 I'm going to kick it off by turning it over to Hans Paul by asking him if he could get the conversation started by talking a little bit about his, as he looks at the global landscape, looking at all the different entities and the different companies and distinctions being made about globalization, the issues around globalization, can you speak a little bit as to how you view the current realities of globalization and leadership and what is required to be successful in this world. And then I'm sure Chairman Ning will pick up on it and spend more time on it talking about his personal experience, but also what he's doing with his company. So thank you. Very good. Thanks, Arneel. Well, good afternoon. It's great to have such a large group of people here just right after lunch. I'm not sure whether, you know, all these numbers of 4.0 and so forth are relevant, but I think what we clearly see is that the world is changing. And we see it becoming really multi-polar world. And I think it's even though somebody said, you know, the Secretary General of the OECD has said we are not yet in a multi-polar world. Actually, we are. We truly are. I mean, there's not just the U.S. and, of course, China, but there is still Europe, but there's India. There is clearly the players in the Middle East. There's Brazil. There's Japan. And so I think the world has really become more complex. Whereas in the past we had the U.S. and we had Russia. And then for a while we had only the U.S. Clearly it is a multi-polar world. And you see this already when companies, you know, do an acquisition, you have to go through the antitrust, you know, legislation of companies in the U.S., in China, in Europe, in sometimes even India, in Brazil and so forth. Everybody wants to have a say. So you have to deal with it. So it's a much more complex world. I think it's also what you see is globalization has moved from really moving more from just manufacturing, outsourcing to Asia or to low-cost countries. We see a clear movement from products to services and now increasingly to data and information. And that really creates also a much, much more complex world as we move forward. And then I think the third key issue is that you also have to think about how to deal with the different constituencies because, you know, not only because of the trade friction, but not everything is now global supply chain. Because it makes you have to be local in some places. You can be regional in some other areas and you can still be global in certain ways. But I think, you know, being able to deal with, you know, local, regional and then global issues at the same time and you need to be much more thoughtful about how you address key opportunities, the key markets, but also key opportunities for generating products and services and data really requires you to be much more nuanced in your global approach and in your portfolio. And maybe the fourth element is that globalization is not just about yourself, but about the partnerships, the ecosystems, which are so commonly referred to, where, you know, where do you do things on your own? Where do you join forces? Maybe where do you just have outsourced everything to somebody who's doing things for you? And so a lot more partnerships, a lot more interactions with very different players. And sometimes, you know, of course it's customers, it's suppliers, but sometimes it's even, you know, competitors with whom you work together in order to really have the best set up in certain geographies, in certain industries, in certain sectors. So truly, many, many more dimensions to watch and it really requires also, and I think that's the key topic of it, what does it mean for leadership? How, you know, you have to adjust to that and how do you make sure that things are really working out in a much more complex world? So what do you do in order to deal with all these challenges and opportunities? As Paul, I think you say the world has become more complex than before. I think more than that, it's not only complex. The world is changing its direction. All of us used to very much support globalization, but today, maybe talking about globalization in this room, globalization are being stopped in many other places. So companies globalized, most of the major companies, we call them multinational companies, but the government still separates. You know, this created a contradicting structure globally today. So commercial force, market force, companies try to be global, try to lower their cost, make a supply chain more efficient, try to enter into a new market, using different technology and labor that want to combine all this most efficient thing together to be a global company. Nobody want to be a global company only for global reason because it's more efficient, more competitive. But today the problem is government want to stop that. Some government want to stop that because they say it's American first. So how can you be global? So do we still believe in globalization today is the issue? Do you? I helped you because I already get globalized. What can I do? No, but what is a person? What is a person? Yes, as a leader, but what is a person? You think? Of course, you know, you got this global vision, okay? The premier just said this morning. So no country, no company can be less more competitive or more efficient or productive if you stay in a small region. So I think if the Chinese have not produced that many shirts for Americans, I don't know how expensive the shirts in America will be. If the Chinese have not bought so many aircraft from the U.S., I think the aircraft company will be very small. And this is the beauty of globalization is, you know, we all learn this in college is the competitive advantage. It's the benefit created by trade but globalization. If you use an iPad like this, you know, it's a global company to do this. Design, material, assembling everything. I mean, this is, we live in a globalization called economy for a long time. We thought it would take it for granted. We thought it's going to be this way forever. Today, things change. We have to, let's say, pause a little bit and think of it over again. Say, do we still believe in globalization? Do we still believe in free trade or free investment? The premier just announced China will open its financial sector for investment next year. Okay. It's globalization. But now people say, oh, globalization is good, but globalization didn't really benefit all of us equally. With globalization, make somebody being sort of less benefit or disadvantage. But I think everybody, everybody, everybody will benefit or more or less. Had no globalization, you think that the workers in the middle waste of the U.S. will bet off? I don't think so. But it's good to find an excuse for something. You know, the most, most difficult kind of dangerous mistake, human being met will be find a wrong excuse, try to solve the problem. This is basically what we are today. We're trying to find something to blame for something we don't like. It's not going to work. Yeah. But I think, you know, what you touched on this feeling of somebody, I mean, some people winning and some people losing, I think this is probably one of the key things that we have to address also as business leaders. You know, as, you know, as we, I think all, you know, we have seen enormous growth around the world. And it's just not just China and maybe, you know, the people who feel, you know, be a bit left out in the Midwest in the U.S. I think when you look at Central and Eastern Europe with the fall of the iron curtain, we've seen the standard of living of, you know, also tens of millions of people in, you know, Central and Eastern Europe rising, in Latin America rising, in Southeast Asia, India also. And over the last 10, 15 years, we also saw that in Africa. So it's not just the U.S. China. We need to get away from this dichotomy between those two and really think about the whole world. I try. No, no. Sorry. It was not, I think, you know, in general, we need to get away from this and to really think, you know, just in terms of, okay, is China winning or is the U.S. winning? I think when we talk about global, the global world, you know, everybody needs to be participating in this. Now, when we talk about, and you mentioned this, you know, try to be more efficient, more competitive, we move factories, you know. And so those people who have been working in the factories, you know, in Detroit maybe are now the ones who are, you know, who have lost a job and who may not find a job at the same salary again. But I think what we see in many parts of the world, that employment has risen massively. Yeah. The question is, you know, so we have enormous benefits, but we also have a lot of anxieties. Now, of course, coming with the technology and all the talk about digitization, AI and so forth. But one of the key elements, I think, of leadership is that we really need to deal with all stakeholders much more. And give me one more second, one more minute, sorry. And I think, you know, rather than talking about investors only, we need to talk about, of course, our employees, our customers, our suppliers, but also government entities, given that these are national government. And we need to make sure that we really also engage with society at large. And the business leaders can no longer just say, you know, this is not my area, this is society at large, is the government's issue. As a business leader, you need to take this into consideration, you need to deliver value. I, to be fair to business, okay. I never said so before, but I want to say it today. To be fair to business, business will not solve everything, problem. You know, you can't say, your business, you have to be innovative, you have to produce new products, you have to be efficient, you have to compete, you have to cause a law, you have to take care of the poor. You know, business do everything, impossible. Let's say, why are these people being left out behind? Education, fair policy. You can't, you can't, you can't be, I don't mean America, but you can't be nationalism, you can't be racism. You have to be fair to everybody. You know, you have to train them well. You know, something which governments must do. If your people don't go to a proper school training class or skill, you blame somebody compete to let them out of work. It's not fair. Not fair at all. China get billions of people. China didn't blame anybody for employment. And China find their own way to create 15 million new jobs every year. Okay? Oh, blame China. Are you guys export too much? You do your share. And another thing is employment. I'm not sure. I think the numbers are contradicting because you know, we need a job. We need employment. But on the other hand, they claim we are the highest employment rate today in history. Around the world, by the way. U.S. only. I don't want to talk about the world. But anyway, okay, sorry, I try. I try the world. I try to cover the world. But anyway, but I heard from people investing in the U.S. They cannot find a neighbor. You know, we get a famous car, a glass company manufacturing in the U.S. They have to slow down their production, shrink their size with no workers. But you still want to want a manufacturing job, move back to the U.S.? How? Let's be realistic. You are consulting company. Tell them what you do, okay? Yeah, you tell them the calculation, the formula. What is the employment? Simple economics, okay? Employment has increased around the world. But I would like to respectfully disagree with you about business cannot be doing everything. And then, of course, different to what I said earlier, I think in the U.S., for example, business is really engaged on education. So the business people in Chicago get together to help the Chicago school board really think about, you know, how to improve the quality of education. And you, if I remember correctly, when the government, you know, at the beginning of the 13th five year plan said, we want to eradicate poverty in China, you know, also your company got one district where they said, you know, you really take care of this. This is what I told you, yes. Yeah, no, no, it's a true story. Yeah, of course, everything I say. Yeah, it's good. So let me just finish. So I think you say only part of it. Yeah, let me give you a full picture. Okay, okay. You know, business does have its social responsibility. Business needed to engage in their community, the society, in charity, being other things, try to do things beyond only money making machine. Okay, that's good. But the business will not be able to replace education. Okay, business will not be able to replace social