[테드] 애리 왈러치(Ari Wallach) 아주 긴 안목으로 계획을 수립하는 세 가지 방법 (파일 추가)

[Jonathan Lion]

<<< 스터디 파일 >>>

162_TED_Talks_20170427.doc

162_TED_Talks_20170427.pdf

우리는 점점 눈 앞의 일들에 압도되어 긴 안목으로 생각하는 법을 잃어가고 있는지 모릅니다.

내 몸 하나 건사하기 힘들고 올해 어떻게 잘 헤쳐나갈지 걱정되는 와중에

더 큰 것들, 더 긴 것들에 대한 생각을 놓치고 있는지 모릅니다.

우리가 선거로 선출하는 그 분들도 많이 다르지는 않은 것 같구요.

이번 주 TED Talks에서는 아주 긴 기간의 계획을 수립하는 방법에 대해 얘기해봐요.

애리 왈러치, 아주 긴 안목으로 계획을 수립하는 세 가지 방법

https://www.ted.com/talks/ari_wallach_3_ways_to_plan_for_the_very_long_term

162^nd TED Talks with Jonathan (2017.04.27.)

Time Table

07:30~07:55 Greeting & Small Talk

07:55~08:00 Break Time (Table changes)

08:00~08:40 Topic Talk (40 minutes)

08:40~08:50 Break Time(Table changes)

08:50~09:30 TED Talk (40 minutes)

09:30~09:50 Wrap up (Share your TED and New Comer Introductions)

Small Talk : Vitamins & Dietary supplement

1. Say hello to each other.

2. Do you regularly take vitamins? How do you feel for that?

3. Why do you think you need (or don’t need) dietary supplement?

4. What is the most effective dietary supplement for you? (ginseng, onion juice, etc…)

5. Share your best tip to keep good health.

Topic Talk. Silent Dinner – prepared by Jeffrey

When I was in university, one of my writing teachers offhandedly mentioned that in Sweden, it was not uncommon to go out for coffee with a friend and to sit together without speaking. That idea lodged itself in my brain, and combined with my love of Bergman films, it sent me straight to Sweden the following summer. While I didn’t have any silent coffee dates in Stockholm during that trip, the concept of being together in silence has resonated strongly with me since. And it’s not just me either. The ability to sit in silence with someone is one of the commonly accepted delineations of friendship. It’s something that happens with our nearest and dearest. It’s something that could fall under, as social media lingo might have it, #relationshipgoals.

But why not test it with people we don’t yet know quite so well? As LM Montgomery (author of Anne of Green Gables) once wrote, “If you can sit in silence with a person for half an hour and yet be entirely comfortable, you and that person can be friends. If you cannot, friends you’ll never be and you need not waste time in trying.” So indeed why not test out the concept with strangers or potential friends?

In that spirit, and in the name of shaking things up, a friend and I hosted a silent dinner in Paris a few months ago. We each invited three guests and told them to come to a slightly experimental dinner party. We didn’t reveal the concept in advance. We simply left a sign on the door of my friend’s apartment indicating that once they entered, our guests would be required to remain silent until after the music stopped. I had prepared a playlist in advance.

Eventually, all eight of us gathered, most of us never having met before, and sans verbal introductions, we poured one another wine and had a dinner just as lively as any other. By the time the playlist ended, we were well acquainted. It felt funny to then have to go around the table and speak our names. The overwhelming accord was that the period of silence could’ve been longer. At the end of the evening, we agreed to host more silent dinners.

A few months later, I moved the silent dinner concept to a slightly different context. During the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona (the “world’s largest gathering for the mobile industry”), I was one of the curators who hosted and produced an event called the House of Beautiful Business, a special pop-up community for meaningful conversations about technology, humanity, leadership, and the future of work.

As part of our programming, we arranged a “Silent Dinner: for Those Tired of Talking.” The concept was fairly simple; we wanted to have a dinner without conversation, a gathering without speech. We wanted to bring people together in a non-traditional way, and especially at a conference-style event, we hoped the “no talking, no pitching” idea would be refreshing. (You can read the account of one of my House of Beautiful Business co-curators Tim Leberecht here.)

We assembled a group of 18 people and arranged a meal. Guests knew it was meant to be a dinner without talking, but we had not communicated any other instructions to them. Just before the dinner’s start we laid out the rules: no speaking and no phone use until the playlist ended. Everything else (eye contact, gesturing, laughter) was acceptable. I had prepared a playlist of a predetermined length (1.5 hours) and used that as our timer, though our guests were not aware of that particular limit. When the music stopped, the talking could begin.

