Parlez-Vous Anglais? Yes, of Course.

Europeans speaking perfect English sounds like good news for native speakers, but it may also be a threat.

Europeans speaking perfect English sounds like good news for native speakers, but it may also be a threat.


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.

Pamela Druckerman / Aug. 10, 2019 / NYTimes

QUOTE:

The EF English Proficiency Index, whose online test rates adults around the world, has found … Of the 27 countries it ranks as highly or very highly proficient, 22 are in Europe.

It won’t be long before Americans realize that top European schools offer a fast-growing number of bachelor’s and master’s degrees, taught entirely in English, for a fraction of the price of many American schools, even if you add on overseas airfare. (In 2009, there were about 55 English B.A.’s offered in Continental Europe; by 2017, there were 2,900.)

Natives are losing their competitive edge. A few jobs still require perfect English, but in the corporate world good English has become a basic requirement, not a personal selling point. … Crucially, the ubiquity of English lulls us Anglophones into thinking that it’s O.K. to be monolingual. It’s not. I’ve been at Amsterdam dinners where everyone is speaking brilliant English, but the minute I leave the table they switch back to Dutch. If all we know is English, we won’t know what the rest of the world is saying about us.

UNQUOTE

READ THE ARTICLE…

The end of the white-collar world as we know it is nigh!

5g new.png

What industrial Globalization did during the last 30 years to blue-collar workers and for the era’s winners: Executives, investors, and stockholders…

…the "5G digital revolution" is going to do to & for white-collar workers during the next 15 years. 

Driving time to work will be irrelevant, you will meet your colleagues from around the world in your company’s 24/7 Holographic Meeting Room.  Often, they will be able to work for less.  All indications are that staying at the table will mean staying in the middle class.

We can’t help you with the Hard &/or Creative Skills you will need.  We can help you with the agility you need to work well on a global team. 

The dawn of the 5G world. How 5G technology will ultimately alter the DNA of the digital experience / December 14, 2018 / Read the Washington Post article with content by Content from AT&T Business

Will 5G remake the world, or just make it a little faster? The promise and pitfalls of wireless’s next generation / Read the Deloitte report


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors.

Working abroad could boost your salary by more than 1/3

“…18 to 34-year-old respondents said they believed they were promoted move quickly after moving abroad.”

“…18 to 34-year-old respondents said they believed they were promoted move quickly after moving abroad.”


Karen Gilchrist / July 3, 2019 / CNBC Make It

QUOTE:

HSBC’s Expat’s survey released Thursday…feedback from 18,000 expats living in 163 markets.

…millennials and Gen Z employees enjoyed the greatest step up in terms of earnings and career progression of all overseas workers…

The average 18 to 34-year-old’s earnings rose 35% after relocating overseas…

…(31%) of 18 to 34-year-old respondents said they believed they were promoted move quickly after moving abroad. Additionally, 71% said they had picked up new skills and 55% said they felt more confident.

Three locations — Hong Kong, the United Arab Emirates, and the U.K. — particularly stood out in this year’s report

UNQUOTE

READ THE ARTICLE…


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.

The Surprising History of Nationalist Internationalism

Nationalists.PNG

David Motadel, a historian at the London School of Economics and Political Science / July 3, 2019 / Opinion section, NYTimes

QUOTE:

The far right is less parochial than we think…

….
Internationalism, a concept that, after all, implicitly presumes the existence of the nation, and extreme nationalism are not necessarily incompatible.

UNQUOTE

[RP: Before our Global Agility training, we clearly define the difference between Globalization, the International System, Globalism, and Global Agility.

  •  Globalization: economic and technological facts, genies we cannot put back in the bottle.

  • The International System: Formal agreements between nations – regulating, among other things, international trade -- largely based on the Bretton Woods Agreement of 1944.

  • Globalism and Anti-Globalism: Opinion about the previous two.

Global Agility refers to what we as individuals can do about the risks and opportunities present in our personal globalized/globalizing environment.

The ongoing Globalization of our economy creates demand for what Human Resource professionals call “Global Agility”.  As individuals the only thing we can do about the International System is to be members of a public that understands enough about the issues to give our representatives some leeway as they try to fix problems and update the system.  While we enjoy opinions as much as anyone else, we are not in the business of promoting or resisting Globalization.  We are in the business of helping anyone – no matter what opinions they express – to better pursue their economic self-interest and promote their beliefs and values.  Our motto is that you have to fit well in the world as it is to effectively pursue your success and represent your values. 

