Science and Technology
-

From an unprecedented number of start-ups to a rising class of billion-dollar giants going global, high technology companies in China have a dramatically increasing need for effective leadership and will soon be facing a immense talent shortage. Even to seasoned executives, the current operating environment seems like a new frontier, due to extreme dynamism caused by rapid economic growth, state-to-private enterprise transition, emerging markets and other factors.

During the past year SPRIE and Heidrick & Struggles, a premier global executive search firm, have partnered to collect data and conduct in-depth interviews with executives in China's high tech firms. Research questions included: What principles and practices are executives using to lead their organizations effectively? How do these compare with practices in other regions? What talent strategies are executives using to promote the next generation of leaders?

As the product of this research goes public, SPRIE has invited two leading executives to give their own "view from the trenches" on the challenges of creating the next generation of high tech leaders in China.

Philippines Conference Room

William F. Miller Moderator
Jack Q. Gao Vice President, Apac Emerging Geography Speaker Autodesk, Inc.
Michael Zhao President and CEO Speaker Array Networks, Inc.
Seminars

Josef Joffe is the Marc and Anita Abramowitz Fellow in International Relations at the Hoover Institution and is publisher-editor of the German weekly Die Zeit.

Joffe's areas of interest include U.S. foreign policy, international security policy, European-American relations, Europe and Germany, and the Middle East.

His essays and reviews have appeared in a wide number of publications including the New York Review of Books, Times Literary Supplement, Commentary, New York Times Magazine, New Republic, Weekly Standard, and the Prospect. Additionally, his scholarly work has appeared in many books and in journals such as Foreign Affairs, the National Interest, International Security, and Foreign Policy as well as in professional journals in Germany, Britain, and France.

Joffe is currently an adjunct professor of political science at Stanford, where he was the Payne Distinguished Lecturer in 1999-2000. He also is a distinguished fellow of the Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies at Stanford. In 1990-91, he taught at Harvard, where he is also an associate of the Olin Institute for Strategic Studies. He was a visiting lecturer in 2002 at Dartmouth College and in 1998 at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School. He was a professorial lecturer at Johns Hopkins (School of Advanced International Studies) in 1982-1984. He has taught at the University of Munich and the Salzburg Seminar.

His most recent book is Überpower: The Imperial Temptation in American Foreign Policy.

Reared in Berlin, Joffe obtained his Ph.D. degree in government from Harvard.

http://www.hoover.org/bios/joffe

 

Event Synopsis:

Professor Joffe opens his talk with two movie quotes, "With great power comes great responsibility" from Spiderman, and "If you build it, they will come" from Field of Dreams. Both quotes, he explains, relate to the idea of modern American hegemony. The United States must concern itself with policies and institutions that promote its own interests and those of others, and by doing so will attract international support and cooperation as it did in the "golden age" of American-led institutions such as NATO. This era ended with the fall of the Soviet Union, following which the United States has seen its legitimacy decline lower than ever, even while accumulating unprecedented military power. The void left by the Soviet Union has unbalanced the global power structure and caused other countries to turn against the aggressive policies of the new single hegemon, the United States, in situations like the invasion of Iraq under George W. Bush.  Professor Joffe describes the role that America's "imperial temptation" played in its invasion of Iraq, causing a further decline in America’s global legitimacy, a crumbling of international support, and an unwitting boon to Ahmadinejad's regime in Iran, which Joffe considers to be the real threat and which essentially had its "dirty work" of removing Saddam Hussein from power done for it by the United States. Joffe urges the U.S. to think strategically about how collaboration with other countries can help rebuild mutually beneficial institutions and bolster U.S. legitimacy, rather than approaching its role in the world ideologically, treating other nations with contempt and turning them against the U.S.

 

A discussion session included such questions as: What has the role of American exceptionalism played in the events of the last decade? Was the outcome of the most recent Iraq war inevitable, or was it a result of bad policies and poor handling by the U.S. government? How can a country go so wrong as the US has (in pursuing the "wrong war, in the wrong country, at wrong time" as Joffe describes)? To what extent has the de-legitimization of the US been caused by its policy toward Israel? What should the U.S. approach now be toward Iran?

