How does “home” look like in the future? What are the impacts of new trends in sustainability or demography? And what transformations has the pandemic brought to housing and homes? Futurist Sylvia Gallusser will join the #FutureSummit2021 with a presentation on “Four archetypes of the Future Home”.
November 10, 4pm (PST) at “The 1,000 Day Radar”, I am hosting a panel on “The Future of Health and Wellness” with four outstanding guests:
– Agathe Acchiardo, Managing Director at Think Next, a foresight and innovation consulting agency focusing on the Health sector.
– Peter Fenwick, Vice President Strategy at Green Shield Canada. Catalyst to scaling health care delivery services and digital health technology firms.
– Marios Kyriazis, Biomedical Gerontologist and Anti-Ageing Physician, Scientific Director at the National Gerontology Centre.
– Andy Wilkins, Founder of Future of Health, Speaker, Podcaster.
November 11, 10am (PST), I am presenting on the topic The Future of Home and Home Life led by Emily Watkins, Sr. Principal, Global Head of Enterprise at Unispace and former Managing Director, Americas Lead, JLL Flex.
The 1,000 Day Radar is an initiative of Grey Swan Guild to reimagine the world looking forward after this pandemic. It entails a series of 1-hr events developed and hosted by our members over a two-day period. The events will be conducted as expert panel discussions with some of the world’s most savvy trend navigators foresight generators and future thinkers – 20+ sessions, 60+ speakers, 150+ key facts of our three year future surfaced.
“Currently most cultures have submitted to the educational model based on the vision of people as Homo sapiens, being possessed of a distinctly Western rationality that dominates and exploits its environment. This form of instrumental consciousness is trapped by its own internal necessity and cannot escape from the force and form of its own logic. The time is ripe for it to cross-pollinate with other non western epistemes to build into our consciousness the flexibility and vision needed to reinvigorate our emergent global civilization.” (Homo Tantricus: Tantra as an Episteme for Future Generations, by Marcus Bussey)
I am delighted to invite Dr. Marcus Bussey at our “Ethics and Philosophy of Futures” open discussion group with Association of Professional Futurists. He will introduce us to the concept of Homo Tantricus and guide us to shift “from a model of mind based on the Western sapientia of Homo sapiens, to a model of mind founded on the consciousness inherent in the Tantra indigenous to central Asia and the Indian subcontinent.”
He will be joined by Dr. Stefanie Fishel who will lead us through the concept of “Microbial State”. With her, we will explore the metaphorical power of bodies on global politics and the potential for the planet’s future. Prof Ananta Kumar Giri will also share his insights as to how to develop true intercivisational ethics.
Join us Thursday 11/11 at 3pm (PST) for an eye-opening group discussion.
The TV series All in the Family debuted in 1971 and remained for 5 years the most-watched show on television. It was groundbreaking for openly talking about serious issues of the day, with storylines evolving around racism, women’s rights, the Vietnam War, homosexuality, and rape, while other shows featured surface-level plots. “Even people who just came in for an episode or two or three remarked about how collaborative the show was,” says writer Jim Colucci who put together the new book All in the Family: The Show that Changed Television, which features interviews with cast and crew members.
50 years later, our notion of family life presents many variations on TV. Many shows make you believe in the power of family from Little House on the Prairie, Gilmore Girls, Roseanne, Full House, Growing Pains, The Cosby Show, Malcolm in the Middle, The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, Full-House, to Brothers and Sisters, Parenthood, Modern Family, This Is Us, Trying, Breeders, The Simpsons, or Bob’s Burgers… The successful family TV show must achieve a delicate balance between presenting idealized family role models who stick together and mirroring our society’s complex evolutions — more diverse, more open-minded, fragmented, recomposed, with love-hate relationships, and sometimes even plain cruelty.
The family bond is an endless source of binge-watchable plots. In November we welcome new seasons of very dynastic-like family lines with The Great, Succession, and Yellowstone, in a tradition closer to Downtown Abbey, Six Feet Under, The Sopranos, Empire, and Game of Thrones — business inheritance, political intrigues, betrayals, disowning parents, fratricides, and mental break-down. Strong female characters lead these three shows: Catherine the Great plots to kill her depraved and dangerous husband; In Succession, Siobhan “Shiv” Roy wants her part of the Logan Roy’s legacy and doesn’t hesitate to put her marriage at stake; Yellowstone’s Beth Dutton will do what it takes to protect the family ranch.