welfare. You know, business will not be able to change the immigration policy. You know, this is not a business at all. Business can do some more part of it. Can do some more. Yes, I mean, make us happy. You know, for for Sino Cam, we got two county in China, one in Tibet, one in Mongolia, I told you before. So yes, we send we send a vice county director to them there. We help them to kind of build some of this small business. And we try to sell their products online to some some kind of distribution network. That's okay. And we are more close to the society. But we're not going to be able to change that. But still, I think of course, it's not just a loan business, but the government of course is was working on the infrastructure. But I mean, you have to create jobs and to create sustainable jobs. And you have to link them. I think high quality job creation is the number one task for business. Yes. High quality. No, no, no, low quality job. But high quality job. But again, you know, it's not just, you know, what you did. But I think, you know, around China, but also around the world, when you see companies, you know, mining companies in Africa, in Latin America, they really also develop communities. You know, they really take care of education, of healthcare, and so forth, of infrastructure. And I think, you know, we only have, and this is, you know, going back to what leadership 4.0 is, I think we really have a much broader sense of responsibility. And it's not corporate social responsibility. It's not CRI, whatever CSR for marketing purposes. It's really something. I think we all have an obligation. I mean, BCG, for example, is working with in certain countries with young adults, you know, who have dropped out of school or out of their apprenticeship, you know, really helping them to get skills to get into a job and so forth. And it's working together with with thousands of companies. And so I think we have a lot of opportunities to make this work and to use our capabilities to really have an impact. Of course, it's not just just business, but business has an important role. I mean, we have capabilities. And we need to make sure that these capabilities are really brought to bear. You know, we also work, I mean, BCG works with the World Food Program, works with the Gates Foundation on Global Health. So there, there are lots of opportunities, very much like, you know, your company is working in many different communities and plays a very important role in not just providing jobs and profitability for investors, but it's, it's, it is really about really helping those communities thrive. Of course, you're not paying welfare, but I'm sure you're also involved in, you know, upgrading the schools or upgrading maybe the hospitals and so forth. So there are lots of things that you're doing. And I think this is how we are being measured as leaders going forward. Are we contributing? Let's go back to business. Let's go back to business. Okay. I still want to say something on globalization on globalization. I think the globalization benefits a lot because our company benefits a lot. China benefits a lot from globalization. I think the global benefit from China a lot because of globalization. I want to quote example, because I, I, I know I'm the chairman of Xinjiang. A crop we call, we call agricultural crop protection company, mainly on crop protection products and seeds. So I want to quote recently when China entered into summer time and there is a new sort of wheat disease happened in China. Could be very serious and it could be quite a large percentage of production of yield of the farmland because of the disease. So, you know, fortunately because of globalization, because Xinjiang does following all this possible disease, insects or some kind of agricultural illness very closely. And we can quickly provide this medicine and pesticide and quickly cure that disease. Okay. That's good. So, I, I think it's something to benefit from globalization, from technology, and really from jointly work between, between Basel team and the team in China. I think it's something make you feel globalization really create value for farmers. Yep. In a quick, very, very quick pattern and way and also in a very efficient and low cost way. So, I think it is something, when you manage a global company, you know, the synergy of moving skills, technology and products globally is enormous. I mean, I feel so encouraged. I mean, there are a lot of, there are sort of examples. So, you know, you have to have a globalization mind, a vision to start that. I think maybe built on what you just said, you know, how do you make sure that there is really good cooperation? I think one of the key elements is that as you become a global or multinational company, you also have to be marquee local and I think really spreading the talent from, you know, across the whole world, also the leadership. I think it's very important to have, at least that's my experience, to have people in the leadership team who have very different backgrounds, you know, who have different experience, different cultural backgrounds. And so, but we still see many of the leadership teams of many big companies being either only American or Chinese or German or Japanese and so forth or not to point fingers at anybody. But I think, or Indian, although I think, and we need, I think one of the key issues of leadership is really to diversify the leadership. And it's not just ethnic background, it's gender, it's sexual orientation, it's people with very different experience, you know, young and old. And do you see this as a key opportunity, the key issue? Or is it easy to make that work? You know, I, you know, we're talking about the real leadership. I think, you know, sorry, I think leadership takes more than that. You know, it's, what you said is a format. It's gender, color, age, education, different things. In organization, leadership means more than that, means determination, vision, execution, you know, many, many things you lead by power or lead by heart. You know, I mean, different kinds of things, style, different things, you need a, you have a different kind of style of leadership. So, you know, when the company tried to emphasize its board composition on board members, so different country, different color, different age, different sector, they