the.world.is.flat-第62部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


living　in　and　what　they　need　to　do　if　they　want　to　thrive　within　it。　One　problem　we　
have　today；　though；　is　that　so　many　American　politicians　don't　seem　to　have　a　clue　
about　the　flat　world。　As　venture　capitalist　John　Doerr　once　remarked　to　me；　〃You　talk　
to　the　leadership　in　China；　and　they　are　all　the　engineers；　and　they　get　what　is　going　
on　immediately。　The　Americans　don't；　because　they're　all　
281　
lawyers。〃　Added　Bill　Gates；　〃The　Chinese　have　risk　taking　down；　hard　work　down；　
education；　and　when　you　meet　with　Chinese　politicians；　they　are　all　scientists　and　
engineers。　You　can　have　a　numeric　discussion　with　them…you　are　never　discussing　'give　
me　a　one…liner　to　embarrass　＇my　political　rivals＇　with。'　You　are　meeting　with　an　
intelligent　bureaucracy。〃　
I　am　not　saying　we　should　require　all　politicians　to　hold　engineering　degrees；　but　
it　would　be　helpful　if　they　had　a　basic　understanding　of　the　forces　that　are　flattening　
the　world；　were　able　to　educate　constituents　about　them　and　galvanize　a　response。　


We　have　way　too　many　politicians　in　America　today　who　seem　to　do　the　opposite。　They　
seem　to　go　out　of　their　way　actually　to　make　their　constituents　stupid…encouraging　
them　to　believe　that　certain　jobs　are　〃American　jobs〃　and　can　be　protected　from　foreign　
competition；　or　that　because　America　has　always　dominated　economically　in　our　
lifetimes　it　always　will；　or　that　compassion　should　be　equated　with　protectionism。　
It　is　hard　to　have　an　American　national　strategy　for　dealing　with　flatism　if　people　
won't　even　acknowledge　that　there　is　an　education　gap　emerging　and　that　there　is　an　
ambition　gap　emerging　and　that　we　are　in　a　quiet　crisis。　For　instance；　of　all　the　
policy　choices　that　the　Republican…led　Congress　could　have　made　in　forging　the　FY　
2005　budget；　how　in　the　world　could　it　have　decided　to　cut　the　funding　of　the　National　
Science　Foundation　by　more　than　100　million？　
We　need　politicians　who　are　able　and　willing　to　both　explain　and　inspire。　And　what　
they　most　need　to　explain　to　Americans　is　pretty　much　what　Lou　Gerstner　explained　
to　the　workforce　of　IBM　when　he　took　over　as　chairman　in　1993；　when　the　company　was　
losing　billions　of　dollars。　At　the　time；　IBM　was　facing　a　near…death　experience　owing　
to　its　failure　to　adapt　to　and　capitalize　on　the　business　computing　market　that　it　
invented。　IBM　got　arrogant。　It　had　built　its　whole　franchise　around　helping　customers　
solve　problems。　But　after　a　while　it　stopped　listening　to　its　customers。　It　thought　
it　didn'thave　to。　And　when　IBM　stopped　listening　toits　customers；　it　stopped　creating　
value　that　mattered　for　its　customers；　and　that　had　been　the　whole　strength　of　its　
business。　A　friend　of　mine　who　worked　at　IBM　back　then　told　me　that　when　he　was　in　
his　first　year　at　the　company　and　taking　an　internal　course；his　IBM　instructor　boasted　
to　him　that　IBM　was　such　a　great　company；　it　could　do　〃extraor