But family suffering most often takes a more intimate form, with structural toxicity, profound identity crisis, and wounds which take time (seasons) to heal if ever: Shameless, Desperate Housewives, Mad Men, Brotherhood, Bates Motel, Skins, Breaking Bad, Borgen, Homeland, The Act, The Servant, Losing Alice, Mare of Eastown and Dexter (which is also due for a comeback this month). No wonder that characters rely on substitute families to thrive — their friends, their workplace, their sports teams, their gang, their life at the hospital, at the post office, or at the law firm.
The demarcation between a blood-related family member and a true soulmate is tenuous, and recent events (the pandemic, social chaos, climate crisis) have even more challenged our notion of family ties. As we have been separated physically from loved ones or forced into prolonged cohabitation in a toxic environment, as we have been summoned to follow our government guidelines or have taken part in protests or collective action, as we have protected our close ones or have lent a hand to strangers, our sense of family and communal effort has been heightened.
As TV series enthusiasts, who better than Ted Lasso’s hero could we quote to close our edito? “If you care about someone, and you got a little love in your heart, there ain’t nothing you can’t get through together.”
This week we cover The Past, Present, and Future of Family. And a little more.
This is an excerpt from the original article by Global Futurist Sylvia Gallusser published in IMCI Magazine, November-December 2021 issue.
A strong approach to Foresight and Futures includes applying multiple lenses and crossing perspectives from multiple disciplines. Both developing a multidisciplinary mindset and collaborating with individuals from diverse backgrounds contribute to enriching our vision, therefore making our foresight practice more inclusive and more robust.
As we observe two main paths to foresight – the academic path and the second-career path -, we notice that both are tightly intertwined with multidisciplinarity.
In the case of the academic path, foresight practitioners graduate in Futures Studies from an academic institution such as a university. In such cases, the chair for Futures Studies is often associated with another department or underlines its interaction with other disciplines such as anthropology, culture studies, economics, political science, public administration, business administration, design, etc.
For example, the Hawaii Research Center for Futures Studies (Hawaii Futures) is located within the Department of Political Science, College of Social Sciences at the University of Hawaii at Manoa.
In Finland, the Turku School of Economics and the Finland Futures Academy offer a program in Futures Studies linked to Economics and Business Administration.
In South Africa, Futures Studies are taught at The University of Stellenbosch, Economics and Management Science along with the Institute for Futures Research.
The Futures Studies Department of the Catholic University of Lille connects with the Department of Development and Strategy.
The Foresight program at the University of Houston defines foresight as “the multi-disciplinary study of change and its implications in the context of the future. It synthesizes insights from a wide variety of fields including economics, engineering, sociology, politics, systems theory, creativity, community building and so on.”
Canada’s largest art, design and media university OCAD U launched a Master of Design in Strategic Foresight and Innovation.
In Taiwan, the Tamkang University provides a Master in Futures Studies based on a broad interdisciplinary academic approach.
The second-career path is taken by foresight practitioners stemming from another profession. These professionals usually have developed skills and credentials in another field.
Popular backgrounds leading to a second vocation in futurism include: design, product management, technology, innovation, strategy consulting, activism, and HR management.
The above-mentioned universities as well as private players and consulting groups have developed certification programs, such as The Futures School, the Institute for the Future, the Center for Engaged Foresight, The Future Today Institute, Futureproofing: Next, The Disruptive Futures Institute.
Corporate and Big Four+ consulting companies engage in Futures Studies, usually focusing on one aspect at a time – future of work, future of business – such as EY Megatrends and beyond, Accenture’s Business Futures 2021 report, or Deloitte’s Technology Futures Report 2021.
