When people think of glocal, they most readily grasp that it is a manufactured word based upon a combination of global and local. That's the easy part. The glocal advocates acknowledge the shrinking of our world, and the opportunity and inevitability of working with people from around the world on a daily basis.
Glocalists accept our shrinking world and embrace -- not shy away from -all that it means.
The number one dynamic which made this happen in the past 7 years is the common usage of the internet and related technology. It is not enough for it to exist. It must be widely used to become relevant.
Today we communicate routinely with those on the opposite side of our spinning mass the same as we do with those across the hall way in our office. Data, personal words, and video images come to our hand held communications devices as we sit, walk, drive, and fly.
Today, I just want to comment on a personal observation. The unity of technology is far ahead of cultural oneness. While we can communicate readily with one another in words and pictures we still face a giant chasm of cultural assumptions and systems of thought. Philosophy and training in realm of mores, priorities, values and social custom still stand in the way of smooth and successful partnerships.
When only governments and large corporations interacted globally, they sent the experts to do intercultural work. Today, at the glocal level with everyone communicating cross culturally, it is easy to find ourselves embroiled in agreements which both sides express themselves ready to move forward but neither side has fully comprehended what the other is actually thinking.
Just one example... Are leaders in countries formally labeled as "third world" adjusted to the concept of entering into relationships as full partners? Are they ready to accept the responsibilities of daily accountability? Or is the assumption still one of "we take", "you give" and everyone "understands why that is necessary."
I am slowly learning. Slow in part because I don't want to accept it. Paternalism is still alive and well. Perhaps it is fed by USA's thinking and vocabulary. But it is equally the refusal of glocal partners to accept full accountability to perform whatever is agreed upon.
This may be greed. In some cases, yes. But I believe it goes deeper. It may be years of learned thinking. Cultural attitudes.
No solutions here today. Just sharing the glocal musings.
Glocalists accept our shrinking world and embrace -- not shy away from -all that it means.
The number one dynamic which made this happen in the past 7 years is the common usage of the internet and related technology. It is not enough for it to exist. It must be widely used to become relevant.
Today we communicate routinely with those on the opposite side of our spinning mass the same as we do with those across the hall way in our office. Data, personal words, and video images come to our hand held communications devices as we sit, walk, drive, and fly.
Today, I just want to comment on a personal observation. The unity of technology is far ahead of cultural oneness. While we can communicate readily with one another in words and pictures we still face a giant chasm of cultural assumptions and systems of thought. Philosophy and training in realm of mores, priorities, values and social custom still stand in the way of smooth and successful partnerships.
When only governments and large corporations interacted globally, they sent the experts to do intercultural work. Today, at the glocal level with everyone communicating cross culturally, it is easy to find ourselves embroiled in agreements which both sides express themselves ready to move forward but neither side has fully comprehended what the other is actually thinking.
Just one example... Are leaders in countries formally labeled as "third world" adjusted to the concept of entering into relationships as full partners? Are they ready to accept the responsibilities of daily accountability? Or is the assumption still one of "we take", "you give" and everyone "understands why that is necessary."
I am slowly learning. Slow in part because I don't want to accept it. Paternalism is still alive and well. Perhaps it is fed by USA's thinking and vocabulary. But it is equally the refusal of glocal partners to accept full accountability to perform whatever is agreed upon.
This may be greed. In some cases, yes. But I believe it goes deeper. It may be years of learned thinking. Cultural attitudes.
No solutions here today. Just sharing the glocal musings.