We entered the candlelit dining room, giddy and uncertain, and took random places around the long table. We had mostly not been introduced, and yet there we were, settling in next to one another, practical strangers, preparing to break bread without having uttered our names. We locked eyes, smiled, breathed in and out. We waited. The music, at first all without lyrics, played, and played with tempo. Time went on, but without looking at our phones (or our watches, for the few of us who still wear those), we couldn’t be sure how much or how fast.

The waiters, who had been instructed to play along with our silence (and graciously did so), entered to a round of spontaneous group applause, offering red or white wine through gestures. Each guest wordlessly chose his or her preferred beverage. Without voices, we saluted one another, clinking glasses. One guest even stood up and mimed a toast. We poured one another water. The meal continued. A first course. More wine (and more applause). A second course. We warmed up. Things were comfortable, friendly, jovial. Someone started a human wave, which we did clockwise and then counterclockwise at some point between courses.

We were having fun. And nonverbally communicating. We didn’t know one another’s names, jobs, accents, or hometowns, and yet, there we were having a lively, lovely dinner. To create a little midmeal movement, we staged a musical chairs situation, with a few of us getting up and switching seats. This way, we could wordlessly converse with guests we’d been too far from before. We joked around. Folded origami. Shared desserts. Sipped coffees.

And then the playlist ended. One of our guests had stepped out to the restroom. We wordlessly agreed to wait for her return. When she retook her seat, we looked around quietly at each other one last time. Someone had to interrupt the silence. “So,” I said. And the spell was broken. One hour and a half after we had entered the room, we went around the table and shared our names; our reasons for participating in the event; and how we felt about it.

The feelings were overwhelmingly positive. Some guests had had previous experiences with silent gatherings (mostly meditation-based ones), and all of us had enjoyed this alternative social experience. Overall, people had come open and curious and they left fulfilled and connected.

“Silent” is of course the wrong descriptor for the gathering. First of all, there was music, a prominent feature of the dinner. And second of all, there we were, in all of our human, animal noisiness. We breathed, sniffled, laughed, fidgeted, chewed, sneezed, clinked silverware and glasses. We shared a truly joyful, amiable experience.

Silence, as a form of communication, is golden.

Topic Questions

1. Have you ever tried to communicate with others without conversations? If yes, how did it feel like? If not, how would you feel about it when you do it?

2. What aspects do you consider important when you communicate? And Why do you think like that?

3. Have you ever been in the situation where you don’t want to talk anymore in conversations with someone? Why did you feel like that?

4. Do you think you can last more than half an hour of non-speaking when with your best friend?

5. Do you agree with this writer’s opinion that silent conversation is golden? And why?

6. If one of your acquaintances would keep silence, what do you feel? If your friend or family? Is there any difference? 

TED Talks. Ari Wallach:

3 ways to plan for the (very) long term

0:11

So I've been "futuring," which is a term I made up —

0:15

(Laughter)

0:16

about three seconds ago. I've been futuring for about 20 years, and when I first started, I would sit down with people, and say, "Hey, let's talk 10, 20 years out." And they'd say, "Great." And I've been seeing that time horizon get shorter and shorter and shorter, so much so that I met with a CEO two months ago and I said — we started our initial conversation. He goes, "I love what you do. I want to talk about the next six months."

0:44

(Laughter)

0:47

We have a lot of problems that we are facing. These are civilizational-scale problems. The issue though is, we can't solve them using the mental models that we use right now to try and solve these problems. Yes, a lot of great technical work is being done, but there is a problem that we need to solve for a priori, before, if we want to really move the needle on those big problems. "Short-termism." Right? There's no marches. There's no bracelets. There's no petitions that you can sign to be against short-termism. I tried to put one up, and no one signed. It was weird.

1:26

(Laughter)

1:28

But it prevents us from doing so much. Short-termism, for many reasons, has pervaded every nook and cranny of our reality. I just want you to take a second and just think about an issue that you're thinking, working on. It could be personal, it could be at work or it could be move-the-needle world stuff, and think about how far out you tend to think about the solution set for that.

