The US Trade Imbalance

The US has long been concerned about its persistent trade imbalance, frequently attributing responsibility to its business-partner countries for the gap between imports and exports. However, it should be recognised that most of the imbalance originates internally, driven by American corporations’ strategic pursuit of short-term profits, often through aggressive offshore profit-shifting practices. American businesses with the highest capitalisation, such as Apple, Google, and Microsoft, significantly contribute to this imbalance by establishing subsidiaries in low-tax jurisdictions like Ireland or Bermuda, legally diverting profits and depriving the US Treasury of critical tax revenues.

Apple has routinely utilised offshore structures, holding over $200 billion overseas at one point, strategically positioning intellectual property (IP) subsidiaries in countries with more favourable tax policies. Similarly, Google’s “Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich” facilitated the shifting of billions in global advertising revenue, resulting in minimal domestic taxation. These practices are typically legal yet ethically contentious, with annual corporate profit-shifting estimated between $300 and $350 billion, leading to approximately $100–$150 billion in lost US tax revenue each year, according to estimates from the Congressional Budget Office and economist Gabriel Zucman.

In addition to technology firms, professional service companies such as McKinsey, other consultancy firms, and numerous US law firms frequently establish regional offices overseas, ensuring substantial earnings remain offshore. Although these practices are mostly legal, they highlight the significant internal roots of the trade imbalance, reflecting structural issues in corporate governance and tax policy rather than external economic aggression.

To meaningfully address these challenges, the US should initiate comprehensive internal reforms, beginning with corporate governance. A decisive shift from shareholder capitalism—prioritising quarterly profits—to stakeholder capitalism, where companies equally value long-term investments in employees, communities, and sustainability, is essential. The 2019 Business Roundtable statement was a symbolic step in this direction, but substantial action has been limited. True reform necessitates redefining executive compensation to incentivise sustainable, long-term growth rather than stock price manipulation through buybacks.

On the policy front, the US government should strengthen anti-profit-shifting measures by enhancing transparency through mandatory country-by-country financial reporting and enforcing stringent economic substance requirements. Implementing the OECD-backed global minimum tax (15%) could curb excessive offshore tax arbitrage by ensuring multinationals pay fair taxes irrespective of where they report profits. Additionally, penalising superficial offshore structures while incentivising genuine domestic investments could significantly mitigate revenue losses.

Ethically, American corporate culture should evolve to reject aggressive tax avoidance as standard practice. Promoting ethical standards and responsible business conduct, supported by public advocacy, investor pressure through Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria, and transparent financial disclosures, could substantially reshape corporate behaviour. Institutional investors, pension funds, and even individual consumers can wield considerable influence by rewarding ethical corporate actions and penalising short-termist, exploitative strategies.

Ultimately, resolving the US trade imbalance is not solely about external tariffs or punitive measures against other nations but requires confronting internal structural issues directly. By embracing rigorous regulatory reforms, incentivising ethical corporate governance, and committing to strategic long-term economic planning, America can effectively rebalance trade, recover significant lost revenues, and foster sustainable economic prosperity for future generations.

6G Network

The 6G network represents the next substantial advancement in mobile technology and is anticipated to launch around 2030. Currently in its research phase, 6G technology promises to significantly surpass the capabilities of both 5G and 4G by delivering vastly improved speeds, reduced latency, increased network capacity, and enhanced connectivity. By leveraging Terahertz (THz) frequencies to achieve greater bandwidth, integrating artificial intelligence for smarter network management, and employing quantum communication technologies for superior security, 6G is expected to power ground-breaking applications. These applications include holographic communication, brain-machine interfaces, autonomous systems, and the Internet of Everything (IoE), thus paving the way towards a future characterised by comprehensive connectivity and intelligence.

