Not Round Now, Not Flat Yet

Does Mr. Freidman depict another brave new world? That’s the question raised by a best selling book: The World is Flat.

Background & Summary

The World is Flat Published with updates in Penguin Books 2006, was written by Thomas L. Friedman, a world-renowned New York Times journalist. He is a three-time Pulitzer Prize winner who has published three other books, two of which like this one deal with economic changes to the global economy.

Friedman summarized a number of changes of political liberalizing, technology empowerments, and enterprise innovations in the past 15 years, and point out that those changes make the world closer together (hence making it flat). These changes began with the fall of the Berlin Wall and include such things as rapid advancements with technological including the internet and search engines which has allowed changes in production and engineering and consumerism. In explaining his thesis, he takes us around the world to places, like Bangalore, India, where he can demonstrate these changes first-hand. The viewpoints of Friedman are mainly IT-based, that caused someone only read the title criticize Friedman an over-optimistic technology determinist, they say, “Hey, the world is not flat, and will never flat”. But I have to say the title is to attract your attention, what it really means is the world is going flat, not the world is flat already. Friedman is a free-market capitalist, but not without compassion and a concern for global issues

It’s fortunate to read Mr. Friedman’s book, the only complain I will made is about the book’s length. I also notice an interest thing that the first edition is under a sub title “A brief history of the 21 century”-- How could you write a “history” of a century when the there are still 95 years to come? Many people may satirize that the exaggeration of name is a marketing strategy, and the sub title of updated edition hence changed to a more rational “The Globalized world in the 21 century”.

Ten Key Points by Freidman & My Opinion

Key Point One: Globalization 1.0 & 2.0 & 3.0
Freidman: From 1492 to about 1800, it was Globalization 1.0, which shrank the world from a size large to a size medium. Globalization 1.0 was about countries and muscles, and about countries (I should say mainly western countries) exploring the new world. The primary question in this era was about how a country fit into the global competition and opportunities.
The second era, Globalization 2.0, lasted from 1800 to 2000. It shrank the world from medium size to small. The key agent of change, and the dynamic force driving global integration was multinational companies. It was the birth and then the maturation of global economy with sufficient movement of goods and information between continents, thus creating a global market.
Globalization 3.0 took off around 2000 and shrank the world from small to tiny, and flattening the playing field at the same time. With the movement of information improved so drastically that it empowered the individuals to participate in the globalization.
While the dynamic force in Globalization 1.0 was countries competing, and that in Globalization 2.0 was companies competing, we find in Globalization 3.0 the power for individuals to collaborate and compete globally.

Me: I’m a little bit disagreeing with is the time line divided Globalization 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0. First I don’t know why 1800 is the end of 1.0 and beginning of 2.0, it’s really “a year of no significance”. I’d prefer 1842, the year First Opium War, as the beginning of 2.0. Second, the world changes too much from 1800 to 2000, at least 1945 (World War 2 ends and computer born) or 1989 is more important than 2000. Globalization 3.0 neither starts from 2000 nor 2001. According to Mr. Friedman itself, I think 1989 is more appropriate as the beginning of revolutionary Globalization 3.0.
My rating: ★★★

Key Point two: the Ten Forces that Flattened the World
Freidman:The Ten flatteners are the 9th November 1989-when the Berlin Wall fells, 9th August 1995-when Netscape went public, Work flow software, Open-sourcing, Outsourcing, Offshoring, Supply-chaining, Insourcing, Informing, and The steroids.

Me: I categorize the ten flatteners as visible and invisible ones. Visible flattener, such as open-sourcing like blog, web2.0, and Firefox are flatteners that we observe even engaged. On the other side, outsourcing, work flow software and supply chaining, that most people have no clue were happening, are quite but revolutionary invisible flatteners. Freidman’s narration of the fundamental changes caused by those invisible flatteners is the essential of chapter two.
My rating: ★★★★★

Key Point Three: the Triple Convergence
Freidman: Convergence No. 1 - The ten flatteners emerged in the 1990s. For them to work together in a complementary, mutually enhancing fashion, they needed time to converge. The tipping point arrived around 2000. The net result was the creation of a global, web-enabled playing field that allows for multiple forms of collaboration in the sharing of knowledge and work in real time, without regard to geography and distance.
Convergence No. 2 - The convergence of the ten flatteners is not enough to make the world flat. The business world (including producers and consumers) has to adapt itself to the new tools. Friedman takes airline’s e -tickets service for example, that until people altered the ticket-buying habit, this technological breakthrough won’t be a productivity breakthrough. “The convergence of the flatteners begat the convergence of a set of business practices and skills that would get the most out of the flat world. And then the two began to reinforce each other”. (p208)
Convergence No. 3 - The third convergence is the new players entering the new playing field. Thanks to the ten flatteners, three billion players from the developing countries have access to both tools of collaboration and billions of pages of information. This gave rise to “a global community that is able to participate in all sorts of discovery and innovation” (p212).