dinary　things　with　just　average　people。〃　As　the　world　started　to　flatten；　though；　
IBM　found　that　it　could　not　continue　thriving　with　an　overabundance　of　average　people　
working　for　a　company　that　had　stopped　being　a　good　listener。　
But　when　a　company　is　the　pioneer；　the　vanguard；　the　top　dog；　the　crown　jewel；　it　
is　hard　to　look　in　the　mirror　and　tell　itself　it　is　in　a　not…so…quiet　crisis　and　better　
start　to　make　a　new　history　or　become　history。　Gerstner　decided　that　he　would　be　that　
mirror。　He　told　IBM　it　was　ugly　and　that　a　strategy　built　largely　around　designing　
and　selling　computers…rather　than　the　services　and　strategies　to　get　the　most　out　
of　those　computers　for　each　customer…didn't　make　sense。　Needless　to　say；　this　was　
a　shock　for　IBMers。　
〃Transformation　of　an　enterprise　begins　with　a　sense　of　crisis　or　urgency；〃　Gerstner　
told　students　at　Harvard　Business　School；　in　a　December　9；　2002；　talk。　〃No　institution　
will　go　through　fundamental　change　unless　it　believes　it　is　in　deep　trouble　and　needs　
to　do　something　different　to　survive。〃　It　is　impossible　to　ignore　the　parallel　with　
America　as　a　whole　in　the　early　twenty…first　century。　
When　Lou　Gerstner　came　in；　one　of　the　first　things　he　did　was　replace　the　notion　of　
lifetime　employment　with　the　notion　of　lifetime　em…ployability。　A　friend　of　mine；　
Alex　Attal；　a　French…born　software　engineer　who　was　working　for　IBM　at　the　time；　
described　the　shift　this　way：　〃Instead　of　IBM　giving　you　a　guarantee　that　you　will　
be　employed；　you　had　to　guarantee　that　you　could　stay　employable。　The　company　would　


give　you　the　framework；　but　you　had　to　build　it　yourself。　It's　all　about　adapting。　
I　was　head　of　sales　for　IBM　France　at　the　time。　It　was　the　mid…nineties。　I　told　my　
people　that　in　the　old　days　＇the　concept　of＇　lifetime　employment　was　only　a　company's　
responsibility；　not　a　personal　responsibility。　But　once　we　move　to　a　model　of　
employability；　that　becomes　a　shared　responsibility。　The　company　will　give　you　access　
to　knowledge；　but　you　have　to　take　advantage　of　it。。。　You　have　to　build　the　skills　
because　it　will　be　you　against　a　lot　of　other　people。〃　
When　Gerstner　started　to　change　the　paradigm　at　IBM；　he　kept　stressing　the　issue　of　
individual　empowerment。　Said　Attal；　〃He　under283　
stood　that　an　extraordinary　company　could　only　be　built　on　a　critical　mass　of　
extraordinary　people。〃　
As　at　IBM；　so　in　America。　Average　Joe　has　to　become　special；　specialized；　or　adaptable　
Joe。　The　job　of　government　andbusiness　isnot　toguarantee　anyone　a　lifetime　job…those　
days　are　over。　That　social　contract　has　been　ripped　up　with　the　flattening　of　the　
world。　What　government　can　and　must　guarantee　people　is　the　chance　to　make　themselves　
more　employable。　We　don't　want　America　to　be　to　the　world　what　IBM　was　becoming　to　
the　computer　industry　in　the　1980s：　the　people　who　opened　the　field　and　then　became　
too　timid；　arrogant；　and　ordinary　to　play　on　it。　We　want　America　to　be　the　born…again　
IBM。　
Politicians　not　only　need　to　explain　to　people　the　flat　world；　they　need　to　inspire　
them　to　rise　to　the　challenge　of　it。　There　is　more　to　political　leadership　than　a　
competition　for　who　can　offer　the　most　lavish　safety　nets。　Yes；　we　must　address　
people's　fears；　but　we　must　also　nurse　their　imaginations。　Politicians　can　make　us　
more　fearful　and　thereby　be　disablers；　or　they　can　inspire　us　and　thereby　be　enablers。　
To　be　sure；　it　is　not　easy　to　get　people　passionate　about　the　flat　world。　It　takes　
some　imagination。　President　Kennedy　understood　that　the　competition　with　the　Soviet　
Union　was　not　a　space　race　but　a　science　race；　which　was　really　an　education　race。　
Yet　the　way　he　chose　to　get　Americans　excited　about　sacrificing　and　buckling　down　
to　do　what　it　took　to　win　the　Cold　War…which　required　a　large…scale　push　in　science　
and　engineering…was　by　laying　out　the　vision　of　putting　a　man　on　the　moon；　not　a　missile　
into　Moscow。　If　President　Bush　is　looking　for　a　similar　legacy　project；　there　is　one　
just　crying　out…a　national　science　initiative　that　would　be　our　generation's　moon　
shot：　a　crash　program　for　alternative　energy　and　conservation　to　make　America　
energy…independent　in　ten　years。　If　President　Bush　made　energy　independence　his　moon　
shot；　in　one　fell　swoop　he　would　dry　up　revenue　for　terrorism；　force　Iran；　Russia；　
Venezuela；　and　Saudi　Arabia　onto　the　path　of　reform…which　they　will　never　do　with　
50…a…barrel　oil…strengthen　the　dollar；　and　improve　his　own　standing　in　Europe　by　
doing　something　huge　to　reduce　global　warming。　He　would　also　create　a　real　magnet　
to　inspire　young　people　to　
284　
contribute　to　both　the　war　on　terrorism　and　America's　future　by　again　becoming　
scientists；　engineers；　and　mathematicians。　〃This　is　not　just　a　win…win；〃　said　Michael　
Mandelbaum。　〃This　is　a　win…win…win…win…win。〃　I　have　consistently　been　struck　that　