Fundamental developments in 6G technology suggest substantial performance improvements over preceding generations. Spectrum efficiency is projected to improve by five to ten times compared to 5G, maximising spectrum utilisation to accommodate rising network demands through high-capacity transmissions. Peak data rates exceeding 1 Tb/s will enable next-generation applications, including holographic communication and immersive experiences in ultra-high resolution. Moreover, latency will reduce dramatically to between 10 and 100 microseconds for over-the-air (OTA) transmissions, facilitating ultra-reliable real-time applications such as brain-machine interfaces, autonomous driving systems, and tactile internet.

Furthermore, mobility will be considerably enhanced, with support for speeds of up to 1000 km/h, accommodating high-speed transport systems like hypersonic travel and advanced railway infrastructure. Connectivity density improvements will allow more than 10 million devices per square kilometre to connect simultaneously, essential for managing dense IoT environments, smart city infrastructures, industrial automation, and ambient intelligence applications. In terms of sustainability, energy efficiency is set to increase by a factor of 100, significantly reducing the environmental impact of the expanding digital landscape. Additionally, an area traffic capacity reaching up to 1 Gbps per square metre will ensure stable and reliable performance, particularly in densely populated urban areas or during high-traffic events.

6G is being developed to cater to diverse and futuristic use cases, broadly categorised into distinct vertical segments. Enhanced eMBB (FeMBB) will support applications such as real-time holographic telepresence for virtual meetings, educational purposes, and entertainment; full-sensory digital interactions incorporating multi-sensory experiences; and ultra-high-definition video streaming for cinema-quality remote collaboration. Enhanced Ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Communications (ERLLC) will deliver highly dependable real-time connections for fully automated vehicles in urban and motorway scenarios, as well as precise, responsive connectivity for smart factories, robotics, and the industrial IoT.

Massive Machine-Type Communications (umMTC) will facilitate the realisation of the Internet of Everything (IoE), comprehensively integrating various devices, systems, and environments to support smart cities and personalised services. Enhanced Low Power Communications (ELPC) will enable advanced nanoscale connectivity within healthcare and biological systems, known as the Internet of Bio-Nano-Things. Long-Distance High-Mobility Communications (LDHMC) will ensure reliable communication in extreme contexts, including space exploration and tourism, deep-sea sightseeing and operations, and hyperspeed railway systems travelling at speeds beyond 1000 km/h.

Finally, 6G places a significant emphasis on energy efficiency and environmental sustainability. Innovations in energy harvesting will enable devices to capture ambient energy from solar power and electromagnetic waves, reducing dependency on traditional battery sources. Zero-power communication technologies will allow certain devices to function solely on harvested energy, particularly beneficial for IoT applications in remote or inaccessible areas. AI-driven energy management systems will optimise resource allocation across the network, minimising power usage without sacrificing performance, thus aligning technological progress with ecological responsibility.

IEEE TEMSCON 2024

The IEEE TEMS (Technology and Engineering Management Society) is an IEEE society focusing in engineering and technology management. TEMS serves professionals who work at the intersection of technical and managerial roles, providing resources for innovation, leadership, and strategic thinking in technology-focused business. The society’s mission is to enhance knowledge and skills in managing the processes, resources, and challenges of technology-intensive and engineering-centric projects.

For the 1st time, IEEE TEMS carried out one of its flagship conference in Indonesia. The IEEE TEMS Conference Asia-Pacific (TEMSCON ASPAC) took place in Bali from 25 to 26 September, at the Prama Sanur Beach Hotel. The conference theme, “Achieving Competitiveness in the Age of AI,” focused on the transformative role of AI in modern business and engineering management. The top leaders of the IEEE TEMS, accompanied by scholars, industry leaders, and researchers from around world (beyond only Asia-Pacific region) gathered to discuss topics including updated innovations related to competitiveness, sustainable supply chain management, cybersecurity policies, digital healthcare innovations, and entrepreneurship, etc within the digital ecosystem.

