This is an excerpt from a more extensive discussion on three rapidly expanding sectors in the 2020s.

I firmly believe in the potential of the global skilled labor market. If I had to choose a guiding principle, this would be it. Nurturing human talent is the key resource of the 21st century. While data is valuable, the most significant opportunity lies in effectively educating a billion more individuals so they can contribute to the “information economy.” This represents the greatest avenue for value creation in the coming decade.

Having spent considerable time in Ukraine over the past six years, I have witnessed firsthand how a burgeoning IT sector can transform an economy, along with the new opportunities that arise when people have more financial resources. When a labor market achieves a crucial "activation energy," it generates essential byproducts such as role models, mentors, emerging career paths, community networks (like the Kyiv product manager meetup), knowledge exchange, and increased demand for specialized training programs. This organic growth is vital for sustainability, making the attainment of ‘activation energy’ a prerequisite for private investment.

Numerous factors contribute to ‘activating’ a knowledge economy. My trip to Rwanda and Kenya in 2019 illuminated several aspects I had previously overlooked. While attempting to launch a coding bootcamp in Rwanda (which did not succeed, but I may revisit), I realized the importance of cost-effective internet, affordable electricity, and reliable devices—elements I had taken for granted. Without these components, participation in the global ‘information economy’ becomes nearly impossible. I remain hopeful that innovations in clean energy can address the electricity challenges faced in these regions.

Reflecting on my experiences in Ukraine and Rwanda, I've contemplated the “lifecycle” of how a location transitions to the ‘activation energy’ necessary for sustainable private sector growth and engagement in the ‘information economy.’ Initially, government funding, smart policies, and/or non-profit support are crucial to bring a substantial segment of the population to a level where investors can develop a skilled workforce.

Here are some overarching thoughts:

Part 1: Providing quality primary education for underprivileged children is essential. This is not an expense that private investors will cover (unless we're contemplating a dystopian future where investors profit from kindergarteners by taking a percentage of their lifetime earnings). Without this foundational step, the gap between where apprentices or students begin their training and the time and resources needed to become productive, specialized workers is too great for private investors to bridge.

This is partly why countries like Ukraine, Belarus, India, Russia, Brazil, and Argentina are thriving in the ‘information economy,’ while regions like Rwanda, Kenya, and Nigeria face more challenges. The former group has already established the positive ‘byproducts’ necessary for sustainable growth, all made possible by a solid foundation of quality primary education for millions of children.

Andela raised over $100 million, but that was insufficient. Billions in public investment are needed to prepare a significant portion of society for specialized training that leads to higher-paying jobs. A pragmatic perspective reveals that while a company can find 100,000 competent software developers in Ukraine, they might only locate 200 in Rwanda today. Thus, the lack of economically viable, trainable labor is the primary issue to address. Until economies of scale in professional training can be achieved, the “information economy” will remain dormant, as profit incentives fall short.

Nonetheless, unlocking the intellectual capital of Africa, Central America, Indonesia, and similar regions presents a significant market opportunity. Many bright individuals exist in these areas who will flourish given the right conditions.

One way to minimize the public or non-profit funding required to turn new populations into ‘investable’ knowledge workers is to provide access to computers and the internet at a young age. Online education isn't exclusive to higher education; there is a wealth of quality content available for younger audiences. If we can overcome the internet access challenges I observed in Rwanda, a large portion of the population could become self-learners. Computers and internet access serve as the essential tools for knowledge acquisition. In the U.S., the prevailing mindset often overemphasizes formal education while undervaluing the motivation for a better life and the potential of the internet.

Part 2: Once a population possesses sufficient foundational knowledge and infrastructure, market dynamics align to allow private companies and educational innovators to train hundreds of thousands of specialized workers. Platforms like Coursera, Udacity, Udemy, EdX, and YouTube are immensely empowering. When combined with mentorship and practical opportunities, this will lead to a surge in new global talent. These platforms offer such high-quality educational content that companies aiming to train 500 employees don't need to invest in creating their own university or hiring a costly faculty. Instead, they can leverage existing educational platforms and focus on enriching apprenticeship experiences. Scaling apprenticeship programs, practical work projects, and validating skill quality represents a substantial business opportunity.

My vision for the future global labor market consists of four key areas:

1) Affordable and accessible infrastructure. Will satellite internet usher in an educational renaissance in Africa? Can inexpensive monitors and keyboards connect to Android devices, allowing those with Android phones to perform tasks typically requiring a PC without the financial burden of a laptop? Will $100 computers become viable for serious work? Are there affordable alternatives to commonly used software?

2) Bridging the Cultural Divide. Consider this example:

“How is the project going so far?”…”It’s ok.”