Non-profit organizations, and government agencies also play a role in building foresight skills for all. The World Economic Forum defines itself as “an independent international organization committed to improving the state of the world by engaging business, political, academic and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas” and a natural Strategy and Foresight player. The OECD’ Strategic Foresight Unit works with many governments and organisations facing many different strategic challenges. The United Nations’ report “Applying Foresight and Alternative Futures to the United Nations Development Assistance Framework” aims to improve multi-year strategic planning. The Millennium Project, which is a global participatory think tank, was originally established under the American Council for the United Nations University before becoming independent in 2009 and growing to 67 Nodes around the world. UNESCO deploys action-learning and collective intelligence to co-create the meaning of sustainability, peace and inclusion thanks to its Futures Literacy Laboratories, through impactful projects such as the Imagining Africa’s Futures project.
Professional associations and publications contribute to establishing futurists’ credibility within the foresight community, such as the World Future Society, the Association of Professional Futurists, the World Futures Studies Federation, The Journal of Futures Studies, and Fast Future Publishing.
Further hubs such the Design Futures Initiative, the Grey Swan Guild, Silicon Humanism, Future Hacker, FuturePod, Futures Space, or Using Foresight contribute to fostering the community and ensuring its liveliness through events, panel conversations, workshops, publications, and sharing of best practices and resources.
The coexistence and collaboration among these players surely illustrate how diverse, active, and multidisciplinary the foresight community is.
However, one aspect which is still at the start of its development is the cross-pollination between philosophy and futures studies.
First of all, the topic of the Future(s) has been hardly studied by philosophers. It rarely appears as such, and when it does, it is often in correlation to larger concepts of time, death, history, scientific progress, freedom, or justice.
Nonetheless, many concepts and tools used by foresight practitioners derive from philosophical approaches. By scanning over centuries of philosophy and engaging with philosophers, thinkers, writers, and leaders, from all continents, we considered twelve main definitions of Futurity which mirror actual Foresight notions and tools.
We are in a time where more and more people are interested in learning what futures thinking is, and how it can be applied. In this episode, Sylvia Gallusser was invited to a live Twitter Space to lead a discussion about the intersection between futures thinking and philosophy.
She gives a brief overview of how philosophy is practiced by people, ethical futures, moral obligations as Futurists, and some things to think about when considering which “future” is more important than others (like the trolley problem).
Listen to the Applying Futures Thinking podcast with Victor Sarat Catalan and Sylvia Gallusser as we discuss “Futures Thinking and the Philosophy of Future(s)”. We investigate our ability to create ethical futures, our moral obligation as futurists, dilemmas around bioethics, AI ethics, as we turn to Greek philosophers, Immanuel Kant, and Arnold Schwarzenegger!
Watch the replay of our conversation with Sean Moffitt and Rom Gayoso, Ph.D., where I introduce our mission at Silicon Humanism, how it intersects technology and humanism, is inherently multi-disciplinary, and constitutes an open call-to-action – a call to (re)place the human component at the core of our technological advancements.
The Silicon Humanism approach connects with a notion at the very core of Futures Studies and Strategic Foresight: the notion of agency. We don’t predict the future, we aim to prepare for it and act upon it!
This is an excerpt from the article Eight Questions With Featured Grey Swan Guild Member: Sylvia Gallusser
Global Futurist — Founder & CEO @Silicon Humanism, Board Member @Grey Swan Guild, Mentor @Sustainable Ocean Alliance
Our Eight Questions is part of our ongoing series profiling some of the amazingly talented members of our global Grey Swan Guild and get behind the curtain of what makes them think and sense the world differently and more effectively than others.
Sylvia Gallusser — born in France, burnished in San Francisco Bay
Bio: Sylvia Gallusser is an inquirer of our future, conducting foresight research on work, education, mental health, transhumanism, and well-aging. She is involved in the future of our oceans with the Sustainable Ocean Alliance and has launched an Ethics and Philosophy of Futures Group with the Association of Professional Futurists.
Sylvia has been advising 500+ tech companies on their strategy. She is a published author of fiction with Fast Future Publishing and facilitates workshops on go-to-market strategy, and futures studies.
