Bold Business Logo

BOLD OPINION: Despite the Suez Canal Blockage, Globalization Is Still the Future

For nearly a week, the Ever Green, the world’s largest container ship, was wedged in the Suez Canal blocking all traffic. The impact of this catastrophe affected global shipping lines throughout the world and affected a vast array of products. Estimates suggest that delays in roughly $10 billion worth of goods were directly affected by the event. And this says nothing about the secondary and indirect impacts these delays will cause. Because of this, many are doubling down on protectionist policies that promote self-sufficiency. Not only is such a perspective extremely short-sighted, it’s outright dangerous.

Like it or not, we live in a globalized world that is highly interconnected and interdependent. But it’s not just its existence that indicates its necessity. The need for globalization extends well beyond this to include many factors. In decades past, infrastructures and technologies prevented such a globalized world from existing. But today, innovations in these areas not only support such a world but likewise show why a need for globalization persists. Even in the midst of a pandemic and the Ever Green’s grounding, it’s perfectly clear globalization is essential.

“Firms have basically decided that they can manage [weather, tariffs, and disease] and still pursue [shipping and inventory] efficiency gains. That helps explain why trade has been resilient.” – Robert Koopman, Chief Economist at the Geneva-based World Trade Organization.

The Pros Far Outweigh the Cons

The versatile shipping container was developed in the 1950s, and it revolutionized supply chains. But alone, it did not create a more globalized world based on trade. It was not until technology advances involving the Internet and global transportation system emerged. This included things like supply chain robotics. (Read more about supply chain robotics and automation in this Bold story.) And it also reflected the adoption of just-in-time (JIT) manufacturing, which markedly reduces inventory holding costs. It’s these cost-savings (and profits) that have driven the need for globalization. In fact, since the 1980s, global shipping increased roughly 1500 percent.

The need for globalization extends beyond the economic aspects of the world situation today. Globalization accelerates the spread of knowledge and innovation both directly and indirectly. It promotes increased competition that further leads to lower costs and better products. Notably, the standard of living has significantly increased around the world as globalization has expanded. Extreme poverty has been reduced by 35 percent since the 1990s as a result of a globalized world. These factors, as well as the ability to better use existing resources, highlight why the need for globalization persists.

“China remains the manufacturing floor of the world. There are problems that are real and need to be dealt with, but it doesn’t change the fact that China has built a very capable network that in the short run people will find very difficult to replace.” – Matthew Cox, CEO of Matson, a shipping container company

An Argument Against Self-Sufficiency

With the impacts of the pandemic, global shipping has been affected significantly. Even before the closure of the Suez Canal, dozens of container ships found themselves stuck outside various ports waiting to load or unload. With quarantines and lockdowns, shipping docks had fewer workers to manage these cargoes. As a result, delays have been encountered affecting supply chains and businesses globally. The Ever Green debacle only add insult to an already existing injury. But it’s these developments that have some calling for greater self-sufficiency and less reliance on a globalized world. But this view is clearly myopic in nature.

Not only did the pandemic negatively affect global shipping lines. It also influenced consumer buying patterns. E-commerce boomed, and the demand for shipping and delivery services skyrocketed. Without question, no nation could be self-sufficient enough to meet such a demand. US consumers need exercise equipment and electronics from overseas, and our agricultural products drive international food supply chains. (Read more about how agtech is tightening food supply chains in this Bold story.) Without a globalized world, the overall standard of living would drop precipitously. While the pandemic and Suez Canal delays have been costly, they do not even come close in justifying protectionist policies.

“Interdependence is here to stay. The issue is, what kind of interdependence do we want and need…Covid-19 presents the world with an opportunity – and necessity – to reinvent a globalization that is neither nostalgic or tribal.” – Jeremy Adelman, Director of the Global History Lab at Princeton University

Future Considerations of a Globalized World

The debate isn’t really about whether there is a need for globalization or not. Instead, the real question involves how we want a globalized world to look. Our choice is really between multilateralism and tribal interdependence. Multilateralism refers to a globalized world where all nations enjoy equal opportunities to participate. This is ideal in that it not only promote fairness and justice. But it also allows for the best use of global resources while better attending to global needs. Such an approach would allow for strategies to address climate change and international trade infractions in a just manner.

