Blog Entry #5

Overview / Summary

Today’s topic was Information Communications Technology (ICT) and World Change – past, present and future.  We talked about the types of ICT’s present in the world today – Mass media, Internet, gaming, wireless technologies, interactive telecommunications, info systems, cloud computing and knowledge management. We went in greater detail on cloud computing and knowledge management. For cloud computing, shared information, resources and software are provided to computers upon demand. We recognized the fact that cloud computing is a better way to run businesses. The shared data centre takes shorter to set up, has a lower cost and is easier to maintain and use. However we did take note of the issue of security of data, when companies store data on a shared database, the fear that other companies can access their data is always there. For knowledge management, we learnt the characteristics of data, information, knowledge and wisdom. Data is just symbols. When data is processed to be true, we gain information. Knowledge is the appropriate collection of information, such that it’s intent is to be useful, and when we have evaluated and understood knowledge, we have gained wisdom. We also talked about whether we are harnessing the full potential of ICT’s and if we are not, what will it take to capture ICT’s full potential.

Key Observations / Ideas

Lets talk about Milo, the interactive virtual boy. He can recognize and interact with humans. He can detect emotions and display his own emotions! Microsoft should be applying this technology into their gaming industry soon enough, but lets look at the big picture of the future prospects of the application of such a technology:

-       Prof suggested this technology could provide lonely elderly with companionship

-       I personally like the idea of a virtual secretary (like in IRON MAN) minding my timetable, deadlines as I deal with the hustle and bustle of life. Such an application of technology would definitely improve work productivity.

I feel that the invention of this technology has opened so many new doors. Imagine if our future security guards, bank tellers, cashiers, taxi drivers are all Milos! Of course, over reliance on this technology is a key concern.  A system being a system always has a chance of failing / crashing, hence while being open to using these technologies, we should remain adept in functioning if we were to one day lose these technologies.

 “The most exciting breakthroughs of the 21^st century will not occur because of technology, but because of an expanding concept of what it means to be human.”

I agree with this quote by John Naisbitt. Essentially, with the invention of ICT’s, we have become more globally connected. As mentioned during our discussion, our perception and interaction has been expanded. We are now capable of interacting with people halfway across the globe. For example, thanks to live news coverage on the Internet and media, we were kept well informed about the hostage situation that took place a half a month ago in the Philippine capital. We shared the experience even though we are geographically separated, such is the impact of ICT on human perception. As for interaction, ‘Skype’ should be a good enough example. The ability to have a videoconference on the Internet with another person anywhere in the world really shows how ICT has expanded human interaction.

“Today’s real borders are not between nations, but between the powerful and powerless, free and fettered, privileged and humiliated.”

With the rapid improvement in ICTs, geographical borders between countries are surpassed. But the inequality in other aspects has not been solved. For example, the divide between the rich and the poor has not gotten smaller.

Have we captured the full potential of ICT?

Definitely not. From the executive summary reading on GITR (Global Information Technology Report 2001-2002), experts came up with several reasons why we are not maximizing the benefit of ICT.

-       Computers themselves will not improve the learning process if we do not change our skills and learn new skills to maximize the benefit.

ICT’s are merely tools to manage OUR knowledge. Youtube, facebook and wikipedia would not be able to function, for example, without our knowledge inputs. As prof mentioned, ‘Garbage-in-garbage-out’.

-       Companies especially in the developing world, have to adapt to reap the benefits of ICT.

-       Most developing countries lack the appropriate managerial and organizational infrastructure.

-       Firms are not convinced that ICT could help their business.

-       Rural markets still have no contact with ICT.

What will it take to capture ICT’s full potential?

Some of the measures proposed in the reading above are to develop infrastructure in developing countries, constantly educate and impart ICT knowhow, and reach out to rural markets. The next chapter, “How ICT could really change the world” proposed a method which I think is quite interesting. The article stated that for technology to be used effectively to revolutionize economic development, we must match technology with need, and ICT’s can be used as a platform for doing this. One idea that one of the experts suggested is using ICT to create direct person-to-person financial links (linking poor people to a sponsor in a rich country). I feel that in this way, ICT can benefit society greatly. In terms of the MDG goals, ICT can help us succeed in eliminating world poverty and hunger, and also help us develop global partnerships for development.

