ABSTRACT

This article is based on observation and experience of the author. The purpose of this article is to promote sharing of knowledge rather than keeping knowledge in silos. The article purports, that this be undertaken by the member nations of AMF to build the repository of knowledge of Asia Marketing Federation (AMF) through blending of local and global knowledge and ensuring effective dissemination. The article further stresses on globalization of knowledge rather than focusing on creation of silos. The importance of appropriate use of technology to drive effective dissemination and thus, democratization is emphasized. The article provides a guideline for the leadership of AMF to ensure creation of a better world, where one can breathe peace and cherish the real meaning of humanity, through proper democratization and globalization of knowledge.

KEYWORDS

Democratization, Globalization, Knowledge Economy, Sustainability, Technological Advancement

Democratization Framework

A brief perspective of evolution of democratization is presented below.

The purpose of democratization as a concept dates to 5th century BCE when rule by the people (free adult male in ancient Athens) was considered as the deciding factor to run a nation. Thus, it had a connotation of majority being run by minority (J J Gillian 1919).

By the middle of 20th century, the concept of democracy featured around people being redefined as adult population. Democratization was conceptualized as the process through which a political regime becomes democratic.

Democratization was difficult to define, primarily since, there was a disagreement to understand democracy, which varies from country to country, varies in terms of the outcome expected out of the democratic norms and principles, and varies in terms of the process followed (Craig M Kauffman, 2023).

GLOBALIZATION STATUS

By the beginning of 1990s when the cold war was gradually declining; and the

world power had shifted to a single point of control, globalization started to surface as a concept for bringing the world under a single network, the focus being trade, under the umbrella of capitalism. Thus, the conceptual definition described globalization as, “the growing interdependence of the world’s economies, cultures, and populations, brought about by cross border trade in goods and services, technology, and flows of investment, people, and information” (Melina Kolb, 2022).

With the advent of technology, the globalization process has taken a different magnitude. It is no more being pushed by the intent of the supplier (Chad P Brown, 2021), but rather is pulled by demand of the consumer. The ultimate extant of globalization is now dictated by real time communication, linked through the virtual world (Muhammad Ramzan et al, 2023). Thus, it is evident that technology is likely to speed up the process of globalization. However, it is also likely that the content of communications and the source of communication will greatly influence the outcome of globalization. This is likely to be influenced by artificial intelligence (AI), as it transforms into a key to building mindsets of the globally networked and connected population (Kristalina Georgieva, 2024).

SUSTAINABILITY

In a simplistic sense, Sustainability could be defined as the, “the ability of mankind to maintain or support a process over time”. From the perspective of Asia Marketing Federation, for example, sustainability is perceived in terms of attainment of sustainable economy, sustainable environment, and finally sustainable society to ensure wellbeing of humanity.

Recent studies shows that economic development alone cannot ensure overall development of a society. Society must focus on basic human needs and foundations of human wellbeing. This is where the Social Progress Index (SPI) along with Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, must be taken into consideration to assess development (Georges Kioes and Tom Pfeiffer, 2015).

Clearly, the global divide is a result of disparity in these two measures, which has been on the rise irrespective of

individual nations focusing on democratization and globalization. If we are to achieve the above, it is imperative to ensure, what I call, ‘Democratization of Globalization’. All of us must accept, that none of us are living in an isolated island.

KNOWLEDGE ECONOMY

Knowledge is the only living currency and therefore for sustenance of our beautiful world, it must be wholistic and integrated (Vivek Bapat, 2013). Therefore, demand for knowledge must be fulfilled through the process of learning and should be offered to all who aspire to learn.

Perhaps most of us in the academia are in search of the answer to the question, how to offer to all who aspire to learn. Academics talk about collaborative learning or collaboration to learn. People in general have considered hybrid and online to be a more alternate mode for exchange of knowledge and communication while comparing with the age-old face to face in person learning and communication. This premise, at times, defeats the purpose of exchange of knowledge and learning. Thus, it is important for all of us to rethink or address this very important pedagogical agenda.