A Sensemaking Metaphorical Tool You Personify:
A violin (technically strings have a metal core). We need method and practice to master the instrument so that the sounds actually produce music. Metaphorically, it connects our left and right brains, our rational mind and creativity, for augmented sensemaking.
1. Who are you/ what makes you tick?
An artist and a multidisciplinary thinker, interested in creating the future.
A global futurist, using both rational lenses from a variety of disciplines (history, philosophy, anthropology, sociology, business strategy, design) and creative approaches (future fiction, arts, music).
2. What are some of the important questions that you are making sense of nowadays?
How to safeguard our mental health, individually and collectively.
How to enjoy the advancement of technology and still keep our sanity thanks to “tech-free bubbles” connection to nature, exercising, healthy enjoyable nutrition, community bonding, intergenerational initiatives, as well as artistic, intellectual, and spiritual nourishment.
3. How are some of the ways you go about making sense of the world?
I have developed a Strategic Foresight methodology based on multidisciplinary thinking, foresight tools, storytelling, and strategy consulting.
Looking back to better look forward > Scanning for signals of the future > Worldbuilding/Storytelling > Backcasting > Action Planning
4. What is overhyped? What is underhyped?
Immortality is overhyped.
Mental health is underhyped.
5. Who is at your sensemaker last supper? Four people?
How do you think about technology? Is it an object, an activity, a field of knowledge, or is it an interpretation of the world? According to Carl Mitcham, we can mean four things when using the word technology:
An object: The things, the machines, the systems around us in our social world.
An activity: The making, the designing, the using of things, something we do.
Knowledge: The know how of knowing how to do things, the know how of the engineer as opposed to the knowing of the scientist.
A worldview: A volition, something that has to do with our will, with an interpretation of the world in terms of will and power, as raw material to intervene upon the world.
Is technology neutral or not? Where are you on the Instrumentalism vs. Determinism spectrum?
Instrumentalism: Society creates and uses technology only as a tool.
Determinism: Technology determines society, it shapes how we live.
Should we consider philosophy of technology as a unity more theoretically, or do you think we should keep the different fields of technology separately when trying to understand the life around us (artificial intelligence > AI ethics; biotechnology and bioengineering > bioethics; life in space > astroethics; autonomous weapons > ethics of wars; etc.)
These are questions we discussed at Using Foresight‘s latest “Futurists of the World” Clubhouse chat with Victor Sarat Catalan and his guests. This open room was a continuation of Victor’s interview with Sylvia Gallusser from his Twitter Spaces. Sylvia has a fascination with Philosophy, and has been exploring the interception with futures for a while. She wanted to spark a conversation with other like minded people, or with anyone who was listening from the audience.
Read the full recap here, including an audio-only conversation that was held in Clubhouse on October 8th, 2021.
Watch the replay of our “Ethics and Philosophy of Futures” event dedicated to Biotechnology, Business, and Ethics with Timothy Dolan, Sylvia Gallusser and the support of the Association of Professional Futurists.
This future fiction piece is inspired by a September 24 conversation led by Victor Sarat Catalan in his Multiverse series, on the theme of The End of the World .
