What I think about TED "The case for engineering our food"

I would like to write about a talk of TED "The case for engineering our food" by Pamela Ronald. 

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

 Pamela Ronald is a plant geneticist. She explains about genetic modification in a clear way to understand. Many people have come to believe that there’s something bad for health and the environment. However her perspective is different.

 Her husband is an organic farmer and they have the same goal. They want to cultivate crops without further damage the environment.

 Farming is one of my hobbies. So, I also plant a variety of vegetables in my small field and have tried to practice organic farming methods. For example, this is mentioned in this speech, I don’t use chemical pesticides possibly but spray an insecticide called B.T., which is based on a bacteria. But when I come to think of it again, grafting is also one of genetic techniques and the rice that we have almost every day was developed using random mutagenesis. Therefore, farmers, even though they are called organic farmers, they use the varieties that are developed using genetic methods and Japanese people live a daily life by eating rice as our staple diet.

 In a way, what she says is true. It is easy to understand it for an amateur farmer like me. We can’t plant vegetables or we are obliged to use too much chemical pesticide without developed varieties. This means that farmers can’t provide enough crops into the market and too much insecticide destroy the environment and is bad for our health. When we come to think about it, or also experientially, even organic farming would not work without genetic modification that makes plants resistant to disease and tolerant of stress. I other words, without it, pests can probably eat all our crops in fields before we harvest.

 The environment has been changing including the global warming and human-beings have food and population issues and poverty issue. Genetic modification can be apparently useful for resolving issues. The resistant to disease and tolerant of stress or the characteristics can help us survive on the earth. As she says, it's the cheapest, safest, and most effective technology for enhancing food security and advancing sustainable agriculture. Additionally, I think that it can contribute to keeping or creating sustainable environment. Needless to say, in doing so, it's very important to talk about a specific crop and a specific product, and think about the needs of the consumer. Careful study and rigorous peer review by scientists are absolutely imperative. And also, every major scientific organization in the world needs to recognize that the crops currently on the market are safe to eat and that the process of genetic engineering is not risky.

What I think about TED "How to start a movement"

I would like to write about a talk of TED "How to start a movement" by Derek Sivers.

http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_how_to_start_a_movement

After listening to this speech, I was able to understand about movements and leadership. Leaders are innovative, creative, and bold.  Leaders make something from nothing and take risks.  The leader is the center of a movement.  Leaders are creative, brave, and have a big vision, so they can create a new path for the future.

The first follower is clever, social and creative.  He/she can understand the value of something great, and share things with many people.  Additionally, he/she can start a movement.  I think that the difference between the first follower and the leader is sociality.

The leader creates innovation while the first follower starts a movement.

In order to start a movement, we need these two kinds of creativity.  In business, this leads to creating a new market and building an organization.

What I think about TED " Build a tower, build a team"

I would like to write about a talk of TED "Build a tower, build a team" by Tom Wujec.

http://www.ted.com/talks/tom_wujec_build_a_tower/transcript?language=en

The other day, in Daniel Pink’s speech, I heard / learned that the reward-and-punishment approach, often doesn’t work, and often does harm. Tom Wujec also experienced a similar phenomenon during the workshop of the marshmallow challenge. He offered a 10,000 dollar prize of software to the winning team. Nevertheless, the result was even worse. Therefore, incentivizing doesn’t lead to better consequences.

The second time around, understanding the value of prototyping helped the same team go from being the very worst to being among the very best.

Daniel Pink says that the new operating system for our businesses revolves around three elements: autonomy, mastery and purpose. Tom Wujec talked about how prototyping is effective to design, which is a creative activity.

Come to think of it, the prototyping involves Mastery. Building a prototype is just the iterative process to get better and better at something that matters. Pink says that Mastery means the desire to get better and better at something that matters.

Tom Wujec explains one approach of mastery through prototyping. Making a prototype, getting feedback, refining work, and facilitating the process. Prototyping uses these iterative processes to get better at designing or resolving issues.

In addition, the words, “the marshmallow challenge” are used in this speech. It’s a “challenge” not a “task”, a “problem”, or a “question”. It seems to be the key word for intrinsic motivation. We should think that our work is challenging or choose a challenging job or find challenging factors in our work.

What I think about TED "The puzzle of motivation"

I would like to write about a talk of TED "The puzzle of motivation" by Daniel H. Pink.

http://www.ted.com/talks/dan_pink_on_motivation

I have studied about “motivation” in the past. I studied “Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.” Maslow was an American psychologist (1908 to 1970). In 1943, Abraham Maslow stated his theory as "A Theory of Human Motivation." In my past, his way of thinking was useful for seeing my motivation objectively. Back then, when changing my surrounding environment, I would remember his theory in order to review my milestone. I would ask myself about what I wanted and needed to do. At the same time, by using his theory, I would watch my status and place in the moment in a calm way.