DEMOCRATIZING KNOWLEDGE IN A GLOBALIZED WORLD

To start the journey of knowledge design, I ask myself, ‘Why We, Academics, Exist’? Do we only exist for a region or a stated group? The word North-South divide is not just discriminatory but is the reason behind perception of world divided even at an intellectual level. This is where democratization of knowledge and technology are defeated. Imagine minds from all over the world are placed in a university and the knowledge created is considered sole property of the said university. This defeats the purpose of collective wisdom.

Knowledge Economy is the principal source of value and competitive advantage (Benoit Godin, 2005). It stretches from factories to classroom and from manual labor to mental prowess. One must focus on intellectual decentralization for building future citizens to ensure that knowledge remains to be intangible and sustainable asset. Lest we forget, knowledge could be created at the factory level and made meaningful through theoretical underpinnings by academia. Thus, integration of process is very important. This will require the information highway and data analytics to be more democratic, ensuring innovation, and enduring discussions on intellectual property and thus building lifelong learning systems. The factories of today along with retail online and offline outlets are rich with data, we need to use them not just for a organization or a nation, but for building a sustainable world, through democratization of information.

The generations from Baby Boomers to Gen alpha of the world are part of the inclusive value chain and belong to domestic, regional, and global socio-political influence. Thus, their right to knowledge cannot be discriminated and must be sustained. Unfortunately, in a world where ‘sustainability’ is the key principle for survival of the future generation, we are still striving hard to understand the meaning of this concept and are still very far from the actual implementation (Bhupinder Singh, 2019). This discrimination has resulted in the various revolutions triggered by the youth as we have seen in Asia and Africa in particular.

The pursuit to building a sustainable world dates to the origins of civilization itself. Since the stone age and more so during the period of hunters and gatherers, sustainability in living has been the pursuit. As the humanity moved forward through first, the agricultural revolution and later, the technological revolution; it was evident that sustainability had become directly proportional to the ability to buy economic living. Sustainable driven countries such as Singapore, and South Korea have performed far better compared to countries such as India, and Nigeria.

Since resources were always scarce and knowledge dispersed; humankind, dating back to their origin, continued to compete to live better. This very nature of human beings supported by advancements, resulted in greater economic and social disparity (Dev Nathan, 2024). Thus, disparity amongst individuals, societies, and nations became the cornerstone of failure. On top of this, the crave for individual power and prosperity has continued to be extremely self-centric, as a result disparity continued to increase. The disposition of autocratic regimes and organizations are on the rise, clearly focusing on sharing for global equity and minimizing conflicts.

The self-centric behavior of human beings, perhaps, endorsed the importance of social and economic equity led by religion to give sustainability a structure, resulting in the golden rule of ethics, ‘do unto others as you would have them do unto you’. Later, the principle was formally propounded by the United Nations under the leadership of Kofi Annan as Global Compact in 1999. Over the years, the sustainability issue has seen improvement moving from business ethics to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) to the Millennium Development Goals (MDG) and now Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and Environmental Social and Corporate Governance (ESG). At a functional level, International Monetary Fund (IMF) engagement on the SDGs is aligned with the five SDG pillars of; People: fostering inclusion; Prosperity: supporting growth, jobs, and poverty alleviation; Planet: engaging in climate action for global security; Peace: strengthening institutions, governance, and tackling corruption; and finally, Partnership: financing the SDG initiatives (David Tremblay et al, 2017). These five pillars must also be part of any knowledge pursuit to ensure both culmination of global thoughts and ensuring minimal disparity amongst nations and thus engineering democratization.

It is obvious that the landscape of sustainability can only survive if and only if the bottom-line, the 5 pillars (specially inclusion of people and partnership), outlined above, are achieved. This is where Democratization of globalization becomes imperative. There is no doubt that globalization has resulted in reducing poverty, however, it has also resulted in greater disparity between nations. Thus, supremacy of nations prevails through greater prosperity and thus indulgence of power play. The North-South divide is a typical outcome of this approach.

