As the title suggests this chapter is about two dates that have forever changed not only the United State but also the world. 11/9 was about tearing down walls and opening up the world “so every human being would realize his or her full potential.” During that time, we saw the world open up like never before and for the first time ever we had the opportunity to be truly global. The events of 9/11 served a different purpose. Hate and power forced us to put up walls once again and served to close up the world.
What Friedman focuses on here is both of these events took imagination. With the tools we have available to us today we really have the power to create almost anything. We are only limited by our imagination. This reinforces one of themes throughout the book, the power of the individual. Never before has an individual had so much power as we do today. In earlier posts and comments, I was concerned about how we are to compete in this flat world and this chapter made me realize something. We as individuals have as much access to the flat world as anyone in India or China. We as individuals need to focus on how we can utilize this to our advantage! I love the quote from the text, “We need to think more seriously than ever about how we encourage people to focus on productive outcomes that advance and unite civilization- peaceful imaginations that seek to minimize alienation and celebrate interdependence rather than self-efficiency, inclusion rather than exclusion. The phrase describes how we can ensure future world changing events are more in line with 11/9 and not 9/11. As Friedman put it, we have the options of brining everyone up to the same level or bringing everyone down to the same level.
Another key thing to pull from this chapter is the fact that we cannot live in fear of what could happen. We cannot let events like 9/11 change us into a fearful nation. When we do we all become small minded and essentially put ourselves in our own cave.
This chapter also answered a question for me. Why are things like Wikkipedia and open-source communities so popular? I honestly could not see what could motivate people outside of the financial gain. Well apparently, the sense of ownership is enough to motivate people to contribute. People also get a validation that is perhaps greater than any financial award.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
The Dell Theory of Conflict Prevention
It is interesting to see the influence that the flat world had had on traditional geopolitical conflicts. These issues that once could have devastated the world such as conflict between North and South Korea have simmered down due to flat world collaborations. The theory behind this is simple, as countries become more involved in global trade and economic development wars and conflict become less prevalent.
The Dell theory of Conflict Prevention grew from the Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention. Freidman found that no two countries with a McDonalds had ever fought a war with each other, which proves that once countries become more economically developed wars are less rampant. This theory has grown in the flat world to state the no two countries that are part of the same global supply chain will ever fight a war against each other. This has happened because companies that invest in the countries require some degree of stability or assurance that there will be no disruptive events. The governments and people of these nations have realized the economic benefit of peace and they do what they can to maintain it. There is no better proof of this than the relation between Taiwan and China. Both countries, at one time diametrically opposed, are deeply immersed in global supply chains and highly invested in each other.
The Dell Theory of conflict prevention only goes so far. There are still several “hot spots” that are not part of a major global supply chain, such as Iraq. Just because they are not collaborating in a global supply chain does not mean they are not using the tools of the flat world to collaborate. One example of this is Al-Qaeda, which according to Friedman uses these same tools for “ mayhem and murder”. This theme has been present throughout this book. Of all the positive thing bought on by the flattening of the world just as many negatives have spawned. As it was discussed in the last chapter, many of the negative side effects will dissipate as people begin to fight them.
The Dell theory of Conflict Prevention grew from the Golden Arches Theory of Conflict Prevention. Freidman found that no two countries with a McDonalds had ever fought a war with each other, which proves that once countries become more economically developed wars are less rampant. This theory has grown in the flat world to state the no two countries that are part of the same global supply chain will ever fight a war against each other. This has happened because companies that invest in the countries require some degree of stability or assurance that there will be no disruptive events. The governments and people of these nations have realized the economic benefit of peace and they do what they can to maintain it. There is no better proof of this than the relation between Taiwan and China. Both countries, at one time diametrically opposed, are deeply immersed in global supply chains and highly invested in each other.
The Dell Theory of conflict prevention only goes so far. There are still several “hot spots” that are not part of a major global supply chain, such as Iraq. Just because they are not collaborating in a global supply chain does not mean they are not using the tools of the flat world to collaborate. One example of this is Al-Qaeda, which according to Friedman uses these same tools for “ mayhem and murder”. This theme has been present throughout this book. Of all the positive thing bought on by the flattening of the world just as many negatives have spawned. As it was discussed in the last chapter, many of the negative side effects will dissipate as people begin to fight them.
The Unflat World
This chapter addresses some of the barriers to the flattening of the world. Essentially Freidman discusses some of the forces impending the flattening of the world and what we can do to stop them.
One barrier Freidman describes is a lack of hope. The hope that allows us to be middle class and allows us to believe there is something better out there for us. We see places lacking this hope are also lacking the ability to connect to the flat world. The world cannot become completely flat until HIV/AIDS riddled Africa or impoverished rural India are bought into it. The key is not to connect the sick to the flat world as Freidman points that will only cause greater problems. The key here is to help them get well so they can connect and that is why ned more social programs like the Gates Foundation.
Another barrier Friedman discussed was the disempowered. These people are between the flat and unflat world. They know it exist but benefit from it minimally. These people in rural India only have to spend a day in Downtown Bangalore to realize the world is indeed flat. So how do we create a pathway for these people to get on board? According to Friedman we must, “ refocus energies of the global populist movement on how to improve local government, infrastructure, and education in places like rural China so the population there can acquire the tools to collaborate and participate in the flat world.”
The frustration of the violent Islamist fringe and there tendency to lash out are another barrier to the flat world. This is an issue because if their were another event on the scale of 9/11 wall s would go up everywhere and the flattening of the world would slow tremendously. Freidman believes it is a fear of change and humiliation that has upset many Muslim radicals and caused the anger we see today. The way to address this is to try and collaborate with the progressive forces in the Arab world in every way possible. Some ideas he suggests are free trade agreements, stabilizing Iraq, and solving the Arab- Israeli conflict. That’s all! It looks good on paper but is easier said than done. Ultimately, this is battle for them to fight and win but these collaboration efforts can tip the scale in their favor!
One barrier Freidman describes is a lack of hope. The hope that allows us to be middle class and allows us to believe there is something better out there for us. We see places lacking this hope are also lacking the ability to connect to the flat world. The world cannot become completely flat until HIV/AIDS riddled Africa or impoverished rural India are bought into it. The key is not to connect the sick to the flat world as Freidman points that will only cause greater problems. The key here is to help them get well so they can connect and that is why ned more social programs like the Gates Foundation.
Another barrier Friedman discussed was the disempowered. These people are between the flat and unflat world. They know it exist but benefit from it minimally. These people in rural India only have to spend a day in Downtown Bangalore to realize the world is indeed flat. So how do we create a pathway for these people to get on board? According to Friedman we must, “ refocus energies of the global populist movement on how to improve local government, infrastructure, and education in places like rural China so the population there can acquire the tools to collaborate and participate in the flat world.”
The frustration of the violent Islamist fringe and there tendency to lash out are another barrier to the flat world. This is an issue because if their were another event on the scale of 9/11 wall s would go up everywhere and the flattening of the world would slow tremendously. Freidman believes it is a fear of change and humiliation that has upset many Muslim radicals and caused the anger we see today. The way to address this is to try and collaborate with the progressive forces in the Arab world in every way possible. Some ideas he suggests are free trade agreements, stabilizing Iraq, and solving the Arab- Israeli conflict. That’s all! It looks good on paper but is easier said than done. Ultimately, this is battle for them to fight and win but these collaboration efforts can tip the scale in their favor!
What Happens When We All Have Dog’s Hearing
I was hoping Freidman had included a chapter on the social downsides of all this wonderful technology we have available to us. I think I first realized that technology was changing the way we socialize when my family began texting and IMing while we were all in the same house. I thought to myself, this is ridiculous! As Freidman puts it, “every new technology or toy that connects us more easily divides us more easily.”
