1/ Came across an article the other day in the New York Times. Scanned the title and thought..huh..what's all this?
2/ There was an opinion essay in the NYT, “End the University as We Know It”
3/ That one was back in 2009.
4/ In it the essayist argued that the university
had become structurally misaligned.
5/ Over-specialized, bureaucratic, producing credentials for jobs that no longer existed.
6/ Fair enough. That resonated with me. In fact, it was almost like an affirmation that I was in fact aligned with the world.
7/ I've plainly become a generalist (to the point of almost being anti-specialist).
8/ Definitely not very good with structure and bureaucracy and, despite being overly degree'd, I have no truck with credentialing.
9/
(Except maybe for pilots and aircraft mechanics. Joking. No, really. Actually, I am joking..a little..but, like..you get my point.)
10/ Sixteen years later, this other basically identical headline drops:
11/ “The End of the University as We Know It”
12/ (No, this isn't a political polemic. There are plenty of other places you can go for that.)
13/ Here I share with you
the ways I can help you and your organization prototype and explore possible futures, and the tools and techniques to do so.
14/ So what I'm going to say is that both of these opinions imply a misalignment between the present and the preparation for creating and maintaining a preferred future.
15/ In the former piece (2009), the misalignment was structural and operational: the university was inefficient, bureaucratic, and overly specialized.
16/ In the piece with the (basically) same title from
several months ago, (March 2025) the misalignment is with (someone's) preferred future.
17/ The same basic diagnosis of a kind of futures misalignment appears in both essays
18/ One misalignment had to do with a kind of institutional failing: bloated departments, tenure sclerosis, escalating costs, students trained for jobs that no longer existed. A misalignment as regards the kind of thinking needed for the future the university was preparing its students for.
19/ The other misalignment
(however aggrevating it may seem to those with high stakes in keeping higher ed as it is today, or has been, or should be) is a more forceful reminder that the future is very much a terrain with existential importance.
20/ The future doesn't arrive with a label on it explaining what it is and how to use it.
21/ The future isn't organized by departments, disciplines, or areas of expertise.
22/ The future doesn't tell you what kind of expertise it needs.
23/ Futures are not
navigated with answers that have come from the past. They're navigated with the consciousness to see possibilities, patterns, and connections that others may not.
24/ And I say that to say this: the future is an expansive terrain and we are constantly in need of people who can see across domains, disciplines, and areas of expertise to help us navigate into and within it.
25/ If you bring your specialized knowledge to the table, you are an expert at execution. Pairing that with the orienting
capacity of the generalist who can see the larger terrain, however, is what will help you and your organization find your way.
26/ No wonder organizations — and companies, and teams — die off. They become too specialized, too rigid, too locked into a particular way of seeing the world. Reified and concretized pasts become shackles to preferred futures.
27/ The kinds of consciousness best equipped to build with a sense of expansive possibility (from learning platforms to the kinds of daily human
operating systems that be of real utility in our challenging environments) are not those most invested in preserving disciplinary boundaries or the status quo, or who are trying to keep their jobs, anymore than the best people to invent the future are those most invested in preserving the past — or have spent too long preserving the present.
28/ Whether at a university, a company, or some new-fangled way of collectivizing and organizing human potential, to be futuristic is to see an
expanse rather than a narrow path; to value exploration over rote answers; and to embrace curiosity over compliance.
29/ This kind of seeing has always looked irresponsible.
30/ That is, until it becomes necessary.