Josef Joffe Editor Speaker Die Zeit
Seminars
-

Dr. Hakjoon Kim has been President and Publisher of Dong-A Ilbo (East Asia Daily) since 2001. His career has spanned the fields of journalism, public policy and academia. After earning his Ph.D. in political science from the University of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in 1972, Kim spend a year as a research associate as the university's Asian Studies Program in the University Center for International Studies and as a research assistant professor in the Department of Political Science. In 1973 he returned to Korea and spent the next 16 years as a professor and a visiting scholar at various universities in Korea and then in Japan, the United States, Germany, Austria, and London.

In 1989, Kim was elected to the Korean National Assembly and became the chief policy assistant, press secretary, and spokesperson for the president of Korea. In 1993 he rejoined the academic world as chairperson of the board of directors and professor at Dankook University while still keeping one foot in the policy world as advisor to the Korean Ministry of Unification and then to the Ministry of Foreign Trade and Affairs.

During this time, Dr. Kim was also publishing books in English on Korean politics, books in Korean on the history of Russia and the Soviet Union, and publishing articles in numerous journals, such as Asian Survey (UC Berkeley), Journal of Northeast Asian Studies (Washington, D.C.), Japan Review of International Affairs (Tokyo), Korea and World Affairs (Seoul), Security Dialogue (Oslo), Far Eastern Affairs (Moscow) and other professional journals. In 1983 he won the Best Book Prize, which was awarded by the Korean Political Science Association for his book Han'guk Chongch'i Ron (On Korean Politics,) Seoul, 1983.

Philippines Conference Room

Hakjoon Kim President and Publisher, Dong A Ilbo, Korea Speaker
Seminars
Date Label
Paragraphs

This paper was discussed at the Global Justice workshop on October 20, 2006.

Abstract of Richard Locke's "Beyond Corporate Codes of Conduct: Work Organization and Labor Standards in Two Mexican Garment Factories":

This paper presents a matched pair case study of two factories supplying Nike, the world's largest athletic footwear and apparel company. These two factories have many similarities - both are in Mexico, both are in the apparel industry, both produce more or less the same products for Nike (and other brands) and both are subject to the same code of conduct. On the surface, both factories appear to have similar employment (i.e., recruitment, training, remuneration) practices and they receive comparable scores when audited by Nike's compliance staff. However, actual labor conditions exist between these two factories. What drives these differences in working conditions? What does this imply for traditional systems of monitoring and codes of conduct? Field research conducted at these two factories reveals that beyond the code of conduct and various monitoring efforts aimed at enforcing it, workplace conditions and labor standards are shaped by very different patterns of work organization and human resource management policies.

About the Author

Richard Locke is professor of political science at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). He is also faculty director of the MIT Sloan Fellows program and co-director of the MIT Italy program. His research focuses on economic development, comparative labor relations, and political economy.

All Publications button
1
Publication Type
Working Papers
Publication Date
Authors

On November 13-14, 2006, the Stanford Project on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (SPRIE) of Stanford University and the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI) together with the School of Technology Management, National Tsing Hua University, will co-sponsor an invitation-only workshop at Stanford University.

Deadlines and Proposal Submission Guidelines

  • Paper proposals are due by July 31; notification of acceptance will be by Aug. 18; papers are due Oct. 31
  • Papers will be considered for inclusion in the proceedings, which will be published in English by SPRIE.
  • Paper proposals should be 1-2 pages long (single-spaced) and in English; include with your proposal citations of your recent and related publications.
  • Submit your proposal in .pdf format; send via electronic mail with the subject "November workshop proposal" to sprie-stanford@stanford.edu. Be sure your proposal arrives in time for the July 31 deadline or it will likely not be considered!
  • Academic presenters of papers will receive a sum that serves both as an honorarium and as support for travel expenses from the home institution to Stanford. Those whose travel across the Pacific or Atlantic will receive $2,000; those who travel from within the contiguous United States will receive $1,800, and those from the Bay Area will receive $1000; lodging and food will be covered by the organizers. Note that papers with multiple authors only receive one honorarium.
Theme

