|
内容：Betty Qu 编辑：Selena Yan Wechat ID: NativeStudy / Weibo: http://weibo.com/u/3476904471
Part I: Speaker
How AI can save our humanity April 2018
AI is massively transforming our world, but there's one thing it cannot do: love. In a visionary talk, computer scientist Kai-Fu Lee details how the US and China are driving a deep learning revolution -- and shares a blueprint for how humans can thrive in the age of AI by harnessing compassion and creativity. "AI is serendipity," Lee says. "It is here to liberate us from routine jobs, and it is here to remind us what it is that makes us human."
Source: TED https://www.ted.com/talks/kai_fu_lee_how_ai_can_save_our_humanity/transcript [Rephrase 1, 14’
Part II: Speed
From strategic planning to strategic discovery by Rod Collins | Aug 13 2018
[Time 2] One of the most common and enduring practices of traditional management is the annual strategic planning retreat. These multi-day offsite gatherings of senior people are often the primary vehicles for charting the future course of the business. During these strategy sessions, teams will review and discuss analyses of past and emerging market trends, reflect upon the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats to the business, and outline the goals and objectives for both the short-term and long-term business cycles. This corporate ritual has become so ingrained in business culture that over the years, ‘strategy’ and ‘planning’ have become almost synonymous terms.
Planning has been a reliable foundation for strategy for many decades because of a dependable and unquestioned assumption, which until recently, has been a stable guideline: the past is a proxy for the future. When this assumption is true, business leaders can rely upon their historical knowledge and expertise to interpret current developments and make the necessary adjustments to adapt to what have been, for the most part, incremental changes.
These changes often have more to do with how things are done rather than what is to be done. For example, during the 1960’s and 1970’s, the vast majority of businesses were installing information technology to transition their basic operations from manual to computerized systems. The basic work remained the same, but the speed and the accuracy of the work was significantly improved.
Strategy in a Rapidly Changing World
When the past is a proxy for the future, business leaders can look backwards to accurately forecast the future and build a strategy to make the anticipated future a reality. But what happens when the past is no longer a proxy for the future and the pace of technological change is so rapid that disruptive innovation becomes the norm rather than the exception? If business leaders can no longer look backward to extrapolate strategy, how will they be able to deliver reliable ROI? These are the new and unprecedented challenges that senior leaders are grappling with today, and many are not quite sure what they need to do differently. They just know that they can no longer depend upon the traditional strategic planning practices that were once so reliable.
In times of great change, strategies are not planned; they’re discovered. And the activities that support discovery are substantially different from those that bolster planning. That’s because when innovation is the key core competency that businesses need to assure sustained success, then companies need to get very good at creating things that have never existed before. And looking backward is often of little use when markets demand innovation. In a rapidly changing world, planning is no longer the foundation for strategy. Today planning’s usefulness is limited to tactical execution, where it remains a vital activity. [605 words]
[Time 3] Emergent Processes
When planning was the foundation of strategy, analytical processes were the primary tools that informed strategy. This explains why twentieth-century managers were so intensely focused on numbers. If you understood all the interrelationships and nuances of the historical numbers, you would have the insights needed to safely plot the future destiny of the business. However, when discovery is the foundation for strategy, a very different and unfamiliar set of activities - emergent processes - become the essential tools that help business leaders chart the future course of the company.
The big differences between analytical and emergent processes are in both the source and the context of their data. As noted above, the key data in analytical processes are numbers and the context for extracting information and insights from these numbers is fundamentally linear. This linear thinking is evident in the pervasive short-term biases of traditional managers who, regardless of the rapid changes happening in the world around them, often assume that the current business models of their particular company will continue for the foreseeable future.
On the other hand, the key source for data in emergent processes is people - specifically employees and customers - and the context for gleaning ideas and insights for new business models that have never existed before is holistic, which means companies need to be adept at rapidly aggregating the collective intelligence of their employees and customers.
When the world is changing fast, the most important information to guide the development of strategy is more likely to come from facilitated gatherings of experts, nonexperts, and unusual suspects than it is from the crisp clean numbers in carefully collated PowerPoint decks or from the supposed smartest person in the room. That’s because the collective intelligence that emerges from facilitated gatherings is far more likely to generate new ways for solving customer problems than linear extrapolations of historical business trends.
Collective Intelligence Workshops
One example of a strategic emergent process is the Collective Intelligence Workshop. These one to two day sessions are large gatherings of between 25 to 60 diverse individuals who represent a microcosm of the business. These holistic workshops include all levels of managers and staff as well as all disciplines who contribute to the development, sale, and delivery of the company’s products or services. Often, a few individuals whose experience is completely outside the industry are included in the session to bring in different perspectives and help accelerate the creativity of the group.