We doubt that a world of globally agile people will agree on much. We are sure that a world of globally inept people will fight about their disagreements.]

 

READ THE ARTICLE…


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.

Deciding how to decide #goodglobalization

Decisions.PNG

Scott Hass / June 17, 2019 / Letter to Editor, NYTImes

QUOTE:

The best decisions are often made with three strategies I experienced in Japan: Consider the effect on others of the decision; consider if the best decision is not to decide at that moment; and have deep awareness of the sources of the thoughts and emotions informing the decision.

UNQUOTE

READ THE ARTICLE…

The writer, a clinical psychologist, is the author of the forthcoming book, “Why Be Happy? The Japanese Way of Acceptance.”


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.

The new definition of a Kilogram represents a victory of humankind over chaos in the universe. Really.

Kili2.PNG

Brian Resnick / May 20, 2019 / VOX

QUOTE:

For more than a century, the kilogram had a very simple definition: It was the mass of a hunk of platinum-iridium alloy that’s been housed at the International Bureau of Weights and Measures in Sèvres, France since 1889.

And for those thinking the kilogram doesn’t matter in the US, which uses imperial units like pounds, feet, and gallons, our measurements are derived from (metric) units. Officially, in the US, 1 pound is defined as 0.45359237 kilograms.

The problem is that Big K is a man-made object, and therefore, it is imperfect. If Big K changes, everything else has to adjust. And this has happened. Big K is not constant. It has lost around 50 micrograms (about the mass of an eyelash) since it was created. But, frustratingly, when Big K loses mass, it’s still exactly one kilogram, per the old definition.

That’s no good. So, what’s better?

The new definition anchors the value of the kilogram to a constant in nature, which can never, ever change

Starting Monday, the kilogram will be defined by the Planck constant.

UNQUOTE

READ THE ARTICLE…


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.

Ghana's 2020 digital census [RP: IT to help female migrants from rural regions]

Ghana.PNG

Youyou Zhou in Accra Ghana / June 18, 2019 / Quartz Africa

QUOTE:

…2020 will be the first time Ghana uses electronic questionnaires to survey the population, a practice only a few African nations have succeeded in doing, and a lot more are trying to adopt going forward.

….

For a country like Ghana, where data on its residents are incomplete and infrequently updated, the census provides a rare opportunity to collect comprehensive data on desegregated population and map all housing structures in the country. Aided by digital technologies, the census results can be useful to allocate resources and formalize much more of the country’s economy.

But census isn’t only about updating population figures. The categories and questions designed into the questionnaire will help collect quality data on human and household conditions across the country. The Ghanaian government wants to pack as many questions as possible in one questionnaire because the kind of desegregated data the census collects isn’t available elsewhere in Ghana.

Ghana’s government wants to find out as much as possible about its citizens right down to how they manage their waste… That can help us determine how disease can spread and what has to be done to improve sanitation within the country…

The scale of data the census collects is crucial to the government’s effort to formalize larger parts of Ghana’s economy, where over 80% of the employed non-farming population work in informal sectors… Jobs such as street vendors, taxi drivers or head porters, most of whom are female migrant workers from rural regions working in urban areas,  aren’t registered with the government. 

The country has tried to roll out a national identification system multiple times in the past without success. There isn’t a uniform address system, either: Many in rural areas do not have a numbered address and rely on a nearby landmark such as a tree, or a gate, to indicate where they live. The current administration wants to solve both problems: The government is pushing residents to register biometric national ID cards (Ghana cards) that assign Ghanians unique ID numbers, as well as building a formal addressing system to document all housing structures in the country since 2017.

“To fight inequality, we must count everyone, and make everyone accountable to pay their fair share in taxes” – Ghana VP Bawumia

A complete database of its people and buildings could help inform policy decisions on taxation and social welfare for the government: a step toward a more formalized economy.

THE OBSTACLES

In 2010, the government had to postpone the census from March to September because of a funding gap. This year, a digital census imposes new challenges: GSS currently doesn’t have the right gadgets, and the money isn’t in place yet to procure 60,000 of them.

The tablets currently being used for the trial census have to be charged every hour or so. Some new tablets Ghana hopes to acquire will be solar charged to be used in areas without electricity. They also need to be water resistant as heavy rains are expected in Ghana close to the end of March.

One source of the gadgets may come from countries that have conducted their censuses digitally. GSS is working with United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), a development partner for the census, targeting especially two African countries, Malawi and Kenya. Malawi conducted its first digital census last year with the support from UNFPA: among the 20,000 tablets they used, 15,000 were from the UK, while the other 5,000 were bought by the government.

