Sign In

Eric Stryson

MD, pan-Asia think tank - Global & Regional Awareness - Purposeful Leadership - Re-Designing Society

Eric Stryson is the Managing Director at The Global Institute For Tomorrow (GIFT), an independent pan-Asian think tank based in Hong Kong and Kuala Lumpur since its foundation in 2004. GIFT focuses on understanding the shift of influence from the West to Asia, the interplay between business, society, and the state, and the evolution of global capitalism rules. With a unique approach to leadership learning, GIFT offers exposure to contemporary issues shaping markets, policy, and society in the 21st century.

Highlights

Aug 23 · linkedin

I read a lot of commentary on technology in education: The potential & pitfalls of AI; The banning of devices. But are students learning how to think critically about technology in society?

It is arguably the most important subject kids need to learn as they become active members of society.

Lest we collectively remain blind to the social costs of existing digital tech applications: consumption, distraction, polarisation, etc

Continuing to allow market forces to set the agenda, even against public interest .

Bold new approaches are needed for preparing students for a technology-enabled future.

This is what we are now working on in Hong Kong, for K-12 students, in preparation for our annual experiential leadership programme.

In 2022 the HKSAR Government released the Hong Kong Innovation and Technology (I&T) Development Blueprint with the vision to establish Hong Kong as an international I&T hub. https://lnkd.in/gW23f_jE

A key objective is to cultivate the local talent needed to realise the ambition – in addition to attracting talents from around the world.

But how to best prepare these future tech talents - and professionals in all fields?

To leverage China’s industry strengths and Hong Kong’s access to capital and international super-connector status.

It requires expansive international mindsets.

The future workforce, to say nothing of future tech leadership, must be able to think critically, not simply follow trends from Silicon Valley.

If we believe technology is a problem-solving tool, what problems does Hong Kong need to solve? Who will teach the next generation?

We examined this in 2021 in our report Redefining ‘Smart City’ for Resilience in the New Normal. https://lnkd.in/gGa58TxT

What public goods can be enabled by technology and need to be prioritised?

How to put money to work in developing the technology applications that will benefit all of society, not only tech owners?

These are questions that go beyond simplistic notions of how to scale an app and monetise attention.

Cultivating a broader view on technology should start early.

Teachers at all levels need new training, new skills and a practical understanding of current and future technologies.

It all needs funding.

All of it needs to be driven by bold and visionary policy making.

Share your comments below and talk to us if you want to help us as we shape this project.

Aug 8 · linkedin

Many companies are seeking to transform their cultures. At university, I studied social psychology with a leading figure in the psychology of influence (incl. cult dynamics), Professor Philip Zimbardo. He led groundbreaking research into the effects of our environment on human behaviour, most notoriously in the Stanford Prison Experiment.

Lately, I have been considering how this applies to the mindsets and behaviours within large organisations, and the desire for creating internal cultures that prioritise staff wellbeing and positive outcomes in society.

This is a topic that should be of interest to all business leaders, indeed all staff at large companies, and especially those who aspire to higher ranks in organisations.

Some of the defining dynamics we have observed within big companies reinforce mindsets that are not only undesirable but sometimes downright harmful.

🔸 Abdication of personal accountability. “It’s not my problem.”

🔸 Perverse rewards systems misaligned with public interest.

🔸 Pay packages that are over inflated relative to value provided to society.

🔸 Plausible deniability for bad behaviour - no chain of custody for decision making.

🔸 Internal politics that erodes moral sentiment and even basic critical thinking

🔸 Administrative burden stifling time to think, reflect, or nurture curiosity.

🔸 Proliferation of always-on communication that scrambles focused and deep thought. This is not just a big company phenomenon.

The list can go on.

I disagree with the anachronistic counter argument that big companies necessarily make life better. They strive to convince us as much.

Certainly, we benefit from an array of products and services that improve quality of life.

Yet the reality is that centralised administrative functions, supply chain efficiencies and financial leverage are foremost tools to concentrate economic gains.

Small and medium sized companies can do just as well. And often more humanely.

We continue to work determinedly to change mindsets throughout the ranks at big companies.

This should be seen as one of our greatest challenges as a society – simply because of the vast resources they command, and vast impact on people and natural systems.

Too often governments are castrated from effectively reigning in self-interested corporate overreach, and thereby protecting public good which is their job.

I am an optimist in imagining a better state of affairs.

We need to be realists when confronting the structural causes of harm.

If I am honest, deep down I am pessimistic that such monstrous administrative structures can ever be adequately reformed. Striving for intellectual humility, I am open to being proven wrong.

Eric Stryson
Add to my network

Location

Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR