Session 3

Brief Overview of the Session:

Like the previous week’s session, we first began with a brief recap of the previous week’s topics. Prof reminded us on some of the things we discussed for human development, for example, the reason why several less-developed countries have a lower human development rate than their more developed counterparts. One country that was mentioned is the Philippines. There are many smart and capable people in the Philippines, but what is inhibiting the country from developing further, is the lack of jobs for these people. Due to lack of proper opportunities in their own country, these people have no choice but to move to other countries for these opportunities. This results in a brain-drain problem in the country, and it is crucial for them to think of a solution to this problem. This leads us to the 1^st topic discussed today- Technology and Industrial Development: Towards Sustainability. Industrialisation, Prof said, was the key driver of development and progress for most countries, as it results in job creation and economic productivity.

The 2^nd topic discussed was Technology and Innovation management, which focuses on the whole innovation process, starting from the generation of potentially useful new ideas and concepts, all the way to the market application stage, where the real products gets introduced into the market and sold to end-consumers.

Interesting observations & ideas:

Session 3A: Technology & Industrial Development: Towards Sustainability

Prof began the topic with an introduction of it, where he told us about how we have been using a linear-approach to production and consumption. This linear approach begins with the gathering and obtaining raw materialsà then these raw materials are manufactured into marketable and usable productsà these marketed products become available to consumers who consume and use these productsà finally, the leftovers from the products after consumption are conveniently dumped as waste.

Yes, this method has served us well in the past, but it is no longer good now. Back then, we thought that our human activities were so small compared to the Earth’s resources, so in time the Earth can just regenerate whatever resources we consume. Unfortunately, this is not true. The scale of our activities have grown so much that Mother Earth’s rate of regeneration can no longer catch up with our rate of consumption. Prof told us that the US’s level of consumption is the highest in the world, so large, that should everyone adopts their rate of consumption, we would need 5 Earths to supply us with the corresponding amount of resources. 5!! Wow, I never knew that US’s level of consumption is so high. Yet, I feel that given their level of consumption, US’ efforts in sustainable development is insufficient and disproportionate, especially when compared to other more environmentally-conscious countries like Europe and Japan.

To achieve sustainable development, we have to now adopt a cyclical approach to development and acknowledge that everything has a life cycle. We have to be mindful of the environment consequences of our actions in each step of the production process. The United Nations Industrial Organization is the pioneer and an advocator of this approach. Not only do they aim and concentrate on achieving sustainable development, they also focus on taking energies and transferring them to the poorer countries so that they have the technologies to compete fairly and sustainability. This is because everyone has a part in sustainability. The world is global, our actions do not only affect us but everyone else in this planet we all share.

Prof Shahi then showed us a video on this cyclical approach. He mentioned that some people felt that it is a propaganda against industrialisation. I personally don’t think so, because I feel that industrialisation is still inherent in the cyclical approach. We are still producing, manufacturing and marketing, the difference is just that we have to remember that our actions have consequences, and thus we have to act responsibly. Furthermore, like Prof said, this cyclical approach presents opportunities for innovation. This in turn generates potential jobs for the people. Thinking of ways to invent methods of renewing energy, developing technologies that are energy-saving, don’t these present opportunities for employment and production?

Out of the 3 readings, reading 2 was what interested me the most. It was a study of how industrialisation has been the key driver to development, which was what Prof told us during the introduction of this topic. However the thing that piqued my interest was the fact that the late-bloomers were able to gain a higher rate and efficiency of development compared to the pioneers and leaders in that field. These leaders, like Europe and the US, have to bear the innovative costs, the costs of research & development, inventions, etc. Whereas the later countries who follow in their stead could just absorb the benefits and positive spill overs of development without having to bear the hefty cost of experimentation. In fact, they could instead concentrate on how they could improve the proven methods and develop more efficiently than their mentors. After reading this, I felt rather ashamed, hahaha. Being a citizen of one of these late bloomers, I’ve seriously never thought about this before. I’ve never considered the sacrifices and pains these world leaders have taken before us, and even criticised some of these countries for being rather arrogant. It must feel real bad, having to see others steal the ideas and concepts that you’ve painstakingly generated and to see them actually benefit much more from them than you did…But I guess that’s just how people are, as stated in this quote Prof shared with us:

“Life is pretty simple:
You do some stuff.
Most fails. Some works.
You do more of what works.
If it works big, others quickly copy it.
Then you do something else.

