 Let me welcome you to this intimate discussion on technology and the social contract. So for those of you who are in the room, it's a small group of people and therefore I hope we can have an interactive conversation around this topic. And I know that some people will be able to watch this also through social media at some point. So the topic we want to focus on now is really how technology, the revolution in technology about which we have heard different dimensions in the sessions that came before. We heard about how the health industry is being transformed through technology. We heard earlier on about how corporate social responsibility is being impacted by technology. And all of this is having an impact on what you might think of as the relationship between the individual and society between the citizen and the state. And what is the, which is of course just another way of saying the social contract. And so the question that we would like to focus on in this discussion is how is the social contract as we have known it likely to be affected by the transformation in our lives that is going to come about through the technological revolution. Is it going to have just a small change in the sense that the contract will be the same but we will use technology in executing it or will it actually transform the nature of the contract itself. And I think that is the topic that this panel that is here is ideally placed to bring to you. And I'd like to start, excuse me, by asking the first of our speakers, which is Toby Sun, to talk a little bit about how the social contract as a concept has itself evolved and how you see the introduction of technology in our lives impacting on that contract. Then we will go to some specific applications of that in different dimensions from the other panelists and we'll come to having then a conversation in which I hope all of you will also be able to participate. So let me turn to Toby. Thank you, Masood. Good afternoon, everybody. So the purpose that I'll try to do is just to probably give an overview of the whole definition of a social contract. Social contracts have been the basis of how we construct society. Every couple of generations, our social contract evolved to better reflect our social norms and values. For our grandparents, being on time was crucial for someone to be trusted. To some extent it reflects the sort of narrative in the industrial economy because if someone were to be late, it would mean that there would be a stop in production. Social changes first led to substitution of human and animal workforce for machines. Since the advent of advanced computers, we are now substituting human brain for advanced robots and algorithms. In the 20th century, liberalism was organized around three presumed pillars. Large corporate employees like Ford and General Motors had three things in common. There was internal pathways for employees for their upward mobility. They were a unionized workforce that could collectively bargain on behalf of the entire community. And finally, a regulatory apparatus that was strong that would oversee big business and organize labor. This trial was the essence of the social contract then. In exchange for full-time work, most families were assured of basic level of welfare, social insurance and upward mobility. The problem is that this tripartite agreement might not exist now. In the 21st century, both the online and offline world, work is increasingly organized, not in large factories, but rather in highly disaggregated and fragmented workplace. Workers increasingly freelance and regulations are being left far behind the pace of technological innovation and economic transformation. This practice is referred to by many economists as fissured workplace. Last year, about 400,000 drivers from Uuba went for a class suit in the United States against the company on the fact that they were treated as contract laborers and not as employees. And they demanded back pay and benefits. A judge proposed a 100 million settlement and he said that if you don't settle the cost of a final settlement could be in excess of maybe 1,000 times more. So what is the challenge that we face in formulating new social contracts in this rapidly changing technological world? The main distributive tool that we have that are prosperity trickling down from productivity to wage and labor has ceased to function. And this is the biggest problem. The decoupling of productivity and wages is a fundamental reason for this structural imbalance. Wealth is being concentrated in the hands of a few who own platforms, robos and algorithms and those living off labor is struggling. This disenfranchised people are now beginning to constitute a new political class. They vote for more radicalised political options and we saw that recently in Brexit, the victory of President Donald Trump, the rise of FNP in France. And this is basically due to this broad breakdown in trust. If wealth is concentrated in capital, some form of democratisation of capital holding is absolutely necessary. So what does the future look like? First we have to be prepared now for new social structures and social contracts when technologies like blockchain and bitcoin will become more ubiquitous. Blockchain will bring economics and technology together in a way society has never experienced before. Previous technologies like the internet allowed us to create openness and the exchange of information. Blockchain allows us to track and trace our interaction, economic transactions and gives us power to disrupt aspects of our own social contract that we do not like. For example, removing the central bank as the creator of trust in our money. If you look at the internet it was more an exchange of information. Blockchain will become the exchange of assets and values. Thank you very much. Thank you very much, Toby. So I think that's very nice because you've given us some of the big changes and I know that others in the panel might come back to some of the issues, particularly the one very important point that you raised about how the nature of employment is changing and in fact even the term employment may itself no longer be relevant in a future where more and more people are working in a different way. So