We also discussed how ICT could be better used in certain industries, such as education, healthcare and agriculture. I feel that, to a large extent, ICT can continue to improve education in a country.  In SMU, most of our traditional textbooks and readings have already been digitized. Are we moving towards a future where all lessons will be carried out online through Skype or online courses? While it is definitely possible, I fear that such a system may be detrimental to students. A personal touch (a teacher that really understands his student’s needs) is required in this industry for optimal learning. A computer system cannot replace this. If a student wants to know more about a certain topic or has doubts to clarify, he cannot ask the computer. On the other hand, a human teacher should be well equipped to answer these questions. For agriculture and healthcare, we can use ICT to complement development. For example, we can use GPS to detect epidemic outbreaks or monitor climate conditions that are optimal for growing certain crops. However, I feel that, for the full potential of ICT to be harnessed, people need to keep abreast of the latest ICT developments and brought up to speed on new technology. In this way, especially for the IT illiterate or elderly folks, the implementation of workshops may aid their integration into the ICT era.

For the Individual Oral Presentation’s segment, I especially enjoyed the presentation on Interpersonal Communication and Intelligent User Interfaces.

Interpersonal Communication

 So, 1 in 8 couples last year met each other over the Internet. 70% of our interaction with friends is through the usage of ICT. Has ICT, after becoming the major platform for areas such as education and healthcare, also become the platform of our social interaction with friends and loved ones? From the above statements, we can gather that this is already partially true. We definitely SMS, MMS, MSN our friends more than we talk face-to-face. However I feel that using ICT in such a personal area has its disadvantages. Most importantly, as we interact with a person through an ICT, we are not exposed to the true spontaneous character of that person. That person can also hide behind the ICT and pretend to be someone he’s not.  I feel that this has the same concept behind why most schools and jobs require a ‘face-to-face’ interview for potential employees. To really get to know a person, we must interact with ‘face-to-face’ and not through the aid of an ICT. However, the use of ICT in this area is not completely redundant. ICT can help long distance friends or loved ones keep in touch. You also have the opportunity to meet people from all over the world and expand your network. In conclusion, we should not depend completely on ICT’s for social interaction, but rather use it as a tool to complement and facilitate genuine, face-to-face interaction.

IUIs

As for IUI’s, I feel that this technology could spell a bright future for our society.  Having such an efficient ‘secretary’ like the one in the movie ‘Iron Man’ would definitely make our work more convenient and productive. But I feel that we need to be concerned about the trust and controllability issue here. Normal computers and programs function according to a code designed by their programmers. This makes their actions predictable and controllable by humans. Giving computers the ability to adapt and learn makes it more difficult to predict their actions. Will people trust IUI’s with their personal information given that there is a level of unpredictability in the actions of IUI’s? I am sure that everyone who has watched the intepretation of Judgement Day in ‘Terminator’ will be concerned about this issue.

Key takeaways

Harnessing the full potential of ICT still boils down to the level of human contribution.

a)    The knower – is the knower willing to share his knowledge on ICT. Wikipedia without information posted by people will not be very useful.

b)   People need to keep abreast of the latest ICT developments and possess the IT knowhow and skills to utilize ICT’s.

We also need to reach out to rural markets who have had no contact with ICT’s.

Although the development of ICT’s has spelled a bright future for us, we need to beware of over-reliance on it and furthermore, of the dangers that it brings. (Security, espionage, invasion of privacy, exposure to corrupting influences and identity theft)

“It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity.” – Albert Einstein

We should always be aware of the impact that technology has on society and always use our moral and ethical judgment as to deciding whether a certain technology should be implemented. Certain technologies, like the Atomic Bomb that Einstein is talking about here, has brought more harm than good.

Issues for further discussion

ICT’s impact on the medical field – How can ICT further impact this field? I recently read an article in The Economist titled An Online Medic. It talks about a device known as the Tempus tele-medicine monitor used in planes, ships and at remote locations like oil wells. Basically, the device can transmit data for vital signs including ECG, blood-sugar and blood-oxygen levels, along with voice and video feed. Crews of aircraft or ships can connect to remote medical centres to help make a diagnosis or obtain treatment advice. Now, the company RDT has come up with an even tougher version which is waterproof and soundproof, and has new functions like a video laryngoscope that can be used to view and open a patient’s airway by inserting a tube. This new technology is to be implemented in the military. What new technologies could ICT offer medicine in the near future?

Humans and technology: too close for comfort? What is the limit for technology?

Especially when by technology we mean the RFID chip implants in humans. Would we be willing to implant a chip in our arm to experience the convenience of technology? Would we be willing to sacrifice our privacy for convenience?

