In a Flat World, Everyone's a Leader
Thomas Friedman is the “Foreign Affairs� columnist for The New York Times as well as a Pulitzer Prize winning author. His poignant insights into foreign affairs remind us of daunting global crises like terrorism and environmental degradation while simultaneously inspiring readers that a better future is possible. He believes it is everyone’s job to be a leader (especially Americans) and to work towards the common good “because in a flat world, if you don’t visit a bad neighborhood, it might visit you� (634).
Friedman’s chapters touched on so many of the themes of our class and tied to so many of our readings, I found myself highlighting almost everything. He features stories of personal change, organizational change, and political change all within the context of our changing world and the innovations (both good and bad) that are evolving out of technology and globalization. My three favorite concepts from his chapters that seemed somewhat new to our discussion of leadership are co-creation, geo-greenism, and the stimulation of positive imaginations. Co-creation is collaboration; whether it’s between leaders and followers or between businesses and consumers, it is the idea that stakeholder involvement generates solutions and progress better than conventional top-down decision-making (553). Geo-greenism is Friedman’s new movement uniting environmentalists, evangelicals and geo-strategists in order to promote global sustainability (578). Stimulating positive imaginations means to “encourage people to focus on productive outcomes that advance and unite civilization� (609). All of the concepts have an underlying theme of collaboration and using our collective wisdom for collective progress. I honestly cannot define any limitations to this reading. Friedman does an impressive job of coherently linking a wide variety of stories ranging from the personal to the political, using narration to define themes and uphold his arguments, and speaking in a language we can all understand. It was my favorite reading thus far, although I may be biased because I’ve been reading his columns and books for some years now. I also liked how I could see so many of the themes and concepts of our other readings exemplified in these two chapters. As a biased reader, I am interested in hearing what others may have identified as limitations in this reading. Did anything strike you as completely off-base or unbelievable? Did you find the reading difficult at all? Why? I’d also like to know if others felt inspired by this reading. Are you ready to “co-create� a better future? Do you have “one good example� to inspire others? Do you have “more dreams than memories�?
Comments
One thing that I missed were stories about how to overcome those that might work against a better future. My general feeling was that he stayed too much in the warm-fuzzy and not really toeing up against these large market-forces that are restructuring our world [for better and worse].
As evidenced by my entry on Friedman, I've been weltschmerzing a bit lately, and hoping for more on how to work past the bumps, not put a happy face on it all. I like his columns as well, but feel that his position as a well-known journalist could be used to press a bit more on issues [like Kristof who has seemed to choose his battles].
Still, I have more dreams than memories. A could caution to keep those dreams alive is to stay on guard against those that'll step on your happy parade. Enough euphemisms? Don't forget - if you don't visit a bad world, it'll visit you. Friedman goes in Teddy Ruxpin category - mostly a big teddy bear with a good piece of knowledge every now and then...
Posted by: Sarah Wolbert | April 14, 2008 07:56 PM