User:Coworker5678

In publications related to "New Work" it is noticeable that terms such as "our society", "our cultural area" are associated with it. In order for "New Work" to actually correspond to the definition of a megatrend, the concept must have a global effect. According to the most favorable interpretation, it can at most be said that the trend in the various regions of the world is developing very differently. One could also see "New Work" as a primarily "Western" concept, because the trend is developing predominantly in the countries that can be counted among the community of values ​​of the so-called "West" (including South Korea and Japan). A trend can be described as a megatrend if it unfolds globally. The question of whether this is really the case, or whether the so-called "West" merely sees it as a global megatrend due to its current dominance, can also be legitimately asked. Because in order for the “New Work” phenomenon, which is primarily geared towards Western society and Western culture, to be viewed as a global megatrend, ongoing globalization based on Western dominance and value systems would be needed. On the other hand, it is questionable whether the criterion of “robustness” in relation to New Work, which is also immanent for a megatrend, will continue to exist in view of the disruptions that are emerging. With Covid, the Ukraine and Taiwan crises, the possible re-election of Donald Trump and the rise of the BRICS countries, imminent disruptions are looming (Scholz: "Zeitenwende"). The importance of world trade thus decreases. With its share of the world population, however, the importance of the "West" for the world economy also decreases. Due to the pronounced demographic change, the "West" is reinforcing this trend itself. The global population and thus economic growth is increasingly concentrated on the societies in the BRICS countries and Africa. The danger of losing the economic dominance of the "West" is accompanied by the danger of losing the dominance of Western concepts in the world. Since the BRICS countries and the countries of the "Global South" are largely authoritarian systems, the basic ideas of "New Work" there today remain largely utopian, with the exception of a few large urban centers. As a result of state control in authoritarian systems, "New Work" is now in competition with other, more traditional economic and work concepts. Which system is globally the most competitive? Is the "West" perhaps even strengthening the way to a self-inflicted marginalization through aspects of "New Work"? If the EU wants to maintain its level of economic performance, industrial production processes will have to be brought back to Europe as a result of weakening globalization, if not de-globalization. The trend towards "New Work" presupposes a post-industrial society that will continue to develop over the next 10 years and is contrary to this - with the risk of finding no or too few workers for "classic industrial fields of activity". If you look at the beginnings of the theories of "New Work", then you will find the work of Frithjof Bergmann, who began to formulate "New Work" as a social utopia in the 1970s. The winners of today's "New Work" trend, on the other hand, will primarily be companies whose business areas lie directly or indirectly in digital business, and their share is also constantly increasing due to "Industry 4.0". Companies whose business areas require little or no infrastructure for employees. But there will also be quite a few companies that want to undermine social obligations under the guise of “New Work”. A legitimate question: Is New Work social or is it just given a social touch? As in other areas, many companies will probably once again leave it to “society” and “politics” to deal with the losers of the “New Works” megatrend.