Through a series of facilitated exercises, the participants are encouraged to think boldly about the future as they rapidly generate as many as two hundred ideas and then, using the collective intelligence of the group, narrow their focus to a small manageable number of initiatives to move to action.
This process of rapid divergence and convergence tends to produce two very different sets of ideas. One set includes innovative ways that the company can incorporate new technologies to update its current products and operations. These are activities that can be accomplished within the immediate six to twelve months. The other set of ideas frequently includes dramatic - sometimes even radical - ideas that could completely transform the business. These are truly long-term activities, which while not immediately pressing, nonetheless may require development activities that begin sooner than later. [ 549 words]
[Time 4] Dual Path Approach
When the past is no longer a proxy for the future, business strategy is no longer a single path. It often requires business leaders to navigate multiple paths at the same time: one that is strengthening what is done today and another that is creating a very different future.
The importance of a dual path approach was highlighted in a recent article by John Hagel and John Seely Brown where they describe the alternative approach to strategy used by many of the technology companies, which they refer to as “zoom out/zoom in.” They noted that unlike most traditional companies who focus on the one to five year horizon, this alternate approach essentially ignores this timeframe. That’s because it’s too easy for executives to fall into the trap of convincing themselves that the company and its business environment will look much as it does today. Instead, the technology companies focus on the 10 to 20 year horizon to force themselves to envision a future that will be very different from today. Hagel and Brown refer to this longer focus as ‘zooming out’.
By shifting the strategy predisposition from things will be the same to things will be different, zooming out compels leaders to learn faster. Leaders are then able to use this new knowledge to guide resource allocation in the immediate six to twelve months - zooming in - so they can both strengthen what they are doing today and begin the experimental work that is needed to start to create what is likely to be a very different future.
A well-known example of current work on designing a different future is the development of driverless cars. Even though there is no practical market for these autonomous vehicles anytime soon, these forward-thinking companies are devoting current resources to what is clearly a futuristic endeavor because they understand that they could run the risk of disaster if they were to assume they could rapidly adapt to an innovative new business model once the new model was imminent. In rapidly changing times, adjusting the business plan may not be an option when the competition has completely transformed and displaced your historical business model.
As we are learning every day in our post-digital world, change is increasingly disruptive and often discards and replaces iconic brands. If business leaders want to develop the capacity to stay ahead of disruptive change, a good place to start is by shifting their focus from strategic planning to strategic discovery. [414 words]
Source: Management https://www.management-issues.com/opinion/7320/from-strategic-planning-to-strategic-discovery/
What can be done about bullies at work? by Manfred Kets De Vries| Jun 04 2018
[Time 5] Ted, a senior VP at a large media company, was famous for publicly deriding and humiliating others. Working for him was like walking on eggshells, as he could fly into a rage over the most trivial matters. He would also impose deadlines designed to set his staff up for failure. To top off his bullying behaviour, he expected his staff to work 24/7, leading many to complain about stress-related problems. Ted’s management style sapped the morale of his division, which was afflicted by a disturbing absenteeism rate and high turnover.
When we think of bullies, we tend to remember the ones we knew as kids. Unfortunately, bullying doesn’t end in high school. Some of these bullies-in-training turn into full-fledged ones in adulthood. Although there can be a fine line between a tough boss and an abusive one, bullying generally refers to being subjected to repeated emotional or even physical abuse. Bullies deliberately manipulate, belittle, intimidate, control or undermine their victims. And in our digital age, the bully’s playing field has now extended to cyberspace.
To determine if you work for a bully, ask yourself the following questions: Do I regularly feel intimidated, criticised and insulted? Have there been occasions when I have been humiliated in front of my colleagues? Have I been called names? Are my efforts constantly undervalued? Do I dread going to work? Is working for my boss making me feel sick? If your answers to these questions are affirmative, there is a good possibility that you are working for a bully.
Many organisations have a “resident bully”, someone who’s often (but not always) in a position of authority. According to a 2017 survey by the Workplace Bullying Institute, 19 percent of adult Americans have experienced abuse at work and another 19 percent have witnessed it. Bullying is a silent epidemic, causing stress-related health problems, including debilitating feelings of anxiety, panic attacks and clinical depression. In some instances, bullying can even lead to suicide.
The bullying personality
The personality makeup of the bully is difficult to pin down. There may be a relationship between bullying and narcissistic personality disorder, the latter characterised by an exploitative way of dealing with the world and the perception that one is entitled to special treatment. Given bullies’ frequent lack of empathy and remorse, some even ascribe psychopathic characteristics to them. Furthermore, it is fair to say that most bullies fall among the autocratic personality types which include a strong need to control and dominate others.