I know that at one point actually Patrick might come back to that point as well. But before we go there let's go to the next panelist and I'm going to ask Changdae Wang to talk a bit about his perspective on this issue, looking also at how all this is going to affect the whole industry of communication and media, which in a way is your background. I look forward to your perspective broadly on this issue. I know you have a presentation that you would like to use. Please. If you allow me. Of course. My notes keep on slipping down. Hold this for me. I'm a newspaper publisher. I print about one million copies daily. It's a business paper in Korea. And I operate three TV channels and Internet services and things like that. So I have about 15 million audience in Korea. So I give you these information so we can understand better. I was listening to medical people before I started this session and people talked about Fourth Industrial Revolution, which was a big topic in Davos this year. And as you know, Fourth Industrial Revolution covers IOT and I just learned IOL, which means life and robotics, sensors, driverless cars, drones and genetic engineering, and thin technology. And people are borrowing money from other people. That's P2P financing. You'll see a lot of these new industrial revolutions happening here and there. So as Simon said, we're going to have a new type of social contract. So I like to focus on social contract in newspaper industry. Through these industrial revolutions, MK, meaning my newspaper, media group, I'm going through lots of innovation strategy. 24 hours, seven days, mobile platforms, that's one thing. And we hear a lot about Ubering taxi, but I suggested Ubering professors, expertise people, and even students and specialists. So I named the Ubering Knowledge Ubering 300. I tried to gather about 300 people. They can help me out. I have about 700 journalists working for me. Adding 300 more would be a good idea. So I tried to build Knowledge Community Network. That's what I called here Knowledge Ubering 300. Then I tried to introduce RAIDA series. RAIDA goes deeper into many places. So I introduced RAIDA series. That's a new news platform specialized in politics, law, finance, consumer behavior, and health. So I even set up these venture companies, small venture companies in Silicon Valley. I hope that will make me a little more money than newspaper business. Next picture is a very complicated one. I didn't bother to translate all the Korean words into English. You probably wouldn't understand this. But my media platform is called Service Journalism. I tried to map media going through this new fourth industrial revolution. Newspaper will introduce robot journalism, and they'll go through all these new ventures. Because traditional paper newspapers don't make much money lately, and the subscription is declining. They really have to find new ways to support their journalists and their employees. So mapping meaning planning course of action in detail. And I'll come back to this later. Now we are facing a new medium era. Google and Face. Actually, whenever you use Google and Facebook, iPhone, you are entering new individual social contract. That's very complicated. Nobody reads them. You maybe start reading first page, then going through several pages, you are tired. You just say yes, but you don't know what you're getting into. You know, Google and Facebook make up about 70% of the digital marketing industry. They are taking all the revenue money from traditional newspapers. And Netflix has become the biggest global multi-media company, offering services in over 140 countries. So what's happening in the media industry is media is going through big deals, emanate. AT&T just purchased Time and Warner for $85 billion. And Verizon has announced that they're planned to buy Yahoo for almost $5 billion. And Disney is also expected to merge with CVS to multiply its size. And Neon Gezai, Shimbun of Japan, they will acquire Financial Times of UK for $1.3 billion. So many mergers and acquisitions are happening in the area of traditional media. And I learned that content is king. Everybody in this media area saying quality of contents is decreasing lately. So I said the flood paradox, meaning there is no drinking water available during extreme floods. So there are many platforms need contents, but quality contents aren't that many. So newspaper is going through many strategic reforms. And the first one is convergence. We try to integrate platform, online, offline, and mobile platforms. And we try to network platforms and tight-knit horizontal and vertical networks. So in the end, we hope to converge your quality contents with the platforms and marketing services. So I checked the most recent technological advancement. And as you know, MIT Media Lab is already in the forefront. And there is a new idea, software, effective computing. Effective is the Emotion Recognition Software and analysis startup created by the MIT Media Lab. What they're doing is software is interpreting humans' emotions, facial expressions, age group, and even gender. So we just before talked about customized personalized medicine. In the news business, we are trying to deliver the same thing. Customized, individualized, precise news to fit the needs of all the readers in this area. What about location-based services? We are here in Doha, Qatar. You give your location to Google. You might find your favorite restaurants and shopping places. And many newspapers around the world they go through VR journalism, virtual reality. And the sizes are getting smaller and smaller, and eventually they come down to contact lens size. And last year, World Association of Newspaper Congress, we talked about this VR journalism and this is going to be a big thing by year 2018. What about mobility and IoT? Everything's mobile these days and we have screens everywhere. Display technology is getting advanced rapidly. Mirrors, windows, desks, and automobile windows, they are all becoming news platforms. And the company Cisco predicted in 2016, videos will make up about 78% of all contents by 2020. So you'll have ubiquitous newspaper here and there. So publishers of newspapers, we are going through lots of headaches, whether