By and large, they are not currently configured as centres for life-long learning. And nor, in the main, are they institutions providing a balanced educational offering of cognitive, technical and social skills. To meet the needs of the future world of work, that might need to change. The importance of a broad-based, Newman-style, education is likely to be greater than ever. This might criss-cross disciplinary boundaries, as one way of increasing people’s ability to make giant logical leaps. Those skills will be social and technical every bit as much as cognitive, with head, hands and hearts sharing equal billing. Put this way, the future university may need to be a very different creature than in the past. It may need to cater for multiple entry points along the age distribution, rather than focussing on the young. And it may need to cater for multiple entry points along the skills spectrum, rather than focussing on the cognitive. It would, in short, need to be plural rather than singular – a “multiversity”, rather than a university. (b) Intellectual Capital  Multiversities are about spreading future skills across the workforce. Another educational challenge is how to spread future technologies across companies. This is crucial if ideas and innovations are to become GPTs, boosting productivity, pay and living standards. At present, evidence on the diffusion of new technologies across firms paints a rather mixed picture. To understand why, it is useful to recognise that two forces are at work when a new idea is diffusing through the economy.
Globalisation does not mean that ASEAN countries should allow themselves to be swamped by foreign companies. It is a legitimate ambition for countries to want to build up their own strong companies. But the companies need to be internationally competitive; it is not viable for them to depend on protected home markets. Companies which cannot hold their own domestically will find it very difficult to compete abroad. Furthermore, governments must understand what industries they have the best chance of building up, given the nature of the global marketplace. In many industries technology and economies of scale have led to a worldwide wave of mergers and consolidations. For example in banking and auto manufacturing the scale has become global, with a few large players dominating the worldwide market. In these industries, the most promising approach for small and medium countries is to seek investments from these major players, not to build up their own national champions to compete against the giants. This is what Thailand has done with the auto industry. Globalisation has its downside. The competition is intense, the environment is constantly and rapidly changing, restructuring and upgrading are endless tasks, and unpredictable disasters strike from time to time. All this brings disorientation, new insecurities, and a sense of loss of control. But governments have to manage these problems and risks.