The biobusiness revolution WILL transform out lives and our economies! Our health, our cloths and materials. Our food, our energy. This week's lesson was about the biobusiness revolution. Basically anything that is "organism" related, such as the health sector, growing new genetically modified crops and making money out of these areas are classified as biobusiness. Hence we see that is indeed a very large area, with many sub topics to cover. In Dr.Shahi's words, "Economic activity of life and life processes."
Biobusiness provides for 25% global GDP, but provides for 40% of the world's labour force. This statistic struck me pretty hard. I previously thought that biobusiness, with all the glamour of doctors and surgeons, and people developing new medicines, and huge pharmaceutical companies making high profits, I wondered whether at all that would be true. However, because of this lesson, I had my predicaments turned sour. It didn't occur to me previously that biobusiness consisted of the illiterate farm workers growing the food we eat as part of it. With that thinking then, wouldn't biobusiness be thought of as being around since man learnt how to farm and trade? And not be a fairly new concept?
Back on track, biobusiness does indeed encompass health and life sciences. And this would probably be where the bulk of revolution is taking place. In the arena of health we now see more and more point of care diagnostics being developed. Common point of care diagnostics that we know of would be the pregnancy test kit, and more recently, the H1N1 test kit, where people can know whether they have caught that dreaded flu bug within a couple of hours. With Genetic engineering, researches now can also grow medicines in life stalk. In a time not too long ago, people couldn't do these things, and of course medicines were synthesized by mixing compounds together. There would be left overs for at times, only the by product of the synthesis was what they wanted and not the main product generated. This represents a great leap forward with the production of medicine. It would of course cheaper as the processes are natural.
The Biobusiness revolution is indeed huge. Many people know that deciphering the whole human genome was a significant milestone in man's history. Or a least i consider it to be. The lesson proved my instincts right. HA! With the decoding, there came a lot of business opportunities. People knew what proteins could be synthesized to cure any flaw. Pharmaceutical companies began their research to produce drugs to help solve any potential problems that came up with genetics. However there were setbacks too. Of course now insurance companies, know that some diseases that may be hereditary, now backed my scientific prove may not be willing to insure someone with a family history of it.
The development of GM food has caused much scare to skeptics. Of course there are always the alternatives to turn to. Going organic and stuff like that. With issues such as these, provides the opportunity to expands man's creativity to provide, hence also providing much business activity. Perhaps it is due to this reasons that have also driven the biobusiness revolution. Nutraceuticals are an example of this. People prefer to eat the food rich in the certain nutrients that they lack rather than just popping a pill. For example eating more red meat, and green leafy vegetables to supplement their iron intake, rather than just popping an iron supplement.
The biobusiness also expands the horizon's of man's imagination! I feel that with the new knowledge, techniques and methods acquired throughout the ages have given a man a step closer to their imagination. Creating new species, bringing back extinct species are all theoretically feasible now, however man has yet to succeed. Cloning animals now is feasible, however we have yet to confirm on the success and certainty of our techniques. All these have given much promise to the hope of genetic engineering and closer to our ambitions. Eradicating diseases, creating hybrids of more powerful humans! This only happens in the work of science fiction authors!
The presenters did a pretty good job! I enjoyed the discussions thoroughly. Perhaps more than the lessons itself :P Probably because we dwelled into the specifics and the consequences rather than the generals of the topic! I enjoyed the development of nano medicine presentation! I was like "wow" its super cool! and the consequences of us being healthier,and not to undergo painful treatments such as chemotherapy and instead just targeting the cancer cells.
Lesson would be 7/10. most part of the lessons i felt intimidated because of the broadness and scope of the subject. However the presentations and discussion gave better points!
Oh! and I just remembered a funny thing about the difference between disease management and wellness management! There is no difference! Just that disease management is about keeping diseased people well, and wellness management is keeping well people well! LOL XD
Sunday, September 26, 2010
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Session 5
In this session we talked about ICT. What is ICT then? Before I attempted the readings, the term ICT was totally foreign to me, although the concept was seriously not. ICT or information and communication technologies are what in my opinion is definitely a driving force for change and development in the world today. A few examples of ICTs that we are familiar with would be the internet, cellphones, and more recently cloud computing.
Essentially, ICTs have not been around so long as the other drivers of world change. This is because, ICTs were developed as I found out only with the development of the knowledge economy. When information needed to travel fast and accurate in real time, hence the needs for Information and Communication technologies, albeit people for the longest time needed to transfer information accurately as fast as possible. I imagined in ancient times, the most common form of ICT for them, especially to the people who were fighting battles and wars would be the messengers, the horses and their pigeons. (punt intended)
So we discussed about the history of the internet. My history of the internet was initially warped, but at least I learnt the truth of it in the lesson. The internet, unlike my contrary belief, was created by the US army, not CERN. CERN came up with the global network, but the US army came up with the first "network" What I found particularly interesting for this session was the componant about web 3.0. We are all familiar with the current web 2.0, where there is the development of different media sources for us to gain information and services. Such as online shopping and video viewing. I honestly haven't heard of web 3.0, but from what i recall, it is about a semantic web. Information is aways collected from your surfing habits, to what you purchase online. Very soon, the web would be integrated into our everyday appliances, for example, when we search for a destination, it would give us recommendations of food and services along the route etc. However we all must avoid the pitfalls of having web 3.0. seem different. Essentially its a gradual implementation of collecting information and then ultimately its goals is to aid us in our likes and dislikes, help us to make more informed choices.
I really like the idea of web 3.0, however, with the data collection for predicting or recommending websites and services, wouldn't it be nearly an invasion of privacy? We let go so much of ourselves when we are on the net, because of the cover of the way the net is built, we feel safe behind a computer, because nobody will know what we are doing, who we are. However with the collecting of information fro our surfing habits etc, companies working with todays psychologists and social scientist, and also mathematicians programming the most advanced algorithm, they could hence build a profile of the person sitting behind a computer and with today's prevalence of social networking, finding out who we actually really are wouldn't be that difficult a job right? This is just a thought to ponder on yeah.
