What the fallacy of the gig economy means to HR

Since around 2015, an eye-opening term, “gig economy”, has been populated together with Ubers’ successful emergence. Recently Uber drives on a bumpy road though. Since then, many researchers have estimated that the gig economy would be the mega trend to replace traditional full-time or infinite work arrangements with contingent and alternative ones, such as independent contractors, on-call workers, temporary-agency workers, etc. Definitely, it was a sensational estimation which would significantly affect workforce management in organizations. Inspired by the estimation, some hastily proclaimed that new generation would work only when they were in the mood to do so following their capricious impulses or work-for-life spirt, not life-for-work.

However, some days ago WSJ released an article, How Estimates of the Gig Economy Went Wrong.It reads that two leading experts on the “gig economy”, Alan Krueger of Princeton University and Lawrence Katz of Harvard confessed that its impact were overblown, “skewed by spotty data and the recession of a decade ago.”

Moreover, according to a report, The Millennial Economy 2018, released by Ernst & Young, millennials (now they are around 20- to 36-year-old.) are finding full-time jobs and risk-averse in their careers. It indicates that millennials want to satisfy their safety and security needs before they go with their intrinsic motivation or impulses- Maslow's hierarchy of needs. That’s why the gig economy has not been so prosperous as anticipated. They prefer stable jobs to contingent and alternative ones.

Nowadays, many organizations seem to be grappling with embedment of a new culture of self-determined career development- ‘go with your intrinsic motivation and take more risks for what you want’. It would be just a hollow ethos to say so unless the organization can ensure their safety and security on their career journey.

Thank you.