KMA 한국능률협회(상근부회장 최권석, 이하 KMA)가 SK AX의 AI 역량 강화 프로그램인 ‘AI Talent Lab’을 기업, 공공기관, 대학 교육 과정에 본격적으로 도입한다. 생성형 AI 확산에 따라 기업 내부의 AI 활용 역량 수요가 증가하는 상황에서 기술 이해와 실무 적용을 결합한 체계적 교육의 필요성이 대두됐다. KMA는 이러한 수요에 대응하기 위해 SK AX와 MOU를 통해 실무 중심 AI 교육 플랫폼인 ‘AI Talent Lab’을 기업·공공기관·대학에 공급하기로 했다. ‘AI Talent Lab’은 전 구성원의 수준별·단계별 AI 역량 육성을 위한 두 과정으로 구성된다. AI Literacy 과정은 생성형 AI 기본 개념과 프롬프트 엔지니어링, AI 활용 사례 등 3개 과목으로 이루어졌다. AI Bootcamp 과정은 Prompt Engineering, Azure OpenAI ＆ LangChain, RAG Essential, Service Packaging 등 4개 코스로 구성되며, 프롬프트 설계부터 AI 서비스 구현 및 배포까지 전 과정을 다루는 프로젝트 기반 학습 방식으로 운영된다. 해당 프로그램은 AI 기초 역량 확보부터 실무형 개발까지 단계별 학습이 가능하도록 설계되었다. 클라우드 기반 온라인 플랫폼으로 운영돼 시공간의 제약 없이 학습할 수 있으며, AI 멘토 에이전트를 통한 개인별 학습 지원이 제공된다. 또한 비전공자를 포함한 전 직원을 대상으로 직무와 직급에 관계없이 업스킬링과 리스킬링이 가능하다. KMA 관계자는 “AI가 모든 구성원의 업무 도구로 자리 잡아 가는 상황에서 실제 업무 적용을 지원하는 체계적인 교육이 필요하다”며 “이번 프로그램 도입을 통해 기업과 공공기관, 대학의 AI 활용 역량 강화를 지원할 것”이라고 밝혔다. ‘AI Talent Lab’의 도입 및 상담 관련 상세 정보는 KMA 한국능률협회 홈페이지를 통해 확인할 수 있다.

?It is common for the authors to include epilogues, however, yours was especially sincere and full of countless thank you-s. Humans are quite similar in genetic aspects(you even mentioned that the reason Kenya became a powerful nation in track-and-field is because it did not lose the talented ones to other sports). Sport is a way of exploring the inner-conscience, so enjoy. Such conclusion seemed a little bit cliche-tic in the first place, pardon me, but as I thought about it more and more, it seems to be a really valuable conclusion. It has been already two years since you wrote the book. If you have the chance to write the epilogue once again, what are the changes that you would want to make? -Haha…well, I think maybe I would try to make that sentence a little less cliche! And I always appreciate feedback, so there is no need for pardon whatsoever. For me, sport is the ultimate lens through which to examine human biological diversity. You can watch the opening ceremony in Rio this summer, and there will be Michael Phelps next to a 1500-meter runner as they walk in, and Phelps will be 18cm taller, but both men will be wearing the same length pants, because of the bodytypes that are advantaged in their respective sports. I find that beautiful and remarkable, if a bit cliche. I really didn’t think so many people would be interested in the book, so I didn’t have an audience in mind so much when I wrote the epilogue, it was more sort of wrapping things up in my own mind. So that’s why I mentioned a wide range of characters from NBA players to Steve Jobs, and discussed the idea of genetic engineering for a perfect athlete. It was just addressing many different things I had been thinking about, almost like I was talking to myself. I think if I could do it again, I would have made a more explicit section of the epilogue where I said: “Here, in short, are aspects of this research that have most influenced how I work outside of sports,” and suggest how they might apply to other people. For example, when I’m trying to learn something new now, I sample a range of techniques first, and pay attention to my learning rate, or “trainability” as I call it in the book. It pays off to spend some time up front finding the method in which you are most trainable. You may be behind at first, but it’s the best way to go. And using some of the information about how athletes “chunk” information to make quick decisions, I’ve applied some of that to learning information quickly, and I can now memorize full hour-long lectures even though I don’t think I have a special memory. So I think I would have taken some time to give a bit more of the practical, utilitarian background. I would still like to do that! ?You worked as a researcher in Alaska near the North Pole, wrote articles while traveling on a yacht... you have been consistently involved in environment and sports-science. You are now working as a journalist for Propublica. Your TED lecture ‘Are Athletes Really Getting Faster, Better, Stronger?’ from 2014 was watched by a quite large number of people in Korea as well. You seem like a person who is consistently interested in new things and inflamed by new topics. Do you have a personal life moto? Is there a specific field that you are especially interested in and working on in these days? -When I lived on the boat, a large research vessel, I was actually doing science, not writing articles yet. I wasn’t a journalist yet, and still thought I would be a scientist. But the more science I did, the more I asked myself: “Am I the type of person who wants to spend my whole life learning or two things new to the world? Or am I the type who wants to learn things new to me more often?” I decided I was the latter, and later realized you really