Also, with ICTs the arena of gaming has achieved a paradigm shift. Games are now more interactive. In a nugget, they have become more "real" than ever. With real time information gathering, a programme could essentially, I say again, predict your behavior and react to you, based on the algorithms they have been programmed with. It may seem like a real being we are actually interacting with, rather than just an algorithm. Perhaps then, it has been our mistake for being so developed. People could now take solace with virtual characters, sympathize with them etc. They are not real, but we are. So our psychology could change and we may end up thinking that we are really interacting with the virtual world, and lose track of what is real and what is not.
With ICTs, people now do not need to travel hundreds of miles to perhaps consult a doctor when they are sick. The doctor can diagnose the illness, and the patient can go to their local pharmacy to pick up their prescription. I have read that in fact, with real time transmission of images and data, operations can also be done remotely. A doctor on the other side of the globe can control a robot which will do an operation for a patient. The same goes for board room meetings, With video conferencing, people can stay at the same place, but the formation of ideas can take place across the globe.
With such prevalence, wouldn't it be a matter of time before the world sees ICT penetration as a rule rather than a tool for the rich? For at least some parts of the world it could be. In fact, in Finland, broadband 1mbps is a human right!
Cloud computing, a developing component of ICTs, bases programmes and systems to be stored on the internet rather than locally. This in my personal opinion is a paradigm shift. We learnt in class about the benefits of how it really streamlines startup costs for enterprises and enable multi tenancy etc. However what does this all mean? If you do not experience it first hand, you will never comprehend the feeling. A few years back, with the prevalence of the internet, we could send files over after we had edited it and stuff. It was good, however it wasnt efficient. People couldn't see what was already done, and there would be overlaps of similar ideas, and hence a loss in productivity. The key point here is productivity. With cloud computing, many people actually can access the same document in the cloud, and edit something onto it. There wouldnt be overlaps, because people could see what is already being written. Essentially it is the same as doing the job face to face, but now its being done remotely. WOW. A very clear example of the cloud prevalence is the Google Docs platform. For those who already know, good for you. For those who do not, I wont spoil your surprise, but you really have to adopt this, and your life's convinience will never be the same!
One of the most thought provoking episodes of this session was the "capturing of the knowledge revolution" ICTs in our opinions have developed pretty advance systems for us to streamline our services and productions, however productivity has only gone up about 5 times as compared to agriculture and the industrial revolution 25X. WHY? The answer turned out to be the way of managing people. At that instant, it brought me back to the first few lessons when prof quoted tech is easy, men are difficult. Yes, its always a grey area when dealing with humans, because of emotions and uncertainty and risk appetites. Men are not easy to herd. You would need a great leader to lead them. However a great leader doesn't come all the time. So there are lapses in decision making etc, hence because we have done what we are dreaming of, what else then can we improve to reach a higher standard?
Another thing that enlightened me was the discussion on ICTs prevalence for the poor. A necessary tool for the poor to help break out of their middleman cycle,esp farmers. With their cellphones, there is no longer a need for corporations and governments to provide for fixed land lines, hence it will be a reduction in infrastructure costs. The society there can kind of skip the step of fixed land lines and jump straight to the modern ICTs, such as cellphones and the internet. I feel that this is indeed great, but however, infrastructure for the cellphone lines are still needed. And the poor will have to pay for their cellphone bills. Only if they have subsidies for the poor to afford and pay for a cellphone, can the widespread of their use prevail. And through this, countries can then have the poor not feel oppressed, because the opportunity for ICTs are available to them, and they will thus not be exploited due to the lack of information, and also too, there will be more competitiveness within these sectors, as with more information, market forces will be more apparent. Opportunities can then be made. The poor, if they are lucky can have the chance to be liberated!
ICT is indeed, without a doubt a driver of world change. And a powerful one that it! However its prevalence must be addressed, and education for their use must be taught and made available. With this, can alot more people have the chance to go up Maslow's hierarchy of needs!
8/10 for lesson. ICTs is one of my more favourate topics of technology. I did learn alot of new things in this lesson, and alot more thought experiments about this driver of change came from that! I would however like more exploration into the way ICTs make impacts on the less fortunate. After all, more than half the world's population live on less than a dollar a day.
Essentially, ICTs have not been around so long as the other drivers of world change. This is because, ICTs were developed as I found out only with the development of the knowledge economy. When information needed to travel fast and accurate in real time, hence the needs for Information and Communication technologies, albeit people for the longest time needed to transfer information accurately as fast as possible. I imagined in ancient times, the most common form of ICT for them, especially to the people who were fighting battles and wars would be the messengers, the horses and their pigeons. (punt intended)
So we discussed about the history of the internet. My history of the internet was initially warped, but at least I learnt the truth of it in the lesson. The internet, unlike my contrary belief, was created by the US army, not CERN. CERN came up with the global network, but the US army came up with the first "network" What I found particularly interesting for this session was the componant about web 3.0. We are all familiar with the current web 2.0, where there is the development of different media sources for us to gain information and services. Such as online shopping and video viewing. I honestly haven't heard of web 3.0, but from what i recall, it is about a semantic web. Information is aways collected from your surfing habits, to what you purchase online. Very soon, the web would be integrated into our everyday appliances, for example, when we search for a destination, it would give us recommendations of food and services along the route etc. However we all must avoid the pitfalls of having web 3.0. seem different. Essentially its a gradual implementation of collecting information and then ultimately its goals is to aid us in our likes and dislikes, help us to make more informed choices.
I really like the idea of web 3.0, however, with the data collection for predicting or recommending websites and services, wouldn't it be nearly an invasion of privacy? We let go so much of ourselves when we are on the net, because of the cover of the way the net is built, we feel safe behind a computer, because nobody will know what we are doing, who we are. However with the collecting of information fro our surfing habits etc, companies working with todays psychologists and social scientist, and also mathematicians programming the most advanced algorithm, they could hence build a profile of the person sitting behind a computer and with today's prevalence of social networking, finding out who we actually really are wouldn't be that difficult a job right? This is just a thought to ponder on yeah.
