Chapter+3+TWIF

Chapter 3 Summary By Gregg Braff

I'd like to start this summary the same way Thomas Friedman began this chapter... with an example. Back in the day... maybe fifteen years ago and over... people would have to wait in line at airports to buy airline tickets. This was later bypassed about ten to fifteen years ago, when airports began installing automated machines that sold you tickets. Buying tickets went much faster and everyone was happy. Then a few years ago, airlines (not the airports) made buying tickets so easy, you can do it from your own computer at home... no lines... no hassle. When you waited on a line, that was Globalization 1.0. When you bought tickets from a machine, that was Globalization 2.0, and when you were able to buy tickets online from your home desktop, that was Globalization 3.0. Friedman, who prides himself on being technologically ahead of the curve, discovered (in this example) of Globalization 3.0 the hard way, by getting a lousy ticket on a flight because he didn't know 3.0 (buying an airline ticket from your home computer) existed yet. This, in essence, is exactly what this chapter is about. We are in an age of Globalization 3.0 right now, however we (the American people, represented in this story by Friedman himself), think 2.0 is the way to go and we're comfortable with it. This is a major problem because all the other people (using 3.0) are getting ahead of us on the plane!

Note to reader: I created the titles for Friedman's Convergences to make it easier to remember Convergence 1: Complementary Goods Creating a New Work PlatformFriedman says items are becoming 3 in 1, 6 in 1, heck, even 98 in 1 products to make our lives easier (for example: a copying machine that can also fax, send emails, scan, and more), but Americans are content with the version that came out ten years ago, instead of last week. Friedman interviewed an economist, Paul Romer, to describe Convergence 1. Romer said, "there are goods that are complementary - whereby good A is a lot more valuable if you have good B. It was good to have paper and then it was good to have pencils, and soon as you got more out of one you got more out of the other, and as you got a better quality of one and better quality of the other, your productivity improved. This is known as the simultaneous improvement of complementary goods." (Friedman, 203-204) Friedman believes (and makes good points) "that the fall of the Berlin Wall, the rise of the PC, Netscape, work flow, outsourcing, offshoring, uploading, insourcing, supply-chaining, in-forming, and the steroids reinforced one another, like complementary goods." (Friedman, 204) The convergence of the "ten flatteners" created a business/work platform that is global and web based, allowing anyone and everyone to collaborate, has zero regard for time, geography, or distance to get in its way, and you only need three simple (at least, nowadays its simple) items to join this work platform: infrastructure to connect to it, education to use it, and governance to get the most out of it. Convergence 2: "Horizontalization:" How to Use the PlatformThis convergence is called "horizontalization." Basically, horizontalization is the knowledge in knowing how to use the technology/the platform at hand. For example: when computers became mainstream for offices in the 1980s, everyone expected productivity to grow rapidly. All it did however was make people more confused because no one knew how to use them properly and to maximize productivity. Knowing how to utilize horizontalization is key in this new platform. Are Americans leading the way in this new platform? Surely we are because we have the strongest economy... nope. Who is leading the way on this new platform? Convergence 3: Fall of the Berlin Wall and the New PlatformConvergences 1 and 2 both simultaneously happened around the year 2000, creating the new platform for business and the world economy, however about ten years before that, communism began to crumble in eastern Europe and India and China began capitalizing their economies. Almost in an instant, **3 B****ILLION** people joined the world economy, that's about half of the world's population. Imagine 3 billion people, eager to join the capital markets of the world from scratch. Do you think they will learn the old platform of business or the new, easier soon to be more successful way of doing things? Of course, they chose the new way! China, India, Russia, and other eastern European nations are becoming (very VERY) quickly assimilated to this new platform and work for fractions of what Americans work for in regards to pay! A new energetic, highly motivated, and educated generation is coming out of these countries... the zippies. They are the first generation born into capitalism and they will eventually crush the American economy... that is, unless something is done in the United States. "Indeed, a lot of these new players from India, China, and the former Soviet Empire are not just walking onto the flat-world field with their enormous hunger to get ahead by outlearning their competition [the U.S.]. What we are witnessing is a mad dash..." (Friedman, 213)

The World is Flat: Chapter Three Analysis: by Brenda Hernandez

In chapter three of The World is Flat, Friedman posits that the convergence of three main factors reached a “tipping point” in 2000 that allowed the ten flatteners mentioned in chapter two to create a global web enabled platform for collaboration. The first of the three factors was simultaneous improvement of complementary goods, which served to produce a synergistic effect to improve workflow and productivity. The second was horizontalization, which describes the point when enough people were comfortable with the new technologies and had developed the skills and business practices that enabled them to get the most out of the flat world. Once a critical mass of key people began to change their ways of doing business, only then could the full effect of the ten flatteners, which had actually been around for years, be felt. The third key factor was that the 1990’s brought the opening up of economies and political systems of many countries that had never before been able to compete in the free market system. The flat world enabled them to get on board rapidly resulting in the addition of 3 billion people to the world economy virtually overnight.