can connect dots that even the scientists haven’t, because they have to focus very narrowly. I jumped from being a scientist to a journalist, and then from all sorts of different jobs. I left a fulltime job in Washington D.C., to take a temporary six-month job as a fact-checker at Sports Illustrated. I don’t know that I have a motto, but just as the development of the best athletes involves diversification prior to specialization, I want my experience to be very wide early in my career. When my learning curve begins to flatten, I want to be somewhere else. That’s difficult, because the pressure is to create a brand and stick to the same thing. But I just can’t. I think we too often progress in life by continually moving more and more toward what we are comfortable with. I want to spend my entire life forcing myself to try things and engage with ideas that I don’t find entirely comfortable. It’s the same with physical training. If you lift the same weight the same number of times every day, you will maintain your muscle, but you won’t force it to change for the better. Right now, I just finished a long story about drug cartels in Mexico, which was a new field for me, and fascinating to understand how those organizations get very good at doing very bad things. It definitely made me wonder about how leadership is structured in organizations, so I’ve been reading some of the psychology about that. And I’m also taking a fiction writing class, because, again, I want to get out of my comfort-zone, and force myself to try a kind of writing that I’m not comfortable with. It’s working! ?Your book was selected as a New York Times bestseller. Moreover, the photo of your book with President Obama was a hot issue as well. I wonder, had the President ever mentioned about the book himself or wrote you an email or mentioned in his SNS about the book. -The President never wrote to me, as I think he probably has a pretty busy schedule! Interestingly, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice mentioned in an interview that she was reading The Sports Gene as well. I enjoyed that, because she and President Obama are from different political parties obviously, and I was glad to think that perhaps people with very different viewpoints might be interested in it. I did see one interview online where President Obama was speaking with a runner who visited the White House, and told her some things about talent, and it made me think he had definitely paid attention to what he read in my book, as it sounded like it was straight from the pages. ?There was this video of you having a heated conversation in MIT with Malcom Gladwell, the founder of 1 million-hours-law. Are you still in an argument with him? -He and I still do discuss it, because we run together. But we have become very friendly. That doesn’t mean we agree, but my feeling is that he has gravitated somehwat more toward the evidence I’ve presented. I give him a huge amount of credit for being willing to change his mind when presented with evidence. He contends that the point of the law or “rule,” as he phrased it, was to show the importance of hard and sustained work. But that was never in question among scientists in the area, and I think the way that it has been applied is often a mistake. As I noted in my book, the scientist who did the actual work that led to the law has been pretty upset at what the public thinks it is. So I hope I helped correct that for people who are interested, although I certainly can’t reach as many people as Gladwell. ?You answered that ‘Phelps will be 18cm taller(than EL GUERROUJ), but both men will be wearing the same length pants, because of the body types that are advantaged in their respective sports. I find that beautiful and remarkable, if a bit cliche’. Could you explain further about why is that ’beautiful and remarkable‘? -In the early part of the 20th Century, there was an idea that there was an ideal way for all humans to be, and that anything different from that was bad. It deviated by fault or error. Instead, now that we better understand biological variation, it’s clear that tremendous variation is an essential part of evolution. There is no “perfect form,” only those that fit more readily into one environment or task than another. As such, I see sports as a celebration of humanity‘s physiological diversity. Some people have asked me if all these specialized body types take away some of the magic of sports for me. On the contrary, I think sports is a grand stage for appreciating biological diversity. Sports are simply contrived environments that we’ve created to test our psychology and biology. To me, the wider the range, the more interesting, and the