Also, with ICTs the arena of gaming has achieved a paradigm shift. Games are now more interactive. In a nugget, they have become more "real" than ever. With real time information gathering, a programme could essentially, I say again, predict your behavior and react to you, based on the algorithms they have been programmed with. It may seem like a real being we are actually interacting with, rather than just an algorithm. Perhaps then, it has been our mistake for being so developed. People could now take solace with virtual characters, sympathize with them etc. They are not real, but we are. So our psychology could change and we may end up thinking that we are really interacting with the virtual world, and lose track of what is real and what is not.
With ICTs, people now do not need to travel hundreds of miles to perhaps consult a doctor when they are sick. The doctor can diagnose the illness, and the patient can go to their local pharmacy to pick up their prescription. I have read that in fact, with real time transmission of images and data, operations can also be done remotely. A doctor on the other side of the globe can control a robot which will do an operation for a patient. The same goes for board room meetings, With video conferencing, people can stay at the same place, but the formation of ideas can take place across the globe.
With such prevalence, wouldn't it be a matter of time before the world sees ICT penetration as a rule rather than a tool for the rich? For at least some parts of the world it could be. In fact, in Finland, broadband 1mbps is a human right!
Cloud computing, a developing component of ICTs, bases programmes and systems to be stored on the internet rather than locally. This in my personal opinion is a paradigm shift. We learnt in class about the benefits of how it really streamlines startup costs for enterprises and enable multi tenancy etc. However what does this all mean? If you do not experience it first hand, you will never comprehend the feeling. A few years back, with the prevalence of the internet, we could send files over after we had edited it and stuff. It was good, however it wasnt efficient. People couldn't see what was already done, and there would be overlaps of similar ideas, and hence a loss in productivity. The key point here is productivity. With cloud computing, many people actually can access the same document in the cloud, and edit something onto it. There wouldnt be overlaps, because people could see what is already being written. Essentially it is the same as doing the job face to face, but now its being done remotely. WOW. A very clear example of the cloud prevalence is the Google Docs platform. For those who already know, good for you. For those who do not, I wont spoil your surprise, but you really have to adopt this, and your life's convinience will never be the same!
One of the most thought provoking episodes of this session was the "capturing of the knowledge revolution" ICTs in our opinions have developed pretty advance systems for us to streamline our services and productions, however productivity has only gone up about 5 times as compared to agriculture and the industrial revolution 25X. WHY? The answer turned out to be the way of managing people. At that instant, it brought me back to the first few lessons when prof quoted tech is easy, men are difficult. Yes, its always a grey area when dealing with humans, because of emotions and uncertainty and risk appetites. Men are not easy to herd. You would need a great leader to lead them. However a great leader doesn't come all the time. So there are lapses in decision making etc, hence because we have done what we are dreaming of, what else then can we improve to reach a higher standard?
Another thing that enlightened me was the discussion on ICTs prevalence for the poor. A necessary tool for the poor to help break out of their middleman cycle,esp farmers. With their cellphones, there is no longer a need for corporations and governments to provide for fixed land lines, hence it will be a reduction in infrastructure costs. The society there can kind of skip the step of fixed land lines and jump straight to the modern ICTs, such as cellphones and the internet. I feel that this is indeed great, but however, infrastructure for the cellphone lines are still needed. And the poor will have to pay for their cellphone bills. Only if they have subsidies for the poor to afford and pay for a cellphone, can the widespread of their use prevail. And through this, countries can then have the poor not feel oppressed, because the opportunity for ICTs are available to them, and they will thus not be exploited due to the lack of information, and also too, there will be more competitiveness within these sectors, as with more information, market forces will be more apparent. Opportunities can then be made. The poor, if they are lucky can have the chance to be liberated!
ICT is indeed, without a doubt a driver of world change. And a powerful one that it! However its prevalence must be addressed, and education for their use must be taught and made available. With this, can alot more people have the chance to go up Maslow's hierarchy of needs!
8/10 for lesson. ICTs is one of my more favourate topics of technology. I did learn alot of new things in this lesson, and alot more thought experiments about this driver of change came from that! I would however like more exploration into the way ICTs make impacts on the less fortunate. After all, more than half the world's population live on less than a dollar a day.
Saturday, September 11, 2010
Session 4
The lesson started about what we have learnt, or rather, what we have dwelled in for these past weeks. We recalled the Maslov state of self-actualization, the 3 barometers of measuring development; literacy rate; GDP per capita; life expectancy. We also remembered other forms of measurement of development, such as happiness, and things that are really integrated into the social fabric, such as crime and alcoholism rates.
We then discussed the drivers of world change. We noted many drivers of world change, such as technology, climate change, governance etc. The one that stood out was germs and diseases. Prof elaborated that it was this that was responsible for the dark ages (some others call it the middle ages), and the renaissance for the Europeans.
The eastern Roman Empire, in the 600s, brought back a disease, now called the bubonic plague. It came from the fleas of rats. With so many people dying, people started to live in isolated communities. The best scientists of that time were consulted, but they could do nothing about it. Science lost credibility, and there was a breakdown of society.
For about 600 years, Europe lived in these ages. Their age of enlightenment came after this. The renaissance period as it was called was due to help from the people of the Middle East. These people developed methods to prevent the spread of the plague. Europe hence opened its eyes once again and embraced science and development. The dark ages were over.
A modern retrospect to the events that happened then would be the Spanish flu, which killed millions worldwide. However with increasing globalization, we can share knowledge and technology with much more ease. Hence, this would prevent a second dark age. Closer to our times, we have had scares such as the H1n1 flu, and the 2003 SARS epidemic.
It is fascinating to learn that things naked to the eye are the fundamental reasons to what happened throughout man’s history. It makes me wonder then, are we really the masters of this world as we claim to be? Are we masters of our fate, or is there a higher calling.
I think that we should include more of these historical discussions during lesson. I find it really stimulating, as these discussions include stories, and the lessons within in. But that is just a thought.
We dwelled of course into the other drivers of world change. We discussed some drivers of change, that the idea itself was too minute to create a change. However when everyone embraced it, a movement formed and ultimately when joined by others, becomes a big change.
