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！
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； and
lifelong learning possibilities…the more it will be willing and able to jump into
the new industries and new job niches spawned by the flat world and to move from dying
companies to thriving companies。
Creating legal and institutional frameworks for universal portability of pensions
and health care …in addition to Social Security； Medicare； and Medicaid…will help
people build up such muscles。 Today roughly 50 percent of Americans don't have a
job…based pension plan； other than Social Security。 Those who are fortunate enough
to have one cannot easily take it with them from job to job。 What is needed is one
simple universal portable pension scheme； along the lines proposed by the Progressive
Policy Institute； that would get rid of the confusing welter of sixteen different
tax…deferred options now offered by the government and consolidate them all into a
single vehicle。 This universal plan； which you would open with your first job； would
encourage workers to establish 401 （k） tax…deferred savings programs。 Each worker
and his or her employe