t need fancy and expensive surveying equipment. FarmSeal, Landmapp’s first product, serves farmers; the company is also launching HomeSeal, for homeowners, and CropSeal, for sharecroppers and landowners. The startup’s platform incorporates local government, legal, and traditional community agreements, and is customizable for different locales.

3D-Printed Weather Stations

Weather data drives numerous economic and public safety decisions. But in many countries, a scarcity of weather stations means no data about vast geographic areas. Unfortunately, conventional weather stations are expensive, costing upwards of $20,000 per unit. In emerging economies, governments and rural communities don’t have the resources or training to buy and maintain them.

At the nonprofit university consortium University Corporation for Academic Research, researchers are leveraging 3D printing to fill the weather gap. They’ve devised a weather station that local government agencies can install in rural communities. The units use off-the-shelf, basic sensors, store data on a small computer, and run on energy generated by a single solar panel. The local agencies have 3D printers to create other parts, including the frame and wind gauges, which can be easily customized or replaced.

The cost? About $300. And beyond letting communities know when, for example, rain is on the horizon, the unit can also be a first alert for natural disasters, like floods.

Read more thought provoking articles in the latest issue of the Digitalist Magazine, Executive Quarterly.

Comments

Taking Learning Back to School

Dan Wellers

 

Denmark spends most GDP on labor market programs at 3.3%.
The U.S. spends only 0.1% of it’s GDP on adult education and workforce retraining.
The number of post-secondary vocational and training institutions in China more than doubled from 2000 to 2014.
47% of U.S. jobs are at risk for automation.

Our overarching approach to education is top down, inflexible, and front loaded in life, and does not encourage collaboration.

Smartphone apps that gamify learning or deliver lessons in small bits of free time can be effective tools for teaching. However, they don’t address the more pressing issue that the future is digital and those whose skills are outmoded will be left behind.

Many companies have a history of effective partnerships with local schools to expand their talent pool, but these efforts are not designed to change overall systems of learning.


The Question We Must Answer

What will we do when digitization, automation, and artificial intelligence eject vast numbers of people from their current jobs, and they lack the skills needed to find new ones?

Solutions could include:

  • National and multinational adult education programs
  • Greater investment in technical and vocational schools
  • Increased emphasis on apprenticeships
  • Tax incentives for initiatives proven to close skills gaps

We need a broad, systemic approach that breaks businesses, schools, governments, and other organizations that target adult learners out of their silos so they can work together. Chief learning officers (CLOs) can spearhead this approach by working together to create goals, benchmarks, and strategy.

Advancing the field of learning will help every business compete in an increasingly global economy with a tight market for skills. More than this, it will mitigate the workplace risks and challenges inherent in the digital economy, thus positively influencing the future of business itself.


Download the executive brief Taking Learning Back to School.


Read the full article The Future of Learning – Keeping up With The Digital Economy

Comments

Dan Wellers

About Dan Wellers

Dan Wellers is the Global Lead of Digital Futures at SAP, which explores how organizations can anticipate the future impact of exponential technologies. Dan has extensive experience in technology marketing and business strategy, plus management, consulting, and sales.

Tags:

Why Millennials Quit: Understanding A New Workforce

Shelly Kramer

Millennials are like mobile devices: they’re everywhere. You can’t visit a coffee shop without encountering both in large numbers. But after all, who doesn’t like a little caffeine with their connectivity? The point is that you should be paying attention to millennials now more than ever because they have surpassed Boomers and Gen-Xers as the largest generation.

Unfortunately for the workforce, they’re also the generation most likely to quit. Let’s examine a new report that sheds some light on exactly why that is—and what you can do to keep millennial employees working for you longer.

New workforce, new values

Deloitte found that two out of three millennials are expected to leave their current jobs by 2020. The survey also found that a staggering one in four would probably move on in the next year alone.

If you’re a business owner, consider putting four of your millennial employees in a room. Take a look around—one of them will be gone next year. Besides their skills and contributions, you’ve also lost time and resources spent by onboarding and training those employees—a very costly process. According to a new report from XYZ University, turnover costs U.S. companies a whopping $30.5 billion annually.

Let’s take a step back and look at this new workforce with new priorities and values.

Everything about millennials is different, from how to market to them as consumers to how you treat them as employees. The catalyst for this shift is the difference in what they value most. Millennials grew up with technology at their fingertips and are the most highly educated generation to date. Many have delayed marriage and/or parenthood in favor of pursuing their careers, which aren’t always about having a great paycheck (although that helps). Instead, it may be more that the core values of your business (like sustainability, for example) or its mission are the reasons that millennials stick around at the same job or look for opportunities elsewhere. Consider this: How invested are they in their work? Are they bored? What does their work/life balance look like? Do they have advancement opportunities?

