Machines are learning. Cars can already move without drivers on the streets. Computer programs are managing to replace jobs that used to be done by professionals, even in areas such as legal services, where some functions that used to be performed by lawyers have now been left in the hands of artificial intelligence.

The times we are living in have been portrayed as an era of accelerated technological change, the consequences of which may be so considerable that they escape our imagination. Are we living in a change of era or an era of change? I am inclined towards the first option, which forces us to build an absolutely digitalized "other self" in order to improve our employability and, above all, our competitiveness.

We know, from historical experiences of radical productive transformations, that new changes are on the horizon for such essential areas in our lives as that of work, which has to do not only with our subsistence, but also with our identity, our environment, our culture, our self-perception and what others perceive of us. The work, at final, is not only what we do, but also to some extent what we are.

Until some time ago, a person's productive life could be summarized in a fairly predictable timeline: a professional degree program , a work, savings, a house of one's own, retirement. However, everything has changed. The work is a relationship in permanent mutation, almost of transhumance from one business to another, with new bosses and new employees, with the demand for new skills and competencies. In this context I foresee some problems or challenges. One problem is that salaries, as has been happening in the developed world, will not grow in line with capital gains because globally successful ventures demand more innovation than the old investment in human resources and infrastructure needed to start up a factory, a business or a professional project . Another is that there is less work because the functions that used to be performed by humans have been taken over by computer programs, algorithms or robotic machines. And another challenge, which is perhaps the most relevant, is that we do not know what jobs people will have to compete for.

The founder of the World Economic Forum, German economist Klaus Schwab, coined the concept of the fourth industrial revolution. If the third was the digital revolution, the fourth is defined by technological advances in fields such as robotics, artificial intelligence, blockchain, nanotechnology, quantum computing, biotechnology, internet of things, 3D printing and autonomous vehicles. Digital technology revolutionized commerce, consumption and logistics. Thanks to it, a North American brand can sell to European customers products whose components were created from third-world raw materials and whose parts were assembled in distant locations, such as China or Mexico.

In the midst of this scenario, it has been estimated that 47% of U.S. jobs are at high risk of being automated. Less catastrophic economists stress that in the past technological changes have ended up creating more work jobs than they eliminated. While the short deadline may be turbulent, they recognize that in the long run it will all be for the better, and the negative effects can be mitigated through government actions.

We are moving from a reality where people are looking for a stable work to one where everyone has to figure out what they want to do, how to find the necessary training , how to promote themselves, how to prove to others that they are good at what they do and that they have value. We are all going to have to get much more involved in creating the work we want to do. Being one's own boss will become more and more common and even necessary.

How do we prepare for jobs we can't even imagine? Are we aware that we are going to have a longer working life? How do we familiarize ourselves with and manage uncertainty? Perhaps we should assume that what we learn today will most likely not be valid in a few years. My recommendation is to train in competencies (and virtues) and skills that will allow us to be more flexible to adapt to changing needs. This will make us stronger for permanent evolution and to re-imagine ourselves again and again. Reinvent yourself, at final.

The institutions that organize our life in society and their responses to the new technological challenge can make the difference between a traumatic transition or one that drives substantial improvements in social welfare from productive advances. In other words, the context is core topic. We must assume that the world will never again be the same as it was, but neither is it yet the same as it will definitely be. Flexibility is the way forward. The future is open.