The focus of the United Nations and the developed nations remains to be a top down approach for reaching sustainability by curbing the economic, social, and environmental challenges. However, the cause of all these challenges are a result of unaccountable development, spearheaded by the developed nations. In this global context, the democratic principles are only preached and not practiced. Democracy remains to be the standards set for the developing nations and poor nations to serve political agenda rather than ensuring sustainability. Forcing the democratic principles as a political agenda alone without bringing equity in knowledge and social structure is never going to make democratic principles a success.

If we really intend to reach the echelon of sustainability, we must have democratization of global wealth, knowledge, technology, environment, and ethical standards. Under the prevailing global practices, it does not seem that the global leadership believes in such an approach nor considers it to be right for their own citizens. Thus, the onus will always fall at national or regional levels for the achievement of global goals. This by itself is a purpose already defeated. This will show good results in terms of certain level of poverty alleviation, but by no means can attain sustainability at the standards of the nations at the leadership table. Thus, we are aiming at a sustainability trap. More importantly, it also must be emphasized that with the technological advancement, if the nations do not take adequate measure to reduce technological disparity, the global democratization will further erode. The graph (Figure 1) below based on the Stan Shih generic GVC Smile Curve (Stan Shih, 1992), shows how technology divide may further result in disparity (Bo Meng, Ming Ye, and Shang-Jin Wei (2020).

The generic GVC curve indicates that with the enhancement of technology, the smile curve will result in greater disparity at the operational level if the stated category of service or good does not take advantage of the utility offered by the technology (dotted line compared to bold line).

Thus, it is imperative that all institutions and nations must undertake proper use of technology to ensure that the target market does not fall behind in the global value chain. In addition, it is also important to understand that the value addition across the value chain is never same. Value addition is least at the manufacturing level, which is easy to buy off the shelf, while at the knowledge and service level it has the greatest impact and value creation. It is evident, that globalization of knowledge cannot be attained merely through acquisition and dissemination (operations). Rather, a wholistic approach is required to maximize potential return.

POINTS TO PONDER

Let us portray a hypothetical situation. The present globalization landscape will

continue to exist, since the world is dependent on each other for various category of resources and more so in the category of knowledge.

The major creation of knowledge and advancement of knowledge is centered around the developed world. The major market for knowledge, on the other hand, focuses on purchasing power of the developed economy and nations having high population, namely Asia.

What if, tomorrow, the centers of creation and advancement of knowledge take a hit? It is obvious that the entire knowledge economy will be seriously impeded. Thus, multilateralism as a means not as an end approach, is a must, to attain sustainable results.

This clearly implies that we should take into consideration, strengths of each global partner and combine them together, rather than, depend on a single entity as knowledge resource, which if collapses will seriously impact the entire world. Also, this ensures reduction in disparity (Andres Ortega, 2020).

This is where I place our learned scholars and partners of AMF to ponder into the following five burning questions, which, to a large extent, will harness the knowledge economy of the future.

1. Will the leadership of the world, focus on democracy at a global level, to ensure lesser global disparity and thus, greater chances for attaining global sustainability of knowledge economy? Let us be reminded that the contribution of individuals, as immigrants of the developed nations, involved in the task of knowledge creation is a collaborative effort, should be recognized. Singapore was created as a knowledge hub and has been extremely successful.
2. Will the global leadership transfer the task of creation and advancement of knowledge to the lesser economies? Since the cost of workforce is far less in the developing economies, knowledge centers may be developed in these nations to create center of excellence. India is considered as the Silicon Valley of the east since the nation could offer the world equitable knowledge resource.
3. Is it right to assume, that the developed world, have greater repository of knowledge compared to rest of the world?

The fact that knowledge is dispersed across the world in various forms is not a myth but fact. People have travelled across continents in search of knowledge and therefore should be given due importance.

