Research Critique: Net Generation is in the Vanguard of Change
The greatest asset that the current generation has, is, without any doubt, their extensive conversancy with technology. The current and more complex problems in the current world can be easily solved with the automation that the Z generation is equipped with. The book, Race Against the Machine by Brynjolfsson and McAfee (2011) explains that economic growth is easily triggered by an innovative community, which is one major characteristic of the Net Generation. Furthermore, innovation results in increased automation that consequently necessitates high skilled labour, which is readily available from the current generation. Growing amidst digital advancements has made today’s youth experts in the tech world. Efficiency is now determined by how fast companies are willing to innovate and adapt. Low skilled labour that is a substitute for machines has been replaced with high skilled labour that is complementary to the machines. More machinery, therefore, mean increased demand for high skill and an opportunity for more productivity. We have seen the ripple effects of lagging behind technology; loss of employment, slow economic growth, hostile political atmospheres, just to mention a few. Brynjolfsson and McAfee (2011), consequently advise that humans be in constant effort to race ahead of technology. Like Don Tapscott (2008) explains in his article, the ease with which the current generation is catapulting human efforts to better race with machines is proving to be the magical key to development.
Summary
Don Tapscott also explains his support for the modern youths in his article, “Net Generation is the Vanguard of Change” (2012). Tapscott is a subordinate professor at Rotman School of Management in the University of Toronto and therefore works closely with students of the current era. He has also gotten to dive deep into their minds and analyzed how they respond to different circumstances. Besides, Tapscott’s interest on the change that the digital world has had on the current generation has led to him to write other books such as “Paradigm Shift”, “Digital Capital”, “Blueprint to the Digital Technology”, and “The Digital Economy”. It is therefore clear that a huge chunk of Tapscott’s life has been a laboratory of experimenting the merits and demerits of the digital economy.
Although Tapscott stipulates why he feels that the current generation is the beholders to increased productivity and efficiency in the current world, his article is rendered inaccurate because his article fails to provide any evidence, provides bias judgements, and superficial arguments.
Critique Segment 1: Lack of Evidence
Tapscott does not support his arguments with data or statistics from any sources, which makes his article to be easily dismissed as mere opinions instead of factual shreds of evidence. All through the article, he does not support any of his arguments with real-time statistics. He, for example, mentions that the interactive games that the children play today require team building and strategic skills. He does not mention any of these games that instil these skills, which makes the point unreliable. Contrarily, traditional games also instilled team building and strategic skills. In fact, the old traditional games promoted more cohesion between the team players because they were done physically. Online games assume the qualities of the team member, which does away with the ability to create an empathic relationship between the team players. Tapscott’s arguments indicate many loopholes which make it lose its credibility.
Critique Segment 2: Biased Judgement
Tapscott does not also consider the flip side of the arguments, that is, he does not provide any counter-arguments or sceptical views, and show how they can be disapproved. At the beginning of the article, he states that “My research says none of this is true”, showing that the arguments he provides for the essay are majorly his findings and not inclusive of other people’s works (para. 2). This is not mean that his works are wrong his long experience in the field makes him qualified to make judgements about how the future economy would look like. However, his failure to include findings from other researchers raises doubt as to whether his ideas are only founded on what he feels is right instead of what is actually right.
In addition to this, research done Gardner and Davis (2013) argues that despite the current generation being well acquainted with technology, most of them are more focused on the entertainment aspect of it rather than the innovation. Several mindsets of the youths today have also been highlighted, some of them being, freedom, customization, entertainment, speed, and innovation. The article argues despite the youth being in the position to bring all these changes, their higher inclination to freedom and entertainment is impeding their efforts to become more productive in the economy and making them less ambitious to implement these goals. Another research carried out by Plowman and McPake (2010) also gives some of the disadvantages that have been brought about by the technology era as an increase in cybercrimes, bullying, which that have resulted in a mentally unstable generation. All these creating obstacles towards the potential growth that these youngsters can ignite. Tapscott fails to address such counter-arguments and explain how true or false they are. In the first paragraph, he explains that the older generation feels that the new one is addicted to online activities, inattentive and unsocial, yet he does not consider the speculations or the assumptions of their judgements. Tapscott’s article is therefore rendered inaccurate and bias.
Critique Segment 3: Superficial
Tapscott (2008) only provides minimal challenges that can be countered by the tech-savvy generation. He only indicates the social transformation, their curiosity as the main factor that makes them very relevant in the current world. There are however so many different ways to which the net-generation can revolutionize the modern world. The article by Zammuto & O’Connor (1992) explains of the numerous opportunities that the youth have in the farming sector, education and processing sector, for example. Their characteristic to want freedom to express themselves and be who they want to be will place them in the right careers and bring maximum productivity. Their affinity for customization instead of mass products also makes them uniquely define their abilities and channel their energy in what they can do best. Their regard for high-speed connections will decrease the amount of time in which results are realized. Tapscott only touches on these type of points which makes his article inefficient.
Conclusion
Although Tapscott provides meaningful reasoning on the usefulness of the current generation, he provides no evidence, focusses his arguments on biased judgements and only provides superficial points, which distorts the relevance of his information. The article leaves so many open windows for counter-arguments. Through the article, we get to learn of the potential remedy that the tech-equipped generation could bring to the rapidly changing socio-economic climate, but we do not adequately understand how they can be able to do this, and what makes them stand out more. The article is mainly based on the technology factor of the current youths, but suppose the older generation is also trained on how to navigate the tech-world, would the current generation be as useful as they are shown to be?