The age of interruption has arrived and we are now all slaves to our Blackberry’s, Laptops, and PalmPilots. I often seek that place where I can get away, sit down, and really focus on my schoolwork. (I have checked my e-mail twice, checked a couple of random websites, and responded to several text messages just while writing this post.) Our time is no longer our own and common social graces are beginning to slip away. Many of us while connected to the web have become completely disconnected to the world around us.
Freidman also points out how IM speak is creeping into everyday language. I did not realize this was issue. There has always been slang but I guess when that is the way you communicate 95% of the time it becomes a preferred language.
The final social downside Freidman discussed is when all of these tools can be turned against us. Just like every celebrity has a blogger out their bashing or praising them so can every normal person. People always laugh at me because I refuse to take pictures today because I prefer not to be on a Facebook or MySpace page. That is where the world is today. There is no longer such a thing as a private life. Everyone, everywhere is a voyeur. All you need now is a camera phone and blog and you have the power to ruin someone’s reputation. The worse part is nothing can be done about it; there are no penalties or punishments.
So how do we protect ourselves:
1. Develop a thick skin.
2. Try not to waste too much time reading this stuff.
3. Keep it all in perspective.
4. Let your kids know what word they are living in!
The age of interruption has arrived and we are now all slaves to our Blackberry’s, Laptops, and PalmPilots. I often seek that place where I can get away, sit down, and really focus on my schoolwork. (I have checked my e-mail twice, checked a couple of random websites, and responded to several text messages just while writing this post.) Our time is no longer our own and common social graces are beginning to slip away. Many of us while connected to the web have become completely disconnected to the world around us.
Freidman also points out how IM speak is creeping into everyday language. I did not realize this was issue. There has always been slang but I guess when that is the way you communicate 95% of the time it becomes a preferred language.
The final social downside Freidman discussed is when all of these tools can be turned against us. Just like every celebrity has a blogger out their bashing or praising them so can every normal person. People always laugh at me because I refuse to take pictures today because I prefer not to be on a Facebook or MySpace page. That is where the world is today. There is no longer such a thing as a private life. Everyone, everywhere is a voyeur. All you need now is a camera phone and blog and you have the power to ruin someone’s reputation. The worse part is nothing can be done about it; there are no penalties or punishments.
So how do we protect ourselves:
1. Develop a thick skin.
2. Try not to waste too much time reading this stuff.
3. Keep it all in perspective.
4. Let your kids know what word they are living in!
If It’s Not Happening It’s Because You’re Not Doing It
This chapter once again reinforces the power of the individual. It also ties in a little bit with Rule # 9 from the how companies cope chapter. Environmentalists and activist now have more power than ever before to influence the behavior of companies. The interesting thing is companies are finally listening.
Thee flat world has given people the opportunity to make a real difference. In Latin America Endeavor is changing the language. Prior to their efforts their was no word for entrepreneur in the Portuguese language. Thanks to all of the work they have done helping small-businesses and start-ups the word emprendedor was born. Of course, that was not all due to Endeavor but also in large part to the spread of the global economy. I also love how people are using the flat world to help build better lives. I understand how and why companies are outsourcing and how it benefits them. However, it is nice to see that there are companies like Digital Divide Data, which are pushing outsourcing in countries like Cambodia to improve the quality of life there.
The most interesting thing I took from this chapter was the role the flat world would take in United States government. We no longer need to rely on elected officials to solve all our problems. We now have the ability to collaborate and solve our own problems. It will be interesting to see if this comes into play in the 2008 elections. As argued in the chapter I believe, “the party that stakes out this new frontier is the party that will be the majority party in the twenty-first century.”
Thee flat world has given people the opportunity to make a real difference. In Latin America Endeavor is changing the language. Prior to their efforts their was no word for entrepreneur in the Portuguese language. Thanks to all of the work they have done helping small-businesses and start-ups the word emprendedor was born. Of course, that was not all due to Endeavor but also in large part to the spread of the global economy. I also love how people are using the flat world to help build better lives. I understand how and why companies are outsourcing and how it benefits them. However, it is nice to see that there are companies like Digital Divide Data, which are pushing outsourcing in countries like Cambodia to improve the quality of life there.
The most interesting thing I took from this chapter was the role the flat world would take in United States government. We no longer need to rely on elected officials to solve all our problems. We now have the ability to collaborate and solve our own problems. It will be interesting to see if this comes into play in the 2008 elections. As argued in the chapter I believe, “the party that stakes out this new frontier is the party that will be the majority party in the twenty-first century.”
Friday, November 30, 2007
Globalization of the Local
Many people, myself included, felt that globalization was a nicer way of saying Americanization. Like I said in an earlier post, I felt that our culture was being pushed onto others. After Reading the book more I realize this is not the case. According to Friedman, globalization actually provides a “greater opportunity to nourish diversity.” He cleverly points out how uploading has actually given everyone the opportunity to spread their own culture. Now we can share our own opinions, photos, music, software, news etc. Another factor that helps maintain cultural identity is the fact the people can now innovate without emigrating. This is key because there is no better way to stay connected your culture than by being immersed in it.
I do not want to romanticize the idea, globalization is a huge force and does not always preserve culture. The fact is there is a middle ground, there is good and bad, we must understand this, accept it and move on.
I do not want to romanticize the idea, globalization is a huge force and does not always preserve culture. The fact is there is a middle ground, there is good and bad, we must understand this, accept it and move on.
How Companies Cope
So how do businesses survive in this ever-changing flat world? Primarily they must be ready for and able to change. This is not the end of if, Friedman has outlined nine rules companies should live by to cope in the flat world.
Rule #1: When the world id flat what can be done will be done. The question is will it be done by you or to you. This rule is simple if you have an idea you should pursue before someone else does. Freidman gives several examples of individuals that have turned great ideas into successful businesses. They key here is many of these things would not be possible if not for the opportunities available in the flat world.
Rule #2: Because we are in a world where whatever is can be done will be done, the most important competition today is between you and your own imagination. This is a theme that has been present throughout the book, the power of the individual. Here Friedman talks a little more about how we can use this power in our companies. Companies need to stretch their employees’ imaginations in order to thrive. This how companies will remain competitive by using their imaginations and tools to maintain constant innovation.
Rule #3: And the small shall act big… One way small companies flourish in the flat world is by learning to act really big. Imagination is necessary, but not sufficient. You have to be able to implement what you imagine. And the key to being small and acting big is being quick to take advantage of all new tools for collaboration to reach farther, faster, wider, and deeper. May be it is just me but things started to get a little repetitive here. It seems like here Friedman took the advice he gives the individual and applies it to the company. Obviously, imagination is not enough to be a success you have to take advantage of the tools available to you. The example Freidman used of Aramex split with Airborne exemplified this perfectly. I would say the reason this is not done more is people do not realize what tools are available to them.
Rule #4: And the big shall act small…One way that big companies learn to flourish in the flat world is by learning how to act really small by enabling their customers to act really big. This is a great idea and companies are actually better for it. When companies let customers “serve themselves in their own way, at their own pace, in their own time according to their own taste.” They are actually making them employees. After all, who knows what the customers want and need better then the customers. I think many companies start to get so big they forget that they need their customers.
Rule #5: The best companies are the best collaborators . In the flat world, more and more business will be done through collaboration within and between companies, for a very simple reason: The next layers of value creation-whether in technology, marketing, biomedicine, or manufacturing- are becoming so complex that no single firm or department is going to be able to master them alone. I had a difficult time understanding this rule. The examples did not necessarily seem like great collaboration efforts. It just seemed like the natural evolution of these companies. Rolls Royce realized the U.K. market was not big enough so they expanded, and video games companies realized games sell better with music. To me that is natural growth. In a global economy, companies must evolve to be truly global to be successful.