Photo session at the TEMSCON opening ceremony

The conference began with a welcome from Conference Chair Prof. Andy Chen (former IEEE TEMS President and current President-Elect of the IEEE Systems Council). The opening session featured introductory remarks from prominent figures, including Prof. Andrea Balz (current President of IEEE TEMS), and Prof. Imam Baihaqi (Vice Rector of ITS Surabaya).

With Prof Benny Tjahjono and the Coventry University Gang at the TEMSCON opening ceremony

The keynote presentations were delivered by distinguished academics: Prof. Richard Dashwood (Vice-Provost for Research and Enterprise and Deputy Vice-Chancellor for Research at Coventry University), Prof. Alexander Brem (Professor and Vice Rector at the University of Stuttgart); and Prof. Anna Tyshetskaya (Vice Rector at Sankt Petersburg University in Russia). After the opening, the conference continued with breaking sessions for research paper presentations.

The second day of the conference was carried out as an Industry Forum with experts highlighted the challenges and opportunities that AI brings to global competitiveness. The speakers, besides Dr Ravikiran Annaswamy (the Past President of the IEEE TEMS) and Dr Sudeendra Koushik (the President-Elect of the IEEE TEMS), was yours truly. It was surely an honour. The title of my presentation was “Towards Complexity-Based Strategic Management.”

Keynote Speech by Yours Truly at TEMSCON Industry Forum

Following the lunch break, the forum resumed with an engaging panel session on “Accelerating Innovation for a Sustainable Future.” Prof. Marc Schlichtner, (Principal Key Expert at Siemens) served as the speaker, with Prof. Robert Bierwolf (TEMS Board of Governors Member) moderating. The panelists included esteemed leaders in technology and engineering management: Prof. Alexander Brem (Professor and Vice Rector at the University of Stuttgart), Prof. Anna Tyshetskaya (Vice Rector at Sankt Petersburg University in Russia), and yours truly. Truly an honour to share the stage with such distinguished figures.


The conference concluded with a gala dinner that offered a warm and lively networking opportunity for all participants. This included the TEMS Executive Committee, Board of Governors members, and leaders from various universities, fostering valuable connections and camaraderie across the academic and professional communities in attendance.

Quantum Methods in Researches

After attending a meeting with Pelindo yesterday, I attended a seminar hosted by FEB UI as part of a series themed “Conducting Impactful Business Research on an International Scale: Recent Trends, Methods, and Challenges.” Today’s session featured Agung Trisetyarso and Fithra Faisal Hariadi discussing “Research Methods: Quantum Approach to Coopetition Analysis and Disruptive Innovation.” This emerging approach leverages quantum states and mathematical formalisms like Dirac notation to model complex systems in social and economic research. By addressing uncertainty, interdependence, and multidimensional data, it opens pathways to innovative analyses of decision-making, preference patterns, and network dynamics.

Quantum methods uniquely represent probabilities through superposition (coexistence of multiple states) and entanglement (interdependencies between variables). In economics, they can model ambiguous preferences and market uncertainties, while in social sciences, they tackle paradoxical decision-making scenarios where traditional logic falls short. Additionally, entanglement provides insights into deep interdependencies, such as the impact of social ties or market ecosystems. The high-dimensional nature of quantum states allows for representing multifaceted variables, such as consumer preferences, and modeling dynamic changes over time—useful for exploring cultural shifts, policy impacts, or market evolution.

I found the discussion particularly compelling regarding its application to handling volatilities and uncertainties in economic systems and complexity-based strategies. The ability to accommodate multiple states and interdependent variables makes this approach well-suited to ecosystem-based strategies, addressing ambiguous preferences and paradoxical decision-making. I plan to delve deeper into these methods to explore their potential in advancing strategic insights.

Non-Accumulative Adaptability

Exploring the ideas about adaptation and emergence as a part of ecosystem (i.e. complex adaptive system — CAS) development, I think it is more exciting when we see it through the combined lenses of CAS, Schumpeter, Kuhn, Foucault, and Lyotard. Each of these perspectives explores how change does not just happen bit by bit, but instead in bold (stolen from Telkom’s five bold moves program) and disruptive leaps, as transformations that completely alter the playing field, whether we’re talking about economies, sciences, societies, or even our basic understanding of the world.

