A prospective client sent me a link to this in-depth article on IBM's design thinking revolution, where Phil Gilbert, IBM's General Manager of Design, has hired over 1000 designers into the firm, and pushed for over 8000 of its managers and staff to get 'trained' in design thinking. They have even created specific design centres across the firm, with design offices in most of its key locations, such as the one above. The goal is nothing short of beginning IBM's next phase of transformation, one of many in its 100+ year history. However, all is not rosy. Despite achieving a monumental success relative to the status quo, 8000 'recognised' design thinkers in a corporation of over 370,000 souls is barely a dent in terms of changing practice. If NoTosh were to effect change in only 2% of the teachers with whom we work, we'd have packed up our bags long ago. I'm not sure hiring 1000 designers in and of itself is the answer to any organisation trying to instil a different way of viewing the world. Here's why. Since design thinking really began to be a thing, back in the early 60s, the designer him or herself has consistently been at the centre of the design process. Even though we talk of 'user-centred design', the actual ideation and production of a solution, and in many cases the synthesis and definition of the problem to be solve, too, are all tasks undertaken by skilled 'designers', rather than the people in the organisation who have the scope, brand, or 'permission' to play in that space. Once the designers leave the project, so does the design thinking. There is a reason d.school sees its executive courses filled with repeat customers and firms like IDEO continue to thrive - they are resolving challenges in specific examples of services or products, but not necessarily transforming the firms and organisations who had the budget and desire to solve a problem in that specific area. Solving a problem costs money. Solving a problem and teaching the client how to do it again and again costs more than just money.... What is probably try about Phil Gilbert? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - He is incompetent - He has a lot of influence on the company - not enough information - He wants to keep things they way they are at the company
He has a lot of influence on the company

President Donald Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un made history with their summit meeting in Singapore. But beyond the handshakes, casual strolls and shared asides, many analysts and experts are already wondering what exactly the enduring substance of the summit will be and whether it could boost Trump's political rating at home. For Trump, the great political disrupter, it was the most significant foreign policy move of his presidency. It comes at a time when he looks to turn around his often weak polls and bolster his political standing at home in advance of midterm congressional elections in November, where Democrats are poised to make gains. From the images of their historic first handshake to signing an agreement on denuclearization, Trump and Kim took the first steps toward writing a new chapter in relations between their two countries. "People are going to be very impressed, people are going to be very happy, and we are going to take care of a very big and very dangerous problem for the world," Trump said sitting alongside Kim after both men signed the joint agreement. It was Trump's biggest moment on the world stage, and an opportunity he was eager to seize. "We got along really well.We had a great chemistry.You understand how I feel about chemistry.It is very important," Trump told VOA contributor Greta Van Susteren immediately after the summit. "I mean, I know people where there is no chemistry. We had it right from the beginning. We talked about that and I think great things are going to happen for North Korea." It was the first ever meeting between a U.S. president and a North Korean leader. The two men signed an agreement that committed both countries to work toward the denuclearization of the Korean peninsula, but the details remain vague. The United States offered unspecified security guarantees and a halt to military exercises with South Korea. Trump also said he raised the issue of human rights with Kim, but added that most of the meeting focused on the nuclear issue. Why did Trump and Kim Jong Un meet in Singapore Pick the correct answer from the following options: - to take casual strolls together - not enough information - Because they were bored - To sign an agreement committing both countries to work toward the denuclearization of the Korean penninsula
To sign an agreement committing both countries to work toward the denuclearization of the Korean penninsula

(Question)
The U.S. Supreme Court signaled Wednesday it may be open to new limits on the government's ability to track someone's movements by accessing data on that person's cellphone. A case before the high court could result in a landmark decision in the ongoing debate over civil liberties protections in an era of rapid technological change. At issue is whether law enforcement will be able to access cellphone data that can reveal a person's whereabouts without having to first obtain a court-issued search warrant. The case stems from the conviction of Timothy Carpenter for a series of robberies back in 2010 and 2011. Prosecutors were able to obtain cellphone records that indicated his location over a period of months, information that proved crucial to his conviction. On Wednesday, lawyers for the American Civil Liberties Union argued that law enforcement should be required to obtain a court-ordered search warrant before obtaining such information. They also argued that allowing law enforcement to access the cellphone data without a warrant would violate the prohibition on unreasonable search and seizures contained in the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. "It is impossible to go about our daily lives without leaving a trail of digital breadcrumbs that reveal where we have been over time, what we have done, who we spent time with," said ACLU attorney Nathan Freed Wessler, who spoke to reporters outside the Supreme Court following oral arguments. "It is time for the court, we think, to update Fourth Amendment doctrine to provide reasonable protections today." Some of the justices also raised concerns about privacy in the digital age. "Most Americans, I think, still want to avoid Big Brother," Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who often sides with the liberal wing of the court, said. Chief Justice John Roberts, who often sides with conservatives on the court, said the central question was whether the cellphone information should be accessible to the government "without a warrant." What does the American Civil Liberties union think about freedom of information? Pick the correct answer from the following options: - not enough information - they regard it highly - they are indifferent - they want to restrict it highly
(Answer)
they regard it highly