Rule #6: In a flat world , the best companies stay healthy by getting regular chest x-rays and then selling the results to their clients. What? That was my first thought but this does actually make a lot of sense. You need to constantly analyze your company’s capabilities. If something does not add value why do it. When you otsource the non-essentials you can focus on your “hot spots” and develop them. That is how HP ended up providing backroom services to the Bank of India.
Rule #7: The best companies outsource to win not to shrink. They outsource to innovate faster and more cheaply in order to grow larger, gain market share and hire more and different specialists-not to save money by firing more people. This falls in line with the last rule. If something does not create value, it would be best to outsource and improve your company by focusing on more value-added activities. I believe many companies jump on the outsource bandwagon because they think it is all about saving money when it is not. Ironically, like LRN, I think companies realize the need for outsourcing when they are ready to grow their business.
Rule #8: HOW you do things as a company matter more today than ever. Price differentiation and service quality are no longer enough to set your business apart in the market. Today it is about how you treat your customers, colleagues, suppliers, and investors. This is one of the few ways you can still differentiate yourself from your competition. As Friedman says, companies today are a lot more transparent so the “how” is really out there for everyone to see. Today’s customers have so much power and it is essential that companies realize this and use it to their advantage.
Rule #9: When the world goes, flat- and you are feeling flattened-reach for a shovel and dig inside yourself. Do not try to build walls. This rule was the most interesting to me. The struggle Greer & Associates faced was one probably faced by many midsized companies. The Flat world , was supposed to make things easier but they found things only becoming more difficult. Once companies realize the need for change they should act on it. Companies have to tie all these rules together to survive building a wall simply will not work!
Rule #1: When the world id flat what can be done will be done. The question is will it be done by you or to you. This rule is simple if you have an idea you should pursue before someone else does. Freidman gives several examples of individuals that have turned great ideas into successful businesses. They key here is many of these things would not be possible if not for the opportunities available in the flat world.
Rule #2: Because we are in a world where whatever is can be done will be done, the most important competition today is between you and your own imagination. This is a theme that has been present throughout the book, the power of the individual. Here Friedman talks a little more about how we can use this power in our companies. Companies need to stretch their employees’ imaginations in order to thrive. This how companies will remain competitive by using their imaginations and tools to maintain constant innovation.
Rule #3: And the small shall act big… One way small companies flourish in the flat world is by learning to act really big. Imagination is necessary, but not sufficient. You have to be able to implement what you imagine. And the key to being small and acting big is being quick to take advantage of all new tools for collaboration to reach farther, faster, wider, and deeper. May be it is just me but things started to get a little repetitive here. It seems like here Friedman took the advice he gives the individual and applies it to the company. Obviously, imagination is not enough to be a success you have to take advantage of the tools available to you. The example Freidman used of Aramex split with Airborne exemplified this perfectly. I would say the reason this is not done more is people do not realize what tools are available to them.
Rule #4: And the big shall act small…One way that big companies learn to flourish in the flat world is by learning how to act really small by enabling their customers to act really big. This is a great idea and companies are actually better for it. When companies let customers “serve themselves in their own way, at their own pace, in their own time according to their own taste.” They are actually making them employees. After all, who knows what the customers want and need better then the customers. I think many companies start to get so big they forget that they need their customers.
Rule #5: The best companies are the best collaborators . In the flat world, more and more business will be done through collaboration within and between companies, for a very simple reason: The next layers of value creation-whether in technology, marketing, biomedicine, or manufacturing- are becoming so complex that no single firm or department is going to be able to master them alone. I had a difficult time understanding this rule. The examples did not necessarily seem like great collaboration efforts. It just seemed like the natural evolution of these companies. Rolls Royce realized the U.K. market was not big enough so they expanded, and video games companies realized games sell better with music. To me that is natural growth. In a global economy, companies must evolve to be truly global to be successful.
Rule #6: In a flat world , the best companies stay healthy by getting regular chest x-rays and then selling the results to their clients. What? That was my first thought but this does actually make a lot of sense. You need to constantly analyze your company’s capabilities. If something does not add value why do it. When you otsource the non-essentials you can focus on your “hot spots” and develop them. That is how HP ended up providing backroom services to the Bank of India.
Rule #7: The best companies outsource to win not to shrink. They outsource to innovate faster and more cheaply in order to grow larger, gain market share and hire more and different specialists-not to save money by firing more people. This falls in line with the last rule. If something does not create value, it would be best to outsource and improve your company by focusing on more value-added activities. I believe many companies jump on the outsource bandwagon because they think it is all about saving money when it is not. Ironically, like LRN, I think companies realize the need for outsourcing when they are ready to grow their business.
Rule #8: HOW you do things as a company matter more today than ever. Price differentiation and service quality are no longer enough to set your business apart in the market. Today it is about how you treat your customers, colleagues, suppliers, and investors. This is one of the few ways you can still differentiate yourself from your competition. As Friedman says, companies today are a lot more transparent so the “how” is really out there for everyone to see. Today’s customers have so much power and it is essential that companies realize this and use it to their advantage.
Rule #9: When the world goes, flat- and you are feeling flattened-reach for a shovel and dig inside yourself. Do not try to build walls. This rule was the most interesting to me. The struggle Greer & Associates faced was one probably faced by many midsized companies. The Flat world , was supposed to make things easier but they found things only becoming more difficult. Once companies realize the need for change they should act on it. Companies have to tie all these rules together to survive building a wall simply will not work!
The Virgin Guadalupe
Before reading The World is Flat I wondered why so many companies were sourcing from Asia when we had such a low cost manufacturer right below us. It turns out they were also wondering why they were sourcing from Asia. It was interesting to see how traditionally low wage, low cost countries like Mexico are affected by the flat world. It also gives you an idea of what stands to happen to China. Eventually the will be standing in Mexico’s shoes wondering where all the money went.
So how do developing countries deal with the flat world? Freidman suggests introspection. They need to take a long hard look at themselves and seeing what their strengths and weakness are. They must ask themselves how to develop their talents to compete in a flat world. Developing countries must focus on four things in order to align themselves with the flat world. First, they must have the right infrastructure to connect their people with the flat world platform. This would arguably be the biggest step for any country, as it requires an upfront investment in internet bandwidth, mobile phones, modern airports and roads. The second step is to develop the right educational system. The system should get more people collaborating on the flat world platform. The third is the right governance. This would probably be the most difficult step this means having the right fiscal policy, laws, and bureaucracy. It may require a great change in traditions and government that may not be so widely accepted. Finally, each country needs to realize the importance of maintaining their environment. This is steps is bound to happen in developing country either out of necessity or the onset of social responsibility.
As the Berlin Wall fell many countries started to make these adaptations however it is in the area of better governance that we see the most important and drastic changes. Countries have focused on developing more market-friendly economic policies. Freidman refers to these changes as reform wholesale. These changes were made in a relatively small number of countries including China, Russia, Mexico, and India. All of these countries understood one important thing; that an open and competitive market is essential for success in the flat world.
Once a country has made wholesale reform, they are better able to make what Freidman refers to as retail reform. This is when countries can upgrade their infrastructure, education, and governance. Countries climb out of poverty when their people have the abilities and resources to start businesses, raise capital, and compete. These changes sound relatively simple and in theory can be accomplished by any developing country, Ireland being the perfect example. However, one barrier to change has been culture. Two important factors determine how well you country can adapt how open it is to foreign influence and how inward the culture is. For obvious reason a country open to foreign ideas and influence have the potential to thrive in the flat world. In addition, while it is important to maintain a cultural identity and investment in your culture it is also important to be open to growth and development.