One such example would be the example of a social idea – communism. Not to digress, I totally agree that social ideas are one of the fundamental factors of change. Indeed change is mostly talked about what we can observe, however an idea is just as much able to materialize if we embrace it. Hence once communities embrace a social ideal, be it communism or capitalism, we can see that it affects everything else that the community will do. It will affect how the community spread of wealth will be. It affects what jobs the people in that community will do. It even decides how people will feel, for those who dislike equality and want to succeed, a feeling of stifling. For those who cannot afford the competition, being equal with everyone else would be better. Indeed I cannot agree more that the mere idea of a social ideal is indeed a very powerful driver of change within communities.
Other drivers of change include demographic change, where a change of mindset would be indulged in. People from the countryside move to cities to find higher paying jobs. Rather than farming, they would want better education so that they can be equipped with the skills to move up the food chain, rather than maintaining the status quo, and continue being country bumpkins.
Commercial innovation too is a massive driver of change in the world today. With new highly value added products being introduced into the market, people are finding their lives getting easier and easier. Now, with the internet, we can purchase items of halfway around the world with a click of a button, and not just that, we can even do it while we are outside of our comfort zones, using our phones.
With commercial innovation, comes the need for keeping costs low with many people wanting to jump onto the bandwagon and sell similar products. Hence competition arises. This too is a massive driver of change. With competition, corporations are always finding cheaper places for manufacture, more efficient machines etc. Hence, the whole demographic nature of production changes. With globalization, the ease of setting up factories and employing people who are satisfied with lower wages, due to their economy are ever present. Hence this changes other countries economies too. Therefore indeed, commercial innovation and competition are massive drivers of change too.
One cannot neglect however that these are not the only drivers of change that are so impactful around the world we live in. For example, environmental factors too are just as powerful in moulding surroundings, causing havoc to our chain processes. Changing expectations too are a driver of change. Demands for wants, and immediate services are now ever more accessible compared to a couple of decades ago, where life was a lot slower paced. People were not caught up in he rat race, and they did not demand immediate services. These drivers, though not apparent, are subtly changing the way we live our lives.
The presentations were really interactive. There was much debate for the first presentation where the topic was the premis of CO2 not being the main cause for global warming. It generated a very lively debate, however the conclusion was that it was never in the first place assumed for CO2 to be the cause of global warming in the first place. The second presentation was about new technologies coming up. The focus was on two new technologies, the universal translation, and the T-ray.
The former is as what its name states. It translates any language in the world. There was again much discussion about its applications. How 90% accuracy is not enough in the medical field etc. The T-ray is an x-ray without the harmfulness of it. Its application was not discussed thoroughly however, but nonetheless, bravo to Szecindyo the presenter!
We had our break afterwards.
In the second session we discussed about change management and change leadership. This is a topic I would think that would be pretty close to my heart. Being preassigned into the course of Leadership and Teambuilding I am currently undergoing, it is necessary to apply what I have read up on leadership and management into the course. So discussing this during a different course, presented to me a different outline on change management and leadership. However as what I have noticed, the concepts stay the same.
What stuck me as a superb familiarity was that of the pessimism time curve. Indeed many of us start of a project with optimism, the feeling of how we are going to be successful and how our project will take the world by change. Then we realize that the job would have a lot of pitfalls. I myself have experienced this when I started my instrument rental company. I had to lower my expectations for success, but nonetheless, with changed expectations, one will not brood too much about failure. Luckily for me, this project is still surviving, and doing pretty ok, hence, the informed realism stage.
Completion for me would be like the ultimate goal. Unfortunately, I have not had a chance to experience it yet, but hopefully, I’ll get there someday! Kudos to this slide! Life is full of ups and downs, and we must tune ourselves to constantly change our focus to fit circumstances, or we would only fail!
A leader is one with a dream, a vision. A manager is the one who manages. Essentially, taking care of the nitty gritties. For any successful team, or in this case, we were discussing about corporations moving through with times, like a tree, a change management must be flexible otherwise if they stay ridgit, in the wind they will be broken upon. However flexibility provides the adaptability for this change. Hence again, remember Darwin’s quote, only the one that is the most adaptable will survive. It’s the same for species, the same for people, the same for organizations.
One thing that I learnt in the lesson was about making plans. We must be able to formulate plans that are flexible and reactive to change. If we were to follow the traditional concept of implementing changes with a deadline, and freeze ourselves to present circumstances, we would be voiding ourselves to the rest of the world, and not be able to react to the circumstances when it does not go our way. Also when we make our plans, we must factor in anticipations for the future. That is why, reports like what Professor asked us to read are for that reason.
The experts predict what will happen, see from current trends, what to expect for the future. For different experts, different measures. Some are experts in drivers of change, hence they see from the current situation, what is going to affect and create change. As managers and leaders, we must have a vision and a plan how to reach the end destination taking into account these changes.
This lesson was an interesting one for me, as it dwelled into a topic that is quite dear to my heart. Information flow was good, however I think we should actually dwell more into the mechanics, rather than just an overview which was what I felt was this week’s lesson. 8/10!
We then discussed the drivers of world change. We noted many drivers of world change, such as technology, climate change, governance etc. The one that stood out was germs and diseases. Prof elaborated that it was this that was responsible for the dark ages (some others call it the middle ages), and the renaissance for the Europeans.
The eastern Roman Empire, in the 600s, brought back a disease, now called the bubonic plague. It came from the fleas of rats. With so many people dying, people started to live in isolated communities. The best scientists of that time were consulted, but they could do nothing about it. Science lost credibility, and there was a breakdown of society.
For about 600 years, Europe lived in these ages. Their age of enlightenment came after this. The renaissance period as it was called was due to help from the people of the Middle East. These people developed methods to prevent the spread of the plague. Europe hence opened its eyes once again and embraced science and development. The dark ages were over.
A modern retrospect to the events that happened then would be the Spanish flu, which killed millions worldwide. However with increasing globalization, we can share knowledge and technology with much more ease. Hence, this would prevent a second dark age. Closer to our times, we have had scares such as the H1n1 flu, and the 2003 SARS epidemic.