Some shipping containers at a port
Despite the mishap in the Suez Canal, the need for globalization remains undiminished.

The alternative is that of tribal interdependence where more powerful nations exert their influence over weaker ones. In such a globalized world, countries like China and the U.S. determine the rules by which other countries will abide. Their tribes dictate how others must participant on the world stage. Thus, their need for globalization unilaterally impacts others, often in an unjust and unfair manner. These types of developments are already at play between the U.S. and China today. But inevitably, this will mean a globalized world that offers an uneven playing for businesses. And ultimately, this will lead to slowed innovation and progress.

Embracing the Need for Globalization

In moving ahead, business must recognize that they operate in a globalized world that is highly interdependent. There is no going back, and doing so would be ill-advised. The effect this would have on standards of living, costs, and innovation would be enormous. Though the pandemic and waterway mishaps showcase areas for improvement, they do not suggest abandoning ship. The need for globalization has never been more evident, especially one that promotes true multilateralism. The challenges we face as a global society require that we acknowledge this fact and embrace the opportunities it offers.

 

Defining diversity, equity and inclusion for business can be difficult – get the free six-page handout that can help put you on the right track!

The Business of Recycling Electronics – Socially Responsible and Lucrative

Over the course of the last few decades, electronics waste has become an increasing concern. The primary problem is that Americans are all too happy to replace existing devices with the latest and greatest technologies. But in the process, they don’t necessarily trade in their old ones or properly dispose of them. Recycling electronics to make room for these new gadgets and communication devices would be ideal. But often, the barriers for doing so encourage users to simply toss them in the trash instead. Not only is this quite wasteful but also potentially hazardous to the environment.

The number of “fix-it” places for electronics have been growing in number for over a decade. But even with these types of businesses, many consumers simply lack interest in repairing a broken tablet or phone. They would rather upgrade their device or purchase a new one outright than spend time, energy and money fixing them. Statistically, less than a quarter of all devices are sent to companies recycling electronics. The vast majority end up as electronic waste. Fortunately, that may be changing as new businesses are finding opportunity amidst these troubling concerns.

“Everyone has that box of electronics that has been in their closet for years that they’re unsure what to do with. We want to help people get paid for the things they have lying around and turn that chore of reselling into a complete joy.” – Mike Barile, CEO and Co-Founder of Backflip

Electronics Waste – A Supply Side Problem?

It’s easy to appreciate that the primary issue with accumulating electronics waste is one of speed. New tables, smartphones, and other electronics are being produced and advanced in record time. A smartphone purchased a couple of years from now may no longer operate on the best networks. Some are not even able to use the same accessories or charging equipment. And with the Internet-of-Things right around the corner, production of electronics will further boom. (Read more about the boom of the Internet of Things in this Bold story.)  All of these factors encourage increasing amounts of electronics waste. And few consumers are motivated in repairing or recycling electronics as an alternative.

Part of the problem resides within the companies making these electronics today. Short-term life spans of any device encourage ongoing sales over time. This is particularly true when new platforms are constantly emerging. Should networks and technological offerings remain more constant, repairing and recycling electronics might seem more appealing. But why do so when the device you have is already outdate? Even changing a battery in something like an iPhone isn’t something most people can easily do. These are the types of barriers some electronics companies impose that further promote electronics waste.

“Our products today don’t last as long as they used to, and it’s a strategy by manufacturers to force us into shorter and shorter upgrade cycles.” – Kyle Wiens, Founder of iFixit

Leveraging Technology for Recycling Electronics

Despite resistance to recycling electronics, there’s money to be made in this industry. The market for refurbished electronics isn’t as small as many might think. But streamlining the process to make recycling electronics easier was something that was desperately needed. Those who decided to take the challenge on themselves often found themselves in somewhat shady situations. From stolen items, to being robbed at gunpoint, the business of refurbishing electronics has had a less-than-glamorous history. But that is changing as new business models emerge.