we are well-prepared for new technological reforms, revolutions. Some people say solutions lie outside of media. And media is well-known for mass media. We can deliver news in a huge amount of quantity. But now we are going through micro-culture era. So micro-culture, so we changed from mass media period to micro-media era. So micro-culture is becoming an important area in this new business. So I was just saying a social contract shift happening. So I'd like to draw some conclusions here. The purpose of the social contract was to negotiate how political power and resources will be distributed in societies. The basic role of new social contract in the 21st century is to illustrate the distribution of information in our society. Media has become the fundamental platform of the 21st century social contract. Media will be the key player in helping individuals and societies communicate and exchange information for positive social development. Okay, political power and resources were money in the past. But now knowledge and information and new actions will be money in the future. So many years back, Mr. Bill Gates worried about the future of the newspaper. He said the newspaper will disappear in 10, 15 years. But as you all know, paper newspaper is still around and we take different formats to go everywhere. The picture I showed here is Jeebo. It's another product from MIT Media Lab. Robert Jeebo is sort of a casual conversation type. They feature families' visual features, voices and behaviors. And so analyzing data and collect data so they can really become a member of your family. I think we'll have infinite interactions with robots, users and big data and things like that. And Google and other those media companies will collect these data and they're gonna provide customized content to help create knowledge societies and advance people's everyday lives. I think media will continue to innovate through its unending quest for knowledge. And again, okay, I show you this media platform. This is sort of my new social contract with my readers. And lastly, I'd like to mention a little bit about global governance and media. This morning I had so many speakers saying future is uncertain and unpredictable because of Donald Trump. He's becoming a president next January and many people are afraid of him. Why are you afraid of him? I think we're afraid of him because trust has shifted from established institutions to individuals, well-educated people not trusted anymore in the United States, in France, maybe in South Korea too. So we have a big shift from leaders to outside leaders, so-called unfiltered leaders. President-elect Donald Trump, his conversation was unfiltered. But if you see him on CNN these days, he's much more elegant. And he really looks like next president of the United States. So in the fourth industrial revolution, I call this digital age, your money and power derives from data and information, and the newspapers will provide you with data and information. And if anybody tried to suppress the freedom of press, I think he'll regret it for sure. Again, last year in Columbia, we had this World Newspaper Congress, and we give awards every year who are promoting freedom of press. And this time, a Russian journalist received a golden panel award, and he made a very interesting comment. He said, 85% of Russians don't know about the freedom of press is a very important factor to elevate people from poverty. So I try to connect press freedom to global government, and we need to think about this idea. Thank you. Industry is changing, and I think you raise one point, which I hope we come back to when we have a conversation, which is that the knowledge and data is the source of power and influence for more. But knowledge and data is being collected from all of us. Every day, everything we do is being mapped and transmitted and aggregated and forming part of the big data. And we may be entering into many social contracts, as you said, without even fully understanding what we have entered into. And the consequence of those individual decisions to be part of this big knowledge and data establishment is in essence to confer a lot of power to the people who can collect and manage that data. So what is the role of the state, as we have seen it in the past, in governing that process? How does that process affect the relative roles of corporations, states, individuals, other pressure groups, other lobbies in the way in which society is organized? I hope we'll come back to that in the discussion. Let me turn now, if I may, to Patrick. Patrick, if you could give us your perspective, and I know you will also focus a little bit on how the technological revolution is changing the nature of the workplace. Thank you. First, a preliminary comment on the topic. Men is a creature of habit. This explains you always have a gap between the new technology and its adoption by the society and its citizens. So just to put things in perspective, being with Capgemini, Capgemini is a 12.5 billion revenue IT services company, but that means we have 185,000 employees today out of which 95,000 in India. So my focus on contribution will be on automation and labor, which is often talked about. And I'll start with a few observations and propose then two paths forward possibly. The first is on automation. We hear a lot. We talk a lot about automation. I say they are in IT. This is the essence of IT. Automation is the essence of IT. And there are three types. We look at it as three types of automation. One that is known for long. This is where you monitor the ITs. It exists for decades. Now you have a new type of automation. This is everything related to industrialization. You first saw it on the shop floor. Now you are seeing it in the IT shop floor. This is how you do robot process automation, IT process automation. And then there is a third that is the most talked about. This is everything called cognitive. Cognitive is artificial intelligence, machine learning, predictive analytics. This area exists only since we have big data. Otherwise you have no use case. You have no economic case to invest whatsoever in cognitive technologies. This is only the amount of data and the value you can extract from it that has allowed