You would believe the end of the world looks like a sci-fi movie. People running out of their cars on LA highways while the asphalt splits open under their feet. Breakers vandalizing stores with baseball bats to stock up on crackers, alcohol, and toilet paper. Your average middle-aged male stopping his heroic breakaway from the pack to give a hand to a lone girl who just lost her mom in a crack of the crust. Flags floating dramatically behind presidents delivering highly emotional addresses to the Nation. A father and his son on a deserted road. Two strangers making love and playfully joking as they await the final stroke of the apocalypse. A regular citizen, an Airforce pilot or a Navy SEAL even better, sacrificing his life to save humanity in a graphic explosion. No, all this misled us. The end of the world looks nothing like that. I don’t say that nowhere in the world you will find people having violent behaviors, storing food, getting high or getting laid, nor believing in a chosen one destined to save us. But you wouldn’t see nor feel all this at once like you could in the pop-corn effluvium of an old movie theatre. Our end of the world is not the visual jumble of all those facets in one picture movie. Our end of the world is nothing more than a pointless fragment. An odd silence. A blurry sky. Heavy breathing. The birds sounding not exactly the same. Nor the inflection in our voices. Nothing more to say, nothing more to plan ahead nor rush into. An irreversible game over. All communication channels eventually shutting down. Even social feeds shutting up. The void around. Before the nothingness. Echoing our human sense of absurdity. A quoi bon? Here we cannot hope for the ultimate turnaround, a well-orchestrated global response, a deus ex machina. It will just all end like this. And yes, it will all have been for nothing. We are all facing doomsday like terminal cancer patients. When the fatal blow is given, we face the absolute nothing. Nothing can be expected anymore at this point. No help, no cure, no nuclear missile to stop it all, no superhero. Not even an infrasound orchestra on a sinking ship to punctuate a deadly ballet with a tragic fermata. The world is dying and all of us at once. No trace behind us. Humankind as another dust in the immensity of the universe. That’s where I personally feel solace. Somehow I always feared death, the idea of leaving the world behind, of not getting to see the future happening, of not being part of the rest of our human history, of having to quit the show before it ends. Then I had children, and their fear of death made me drown my own. I had to find the impossible words to tame their terror. Their panic, imagining me lifeless. Their fright of not being able to picture themselves dead. Whereas now, we are all walking down death row together as one, staring death in the eye simultaneously. No one to stay behind, to grieve for the lost ones. No survivor to be jealous of. You might find me crazy to be so calm, so quiet, so peaceful. To almost find comfort in this collective goodbye. And I believe it might be because I am in the last movement in the farewell symphony. The circumstances accelerated this last performance – shock, denial, and pain, anger, withdrawal, sweet nostalgia. I now embrace the fact that we are all living our last seconds, what else can I do. Acceptance. I watch them asleep and I know that all of us, here in this field, and all over the Earth and in space, are going to black out at the exact same time. I close my eyes, I listen to the ambient goodbye, I smell their hair. I touch their warm skin. Their pulse. My babies. I breathe. And I wait. Three. Two. One. Z.
Our Founder Sylvia Gallusser was interviewed by the European Industry Forum about the future of work. She expresses her views on the changes that are happening in the workplace, with a focus on mental health and how employers can improve their empathy skills to develop a trust-based work environment. She evokes the changes she sees happening and two wishes she has for the future.
Listen to the interview.
Read the transcript of the interview.
What kind of change in the work environment do you notice – what have you experienced, what is here to stay, what will be reverted?
Hi I’m Sylvia Gallusser, founder at Silicon Humanism, based in California.
Among the things we observed here is the consensus around an hybrid model, with a variable split of workdays at the office vs. at work-from-home. Note that remote work was already very well adopted in many companies in California, especially in the tech industry.
We also observe a tendency towards the hub-and-spoke model, with one main office complemented with satellite offices in more remote areas to enable people to live further from urban areas. Smaller companies are trying to attract talents while big corporations are losing control over their workforce in remote contexts – with employees sometimes even exercising two jobs at the same time! I do believe hybrid work is here to stay, with a touch base headquarter, but increased remote work in an overall environment allowing more trust.
Some companies are talking about decreasing the salary of remote workers, which I believe is counterproductive and not helping with a main issue – the increase in anxiety towards going back to work. We cannot deny that there is a global mental health crisis which has been described as a pandemic within the pandemic.
After a decade where ride-hailing gigs and flexible freelance jobs were on the rise, it seems that people are now looking for a more stable, secure and regulated work environment. They are less looking for a challenge (they have enough of it with the pandemic) than for comfort at work and for work-life balance.
2. Are business leaders responsible for broader concerns than taking care of their workforce (such as an economic crisis, a pandemic, climate change) ?
Employers have a choice between being idealistic or being realistic and pragmatic. Sometimes businesses just cannot survive if they have too much burden, regulations, taxes. And if they collapse, then lots of people lose their jobs. But at the same time, do we want unethical businesses?
Regarding broader concerns such as climate change, health crisis, it’s an ethical question above all. And we have many signals such as cancellation culture that we cannot accept big brands that don’t play their part in the collective game, any more.
