Abstract
3 min readI would like to talk about subject of managing research (which members of IRI are all in business of doing) but from a somewhat different perspective than usual. I think we would agree that most of work that brings technology to people is done by companies. But where we may slightly disagree is over question of whether sole function of companies should be to serve a financial objective, or whether there's also a social objective that ought to be served. I know, I know. I'm a Cambridge academic. I'm a liberal, pinko, whatever. Actually, I'm a pretty hard-core capitalist. And I'm going to arrive at a conclusion that may be a little bit surprising, which is that combining a financial function with a social function may actually be a good thing for early-stage innovation in current business environment (though not necessarily in later stages). Let me start with my motivations and why I've titled this talk Jobs for My Grandchildren. I have two grandchildren. One of them is a thoughtful, intelligent three-year-old boy. His sister is a one-year-old and is, as her mother describes her, ferocious. They'll be coming on job market and looking for jobs in about 25 years. So question is, What should we be doing now so that, when they get to be 25, they will have same opportunities for really interesting jobs that we had? I had no trouble getting a job when I left graduate school, but if you talk to students now, thing they're most concerned with is whether or not they're going to get a job. It really is a serious issue. If you think of way our society is set up, you can't really become an adult unless you have a job. You have to have one. The problem of job creation in United States is often framed in terms of what we can do better than India or China. I think there is actually a much more demanding problem: it is not competing for existing jobs, or even creating new jobs, but creating new categories of jobs. That is how we prospered in period between World War II and present: we created new kinds of jobs, jobs that simply didn't exist Bioengineering didn't exist; pharmaceutical industry as we know it now didn't exist; information technology didn't exist; social engineering didn't exist. The places where we've done only so-so, such as automobiles, were areas where advances in manufacturing were spectacular, but those kinds of jobs existed The Teakettle Problem: Framing Issue Let me start by talking about jobs and what is called in trade the tea problem. This was first posed to me by a theologian, John Polkinghorne, but it's become pretty well known for helping to think through complex issues. Suppose I have a tea kettle, and tea kettle is hot. Why is tea kettle One answer is that kinetic energy of molecules is high due to thermal agitation; that's a scientific answer. A second answer is that it was on stove for 15 minutes; that's an historical answer. A third answer is that I wanted tea; that's an intentional answer. And there are other kinds of answers. The point these teakettle answers make is that when you ask a question--Why is water hot? or How do we create jobs?--you actually ask many questions all at once. If you only give one box for answer, you're doomed from very beginning: you've walked into a semantic trap. So when we ask, How do we create jobs? we need to be open to many answers. There are jobs that are broad employment challenges: How do we get Detroit back on its feet? There are political challenges: How do we help people who vote? But jobs challenge that I'm interested in is: How will we create entirely new industries, new areas for my grandchildren to work in? You might say, Okay, but United States is a very creative society; why is this even a problem? We've done it before. I think there are a couple of answers to that question. …
Discussion(0)
No comments yet. Be the first to comment.