Comments on: Separating Innovation and Production http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/12/24/separating-innovation-and-production/ any technology distinguishable from magic is not sufficiently advanced Fri, 09 Jan 2009 02:15:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6 By: Mark Federman http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/12/24/separating-innovation-and-production/#comment-38473 Mark Federman Sun, 24 Dec 2006 17:09:23 +0000 http://www.robhyndman.com/2006/12/24/separating-innovation-and-production/#comment-38473 The basic assumption of offshoring that you cite - "us" is the brains and "them" is the brawn - comes from a deeply rooted combination of colonialist and Taylorist thinking. This is far from surprising, since it is a theme that permeates contemporary business management schools and training. North American business could have taken a lesson from the Japanese experience over the past five decades in which "Made in Japan" was originally understood to mean "cheaply manufactured goods" but now conveys "highest quality engineering and innovation," (although, arguably, "Made in South Korea" conveys a similar quality). But North American business is very slow to learn, it seems, and are facing a similar lesson in much greater scale with China and India. Chinese manufacturing technologies are now equal to or beyond the capabilities of North American, and we are hearing reports in some of the business journals of innovative Chinese engineering and design that did not come from the order-placers in North America. Your ghastly realization is worse than the vision you portray: We in North America will also be left with clueless politicians who live in reality-resistant bubbles. The basic assumption of offshoring that you cite - “us” is the brains and “them” is the brawn - comes from a deeply rooted combination of colonialist and Taylorist thinking. This is far from surprising, since it is a theme that permeates contemporary business management schools and training. North American business could have taken a lesson from the Japanese experience over the past five decades in which “Made in Japan” was originally understood to mean “cheaply manufactured goods” but now conveys “highest quality engineering and innovation,” (although, arguably, “Made in South Korea” conveys a similar quality). But North American business is very slow to learn, it seems, and are facing a similar lesson in much greater scale with China and India. Chinese manufacturing technologies are now equal to or beyond the capabilities of North American, and we are hearing reports in some of the business journals of innovative Chinese engineering and design that did not come from the order-placers in North America.

Your ghastly realization is worse than the vision you portray: We in North America will also be left with clueless politicians who live in reality-resistant bubbles.

]]>