A Great Key to Understanding Our Time
|
While many people in the West have become familiar with words like outsourcing, offshoring and globalisation, some questions remain: what exactly do these words mean? When did globalisation as we know it begin? What are the forces that drive globalisation and what will the future of a globalised world look like? Thomas Friedman, the three-time Pulitzer prize winner, addresses these questions in an honest, informed way by arguing that the world has become flatter in the last 20 years.
The author begins by outlining the forces that led to globalisation or a flattening of the world: the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989; development of the internet and web browsers; offshoring; outsourcing; uploading (read Blogging, Youtube and the MySpace phenomenon) and improved supply chain management. He convincingly argues that the fall of the Berlin Wall and the development of the computers and the internet have led to an increase in the global (skilled) labour force and vast improvements in labour productivity. By using cogent examples from India, Thomas Friedman explained that the development of the internet and the presence of a skilled labour force in India enabled that country to jettison fifty years of Socialism in favour of a free market economy. This has in turn led to astronomical growth rates on the subcontinent.
The author then sets his sights on America's place in the flattening flat. He stresses that while the US has the best universities in the world, it (the US) cannot take it for granted that it will be the leader in science and technology in the new flat world. He presents interesting statistics, which indicate that, the number of US maths and science graduates is falling rapidly, a situation he calls a quiet crisis. Furthermore, Mr Friedman bemoans the failure of the US political class to see the looming crisis ahead. Instead, the politicians in Washington seem to be too busy fighting over petty issues such as drugs in sports and whether or not to teach intelligent design in America's schools.
Mr Friedman then examines the so-called Unflat World i.e. the Developing World (as if we needed another word to describe the poor). He states the inhabitants of the Unflat World (rural India, Africa, rural China) are either too sick or their local governments too broken to participate in the Flat World platform. Though his analysis is a tad too simplistic for me, it does have a ring of truth to it. Yes, bad governments can be a barrier to their people's economic progress. This is all the more regrettable in a world where the barriers to participation in the global economy are being constantly reduced.
The flattening of the world has enabled educated, savvy Indians and Chinese to access hitherto closed markets in the West. Furthermore, their increased prosperity has enabled them to buy more Western goods and services. In a flattening world, both rich and poor countries gain from trade and exchange. However, the book argues that there are also real losers in the flattening process chief among who are people who lose their jobs to oursourcing or offshoring. Friedman argues for more elaborate safety nets to help those who lose out in the globalisation game.
The book is quite US-centric but it does not detract from its main theme. The key message that I took from the book is on page 343. Mr Freidman: "Wealth in an age of flatness will increasingly gravitate to those countries that get three things right: the infrastructure to connect as efficiently and speedily as possible with the flat world platform, the right education programmes and knowledge skills to empower more of their people to innovate and do value-added work on that platform, and finally the right governance - that is, the right tax policies, the right investment and trade laws, and, most of all, the right inspirational leadership - to enhance and manage the flow with the flat world." It is a message that I, as a Nigerian, have taken to heart. I highly recommend The World is Flat to anyone interested in understanding the forces that drive globalisation and how they will affect him/her in the nest 20-30 years.
|
|
Disappointing
|
Friedman's latest book is just plain disappointing. We all know that the world is growing more connected -- the internet, cell phones, global trade, etc. are all growing quickly. The world is changing fast. We all know that.
Friedman's book does not add much. He is not an expert in any of the topics he discusses, and he does not do the kind of in-depth research or thinking needed to come up with an interesting prediction or observation. Rather, he just picked a "hot topic," did a few random interviews, and wrote a book.
Freidman oversimplifies an incredibly complex process, and he does not tell you anything you do not already know. He also repeats his catch phrase -- "the world is flat" -- over and over, as if trying to make you remember the name of his book.