Motivations
Why do bullies behave the way they do? One explanation is that they’re looking for attention. Being noticed makes them feel important. In addition, they may be motivated by feelings of envy and resentment. Bullies are typically insecure and don’t need very much to see other people as threats. They may also be projecting their own feelings of vulnerability onto their victims. In order to avoid feeling ashamed and humiliated for their own shortcomings, they go to great lengths to shame and humiliate others. [498 words]
[Time 6] Developmental observations
Many bullies had a disturbed childhood. They often grew up in homes with little warmth and positive adult attention, raised by emotionally and physically abusive caretakers. Such an environment would have quickly taught them that vulnerability leads to abuse and that the best defence is to lash out. By becoming bullies themselves, they gain more control over their lives and compensate for the lack of attention (or the abuse) they experienced at home.
Managing the bully
Despite the prevalence of workplace bullying, surveys show that the majority of employers do far too little or even resist taking action when bullying behaviour is identified. Why is that? The easiest answer is that culprits could be in top management. But even when that’s not the case, a fair amount of denial, rationalisation and even tacit acceptance of bullying can be observed.
Those in power may turn a blind eye because many bullies are perceived as “rainmakers” contributing to profitability. In such cases, bullies are tolerated so long as they ensure short-term company success. But this neglects the potential costs in terms of an organisation’s culture, not to mention that health deterioration, stress reactions and depression among employees can all impact the organisation’s long-term bottom line and survival.
Top executives who realise the danger of bullying and want to do something about it are in for a challenge. It may be difficult for bullies to unlearn what has become ingrained behaviour over time. And if bullying has already become part of the organisational culture, the challenge is even more formidable.
Role of executive coaching
If coaching is sought as a way to deal with bullies, coaches should note that bullies have limited self-insight and empathy, which makes changing their behaviour all the more problematic. Coaches would do well to start with a surface-level discussion of simple actions that warrant change before exploring the underlying dynamics for the dysfunctional behaviour.
Equally challenging is putting some kind of “treatment plan” in place. For example, coaches may consider a behavioural carrot-and-stick approach: The bully should be made aware of the consequences that will follow if their dysfunctional way of relating to others doesn’t change. Another approach could be to agree on one negative behaviour pattern that needs to be replaced with more positive behaviour. Once this change has occurred, other seemingly harder to modify behaviour patterns could be next in line. In this educational journey, bullies should realise the negative impact of their actions and take responsibility.
The other side of the coin: Being bullied
What should you do if you are the target of a bully? The wisest strategy is to completely avoid such people. But if that’s not an option, the challenge becomes not to play their game. Don’t allow yourself to be baited or get emotionally hooked. If bullies are denied a reaction, there is a chance that they may stop.
If bullies continue their unpleasant behaviour, another strategy would be to set boundaries. You should make it clear to them that their behaviour will be documented and that they may face some form of disciplinary action. Furthermore, you should ask your co-workers to support you, to serve as witnesses and also to document what’s happening. However, bullying is often sustained by the silence of bystanders unwilling to help. You should inform such people that this stance could be viewed as another form of bullying.
When building a case for HR, it is crucial to demonstrate how bullying affects the productivity of the people working in the organisation. You need to make a very clear and convincing business case to senior management that the bully (in spite of his or her contributions to the bottom line) will be just too expensive to keep in the long term.
Finally, if you’re being bullied, you would be wise to build a personal support network to bolster your feelings of confidence and resilience, as bullies are experts at creating self-doubt. Of course, there are always going to be instances where top management is complicit in encouraging bully-like behaviour. In that case, the final strategy may be to quit this toxic environment. Staying would only make you sick.
Whatever bullies try to do to you, keep in mind Eleanor Roosevelt’s wise statement: “No one can make you feel inferior without your consent.” [717 words]
Source: The Management https://www.management-issues.com/opinion/7312/what-can-be-done-about-bullies-at-work/
Part III: Obstacle
How much to worry about Turkey’s turmoil Aug 18th 2018
[Paraphrase 7] THERE was a time when people thought that a secular, democratic Turkey would eventually accede to the European Union and join the club of wealthy liberal states known as the West. There was a time, too, a few years ago, when Turkey was a darling of emerging-market investors.
Those days are long gone. Politically, the country has been tilting away from the West for years: becoming more stridently Islamist, picking fights with NATO allies and transforming itself into a virtual autocracy under President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Economic-policy orthodoxy has been junked. High growth rates have depended on foreign borrowing: the amount of corporate foreign-currency debt has more than doubled since 2009. Mr Erdogan, who believes that high interest rates magically cause inflation rather than cure it, has stopped the central bank from acting sensibly.