Personal Rating

8/10. The videos that Prof showed us about ICT, particularly the one about Milo, the virtual boy, were really intriguing and thought provoking.  

Blog Entry #4

Overview / Summary

Drivers of World Change – During this session, we defined the role and function of a driver of world change, which was simply something that forces the world to change. We went on to explore some examples of drivers and categorize them. For example, under environmental drivers, we talked about the impact of germs and environmental change on society. Other types of drivers of change included competition, globalization and business innovation.

Change Management / Leadership – We defined the difference between managing change and leading change.  How one is reactive and the other is proactive.  We discussed possible reasons for resistance to change and some possible solutions for these. We also discussed the two models of change – The first being the freeze-unfreeze-refreeze model and the second being the modern model with continuous monitoring and constant renewal.

Interesting Ideas & Observations

Charles Robert Darwin said: “It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent; it is the one that is most adaptable to change.” In the reading ‘Directing and Managing Change’, a simple analogy is given which I feel is quite relevant here. A man is walking in a jungle and sees a tiger. He climbs a tree and survives. A change happens, the man assesses it and acts accordingly. How does the man survive? He adapts to the jungle. When SARS hit us, we were able to assess the situation and adapt. For example, we quarantined the sick and developed a treatment for the disease. We survived the SARS outbreak because we adapted. Thus adapting is vital to our survival.

George Bernard Shaw goes a step further and states that it is not enough to adapt, we need to cause the change. “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world, the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” – Is it, therefore, good to be unreasonable? I agree that when we have a vision, we should not let it be destroyed by the constraints and limitations of the world. And definitely this persistence has led to progress in many areas of our society. But is this not the attitude that has led to our environment’s current dire state? Our persistence to adapt the world to our needs, by replacing Earth’s forests with lumber mills and by setting up factories which pollute her air, has led to environmental issues such as global warming. Hence I feel that leaders of change have the responsibility of being aware of the negative effects of their ideas / inventions. If the costs outweigh the benefits, maybe we should reconsider if our idea is really for the good of mankind.

This brings me to one of the readings, ‘Zambia-The Construction Industry’. Zambia is suffering from stagflation (high inflation, low GDP). The article proposes a few approaches that the construction industry can adopt to alleviate this problem, such as building core competencies and flexibility, using knowledge for competitive advantage, training and development of staff, customer satisfaction and innovation. My opinion is that improving knowledge and training of staff are the two key areas that need to be done. Zambia needs to gain knowledge in the construction industry to be competitive. But to do this, they first need to learn from other countries (either send people abroad for training or hire experts from abroad to come and train their workers). Following this, they can then innovate and come up with their own technologies. I feel that they also need to adopt a less rigid mindset, as mentioned in the article, and be open to change.

The 12 pillars of competitiveness – I feel that the system is quite an effective method of comparison as most of the factors of competitiveness of a country have been included and I do feel that introducing such an index for countries would encourage countries to be competitive in all aspects and this should breed efficiency and greater productivity. However, I still feel that such an index might have a negative effect on poorer countries low on the index, as companies may be reluctant to invest in them, hence affecting their future economic and social prospects.

MNCs VS NGOs? or MNCs + NGOs – This different perspective brought up during one of the individual oral presentations was rather though-provoking. I personally feel that it is possible for MNCs and NGOs to work hand-in-hand. NGOs need to show the MNCs that their cause need not be at the expense of the MNCs’ profit maximization objective. For example, most NGOs are pressuring MNCs to go green. Instead of being destructive by holding protests and riots, they should try and convince the non-green companies that if they go green, their pool of customers will be higher, since more customers are inclined to buy their green products.

Traditional Model for change VS Modern Model – As mentioned in my overview, two models were discussed during the second half of the session. The freeze-unfreeze-refreeze would be effective if change is a discrete event. But in reality, change is constant. We have to be flexible and hence the modern model, which adopts a continuous approach, is definitely more effective. I agree with Prof that when adopting this approach, there needs to be a good form of change management, otherwise the whole process would be chaotic. The reading, ‘Directing and Managing Change’, introduces a rather systematic approach for managing change. It is divided into the deciding policy and the implementing policy. Under the deciding policy, the management states the aims and its present position, evaluates opportunities, reviews strengths and weaknesses and then derive alternative strategies. Following this, the best strategy is decided upon. The management then prepares a quantified and precisely timed forward plan to implement the change.