this development. What we are seeing now is not an incremental development. What we are seeing now is a combination of these different types of automation. And that is what is hurting notably the labor market. And when you look now economically on what automation is and related to labor, the first most evident, the obvious one that is much talked about is efficiency. Efficiency is about cost savings. It is about productivity improvement. So yes, this is eliminating labor. But there is a second business value which is efficiency. Efficiency is all about the quality of the processes, about the productivity. It affects labor but not in the same way. It even creates new opportunity. And the third element is about the business outcome. It completely changed business model. It completely changed industries. We just heard about media. We hear about hotel or entertainment or the way you will define it. It is generating opportunities for new type of activities. So automation is not just one word. We need to look at the three by three approach, possibly the way I just described it. Now the impact on labor is massive and is multi-form. The first one we see is the relationship notably of the new generation to the employer. The employee-employer contract is disappearing. We are recruiting now people in the mid-20s who state arriving with us our ambition is to have four employers experienced by the age of 30. A few years ago everybody would come and say I want to make a career, I love your company. So here what you see the shift socially is that the people what matters most is to enrich the ability to network. They know they are on their own and they know that they have to build their own currency. And in this respect I would like to give one example in the valley there is a company called Geekster. Geekster is a network of geeks. There are about thousands of the top schools. They are all freelancers and they are 60% of them are RBNB all year long. They don't even have a personal address. They travel they work 60 to 80 hours per week. And this company has established something called which is a currency called karma and these members, the stop developers are more fighting to get the currency, the karma currency that increase their value than fighting for the remuneration on the job. Remuneration matters obviously this important of this networked economy and the importance of the individual aspect. I mentioned in automation the third part notably around the cognitive these are in fact powerful tools. As you have seen in the previous session on healthcare these are extremely powerful tools. These create opportunities what we call it the augmented workforce. So the workforce today has the ability to do much more not only in volume as we have seen with Geno but also in quality. So that creates new opportunity. For instance mathematicians have jobs outside of financial services effectively they have jobs everywhere which was not the case before. Of course there is a kind of segregation. So the challenge is on risk killing and here this is a pretty unfair picture when you look at the labor situation because there are people who have the ability, the some core competencies to be risk killed and every company I believe and certainly ours is investing massively in risk killing because you have a good business case in risk killing. Unfortunately there is a significant percentage that we will not be able to risk kill and that will create a question for the company not to be in terms of cost but also for the society. Then at the opposite you have a talent war. The talent war is global. It has always existed when we had an increase in technology evolution but here I said Toby comes from Bangalore. You look at Bangalore today. It was a hot place for outsourcers. Now it's a hot place for everything. It's a hot place for startups. India GDP is growing by 7%. Good monsoon this year it will continue to grow next year. So FDI is increasing. So if you look for talent in Bangalore be ready to pay. It's extremely expensive and wherever you go because and that was what was mentioned before it's micro media possibly and certainly but it is micro in everywhere. You have micro ecosystems for every type and so you need specialists and there is this dichotomy between the population we had before and I mentioned the risk healing and now what you need to do. One example for instance there is a company also created by a French entrepreneur based in the west called Upwork. I was working with them. I was looking for blockchain expert as Toby mentioned on Upwork. I found someone in Kerala he was charging by the hour what we pay by the by the day. But it's normal because he's on a global marketplace. So even if it delivers from Kerala it doesn't matter because he has skills that are in demand globally so he can charge, commend the premium. Then there is another two other more social aspects. One is the labor part and the taxation of labor we had a comment earlier from the secretary of OECD is fund a big part of our welfare system with all these changes it will create a gap and we will have to address it and if we look at the success or lack of success of ideas such as the tax I doubt that the answer is to have a tax on machine transaction or transaction per machine or the gap because this notion of employer status funding the welfare system will be heard by this transition. And lastly last observation is that all what I described is very similar to what we call what we see in other aspect of the so called shared economy what we see in transportation what you will hear in entertainment or hoteling. In fact these are technologies that allow to target economic inefficiencies and transform them in pool of profit that's my definition of shared economy a little caricature but at least it's simple enough and then labor is inefficient today the labor market is inefficient today and it's a huge volume of spend the total spend is massive so expect with this new generation also that have that has understood it and position itself for this the problem for society is of course the new generation we heard about an employment in some geographies and we know it but it's the whole lifespan with also the more senior population so two ideas