I really enjoyed Beruit to Jerusalem when it came out, and I was very disappointed to read this one.
|
|
too simplistic though very good fairytale
|
|
Thomas Friedman charms the readers with his grand story of a fast changing world in a borderless life of business, wealth, competition and entrepreneurship. Interesting read, but his vision and messages are too narrow and even too simplistic. What is more, his knowledge about China and India and other parts of the world is less than profound. More serious readers should also read 2 other new books: 1. China's global reach; 2. China and the new world order, both by Chinese journalist/consultant George Zhibin Gu, which offers more dynamic and realistic insights on emerging China and India in relation to the established West.
|
|
|
Not too exciting...
|
I thought the idea was good, but like so many of these books, not enough to fill a few hundred pages. I think we know that the "world is getting flatter" (even the metaphor is a bit naff - the world is shrinking) and that this is changing business.
Don't bother.
|
|
|
In America or around the world.
|
From the first few pages when Friedman leaps from level playing fields to a flat world, it is almost easy to understand why the cover shows ships falling off the edge of an un-flat world [NOTE: The current dust cover, changed since this review was written, no longer depicts ships falling off a 'flat' earth. You can draw your own conclusions as to the motives behind that decision.]. Something is missing here. "Level" is not "flat". And ships don't fall off a flat surface. Is he trying to be ironic? If so, Friedman ought to leave that to Tino Georgiou. If he thinks a "brief history" of the past five years is a funny concept, again I refer you to Tino Georgiou--"The Fates" for more robust and pointed humor.
As a journalist, with seemingly unlimited resources and the once-gilded New York Times brand name behind him, Friedman has leveraged his basic skills into best-sellerdom, all the while seemingly in shock and awe of all the things his rich travel budget allows him to take in. Yet I have to ask, where's the beef?
Yes, the world has shifted from networks based on mythology and monarchies, through manufacturing and Marxism, to today's global marketing, but services aren't a new phenomenon; they've always been with us. And although wireless communication has made the world faster and more competitive, life is no more ruthless, violent or uncertain now than when plagues, expansive military conquest, disease, poor hygiene, inbred monarchies, and wealth-by-acquisition ruled the world as they have for most of human existence. Sure, technology has increased the pace, but each generation seems to think that the last generation had it slow and easy, and that has never been the case. The poor villager who wandered too far away from his hut 1,500 years ago experienced no less a shock than today's global traveler stepping off a plane in Mumbai.
And this outsourcing 'problem' is not new and it is not based simply on information technology. For as long as man has tried to better his life and to leverage his advantages, he has hired someone else to produce the things he needs, be it food, cooking, child care, or production. Like services, outsourcing is not new. That villager from 1,500 years ago thought that outsourcing crop production to the next village over was no less daunting or distant than Americans importing oranges from Israel or roses from Brazil. And you can bet the other villagers were mad as hell at him for taking away 'their' work.
For more than fifty years, columnists, pundits, journalists, armchair analysts, and bad economists have been intrigued by each new emerging economic superpower, from the Soviet Union, to the European Union, to Japan, to China, and now India, and each time all that wonderment and starry-eyed predictions have come to nothing. Like Ayn Rand said, what separates America from the rest of the world is that we were the first to think of making money, not just taking money. And America still does that very well. I still have my doubts about the sustainability of growth in China and India. Sooner or later they are going to hit a consumer-oriented economy and demands for many things their people don't demand today. Besides, their growth has been exaggerated by the fact that they started basically at zero. Bad analysts like straight-line extrapolations. Not only do these growth lines sometimes flatten out, they can nose dive. And what's bigger and more dramatic, 3% growth in a $11 trillion economy or 7% in a $200 million economy?
Maybe the world has become more homogenous with technology and communications. But anyone who thinks that there is some huge melting pot, in America or around the world, would be better served by recognizing the world as a salad bowl, not a melting pot. And neither the pot or bowl are flat. Unless you must have this book, skip and get yourself a copy of Tino Georgiou--"The Fates"
|
|
|
United States | 
United Kingdom | 
Canada