The Socio-Technical Vision Silicon Valley Left Behind

By Dave Toole

I had the good fortune of having lunch with John Seely Brown, JSB has contributed significantly to our understanding of the human side of technology without receiving the recognition he deserves. His journey has impacted hundreds of millions of jobs since the inception of the personal computer, alongside many other innovations that emerged during his leadership at Xerox PARC. JSB, as he is known, is a co-founder of Team Human. We met when we shared concerns about the potential impact of social media when it was just emerging. As advisors to the team at UC Santa Barbara, we collaborated during the founding of the Center for Information Technology and Society. They presented many studies concerning society’s adoption of social media. If there was closer attention in the early 2000s, we might have avoided the challenges we face today, which arose when social media strayed from its original purpose of serving society.

JSB developed what he calls a socio-technological view to frame innovation. I’ve been in Silicon Valley for nearly 50 years (which goes by fast). During this time, I’ve witnessed the front lines of numerous technological generations and their impact. At lunch I asked him what he meant by the term socio-technical, and he emphasized the importance of human interaction with technology. He involved sociologists, anthropologists, philosophers, and others who could help engineers better understand the context of the problems they were solving. A notable example he mentioned was the computer mouse, a significant influence on both Apple and Microsoft. He went on to serve on the Amazon board, contributing to strategy and various initiatives to help organizations shape their perspectives on the Future of Learning and Work.

JSB shared a couple of books for me to read. One is a story about how innovation at Stanford has been hijacked by a select few who profit from Silicon Valley’s top talent. The book is called How to Rule the World by Theo Baker. Its central thesis is that economic extraction benefits only a few. We have seen that the pioneers of Silicon Valley aimed to build a better future for the many who would eventually benefit from their efforts. I witnessed this firsthand. However, somewhere along the way, we lost our way. I took a company public in my 30s and saw how the framing of incremental economic gain could be applied in ways that didn’t always benefit the many but rather the few. We can do better. It’s our choice.

In April, we organized a multi-generational conversation at KQED to explore what we are calling Team Human. We decided to rename our efforts from H-Corps to Team Human. Marin Wilts, who has helped shape this group, saw the name was already being used by an author for a book and podcast series. That author is Douglass Rushkoff, whom I connected with in the early days of social media. Douglass has a profound perspective on digital technology and economics. I encourage you to check out his work, as it addresses many of the issues we should be considering. More to come on this perspective.

Team Human will be sharing more about metrics related to human agency in the age of AI and the Future of Work. Our initial focus will be on how we might measure the impact of learning in an AI-driven era that creates new knowledge. We will also highlight others tackling this complex and important issue as we work towards transitioning to a world that prioritizes our intelligence, relationships, and the role we want AI to play in human flourishing. We’ll share some intergenerational interviews that we're encouraged to expand. Coming soon with JSB sharing his story.