The global economy has traversed multiple eras, each marked by a distinct set of priorities and paradigms.

In the labor economy of the industrial age, physical output and measurable productivity were the defining indicators of success. As we entered the late 20th century, the knowledge economy supplanted this model, elevating information, intellectual capital and efficiency as the primary drivers of competitive advantage.

Today, however, we stand on the threshold of a more elusive and profound transformation. This new phase, best described as the post-knowledge economy, is not powered by data alone, but by emotional conviction, symbolic alignment and collective purpose. In this emerging reality, institutions cannot thrive on metrics without meaning; nor can they secure loyalty without legitimacy.

It is a shift particularly relevant to the Asia-Pacific, where economic dynamism often coexists with profound social change, demographic transitions and trust deficits between institutions and stakeholders. As Asian nations as diverse as South Korea, Indonesia and Malaysia strive to navigate productivity plateaus, generational value shifts and rising inequality, it becomes increasingly evident that systems based solely on transactional efficiency are no longer sufficient to inspire innovation or social cohesion.

To understand this transformation, it is helpful to return to an unlikely but prescient source: Jean-Jacques Rousseau, the 18th-century French philosopher. In his treatise The Social Contract, Rousseau argued that legitimate authority arises not from coercion or hierarchy, but from a mutual agreement between the rulers and the ruled: a collective will built on reciprocity, trust and shared purpose.

In today’s corporate and institutional life, Rousseau’s insights help illuminate a growing crisis: the legitimacy deficit afflicting many organizations, particularly those struggling to connect with younger, purpose-driven stakeholders.

In Southeast Asia, for example, there is increasing skepticism toward large corporations perceived as extractive, taking more from employees, consumers and the environment than they return. The rapid growth of digital economies and financial inclusion, while broadly beneficial, has also brought to light the disconnect between institutional ambitions and lived experience.

From gig workers in Jakarta demanding greater social protection to youth in Bangkok disengaging from traditional employment and embracing entrepreneurial or creator paths, we see a common theme: emotional dislocation from systems that feel impersonal, rigid or indifferent.

In the post-knowledge era, what Rousseau described as the general will finds modern expression in emotional alignment. Today’s employees no longer seek security alone; they seek resonance. Consumers do not merely buy convenience; they buy into stories, values and symbolism. And governments, too, are being judged not just by gross domestic product growth, but also by their ability to connect emotionally and ethically with increasingly discerning publics.

Consider the evolving labor dynamics across some East Asian nations, where burnout, quiet quitting and “the great disengagement” have prompted a national reckoning with work culture. It is not that productivity has collapsed. Rather, emotional detachment has eroded the social glue that sustains innovation, loyalty and civic trust.

This erosion is not confined to the workplace. In regional politics, we see younger generations, particularly Gen Z across Indonesia, the Philippines and Malaysia, demanding greater transparency, authenticity and representation. These demands are not always articulated in formal political terms. They manifest in consumer choices, voting patterns, digital activism and even the brands people are willing to support or boycott.

In this landscape, conviction has overtaken compliance as the currency of legitimacy. And emotional clarity, not technical excellence alone, is becoming the key differentiator.

Institutions today must confront a fundamental question: Are they factories of output, or communities of meaning? The answer will shape their relevance in the years ahead.

This requires more than a cosmetic rebranding of purpose. It calls for a structural reimagining of leadership, culture and engagement. Emotional conviction cannot be reverse engineered from quarterly targets. It must be woven into the organizational fabric: from how policies are crafted to how leaders listen; from how failure is framed to how success is celebrated.

Some companies and governments are beginning to model this shift. For example, several leading Indonesian firms in the region, such as HM Sampoerna and Kalbe Farma, have sought to differentiate themselves by investing in socially impactful narratives, including support for micro-entrepreneurs and educational advancement.

This approach emphasizes the creation of environments and experiences that uphold individual dignity, promote autonomy and enhance psychological well-being, reflecting a strategic imperative in the face of demographic and societal change.

A growing body of research demonstrates that emotionally aligned organizations enjoy higher retention, greater trust and stronger resilience in times of disruption. Emotional commitment turns customers into advocates, employees into innovators and institutions into cultural anchors.

In a region where AI, automation and demographic shifts will redefine work and value, emotional differentiation may be the only sustainable competitive advantage.

This does not mean discarding data or rejecting performance indicators. Rather, it means recognizing that metrics must be contextualized by meaning. Productivity without purpose leads to burnout; innovation without intention leads to disillusionment; growth without grounded values leads to social fragmentation.

As Rousseau might have put it, legitimacy must be felt, not imposed. Institutions must earn their place not through control, but through connection. The time has come for a new kind of social contract: one that is not written in legislation or corporate mission statements alone, but inscribed in daily acts of emotional reciprocity.

This means leaders must see their people not just as human resources, but as moral agents and coauthors of meaning. It means moving beyond transactional engagement to relational loyalty. It means shifting from “managing change” to inspiring belief.

In practice, this could take many forms: giving employees a voice in strategic decisions, redesigning incentives around shared values, or embedding public good into business models. But the principle remains the same: legitimacy is emotional before it is operational.

Rousseau’s ideas, radical in their time, are once again relevant in ours. As we move beyond the knowledge economy into an era where meaning is the most scarce and valuable resource, leaders must rethink the very foundations of authority and engagement.

For the Asia-Pacific, a region marked by youthful populations, digital acceleration and rising social expectations, the stakes are particularly high.

Institutions that recognize this moment and respond with emotional intelligence and symbolic clarity will not merely survive but lead, because in this new economy of meaning, legacy is not built through control, but through conviction.

***

The writer is a senior executive at one of Asia’s leading nutrition and consumer health companies who advises Indonesian businesses on business transformation and adaptive strategy. The views expressed are personal.