Digital Transformation: the new paradigm

During the past years, the idea of smart has been replaced by the concept of digital transformation. This term seems to respond in a more accurate, and definitely more neutral, manner to different ideological trends that always support the evolution of society.

However, it is evident this term does not add anything new. Instead, it takes us back to the origin of computer science and its raison d’être. The term digital is very old; it is actually ancient. It emerges from the technological origin of computational calculus and the machines related to it.

The ideological appropriation of technological terms is not a new phenomenon. It has always been present but since the last quarter of the twentieth century, it seems that agreeing with certain terms means being in line with a specific ideological position. There are numerous examples in the world of the so called “TIC”: makers, developers, smart, digital, even the ill-fated term innovation.

It is definitely better to bet for an ideological agnosticism and see the glass from our personal perspective. The concept of digital transformation emerges as a decisive and –apparently- definite step towards a new model of society. However, if we continue this way, its use will be as short-lasting as that of the term smart.

Actually, digital transformation could be understood as the process towards the creation of user-focused services (where the user is the main player in all processes) that use all the new possibilities derived from technology (communications-based technology and data transformed into knowledge) in all their (cultural and scientific) activities. The output, in technological terms, would be a “smart” configuration of their activities... As Andrea di Maio put it in the last Digital Govern Congress, ‘smart’ is only the highest level of digital maturity of a process or an area of knowledge.

I definitely bet for this idea. Digital transformation should be understood as a process associated with certain maturity in the use of emerging technologies in our daily activities. But the most important element of digital transformation will always be the people: there is no transformation without training.

Transformation undoubtedly refers to processes (either business, vital, personal, or comprehension processes) that affect human relations and ultimately modify habits and businesses (the famous business model). And with this transformation there is no going back. Technology in use is the excuse, the leitmotiv of this absolute revolution.

As Eduardo Serra said “when the way of transferring knowledge changes, we witness a civilization change”. We are living a milestone in the history of humankind (the term may sound exaggerated now but it is actually so). This is undoubtedly a key moment, like the invention of the printer. What is really changing is the way people –or a large number of them- communicate and relate to each other. These changes are not easy to absorb. In business terms we would say that change management is difficult. And on many occasions changes lead to confusion.

This is not only about social networks. This is about the perception of society, the type of interaction and, above all, the immediacy of response. This has to do with skills and competencies in the new life: digital competencies.

One of the biggest mistakes we all make is to approach new challenges with the vision and parameters for old challenges. Obviously, the problem today is two-fold: not only is our adult vision completely obsolete for the digital paradigm but the new generations have a much better understanding of it.

The generations from the last quarter of the twentieth century have created, promoted and set in motion the revolution on the solid foundation of the progress originated at the end of the nineteenth century. But we cannot keep up with it because our vision is that of a creator rather than of a user. That is why we continue using terms like digital transformation when we should not talk about transformation but about digital reality and natural evolution of systems.

Unfortunately, time flies very fast. There is limited room available to accommodate and assume technologies and ideas. And such room will grow smaller with time. We are approaching times of continuous cycle or continuous changes without time for consolidation. We need to accept it and stop seeing everything as closed cycles (like it used to be: a 4-year systems plan, 5-year industrialization plan). We need to be proactive and turn the wheel without stopping at stages, or phases marked by evolution. We need to see with the eyes from the future.

Is it hard? I don’t think so. Look at the new generations and how natural their relation with “technology” is to them. Talking to them about digitalization is absurd. They are natural born digitals. What we need to do is to make this wave reach everybody. Everyone should have the same opportunity. It is important to avoid a gap that may result from the incapacity to guarantee equal access to knowledge, which is not the same as equal access to technology. And here lies the next big paradigm: digital sovereignty.

I couldn’t agree more with digital sovereignty considering everybody’s capacity to guarantee equitable access to information sources that can widen our knowledge. But it should have no ideological connotation. Digital sovereignty is similar to the revolution of the printing house: it allowed a large number of people to have access to texts that, up to that moment, had been kept and watched over for an elite. A slow process throughout several centuries made culture universalization possible through literacy. Now it’s our turn to do the same in a few years, in a few days, in a few hours.