Herding Cats – I found this reading extremely interesting. The crux of the article suggests that an effective way to implement change programs is to make employees feel involved in the process. This will provide them with the motivation, skills and knowledge required to adopt the new systems and procedures. I strongly agree with the article. Humans only resist change when it makes them feel out of control. They will definitely be more open if they felt involved, understanding and accepting the reasons for change and most importantly having a say in the process. Managers need to understand that, as mentioned in the article, ‘the human element is the most critical ingredient to technological success.’

Moderation of information in WEB 2.0 – We had a debate about this. I personally feel that some form of moderation is required for the verification of information on WEB 2.0.  Otherwise extreme and contentious comments made on the internet, especially on sensitive race and religion issues, could lead to the occurrence of riots. But Prof raised an interesting counter-point, who would be responsible for moderating? So I guess it falls on the users to post comments responsibly and I do agree that eliminating anonymity would reduce misinformation and such extreme comments, as people are held accountable for what they post. Readers can also check the reliability of the sources of information.

Key Takeaways

There are essentially 3 ways to cope with change

-       Make it happen

-       Respond when it happens

-       Be surprised when it happens

I feel that this probably sums up what the whole session is about. There are 3 ways in which we can interact with change. Take the leadership role and make change happen, take the manager role and adapt when it happens, or take the follower’s role and be surprised when it happens. From the video clip that Prof showed us, we could see that it takes a lot of courage to be a leader, to do something different from the crowd. But I feel that to lead the change is essentially the best way to deal with change. Hence we should always strive to be leaders of change and not merely managers. We should definitely not be ‘laggards’ whom are caught unaware and unprepared when change happens. The reading, ‘Directing and Managing Change’, also suggests that an effective way of overcoming problems set by change is to forecast what is likely to happen, plan ahead and act accordingly. For example, we observe that the population of the planet is increasing steadily. Most likely, this will cause the shortage of food to increase in the future. Hence we need to act accordingly to deal with this potential problem.

Humans resist change when they feel ‘out of control.’ As a manager, we should make them feel more involved in the change process.

Can small companies with great leaders and management still succeed? – The question of insufficient resource and funding hampering ideas was brought up during one of the individual oral presentations. Prof quoted Leon Kaiser, “I choose to live outside my budget.” If we have a vision, we should not let the lack of funds or resources limit that vision. Instead, we should persist and look for ways to solve these problems.

Areas for further discussion

Will MDG goals succeed if they adopt Ghosn’s cross- functional approach? – I feel that it is definitely possible but may be difficult. It is on a much larger scale as compared to ‘Nissan’ that Ghosn successfully revived. Anyway this issue could have been discussed further.

Ratings

9/10 – Although there were many readings in preparation for this class, I felt that the discussions were thought provoking and some of the contributions given by Prof and other students were indeed enlightening.

Blog Entry #3

Summary / Overview

Today’s lesson covered two main topics, Industrial Development and Innovation Management. For the first half of the lesson, we discussed issues such as the aspects of Industrial Development. Is Industrial Development always a trade-off with sustainability? Could we possibly adopt a different economic model that would give us both?  Who plays the biggest role in the sustainability of the environment?

The second half of the lesson began with a very interesting video clip. We witnessed what technology has evolved to today, how a person can interact with a computer and feel that she is in another world completely due to realistic nature of that world.  We talked about Prof’s landscape model for technology and the RDA process. We discussed whether innovation should be market driven or technology, and Prof used another interesting video (Andes Tele-transporter) to illustrate how market demand drives certain innovations.

Interesting Ideas / Observations

Linear VS Cyclical Models – Traditional linear models, that we have used previously, brought a trade-off between economic well-being and environmental well-being. But a cyclical approach promises to bring us both. I feel, however, that adopting a cyclical approach is easier said than done.  The government will need to internalize all externalities. This entails, among other measures, imposing taxes on non-environmentally friendly goods and services and subsidizing environmentally friendly ones. Would society, as a whole be welcome to these measures? Would we be alright with paying more for our furniture because of taxes imposed on non-green timber companies? On the company level, the reading “Sustainability for Tomorrow’s Consumer” brought forward several interesting observations. Based on assessments, it was found that resource views of consumption do not align with economic views. In other words, many critical resources are significantly underpriced. If governments were to raise the price of, say water, the effect on society and standards of living would be tremendous. This change may be too great, especially for the poor. On the subject of change, Prof mentioned that during any change process, people would lose power. The fear of losing power hence contributes to the reluctance to change and thus this cyclical model may be difficult to implement in reality.