We also need to take into account that Mental Health isn’t a shameful private matter anymore. It has become a society concern. People start getting out of the mental health closet. They open up about it, so employers cannot keep on ignoring the core topic of mental health at work. They hold social responsibility towards their collaborators. The accountability is collective. And empathy is a core skill which is more and more expected from managers.
3. If you had one wish of a thing to change in the way we work both on the leaders’ side and on the workforce side, what would it be?
I actually have two wishes.
First, in response to the mental health crisis, I’ve been advocating for a New Care Act at Work(-from-Home): Business leaders need to go beyond old-fashioned paternalism now more than ever, to sign up for a redesigned care act towards their workforce, better suited to the new context of increased remote work without falling into surveillance. This contract implies trust between employer-employee, but they also have a moral obligation to provide the framework (resources, processes, tools, platforms, mindset) to enable harmonious collaboration.
Then more generally, a way I’d wish to see change (and I admit, I am biased), is by inducing more futures thinking in companies. Business leaders as well as individual workers will gain from being less scared about the future. Instead they will need to prepare for it. They need to hire more futurists in their team or develop a futurist mindset, so that it helps them and their teams regain agency, agency over our ability to act upon the future.
BIOETHICS – What augmentation technology would you like to add to your own body? – How do you feel about germline gene editing and designer babies? – Are you ready to eat lab-grown meat? – In what sense do AI and biotechnology challenge what it means to be human?
On September 9, at the Association of Professional Futurists “Ethics and Philosophy of Futures” meetup hosted by Global Futurist Sylvia Gallusser, we had a deep conversation with Timothy Dolan about Biotech, Business, and Ethics. We evoked “algeny”, the genetic revolution, its unintended consequences, existential threat, and the notion of unambiguous good. Rewatch the session below.
With Victor Sarat Catalan at Using Foresight “Futurists of the World” meetup on September 10, we engaged further around bioethics and how we all feel personally about human augmentation, transhumanism, and ethics of future evolution. We brought the concept of “Ethics ROI”: how can we evaluate and measure the effect of our ethical work? And isn’t it contradictory with the definition of ethics?
Victor captured the essence of our conversation in an article and audio clip (below).
Every Friday, Foresight Advocate Victor Sarat Catalan hosts a Clubhouse conversation with his Using Foresight community. His Futurists of the World room gathered Professional Futurists, Foresight Practitioners, Futures Researchers, Futurologists, Strategic Forecasters, Trend Analysts, and more.
Rom Gayoso gave a thought-provoking presentation and led a profound debate about the use of autonomous weapons, the differences among ethics, legitimacy, accountability, moral obligation, and essence, as well as the notion of “true autonomy” beyond artificial intelligence.
Rom Gayoso is an economist with over 15 years experience in Fortune 500 companies. His work is in econometrics, Monte Carlo Simulations, and scenario planning. His dissertation is in applications of Scenario Planning in geopolitical, biomedical and energy sectors designed to help policymakers make more informed decisions. He is a published author, key note speaker, and regularly contributes to a variety of projects in the foresight/futures arena. Currently he is the editor of the International Market & Competitive Intelligence Magazine.
– Thu 8/26 (5-6PM PST) THE HOME OF THE 2020s MAKING OUR HOMES MORE RESILIENT with Sylvia Gallusser
– BONUS! Thursday 8/26 after the talk I will have a panel discussion with Kelly Kornet and Greg Solis about frameworks, rigor, including the voices of others, and whatever else is happening in our/your multiverses of #FuturesDesign.
As 24 million children and youth are at risk of dropping out of school as a result of the global health crisis, according to UNESCO, Wellbeing Futurist Tom Meyers at Futurize Yourself et al. shared his inspiration to the students at RNB Global University in Rajasthan, India. He reached out to 8 futurists from all over the world to reinsufflate energy and motivation through a beautifully crafted video.
I couldn’t be more grateful to be part of such a meaningful and purposeful initiative along my amazing foresight colleagues and friends Victor Sarat Catalan Agustin Borrazas Mauricio Hernandez Chirag Tripathi Bernard Moerman Maxine Cunningham Christian Dr. Forstner. Thank you Tom!