that we see one that I try to put into practice it's very difficult one is that I don't believe anymore in one employment status we'll have to go to something much more granular we'll have a diversity of status today we know an employment status civil or private company you're an independent you're temporary by the way that was already your first attempt or you're unemployed today we'll have tens of different status and this is a big challenge on to adapt to it I said only one issue is pension how do you manage if this model will remain how do you manage it but I believe the multiplicity that will allow the flexibility based on the to address the situation that I briefly describe in my few observations is needed the second and I will finish with this but it's more well known but I think it's interesting if you have question to debate is basic or universal income I'm Swiss we voted massively against it 77% because it was too early it was ill defined but Finland will will make pilots and I think this this is this might be an interesting avenue but that implies a disconnect between labour and revenue but there is a social challenge and there is a disconnect that will need to be addressed by the moderator my short contribution thank you thank you very much Patrick it would be interesting to ask yourself in 10 years time now you say you have about 185,000 employees in 10 years time do you think you'll have 180,000 or more people associated with you but how many of them will be employees it may only be 185,000 or 18,500 and I think that's part of what you're getting at I will not comment because we have to address it with the international workers council before but absolutely this is a big debate right now thank you and also I think we should come back to the question you raised about what this implies for the way that you think about old age security and pensions and I would say in the United States for example for most for many people if not most their health insurance is linked to their employment status so if they change jobs they move to the employment plan of their new employer now if more and more people are employees what does that mean for the way in which we think about health, pensions and a variety of things which traditionally we have associated with the relationship between individuals and the place in which they work assuming that that relationship would be stable and long lasting and now as you say it is changing quite dramatically let me now I have another speaker who is Sebastian and Sebastian I know you are going to use a power point for your presentation it works I don't have any power points but I feel better standing up let me tell you at least what we are facing I am the chairman of a big hotel company and we have 240,000 employees in 95 countries if I want to resume summarize the last 20 years what happened basically since 2000 just bear with me a second 1960 2000 all the hotel companies in the world Hilton, Hyatt, Marriott Intercon, Accor were actually created in 1960s for 40 years in a row we benefited from 90% of the profit pool 10% when in the hands of traditional travel agent of which we paid them a 10% commission and that lasted for 40 years easy game with a growing industry which is a travel and tourism industry in 2000 what happened well you had a first digital mutation which was the online travel agencies booking Expedia they did not invent anything extraordinary they just had a new technology a better machine a better equipment far greater than what existed into the traditional travel agent and they made it global and we as hoteliers felt it would be wonderful because it would be easier access for the guest 5 years later met a search all those online platform which you can compare pricing you have Kayak, Trivago, TripAdvisors and there again we felt he was extraordinary for the guest because they can make a better choice and an easier choice and there again we did not react as hotel companies and then 6 years ago 3rd mutation 3rd revolution different nature the first two one were based on technology it's called the sharing economy Airbnb where different from the first two revolutions they decided to change the model to invent a new sort of accommodation you no longer go to hotel but you go to somebody's home and it works and you look at 2016 the same profit pool I talked to you about which being 90-10 between the hoteliers the travel agent today is 5% for travel agent I went down from 90% to 70% and all those digital players they today have 25% the profit and no one can say it's unfair because we could have seen it coming and we did not react and I guarantee you you do the exact same mathematics in 10 years you don't have to wait another 15 years my share is 70% to 50% undoubtedly well and no one's gonna stop it and I've been saying and as chairman CEO for the last three years that no one should either say I mean should say that it is a threat yes it is much more an opportunity than a threat as long as you decide to participate into it as long as you decide not to be a spectator of your own environment but to be an actor so you need to basically participate in this growing pie going from 25 to 40% of profit well now it has another implication on social issues which is what the topic is all about booking.com and I'm very friendly with them so am I with Expedia so my chart is not again either of the two because we partner with them but if you pause a minute booking.com which only existed for the last 20 years has today a market cap of roughly 80 billion dollars which is more than all the hotel listed company together created 50 years ago but much more noticeable than the market cap because the market cap is a reflection of your growing factor all those big listed company Hilton, Marriott, Starwood, Intercon, Akko or Hayat Choice, Wyndham we probably have 2 million employees they have less than 1% 20,000 so I am a firm believer that all this new technology is extraordinary all this new technology is enhancing quality of life all this new technology is being sought after by the millennial because they wanted because they created but I'm also convinced that you're going to have more job destruction for the next 3 to 4 years that you're going to have