It is fascinating to learn that things naked to the eye are the fundamental reasons to what happened throughout man’s history. It makes me wonder then, are we really the masters of this world as we claim to be? Are we masters of our fate, or is there a higher calling.
I think that we should include more of these historical discussions during lesson. I find it really stimulating, as these discussions include stories, and the lessons within in. But that is just a thought.
We dwelled of course into the other drivers of world change. We discussed some drivers of change, that the idea itself was too minute to create a change. However when everyone embraced it, a movement formed and ultimately when joined by others, becomes a big change.
One such example would be the example of a social idea – communism. Not to digress, I totally agree that social ideas are one of the fundamental factors of change. Indeed change is mostly talked about what we can observe, however an idea is just as much able to materialize if we embrace it. Hence once communities embrace a social ideal, be it communism or capitalism, we can see that it affects everything else that the community will do. It will affect how the community spread of wealth will be. It affects what jobs the people in that community will do. It even decides how people will feel, for those who dislike equality and want to succeed, a feeling of stifling. For those who cannot afford the competition, being equal with everyone else would be better. Indeed I cannot agree more that the mere idea of a social ideal is indeed a very powerful driver of change within communities.
Other drivers of change include demographic change, where a change of mindset would be indulged in. People from the countryside move to cities to find higher paying jobs. Rather than farming, they would want better education so that they can be equipped with the skills to move up the food chain, rather than maintaining the status quo, and continue being country bumpkins.
Commercial innovation too is a massive driver of change in the world today. With new highly value added products being introduced into the market, people are finding their lives getting easier and easier. Now, with the internet, we can purchase items of halfway around the world with a click of a button, and not just that, we can even do it while we are outside of our comfort zones, using our phones.
With commercial innovation, comes the need for keeping costs low with many people wanting to jump onto the bandwagon and sell similar products. Hence competition arises. This too is a massive driver of change. With competition, corporations are always finding cheaper places for manufacture, more efficient machines etc. Hence, the whole demographic nature of production changes. With globalization, the ease of setting up factories and employing people who are satisfied with lower wages, due to their economy are ever present. Hence this changes other countries economies too. Therefore indeed, commercial innovation and competition are massive drivers of change too.
One cannot neglect however that these are not the only drivers of change that are so impactful around the world we live in. For example, environmental factors too are just as powerful in moulding surroundings, causing havoc to our chain processes. Changing expectations too are a driver of change. Demands for wants, and immediate services are now ever more accessible compared to a couple of decades ago, where life was a lot slower paced. People were not caught up in he rat race, and they did not demand immediate services. These drivers, though not apparent, are subtly changing the way we live our lives.
The presentations were really interactive. There was much debate for the first presentation where the topic was the premis of CO2 not being the main cause for global warming. It generated a very lively debate, however the conclusion was that it was never in the first place assumed for CO2 to be the cause of global warming in the first place. The second presentation was about new technologies coming up. The focus was on two new technologies, the universal translation, and the T-ray.
The former is as what its name states. It translates any language in the world. There was again much discussion about its applications. How 90% accuracy is not enough in the medical field etc. The T-ray is an x-ray without the harmfulness of it. Its application was not discussed thoroughly however, but nonetheless, bravo to Szecindyo the presenter!
We had our break afterwards.
In the second session we discussed about change management and change leadership. This is a topic I would think that would be pretty close to my heart. Being preassigned into the course of Leadership and Teambuilding I am currently undergoing, it is necessary to apply what I have read up on leadership and management into the course. So discussing this during a different course, presented to me a different outline on change management and leadership. However as what I have noticed, the concepts stay the same.
What stuck me as a superb familiarity was that of the pessimism time curve. Indeed many of us start of a project with optimism, the feeling of how we are going to be successful and how our project will take the world by change. Then we realize that the job would have a lot of pitfalls. I myself have experienced this when I started my instrument rental company. I had to lower my expectations for success, but nonetheless, with changed expectations, one will not brood too much about failure. Luckily for me, this project is still surviving, and doing pretty ok, hence, the informed realism stage.
Completion for me would be like the ultimate goal. Unfortunately, I have not had a chance to experience it yet, but hopefully, I’ll get there someday! Kudos to this slide! Life is full of ups and downs, and we must tune ourselves to constantly change our focus to fit circumstances, or we would only fail!
A leader is one with a dream, a vision. A manager is the one who manages. Essentially, taking care of the nitty gritties. For any successful team, or in this case, we were discussing about corporations moving through with times, like a tree, a change management must be flexible otherwise if they stay ridgit, in the wind they will be broken upon. However flexibility provides the adaptability for this change. Hence again, remember Darwin’s quote, only the one that is the most adaptable will survive. It’s the same for species, the same for people, the same for organizations.
One thing that I learnt in the lesson was about making plans. We must be able to formulate plans that are flexible and reactive to change. If we were to follow the traditional concept of implementing changes with a deadline, and freeze ourselves to present circumstances, we would be voiding ourselves to the rest of the world, and not be able to react to the circumstances when it does not go our way. Also when we make our plans, we must factor in anticipations for the future. That is why, reports like what Professor asked us to read are for that reason.
The experts predict what will happen, see from current trends, what to expect for the future. For different experts, different measures. Some are experts in drivers of change, hence they see from the current situation, what is going to affect and create change. As managers and leaders, we must have a vision and a plan how to reach the end destination taking into account these changes.
This lesson was an interesting one for me, as it dwelled into a topic that is quite dear to my heart. Information flow was good, however I think we should actually dwell more into the mechanics, rather than just an overview which was what I felt was this week’s lesson. 8/10!
Thursday, September 2, 2010
Session 3
My format for writing this entry will be different from my previous posts. I found it hard to give individual sections what they deserve as a few of my points overlapped. I will thus integrate my thoughts with the flow of the events so as not to make the entry feel disjointed and segregated.