UNQUOTE

READ THE ARTICLE…


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.

Parting thoughts from a French diplomat as he leaves America.

Does the U.S. want to become a new “Middle Kingdom” or does it want to continue helping to shape the world?

Does the U.S. want to become a new “Middle Kingdom” or does it want to continue helping to shape the world?


François Delattre,France’s ambassador to the United Nations/ June 13, 2019 / Opinion, NYTimes

[RP: “The Middle Kingdom...was the domain of King Augustus Bonifacius. King Bonifacius was not a good ruler of the land. He was greedy, uncaring of his heirlooms, and kept a retinue of worthless knights. Eventually his misrule led to Farmer Giles' decision to establish himself as an independent lord and eventually the king of the new Little Kingdom. ...Augustus Bonifacius was unable to prevent the separation of Giles' realm from the Middle Kingdom.”

“Farmer Giles of Ham” is a short story written by J.R.R. Tolkien in 1947]

QUOTE:

We are now in a new world disorder. The three main safety mechanisms are no longer functioning: no more American power willing to be the last-resort enforcer of international order; no solid system of international governance; and, most troubling, no real concert of nations able to re-establish common ground.

In the absence of a functioning multilateral system, the world tends to devolve into spheres of influence; that leads of confrontation, as European history has shown too many times. The risk is even greater when geopolitical divides are superimposed on the technological battle between American- and Chinese-led digital worlds.

Europe faces an existential decision. Does it want to remain a full-fledged player in the world, with a vision and policy it owns? Or will it resign itself to becoming, at best, an impotent witness to the rivalry among the great global powers or, at worst, these powers’ playground?

The United States also faces a fundamental choice. Does it want to become a new “Middle Kingdom,” an insular Fortress America? Or does it want to continue speaking to the world and helping to shape it?

 A prerequisite for a stable international environment is for America to be engaged in world affairs and multilateral institutions. To combat terrorism, prevent nuclear proliferation, manage international crises and protect our children from an environmental tragedy in the making, we need America’s strong commitment, as well as new forms of multilateralism adapted to the times we live in. America can’t make it alone, and the world can’t make it without America.

UNQUOTE

READ THE ARTICLE…


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.

Renew the Bretton Woods System

The gradual disintegration of the global rules-based economic order requires a new ‘Bretton Woods’ conference to reaffirm the benefit for all countries of internationally accepted, treaty-based economic relationships – and to reinvent the institutions to manage those rules.

The gradual disintegration of the global rules-based economic order requires a new ‘Bretton Woods’ conference to reaffirm the benefit for all countries of internationally accepted, treaty-based economic relationships – and to reinvent the institutions to manage those rules.


Stephen Pickford / June 12, 2019 / Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs

QUOTE:

Towards the end of the Second World War, the Allied powers came together in 1944 to plan a new economic order for the post-war world which would avoid a repeat of the disastrous policy mistakes of the 1920s and 1930s.

At the conference in Bretton Woods, New Hampshire, 44 Allied countries met under the intellectual leadership of Harry Dexter White (a senior US Treasury official) and John Maynard Keynes. The conference envisaged new rules of the game to prevent countries following the ‘beggar-thy-neighbour’ policies that had led to the Great Depression.

This new structure was initially successful in allowing the world to recover after the war.

Over the subsequent 50 years the structure of the global economy changed rapidly.

But these institutions, and the rules that they manage, have not adapted quickly enough over the last decade to the changing world order, and to the growth of popular discontent with globalization and internationalism.

To tackle this erosion of support, a new ‘Bretton Woods’ conference is needed. As with its predecessor in 1944, its aim would be to reaffirm the benefits for all countries of international cooperation rather than unilateralism.

Risk versus reward

But the current challenges require a substantial rethink of the international economic and financial architecture. Incremental changes are unlikely to be able to address these challenges. And without changes, the Bretton Woods institutions – and the international economic system that they support – will continue to erode, until at some point they break.

UNQUOTE

The Bretton Woods Conference, 1944 / US State Dept. Archive

READ THE ARTICLE…


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.

How the World is actually (not) governed

Blood Diamonds.PNG

Interview by LYNN FRIES of HARRIS GLECKMAN, senior fellow at the Center for Governance and Sustainability at the University of Massachusetts Boston. / May 23, 2019 / The Real News Network

[RP PREFACE:

We individuals are pawns on the bottom board of a 3-dimensional game of chess.  We organize into Nation-States so that we as law-abiding individuals are not in a war-prone “state of nature” vis a vis each other.  We’ve created and empowered Companies that cooperate/compete and produce wealth on the middle level of the game.  On the top level, Nation-States, who are in a “state of nature”, relate to each other…first to secure themselves with armies and alliances, second to prosper from their security. 