CAS implies that change is a matter of adaptive cycles — cycles of growth, accumulation, collapse, and renewal. An ecosystem could grow, accumulates the resources until hitting a limit. Then its whole structure becomes unsustainable, collapses, and reboots in a new way — it reorganises itself with fresh relationships and opportunities. This cycle is anything but smooth; it’s like a forest fire clearing the way for new growth, and it’s essential for resilience and long-term adaptability. This model resonates closely with Schumpeter’s idea of creative destruction in economies. Schumpeter saw capitalism as a system where innovation doesn’t build up neatly on top of the old but bulldozes it — new technologies, businesses, and products disrupt markets, toppling established companies and paving the way for the next wave of growth. For Schumpeter, entrepreneurs drive this cycle, constantly reinventing the economy and shifting the landscape in unexpected ways.

Thomas Kuhn brought a similar idea into science with his concept of paradigm shifts. In Kuhn’s view, science isn’t a smooth, cumulative process of adding one discovery to the next. Instead, it moves forward in fits and starts. Scientists work within a “paradigm” — a shared framework for understanding the world — until enough anomalies build up that the whole system starts to feel shaky. At that point, someone comes along with a radically new idea that doesn’t just tweak the existing framework but replaces it. Kuhn’s paradigm shift is a profound reimagining of the rules, kind of like Schumpeter’s creative destruction but applied to the way we think and know. It’s as if science periodically wipes the slate clean and rebuilds itself from a fresh perspective.

As a Gen-X, I must also mention Michel Foucault. Foucault offered a more historical spin on these ideas with his concept of epistemes. Foucault believed that every era has its own underlying structure of knowledge, shaping how people perceive and think about the world. These epistemes don’t evolve smoothly; they’re punctuated by abrupt shifts where the entire basis of understanding changes. Just like in a Kuhnian paradigm shift, when a new episteme takes over, it fundamentally changes what questions are even worth asking, as well as who holds power in the discourse. In Foucault’s view, knowledge isn’t just a collection of facts piling up—it’s tied to shifts in power and perspective, with each era replacing the last in a way that’s not fully compatible with what came before.

Then there’s Jean-François Lyotard, who takes the idea a step further by challenging the very idea of cumulative “progress” altogether. As a postmodernist, Lyotard argued that the grand narratives that used to make sense of history, science, and knowledge are breaking down. Instead of one single, upward trajectory, we’re left with multiple, fragmented stories that don’t fit neatly together. Knowledge, for Lyotard, is no longer a matter of moving toward some ultimate truth but an evolving patchwork of perspectives. This rejection of a single narrative echoes Schumpeter’s and Kuhn’s visions of disruption and replacement over seamless continuity. Lyotard’s work suggests that, in knowledge and culture alike, stability is always provisional, subject to the next seismic shift in understanding.

Let’s imagine they can talk together

So when we look at all these thinkers together, a fascinating picture emerges. In CAS, Schumpeter’s economics, Kuhn’s science, Foucault’s history, and Lyotard’s philosophy, progress is not about slowly stacking up ideas or wealth. Instead, it’s about cycles of buildup, breakdown, and renewal — each shift leaving behind remnants of the old and bringing forth something fundamentally new. This kind of progress isn’t just unpredictable; it’s fueled by disruption, tension, and revolution. These thinkers collectively remind us that the most transformative changes come from breaking with the past, not from adding to it. Progress, in this view, is a story of radical leaps, creative destruction, paradigm shifts, and fresh starts—where each new phase is a bold departure from what came before.