Me: Brilliant observation and elaboration, I totally agree with you.
My rating: ★★★★★
        
Key Point Four: Ricardo is Still Right
Freidman: “America as a whole will benefit more by sticking to the general principles of free trade.”(p263)

Me: In the America and Free Trade chapter, Friedman says although American will lose job to foreign competition or technological innovation, America as a whole will benefit more by sticking to the general principles of free trade. Trying to erect walls will only provoke others to do the same and impoverish us all. He then makes a win-win example of free trade, which is HeyMath.com. The author also argues that free trade itself is not enough. It must be accompanied by a focused domestic strategy aimed at upgrading the education of every American, so that he or she can compete for the new jobs in a flat world. I’m a believer of Ricardo’s classical economic theory, but also agree that free trade is not enough. What Friedman point out is we have to stick to free trade, and give everyone chance to receive better education at the same time, help them to compete. It’s not only applied to Americans, but also Chinese, as we are going to compete in the high-end market.
My rating: ★★★★★

Key Point Five: CQ+PO>IQ
Freidman: “In a flat world, IQ still matters, but CQ and PQ- curiosity quotient and passion quotient- matters even more.” (p304)

Me: Freidman dedicate three chapters to education, including the untouchables, the right stuff, and the quiet crisis. What interests me and worries me most is this formula. I still remember when I was in primary school; 18/20 kids compete to answer teachers’ questions. But when we enter High school, 2/20 student are doing the same thing. The examination-oriented education kills passion and curiosity. If China is going to compete with Americans, our education system needs to be fundamentally changed.
My rating: ★★★★

Key Point Six: Wal-Mart’s Dark Side
Freidman: Although Wal-Mart helps people save money and improve their lives, it has pursued cost cutting and profit margins to such a degree that “whatever social benefits it is offering with one hand, it is taking away with the other.”(P163)

Me: When the world is flat, company both can and must take advantages of the best producers at the lowest price any where they can be found. So the global supply chains that draw parts and products from every corner of the world have become essential. All companies strived to lower the total cost of delivering all parts on time from all corners of the globe, and certainly lower than competitors. In Flattener 7 Supply-Chaining, Freidman praise Wal-Mart much, but he also honest about Wal-Mart’s dark side. As consumers, we love supply chains and low prices, but workers may not. The chase for “global optimization” is the drive of exploitation of workers in developing countries. Wal-Mart offers consumers cheap products, but also forces suppliers to cut wages and benefits of workers. China is the largest sweat factory of America; I think it’s not good for both American and Chinese workers.
My rating: ★★★★

Key Point Seven: The four problems keep a Unflat world
Freidman: There are four categories of threats--or people simply outside the flat world, I call them too sick, too disempowered, too frustrated, and too many Toyotas.

Me: Friedman exams four problems that keeps the world unflat: diseases caused by poverty in Africa, objection of those disempowered by globalization, angry terrorists in Arab- Muslim world that caused by frustration, and the century’s energy shortage. Freidman do conclude major obstacles of the flat world, but all those four problems are too difficult for him to solve.
My rating: ★★★★

Key Point Eight: Uploading and Cultural diversity

Freidman: There is a considerable and justifiable worry that “globalization means Americanization”, globalization can produce homogeneity, but also a threat to homogeneity, since the kind of globalization we are talking about, with internet and the flattening of the world, is different from before. Takes blog and podcasting for example, those uploading make possible “the globalization of the local”, Thus “although worrying about pulverizing effects of globalization is very legitimate, but ignore its ability also to empower individuals and enrich our cultural cornucopia and its positive effect on human freedom and diversity.”(p510)

Me: I have to admit that to some extent, Globalization is Americanization. You can see American brands, American movies, American pop stars, American fashions all around the world. I’m a “victim” of the homogenizing-Americanizing too. When I look at my music Library in Window Media Player, I find that 90% of my music collections are English songs. When I buy snacks, Lays or PRINGLES comes first, not Oishi or Copicq (two Chinese brand). Uploading only gives you potential to diversify, but not necessarily. Does podcasting makes your voice global? Not really. If you look at YouTube, the truth is, you can upload what you want, but you can’t make everyone watch you. It is a reverse in global culture market and commodity market; we import more than we export. The problem of culture exchange remains a big challenge.
My rating: ★★★

Key Point nine: Dell theory of conflict prevention
Freidman: “No two countries that are both part of major global supply chains, will even fight a war against each other. The essence of which is that the advent and spread of just-in-time global supply chains in the flat world are a great restraint on geopolitical adventurism.” (p522)

Me: Global companies help preventing world wars better than Global politicians. Of cause Supply chain does not guarantee that war will never happen, but government will think three times about engaging in a war-- the price of a war will much higher than it was decades ago.
My rating: ★★★★

Key Point Ten: Don’t Let Imaginations Get the Best of Us
Freidman: “We cannot retreat from the world. We have to make sure that we get the best of our own imaginations—and never let our imaginations get the best of us.”(p550)

Me: There are two competing forms of imagination in the world today: 11/9 versus 9/11. “One brought down a wall and opened the windows of the world—both the operation system and the kind we look through, another brought down the World Trade Center, putting up new invisible and concrete walls among people. “(p543) American has long been pride as a country flourish positive imagination. But after 9/11, America has gone “from exporting hope to exporting fear”. In chapter 15 11/9 Versus 9/11, the warns by Friedman that Americans shouldn’t “let imaginations get the best of us and thereby paralyzing ourselves with precautions”. (p550) is absolutely right. Friedman explained how to get best of our own imaginations and never let our imaginations get the best of us by giving very good examples, like eBay, JetBlue and Aramex. What I want to praise Friedman more is he has a very clear sense of what Americans can do .America can not force other countries to change, but can collaborate with others to change their context to help nurture more people with the imagination of 11/9 than 9/11.
My rating: ★★★★★