1:52

Because short-termism prevents the CEO from buying really expensive safety equipment. It'll hurt the bottom line. So we get the Deepwater Horizon. Short-termism prevents teachers from spending quality one-on-one time with their students. So right now in America, a high school student drops out every 26 seconds. Short-termism prevents Congress — sorry if there's anyone in here from Congress —

2:23

(Laughter)

2:25

or not really that sorry —

2:27

(Laughter)

2:29

from putting money into a real infrastructure bill. So what we get is the I-35W bridge collapse over the Mississippi a few years ago, 13 killed. It wasn't always like this. We did the Panama Canal. We pretty much have eradicated global polio. We did the transcontinental railroad, the Marshall Plan. And it's not just big, physical infrastructure problems and issues. Women's suffrage, the right to vote. But in our short-termist time, where everything seems to happen right now and we can only think out past the next tweet or timeline post, we get hyper-reactionary.

3:07

So what do we do? We take people who are fleeing their war-torn country, and we go after them. We take low-level drug offenders, and we put them away for life. And then we build McMansions without even thinking about how people are going to get between them and their job. It's a quick buck.

3:25

Now, the reality is, for a lot of these problems, there are some technical fixes, a lot of them. I call these technical fixes sandbag strategies. So you know there's a storm coming, the levee is broken, no one's put any money into it, you surround your home with sandbags. And guess what? It works. Storm goes away, the water level goes down, you get rid of the sandbags, and you do this storm after storm after storm. And here's the insidious thing. A sandbag strategy can get you reelected. A sandbag strategy can help you make your quarterly numbers.

4:05

Now, if we want to move forward into a different future than the one we have right now, because I don't think we've hit — 2016 is not peak civilization.

4:15

(Laughter)

4:16

There's some more we can do. But my argument is that unless we shift our mental models and our mental maps on how we think about the short, it's not going to happen.

4:27

So what I've developed is something called "longpath," and it's a practice. And longpath isn't a kind of one-and-done exercise. I'm sure everyone here at some point has done an off-site with a lot of Post-It notes and whiteboards, and you do — no offense to the consultants in here who do that — and you do a long-term plan, and then two weeks later, everyone forgets about it. Right? Or a week later. If you're lucky, three months. It's a practice because it's not necessarily a thing that you do. It's a process where you have to revisit different ways of thinking for every major decision that you're working on. So I want to go through those three ways of thinking.

5:08

So the first: transgenerational thinking. I love the philosophers: Plato, Socrates, Habermas, Heidegger. I was raised on them. But they all did one thing that didn't actually seem like a big deal until I really started kind of looking into this. And they all took, as a unit of measure for their entire reality of what it meant to be virtuous and good, the single lifespan, from birth to death. But here's a problem with these issues: they stack up on top of us, because the only way we know how to do something good in the world is if we do it between our birth and our death. That's what we're programmed to do. If you go to the self-help section in any bookstore, it's all about you. Which is great, unless you're dealing with some of these major issues. And so with transgenerational thinking, which is really kind of transgenerational ethics, you're able to expand how you think about these problems, what is your role in helping to solve them.

6:12

Now, this isn't something that just has to be done at the Security Council chamber. It's something that you can do in a very kind of personal way. So every once in a while, if I'm lucky, my wife and I like to go out to dinner, and we have three children under the age of seven. So you can imagine it's a very peaceful, quiet meal.

6:30

(Laughter)

6:32

So we sit down and literally all I want to do is just eat and chill, and my kids have a completely and totally different idea of what we're going to be doing. And so my first idea is my sandbag strategy, right? It's to go into my pocket and take out the iPhone and give them "Frozen" or some other bestselling game thing. And then I stop and I have to kind of put on this transgenerational thinking cap. I don't do this in the restaurant, because it would be bizarre, but I have to — I did it once, and that's how I learned it was bizarre.

7:09

(Laughter)

7:10

And you have to kind of think, "OK, I can do this." But what is this teaching them? So what does it mean if I actually bring some paper or engage with them in conversation? It's hard. It's not easy, and I'm making this very personal. It's actually more traumatic than some of the big issues that I work on in the world — entertaining my kids at dinner. But what it does is it connects them here in the present with me, but it also — and this is the crux of transgenerational thinking ethics — it sets them up to how they're going to interact with their kids and their kids and their kids.