So how do developing countries deal with the flat world? Freidman suggests introspection. They need to take a long hard look at themselves and seeing what their strengths and weakness are. They must ask themselves how to develop their talents to compete in a flat world. Developing countries must focus on four things in order to align themselves with the flat world. First, they must have the right infrastructure to connect their people with the flat world platform. This would arguably be the biggest step for any country, as it requires an upfront investment in internet bandwidth, mobile phones, modern airports and roads. The second step is to develop the right educational system. The system should get more people collaborating on the flat world platform. The third is the right governance. This would probably be the most difficult step this means having the right fiscal policy, laws, and bureaucracy. It may require a great change in traditions and government that may not be so widely accepted. Finally, each country needs to realize the importance of maintaining their environment. This is steps is bound to happen in developing country either out of necessity or the onset of social responsibility.
As the Berlin Wall fell many countries started to make these adaptations however it is in the area of better governance that we see the most important and drastic changes. Countries have focused on developing more market-friendly economic policies. Freidman refers to these changes as reform wholesale. These changes were made in a relatively small number of countries including China, Russia, Mexico, and India. All of these countries understood one important thing; that an open and competitive market is essential for success in the flat world.
Once a country has made wholesale reform, they are better able to make what Freidman refers to as retail reform. This is when countries can upgrade their infrastructure, education, and governance. Countries climb out of poverty when their people have the abilities and resources to start businesses, raise capital, and compete. These changes sound relatively simple and in theory can be accomplished by any developing country, Ireland being the perfect example. However, one barrier to change has been culture. Two important factors determine how well you country can adapt how open it is to foreign influence and how inward the culture is. For obvious reason a country open to foreign ideas and influence have the potential to thrive in the flat world. In addition, while it is important to maintain a cultural identity and investment in your culture it is also important to be open to growth and development.
Sunday, November 18, 2007
This is Not A Test
“For a country as wealthy as we are, it is amazing how little we are doing to enhance our natural competitiveness.” This quote hit the nail on the head. We need to meet this challenge head on as we did during the Cold War era. We need to pursue what Freidman calls “compassionate flatism.” We need a leader that realizes what Kennedy realized, “I believe we have all the resources and talent necessary, but the fact of the matter is we have never made the national decisions or marshaled the national resources required for such leadership.” Like we did then we must now create and accept “a firm commitment to a new course of action.” We need to prepare are selves for the new pressures of global competition and that is what compassionate flatism stands for. Freidman suggests five action areas:
Leadership: Americans do not understand what is happening in the flat world because our leaders do not. In China and India leaders are engineers and scientist so they understand what is happening in the flat world. Freidman actually suggests that Americans leaders are going out of their way to make us stupid! As quoted in the book, “No institutions will go through fundamental change unless it believes it is in deep trouble and needs to do something different to survive.” We are in deep trouble! The successful leader needs to educate us about our trouble and enable us to guide ourselves out of it.
Muscle Building: We need to lose the fat of lifetime employment and build the muscles of lifetime employability. The government and companies need to provide us with the tools to make ourselves lifetime employable! Freidman suggest these tools are portable benefits and opportunities for lifelong learning. He also promotes access to stock options. If you have these factors you are free to move to new industries created by the flat world and you are more personally invested in your job.
Cushioning: This idea explains that while we do need to lose fat some fat is necessary. Specifically, wage insurance is one fat that we need. This would compensate you for you lose of pay due to your loss of specific skills. When workers meet the three qualifications they would receive payment for two years covering half the drop in their income. I just wonder where the $8 billion in funding is supposed to come from.
Parenting: “There comes a time when you’ve got put away the Game Boys, turn off the television, shut off the iPod, and get your kids down to work.” I am glad someone said it. I think the main reason the kids in other countries are excelling over ours has a lot to do with the way we parent our children. We do not teach them anything, we don not make them do anything so they do not grow up to be anything. As Freidman suggest we need to encourage our kids to work hard! That is the bottom line. One final thing that struck a cord with me were his comments on the remarks made by Bill Cosby at the Rainbow Coalition. I agreed with every word he said and believed that he pointed out the reality of our situation. What caught me off guard is that people were offended by it. It seems we are working so hard to protect our feeling instead of focusing on building skills and character in our children.
Leadership: Americans do not understand what is happening in the flat world because our leaders do not. In China and India leaders are engineers and scientist so they understand what is happening in the flat world. Freidman actually suggests that Americans leaders are going out of their way to make us stupid! As quoted in the book, “No institutions will go through fundamental change unless it believes it is in deep trouble and needs to do something different to survive.” We are in deep trouble! The successful leader needs to educate us about our trouble and enable us to guide ourselves out of it.
Muscle Building: We need to lose the fat of lifetime employment and build the muscles of lifetime employability. The government and companies need to provide us with the tools to make ourselves lifetime employable! Freidman suggest these tools are portable benefits and opportunities for lifelong learning. He also promotes access to stock options. If you have these factors you are free to move to new industries created by the flat world and you are more personally invested in your job.
Cushioning: This idea explains that while we do need to lose fat some fat is necessary. Specifically, wage insurance is one fat that we need. This would compensate you for you lose of pay due to your loss of specific skills. When workers meet the three qualifications they would receive payment for two years covering half the drop in their income. I just wonder where the $8 billion in funding is supposed to come from.
Parenting: “There comes a time when you’ve got put away the Game Boys, turn off the television, shut off the iPod, and get your kids down to work.” I am glad someone said it. I think the main reason the kids in other countries are excelling over ours has a lot to do with the way we parent our children. We do not teach them anything, we don not make them do anything so they do not grow up to be anything. As Freidman suggest we need to encourage our kids to work hard! That is the bottom line. One final thing that struck a cord with me were his comments on the remarks made by Bill Cosby at the Rainbow Coalition. I agreed with every word he said and believed that he pointed out the reality of our situation. What caught me off guard is that people were offended by it. It seems we are working so hard to protect our feeling instead of focusing on building skills and character in our children.
The Quiet Crisis
had trouble deciphering this chapter. The other chapters I knew from the first paragraph what point Freidman was trying to express. All I got out of the first couple of paragraphs was that Americans have become fat, complacent, and lazy. It seems that we all developed an ungrounded superiority complex that has caused us to lag behind. This I guess is what caused our quiet crisis. The U.S. is suffering in the arena of science and technology. What is important here is that the U.S. could see itself fall behind as an innovator. Freidman believes any country has to develop three basic things to remain competitive: the right infrastructure, the right education programs, and the right ambition. He describes our gaps in these areas as our dirty little secrets.
Dirty Secret 1: The numbers gap refers to the expanding gap between the number of people leaving science and technology industries and the number of people entering these fields. To me the key to this is simple, we promote the sciences again. How we can expect an industry to grow if it is not promoted. This is basic marketing to me. Provide the incentive and people will gravitate. (I would say the abundance of jobs in this area would be incentive enough because we are not completely oblivious to the labor market)
Dirty Secret 2: The numbers gap is clearly caused by the education gap. Because we are not promoting math, science, and engineering in our young people they are not pursuing it. There is no doubt about we are struggling in the math and science arena and evidence seems to suggest that things will only get worse. What bothers me is that though numbers clearly show we are falling behind nothing is being done about. We are already at the point where our college graduates can barely read …….very SCARY!