A person in Ukraine interprets this as “Oh, okay, everything is fine. All good.” Conversely, someone in the U.S. might perceive it as “Oh no, we’re doing a terrible job…everything is NOT okay.” This cultural gap poses a larger challenge than merely acquiring technical knowledge. A noteworthy book, "The Culture Map," delves into the communication differences among cultures worldwide. I recommend it to anyone working with global teams. Much of the innovation, creativity, and problem-solving in modern workplaces occurs between individuals rather than within a single person's mind. Even if a team communicates in English, they may not be using the same language.

Some of this cultural gap will resolve itself through social media, as millions of young people consume similar content, leading to a borderless culture. The remainder of the issue can be addressed through soft skills training and cultural education within organizations. In my experience, 99% of problems in cross-cultural software teams stem from communication failures rather than technical deficiencies.

This communication divide explains why roles like sales, marketing, customer success, and copywriting have proven more challenging to globalize. However, as the world becomes more interconnected, these roles are likely to evolve. To put it bluntly, emotional intelligence is harder to outsource than intellectual capability.

As an American, I do not advocate for cost-effective alternatives to U.S. workers but rather highlight the increasing competition global designers and developers will face in soft skill specializations.

Programs like SV Academy in the U.S. intrigue me as they systematically tackle specialized soft skills training. I anticipate similar initiatives will emerge in other countries, making this an area of keen interest.

3) Inefficiencies in labor markets related to law and other professional services. I recently paid $300 per hour to consult with a top neurosurgeon in Canada specializing in Deep Brain Stimulation surgeries. I can continue this consultation for as long as I wish at that rate. In contrast, securing just one hour with an associate at a corporate law firm could cost between $400 and $600. Why is it that the expertise of an experienced brain surgeon is cheaper than that of a legal associate with less experience and knowledge? This discrepancy arises from regulatory barriers and high education costs. Why can't a talented young individual in India perform the same tasks as an associate at DLA Piper? It’s not as if they can't access the U.S. Constitution or legal textbooks online.

This example highlights the skill-to-value paradox created by conventional wisdom, apprehension, and regulatory barriers, resulting in distorted labor markets. It seems illogical that an inexperienced legal associate is more expensive than a specialized brain surgeon. This represents a significant inefficiency, and I believe many other regulated professions will soon face increased global competition as innovative entrepreneurs and educational investors discover regulatory workarounds and effective messaging.

4) The U.S. higher education system is in disarray, and for-profit apprenticeship and education programs will continue to rise in popularity. The variety of formats and subject matters within these programs will extend well beyond technology. It no longer makes financial sense for many students to incur the debt associated with a four-year college degree. The economics simply don’t add up. Somewhere along the way, the U.S. higher education model has devolved into a competition of 1) endowment size (no pun intended), 2) rankings from U.S. News and World Report, and 3) the number of administrators relative to educators. This is nonsensical, especially when high-quality alternatives that are more affordable, quicker to complete, and yield higher economic returns are becoming available.

It's important to clarify what I mean by “for-profit apprenticeship and education programs.” I'm not referring to exploitative entities like the University of Phoenix or other private equity-owned accredited institutions that have devolved into predatory lending schemes. Instead, I mean companies like Udacity, Udemy, Lambda School, Hack Reactor, and SV Academy.

U.S. higher education will undoubtedly retain its importance in the future, with some institutions demonstrating initiative in the right direction—Georgia Tech, Arizona State, UPenn, University of Illinois, and University of Michigan, for example, are utilizing platforms like Coursera to offer lower-cost online degrees and certificates. I often check Coursera to track which universities are providing degrees, staying attuned to the evolution of the MOOC model and any intriguing innovations or programs.

Finally, I believe undergraduate education and advanced research can be separated. Before the internet and streaming content, young people needed to physically be in the same location as an expert to collaborate or learn. For instance, if I wanted to study chemistry under an expert, I had to be where their research was conducted and hope they were willing to teach me. Today, that’s no longer the case. With the advent of digital access, universities are losing their monopoly on higher education. We are in a transitional phase where the brand value of universities exceeds their practical worth to most students, but this discrepancy is beginning to shift.

This section became more extensive than anticipated, reflecting my passion for this subject. I firmly believe that there are millions of talented individuals worldwide, and as innovators develop more efficient ways to harness their productivity—doing so faster and more cost-effectively—we will witness a transformative shift in the global labor force. If someone in Somalia can acquire the skills to become a DevOps engineer on AWS, they will have ample opportunity to explore classic literature and philosophy, accessing a liberal arts education on Coursera for a fraction of the cost of traditional education.