7:47

Second, futures thinking. When we think about the future, 10, 15 years out, give me a vision of what the future is. You don't have to give it to me, but think in your head. And what you're probably going to see is the dominant cultural lens that dominates our thinking about the future right now: technology. So when we think about the problems, we always put it through a technological lens, a tech-centric, a techno-utopia, and there's nothing wrong with that, but it's something that we have to really think deeply about if we're going to move on these major issues, because it wasn't always like this. Right? The ancients had their way of thinking about what the future was. The Church definitely had their idea of what the future could be, and you could actually pay your way into that future. Right? And luckily for humanity, we got the scientific revolution. From there, we got the technology, but what has happened — And by the way, this is not a critique. I love technology. Everything in my house talks back to me, from my children to my speakers to everything.

8:55

(Laughter)

8:58

But we've abdicated the future from the high priests in Rome to the high priests of Silicon Valley. So when we think, well, how are we going to deal with climate or with poverty or homelessness, our first reaction is to think about it through a technology lens. And look, I'm not advocating that we go to this guy. I love Joel, don't get me wrong, but I'm not saying we go to Joel. What I'm saying is we have to rethink our base assumption about only looking at the future in one way, only looking at it through the dominant lens. Because our problems are so big and so vast that we need to open ourselves up.

9:40

So that's why I do everything in my power not to talk about the future. I talk about futures. It opens the conversation again. So when you're sitting and thinking about how do we move forward on this major issue — it could be at home, it could be at work, it could be again on the global stage — don't cut yourself off from thinking about something beyond technology as a fix because we're more concerned about technological evolution right now than we are about moral evolution. And unless we fix for that, we're not going to be able to get out of short-termism and get to where we want to be.

10:18

The final, telos thinking. This comes from the Greek root. Ultimate aim and ultimate purpose. And it's really asking one question: to what end? When was the last time you asked yourself: To what end? And when you asked yourself that, how far out did you go? Because long isn't long enough anymore. Three, five years doesn't cut it. It's 30, 40, 50, 100 years.

10:45

In Homer's epic, "The Odyssey," Odysseus had the answer to his "what end." It was Ithaca. It was this bold vision of what he wanted — to return to Penelope. And I can tell you, because of the work that I'm doing, but also you know it intuitively — we have lost our Ithaca. We have lost our "to what end," so we stay on this hamster wheel. And yes, we're trying to solve these problems, but what comes after we solve the problem? And unless you define what comes after, people aren't going to move. The businesses — this isn't just about business — but the businesses that do consistently, who break out of short-termism not surprisingly are family-run businesses. They're transgenerational. They're telos. They think about the futures. And this is an ad for Patek Philippe. They're 175 years old, and what's amazing is that they literally embody this kind of longpathian sense in their brand, because, by the way, you never actually own a Patek Philippe, and I definitely won't —

11:41

(Laughter)

11:42

unless somebody wants to just throw 25,000 dollars on the stage. You merely look after it for the next generation.

11:49

So it's important that we remember, the future, we treat it like a noun. It's not. It's a verb. It requires action. It requires us to push into it. It's not this thing that washes over us. It's something that we actually have total control over. But in a short-term society, we end up feeling like we don't. We feel like we're trapped. We can push through that.

12:13

Now I'm getting more comfortable in the fact that at some point in the inevitable future, I will die. But because of these new ways of thinking and doing, both in the outside world and also with my family at home, and what I'm leaving my kids, I get more comfortable in that fact. And it's something that a lot of us are really uncomfortable with, but I'm telling you, think it through. Apply this type of thinking and you can push yourself past what's inevitably very, very uncomfortable.

12:47

And it all begins really with yourself asking this question: What is your longpath? But I ask you, when you ask yourself that now or tonight or behind a steering wheel or in the boardroom or the situation room: push past the longpath, quick, oh, what's my longpath the next three years or five years? Try and push past your own life if you can because it makes you do things a little bit bigger than you thought were possible.

13:19

Yes, we have huge, huge problems out there. With this process, with this thinking, I think we can make a difference. I think you can make a difference, and I believe in you guys.

13:34

Thank you.

13:35

(Applause)

TED Questions

1.   Please summarize this TED Talks in your own way. What are the 3 ways to plan for the (very) long term?

2.   Talk about any example of short-termism from personal stuffs to political issues.

3.   How often do you think about future? How far away that future is? 1 year, 10 year? Usually when do you think about future?

4.   What do you think about when you think about future?

5.   What’s good for thinking about future (or plan for the long term)? What’s bad for it?

(There could be some more questions coming.)

6.   When and where is best fit for thinking over something?