Summary Overview
Today for TWC class, one of the topics we focused on was technology and global dominance. We were introduced to the different dimensions of global dominance. Prof showed us his organizational model for identifying dominant players & innovation leaders, and how societies / corporations / organizations at different stages of technology dominance display very different attitudes. I found his ideas very interesting and will touch on it in greater depth later. From the individual presentation by Ellen, I managed to learn more about the rise in American culture in our society.
For the 2nd half of the session, we focused on the topic of technology and human development. Prof kick-started the session with a video depicting the globalization in Indonesia and how it has led to the poor becoming poorer and the rich becoming staggeringly richer. We then discussed a bit about development and the various aspects of development. We concluded with a brief discussion on the introduction of the MDGs. For this topic, I found the individual presentations really thought provoking! Especially the presentations on Internet addiction and the capability approach, which I will also touch on later.
Observation & Ideas
1) China > USA? – A sweeping statement. I agree that China will overtake the US in terms of global dominance in the future, but I disagree that they are already more dominant. Firstly, this statement is going by the assumption that the largest industrial production rules the globe. But this is not true. Through the course of this lesson, we learnt that dominant players need to be able to lead the change process. But post-globalization, China did not create its own modern industries, but instead received them from the west. China is effectively functioning as a factory to the world. MNCs from all over the world set up production plants in China to take advantage of its cheap labour and big domestic market. So I guess I would rate China as a rapidly rising star, but to reach the top, they will need to adopt a more open perspective and take the role of innovator. Has China sent people to the moon like US has? No. Furthermore, the large income gap between the rich and the poor has yet to be fully rectified in China. On the per capita GDP basis, China is still way behind US and Japan and even Singapore.
2) Prof’s Organizational Pyramid – A majority of the class agreed with this model. It would be difficult to deny that societies or even companies that have adopted a more open, optimistic perspective and that have been keen to learn and invest in new ideas have been rising stars in the past and present. Just look at Singapore, or in terms of companies, APPLE.
3) “Change is inevitable and often necessary, the transition process can often be difficult and painful (for some)” – Yes, as mentioned in my previous blog entry, I feel that, sometimes, the process of always having to learn new skills to keep up to date with technology can be time-consuming and ‘painful’. Prof also added a good point that whenever there is change, some people will lose power / influence, which is why some people are more reluctant to accept change into their societies or organizations.
4) The Colonial Holocaust and its Legacy – I found this reading the most intriguing among all the other readings this week. The proposition that the actual motivation behind Christopher Columbus’ so-called ‘exploration’ was to expand the European Empire to Latin America, by exploiting their wealth, land and cheap labor, I would admit, would be difficult to deny looking at the evidence given in this article. Furthermore, the atrocities and the genocide that they committed while colonizing Latin America do not help the Europeans’ case for colonization. However, I feel that we do need to take into account a possibility of biasness in this article, as some of the claimed ‘acts of atrocities’ may have just been myths.
5) Is Corporation the new ruler of the world? – Yes, I believe that this will happen in the future. With the rapid growth of MNCs, the revenue generated by them is already even higher than the GDP of many countries. Examples are Citibank and Google. The aggressive marketing strategies and greed of some big international banks caused the global financial crisis in 2008/9. Such is the power and influence of big corporations on the state of the world economy. In the aftermath of the crisis, the American and European governments are implementing laws to curb their power. So I feel that governments should take responsibility and intervene when corporations grow too powerful, to curb their dominance, to prevent the repeat of such a negative global event.
6) We, as developed countries, have an obligation to help third world countries progress – I feel that setting of the 1st MDG (to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger) has emphasized the importance of this. We need to improve the standard of living in these countries. I disagree with the Darwinist point of view (survival of the fittest). Let us not forget that in the past, the first world has always exploited the resources of the third world to get to where they are today. It’s time we give back and adopt a humanitarian approach to help these countries progress.
7) Capability Approach – How do we go about categorizing which technology would be related to human capabilities? This was the most interesting presentation for me, and it didn’t disappoint in sparking off some thought-provoking discussions. I must admit that I have always had the perspective that humans in less-developed countries will not be able to effectively make use of our advanced technology if we were to give it to them today. I have always seen technological advancement as a progressive phenomenon, one that needs to be taken step by step. But Prof introduced the concept of leap-frogging. I think that the class agreed that the level of infrastructure would be a constraint for this concept. For example, computers and laptops are not of much use without a reliable electrical supply. But what about the quality of the people? I think given the proper education, this would not be an issue. They can be innovative, but just lack the premise to do so due to lack of educational background.
Key Takeaways
1) First and foremost, we know the general trend for characteristics of dominant players - open, optimistic perspective & keen to learn and invest in new ideas. The 2nd part to the model is that the dominant players can either continue to be competitive or grow complacent and fall. We should, hence, always strive to take on these characteristics, but after becoming the dominant player, we should not grow complacent, but continue to strive to improve and innovate.
2) My second takeaway would be that we are obligated to help the third world progress, as emphasized by the introduction of the 1st MDG!
3) Lastly, to argue that people of the third world would not know how to use our advanced technology because they are not as open / innovative is not valid. So we should not take this into account when deciding what technologies to share with the third world in the ‘capability approach’, but rather whether their level of infrastructure can handle such advanced technologies.
Issues for further discussion
1) Has convenience instead of necessity become the motivational force of invention of technology? – From the presentation of Internet addiction, I feel that this question is extremely relevant especially to last week’s discussion (Is technology leading us to become a lazy and obese generation) and could have been discussed in greater detail.
2) I was also wondering if the concept of leapfrogging technology could be applicable for green tech in the near future. Since global warming is becoming such a big issue, and the earth is dying at a rapid rate, I was wondering if it was feasible for countries with advanced green tech to share their technologies with the rest of the world and how long it would take to get these technologies up and running, so as to fight global warming as one world. Eg. Decreasing CO2 emissions produced by one country would not be as effective as decreasing CO2 emissions by every country in the whole world!
Ratings
9/10: Definitely more thought provoking and interesting than the first lesson. Some of the presentations were extremely creative and informative.
No comments:
Post a Comment