job creation you have a lapse of time for people to adapt to this new revolution because companies like ours look at all these hotel companies we have 2 things they don't like to have we are capital intensive we are labor intensive all the companies you can think of we did not exist 25 years ago they don't have capital intensities they do not want to have labor intensity because they don't want to depend on any legislation locally that they don't understand they don't want to pay the price for it and if you go one step further it also has impact on government officials because they also have a lot of jobs and technology could also replace the jobs they have in their own administration and they can't adapt to it as much as I cannot adapt to it so if you want to simplify it for my big company which I endorse and I love doing what I'm doing you basically could regroup my 240,000 people in 3 buckets a third are extraordinary locomotives they understand the new world they understand the new technology and they actually want to participate into it and they probably could be initiators in moving things around and probably be a head of the game and probably be an actor of your own environment I have another third of my company where they understand the new world but they do not know how to participate they need to be trained they're asking to be trained they're going to be great soldiers but they won't be locomotive and have one third blind they do not want to see what's going on they do not want to be trained they're very happy with the process they've been enjoying for the last 50 years and you have to bring them with you even though it's a heavy burden sensing in all the big administration in all the mature countries they're facing the same three issues so as much as I am pushing for new technology I'm saying you have to adapt which gets to one conclusion which is the toughest part has nothing to do with money has nothing to do probably with age has to do with model what is it that differentiates the old economy to the new economy and I'm putting aside purposely technology one thing all those new companies who got created were created on a blank sheet of paper by less than 35 years old people no legacy no inertia no processors no history, no people 100% of the old economy we have hundreds of thousands of people we have processors we have inertia and we have history and culture the impact of those differences is the following the new company have a horizontal organization they share ideas they innovate together they speak to each other you don't keep a secret and you move it's called agility all the old traditional companies we have a vertical organization pyramidal hierarchy you keep your secret because it gives you status it gives you power if you don't change the old economy from vertical to horizontal you will never be able to adapt to the new world well Sebastian there was certainly a sobering message so I think you have had a very interesting perspective from different speakers on how they are dealing with the challenges that are faced by technology both at the company level at an industry level and what would be good now is to try and bring you in directly into this conversation and I'd like to encourage you to ask your questions and we'll try and get maybe three or four questions and then come back to the panelist and then go back out again to make it more interactive so let me start with the lady in the first row then I'm going to go to the gentleman in the third row and then we will take it from there so if you could please bring a microphone to the lady in the first row hello my name is Iman I think we had a very live panel speaking today I will have this one it's a comment and then a question then a doubt the comment says that the CEO of Nokia when they were about to close down he had a small statement to his employee he said we have done nothing wrong except that we do not change and Nokia now is not known anymore especially to our new kids the second thing is that that was my comment that if we don't accept the changes they will vanish that's the statement and the message but then and a few months from great exit to the United States election there was another shocking message that people refuse to change and the new word is either support Donald Trump the person who brought a new change and the great exit and the reason that they've been elected and the reason that the United United Kingdom United States refused the changes the people refused through the election the free world election refused the changes refused was by elderly non-educated people have lost their jobs people were affected with globalization the changes of the new world now my doubt how would the speakers elaborate with the new generation saying that the changes is good but the people who elect in democracy countries do the change how would you speak to them my name is from Korea I was from a public official and now I'm president of the overseas Korean Foundation I was very much impressed with the exposure by different speakers and because of this fast change and because of the delay of adaptation and difficulties a lot of challenges are there but our social contract our labor union for example try to resist any necessity of reform and change and government sector also tries to bring some new reform and restructuring but sometimes they don't understand the gravity of the situation and the leaders also fall back in tackling these issues and they create the gap that leads up to the political problem that we see today potentially my question is how the organization such as OECD and ILO even the labor international labor union organizations take these issues seriously and study and embark on to educate people political leaders other social leaders NGOs and the labor union people for the better of the entire society so my question is about education what the international organizations doing about it thank you thank you very much so I'll take one more question from that gentleman over there Mr. Dadoosh yeah, Uri Dadoosh from Washington DC I have a question actually for Sebastian Bazin I'm very interested when you say that we're going to see a lot less a lot of change that will affect your employees where