my　newspaper　columns　that　have　gotten　far　and　away　the　most　positive　feedback　over　
the　years；　especially　from　young　people；　have　been　those　that　urged　the　president　
to　call　the　nation　to　this　task。　Summoning　all　our　energies　and　skills　to　produce　
a　twenty…first…century　fuel　is　George　W。　Bush's　opportunity　to　be　both　Nixon　to　China　
and　JFK　to　the　moon　in　one　move。　Unfortunately　for　America；　it　appears　as　though　I　
will　go　to　the　moon　before　President　Bush　will　go　down　this　road。　
Muscles　
Since　lifetime　employment　is　a　form　of　fat　that　a　flat　world　simply　cannot　sustain　
any　longer；　compassionate　flatism　seeks　to　focus　its　energy　on　how　government　and　
business　can　enhance　every　worker's　lifetime　employability。　Lifetime　employment　
depends　on　preserving　a　lot　of　fat。　Lifetime　employability　requires　replacing　that　
fat　with　muscle。　The　social　contract　that　progressives　should　try　to　enforce　between　
government　and　workers；　and　companies　and　workers；　is　one　in　which　government　and　
companies　say；　〃We　cannot　guarantee　you　any　lifetime　employment。　But　we　can　guarantee　
you　that　government　and　companies　will　focus　on　giving　you　the　tools　to　make　you　more　
lifetime　employable。〃　The　whole　mind…setof　a　flat　world　is　one　in　which　the　individual　
worker　is　going　to　become　more　and　more　responsible　for　managing　his　or　her　own　career；　
risks；　and　economic　security；　and　the　job　of　government　and　business　is　to　help　workers　
build　the　necessary　muscles　to　do　that。　
The　〃muscles〃　workers　need　most　are　portable　benefits　and　opportunities　for　lifelong　
learning。　Why　those　two？　Because　they　are　the　most　important　assets　in　making　a　worker　
mobile　and　adaptable。　As　Harvard　University　economist　Robert　Lawrence　notes；　the　
greatest　single　asset　

that　the　American　economy　has　always　had　is　the　flexibility　and　mobility　of　its　labor　
force　and　labor　laws。　That　asset　will　become　even　more　of　an　advantage　in　the　flat　
world；　as　job　creation　and　destruction　both　get　speeded　up。　
Given　that　reality；　argues　Lawrence；　it　becomes　increasingly　important　for　society；　
to　the　extent　possible；　to　make　benefits　and　education…the　two　key　ingredients　of　
employability…as　flexible　as　possible。　You　don't　want　people　to　feel　that　they　have　
to　stay　with　a　company　forever　simply　to　keep　their　pension　and　health　benefits。　The　
more　the　workforce　feels　mobile　…in　terms　of　health　care；　pension　benefits；