more power sport has to appeal to everyone. I feel the same way about culture. I love the Olympics because it mixes cultures on a scale I don‘t think is really replicated just about anywhere else, and I like to see how that manifests. In short: at times human diversity is divisive, but in sport, it’s part of the celebration of achievement. Who is Epstein? He was born in Chicago, Illinois on the 31st of January, 1980. He majored in Environmental science and astronomy in Columbia University. He worked as an environmental research worker in the Artic Circle near Alaska. He also worked at the a seismological laboratory and charted the submarine topography of the Mediterranean ocean. As a sport-illustrate senior contributor, he is a celebrated journalists who writes sports-science and Olympics stories through careful research and checking, such as breaking the story that the Yankees‘ Alex Rodriguez, the tycoon of baseball was tested positive for steroids. He included his experience of being a varsity track-and-fields runner with teammates who came from Jamaica and Kenya and of working in the sports scenes in his book ‘The Sports Gene’, 2013. President Obama’s picture of buying the book at the bookstore was sensational. Also, Condoleezza Rice, the former secretary of state also recommended her acquaintances to read the book. Now he is working at the public benefit media ‘Propublica’ as a journalist and recently covered the story of the Mexican drug cartel’s local relief activity. Senior reporter Byong Sun Nim bsnim@seoul.co.kr

Can a genetic test tell whether my child who seems to be talented in sports will be able to succeed as a professional? When is the best time to select the right sport? If the child puts in efforts of more than 1 million hours, will he/she have the ability that no one can possibly think of challenging? There might be a quite large number of parents with such questions. David Epstein, the American sports-science journalist who published ‘The Sports Gene’ in 2013 advised through the e-mail interview that ‘There is no such test like that at the moment. It is actually best to experience diverse kinds of sports in one’s adolescence and choose a certain sport when one comes of age, being able to check one‘s degree of achievement and concentrate fully on the choosen sport’. Apart from certain sports such as golf and gymnastics, too much of either early or immersion education is not recommendable in sports. Following are the Q&As. ?First, I have to confess that I was personally touched by the well-done research and committed interviews. I guess that the time for writing took much longer than you had expected. Also, what were the reasons that you decided to write this book and how much are you satisfied with the outcome? -The research time for the book did indeed take longer than I expected. The topic was so complex, and there was, unfortunately, a lot of poorly done science I had to sift through to find the best work. (I was lucky I had a science background that helped with that.) For the first year, I did not write a word, I only tried to read 10 scientific papers a day, every day. As far as why I decided to write the book, it really came out of my own experience as an athlete, and as a sports spectator. I grew up in an area outside of Chicago where I ran on high school track teams with a lof of Jamaican immigrants. We had so many amazing sprinters, and when I realized Jamaica was an island of 2.5 million people, I wondered what could possibly be going on there to make so many fast sprinters?! And then in college, I moved up to run longer distance, and now I was running against Kenyan athletes, and learning that they weren’t just Kenyan, they were all from one small minority tribe, the Kalenjin. So, again, I’m wondering: What in the world is going on over there? Those questions combined with things I would see on television, like a women’s softball pitcher striking out the best Major League hitters. As soon as I saw that, I made an estimate calculation of the speed of her pitch and the closer distance of the mound to see if there was less time to swing, and there wasn’t, so I wondered why the men couldn’t hit it. So I just kept keeping all these questions in my mind, and when I had the opportunity, I wanted to go as far toward answering them as possible using the best available science. So really it was my own curiosities, and I didn’t know that so many other people would be interested. ?Your book‘s greatest strength may be that the readers can go through your experience as a varsity track-and-field player for 800 meters and also the interviews with Barry Bonds and Jennie Finch. Your theory of knowledge bulk was really intriguing as