This session covered technology and industrial development towards sustainability and technology and innovation matters. In the first half, we were shown why as a country becomes more developed, their industries shift their focus from before, treating every unprofitable cause as an externality to sustainable development. Essentially, unlike previously done, sustainability requires a shift from linear thinking to circular thinking. What do I mean? It means that unlike the old industrial model, which focuses just on economic development and not caring for the environment's well being, the new model of sustainable industries are economic development and environmental well being.
As we went through this portion of the class, a question formed in my head. The question was why had the industries and governments decide to adopt the sustainable industrial model? It was at this point when a self realisation occurred. The realisation stemmed from the thought of global warming. How the polar ice caps are melting and how sea levels are rising. Possibly in the next 20 years, all the low lying ares on earth would disappear from the map.
As I thought more, although global warming was one of the major reasons that the developed industries are shifting to being more environmentally sustainable, it was not the only reasons. Other reasons I could think of was also pollutants being disposed off into rivers and seas. Being so polluted, it could not support the life that lived in it before. Whole ecosystems would be destroyed. People would fall sick drinking the polluted water.
Other reasons too played a part, like the excessive burning of fossil fuels to fuel man's industrial ambitions, or the reckless felling of trees, plants and killing of animals to their extinction? Now we have realised this, was the only reason why we are taking all the initiatives for sustainability. But, are we already too late?
Prof then showed us a Youtube video of a woman, most probably an environmental activist, giving a condensed history of how industrailisation came to be. She showed that, for the sake of economic development, governments are metaphorically "bowing down" to big corporations to to fund their economy. As the corporations grew bigger, they became more greedy. So to quench their thirst for greed, more and more natural resources were used up until what is being left today, where we are starting to feel the effects of a world too fast and too greedy to get rich. The effects are the change and shift in weather patterns, more hurricanes, floods, barren land, a warmer world.
What has made the world into its present state? Its the whim and fancy of rich developed nations that has caused this. While they have developed economically, the rest of the world lagged behind. Now that they have realised the consequences of a world running out of resources, they are actively promoting more environmentally sustainable projects. But will it work? It is the doings of the western nations because of their greedy corporations that got we are where we are in the first place. In fact, the US uses far more resources than anyone around the world. Their consumption for natural resources is in fact sixty times more than the average chinese or indian.
The lesson explained that with sustainable development, a new industrial plan must be drawn out. Without the consideration of the natural world, and only caring about profits, the industrial plan then was first to extract the resources, process it, manufacture it, then market it,finally selling it. But with the new sustainable measures in place, quotas could be set on how much new resources are taken up, whether it would be possible to reuse the materials, or even better, make the products from previously used material. Essentially the new model is now circular, where industries take into account the environmental consequences, otherwise it will come back to bite you in the backside.
We then took a dive into the readings. The first reading was about the European Union's plans for industry development and environmental sustainability. The article elaborated on the measures taken to reduce the levels of pollutants in their industries and also to reduce the carbon footprint of their industries to help a suffering world. However I did notice that perhaps the EU has been too ambitious in their figures. Perhaps, whether they can reach their goals, only time will tell.
There was a question of since much of the world's resources have been used up, how then can developing countries develop into developed economies? Reading 2, as briefed through in the lesson showed that it was possible to get developed without first going through the process of industrialisation. To me this was an eye opener, but I knew that this was possible.
This is because, taken to a local context, I know for a fact that Singapore has no natural resources, and we are too weak to colonise new territories. But we developed our economy first to be skilled and ultimately developing a service economy where the fundamental force of driving out economy is knowledge. New niche sectors are popping up ever so frequently in the country that I so love. We are to the whole world, an impeccable finance industry, the forth largest in the world for forex trade, a rising star in biotech and R&D, the regions best health hub etc. We didn't need to go through a face of processing natural resources and industry, but rather we went through the stage of skilled labour and then now having a knowledge based economy.
Also elaborated was how other countries, who are not yet developed can build on their niches. Being underdeveloped, as I understand, that these countries would have a more pristine and undestroyed natural environment. Hence they could capitalise on this niche of theirs, to build it into a sustainable tourism industry, considering factors of overcrowding etc.
The 3rd article was about the business models of many major companies. After studying through it, the truth is that most business models are unsustainable. The challenge then I think for us is the question on whether we can create a model that is sustainable. I believe that the business model that is sustainable is indeed very possible.
This is because, although cost is a factor, where sustainable technologies are indeed more expensive, if companies are willing to spend more for environmental sustainability rather than on producing obscene profit amounts, the advantages will far outweigh their initial costs.
People who have already converted to being green, will buy their products, they will have a whole new market of followers. The not too obvious advantages would be that perhaps our climate will revert back to how it was previously, like in the last 20yrs. Its a long call but it may be possible. Perhaps a multi step approach will make the transition less painful, or in this case, costful. One could first introduce sustainability gradually embracing the concept, slowly implement products that are greener, first on the drawing board, then finally implementing it with wholesale production. Perhaps governments who introduce legislation for adoption for this green technology can quicken the transition for businesses to draw their own environmentally sustainable business plans.
An example of a company that has embraced a environmental sustainable model is that of apple computer. Apple inc has made all its products with 100% recyclable materials, with zero mercury. In fact, its computers are the gold standard for the tech industry for environmental sustainability. Perhaps that has already gotten them more a market share, as we can already see the conversion of people to using a Mac.
Indeed it is true that when one is poor(referring to countries) he does not overfish. He is contented. As he gets into the next level of wealth building, he does not stop, for he has tried the luxury, and cannot rests till he can afford it. He kills nature around him to make his keep. Finally as he has made enough, he has nothing more to want, he takes alook around, and he realises what atrocities he has done. He is repentant as he tries to stat anew to regrow what he has killed. This observation is a very powerful one as we are now seeing the same with the developed countries. How they legislate so much into conserving the environment and also setting goals to keep themselves motivated.
Developing countries cannot afford the expensive green technology but they too need to develop. They are reflections of what the developed countries have been in the past. Perhaps, for the survival of humankind, we have to cross boarders to help one another. Developed countries should share their knowhow on green technology, so that the developing countries can too achieve economic growth in the environmentally sustainable way.