Dirty Secret 3: We also have an ambition gap. As the text pointed out, not only is work in India cheaper but it is generally done better. The reason for this is clear. They work harder and better because they have the need and desire to do so. For some strange reason we have lost that desire.
Dirty Secret 4: The next problem is one I noticed while I was growing up. That was the education gap at the bottom. Because education is left up to individual school districts the educational levels vary based upon the residents of the district. This meant that wealthier districts provided better educations than less affluent areas. The problem here is the substandard education many districts provide do not prepare their student to compete in a flat world.
Dirty Secret 5: I find the funding gap that we have created unbelievable. Logically, if we are to continue to be a leader in technological developments we must invest heavily in the area. By some twist of fate funding for research in physical and mathematical science has decreased over the years. The solution here is so obvious I need not discuss it. (If it isn’t that obvious read pg.363)
Dirty Secret 6: This entire chapter has infuriated me. Each of these dirty little secrets served to upset me more and more. Well, Freidman saved the best for last! This upsets me because it should not be a reality. As we sit around focusing on tax cuts and the “war on terror” the rest of the of the world is whizzing by approximately 40 times faster. Broadband and information technologies are critical to advancing productivity and innovation but we seem uninterested in developing are capabilities. The infrastructure gap needs to close and it needs to close now if we are to remain competitive!
Dirty Secret 1: The numbers gap refers to the expanding gap between the number of people leaving science and technology industries and the number of people entering these fields. To me the key to this is simple, we promote the sciences again. How we can expect an industry to grow if it is not promoted. This is basic marketing to me. Provide the incentive and people will gravitate. (I would say the abundance of jobs in this area would be incentive enough because we are not completely oblivious to the labor market)
Dirty Secret 2: The numbers gap is clearly caused by the education gap. Because we are not promoting math, science, and engineering in our young people they are not pursuing it. There is no doubt about we are struggling in the math and science arena and evidence seems to suggest that things will only get worse. What bothers me is that though numbers clearly show we are falling behind nothing is being done about. We are already at the point where our college graduates can barely read …….very SCARY!
Dirty Secret 3: We also have an ambition gap. As the text pointed out, not only is work in India cheaper but it is generally done better. The reason for this is clear. They work harder and better because they have the need and desire to do so. For some strange reason we have lost that desire.
Dirty Secret 4: The next problem is one I noticed while I was growing up. That was the education gap at the bottom. Because education is left up to individual school districts the educational levels vary based upon the residents of the district. This meant that wealthier districts provided better educations than less affluent areas. The problem here is the substandard education many districts provide do not prepare their student to compete in a flat world.
Dirty Secret 5: I find the funding gap that we have created unbelievable. Logically, if we are to continue to be a leader in technological developments we must invest heavily in the area. By some twist of fate funding for research in physical and mathematical science has decreased over the years. The solution here is so obvious I need not discuss it. (If it isn’t that obvious read pg.363)
Dirty Secret 6: This entire chapter has infuriated me. Each of these dirty little secrets served to upset me more and more. Well, Freidman saved the best for last! This upsets me because it should not be a reality. As we sit around focusing on tax cuts and the “war on terror” the rest of the of the world is whizzing by approximately 40 times faster. Broadband and information technologies are critical to advancing productivity and innovation but we seem uninterested in developing are capabilities. The infrastructure gap needs to close and it needs to close now if we are to remain competitive!
The Right Stuff
It is clear that with this new flat world education is the key to survival. It is important to transform educational systems so as that workers can actually get jobs that exist in their societies. So now many are asking, "how do we educate our children?”
According to Friedman the first skill you must develop is “learning how to learn”. In other words what you know will become out of date quickly so you must constantly learn and develop new skills. To me this is a given as it has always been the key to remaining competitive.
The next thing he point out are navigation skills. I had not even thought of this much less how important this was. It will be important for us and our children to effectively navigate the virtual world and separate the noise from the facts. As Freidman points out this has always been important but today more and more people are getting from news sites that are not edited.
CQ + PQ > IQ embodies Friedman’s third theme of passion and curiosity. This mean that that your curiosity quotient and passion quotient are more important than your intelligence quotient. Basically if you have these factors you have a competitive advantage in the job market. These people are self-educators and self-motivators and essentially this is the key to success in the flat world.
Stressing liberal arts means teaching your kids to essentially think outside the box. Friedman describes it as teaching people early to think horizontally. I think this important because today we see math and science as main focus while the arts and music seem dispensable. I like Freidman believe these areas are essential for innovation.
Finally, Friedman discuses how we need to help our students develop the ability to think horizontally. They need to mesh together different perspective to produces a third one. This would essentially involve using the right brain so it is important to nurture that. This is simple if we want our children to become untouchables we have to help them develop both left and right brain skills. It will be nice to see this come to fruition as we have traditionally focused on our analytical left-brain abilities.
The final piece of the puzzle is how we make this happen. What does all this really mean for education? I think the example he gave with Georgia Tech really does set a standard. We have to begin changing our policies and the way we look at students. The goal after is not just to produce an engineer but a good one. Therefore, we need to promote our test tubes and out tubas!
According to Friedman the first skill you must develop is “learning how to learn”. In other words what you know will become out of date quickly so you must constantly learn and develop new skills. To me this is a given as it has always been the key to remaining competitive.
The next thing he point out are navigation skills. I had not even thought of this much less how important this was. It will be important for us and our children to effectively navigate the virtual world and separate the noise from the facts. As Freidman points out this has always been important but today more and more people are getting from news sites that are not edited.
CQ + PQ > IQ embodies Friedman’s third theme of passion and curiosity. This mean that that your curiosity quotient and passion quotient are more important than your intelligence quotient. Basically if you have these factors you have a competitive advantage in the job market. These people are self-educators and self-motivators and essentially this is the key to success in the flat world.
Stressing liberal arts means teaching your kids to essentially think outside the box. Friedman describes it as teaching people early to think horizontally. I think this important because today we see math and science as main focus while the arts and music seem dispensable. I like Freidman believe these areas are essential for innovation.
Finally, Friedman discuses how we need to help our students develop the ability to think horizontally. They need to mesh together different perspective to produces a third one. This would essentially involve using the right brain so it is important to nurture that. This is simple if we want our children to become untouchables we have to help them develop both left and right brain skills. It will be nice to see this come to fruition as we have traditionally focused on our analytical left-brain abilities.
The final piece of the puzzle is how we make this happen. What does all this really mean for education? I think the example he gave with Georgia Tech really does set a standard. We have to begin changing our policies and the way we look at students. The goal after is not just to produce an engineer but a good one. Therefore, we need to promote our test tubes and out tubas!
The Untouchables
This chapter begins by reinforcing a comment I made on an earlier blog. Thanks to globalization 3.0, we are no longer just competing with other M.B.A.’s in the U. S. We are competing globally with Indian and Chinese students as well. For us this means we have to work much harder to be successful. My question is, is that enough? According to Friedman, it is we must simply focus on developing our skill sets so that they are efficient in the global market.
Friedman outlines what we could do to be competitive in the global market. According to him, the key is figuring out how to make yourself an untouchable. These are people whose jobs cannot be outsourced, digitized, or automated. These jobs fall into three broad categories.
Special or Specialized: These are you athletes, musicians, authors, and surgeons. These jobs are so specialized they cannot be outsourced and they have a global market so they earn global wages. Not very many of this will fit into this category because all of these jobs require you to have a level of innate ability that we do not all posses.
Localized or Anchored: These are jobs that must be done in a specific location so they are considered untouchable. There are many jobs in this category such as servers, plumbers, cooks, repairmen, cleaning ladies, nannies and sales clerks. Do you notice a trend with these jobs? They are numerous but necessarily the most desirable. Granted there are some desirable positions in this category I believe they are outnumbered. I wonder if people think, “why go to college and study accounting where there is no job security when I could go to cosmetology school and be ensured employment?”
