1/29

One aspect of future business where our class clearly disagreed was whether business will become more or less integrated. My original opinion was that business would be more integrated because we’ve seen shifts towards the one-stop-shop box stores of Walmart and Target away from purchasing our goods separately from the butcher, veggie stand, and other “specialty” stores. However, as I thought more, many modern companies and organizations have also become less integrated and rely on a network of extremely specialized entities. The example in class was Eli Lilly, where people who are not part of the regular R&D team are provided incentives to innovate, but are not integrated into the entire organization. The company, who specializes in manufacturing, basically outsources the research process to those who specialize in research. This is specialization at its best. In conclusion, I think that there might be a polarization. I see a trend in integration of networks (distribution markets, corporate conglomerates, social behavior, etc.), but specialization in specific skills (research and design firms, outsourcing non-core functions, etc.).

One thing that will shape our future is personal choice. Our class discussion revolved mostly around how technology will improve business or standard of life in the future, but did not address how people will choose to embrace the technologies. The economist in me wants to say that everyone makes the “correct” decision by balancing short-term interests and long-term interests. However, I believe that after the fact, most people would not have made the same decisions if given a second chance after the fact. For example, we are, supposedly, more “sophisticated” now than at any other time in history in food and nutrition. However, this generation is the first in history that has a life expectancy lower than the previous generation, due primarily to obesity. The increased knowledge helps us understand what can help the body, but it also provides the ability to consume much more fat, salt and sugar than previously available. I would argue that the shorter life span is because of personal choice and preferring the short-term enjoyment of the fat, salt, and sugar over the long-term interest of living a long and healthy life. I would think that people at the end of their life would prefer to live longer years rather than eat the fat, salt, and sugar (this can be debated). My point is that advances in technology or knowledge are only good if they help humans achieve what we really think is worth achieving. This opens up an entirely different debate, which I will not continue today.