* Essential summer reading: The World is Flat: A Brief History of the 21st Century
Have you purchased a copy of Thomas L. Friedman’s book “The World is Flat: A Brief History of the 21st Century”? I bought my copy at Costco over the weekend and have had trouble putting it down since.
Friedman, a producer for the Discovery Channel and who has inroads to a variety of top executives and government people the average person could never get in to see, has written an easily digestible, anecdotal, and, I think, largely truthful work that clearly illustrates what is going on in the world – the shift of power and the dynamics of globalism.
This book should be standard read for every high-school and college student in America, as the ultimate effects of what Friedman discusses will most directly affect them. However, my recommendation would be for every business-person to buy a copy and read it deeply, and thoroughly. This book hits you where you live.
Friedman breaks the history of globalism into three phases 1.0, 2.0 and 3.0. In Globalism 1.0, countries became aware that other countries existed and began to develop quid-pro-quo relationships. Globalism 2.0 saw the rise of multinational companies. Now, according to Friedman, Globalism 3.0 brings individuals together, no matter how far they are from one another.
Part of what makes the book so good is that Friedman gives you examples that read like case studies. He makes it very easy for you to see why company executives would opt to contract with a given outsourcer or offshorer. The reality of our cause and effect world is brought immediately into focus.
For example, early in the book Friedman talks about U.S. tax preparation activities going on in India. Some smart Indian designed some software that keeps U.S. tax filer names and social security numbers private, restricts printing out or locally saving worksheets, and provides a way for Indian tax preparers to fill out the tax forms for virtually every state in the union plus the Federal government.
Last year, Indians completed about 400,000 tax forms for various tax preparation companies in the U.S. Tax preparers are not allowed to bring pencils or paper into their workplace. They spend the day completing tax forms-all for a few hundred dollars a month (a nice wage in Bangalore)-and some pretty decent benefits, including tuition-reimbursement plans.
In China, the state of Dalian (the Chinese equivalent of Silicon Valley) has 22 universities. A full 40% (!) of students graduate with degrees in engineering or science. The rest are expected to take a second language (Japanese or English) and computer science courses “so they can be employable”.
I only have two nit-picky issues with the book:
1) Friedman makes India sound like the bedroom community for American companies that need to outsource work that most Americans either want too much money to perform, or will not do at all. He forms the same basic allegation with China being the bedroom community for work India wants to outsource. While I do not disagree with the premise, I believe that Indian companies have come very far in their capabilities and will some day soon overtake American companies in innovation – that is, once they realize that, they do not have to be a bedroom community nation. And I believe that China is poised to be a powerhouse in terms of exciting new innovations.
2) With this frame of reference, Friedman paints a “Here in America, we’ll just go on to the next big thing” mentality, drawing an illustration of New Hampshire getting into submarine building when the whaling industry went bust, among others. My trouble with this continues to be that we cannot go on to the next big things if a) we are not graduating science and engineering students and b) we aren’t racing to beat others to the innovation table.
While there is some good innovating going on in this country, especially in the realms of biotech and nanotechnology, I am still not convinced that America can go on just like it has been without some drastic re-tooling, in terms of how our cog fits into the global gears. We cannot be thought leaders without new thoughts to lead.
Friedman summed it up best: “Americans can’t get a haircut in India,” he said to an Indian outsourcing company executive. “Yes,” the man replied, “but you can schedule it here.”
India’s question (today) seems to be: “What can we offload American companies from having to do?” Tomorrow, I believe that question will be: “Why should American companies be doing that, when we can do it just as well if not better?” Ditto for China, Russia, and others.
As always, I would love to hear your ideas and input.