According to Maslow’s way of thinking, people are motivated to achieve several specific goals. They are defined in “Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs” in the form of a pyramid.

http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/conation/maslow.html

At first, this hierarchy of needs was divided into 5 stages which were as follows:

1. Biological and Physiological needs - air, food, drink, shelter, warmth, sex, sleep.

2. Safety needs - protection from elements, security, order, law, limits, stability, freedom

from fear.

3. Social Needs - belongingness, affection and love, - from work group, family, friends,

romantic relationships.

4. Esteem needs - achievement, mastery, independence, status, dominance, prestige, self-respect, respect from others.

5. Self-Actualization needs - realizing personal potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences.

Later, in 1970, the five-stage model was expanded to an eight-stage model. Which is as follows:

1. Biological and Physiological needs

2. Safety needs

3. Social Needs

4. Esteem needs

(steps 1 through 4 are the same as the ones in the five-stage model.)

5. Cognitive needs - knowledge, meaning, etc.

6. Aesthetic needs - appreciation and search for beauty, balance, form, etc.

7. Self-Actualization needs - realizing personal potential, self-fulfillment, seeking personal growth and peak experiences.

8. Transcendence needs - helping others to achieve self-actualization.

Recently, I have found the relation between Daniel Pink’s speech and Maslow’s Hierarchy. I think maybe, under developing social circumstances, people discover their motivation in Maslow’s stages 1 and 2. Therefore, these stages were the 20th century rewards, extrinsic motivators, or carrots and sticks. But nowadays, in the globalized society and economy, people have to expand their views and explore their activities to resolve candle problems. I think what people need to use in order to expand their views and explore their activities is not “knowledge” but “wisdom”. In the current circumstances of the 21st century, people solve the mystifying candle problems through their intrinsic

drive. This drive involves Maslow’s stages 3 through 8. To put it simply, the 20th century motivators are equivalent to Maslow’s stages 1 and 2 and the 21st century motivators are Maslow’s stages 3 through 8.

However, when considering the management of a company, business managers are required to have more courage and strong leadership skills. Because they must keep on paying people adequately, fairly, and absolutely even though the global environment is complicated, diverse, and chaotic. On the other hand, workers also require more self-management and creative ability. In reality, we have limitations with money and time and we have to work on creative things. In a way, it is a little harder for us to work than it was in the 20th century. In order to strengthen our business, solve a lot of those candle problems, and change the world, first we have to change our concept of value and keep our higher stage motivations. What can we supply by autonomy, mastery, and purpose in Daniel Pink’s speech? According to Maslow’s way of thinking, I would guess that it is “Transcendent needs.” In other words, I guess that it might ultimately be the motivation for social contribution. The final goal of intrinsic motivation would be social contribution.

To conclude, I think the changing of our motivation has come from the result of the changing of our society. Specifically, it is the changing of our supply and demand. Conversely, we can say that the products and services for social contribution would increase, leading to sales and profits for the company. Business managers and workers need to keep this in mind.

While looking at my children’s smiles, I sometimes think about what I can do for them and what can be a goal for us. I think that this type of thinking process is also one of the transcendent needs and intrinsic motivators. When we work on this kind of theme, needless to say, obviously, we must work creatively, passionately, and effectively. Because at that time, we can play the role of a hero like in American movies. They can risk their lives and do a really good job for love and others, not for money. If we can find this sort of motivator, we will be able to grow stronger, do a better job, and live life more fully.

What I think about TED "Keep your goals to yourself"

I would like to write about a talk of TED "Keep your goals to yourself" by Derek Sivers.

http://www.ted.com/talks/derek_sivers_keep_your_goals_to_yourself

In my youth, I was the type who practiced my goals after sharing them.  But now, as for my personal goals in life, I don't state them clearly/publicly.  There are a few reasons for this.  First, I'm not sure how to achieve my goals.  I don't think I can come close to achieving my goals by my effort alone.  Secondly, due to quick changes in the surrounding environment, I often have to change my goal subtly.  Additionally, I have no time to share my goal with someone and worry whether or not I can achieve it.  I believe that there is not time to share something with others when someone is earnest and serious about it.

What I think about TED "Try something new for 30 days"

I would like to write about a talk of TED "Try something new for 30 days" by Matt Cutts.

http://www.ted.com/talks/matt_cutts_try_something_new_for_30_days

After becoming an adult and graduating from college, most people certainly tend to think of themselves as nothing but a worker.  I belong to a trade company. I'm a manager and salesman in Japan.  I am able to eat food and live a decent life with my family.  I actually kind of enjoy my life.  So one day in the past, I stopped thinking about other possibilities. Actually, I did so many years ago.  Although, right now I can agree with this speech.  Also, I guess that if I really want something badly enough, I could do anything for 30 days.  Additionally, if I continue to make a lot of effort for longer periods of time, I could change myself like a growing teenager.