Hmmm ... not any maps I have seen ->
The shift to serverless will cause an explosion of higher order systems. Yes, some types of jobs will become less relevant but new forms will be created. For software engineering you need to think more conversational programming / centaur chess / capital flow. 
Furthermore, the types of future roles that this will enable will be as bizarre to us as Chief Digital Officer or Social Media Consultant is to the past ... see machine psychologist or harmony designer - blog.gardeviance.org/2015/04/near-f…
What the maps do have is Containers and Kubernetes becoming invisible subsystems and therefore irrelevant to most bar maybe a few large providers. That's not the same as humans. It's more akin to OpenStack's self inflicted irrelevance and lack of importance to the future.
So, I suppose if you define the sum total of human work as Servers, Data Centres, Containers, Kubernetes and OpenStack then you might feel the future is a bit gloomy ... for the rest of us, we will be cheering and happily doing other stuff.
However, today there is a schism happening in the tech community and the gulf between these two factions is only likely to get larger. @forrestbrazeal nailed it ...
X : There will be lots of work in containers over the next decade.
Me : Of course. There is plenty of interim work and you have to factor in niches and inertia i.e. some will punt the future until after they retire. A decade disappears however in the blinking of an eye.
Me : Of course. There is plenty of interim work and you have to factor in niches and inertia i.e. some will punt the future until after they retire. A decade disappears however in the blinking of an eye.
... also expects oodles of the usual games e.g. lobbyists through the EC trying to get legislation that in effect bans the future or vendors trying to survive by leeching on Government. It's never very pretty if you're on the wrong side of the future and unwilling to adapt.
... what you need to remember is ultimately you don't have a choice, you have to evolve. But in the meantime, if you are so inclined then there's plenty of money to be made exploiting the hopeless and hapless.
It's so easy to ignore user needs and reinforce existing customers' inertia in order to prevent them adapting and keep them feeding you. If that's what you really want to do.
The 16 types of inertia they should watch for are also the 16 types that you can exploit ...
The 16 types of inertia they should watch for are also the 16 types that you can exploit ...
... I suppose it's a question of what matters most to you? If your only focus is on your immediate sales or some future retirement date then it doesn't surprise me. Of course, it has a terrible impact on the future of that company but then caveat emptor.
X : How do you exploit that inertia?
Me : Really? You're straying into dark arts here. Take existing physical capital ... you emphasise the importance of sunk costs, over inflate the cost of change, play on political concerns of past prudence etc ->
Me : Really? You're straying into dark arts here. Take existing physical capital ... you emphasise the importance of sunk costs, over inflate the cost of change, play on political concerns of past prudence etc ->
... oh, and whatever you do ... don't let the executive see a map or at the very least dismiss them as irrelevant. It's pretty hard to play dark arts if they're looking at a map which says the opposite and spells out the future change.
Alternatively, think about adapting?
Alternatively, think about adapting?