Ping-pong tables and bringing your dog to work might be trendy, but they aren’t the solution to retaining a millennial workforce. So why exactly are they quitting? Let’s take a look at the data.

Millennials’ common reasons for quitting

In order to gain more insight into the problem of millennial turnover, XYZ University surveyed more than 500 respondents between the ages of 21 and 34 years old. There was a good mix of men and women, college grads versus high school grads, and entry-level employees versus managers. We’re all dying to know: Why did they quit? Here are the most popular reasons, some in their own words:

  • Millennials are risk-takers. XYZ University attributes this affection for risk taking with the fact that millennials essentially came of age during the recession. Surveyed millennials reported this experience made them wary of spending decades working at one company only to be potentially laid off.
  • They are focused on education. More than one-third of millennials hold college degrees. Those seeking advanced degrees can find themselves struggling to finish school while holding down a job, necessitating odd hours or more than one part-time gig. As a whole, this generation is entering the job market later, with higher degrees and higher debt.
  • They don’t want just any job—they want one that fits. In an age where both startups and seasoned companies are enjoying success, there is no shortage of job opportunities. As such, they’re often looking for one that suits their identity and their goals, not just the one that comes up first in an online search. Interestingly, job fit is often prioritized over job pay for millennials. Don’t forget, if they have to start their own company, they will—the average age for millennial entrepreneurs is 27.
  • They want skills that make them competitive. Many millennials enjoy the challenge that accompanies competition, so wearing many hats at a position is actually a good thing. One millennial journalist who used to work at Forbes reported that millennials want to learn by “being in the trenches, and doing it alongside the people who do it best.”
  • They want to do something that matters. Millennials have grown up with change, both good and bad, so they’re unafraid of making changes in their own lives to pursue careers that align with their desire to make a difference.
  • They prefer flexibility. Technology today means it’s possible to work from essentially anywhere that has an Internet connection, so many millennials expect at least some level of flexibility when it comes to their employer. Working remotely all of the time isn’t feasible for every situation, of course, but millennials expect companies to be flexible enough to allow them to occasionally dictate their own schedules. If they have no say in their workday, that’s a red flag.
  • They’ve got skills—and they want to use them. In the words of a 24-year-old designer, millennials “don’t need to print copies all day.” Many have paid (or are in the midst of paying) for their own education, and they’re ready and willing to put it to work. Most would prefer you leave the smaller tasks to the interns.
  • They got a better offer. Thirty-five percent of respondents to XYZ’s survey said they quit a previous job because they received a better opportunity. That makes sense, especially as recruiting is made simpler by technology. (Hello, LinkedIn.)
  • They seek mentors. Millennials are used to being supervised, as many were raised by what have been dubbed as “helicopter parents.” Receiving support from those in charge is the norm, not the anomaly, for this generation, and they expect that in the workplace, too.

Note that it’s not just XYZ University making this final point about the importance of mentoring. Consider Figures 1 and 2 from Deloitte, proving that millennials with worthwhile mentors report high satisfaction rates in other areas, such as personal development. As you can see, this can trickle down into employee satisfaction and ultimately result in higher retention numbers.

Millennials and Mentors
Figure 1. Source: Deloitte


Figure 2. Source: Deloitte

Failure to . . .

No, not communicate—I would say “engage.” On second thought, communication plays a role in that, too. (Who would have thought “Cool Hand Luke” would be applicable to this conversation?)

Data from a recent Gallup poll reiterates that millennials are “job-hoppers,” also pointing out that most of them—71 percent, to be exact—are either not engaged in or are actively disengaged from the workplace. That’s a striking number, but businesses aren’t without hope. That same Gallup poll found that millennials who reported they are engaged at work were 26 percent less likely than their disengaged counterparts to consider switching jobs, even with a raise of up to 20 percent. That’s huge. Furthermore, if the market improves in the next year, those engaged millennial employees are 64 percent less likely to job-hop than those who report feeling actively disengaged.

What’s next?

I’ve covered a lot in this discussion, but here’s what I hope you will take away: Millennials comprise a majority of the workforce, but they’re changing how you should look at hiring, recruiting, and retention as a whole. What matters to millennials matters to your other generations of employees, too. Mentoring, compensation, flexibility, and engagement have always been important, but thanks to the vocal millennial generation, we’re just now learning exactly how much.

What has been your experience with millennials and turnover? Are you a millennial who has recently left a job or are currently looking for a new position? If so, what are you missing from your current employer, and what are you looking for in a prospective one? Alternatively, if you’re reading this from a company perspective, how do you think your organization stacks up in the hearts and minds of your millennial employees? Do you have plans to do anything differently? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

For more insight on millennials and the workforce, see Multigenerational Workforce? Collaboration Tech Is The Key To Success.

Comments