In 2019, a company called Backflip was launched that wanted to take the risk and hassle out of recycling electronics. Founders Mike Barile and Adam Foosaner saw an opportunity to provide a much-needed service to an industry while also turning a profit. In essence, Backflip serves as an intermediary between electronics sellers and buyers. However, it speeds up the process, making it simple and easy for everyone. Sellers simply have to answer a few questions about their device, drop it off at UPS, and collect cash. Backflip handles all the rest, including selling devices to others after the fact.

“Forget the back-and-forth of negotiating over price and scheduling a meetup. We’re here to do all the work for the seller and make sure they get paid fairly and quickly.” – Adam Foosaner, Cofounder and CTO, Backflip

Incentives for Reducing Electronics Waste

Notably, there are relevant and serious concerns relating to the rising amounts of electronics waste. Many devices are not properly disposed, which has the potential to expose the environment and human beings to toxic chemicals. Lithium-ion batteries, mercury and beryllium are examples of such substances commonly found in electronics. This as well as the potential for profit was a driving force for the founders of Backflip. If the company could provide convenience and efficiency to consumers, then they would be more inclined to recycle. Not only would Backflip earn a commission for each transaction, but people would become more accustomed to recycling electronics.

A bunch of colorful motherboards just lying there
Recycling electronics is both a moral imperative and a profitable business.

These types of business solutions are important to promote social responsibility among consumers. The same could be pursued through legislation and policy measures, but to date, these have been haphazard. Only 19 states currently have laws that ban illegal disposal of electronics waste, and few enforce it. Likewise, broader legislation to require more responsible production of electronics by companies with longer lifespans has also been considered. But thus far, resistance to such laws have prevented them from moving ahead. At least currently, it seems that the best solutions will come from bold businesses. And Backflip is one such company that could make an impact.

Making Recycling Electronics “Cool”

As is evident, there are a number of obstacles when it comes to recycling electronics. Inconvenience, haggling, and shipping costs have been among some of the most obvious. Combined with a rising number of electronics devices, this is an ever-increasing concern in terms of electronics waste. However, businesses can do their part by having their own social impact strategy to promote recycling electronics or proper disposal. (Read more about the importance of a social impact strategy in this Bold story.) Companies can create incentives to change customer perspectives. They can also make the process more convenient and simpler. Backflip shows how such a strategy not only promotes business viability but social welfare also.

 

Defining diversity, equity and inclusion for business can be difficult – get the free six-page handout that can help put you on the right track!

BOLD OPINION: Virtual Medical Training Is a Temporary Fix, Not a Long-Term Solution

Throughout the world, school systems have been forced to shut down and conduct online learning due to the pandemic. This placed a tremendous strain on teachers, students, as well as parents in the process. Not only did many students struggle emotionally and academically in the process. But educators had to also adapt to new teaching styles, curricula, and assessments. Notably, this not only applied to primary, secondary and college educational systems. It has also affected medical schools and medical student education as well. Without in-person learning, many medical students feel a bit short-changed in their experience.

Like other educational systems, many medical schools have turned to virtual medical training to fill the gaps. The pandemic has served as a catalyst in healthcare and in other areas. (Read more about the positive changes and innovations the pandemic brought about in this Bold story.) The risk of being exposed to COVID precluded in-person learning, and thus, medical simulations have been used instead. But how effective are medical simulations and virtual medical training for the doctors and surgeons of the future? Is their training adequate? Do they gain quality skills that allow them to excel in real-life healthcare environments? Do these virtual reality offerings somehow make them even more adept for telehealth? These are the questions that deserve further consideration.

“When you’re on Zoom, you can’t tell if the person is clenching their hands or shaking their legs. For some of my classmates, the feedback was we had to show more empathy. But how am I supposed to make my empathy known through a computer screen?” –  Sarah Serrano Calove, Second-year student, University of Massachusetts Medical School

Medical Simulations and Necessary Sensory Exposures

During normal times, medical students are exposed to a variety of hands-on experiences. First-year medical students spend a sizable portion of their time dissecting cadavers, learning about different organ systems. Later, they practice face-to-face interviewing skills while performing the basics of a physical exam. In the process, a host of tactile, visual, auditory, and even olfactory sensations are encountered that facilitates learning. But the vast majority of these are lost with virtual medical training. Medical simulations might offer some of the visual and auditory cues, but otherwise, they are notably lacking.

