You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


Europe's increasingly protectionist economic trajectory after Brexit is becoming clearer by the day.

Germany will this week launch a new industrial strategy that will align it more closely with France in its desire to protect national champions against threats from China and the U.S.

Economy Minister Peter Altmaier will unveil the strategy on Tuesday to grant special support to sectors such as batteries for electric cars, chemicals and 3D printing, two industry sources and one official said. The German newspaper Die Welt reported Thursday that the strategic industries for protection in Altmaier's paper would also include cars, machine engineering, medical devices, green technologies, aerospace and defense.

Altmaier's plan comes hard on the heels of proposals from the BDI, Germany's biggest industrial group, to take a more defensive line against China and allow companies to bulk up into European champions that can take on Asian rivals, even if that means rewriting the EU's hallowed competition rulebook.

The debate over national champions has taken center stage politically because Paris and Berlin are frustrated that the European Commission's antitrust regulators are set to block a landmark merger between France's Alstom and Germany's Siemens in the rail sector.

"We have allowed too many mergers, so it is wrong to change the rules to allow for even larger mergers" — Lars Feld, German economist

Brussels argues that a combined Franco-German train behemoth would harm consumers and smaller businesses in the same sector, but the free marketeers at the Commission are looking increasingly isolated. Freed from British economic liberalism in the EU, French and German policymakers are increasingly looking to tear up the EU's competition and merger rules to cosset their biggest businesses.

Only last Thursday, Altmaier told parliamentarians in the Bundestag that the EU should allow the creation of "European champions" that can compete with China and the U.S. "That is why we must ... consider what adjustments are necessary in our competition law," he said. His French counterpart Bruno Le Maire has also called for new EU competition rules to smoothe the creation of champions.

The German economy ministry explicitly named certain companies as important, including BASF, Thyssenkrupp, Siemens and Deutsche Bank, which will raise eyebrows in Brussels, particularly if Germany intends to allow these companies to bend EU merger rules.

Manfred Weber, the German conservative among the favorites to succeed Jean-Claude Juncker as Commission president, has also slammed the Commission's move to block the Alstom-Siemens merger as a "major mistake" and raised the prospect of changing EU competition laws.

Après nous le dirigisme

Critics warn that without the counterweight of Britain, France and Germany are likely to push the EU toward more dirigiste economic policies that could harm consumers by creating inefficient monopolies.

German economists are alarmed. Lars Feld, a member of the country's national council of economic experts (informally described as Germany's "wise men"), said the plan is akin to calling for a "centrally planned economy."

"We used to be worried that if Britain left the EU, Germany would be more isolated in defending liberalism against anti-market policies. But now it looks like Germany is going to be the driver of such free-market hostility."

According to the ministry, the paper will be named "Industrial Strategy 2030" — an echo of Beijing's "Made in China 2025."

"Minister Altmaier will present measures to secure the economic and technological leadership of Germany and the European Union with the industrial strategy," a spokesperson for the economy ministry said.

The plan is already being hotly debated in Germany. Economists decried the strategy as a dangerous sign that Germany is promoting state intervention. Feld said he fears the plan is a “radical upheaval of German economic policy” and said the call for European champions is an “attack on EU competition policy.”

“Researchers have found over the past years that merger control was too lax. We have allowed too many mergers, so it is wrong to change the rules to allow for even larger mergers," he said.

Isabel Schnabel, another member of the council of economic experts, said that instead of subsidizing companies, Germany should spend the money on research and education. "Dear <PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED_PERSON>, if we have so much money to spend — why not ... create three to five German Berkeleys instead of pouring money into national champions?" she said on Twitter.

A shot of pragmatism

Traditionally, it's been the left in Germany that was friendlier toward state intervention. But the plan by Altmaier, a center-right politician, signals a broader shift in Germany toward industrial planning.

Commentators from industry and Altmaier’s own Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party see the strategy as a welcome dose of pragmatism. Faced with aggressive strategies in China and the U.S. to attract manufacturing and high-value technologies, Germany can no longer afford to play laissez faire and needs to identify the sectors that it wishes to maintain in Europe, the argument goes.

Stefan Rouenhoff, a lawmaker from the CDU and member of the Bundestag’s committee for economic affairs and energy, welcomed the minister’s plans.

“We are in the midst of a competition of economic systems. This is about asserting Germany and Europe in the face of competition from the economic behemoths China and the United States,” he said. “Both in technological development and in digitization, we are facing incredible leaps that will massively change our economic and social lives.”

The risk of mega companies is that they become cumbersome behemoths that under-invest and overcharge consumers.

Rouenhoff said he has not seen Altmaier’s paper yet, but mentioned what he considers to be important: “Points of an industrial strategy should above all include the promotion of innovation and research and the promotion of digitization in our country, for which a good digital infrastructure is indispensable. Ultimately, however, we also need new approaches to competition and tax policy.”

According to Die Welt, the paper names several measures to help strategic sectors, ranging from calls for a competitive tax system and affordable energy to subsidies for the development of new key technologies.

But the paper also endorses much more controversial measures, particularly a call for mega-mergers along the lines of Alstom-Siemens. In the eyes of their proponents, such mergers would allow EU companies to punch in China’s weight class. But the free-market critics say the risk of mega companies is that they become cumbersome Leviathans that under-invest and overcharge customers.

Hans von der Burchard contributed reporting.

This article is from POLITICO Pro: POLITICO’s premium policy service. To discover why thousands of professionals rely on Pro every day, email <PRESIDIO_ANONYMIZED_EMAIL_ADDRESS> for a complimentary trial.