Both these trends have now come to a head. Turkey is gripped by a currency crisis, precipitated partly by America’s imposition of sanctions over Mr Erdogan’s refusal to release a pastor, Andrew Brunson, who is absurdly accused of terrorism. President Donald Trump has made matters worse by vowing to slap higher tariffs on Turkish metals. The lira has lost a fifth of its value this month, further fuelling inflation, increasing the burden of foreign-currency debts and threatening the health of Turkey’s banking system. Relations with America are poisonous.
Mr Erdogan blames Turkey’s economic problems on a plot by foreign enemies and has imposed retaliatory tariffs on American cars, alcohol and even cosmetics.
The crisis poses three types of risks: for other emerging markets, nervous that investors will flee as contagion spreads; for Turkey’s economy, which is staring at a deep recession; and for the West, whose fraying bonds to Turkey could finally break. On each count, how bad could things get?
When Erdogan sneezes
Start with the least-bad news. The lira’s collapse has caused wobbles in other emerging markets that may share one or more of Turkey’s traits, including an inadequate savings rate, a big current-account deficit, lots of foreign-currency debt and high inflation. The South African rand swooned; the Indian rupee hit a record low this week; Argentina, which has already had its own currency crisis this year, raised interest rates again. Shares in banks with exposure to Turkish borrowers fell (see Finance section).
The environment for emerging markets has become less forgiving as the tightening of monetary policy in America has boosted the dollar and as concerns grow about China’s economy. But a cascade of currency crises still seems unlikely, mainly because Turkey’s frailties are so acute.
Of the big emerging-market economies, only Argentina and Egypt (both now wards of the IMF) also have a double-digit inflation rate; none has a current-account deficit as big, although Pakistan’s comes close. Other markets have more room for policy manoeuvre. And the ones with problems that are most similar have shown more alacrity in tackling them. The fact that Argentina’s central bank acted to raise interest rates is a source of comfort.
For Turkey itself, there is a fairly standard blueprint to follow when an economy gets into such straits: raise rates to reduce pressure on the currency and tackle inflation, and seek out emergency financing from the IMF, tied to a set of investor-friendly policies. Argentina did just that earlier this summer, helping to nip its crisis in the bud.
Turkey has so far done little more than fire-fight, offering some help to the banking system, making it harder to speculate against the lira and drumming up promises of investment from allies such as Qatar, which will provide dollars but not credibility. Mr Erdogan’s resistance to higher interest rates, and the fact that turning to the IMF would require some bowing and scraping to America, dent the chances that Turkey will get ahead of things. That could be the difference between a managed adjustment and a chaotic collapse, in which defaults spread and banks teeter.
He blames America
Mr Erdogan may yet see sense. But his autocratic style fosters bad policies. He has undermined the institutions that ought to stand up to him. The central bank, which should be independent and technocratic, defers to a leader with crackpot views. The finance ministry is run by the president’s son-in-law. The media, which should be pointing out Mr Erdogan’s mistakes, are so cowed that they repeat his conspiracy theories instead. Deprived of real news, many Turks believe their problems are caused by a Western plot. With no one to curb him, Mr Erdogan is free to indulge his worst instincts.
In normal times, Turkey’s Western allies might help by telling Mr Erdogan to change course. But European governments are scared to upset him, lest he open the gates and let Syrian refugees flood into Europe. And Mr Trump is engaged in a ridiculous chest-thumping contest with the Turkish leader, with each man trading threats and stirring up patriotic anger against the other. Neither is willing to back down, for fear of looking weak.
In the short run Turks will suffer far more from the crisis. Many are already feeling poorer as prices soar. In the long run, however, America will suffer, too. Turkey is an important ally in a crucial place, straddling the crossroads between Europe, the Middle East and Asia. If it falls out too badly with the West, it may drift even closer to Russia or China. Mr Trump is right to press for the release of Mr Brunson, but wrong to use tariffs to that end. The rules-based trading system depends on countries not using such blunt weapons indiscriminately. And the NATO alliance is undermined when America’s president needlessly inflames disputes with tetchy member states.
Mr Trump and Mr Erdogan need to find a face-saving way for each to declare victory and dial down the aggression, as Mr Erdogan has previously done with Russia and Mr Trump with North Korea. That would create room for the West, including the IMF, to help Turkey step back from the abyss. It will be hard to save a country whose leader does not understand why it is in trouble. But Turkey is too important to be abandoned. [1019 words]
Source: Economics https://www.economist.com/leaders/2018/08/18/how-much-to-worry-about-turkeys-turmoil | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2018-8-17 22:14:00
收藏
收藏
