But most companies have White management and it's really a club. It's a frat. It's not that asians can't be CEO's… it's that they aren't really part of the club.

My last company (won't name) inititally had a female asian GM. She was really cool.. had that down to earth vibe. Was confident, yet gentle.. really pleasant.

She left due to pregnancy, and the White guy took over.. so it was back to the same ol'…

But I felt like… in a way, once the White guy took over.. the team seemed to be back in the “club” mode.

I can remember smug and self-satisfied American and European commentators in the eighties deriding the Japanese for being “mindless” robotic sheep that lack the ability to think for themselves or be creative.Back then they said that Japanese culture suppressed individualism and creativity and that was why Japan could never sustain economic power! Of course we now know just how creative the Japanese can be.

Articles like Pollock’s are generally designed to make white America feel secure rather than provide any meaningful insight into the cultures of Asia. I would take it with a pinch of salt.

However, in the workplace, what they mean by innovation is something slightly different. I read that many people often go by 4 ranks or catergories of innovation, ranging from little improvements (which involves copying)to radical innovation;something that’s really new. I still don’t understand how they judge it though, but it probably makes sense for those who have studied it for a long time.

Based on my liberal arts college experiences, that type of environment does encourage a lot of thinking outside the box. However, I find the majority of those students, professors and staff not that different from others who don’t have a liberal arts education. Most people are conforming, a lot of times it’s just the package rather than the substance which makes people believe it’s very innovative. Of course, there are many exceptional thinkers but as it is with all topics, critical thinking involves facing reality and viewing things in a relative manner.

Pollock’s article is valid but I’m afraid many readers will misunderstand it. Although, there’s a few points I disagree with. This isn’t the matter of Asians can’t innovate or there’s no creativity among the Chinese. It’s really about the the whole system(s) of work, learning and doing anything. Be a little optimistic, necessity is the mother of invention. There’s some truth to that quote and in Asian societies, there’s plenty of necessary things to work on.

Plus, this is sort of brainstorm activity Pollock did. Generally speaking, people can come up with 100 ideas each day, 90 of them won’t be anything original in essence, 5 could be worth your time, 3 are a definite must-see and 2 of them would be too silly/dangerous to consider.