OP-ED: Worldsourcing replaces outsourcing, By William J. Amelio, BBC, 10 December 2007
Good piece in line with my vision of the Core's emerging--and ever strengthening--rule set.
This is, quite essentially, why I'm so high on Enterra's future: the harmonization and dynamic management of rules among very complex domains is becoming THE definition of security, which, in its nonzero-sumness, is crowding out those zero-sum definitions of defense that still afflict our world, diverting attention from serious and eminently addressable problems.
| Permalink |
Comments (1)
World-sourcing in its current sense started in U.S. in 1970s. The Department of Commerce, using DOD as a partner and first buyer defined the digital part manufacturing specifications, software and procedures to create network parts manufacturing. From the start we emphasized international standards on those aspects as well as the evolving IT networks. It would take real pea brains to not see that World-sourcing of cutting edge businesses would follow. DOD promoted the process overseas though its joint logistics efforts with NATO and Japan. The civil aircraft manufacturers and automakers were early commercial players and expanded their involvement over the years. Carter, Reagan, Bush I, and Clinton administrations all were involved in some manner with Clinton showing the most knowledge of the new technologies in his original platform. Now, under Bush II, the DOD has become the major player to tutor and sponsor small and medium sized businesses in the new techniques. World-sourcing of military and commercial products became a major player in the U.S./European post Cold War relationship to world.
DOD used logistics to promote mass customization techniques.
The problem with World-sourcing is that due to lack of media, political and academic forums for the public, we have not prepared enough young folks for finding roles in this new order. Part of the reason was that the Republican right and union left would not be happy if they became aware too soon of our government involvement in changing the domestic and world economies. Clinton's Secretary of Labor wrote very incisive books predicting the change and calling for modernization of our education system. However, the Labor Department staff during the Clinton era did not grasp the implications, or have the courage to deal with them. The last time I watched the K-12 system's reaction in California, was their mild amusement about potential changes, unless someone would provide grant money to look into the possibilities.
I don't think the No Child Left Behind program addressed any insights of how the world economy had changed and how students could adjust to that change.
If you already understand what's going on and use the Internet, you can find people that will point you toward education and business
opportunities. If not ............. there is always Lou Dobbs for help!
Posted by Louis Heberlein | December 18, 2007 7:41 PM