The presentations given were about aquaponics fish farming, and Israel's green technology. The presentations were pretty insightful, esprecially about the green technology Israel is developing. The country is a leader in green techonology development in the middle east and the world. Alot of money is being poured in for research for the development the green technology. In fact it shocked me that Israel has the highest university graduates penetration percentage. Thus they have the skilled labour for research to innovate and create the new green technology to give them a cutting edge to be a leader in the world in this field.
After this was a break before the start of session 3b.
Session 3b talked about technology and innovation management. About how an idea formulates into a product for consumption in the mass market, and its challenges. The session first went through the process of doing "stuff"(taken from a poen by Tom Peters" Essencially, if we want to succeed, we have to keep doing things at the forefront of making people's lives more convinient and meaningful. We should not enter opportunities that others have already taken and made big, jumping on the bandwagon. We build ideas, and from these ideas try to turn them into products that have new market possibilities and not just reinterating and reproducing what other successful people have done. Once we have succeeded, others too will follow us, hence we need to think up more on newer ideas that are just as good. Perhaps we think up of new ideas that are too futuristic, we could shelve them, and perhaps return to them when the appropriate time comes.
We have to innovate and to create the product or service that can shape people's lives. However, even thought much input has gone into research and development and understanding new things, still, alot of innovation is needed. In reality, the application process for these research and development (due to lack of ideas) are dismal. Those who succeed will make it big. The rate of innovation is highly disappointing, as compared to the rate of our informantion gathering. Finally, if a good idea has gone through, it will be developed and then finally released to the market for retailers to sell. Here we learn that ideas, are actually the key to building an innovative product to meet the market demands.
Following from the development of ideas, it is noted that these ideas form from a technology driven or market driven perspective. This means that, for market driven, it is how a young entrepreneur, without much money, finds a solution for an existing problem in the mass market and creates a product to solve it. Whereas, in a technology driven perspective, it is the creation of an entirely revolutionary product, with the backing of sufficient funds to create a product that attracts people and give them value added advantages that was not previously attainable before. An easier way to explain that is by saying that before apple created the iPhone, no one knew they could not live without one.
I found that thought really enlightening. But, as for a young entrepreneur to succeed, he must not only find a problem, he too must devise a solution that is stable and marketable. This is very unlike the Big corporations, where they can afford to make new value added products, employing teams just to think about the creation of a new mass market product that would serve as value addedness to a person. As we observe, alot of products in our market today are technology driven. So the question is, can we actually create anything to compete, without even hindering us in the first place? I'd think not.
We observe that to innovate is not an easy thing. It is the development process, by which the idea is the most fundamental. To apply current knowledge into creating a new product that people would see that they need. However the process of getting a service or product into the market does not end there. After all the application of the research and development for a product, and the creation of it, one must market it to ensure people will buy it. Hence we see that this is a shift of focus, from the scientific to the social science of management and business. It is, perhaps a good question to ask then, has technology really driven world change? or perhaps its the successful implementation by the marketing and advertising gurus that really has driven world change in the modern world.
Rating: 7/10
This session covered technology and industrial development towards sustainability and technology and innovation matters. In the first half, we were shown why as a country becomes more developed, their industries shift their focus from before, treating every unprofitable cause as an externality to sustainable development. Essentially, unlike previously done, sustainability requires a shift from linear thinking to circular thinking. What do I mean? It means that unlike the old industrial model, which focuses just on economic development and not caring for the environment's well being, the new model of sustainable industries are economic development and environmental well being.
As we went through this portion of the class, a question formed in my head. The question was why had the industries and governments decide to adopt the sustainable industrial model? It was at this point when a self realisation occurred. The realisation stemmed from the thought of global warming. How the polar ice caps are melting and how sea levels are rising. Possibly in the next 20 years, all the low lying ares on earth would disappear from the map.
As I thought more, although global warming was one of the major reasons that the developed industries are shifting to being more environmentally sustainable, it was not the only reasons. Other reasons I could think of was also pollutants being disposed off into rivers and seas. Being so polluted, it could not support the life that lived in it before. Whole ecosystems would be destroyed. People would fall sick drinking the polluted water.
Other reasons too played a part, like the excessive burning of fossil fuels to fuel man's industrial ambitions, or the reckless felling of trees, plants and killing of animals to their extinction? Now we have realised this, was the only reason why we are taking all the initiatives for sustainability. But, are we already too late?
Prof then showed us a Youtube video of a woman, most probably an environmental activist, giving a condensed history of how industrailisation came to be. She showed that, for the sake of economic development, governments are metaphorically "bowing down" to big corporations to to fund their economy. As the corporations grew bigger, they became more greedy. So to quench their thirst for greed, more and more natural resources were used up until what is being left today, where we are starting to feel the effects of a world too fast and too greedy to get rich. The effects are the change and shift in weather patterns, more hurricanes, floods, barren land, a warmer world.
What has made the world into its present state? Its the whim and fancy of rich developed nations that has caused this. While they have developed economically, the rest of the world lagged behind. Now that they have realised the consequences of a world running out of resources, they are actively promoting more environmentally sustainable projects. But will it work? It is the doings of the western nations because of their greedy corporations that got we are where we are in the first place. In fact, the US uses far more resources than anyone around the world. Their consumption for natural resources is in fact sixty times more than the average chinese or indian.
The lesson explained that with sustainable development, a new industrial plan must be drawn out. Without the consideration of the natural world, and only caring about profits, the industrial plan then was first to extract the resources, process it, manufacture it, then market it,finally selling it. But with the new sustainable measures in place, quotas could be set on how much new resources are taken up, whether it would be possible to reuse the materials, or even better, make the products from previously used material. Essentially the new model is now circular, where industries take into account the environmental consequences, otherwise it will come back to bite you in the backside.
We then took a dive into the readings. The first reading was about the European Union's plans for industry development and environmental sustainability. The article elaborated on the measures taken to reduce the levels of pollutants in their industries and also to reduce the carbon footprint of their industries to help a suffering world. However I did notice that perhaps the EU has been too ambitious in their figures. Perhaps, whether they can reach their goals, only time will tell.