you see the change because I assume in a hotel chain like yours you have a lot of people who do things that are not going to be replaced by robots or computers or whatever and others that are so if you could give us some kind of your view of the distribution of where this burden will fall I'll be very interested in that thank you very much Uri we have three questions and if I may I don't see anybody's hand up add a question of my own and before turning back to the panelists and I guess my question is that I think what all of you have pointed out is that there is a transformation in societies that is happening because of technology in different ways and some companies, some people will do remarkably well from it other sectors, other companies other people will be impacted negatively and they will try to adapt some will adapt well, some will not adapt well this process will take a decade if not more depending on where you are which sector, which country how do you bring about a conversation at the societal level that will create the most harmonious conditions for managing such a existential transformation because if you are in booking.com to take Sebastian's example they don't see why they should be worrying about the social contract as it affects the employees of the hotel industry and if you are in your industry you are simply managing your problems but how do you create the societal discussion that would bring about a new social contract that recognizes this new reality but also recognizes the inherent and quite complex difficulties of surmounting these problems without resulting in the kind of rejection that is only something that can hold back the flood for a while but it cannot change the course of the water so let me add that question if I may and I would like to just go down in order and ask each of you to address any of the questions that have come to you so I will start with you Tom from you the challenge is more that organizations are guided by profits more and more because you have the financial sector the private equity funds venture capital coming into play and they are extremely conscious of the return that they are making so when it comes to decentralization of any sort of wealth you know you see increasingly that people who have higher skills and organizations are paid much more multiple which is probably maybe 100 times 200 times more and nobody complains about it so who is able to regulate this I think only governments can so you know if you tell companies to do that I think it would be very difficult it's be a very onerous ask of them to answer your question about the politics of it again if you see the reason why President Electrum won or you know what happened in Brexit is more because of a lack of trust people are increasingly fed up with organized structures and they just want to change and whoever is able to even suggest a change articulated well is finding success I mean how long it will last we don't know but it is something that let me say the flavor of the season whether it is in China whether it is in Japan whether it is in many parts of the world you are seeing this and we might continue to see it again in future thank you very much Toby it's my my call you know I cannot answer all those three questions but I'll try to answer how to bring about change ok what's happening this 21st century now is that trust is distributed the amount of trust is becoming less and less and why we go to use Uber taxis and why do we go to Airbnb because we can have a trust transparent accountable and inclusive you know so we have some degree of trust in these companies so we use services they provide to us but bring about trust is extremely difficult exercise you know I studied the business for many years and in this case I suggest sort of a dictatorial management style to bring about change in your companies South Korea has a number one company called Samsung they make Galaxy cell phones and household electronics it's a very diversified number one group they even account for almost 25% of Korean GDP it's number one I would say super company the chairman of this company more than 10 years ago asked his employees change everything except your wife and kids okay so that's how Samsung built up number one cell phones and electric equipment like that one of the CEO this satisfied with the old cell phones he burned up virtually hundreds thousands of cell phones in front of his plant workers that was extreme shocking method to bring about quality control in Samsung electronics so with different types of management style in this case bring about big change revolution coup d'etat democratic ideas wouldn't work so in my case in my newspaper I tell my journalists all the time bring about new change adapt to fourth industrial revolution but cannot do that just sitting in Seoul, South Korea so I happened to send one of my smart journalists to Silicon Valley and now he's sending me some change and ideas and last time he was running after Puck and Ma in Silicon Valley and every January in Las Vegas they have CES right and I'm going to bring many of my employees to CES to bring about new change so I think we need to go to Silicon Valley Bangalore, Hyderabad for new change even talk to young kids Sebastian said people less than 35 age I'll say teenagers they're the one who bring change this year, this time so another way of bringing in change to your company maybe forcing your employees to read newspapers newspapers still deliver good ideas and they can bring change and they can give you ideas how new president like Donald Trump got to manage United States thank you thank you very much I'm going to convince young people to read anything but the feed that only feeds what they want to hear from likewise sources let me turn to Patrick I will just cover on the first question one aspect I have not mentioned is mobility and mobility goes both ways so that would be a message to a younger generation first it's simple to work it's one way that drives a lot of mobility and then it all depends how protectionist it will be you heard for instance the upcoming administration in the US saying they would limit the visa for in the technology sector but that will trigger the other movement of mobility