If it is difficult for governments to intervene, it boils down to…

After the presentation on “Is development and sustainability always a trade off?”, we discussed how much a role should a government play in the sustainability issue. Yes, I agree that taxes and subsidies (the carrot and stick) approach may help alleviate the problem. Firms can strive to innovate in environmentally friendly production techniques, but it all boils down to the consumer. As the consumer, we control the demand and the market for ‘green products’.  The government can only do so much to promote these products and services, if we do not buy these goods and services, the green firms will suffer a loss and eventually perish.

 Measuring our Ecological Footprint – I feel that this is a good idea to put pressure on firms and companies to be environmentally friendly, however I feel that it may be quite impractical. Measuring a product’s ecological footprint would constitute tracking the product’s impact on the environment throughout its entire lifecycle, from production, to utilization, to disposal. It may be difficult to track these products once they have left the four walls of the store. Furthermore, who would enforce such a monitoring system? Having an Environmental Management System can solve this problem, but the EMS, or systems as a whole, suit larger organizations, as it is likely that organization has already developed a similar systemic approach to management processes. It may not be cost efficient for SMEs to start an EMS.

“The trick is doing something else” (Tom Peters) – In conjunction with Prof’s landscape model for technology, I definitely agree with this quote. With the rapid advancement in information technology, for example the internet, we are much closer to having ‘perfect information’ in global industries than before. How then can we save our products from being commoditized and effectively stay at the summit in the long run? From the model, we can either translate cutting edge new technology into reality (cloud to summit) or improve upon and rethink our existing technologies (valley to summit). In other words, keep innovating to maintain an advantage over competitors! In my opinion, translating cloud opportunities into summit opportunities would be more difficult than the latter, but would give you the advantage for a longer period of time. This is because once your firm puts these technologies into the market, other firms would need to develop these technologies from scratch. As opposed to if your firm comes up with a minor improvement of a product, it would not take much for other firms to follow in your footsteps. Hence, we should always strive for completely new and “out-of-the-norm” ideas. In my previous blog entry, I gave the example of Apple as a company that successfully does this. 

How can Singapore do better to be a more innovative nation? – In the light of the ‘3M’ presentation, this question was raised for discussion. I liked the point of lowering the price of failure in Singapore. Yes, I feel that in everything we do, people calculate the cost of failure and analyze if it is worth it to take the risk. I feel that the government can play a big role in this. They could subsidize or invest in more ‘risky’ innovative projects.  Of course, this can go two ways. It may result in more ‘flops’. This raises the need for a proper innovation management system. Secondly, I feel that the government, or organizations, can provide incentives for useful innovations. For example, in the Singapore Armed Forces, people that come up with ideas that can improve the camp facilities are rewarded with a sum of money. Of course, the quality of our ideas boils down to our education and I feel that Singapore is taking a good stand in making primary education compulsory for all Singaporean children.

Market-driven innovations VS Technology driven – As Prof used the video of tele-transporters to illustrate, market-driven innovations are probably more successful due to the fact that there is already a need for the product, which would result in faster revenue.  Spencer reinforced this concept in his presentation when he talked about knowing the consumer, how engineers met the consumers to get to know their needs.

Key Takeaways

1)   In terms of environmental sustainability, we, as the consumers, play a big role. We control the demand for ‘green’ products, so we should all ‘go green’ and switch to more environmentally friendly alternatives today.

2)   We need to look at the big picture. After reading the article “Sustainability for tomorrow’s consumer”, I realized that one mere product, in its lifecycle, may have a bigger detrimental effect on the environment than we realize.  Producing a shirt, for example, may not have a direct impact on the environment. But growing the cotton needed for the shirt uses 6,500 litres of water, and the regular washing of the shirt uses 2,700 litres. According to this same article, if present trends continue, by 2025, 1/3 of the world’s population will be affected by water scarcity.

3)   Keep innovating! – The trick IS doing something else. We should stop doing the norm, start thinking out of the box. If organizations keep differentiating their products, it will be difficult for other organizations to commoditize their products, hence putting them at the ‘summit’ permanently.

4)   From the RDA process, we can see that different people play different roles for the innovation development process. For the dream to become a reality, we all need to master each of our expertise and work together.

Issues for further discussion

1)   Does green technology have any detrimental side effects? It is assumed that green technology will only benefit the environment. In one of the readings, it was mentioned that a dam being built with the intention of harnessing energy from water as a ‘green’ alternative to burning fossil fuels was in turn destroying the natural habitat of many fishes and water animals living there.