So, people and companies organized into countries; countries that make war and/or cooperate with each other in whatever ultimately non-binding yet lawful “international system” they can devise and maintain.

In the interview “There Are no Nation-States, Only Corporate Global Governors” Harris Gleckman describes the players and the state of play in this space between nations at the top of our world.  He focuses on how, during the recent decades of “globalization”, corporate players from the middle level have begun to play independently not only in the “international” space between Nation-States but also inside combinations of Nation-States who, until now, enclosed both their populations and their companies.  

So, people organized into countries with domestic companies; “post citizens” and transnational corporations; sovereign countries; and a non-sovereign “international system”.]

It’s a long 2-part interview.  I am going to quote some descriptions and definitions, then I’m going to follow the author by relaying the example he used to best explain his point.

 

QUOTE: 

 “One of the things which prompted the World Economic Forum to... eel the need for a new system of global governance was an anxiety that the whole globalization project of the last 30 years… …they could see that the aspirational benefits collapsed with the impact of the start of the 2008-’09 financial crisis. And so, they said if we’re not going to be able to maintain the dreams of people, their anger will come to the fore. And so, we need to come up with a new system of governance which keeps the corporate role central, but now involves civil society and governments and other actors to be participants in this process…”

 

“Previous to this initiative on multistakeholderism , we had formal global governors in nation-states and de facto governors in the corporate world.

Under multistakeholderism, the formal global governors now become a combination of corporate executives, government representatives, civil society representatives, academics, media figures, whatever combination is seen as useful for providing a new buffer space in global governance, but that remains unenforceable, remains a voluntary system.”

 

Volunteerism is another principle in back of multi-stakeholder governance. When volunteerism says we will declare this is what we would like to do. Those who would like to join this process might be welcome to do so. When they find that it’s not what they like, they can say goodbye. And if they find that the voluntary principles that are articulated are not to their short-term or medium-term sense of power, they can ignore it, because there’s no statutory penalty for not doing it.”

[Example: Blood Diamonds]

“A number of major civil society organizations correctly brought to the world’s attention that diamonds were being taken from central war zones in Africa, sold on the international markets and then the money that was from those sales was being used to buy arms to continue the wars in those areas. They brilliantly created the public image that these diamonds, which the industry had spent decades saying these are love objects, you provided one to someone that you really loved. But these were really, really blood diamonds. They were tied up in death and destruction.

This was a shock to the world diamond industry. This was a shock to some of the diamond exporting countries who saw some of their income go down. And so, the diamond industry said to the civil society organizations, “let’s join forces. We can solve this problem in conjunction with some of the African exporting countries. And we will set up a voluntary certification system.” That voluntary certification system was that the countries were to say that any given group of diamonds were extracted from areas which were not war zones.

What happened at the United Nations is that those African countries and the European countries went to the United Nations and said don’t deal with this issue. It is being handled by this multi-stakeholder group. Let’s give them time to do it by themselves. And in fact, let’s give them the United Nations blessing for their efforts. The blood diamond called the Kimberley Process tried to set out, wrote some rules defining areas in conflict, defining how the certificate should work. But then it didn’t really work that way when diamonds were being presented to the diamond industry to purchase. Funny thing, there were no arrests made if the diamonds didn’t have the right certificates. Funny thing, every once in a while some of these diamonds were being certified by countries as if they came from non-war areas. Civil societies raised their voices, saying, wait a minute, we’ve got to fix our certificates. We have to punish those countries who are falsely certifying diamonds. We have to issue sanctions against firms who are buying uncertified diamonds. The diamond industry and the countries involved said no, no, no. Eventually the civil society organizations, one by one, withdrew.

And so you end up having a situation where even the public pressure of those three key organizations that brought to the world’s attention the issue of blood diamonds had to withdraw, because the process was so voluntary it did not work. However, it did manage to prevent the international system from actually having formal intergovernmental rules about the process or establishing global sanctions that could, through a multilateral system, been much more effective.”

UNQUOTE

READ THE INTERVIEWS…

There Are no Nation-States, Only Corporate Global Governors (Pt 1/2)

Three Ways To Discipline Corporate Global Governors (Pt 2/2)


Disclaimer The views and opinions relayed in this blog are those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of Global Agility Services LLC or its staff.