Why we can’t forward-think

Or why is “innovation” foreign to us? More fundamentally, why can’t we wrap our heads around “competitiveness”?

On the other hand, we in the chattering classes believe we are doing Juan de la Cruz a favor by raising a dire need, poverty – for all to appreciate. And we get psychic “income,” a sense of purpose and fulfillment, in our efforts.

And in the process, we haven’t recognized the barrier posed by cognitive development – or underdevelopment.

But that is not surprising given our lack of development experience.

And that even understates the challenge. But then again, cognitive impairment explains why the ability to connect the dots is not universal. Otherwise, Steve Jobs would not be a genius per the body of knowledge advanced by the folks at Yale.

For example, take democracy. Why is America fumbling like an amateur despite being the epitome of democracy and the free market?

And it comes down to the basic human need for survival, as in physiological “needs.”

In other words, even Americans – human as they are – struggle to move beyond self or parochial or tribal bias and into the community, as in the common good. And it explains the greed at the base of the “2008 Great Recession.”

America is supposed to be the great experiment in “the pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness.” And that presupposes that the common good is supreme.

If we circle back and connect the dots, what do we see? The imperative to forward-think.

And to forward-think is beyond foresight. And why “innovation” and “competitiveness” are not a walk in the park.

And neuroscience explains why. And why Daniel Kahneman, a psychologist, won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2002.

In other words, our “knee jerk” is fraught with peril, including shortsightedness, and why we must learn to switch from an “automatic” to a “conscious” mode of thinking.

Why have our efforts to prioritize “poverty” and “jobs” failed consistently?

Should we stop and ponder? Why do we fall into the trap of “insanity” like clockwork — yet remain oblivious?

Recall “learned helplessness” — and why the blog never tires of raising the folly of comprehensive agrarian reform, the OFW phenomenon, and our celebration of the BPO industry over industrialization, among others.

Even more fundamentally, we can’t imagine defining our challenge as replicating the success of Vietnam in attracting Samsung and Apple to make it the latest Asian Tiger.

And so we launched Arangkada, developed scores of road maps – and even attained the ideal 6%-7% GDP growth rate over ten years – but still left behind by Vietnam.

Have we ever internalized “creative destruction”?

Because of our caste system, we can’t fathom that “change” rather than “stability” is the norm. Why? We are a subset of this “universe” in constant motion and expansion.

Yet, we, wittingly or not, want to preserve our rank and its privileges.

We are parochial and insular. We value hierarchy and paternalism and rely on political patronage and oligarchy; ours is a culture of impunity.

Our instincts explain why we can’t find our place in the sun. It is not about embracing a colonial mentality but internalizing the distinctions between freedom and autocracy.

The universe is not about autocracy – and why the blog often discusses the photosynthesis phenomenon.

Our tendency to celebrate autocracy – think Marcos and Duterte – reveal our backwardness. Why did the world applaud Harry for bolting out of royalty? Or why does Putin recall Peter the Great? His backwardness ignores the Bolshevik revolution, for example.

Let's get back to cognitive development. Why can't we determine why our neighbors left us in the dust one after the other?

We rely on our academic laurels despite the embarrassment of our underdevelopment.

Experience is the best teacher. And why the blog frequently highlights the effort of Fortune 500 companies to address the shortcomings of American higher education.

For example, the experience would have taught us forward-thinking to distinguish the “vital few” from the “trivial many” as well as “drivers” from “enablers.”

But then again, our value of hierarchy and paternalism robs us of the opportunity to embrace community and experience a sense of purpose and meaning.

Recall the 3Cs of the hardy mindset: (1) Commitment, as in the sense of purpose and meaning, (2) Challenge, that “change” rather than “stability” is the norm; and (3) Control, i.e., we can’t problem-solve because our caste system taught us that we could control others when we only have control over ourselves. And that reinforces the reality imposed by this universe, i.e., change and not stability.

Over the past dozen years, the blog risked modesty by relating my private sector experiences – in global competition and mentoring my Eastern European friends.

Recall how my 200-year-old former MNC-company demonstrated the opposite of rank and privileges by allowing me to change its planning and budgeting model, buy technology from the outside, and lead investment efforts in China and India, among others.

On the other hand, my Eastern European friends had to accept that despite my background, I would not prescribe the free market rules but instead share relevant principles that they would then encounter in the real world.

Why? They had to learn to forward-think, distinguish the “vital few” from the “trivial many” and “drivers” from “enablers.”

Why is innovation foreign to us? Why can’t we wrap our heads around “competitiveness”?

Why have our efforts to prioritize “poverty” and “jobs” failed consistently?

Gising bayan!