Leading high tech regions face the challenge of sustaining their competitive position amidst shifts in the global knowledge economy. Their ability to create/re-create their edge depends in large measure on the ability to foster innovation and entrepreneurship--to respond to challenges and opportunities presented by competition and collaboration with rising high tech regions as well as to innovate in technologies, services, processes, strategies and business models. The workshop will concentrate on three topics:

Indicators and Analysis of Regional Innovation and Entrepreneurship

  • What are the core strengths and weaknesses of major high tech regions now facing the challenge of sustainability? How are they evolving? Which indicators best reveal regional attributes and trends and how can we improve the collection of such data?
  • What key factors are determining the development of these regions and how is each region's performance in innovation and/or entrepreneurship?
  • What indicators point to the next stage of development for these regions?
Policies, Strategies, Models
  • How are regions responding to pressing challenges and opportunities? How are regional leaders reinventing strategies, exploring new practices, and developing new models?
  • How effective have government policies (national and local) been in fostering productive high tech regions? What are similarities and differences in these policies across regions/countries?
Global Linkages
  • High tech regions are connected through people, technology and capital, linkages that have become both more important and more complex.
  • How do multinationals, hybrid firms and local firms use linkages of people, technology and capital to enhance their competitive advantage? What new business models have emerged recently?
  • What forces nurture or inhibit these global high tech linkages? What kinds of processes and networks are at play and what is their impact on the vitality and sustainability of regions?

Stauffer Auditorium
Hoover Institution
Stanford University

Workshops
Authors
News Type
Commentary
Date
Paragraphs
Is the prospect of a North Korea missile test a red line that, if crossed, seriously threatens U.S. security and, hence, warrants strong action? "No," CISAC science program director Dean Wilkening answers.

North Korea is poised to flight test a ballistic missile that may have intercontinental range -- an action the Bush administration declares would be provocative. Others have called for sanctions if the flight test occurs, the use of U.S. ballistic-missile defenses to intercept the missile in flight or a pre-emptive attack against the missile-launch site. But is this missile test a red line that, if crossed, seriously threatens U.S. security and, hence, warrants strong action? The simple answer is "No."

In thinking about this test, one must not lose sight of two paramount goals: rolling back North Korea's nuclear weapons program and the eventual peaceful reunification of North and South Korea. Ballistic missiles constitute a serious threat to the U.S. homeland only when armed with nuclear warheads and they are only one delivery means for such weapons. In this sense, ballistic missiles are of secondary concern. By most estimates, North Korea has sufficient nuclear material for a few nuclear explosive devices, but whether they can design a nuclear weapon that satisfies the size, weight and delivery constraints associated with intercontinental-range ballistic missiles is far from obvious.

If North Korea tests a three-stage version of the Taepodong-2 missile, it will likely attempt to put a satellite into orbit, just as it did in 1998 when it failed to place a satellite into orbit with the smaller Taepodong-1 missile. North Korea has a sovereign right to launch satellites, or to test ballistic missiles for that matter. International protocol requires launch notification and restrictions on air and marine traffic for reasons of range safety -- steps North Korea failed to take in 1998 -- but no international agreement bars this test. True, North Korea agreed to a unilateral moratorium on ballistic missile flight tests in 1999, pending further talks with the United States regarding North Korea's missile program, but the Bush administration refused to join these talks. North Korea leader Kim Jong Il reaffirmed this flight test moratorium in the 2002 Pyongyang Declaration signed with Japan, but this document is not a legally binding commitment.

If successful, this flight test would demonstrate that North Korea can produce rockets large enough to carry payloads intercontinental distances. However, this does not translate into an immediate threat because North Korea has not demonstrated that it can build a nuclear warhead that is small enough to fit on top of a Taepodong-2 missile and that can survive re-entry into the atmosphere after flying intercontinental distances.

Given vastly superior U.S. conventional and nuclear forces, deterrence should dissuade North Korea from ever using such missiles, except for saber rattling, or worse selling nuclear weapons or nuclear material abroad (this is a serious red line). Kim Jong Il may be a ruthless totalitarian leader, with little regard for the welfare of his people, but he is not suicidal.