4. Does the developed world house greater prospective market for education? The market for education is directly proportional to population growth. Thus, Asia, Africa along with some parts of Americus are likely to be the growth centers. This is where knowledge is likely to prosper.
5. What should be the definition of contextualization and standardization under the changing knowledge economy? It is evident that contextualization is related to the cultural and social norms of a society while standardization is related to acceptable human practices and norms. Thus, clearly, globalization of knowledge will require adjustments rather than a single prescription.

AMF KNOWLEDGE STRATEGY

The learning model of Asia Marketing Federation (AMF), should take the leadership position to endeavor into democratizing knowledge, which is ultimately the backbone for social, economic, and political emancipation resulting in global sustainability. The basic principle of the model should reflect upon solving the age-old dilemma of ‘why we should prefer people who do good things that we don’t; rather than hate them because they don’t do things that we prefer.’ This we see in today’s world as the burning mindset resulting in compartmentalization. The purpose of AMF approach should focus around, ‘strengthen both, through sharing differences.’ The illustration 1 below depicts the outcome of the two approaches.

The knowledge democratization process is depicted in Figure 2 below. This is likely to strengthen democratization of acquisition and dissemination of knowledge using appropriate technology to ensure that no one is left behind. Interestingly, this focuses on building segments through appropriate use, enhance satisfaction through linking needs and wants with appropriate knowledge, and build brands through the creation of advocacy (Philip Kotler, Hermawan Kartajaya, and Iwan Setiawan, 2016).

AMF must not fall into the trap of the majority or powerful or the unsustainable globalized standards but rather should ensure that these standards are contextualized, based on appropriate changes and value addition. The discussions clearly portray the importance of democratization of global knowledge for sustenance of the global knowledge framework and the knowledge economy. It also sets the context that this task must be undertaken in the major market, namely, Asia and perhaps Africa since, they are the major market and the growth center of the world showing much larger economic growth compared to rest of the world, amidst a global headwind (Krishna Srinivasan, 2024).

The Asia Marketing Federation is the demand assessment center (purpose of marketing) of Asia and therefore AMF should take the lead and set an example. Moreover, AMF can work across the global value chain of knowledge, more specifically, ‘marketing knowledge’. Let us assess the checklist of the knowledge driven activities undertaken by AMF (Illustration 2) and translate that into the Stan Shih GVC Smile Curve (bold line: present state and broken line: planed state). The value chain of knowledge economy is divided into seven activities as generally accepted factors in the global value chain of knowledge economy.

First and Foremost, the above analysis illustrates that AMF at present (Now) focuses only on dissemination and advancement of knowledge but is very much ready to take a leap forward. Second, the value addition, is both extremely limited as well as least across the value chain. It is further evident that focus (Plan) on the entire value chain is likely to add greater value and distribution of income, across the value chain, will be more equitable. Third, the plan suggests creation of specialized portfolio for each of the activity within the global value chain under various AMF portfolio, which could be NMA centric or built through NMA partnership. Fourth, it stresses on the importance of integrating global, regional, and national knowledge to ensure worthwhile and contextualized outcome. Fifth, this focuses on both financial as well knowledge sustainability through maximizing reach.

Illustration 3 elucidates the use of technology, with some examples, to ensure integration of stakeholders, knowledge, and process. This does not imply that the entire learning paradigm will be virtual. It emphasizes on the importance of adapting technology for enhancement, real-time feedback, co-creation, democratization, and globalization of knowledge. The importance of face-to-face learning and endorsement of local, regional, and global legal entities will remain valid.

Future of learning and skills development under the AMF banner requires substantive change in mindset. Modular learning at a global level based on integration of national, regional and global knowledge, rather than linking it solely to western standards is essential. In addition, technology integration as part of the learning tool will ensure greater value addition and most important, greater reach ensuring democratization of knowledge. Thus, it is important to assess the AMF learning framework as a platform for future citizens. The list should not be considered as comprehensive nor exclusive. These are entirely suggestive.

