Over the last 18 months, I have subscribed to what seems like an increasingly eclectic range of newsfeeds, on-line magazines, blogs and podcasts. Some of the material relates directly to my governance research (OK, quite a bit does), and some of the subscriptions are pure indulgences—to take my mind off the former. I've discovered that, in reading widely, I've learnt a little about a lot of things. Interestingly, some of the "unrelated" material has actually been helpful in terms of piecing together disconnected research ideas that I've had floating around. On the flip side, several of the subscriptions have turned out to be "noise" to me, so I've cancelled them.

One article that arrived in my Reeder application today was entitled The history of humans is the history of technology. Titles like this tend to catch my eye, if for no other reason than they are quite provocative.  I quickly discovered the article was an interview with a writer I've not heard of before—Robin Sloan. Hope Mills, the author of the article, interviewed Robin Sloan via email. Yes, via email! In her introduction Mills writes: Robin Sloan is the kind of writer/thinker you want to take out for a beer and ply with questions. About writing. About reading. About life. He is frightfully creative and incredibly open-minded. He also happens to tell really good stories. Below is our conversation, conducted over email, about stories, technology, and giving up the iPhone. 

With an introduction like this, I was hooked. I read the article right through—twice—and have come away with much to ponder. If you can spare a few minutes over the weekend, grab yourself a coffee and read the article. It just might set you thinking as well. If it does, I'd love to hear what you got out of it.

I had the privilege of attending the inaugural Gender Diversity Summit in Auckland yesterday. Approximately 90 delegates—the majority of whom were female leaders from business and academia—assembled to discuss diversity in company C-suites and board rooms. It was an interesting day, and I'm pleased I responded to the invitation to attend. The full participation of women in the senior echelons of business and governance is a topic that needs robust research, critical thought and vigorous debate, to ensure we understand what we are trying to achieve and, crucially, why. If such rigour is not applied, the outcomes of these types of initiatives will naturally reflect the wishes of the most eloquent protagonists.

That leads me nicely to the point of this post. An opinion piece caught my eye while reading the New Zealand Herald in the cab to the Summit venue. Peter Lyons, an Economics teacher at St Peter's College in Epsom, Auckland, wrote a very good article about the important role of critical thinkers in society. Lyons asserted that corporate-speak and populist techno-babble has taken over our society, yet it does us no good. He went on to say critical thinkers are crucial to social and economic progress, because they rise above the status quo and they ask the hard questions like "why?" and "what if?".

Lyons' article was as refreshing as it was timely. Having re-read the article a couple of times, and pondered the discussion at the Summit, I've come to realise we have a rather large blind spot in our society. We naturally drift towards conformity and populist viewpoints, lest we be ostracised by offering alternative views. Somehow, we need to overcome this tendency if our society is to grow and develop. But how? At the risk of grossly oversimplifying things, one option might be to turn to Mr Lyons' profession for help. If philosophy was reintroduced as a core subject in our high school classrooms—to teach the emerging generation how to think critically—I suspect a broader range of options would be debated and better decisions would ensue. And that can only be good for social and economic progress.

According to a survey commissioned by accounting software firm MYOB and conducted by Colmar Brunton, New Zealand firms are slow adopters of technology. A newspaper article which summarises the research report was published today. The report contains statistics about the digital world, including cloud-computing uptake and website presence. The article suggests that NZ businesses are "off the pace", and goes on to imply that the NZ economy is weaker as a result of slow technology adoption.

Gosh, this is heady stuff. The Internet has changed the way we live and work, and no doubt will continue to do so. But to say that an economy is weaker because uptake of the latest iterations of computing capability is slow is a big call. Businesses need to get clear about their motivations and choices. I know many SME firms that operate well (ie. very profitably) using so-called legacy computing systems. They have not embraced cloud computing (for example) because the financials and or security risks simply do not stack up for them.

Finding new and more efficient ways of doing things is an important element in the business mix. In fact, the pursuit of sustained competitive advantage demands that we continue this quest. However, jumping on-board with a new development because everyone else is seemingly doing so is not a sufficient justification. We need to be careful to avoid the trap of seeing all innovations as panaceas. We have much to learn from history in this regard. While some innovations will prevail, many of today's so-called innovations will be re-labeled as "fads" in the future, just as we have re-labeled earlier developments. Let's keep our eyes open and our brain engaged when looking at new innovations. I suspect the economy will be better for it.

*Declaration. I happily use a mix of cloud- and local-computing tools on a daily basis.