The new players from India, China and the former Soviet empire are extremely well educated, were previously unable to realize their potential, and have a strong desire to get ahead. Friedman explains why this convergence is happening so fast. “Because once the world has been flattened and the new forms of collaboration made available to more and more people, the winners will be those who learn the habits, processes and skills most quickly-and there is nothing that guarantees it will be Americans or Western Europeans permanently leading the way.” (Friedman, 213-214) A discussion with one Rajesh Rao, one of the key players in India elicits the following, “Instead of complaining about outsourcing, said Rajesh, Americans and Western Europeans would be better off thinking about how you can raise your bar and raise yourselves into doing something better.” (Friedman, 222)

I could not agree more that Americans have to wake up and realize that we cannot take for granted anymore that we will continue to be the leader of innovation in this new world economy. Complaining about outsourcing is as futile now as when a factory worker who was replaced by automation did the same thing in the last century. As a country we need to learn from our previous mistakes. Before the Japanese auto industry took off, American car companies exported big cars to Japan and did not put the steering wheels on the correct side for Japanese drivers. Needless to say, the cars did not sell. When the Japanese started making cars, the American automakers did not think the Japanese would gain a large share of the market. It is imperative in this new global economy that we teach our children to be adaptable. If we want the children of today to have the same (or better) standard of living as their parents then this is essential. It is no longer enough to take for granted that simply by virtue of being born an American; a person is entitled to a certain lifestyle. Friedman discusses this with Microsoft chairman Bill Gates who says, “And as a result of China’s drive to succeed, the “ovarian lottery” has changed-as has the whole relationship between geography and talent. Thirty years ago, if you had a choice between being born a genius on the outskirts of Bombay or Shanghai or being born an average person in Poughkeepsie, you would take Poughkeepsie, because your chances of thriving and living a decent life there, even with average talent, were much greater. But as the world has gone flat and so many people can now plug and play from anywhere, natural talent has started to trump geography. “Now, I would rather be a genius born in China than an average guy born in Poughkeepsie.” (Friedman, 225)

In the last part of Chapter three, Friedman discusses three events that converged to obscure the triple convergence from many people. Together they resulted in a lot of people missing the first triple convergence. He called these events the other triple convergence: the dot.com bust, 9/11, and the Enron, Tyco and WorldCom scandals. With the news coverage dominated by these stories, moves toward globalization were not looked upon favorably. The politicians and the public were ill informed. I tend to agree that an ill informed public is the norm rather than the exception. The sensationalized stories that make the news take public focus off of important issues such as the current health care debate. Instead of informing the public on the issues, the news often consists of stories about partisan political bickering.

If what Friedman says is true there are some potential positive consequences in the next 10 years. Collaboration will continue on an even more massive scale, which could lead to advances in medicine, technology and manufacturing when the most brilliant minds are able to work together. This will lead to lower priced and higher quality goods and services. People will be even more accessible to one another and have increased access to information, as more people will have the web at their fingertips on their cell phones. Devices that monitor health could be implanted into the body. In the near future, a diabetic may never have to do a finger stick. Instead nanotechnology could send data about glucose levels right to a PDA or computer and even graph the data trends, which could be transmitted to a physician.

There are also some potential negative consequences in the next 10 years if what Friedman says is true. There will be increased competition for jobs as outsourcing continues. This could further widen the gap between the rich and poor. There may be fewer jobs available for the average person. The amount of learning disabled children as well as autistic children seems to be growing. Where will they fit in the future? Another negative consequence is that technology can be misused to facilitate criminal activity. It can also be used to track where people go, what they buy, and everything else about them, which can result in a “Big Brother type of society. An additional issue is that people can become isolated from one another if too many of their social connections are online. We can be intimately acquainted with people on the other side of the world and not know our next-door neighbors. Finally, as the technology becomes so cheap and is obsolete in a few years how will our planet be affected by the pollutants that these discarded devices leave behind?

As educators we need to make sure that our schools are preparing students for the challenges that lie ahead. Teachers need to be trained how to utilize technology in their classrooms. The outdated instructional methods need to be updated to reflect the advances in technology. I believe this will get easier as the older teachers retire and the newer teachers who have grown up using technology replace them.

The students of today are growing up in a very different world than we did. Our students are accustomed to the fast pace of video games, are comfortable with technology and use it connect with one another and the rest of the world. A cell phone is like an appendage to them. When information is available anywhere at lightning speed, it is easy to understand why many would feel that memorizing a bunch of facts is pointless.

Schools in general need to update their practices in the flat world in the same way that businesses have updated. We need to educate them in a way that promotes higher order thinking and critical thinking. Creativity needs to be nurtured. We also need to teach students to be critical consumers of information. Schools need to connect beyond their four walls to the outside world.