1. Compilation and application of all the academic knowledge created by the human capital of AMF. This includes the books (Marketing 3.0 to 6.0 by Professor Kotler, Pak Hermawan Kartajaya, and team), case studies (award winning organizations), entrepreneurship (individuals recognized as winners), personal works (members of NMAs), AMF Journal, etc.
2. Strengthen and focus on the CPM and other specialized professional and certificate programs offered by AMF and affiliated NMAs. Must be careful not to dilute already created AMF market by frail individual centric programs.
3. Contextualize learning process and knowledge content. The approach to globalization of knowledge must be democratic with due diligence being given to ensure the unique contribution all can make in the global knowledge space through online or offline interaction.
4. Assess knowledge value chain; knowledge creation at one end, skills focused somewhere in the middle and delivery or service skills as a reflection of outcome at the output end using ISO standards.
5. Build joint venture institutions based on category to ensure sustainable and efficient knowledge value chain.
6. Organize higher education conference, research and publications based on multilateral research conclave series, in partnership with, regional and global stakeholders (academia and business).
7. Focus on seven dimensions of learning: creation, acquisition, distribution, dissemination, advancement, marketing & branding, and advocacy of knowledge with focus on; local, regional, and global changes.
8. Emphasize on knowledge along with the financial model to ensure sustainability. Financial resources mobilization should also ensure creation of endowments based on shared contribution.
9. Focus beyond core marketing principles. Rather, focus should be on the impact Science, Technology, Analytics, Governance, and Entrepreneurship (STAGE) play on marketing to ensure creation of balanced human capital.
10. Use a partnership model. Not just about a specific territory or economy but rather how partnership is beneficial for the network and strengthens the value chain driven model ensuring compounded impact. Also, tap the best minds of the world to be part of AMF knowledge economy. Every partner can offer unique space in terms of learning using PHYGITAL (Physical & Digital) or hybrid learning model.
11. Offer each partner’s unique strength in embedding development approach under the prevalent environmental (climate, social, economic, political) challenge to learning with outcome measured by the five pillars of sustainability. This is likely to be another unique strength of AMF.
12. Shift from curriculum based to extracurricular based to super-curricular based learning. This includes general education, technology-based learning, social and cultural sensitivity, and humane mindset.
13. Balance the human and technology intervention and participation, I remind myself that, ‘we are stupid if we do not take help from technology, we are dumb if we are blinded by technology’
14. Technology driven approach is paramount to sustainability and democratization of global knowledge, however we need to ensure:
15. Business research for governance through use of AI for businesses to goodness matrix.
16. Data mining as focal point for data collection using for example IoT/IoS.
17. CAI – Centre for artificial intelligence to rule analytics.
18. Consumer behavior to add data science as behavior tools.
19. Services with technology for societal relationship building and emancipation
20. Communication through synthesis of the technology and ensuring creativity
21. Physical distribution adding drone along with block chain for value chain studies.
22. Use of 3D or even 4D product development along with AR/VR/MR applications.
23. Real time decision from board to customer services.
24. Assess concentration courses and minor courses from quantitative to behavior-based outcome.
25. Cross functional (beyond business) research with focus on innovation, entrepreneurship, technology, etc.

Concluding Remarks

It is evident that we must continue with the pursuit of creation of new paradigm outlined by Professor Philip Kotler, Pak Hermawan Kartajaya, and all the excellent minds under the umbrella of AMF. To reach the echelon of sustainability one must ensure four most important perspective: first, we must have regional integrity through democratization of regional wealth (human capital and financial), ensure regional peace and security (an alarming state as we exchange ideas), foster regional knowledge and technology dissemination.

One should follow an approach where the principle of singularity is maintained while the knowledge is contextualized through integration of localized singular thoughts and beliefs. There will always be competition within nations and of course across academic institutions, but one should focus on improvement based on the distinguishing factors of the local entity. However, continue to listen what the world has to say about us. It is important that we start ‘speaking up rather than spoken to regarding the unique value proposition’. Global recognition implies that one should answer to the question, why does a specific region exist and what will the world loose if the region ceases to exist. This is foremost for recognition of regional identity at global level.