More important, these missiles would be highly vulnerable to pre-emptive attack in the midst of a crisis, which is when pre-emption makes sense, because these missiles are large and easy to detect, they are not mobile, and they take many hours, if not days, to erect in a vertical position and fuel -- precisely the activity that generated this concern.

On the other hand, U.S. sanctions against North Korea in the wake of a test flight could backfire. They would likely cause rifts with other friendly parties to the Six Party talks aimed at eliminating North Korea's nuclear weapons, especially China. U.S. national missile defenses may not be within range, depending on the flight trajectory, to intercept this flight test. If this unproven U.S. missile defense were to fail and North Korea's flight test succeed, the Bush administration would be embarrassed, and Kim Jong Il triumphant. And, pre-emptive attack against the test facility would be a unilateral act of war at a time when U.S. unilateralism has hurt more than helped U.S. vital interests. South Korea would adamantly oppose such adventurism because Seoul is vulnerable to retribution, being within artillery range of the Demilitarized Zone.

So, what should the United States do on the eve of this flight test? Nothing, beyond expressing its dismay that North Korea appears to favor conflict over cooperation.

A Taepodong-2 flight test allows the United States to learn more about this missile than North Korea, given the concentration of technical intelligence assets in the area, which would help resolve the question of whether this missile, in fact, constitutes a serious threat to the U.S. homeland. In addition, such a test would isolate North Korea further and reinvigorate the Six Party Talks by encouraging South Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the United States to overcome their differences and create a united front to persuade North Korea to renounce its nuclear weapon program, which is the real threat.

Stepping back, U.S. leaders should see that North Korea is a mouse and the United States the elephant. Contrary to popular mythology, elephants are not, and should not be, afraid of mice.

Hero Image
wilkening logo
All News button
1
-

Emily Harris is a Knight Fellow at Stanford University this year. She was born in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and earned a bachelor's degree in Russian and East European studies at Yale University. She got her first journalism job as a morning news director at KBOO, a community radio station in Portland, Oregon in 1993. Harris worked from Moscow as a freelance writer and radio and TV reporter in the mid-nineties before moving to Los Angeles, where she was the senior producer of a daily radio talk show at KCRW. She returned to reporting as a correspondent specializing in business and economics for a number of TV and radio programs around the globe before being hired by National Public Radio in Washington, D.C. in 2000. She worked as a general assignment reporter in Washington for NPR, then joined NOW with Bill Moyers on PBS. In late 2002 she was named NPR's Berlin correspondent, a post from which she has covered Central and Eastern Europe as well as spent considerable time in Iraq. She was a key member of the NPR team that won a Peabody for coverage of Iraq in 2004.

Reuben W. Hills Conference Room

Emily Harris NPR correspondent and 2005-2006 Stanford University Knight Fellow Speaker
Seminars
Authors
George Krompacky
News Type
News
Date
Paragraphs

On May 20-21, 2006, the Stanford Project on Regions of Innovation and Entrepreneurship (SPRIE) and the China Institute for Science and Technology Policy (CISTP) of Tsinghua University co-sponsored an international workshop in Beijing on "Greater China's Innovative Capacity: Progress and Challenges."

The workshop, held in collaboration with the Zhongguancun Science Park and the Industrial Technology Research Institute (ITRI), was hosted on the campus of Tsinghua University. Participation by more than 70 academics, industry leaders and government policy makers reflected many of the ongoing partnerships SPRIE holds with institutions, individuals and organizations around the world.

The nine workshop sessions and more than twenty paper presentations provided rich opportunities for engaging discussion and knowledge sharing. The output of this workshop will lead to the publishing of selected proceedings in the near future.

Theme and Topics

The workshop addressed how the innovative capacities in Greater China are evolving. What are the most significant areas of progress and challenge? Scholars and business leaders from the U.S., Europe and Asia were brought together to discuss new research and current practice of key aspects of Greater China's innovative capacity: inputs, processes, outputs, institution, government policies, business models and management strategies.

More specifically, the workshop focused on:

  • information and communications technologies
  • innovation across the value chain from R&D to business processes and models
  • development within and linkages among key regions and players in mainland China, Taiwan, Singapore and Silicon Valley
All News button
1
Subscribe to Science and Technology