Middle Class Jobs: These are not the traditional middle jobs of course because they are being outsourced whenever possible. These are the “new middle jobs”. Managers will now have to be horizontal collaborators. Every job will have a local aspect but it is important that they have the ability to collaborate globally. One key field that Friedman mentions is managers who can orchestrate 24/7/7 supply chains. (I guess that makes me a little happy because my focus is on supply chain.)
There are a couple more of these “new middle” type jobs that I felt really stood out.
The Great Explainers: These are people who see complexity and explain it with simplicity. If you can explain something well you can see the opportunities better.
The Green People: With the world developing so quickly and people wanting so many things the world will need many “green jobs”. These jobs will involve sustaining the environment or creating renewable energies.
The Passionate Personalizer: These are people that add the special personal touch to routine middle jobs. Basically anyone that can change an old middle service job and add something special to it there is a chance it will not be outsourced. I like this the most because that means there is hope for some of the people not aware of changes in the flat world.
Friedman outlines what we could do to be competitive in the global market. According to him, the key is figuring out how to make yourself an untouchable. These are people whose jobs cannot be outsourced, digitized, or automated. These jobs fall into three broad categories.
Special or Specialized: These are you athletes, musicians, authors, and surgeons. These jobs are so specialized they cannot be outsourced and they have a global market so they earn global wages. Not very many of this will fit into this category because all of these jobs require you to have a level of innate ability that we do not all posses.
Localized or Anchored: These are jobs that must be done in a specific location so they are considered untouchable. There are many jobs in this category such as servers, plumbers, cooks, repairmen, cleaning ladies, nannies and sales clerks. Do you notice a trend with these jobs? They are numerous but necessarily the most desirable. Granted there are some desirable positions in this category I believe they are outnumbered. I wonder if people think, “why go to college and study accounting where there is no job security when I could go to cosmetology school and be ensured employment?”
Middle Class Jobs: These are not the traditional middle jobs of course because they are being outsourced whenever possible. These are the “new middle jobs”. Managers will now have to be horizontal collaborators. Every job will have a local aspect but it is important that they have the ability to collaborate globally. One key field that Friedman mentions is managers who can orchestrate 24/7/7 supply chains. (I guess that makes me a little happy because my focus is on supply chain.)
There are a couple more of these “new middle” type jobs that I felt really stood out.
The Great Explainers: These are people who see complexity and explain it with simplicity. If you can explain something well you can see the opportunities better.
The Green People: With the world developing so quickly and people wanting so many things the world will need many “green jobs”. These jobs will involve sustaining the environment or creating renewable energies.
The Passionate Personalizer: These are people that add the special personal touch to routine middle jobs. Basically anyone that can change an old middle service job and add something special to it there is a chance it will not be outsourced. I like this the most because that means there is hope for some of the people not aware of changes in the flat world.
America and Free Trade
chapter poses a very good question. Should there still be free trade in flat world. One could argue that individual Americans would be better off if the government restricted free trade. One could also argue that we need to do what is best for America regardless of the effects on the individual. This group would argue that country as a whole benefits if there are no restrictions on outsourcing, supply-chaining, and offshoring As far as Ricardo’s theory on Free Trade is concerned I think this works best when we speak of trading goods. Trading where you have a comparative cost advantage does not work as well when discussing knowledge work and services. When trading goods freely you do lose some jobs to a country that produce those more efficiently but that in turns encourages a more educated population. When you start to freely move knowledge based jobs where do we turn. What is the next step for us? The only result I really see from this is mass unemployment. I am not arguing that outsourcing should be eliminated but regulated. I guess this makes me a protectionist.
Freidman took another stance he supports the idea that more Americans would be better off if we do not erect barriers to outsourcing than if we do. He says that we not only need to maintain a free trade policy we not to promote education so that we can compete in this new flat world. He also argues that though we would suffer a “transition phase” there is no reason to believe the changes will be permanent as long as the global pie keeps growing. To convince me I need hard evidence to support that the “dip” in our economy would not permanent. I also would need a guarantee that this “dip” would not be long standing. If there is no hard evidence, there is no justification for taking the risk!
The one factor of his argument that I did agree completely with is that by encouraging outsourcing to countries such as India and China we drive up the wages. When the wages rise to American/ European range it levels out the playing field. Though this takes time this is the long-run positive outcome I hope to see with the flat world.
Freidman took another stance he supports the idea that more Americans would be better off if we do not erect barriers to outsourcing than if we do. He says that we not only need to maintain a free trade policy we not to promote education so that we can compete in this new flat world. He also argues that though we would suffer a “transition phase” there is no reason to believe the changes will be permanent as long as the global pie keeps growing. To convince me I need hard evidence to support that the “dip” in our economy would not permanent. I also would need a guarantee that this “dip” would not be long standing. If there is no hard evidence, there is no justification for taking the risk!
The one factor of his argument that I did agree completely with is that by encouraging outsourcing to countries such as India and China we drive up the wages. When the wages rise to American/ European range it levels out the playing field. Though this takes time this is the long-run positive outcome I hope to see with the flat world.
The Great Sorting Out
The link between Friedman’s “The Great Sorting Out” and Marxist theory is uncanny. The connection is real. Marx was one of the first to visualize the global market without the complication of national boundaries. The way Marx describes the industrial revolution and how it flattened the world mirrors what is happening today in the IT revolution. Though the IT revolution is leading to a frictionless and efficient global market, it does have a downside. As I stated in earlier posts this could result in an overall loss of identity. The quote “Some sources of friction are worth protecting, even in the face of a global economy that threatens to flatten them” reflects what I believe to be the ideal outlook on the global economy.
So how are we sorting it out? Ok so I thought the story of Indiana outsourcing to the low priced India firm was humorous but what does this mean? As Friedman put it “Who is exploiting Whom?” Are we taking advantage of them by paying lower prices or are they taking away our opportunities? I thought the reaction by the Indiana politicians was wasteful, time consuming, and costly. However, I am sure many do not see it that way. As Freidman put it with horizontal collaboration, it is difficult to see who is on top and who is on the bottom.
The same way different people and process need to be sorted out so do the relationships between companies and communities. In the global market, companies cannot survive being bound to a single nation. It seems the companies are becoming global as well. Not in the old-fashioned sense of seeking cheap labor or research globally but a true global organization such as Lenovo-IBM. This company is headquartered in New York with factories everywhere from Raleigh to Beijing. The top management of the company is mixed with American and Chinese citizens. This company is not specifically tied to any one nation and is truly global company. Overall Friedman points out that investors are indifferent about where profits come from as long as companies are sustainable.
The section on Who owns What struck a cord within this chapter as it discusses the issues of intellectual property in the flat world. Freidman suggests that intellectual property law has to adjust or we as a society will not get the benefits or be protected from the drawback of a flat world. Currently there are two sides of the fence. One side suggests protecting inventor’s proprietary interests, which provide incentive for innovation. The other side would argue the free flow intellectual assets. Freidman suggests the obvious solution, which is a balance between the two. Though this seems the most logical solution, I do not believe it is feasible or realistic.
So how are we sorting it out? Ok so I thought the story of Indiana outsourcing to the low priced India firm was humorous but what does this mean? As Friedman put it “Who is exploiting Whom?” Are we taking advantage of them by paying lower prices or are they taking away our opportunities? I thought the reaction by the Indiana politicians was wasteful, time consuming, and costly. However, I am sure many do not see it that way. As Freidman put it with horizontal collaboration, it is difficult to see who is on top and who is on the bottom.