We must ensure respect towards all and at the same time bridging relationship with neighbors and beyond, with an intention to build mutual gainful pursuits through respect. Also, try adding slowly but steadily new nations and knowledge partners into the network for both creation of markets as well as partners. Regional identity can only be ascertained when the regional partners will present itself to the world as a united entity with a portfolio of brands that they offer to the world for the wellbeing of humanity. Figure 3 depicts a simplistic model showcasing the triangulation paradigm for democratization of localized knowledge into global knowledge.

As an epilogue, three major outcomes can be submitted. First, “ignoring globalized knowledge will result in chronic psychosis; protective isolation of local knowledge will result in psychotic dependence. This necessitates that local and global knowledge be merged to result in creation of comprehensive knowledge”. Second, “compartmentalization of knowledge will create greater disparity, while democratization of global knowledge will ensure greater equity”. Third, “dissemination of knowledge using appropriate technology adaptation and direct human intervention enhances brand equity”.

REFERENCES

1. Andres Ortega (2020), “Multilateralism has Lost its Way: Collective Intelligence is Needed to Build a New Multilateralism for 21st Century, July Edition, The Globalist.
2. Benoit Godin (2005), “The Knowledge-Based Economy: Conceptual Framework or Buzzword?” The Journal of Technology Transfer, Volume 31, pp 17-30, Springer.
3. Bhupinder Singh (2019), “Sustainable Development: A Key to Human Survival”, International Journal of Advance Research and Innovative Ideas in Education, Volume 5, Issue 3.
4. Bo Meng, Ming Ye, and Shang-Jin Wei (2020), “Measuring Smile Curves in Global value Chains”, Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Volume 82, Issue 5, pp 988-1016.
5. Chad P Brown (2021), “US China Trade War Tariffs: An Up-to-Date Chart”, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
6. Craig M Kauffman (2023), “Democratization”, Politics, Law and Government Science, Editor: Encyclopedia Britannica, Britannica.
7. David Tremblay, Francois Fortier, Jean-Francois Boucher, Olivier Riffon, and Claude Villeneuve (2017), “Sustainable Development Goal Interactions: An Analysis Based on the Five Pillars of the 2030 Agenda”, Sustainable Development, Volume 28. ResearchGate.
8. Dev Nathan (2024), “Knowledge and Global Inequality Since 1800: Interrogating the Present as History”, Elements in Development Economics, Cambridge University.
9. Georges Kioes and Tom Pfeiffer (2015), “Social Progress Index (SPI) Measuring More than Just GDP”. Deloitte.
10. J J Gillian (1919), “The Origin of Democracy”, American Journal of Sociology, Volume 24, Number 6, pp 704-714.
11. Krishna Srinivasan (2024), “Asia’s Growth and Inflation Outlook Improves, but Risks Remain”, Economic Growth, International Monitory Fund Report.
12. Kristalina Georgieva (2024), “AI Will Transform the Global Economy. Let’s Make Sure it Benefits Humanity”, International Monetary Fund.
13. Melina Kolb (2022), “What is Globalization and How Has the Global Economy Shaped the United States?” Editor: Madona Devasahayam, Helen Hillebrand, and Steven R Weisman, Peterson Institute for International Economics.
14. Muhammad Ramzan, Sami Ullah, Syed Ali Reza, and Muhammad Nadeem (2023), “A Step Towards Achieving SDG 2030 Agenda: Analyzing the Predictive Power of Information Globalization Amidst Technological Innovation-Environmental Stewardship Nexus in the Greenest Economies”, Journal of Environmental Management, Volume 335.
15. Philip Kotler, Hermawan Kartajaya and Iwan Setiawan (2016), “Marketing 4.0: Moving from Traditional to Digital”, John Wiley & Sons.
16. Stan Shih (1992), Empowering Technology-Making Your Life Easier, Acer’s Report, New Taipei.
17. Vivek Bapat (2013), “Why Knowledge is Becoming the Ultimate Currency”, Forbes, June Issue.

Author:

Professor Syed Ferhat Anwar

President, Asia Marketing Federation

Vice-Chancellor of BRAC University, Bangladesh