IEEE R10 WiE&Industry Forum

The leading role of the IEEE in advancing global science and technology development is undeniable. Still, outside the circles of scientists and engineers, people are more or less blind about the IEEE activities. Interestingly, since the leadership of Prof. Gamantyo Hendrantoro and Dr. Agnes Irwanti in the IEEE Indonesia Section, the publication of IEEE’s scientific discourse has been more widely disseminated to the general public. For two consecutive years, IEEE Indonesia has brought the IEEE President to Indonesia, featuring discussions broadcasted on television to improve the interest of the Indonesian public.

The IEEE President of 2024, Dr Tom Coughlin, paid a visit to Jakarta this week, accompanied by IEEE R10 Director Prof. Lance Fung, IEEE R10 Director-Elect Prof. Takako Hashimoto, IEEE R10 Women-in-Engineering Committee Chair Dr Agnes Irwanti, IEEE Malaysia Section Chair Dr Bernard Lim, and IEEE Indonesia Section Chair Prof. Gamantyo Hendrantoro. As part of the leadership activities, an IEEE briefing was held on the morning of May 14, followed by a talkshow broadcasted by TVRI.

The theme of the talkshow was “Shaping the Future: Women’s Role in Industry” — featuring prominent leaders from the industry, university, government, and the IEEE organisation in the region. One of them is a dear old friend of mine, Elysabeth Damayanti, the OVP of Cybersecurity at Telkom Indonesia. The talkshow started with an opening speech by Dr Agnes, and some keynote speeches from Ms Mira Tayyiba as the General Secretary of the MCI, and Dr Laksana Tri Handoko as the Head of BRIN — the Indonesian governmental centre for research.

As one of the speaker of the talkshow, I started by mentioning the implications of Complexity Science: that we always recognise the diversity of the systems we are working on, where different fields, agents, participants, are all interconnected, resulting in emergence: new values, greater values, surprising values. It is how the Internet and our digital world proliferates, and how both natural ecosystems and business ecosystems sustain. This perspective naturally supports the idea of inclusivity, as different agents from various demographic groups are considered crucial for the survivability and innovativeness of all the systems we are living in, including, surely and crucially, the role of women. It is a key reason to reduce and close the gender disparity.

The WEF has released the 2023 Global Gender Gap Report, mentioning Indonesia in rank 87th out of 146 countries in gender gap. Low enough, but still ahead of some developed countries in Asia, including Japan, China, and South Korea. Indonesian score was about 68% of the gender gap closed — including the relatively low gap in health quality, medium gap in economic participation, and high gap in political empowerment.

We believe that digital transformation that we are developing now, could and should plunge down the disparity. Currently we carry out the digital transformation in strategic & business level to alleviate the economy of the people from the eastern part to the western part of Indonesia; by developing platform, making some piloting implementation with the government, national industry, and then expand it. We work to to enhance MSME business, agriculture, industry, educations, etc, even to remote islands in Indonesia. It is evident, that digital platforms have provided women and men quite equally with wider access to knowledge, services, market & business opportunities. But the transformation must be carefully-planned and deployed with proper education.

Digitalisation in work processes allow us to provide better empowerment for women. It may bypass many social challenges, encouraging women to reduce the unfortunate judgement that are still existing from the traditional norms. Business transformation allow better inclusions in workplaces and business in general. It is also an opportunity for women to aggregate their commitment, capabilities, and opportunities. Use digital services to maximise collaborations, to work in partnership, to be brave take the leadership of the community, to lead the change, and to support each other both in personal level, organisational level, and cross -industry ecosystem.

That is the one of the key. Another key is diversity & uniqueness. So, women should keep their own identity, personality, and mindsets, to preserve different perspectives & values; while opening their mindset to new cultures, different ways of think.

I spent the rest of the time to listen from the honorary speakers of this event. It is one of the most valuable day for me this year, to learn a lot from the wisdoms presented today. Hopefully the IEEE Indonesia Section will continue this valuable activities more and more in the future.