is where you bring work to people I mean if people cannot come to the work today you can bring work to the people so this is a different approach this is the approach of centres of factories, different kind of mode but in any case the location of the centre will not be determined by where you live so you will need mobility in one way or the other and this will create movement and it's another aspect of flexibility beyond the labour conditions it's the mobility if we kill this then we are in big trouble the second question fourth is what I advise across our organisation is plan for disruption execute for evolution because all these things who are changing cannot be addressed too much in a disruptive manner there are ways and I agree some authority is needed to force the change but you have the population that you have but if you don't plan for disruption then you miss the point and with the level of uncertainty that it contains thank you very much Patrick and then let me go to Sebastian now and including the question that I think I remember the answer to your question is the following big companies like ours will not destroy jobs probably to the country we are probably going to be continuing in the future we open one new hotel every 36 hours so I employ another 20,000 people per year the impact is not on the big chains the impact is on the small independently owned and run hotels which is the vast majority of the hotel industry in the world the only place when you have a majority of the chain market is the US 70% in the hands of the five big guys you take France 70% of French hotels are independently owned and run you take Italy 95% of Italy are independent and those independent hotels are lacking three or four things they don't have technology they don't have any money and they don't have any expertise or talent with a new digital world so each of them a bit naive way accept it too fast to be in the hands of the online travel agency the cheaper source access to clients except that today they are totally depending on them to the extent of 50, 60, 70% of occupancy in the hands of those big machine since the cost of commission went up dramatically for the last five years in order for them to keep sustaining and pay the price of that commission they have to no longer maintain the property the way it was maintained before who is the leader of the marketing director the people in charge of the local sourcing so since they cannot maintain the property what's happening to them trip advisors downgrade them they've been downgraded so they are on page number 5 or page number 20 of the booking engine so occupancy goes down so 20% a third of the independent mom and pop hotels are closing basically over the next five years and that is one job out of ten GDP of the major companies of the major geographies so you see it coming the benefit for me is if they die I'm going to be enhancing my market share and before they die they're probably going to be knocking on my door to be distributed by aquahotel.com to basically hide under my umbrella because this is not the answer and again I'm not blaming booking Expedia I wish we would have invented booking in Expedia invented Airbnb but I'm just telling you and which is even worse 80% of the traffic goes in 300 cities in the world 80% of the traffic goes on page number 1 and page number 2 of those websites so if you happen to be in a tertiary city on page number 20 you have very little hopes to survive so and to get back to you on your question sir on what do you do then and how do you adapt well there's two ways to look at it the first way is all those new initiatives be a participant co-partner, invent one of your own because you're going to have new Airbnb of the world which is why we have our own autonomous lab of which I'm hiring people to invent new product, new services away from a hotel room that companies never done before we went into concierge digital economy so you need to expand your presence and your market share in something different from what you're accustomed to which is difficult but you can do it the second is what you alluded to Chairman Chang and you're so correct I keep saying it's between 25 and 35 years old and they're very good but I also know that those today between 5 and 15 will be far better than those today between 25 and 35 years old in 15 years that's harder but that new generation has something very defined they have a predictability of the future which is 20 times better than mine because if they want something which does not exist they will create it so in order for me to think like that new generation you have to identify who are there in your own organization and I have 60% of my people are underneath 35 years old except they haven't been identified they haven't been recognized and you don't give them authority so you have to identify them you have to give them breathing room oxygen, autonomy and discretion which is why I'm talking about culture you have to get the elderly generation to accept that they wait to 25 years to get direction well we're not going to be imposing 25 years for the young people before he's going to get autonomy we're not going to be leaving you so you need to basically have those two generations to talk to each other where the young people respect the old because he has wisdom and experience but when the old people accept to give power much sooner that he expected probably in the next two to three years so that dialogue between those two generations is indispensable alright thank you very much well this has really been a fascinating discussion and I'd like unless there is pressing questions I'd like to take this opportunity to thank all of the panelists and I'd like to ask each of you to go away with one question for yourself and that is we've got a glimpse of the nature of the societal transformation that lies ahead in each of our countries in your own mind how well prepared do you think your country your society is to deal with this transformation on a scale of 0 to 10 would you say at the end of this conversation you think that you are closer to 10 you're somewhere in the middle or we haven't yet actually formulated the scale so with that I want to ask you to please thank the panelists