The trick is the doing something else.”

- Tom Peters –

The emphasis is this quote is more on the need for constant innovation, but it also states the fact that it is human nature to be copy-cats. However, hopefully with the existence of patents and copyright now, innovators will stand to benefit much more than they used to and receive their due rewards. J Seeing how I’ve somewhat digressed to the next topic, let’s just move on to that…

Session 3B: Technology & Innovation Management

This topic, as previously mentioned, generally revolves around the concepts of innovation creation and the process involved. It shows the steps involved in the birth of a new innovative product, beginning with the idea generation and research step, then moving on to the development stage where the idea is converted into a real working product, to finally ending off in the market application stage, where the product is introduced to consumers.

I like the way the different market positions and opportunities shown were depicted in The Shahi Landscape Model for Technology. In it, there were three locations that business could place themselves. 1) Valley Opportunities: Here is where the bulk of the market are. They are so many players crowding around here that the profit margin here is so low. 2) Summit Opportunities: This is the place where there is ample opportunity for profit. Here, there are high barriers to entry and if a firm is able and willing to invest and research in the ideas and concepts found here, they stand a high chance of becoming market leaders when they succeed. 3) Cloud Opportunities: These are opportunities that haven’t taken form. We haven’t figured out a way to make money from them yet, but they seem to present ample benefits and opportunities in the future.

Like Prof said, every company goes through a cycle and will find themselves in each location sometime. It is important for companies to establish a balance in their positions, they have to invest appropriately and proportionally in each place. The smart approach would be to invest the biggest portion in summit opportunities and be cautious about getting stuck in the valley opportunities. I personally feel that most Asian companies face the problem of getting stuck at the Valley, such as Japanese companies. I think Japanese companies are sometimes far too traditional. They like to stick with old traditional techniques and methods that can no longer be applied today with much efficiency. I especially feel that their organizational hierarchy and promotion system is generating this problem. Their respect for the seniors in the organization, and their adherence to legacy-planning, results in companies that are very conformed and limited in their ideas. This limits the ability of these companies to innovate and push themselves up to the Summit.

Individual Presentations

Prashant’s presentation left the deepest impression on me this session. His presentation was on the issue of sustainability in the fashion industry, and it cited H&M as one of the fashion companies that strove to embed sustainability in their production and marketing. What got me thinking was one of the question in the presentation: “Who is responsible for sustainability? The Government, Industry or Consumers?” I generally feel that all 3 are responsible for sustainability. Like Prof said during the beginning of the session, the world is shared, and our actions affect one another. Thus I feel that all three bodies have the responsibility to be sustainable in their actions. However, I also acknowledge that the government has a greater responsibility, because I feel that as the leaders, they should guide and teach their followers when they are making mistakes and getting out of hand. As mentioned in the video Prof showed us before class, “…I believe that the government is for the people and by the people.” I feel so too. I government are the people who lead the nation, just like parents they should ensure that their children are behaving properly. In order for companies and consumers to know that they have to do their part in ensuring sustainable development, the government must first take steps to ensure that they know the importance and necessity in doing so. The government should take steps to ensure that consumers are aware of the need for sustainable development, and to educate them on the products that are certified as green. Companies should be taxed and given incentives and rewards accordingly. After this guidance has been provided, consumers and industries would both have to act responsibly as they can no longer give the excuse of not knowing the need for such responsibility.

Session rating: 9/10

This session was definitely interesting and though-provoking for me.