Architecting Digital Transformation

I got this books a couple years ago: Architecting the Digital Transformation, edited by Zimmermann, Schmidt, and Jain. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-49640-1. It is interesting to find insights on digital transformation at an enterprise scale with emphasis on architecture-driven agility, the evolution of enterprise architecture roles, and the systemic cultural and organisational shifts necessary to support sustainable, adaptive transformation. Digital transformation has emerged as a critical undertaking for large organisations striving to remain competitive amidst rapid technological and societal change. Success at enterprise scale requires more than the adoption of new technologies — it demands a reimagining of business architecture, organisational culture, and governance mechanisms.

This book offers a research-based perspective on navigating this complexity. A key concept introduced is perpetual evolution—a modular and flexible architectural model that enables continuous innovation. Systems are designed so that components can be independently upgraded or replaced, allowing quick integration of new technologies while avoiding the constraints of monolithic infrastructure.

Complementing this architectural agility is the bimodal IT strategy, which combines a stable core system with a more experimental, agile layer. This setup enables organisations to innovate rapidly without compromising operational stability, bridging legacy systems with modern digital initiatives.

A recurring theme is the alignment between agile teams and enterprise architects. These roles have traditionally been at odds—agile valuing speed and adaptability, while architecture focuses on structure and governance. However, case studies in the book show that collaboration between the two improves both solution integrity and delivery speed. Architects are repositioned not as distant planners, but as facilitators embedded within teams.

To reinforce architectural discipline without imposing rigid control, the authors introduce lightweight governance and social incentives. The Architecture Belt, for example, is a gamified ranking system that encourages adherence to architectural principles in a positive, participatory way. This proves especially effective in large-scale agile environments where consistency must coexist with autonomy.

Cultural change is equally vital. Organisations must build digital dexterity—a culture of fast learning, experimentation, and team autonomy. Successful transformation often comes from empowered cross-functional teams that are free to explore, prototype, and iterate. In this paradigm, enterprise architects become active contributors to the digital ecosystem, supporting communities, sharing knowledge, and offering hands-on technical guidance.

The book also examines the shift in Enterprise Architecture Management (EAM). Traditional, centralised models are no longer compatible with agile and DevOps practices. Instead, Agile EAM is iterative, collaborative, and closely integrated with delivery teams, enabling organisations to respond more effectively to technological and market changes.

Finally, the authors present Service-Dominant Design (SDD) as a practical framework for creating digital services through co-creation. Rather than building solutions in isolation, SDD emphasises contextual understanding, stakeholder collaboration, and iterative development—ensuring outcomes that are both technically sound and meaningfully relevant.

In essence, the role of enterprise architecture is being redefined. The most effective digital transformations are those where architects take a hands-on role in shaping platforms, facilitating cross-team collaboration, and ensuring coherence across the digital ecosystem. By embracing both structure and agility, architecture becomes a living framework that evolves in step with the business.

BOD Convo: BRI & Telkom

As a part of Synergy team of Telkom Group, sometimes we are requested to facilitate meetings between or among SOEs. This week we got involved in a meeting between the Vice CEO of BRI (Catur Budi Harto), IT Director of BRI (Arga Mahanana Nugraha), Group Business Development Director of Telkom (Honesti Basyir), and CEO of Admedika (Dwi Sulistiani) as one of the subsidiary of Telkom. BRI & Telkom are two of the greatest SOE in Indonesia with strong roles & commitments to enhance ecosystem-based national economy through transformations in technology and business: BRI as the top bank in Indonesia, and Telkom surely as the top telco in Indonesia.

Streamlining among SOEs business developments is always necessary, including technological aspects. As a commitment, BRI will cease its satellite initiatives and return instead to use Telkom satellites (or other providers in compliance to regulatory and business norms). Alignments in the use of data centres are under consideration too. National economic development programs will be managed in alignment with competencies and business. An establishment of BRI-Pegadaian-PNM holding to grow MSME and ultra-micro economy is a good example for that, as well as other holdings and strategic alliances among SOEs. Doors for cross investment could also be opened, for example in healthcare ecosystem.

« Older posts

© 2025 Kuncoro

Theme by Anders NorénUp ↑