Writing for Bloomberg, Profs. Jonathan Gruber and Simon Johnson argue that federal investment in scientific research can help address income inequality. “America desperately needs more hubs of growth,” they write. “It’s a problem that the government can and should address, by identifying and investing in the technologies of the future – and ensuring that the American people as a whole share in the gains.”
A survey developed by Senior Lecturer Robert Pozen identifies several habits of highly-productive people, reports Prachi Bhardwaj for Money. “Probably the most important habit is whether you are geared to accomplishing a lot rather than putting in a lot of hours,” explains Pozen. “That leads to the second most important thing, which is whether you’ve defined your highest priorities and you’re focused on your highest priorities.”
In an article for The Boston Globe, Profs. Jonathan Gruber and Simon Johnson underscore how federal investment in scientific research could be used to help ease income inequality in America. “Scaled-up and deployed strategically across most states, we estimate that an investment of $100 billion per year in public research and development could help create 4 million good new jobs,” they write.
Profs. Jonathan Gruber and Simon Johnson speak with MSNBC’s Stephanie Ruhle about their book, which argues that government investment in scientific research can help tackle income inequality. Gruber explains that inequality in America is place-based, noting that “we need a solution that is going to help the rest of the country, not just super-star cities, and we think place-based federal R&D can do that.”
In an article for The Wall Street Journal, Senior Lecturer Robert Pozen argues that more transparency is needed on how executive pay is tied to performance at public companies. “Compensation committees charged with tying pay to performance should be using the same scorecard as ordinary shareholders,” writes Pozen. “If they’re not, they should have to explain that decision to investors.”
Profs. Jonathan Gruber and Simon Johnson discuss their new book, which argues that investment in scientific research is key to jump-starting the American economy, on Boston Public Radio. “We invest in science, turn that science into jobs,” says Johnson, “and spread that around the country. The coastal superstar cities have become extremely expensive, but there’s a tremendous amount of talent spread across the U.S.”
Forbes contributor Joe McKendrick writes that MIT researchers have developed a new metric for analyzing the value of the digital goods and services people use. McKendrick writes that the research provides “an idea of what digital goods -- those free or paid-for subscription services available via the internet and mobile -- add to our economy.”
Prof. Erik Brynjolfsson speaks with Sabri Ben-Achour of Marketplace about his work quantifying the economic benefits of goods and services that GDP does not measure. “We haven’t been measuring the value of the environment or digital goods,” says Brynjolfsson. “That means policy makers, when they are trying to see where is value coming and how is the economy growing, they have been missing that understanding.”
Wall Street Journal reporter Mike Bird writes that MIT researchers have proposed a new metric for GDP that would incorporate free digital goods and services. Bird explains that the researchers found that Facebook “would have boosted U.S. economic growth by between 0.05 and 0.11 percentage points a year” under the new metric.
Writing for The Wall Street Journal, Prof. Thomas Malone examines how AI could transform business hierarchies. “AI may create some more centralized hierarchies, and even more situations that call for flexible structures,” writes Malone. The overall goal, though, will remain “figuring out how to combine the different capabilities of people and computers into ‘superminds’ that are smarter than anything we’ve ever had before.”
Quartz reporter Eshe Nelson writes that MIT researchers have proposed redesigning GDP to incorporate free digital goods and services. Prof. Erik Brynjolfsson explains that updating GDP provides a “realistic idea of what creates value in society and what doesn’t. A lot of digital goods we’ll find are creating a ton of value.”
Axios reporter Kaveh Waddell writes that a group of economists led by Prof. Erik Brynjolfsson has proposed creating a new metric to measure GDP that accounts for the value of free digital goods and new technologies. The researchers estimate that “hidden benefits from Facebook alone have added 0.05–0.11 percentage points to GDP every year since its 2004 launch,” Waddell explains.
MIT researchers have found that companies with experienced technologists on their boards tend to have better financial outcomes, reports Sara Castellanos and Angus Loten for The Wall Street Journal. “Directors on digitally savvy boards have an understanding, tested by experience, of how digital technologies impact the way that companies will succeed in the next decade,” explains research scientist Stephanie Woerner.
In an article for Fast Company, Clifton Mark highlights a study by Prof. Emilio Castilla examining the impact of meritocratic practices. Castilla and his colleagues found that “in companies that explicitly held meritocracy as a core value, managers assigned greater rewards to male employees over female employees with identical performance evaluations.”
Writing for The Washington Post, research affiliate Ashley Nunes examines the impact of countries around the world banning the Boeing 737 Max 8 from operating in their airspace. “If airlines start to believe that there is something inherently wrong with Boeing’s prized offering — or, even worse, if consumers start to identify the new 737 models as unsafe — it will have serious ramifications for Boeing,” writes Nunes.