thought that they would become a good board. I don't think so. You may need only one, one good person to be a good leader or need a tank. You, you don't know, but you take a different form. Particularly when you lead a global, global company and, and, and it's very much a balance between how much you respect local culture or how much you want to lead that strategy. I mean, how much you want to be very friendly to people or how much you want to be very decisive, you know, many, many things. Eventually, whether you are living an efficient organization, very productive, very efficient, very competitive and offering so-called high quality jobs. Sorry, I think we need to give the time to the floor, right? Yeah, I have, I have one more point, you know, but because leadership, I think just focusing on the board or executive committee, I think is too narrow. I think leadership is, you know, across the world, you have decentralized decision-making. The question is, are you very centralized or are you very decentralized? Are you empowering people to make decisions? You, you, you prefer centralized or decentralized? I prefer decentralized. I think very much, you know, that there is- So I have to be centralized. I have to be centralized. You know, centralized, decentralized means no decision. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. No, no, I think this is really- Nobody responsible, no decision-making, nobody you can evaluate. It's not my problem. You know, the company is doing poorly, but everybody is doing proudly because they proud themselves. You know, you need one people to lead. I mean, in any organization, I think in, in, in Boston Consulting must be the same. In somebody, stand up, decide, direction, go ahead, and say, oh, where we go? Where we go? I mean, if today, if today, you know, all the people in the room speak together, you hear nobody. No, but, but while you have, just let me qualify, you know, what you have, of course, one- No time, no time, no time. Yeah, I know. But I think, I think the key is, if you have a- Only two minutes. Yeah, a broad opportunity for people to really, you know, follow the direction, you know, they can, they have to make local decisions because they are much faster. If you, everything has to go through a center, I think you would be in trouble. I think it's really part of, of leadership 4.0 to be able to, to deal with a much more complex, heterogeneous and decentralized organization. Very, very textbook answer. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, absolutely not. Absolutely. I, I have, I have lifted, I do live it. But I think we should really have, you know, maybe one or two questions or- Yeah. No lengthy comments please, you know, we have already taken too much time. Okay, here, that's the question here. Yeah, so, sorry I have to go back to the sort of globalization versus the workforce employment issue. Apologies to determining. So I'm, I guess the, the point is, the question is because globalized or multinational companies are really benefiting from the comparative advantages across different countries, but within each country not everyone is enjoying the same benefit and plus normally it is the government's responsibility to provide relevant trainings and education so that these people can catch up with the globalization trend. My question to Mr. Berger is that do you think it, it is the responsibility of the multinational companies now instead of the government that they should provide relevant trainings opportunities and such, take such response responsibilities? Okay, shall we collect one more question and then we answer. They said 38 seconds. Okay, so let me, let me answer very clearly. I think, I think companies really have, you know, especially as we now enter the age of digitalization a responsibility to really retrain people to a large extent and not to, to wait for, for government entities. I think there is a contract, an implicit and explicit contract between a company and the workers to really engage and make sure that people really have a chance to build for, for their future also. And if the training is not sufficient for your company, but I think it should really help you to find another job as you move forward. Thank you very much. Sorry. You should. Okay, no, no, no, I'm okay now. He's looking at the, he's looking at the time and given the interest of time, I, I want to first say I didn't expect it to be this lively. So that was fun. You didn't agree on several issues, but I have to believe that you probably agree on the fundamentals and not so much on the differences You know, when Professor Schwab created the World Economic Forum in 1971, he also wrote a book called The Stakeholder Theory, which was revolutionary at that time because Milton Friedman was the dominant force of thinking in business, which is the business of business is business. And his theory was over time that is not going to be the case. You have to look at multiple stakeholders. But along with that came the notion, how do you balance the interest of the different stakeholders and who is responsible for those? And it is that lesson that has progressed over the last 50 years and also there's something called the Davos spirit. And the Davos spirit was if you bring intelligent people, well-meaning people, well-experienced people for multiple areas, they will have a great conversation, they may not agree on everything, but they will work together to creating a better world. And I think today you saw a reflection of that two of the more outstanding people in their own disciplines challenging each other on their assumptions, sometimes even on their conclusions. But I think at the end of this way, this is not the end of the conversation, this is the beginning of the conversation. It's ongoing one. And it's an ongoing. I used to be a professor and I used to say that just because you started talking doesn't mean they have started listening. And just because you stopped talking doesn't mean they have stopped thinking. So we are going to stop talking now and you're going to continue thinking about the discussion points that Hans Paul and Guang Nin raised over here. So Chairman Ning, thank you so much for your comments. And Chairman Glockner, thank you. Thank you. Very good, thank you. Adios, thank you. Thank you, very good.