The same way different people and process need to be sorted out so do the relationships between companies and communities. In the global market, companies cannot survive being bound to a single nation. It seems the companies are becoming global as well. Not in the old-fashioned sense of seeking cheap labor or research globally but a true global organization such as Lenovo-IBM. This company is headquartered in New York with factories everywhere from Raleigh to Beijing. The top management of the company is mixed with American and Chinese citizens. This company is not specifically tied to any one nation and is truly global company. Overall Friedman points out that investors are indifferent about where profits come from as long as companies are sustainable.
The section on Who owns What struck a cord within this chapter as it discusses the issues of intellectual property in the flat world. Freidman suggests that intellectual property law has to adjust or we as a society will not get the benefits or be protected from the drawback of a flat world. Currently there are two sides of the fence. One side suggests protecting inventor’s proprietary interests, which provide incentive for innovation. The other side would argue the free flow intellectual assets. Freidman suggests the obvious solution, which is a balance between the two. Though this seems the most logical solution, I do not believe it is feasible or realistic.
Monday, November 12, 2007
The Triple Convergence
The triple convergence explains how the world became flat, how we used it our advantage, and how this together changed the playing field.
Convergence I: The combination of the ten world flatteners created a new global platform. This new platform allowed us to collaborate and communicate in ways in we never have before. This new platform allowed us to collaborate without regard to geography, time, or distance. It is interesting to see how the ten seemingly unrelated flatteners came together to create a new global platform. It was as if the world was revolving right before our eyes and we did not really realize what was happening until after it was said and done.
Convergence II: This new platform would not be useful if we did not change the way we did business. What it took business process to change, adapt and benefit from new technologies is what is Friedman refers to as “horizontalization”. In globalization 3.0, we moved from a vertical chain of command to a horizontal chain of command for value creation. These lead companies to focus less on chain of command and more on connection and collaboration. Companies have begun to realize the advantages created by thinking horizontally and have begun to use collaboration to their advantage.
Convergence III: Before the flattening of the world, the global economy consisted of about 2.5 billion people. The flattened world allowed another 150 million people to be added to the global connected workforce. More importantly globalization is now being driven by the individual not by governmental agencies. Because of the new flat world we now have access to collaboration tools and raw information. As I stated in a previous post it is necessary for us to accept and adapt to this new flat world in order to be competitve. In India these individual are referred to as Zippies. Zippies are the Indian youth who have come to age since India shifted away from socialism. Instead of trying to get a Visa to work or study in the U.S. this generation has discovered they can now stay in India and be just as successful. The point is clear then that the ten world flatteners have enabled Indians, Chinese, and Russians to innovate without having to emigrate.
The Other Convergence: The other convergence helps to explain why the triple convergence occurred and so many of us did not seem to notice it. I personally believe that it takes time for the world to adjust to new trends and it is not something that can happen over night. We did not miss it we were aware of it but distracted by other global events. Friedman points out three smokes screens the caused us to “miss” the triple convergence\. The first thing he attributes to the smoke screen is dot-com burst. So many people associated dot-com with globalization that when it failed we believe globalization as well. I agree with him that this is ludicrous but I do not think that many people associated this with globalization. The other two factors attributed to the smoke screen were 9/11 and the corporate scandals. This just support my theory that we were distracted by other world/economic crisis at the same time that the triple convergence occurred.
Convergence I: The combination of the ten world flatteners created a new global platform. This new platform allowed us to collaborate and communicate in ways in we never have before. This new platform allowed us to collaborate without regard to geography, time, or distance. It is interesting to see how the ten seemingly unrelated flatteners came together to create a new global platform. It was as if the world was revolving right before our eyes and we did not really realize what was happening until after it was said and done.
Convergence II: This new platform would not be useful if we did not change the way we did business. What it took business process to change, adapt and benefit from new technologies is what is Friedman refers to as “horizontalization”. In globalization 3.0, we moved from a vertical chain of command to a horizontal chain of command for value creation. These lead companies to focus less on chain of command and more on connection and collaboration. Companies have begun to realize the advantages created by thinking horizontally and have begun to use collaboration to their advantage.
Convergence III: Before the flattening of the world, the global economy consisted of about 2.5 billion people. The flattened world allowed another 150 million people to be added to the global connected workforce. More importantly globalization is now being driven by the individual not by governmental agencies. Because of the new flat world we now have access to collaboration tools and raw information. As I stated in a previous post it is necessary for us to accept and adapt to this new flat world in order to be competitve. In India these individual are referred to as Zippies. Zippies are the Indian youth who have come to age since India shifted away from socialism. Instead of trying to get a Visa to work or study in the U.S. this generation has discovered they can now stay in India and be just as successful. The point is clear then that the ten world flatteners have enabled Indians, Chinese, and Russians to innovate without having to emigrate.
The Other Convergence: The other convergence helps to explain why the triple convergence occurred and so many of us did not seem to notice it. I personally believe that it takes time for the world to adjust to new trends and it is not something that can happen over night. We did not miss it we were aware of it but distracted by other global events. Friedman points out three smokes screens the caused us to “miss” the triple convergence\. The first thing he attributes to the smoke screen is dot-com burst. So many people associated dot-com with globalization that when it failed we believe globalization as well. I agree with him that this is ludicrous but I do not think that many people associated this with globalization. The other two factors attributed to the smoke screen were 9/11 and the corporate scandals. This just support my theory that we were distracted by other world/economic crisis at the same time that the triple convergence occurred.
The Ten Forces That Flattened The World
I wish I could have complemented on all of the flatteners but I had to cut them in half for time and space reasons. I have briefly discussed the first five flatteners in detail below.
The New Age of Creativity: While the fall of the Berlin Wall opened the world up politically to globalization, the PC removed the physical constraints and made it all possible. I am by no means down playing the role the collapse of the Soviet Empire had on flattening the world. As Friedman said, it allowed us to think of the world as a single market. However, the PC allowed us to take advantage of this global marketplace. Because of the PC, information became more powerful and free flowing and to me that was the key to making the world flat.
The New Age of Connectivity: With information at our fingertips and the world opened up like never before and Netscape allowed us to reach out to the world. I think one important thing to take from this is that the internet became more accessible and easy to use which increased demand and usefulness of it. The other important thing to take from this is compatibility. Having one common way to “get on the internet” is what allowed for this new connection between people anywhere in the world.
Work Flow Software: It logically follows that if everyone has standard protocols work can easily be shared and transferred. I love the way it was put in the text, “Standards don’t stop innovation, they just clear away a lot of extraneous stuff so you can focus on what really matters.” Because we have developed standards such as XML or TCP/IP, we can outsource and focus on adding value to our products and services.
Uploading: It seemed that uploading gave the little person, the geeks as Friedman calls them, more power. The little man no longer needs the traditional institutions they could simply create their own. People no longer have to watch the game they could now be a part of it. Two things stuck with me from this flattener. First, many (Microsoft executives) believe that open-source community developed software will not survive because there is no economic incentive but the evidence would suggest otherwise. I think that empowerment the individuals get in these community based initiatives outweigh the economic benefit. The evidence seems to support my belief. Firefox gained 10% of the browser market in one year, Youtube has literally created self-made stars, and Wikipedia has 841,358 articles compared to the 36,000 Encarta offers. The numbers speak for themselves. The second thing that stuck with me is that uploading also empowers individuals with malice intent. Anyone could change a Wikipedia biography or spread viruses through their uploaded content. Our willingness to accept this information or content without question could lead to dire consequences.