Rewatch Roger Spitz’s lecture at #QuantumThinking2021 and the debate that follows with Sylvia Gallusser, Ligia Zotini Mazurkiewicz and Lala Deheinzelin on the topic of “Disrupting Existence: The Future Me”.
We discussed possibilities offered by emerging technologies, human-tech relationships, space travel, ethics and philosophy. We wondered about our future selves, but also about our future “us”!
Thank you so much Maria Athayde, Andre Chaves, and Future Hacker for creating such an inspiring event!
Rom Gayoso, Editor of the newly launched International and Competitive Intelligence Magazine, invited Futurist Sylvia Gallusser to present her foresight methodology and the results of her work on the “Home of the 2020s”.
In her article “Futures Homes – At Home during the Post-Pandemic Era”, Sylvia introduces her X-ing from home framework including 3 post-pandemic scenarios: back to the familiar, pandemic-frozen, creative disruption.
Read the full article here (p.42). Thank you Rom for the opportunity to publish our research!
On July 21, Hacking HR organized an event on “Mental Health at Work: The Defining Challenge for HR in 2021” along four expert panels led by Hacking HR Founder Enrique Rubio:
Mental Health In The Workplace
The Business Imperative To Address Mental Health At Work
Leading Upward: How To Turn The C-Suite Into Champions of Mental Health
The Ethical Imperative: Why Addressing Mental Health At Work is Urgent
During the first panel, along with two wonderful panelists Anita Kanti and MaryBeth Hyland, Silicon Humanism Founder Sylvia Gallusser discussed the impact of the pandemic on mental health at work, the role of the employer and the ecosystem to support employees in their mental health challenges, and how to go beyond awareness to actual long-term and efficient actions.
Among the insights brought up during the day, Enrique underlines the following aspects:
We must move from awareness to action. We will always be in the cycles of becoming more aware about an issue, but awareness without action is nothing.
Mental Health is not stand alone in the workplace. It is interconnected with culture, leadership, management, and a lot more. Therefore, to resolve the mental health challenges at work we must think holistically and systemically.
Leaders are the front line to support employees. While professional support will sometimes be needed, leaders must create the environment for their people to vulnerably come forward and express what they may be going through and the support they need.
Mental health MUST NOT become another fad at work. While we acknowledged how positive it is to give people a week off or a “no zoom Friday”, these things alone are not enough. And for the larger organizations that usually become role models of these behaviors is important to acknowledge so.
Finally, we all agreed on the complexity of mental health at work. And we also agreed on: having a long term vision of what we want to do, and start small with actionable steps that can provide quick, but sustainable wins.
The free online event “Future Hacker Quantum Thinking 2021” takes place on July 27th. Experts from around the world involved in creating our future discuss their ideas at Future Hacker Quantum Thinking 2021. The main speakers will be:
Itai Talmi, the founder of Born Partners, a company that works in innovative transformation initiatives and research and development in future strategies, talks about the theme ‘Quantum Anarchy’;
Roger Spitz, founder of Techistential, an innovation and disruption research, and education platform and contributor to the MIT Technology Review, which addresses ‘Disrupting Existence: The Future Me’;
Maria Paula (MP) Oliveira, Chief Innovation Officer at EY MENA, one of the most recognized innovation leaders in the international market, talks about ‘Epic Trends’.
After each keynote speaker, there will be a debate with multidisciplinary professionals specialized in digital culture, technology, new trends, creative and collaborative economy, among other fields linked to building the future.
As a part of this pool of innovators, our Silicon Humanism Founder Sylvia Gallusser will be taking part of a heated and mind-opening discussion about our Human Future. The goal is to inspire the audience to the new, the daring, the disruptive.
About Future Hacker: Started a year ago as a podcast on innovation, science, technology, and disruption with an emphasis on the next 10, 20, 30 years. It expanded with a channel in the United States where experts from around the world get interviewed. The podcast is available on most players (Google, Apple, Spotify, and others). Today it’s heard in more than 70 countries, in addition to a partnership with a Brazilian radium station, the Rádio Capital AM, aimed at classes C and D, with a program with more accessible language to democratize the subject.