There was a question of since much of the world's resources have been used up, how then can developing countries develop into developed economies? Reading 2, as briefed through in the lesson showed that it was possible to get developed without first going through the process of industrialisation. To me this was an eye opener, but I knew that this was possible.
This is because, taken to a local context, I know for a fact that Singapore has no natural resources, and we are too weak to colonise new territories. But we developed our economy first to be skilled and ultimately developing a service economy where the fundamental force of driving out economy is knowledge. New niche sectors are popping up ever so frequently in the country that I so love. We are to the whole world, an impeccable finance industry, the forth largest in the world for forex trade, a rising star in biotech and R&D, the regions best health hub etc. We didn't need to go through a face of processing natural resources and industry, but rather we went through the stage of skilled labour and then now having a knowledge based economy.
Also elaborated was how other countries, who are not yet developed can build on their niches. Being underdeveloped, as I understand, that these countries would have a more pristine and undestroyed natural environment. Hence they could capitalise on this niche of theirs, to build it into a sustainable tourism industry, considering factors of overcrowding etc.
The 3rd article was about the business models of many major companies. After studying through it, the truth is that most business models are unsustainable. The challenge then I think for us is the question on whether we can create a model that is sustainable. I believe that the business model that is sustainable is indeed very possible.
This is because, although cost is a factor, where sustainable technologies are indeed more expensive, if companies are willing to spend more for environmental sustainability rather than on producing obscene profit amounts, the advantages will far outweigh their initial costs.
People who have already converted to being green, will buy their products, they will have a whole new market of followers. The not too obvious advantages would be that perhaps our climate will revert back to how it was previously, like in the last 20yrs. Its a long call but it may be possible. Perhaps a multi step approach will make the transition less painful, or in this case, costful. One could first introduce sustainability gradually embracing the concept, slowly implement products that are greener, first on the drawing board, then finally implementing it with wholesale production. Perhaps governments who introduce legislation for adoption for this green technology can quicken the transition for businesses to draw their own environmentally sustainable business plans.
An example of a company that has embraced a environmental sustainable model is that of apple computer. Apple inc has made all its products with 100% recyclable materials, with zero mercury. In fact, its computers are the gold standard for the tech industry for environmental sustainability. Perhaps that has already gotten them more a market share, as we can already see the conversion of people to using a Mac.
Indeed it is true that when one is poor(referring to countries) he does not overfish. He is contented. As he gets into the next level of wealth building, he does not stop, for he has tried the luxury, and cannot rests till he can afford it. He kills nature around him to make his keep. Finally as he has made enough, he has nothing more to want, he takes alook around, and he realises what atrocities he has done. He is repentant as he tries to stat anew to regrow what he has killed. This observation is a very powerful one as we are now seeing the same with the developed countries. How they legislate so much into conserving the environment and also setting goals to keep themselves motivated.
Developing countries cannot afford the expensive green technology but they too need to develop. They are reflections of what the developed countries have been in the past. Perhaps, for the survival of humankind, we have to cross boarders to help one another. Developed countries should share their knowhow on green technology, so that the developing countries can too achieve economic growth in the environmentally sustainable way.
The presentations given were about aquaponics fish farming, and Israel's green technology. The presentations were pretty insightful, esprecially about the green technology Israel is developing. The country is a leader in green techonology development in the middle east and the world. Alot of money is being poured in for research for the development the green technology. In fact it shocked me that Israel has the highest university graduates penetration percentage. Thus they have the skilled labour for research to innovate and create the new green technology to give them a cutting edge to be a leader in the world in this field.
After this was a break before the start of session 3b.
Session 3b talked about technology and innovation management. About how an idea formulates into a product for consumption in the mass market, and its challenges. The session first went through the process of doing "stuff"(taken from a poen by Tom Peters" Essencially, if we want to succeed, we have to keep doing things at the forefront of making people's lives more convinient and meaningful. We should not enter opportunities that others have already taken and made big, jumping on the bandwagon. We build ideas, and from these ideas try to turn them into products that have new market possibilities and not just reinterating and reproducing what other successful people have done. Once we have succeeded, others too will follow us, hence we need to think up more on newer ideas that are just as good. Perhaps we think up of new ideas that are too futuristic, we could shelve them, and perhaps return to them when the appropriate time comes.
We have to innovate and to create the product or service that can shape people's lives. However, even thought much input has gone into research and development and understanding new things, still, alot of innovation is needed. In reality, the application process for these research and development (due to lack of ideas) are dismal. Those who succeed will make it big. The rate of innovation is highly disappointing, as compared to the rate of our informantion gathering. Finally, if a good idea has gone through, it will be developed and then finally released to the market for retailers to sell. Here we learn that ideas, are actually the key to building an innovative product to meet the market demands.
Following from the development of ideas, it is noted that these ideas form from a technology driven or market driven perspective. This means that, for market driven, it is how a young entrepreneur, without much money, finds a solution for an existing problem in the mass market and creates a product to solve it. Whereas, in a technology driven perspective, it is the creation of an entirely revolutionary product, with the backing of sufficient funds to create a product that attracts people and give them value added advantages that was not previously attainable before. An easier way to explain that is by saying that before apple created the iPhone, no one knew they could not live without one.
I found that thought really enlightening. But, as for a young entrepreneur to succeed, he must not only find a problem, he too must devise a solution that is stable and marketable. This is very unlike the Big corporations, where they can afford to make new value added products, employing teams just to think about the creation of a new mass market product that would serve as value addedness to a person. As we observe, alot of products in our market today are technology driven. So the question is, can we actually create anything to compete, without even hindering us in the first place? I'd think not.
We observe that to innovate is not an easy thing. It is the development process, by which the idea is the most fundamental. To apply current knowledge into creating a new product that people would see that they need. However the process of getting a service or product into the market does not end there. After all the application of the research and development for a product, and the creation of it, one must market it to ensure people will buy it. Hence we see that this is a shift of focus, from the scientific to the social science of management and business. It is, perhaps a good question to ask then, has technology really driven world change? or perhaps its the successful implementation by the marketing and advertising gurus that really has driven world change in the modern world.
Rating: 7/10
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)