2)   How can we promote greater innovation in Singapore – I feel that we could have discussed this question further!

Personal Ratings

8/10. There was more room for discussion, which was really good.

Blog Entry #2

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 2^nd 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 1^st 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 2^nd 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 1^st 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.

Blog Entry #1

Brief Overview and Summary

For our first TWC session, we had the opportunity to discuss how technology has played an integral part in the progress of most civilizations. Watching an extract of the show “Guns, Germs and Steel” then led us to question why certain civilizations were able to dominate the world with technology while others failed to do so (case-in-point is the people of Papua New Guinea). We then proceeded to ponder if technology was leading us to become a lazy, obese generation. Finally, we discussed whether embracing technology is a choice and if so, how can we strike a balance in order to avoid this tragic fate!

Observation and Ideas

Probably what captured my attention most was Yali’s ominous question, “Why did the white men have more cargo than the New Guineans?” In other words, why are some civilizations able to dominate the world with technology and others not?

It boils down to the resources that a country possesses and the quality of its people. From the video “Guns, Germs and Steel”, we can see that the New Guineans were not blessed with many edible fruit-bearing plants in their jungles. Even farming did not reap the same benefits as it did for other civilizations because their crops were different and generally more difficult to plant. Furthermore, they lacked farm animals to domesticate. Hence without a proper productive food supply, it was difficult for them to progress beyond the hunter-gatherer way of life because they could not support a large population.

In addition to this, I believe that a civilization also requires the people to have the ability to manipulate these resources and find new ways to improve technology. It is not a question of race or genetics, but of education. There were no schools or universities to develop a good mathematical, scientific or engineering foundation for the people so that they could later develop or discover new technologies for their civilization.

I also agree with Jared Diamond (in the video Guns, Germs and Steel) that the advancement of technology is based on a series of developments. In a modern context, without the Internet, we would not have Internet banking. And without the computer, we would not have the Internet. In the same way, while the rest of the world was progressing upon their existing technologies, civilizations like Papua New Guinea were left behind because they lacked the adequate resources and people to take the first few steps in modernization.  For example, when the rest of the world started using metal tools, the New Guineans were still using stone tools because they lacked metal specialists. Why? This required farmers to generate food surpluses to feed the metal workers and their agriculture was simply not productive enough!

I would agree to a certain extent that technology is leading us to become a lazy and obese generation. Like Karl Marx once said, “The production of too many useful things results in too many useless people.” It is obvious that people started spending more time at home, on their couches after Mcdonald’s started their Mcdelivery service.  Are our bodies made to be served by technology? I believe not, and this is probably why more people are growing obese in modern times. But let us not forget about the people who remain fit and healthy despite the rapid advancement of technology around them. Hence, I feel that it boils down to a question of discipline in the way one lives.  Technology is just a tool. It is up to us to decide whether or how to use it.

Key Takeaways

This leads me to my first takeaway. Technology is a choice and we have to strike the ideal balance.  We should use technology to improve our productivity but at the same time remain cautious of its negativities.  Secondly, it is quite obvious that civilizations that prosper are the leaders of the change process. Hence, we should always try and think outside of the box when facing problems and come up with something new. Innovation comes down to our creativity and imagination!

Issues for Further Discussion

I would have loved to hear more of my classmates’ opinions and theories on the roots of inequality between poorer civilizations and richer ones. I realized that the factor ‘availability of resources’ is just one of the many reasons why certain civilizations manage to dominate with technology, but others are not able to. Other factors such as geographical location and religion may have played a bigger part in hampering their modernization process.

“Technology is easy, but people are hard.” - This could have been discussed further! People, I feel, are generally resistant to change. Learning new skills and how to use new services is troublesome and time-consuming. Just ask my grandfather whom my mum tried to set up a ‘facebook’ account for. However I feel that our present generation is being brought up to be more open-minded to change, which spells a bright future for our civilization.

Are we responsible for sharing our technologies with other civilizations? This probably would solve the problem of inequality to a small extent, since it still boils down to the availability of resources. But since we face the same global problems such as floods, tsunamis and global-warming, it would definitely benefit the world as a whole if we share our, for example, energy conservation technologies. Hence, my take would be ‘yes’, it is our responsibility to share our technologies with other civilizations.

Personal Ratings

8/10 – A thought-provoking session that sparked many interesting discussions.

I also enjoyed listening to my classmates’ interesting opinions.