In most of the medical simulations, virtual mannequins serve as avatars for providers and as patients. Students are asked to go through a series of tasks that are meant to mimic in-person training. But virtual medical training can only imitate real-life so much. Instead, they are often fraught with technical limitations and less-than-real characters. Naturally, it’s challenging to truly grasp what it’s like to encounter patients in person if your only exposure is virtual. These online exercises might advance knowledge in some areas, but they fail in adequately mimicking direct patient contact.

“A cadaver’s body parts wouldn’t look as smooth and perfect as they do on a screen. Let’s say the cadaver was an alcoholic, you might see liver cirrhosis with bumps and ridges covering the liver.” – Jerrell Catlett, First-year student, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai

Assessing the Quality of Virtual Medical Training

The use of medical simulations did not start with the pandemic. Such virtual doctor training techniques have been employed in numerous schools, particularly those with online components. But they were primarily used as adjuncts and not as primary learning tools. Thus, the jury remains out on how effective these educational tools may be. Some tout the ability for medical simulations to offer a more comprehensive exposure to clinical situations. But this may be no better than traditional didactic teaching. Naturally, this depends on the preferred learning style of the medical student. But the bottom line is that no one knows how effective virtual medical training systems are.

A doctor getting some medical training via her laptop
Virtual medical training was good for a short-term fix, but it can’t replace in-person training forever.

With the pandemic, it has similarly been difficult to evaluate medical student learning with medical simulations and remote learning. Typically, anatomy classes may hold practical examinations in person, which is now no longer possible. Online assessments using simulations now replace these practices in many schools. But both students and educators alike worry the assessments are limited. These issues are even more evident in later training years involving patient assessments and surgical training. Evaluating whether a medical student’s performance virtually equates to real-life skills is simply not possible. Not enough data has yet been collected to make these determinations.

“Most of the virtual learning hand-on training cannot be imparted by online teaching alone. The students of today are assumed to be digitally literate and may adapt easily to the use of gadgets and online education, but all the teachers and students may not be tech-savvy.” – Soujanya Kaup, Associate Professor and Lead Researcher in Ophthalmology

Optimal Learning and Medical Simulations

One of the other challenges related to all types of virtual and online learning systems has been student engagement. Many are experiencing “blue-screen burnout,” and others can only focus on medical simulations for so long. This combined with information overload that can occur with web-based systems leads to poor attention and retention. As an adjunct to learning, virtual medical training offerings don’t run into these issues. But as completely immersive tools designed to provide all education, these issues often become significant.

Notably, there are some advantages to virtual medical training beyond its ability to deter the spread of COVID. Such systems broaden access to medical experts that students may not otherwise encounter. They also expand opportunities to connect to web-based resources and supports. And they can better ensure exposure to a more complete array of healthcare situations during their training. That includes telehealth and telemedicine. (Read more about the pandemic-spawned explosion of telehealth and telemedicine in this Bold story.) But their capacity to replace the majority of hands-on clinical training experiences is limited. Medicine remains an art, and in order to perform it well, in-person doctor-patient interactions are needed.

Time to Get Back to Hands-On Medical Training

Without question, the use of medical simulations and virtual medical training has been essential this past year. Unfortunately, however, the pandemic has robbed many medical students of some very valuable educational opportunities. Many feel they have missed out on a traditional rite of passage in the process. The value of practical experience and hands-on learning in medicine cannot be overstated. Of course, technologies will continue to enhance learning and knowledge. But medicine training is one area where they simply cannot replace in-person encounters. For this reason, as soon as it’s safe, medical schools need to quickly resume traditional educational approaches. Quality of healthcare in the future depends on it.

 

Defining diversity, equity and inclusion for business can be difficult – get the free six-page handout that can help put you on the right track!

How can we help?