Outsourcing: There are several factors that led to the development and success of outsourcing. Outsourcing in turn is one of the flatteners of the world. India has benefited significantly from the overcapacity of fiber optics. Indians and their American counterparts are able to use all of this for next to nothing. Another factor in the success of outsourcing is the highly educated Indian population. Indians realized early on that the intellectual power of their citizens could provide them with a huge advantage. This is what seemed to set them apart from other Asian nations and allowed them to be a prime nation for outsourcing. I believe this is perhaps the single most important factor making India the powerhouse that they are. Another key factor was India’s finance minister opening up the economy for competition. I thought it was somewhat amusing that thing that bought all of these seemingly unrelated factors together was the Y2K threat. It was because of this threat the Americans found themselves searching for computer engineers and India found itself providing them. I do not know if I would go as far to call it Indian Independence Day as Friedman did but it was a major turning point for the country.
The New Age of Creativity: While the fall of the Berlin Wall opened the world up politically to globalization, the PC removed the physical constraints and made it all possible. I am by no means down playing the role the collapse of the Soviet Empire had on flattening the world. As Friedman said, it allowed us to think of the world as a single market. However, the PC allowed us to take advantage of this global marketplace. Because of the PC, information became more powerful and free flowing and to me that was the key to making the world flat.
The New Age of Connectivity: With information at our fingertips and the world opened up like never before and Netscape allowed us to reach out to the world. I think one important thing to take from this is that the internet became more accessible and easy to use which increased demand and usefulness of it. The other important thing to take from this is compatibility. Having one common way to “get on the internet” is what allowed for this new connection between people anywhere in the world.
Work Flow Software: It logically follows that if everyone has standard protocols work can easily be shared and transferred. I love the way it was put in the text, “Standards don’t stop innovation, they just clear away a lot of extraneous stuff so you can focus on what really matters.” Because we have developed standards such as XML or TCP/IP, we can outsource and focus on adding value to our products and services.
Uploading: It seemed that uploading gave the little person, the geeks as Friedman calls them, more power. The little man no longer needs the traditional institutions they could simply create their own. People no longer have to watch the game they could now be a part of it. Two things stuck with me from this flattener. First, many (Microsoft executives) believe that open-source community developed software will not survive because there is no economic incentive but the evidence would suggest otherwise. I think that empowerment the individuals get in these community based initiatives outweigh the economic benefit. The evidence seems to support my belief. Firefox gained 10% of the browser market in one year, Youtube has literally created self-made stars, and Wikipedia has 841,358 articles compared to the 36,000 Encarta offers. The numbers speak for themselves. The second thing that stuck with me is that uploading also empowers individuals with malice intent. Anyone could change a Wikipedia biography or spread viruses through their uploaded content. Our willingness to accept this information or content without question could lead to dire consequences.
Outsourcing: There are several factors that led to the development and success of outsourcing. Outsourcing in turn is one of the flatteners of the world. India has benefited significantly from the overcapacity of fiber optics. Indians and their American counterparts are able to use all of this for next to nothing. Another factor in the success of outsourcing is the highly educated Indian population. Indians realized early on that the intellectual power of their citizens could provide them with a huge advantage. This is what seemed to set them apart from other Asian nations and allowed them to be a prime nation for outsourcing. I believe this is perhaps the single most important factor making India the powerhouse that they are. Another key factor was India’s finance minister opening up the economy for competition. I thought it was somewhat amusing that thing that bought all of these seemingly unrelated factors together was the Y2K threat. It was because of this threat the Americans found themselves searching for computer engineers and India found itself providing them. I do not know if I would go as far to call it Indian Independence Day as Friedman did but it was a major turning point for the country.
Saturday, October 13, 2007
While I Was Sleeping
Outsourcing is not all Bad
Like many others, my initial thoughts on outsourcing were unenthusiastic. I felt that we were losing too many jobs for the mere sake of cutting costs. I did not comprehend how low costs would benefit a nation full of jobless individuals. I never took the time to rationalize the benefits that outsourcing has created for us. First, there is the improved customer service. I know we have all had a bad experience with a call center but that is not what I am referring to. I am speaking of what is happening to service here. The example used in the book is perfect. With accountants outsourcing the grunt work of tax preparation they have more time to focus on creative and complex tax strategies. So essentially, we are getting a higher level of service at a lower cost. Another positive result of outsourcing has been the dramatic increase in exports of merchandise and services to India. So even though some service jobs are being lost American business are growing because of it. It follows that new jobs must be created as businesses grow. The number of jobs created may not offset the number outsourced but the results are still relevant. For now, outsourcing is here to stay so we must first accept it and learn to use it to our advantage.
Technology and Terror
The first chapter points out how many factors have come together to make the world flat and how many organizations are using this to their advantage. Like Friedman, a sense of dread washed over me when I considered how terrorist organizations could use this to their advantage as well. I had never fathomed the impact that the flat world could have on terrorism. Any and every terrorist organization has the ability to communicate and operate more efficiently on a global scale. Does this mean we will see the amount and scale of terrorist activity rise over time?
The Flat World=Loss of Diversity
I am afraid I do not agree fully with the statement that new jobs created in India allow the Indian workers to be more Indian. It is true that instead of having to leave their country to work with a large corporation they get to stay in India. However, at the same time they are teaching them to speak without their accents and to use regional dialects. They also force them to adopt random names like Ivy Timberwoods. If that same employee were to take a position with a company in Georgia, would she be forced to learn a southern accent in order to get the job? Would she be asked to change her name? The answer is no. Think about how you would feel if everyday you went to work you became Nitu Somaiah forced to speak the dialect of Bangalore, India. How can you claim to be protecting cultural identity when you ask people to be someone they are not everyday?
Like many others, my initial thoughts on outsourcing were unenthusiastic. I felt that we were losing too many jobs for the mere sake of cutting costs. I did not comprehend how low costs would benefit a nation full of jobless individuals. I never took the time to rationalize the benefits that outsourcing has created for us. First, there is the improved customer service. I know we have all had a bad experience with a call center but that is not what I am referring to. I am speaking of what is happening to service here. The example used in the book is perfect. With accountants outsourcing the grunt work of tax preparation they have more time to focus on creative and complex tax strategies. So essentially, we are getting a higher level of service at a lower cost. Another positive result of outsourcing has been the dramatic increase in exports of merchandise and services to India. So even though some service jobs are being lost American business are growing because of it. It follows that new jobs must be created as businesses grow. The number of jobs created may not offset the number outsourced but the results are still relevant. For now, outsourcing is here to stay so we must first accept it and learn to use it to our advantage.
Technology and Terror
The first chapter points out how many factors have come together to make the world flat and how many organizations are using this to their advantage. Like Friedman, a sense of dread washed over me when I considered how terrorist organizations could use this to their advantage as well. I had never fathomed the impact that the flat world could have on terrorism. Any and every terrorist organization has the ability to communicate and operate more efficiently on a global scale. Does this mean we will see the amount and scale of terrorist activity rise over time?
The Flat World=Loss of Diversity
I am afraid I do not agree fully with the statement that new jobs created in India allow the Indian workers to be more Indian. It is true that instead of having to leave their country to work with a large corporation they get to stay in India. However, at the same time they are teaching them to speak without their accents and to use regional dialects. They also force them to adopt random names like Ivy Timberwoods. If that same employee were to take a position with a company in Georgia, would she be forced to learn a southern accent in order to get the job? Would she be asked to change her name? The answer is no. Think about how you would feel if everyday you went to work you became Nitu Somaiah forced to speak the dialect of Bangalore, India. How can you claim to be protecting cultural identity when you ask people to be someone they are not everyday?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