well. So, what you really wanted to say is that one cannot choose between nature and nurture. Concentrated workouts are important, however, there is no need to put in 1 million hours of work. One can experience diverse kinds of sports while he/she is young and then once he/she comes of age, he/she can choose one specific filed and put in his/her efforts. This is what you offer as an advice for parents who have kids that seem to be talented with sports. Is it right? -That’s right. The science has moved past the question of “nature or nurture,” and on to attempting to figure out what the balance of nature and nurture is in any specific situation. Without both genes and environments, there are no outcomes at all. So the real quest is to understand the interplay of nature and nurture, and how we can best use it. And this is important, because some people asked me after the book came out why scientists even study genetics if we can’t change it. The answer is that we can alter environments so that people get more out of their genetics. That’s why I use that quote toward the end of the book by J.M. Tanner?who was the world’s expert in body growth and development, and was a worldclass athlete: “Everyone has a different genotype. Therefore, for optimal development, everyone should have a different environment.” The more we understand about nature, the more we can help tailor the nurture to help everyone get the best out of themselves. As far as putting in hours of work, you’re exactly right. There is no magic number of hours. When I went through the work about the 10,000-hours rule, I expected to find something amazing I could write about. But what I found was work filled with statistical problems that needed to be addressed, because it’s actually damaging the development of athletes. The actual research shows that the typical route to success in most sports?and in fact many other activities?is to have a “sampling period,” where the learner has exposure to a wide variety of skills early, before then focusing in and specializing. That’s why I added an afterword to the book, and you can see, on pages 416 and 417, I added the charts with the aggregate data that show the development path of elite athletes. They sample sports early, and practice less and in a less technical manner early on than their peers who plateau at lower levels. There are exceptions, of course, and golf may be one because it’s a very unusual endeavor, in which the athlete is not time limited and does not need to predict the actions of others. But the fact is, most performers who go on to become elite do not follow the Tiger Woods path of early specialization. They follow the Roger Federer path; his parents forced him not to focus on tennis too early, and to continue playing badminton, basketball, and soccer before he could specialize. That’s the norm for those who become creative adult athletes. (And, by the way, there is evidence the best musicians do this as well.) Still, even looking at the data, people often don’t believe me. They send me messages: “Ok, maybe in some American sport that’s true, but never in soccer!” Well, luckily for me, shortly after the German national team won the World Cup, this study came out showing that they followed this exact pattern as well. The best players spent more time in unstructured activities as kids, and put off full specialization until after their less skilled peers. The study is called “Practice and play in the development of German top-level professional football players.” As an aside, Malcolm Gladwell and I had a public debate about this, and he conceeded that he didn’t expect people to take the 10,000-hours so seriously. You can see it here on YouTube. He and I have become running partners, so we continue to discuss on our own time! ?What was the most difficult part of writing the book? Even though you are an investigative reporter, it would have not been easy to do interviews while traveling since you would have to check the sources and work on the drafts on the plane. -Well, I didn’t have to do too much on planes, because I took a long time to write the book. When I chose my publisher, my priority was not the best financial offer, but the publisher that would make me an equal partner in determining how long I needed in order to write the book. In some ways, I still felt rushed, but I didn’t want to be on the normal timeline of one year or 18 months, because I knew I needed to learn a lot of material. So that was ok. It was a challenge, though, to arrange some of the interviews. In the last chapter of the book, I tracked down a man who was living as a reindeer farmer in the Arctic, and didn’t speak English, and it took me a while even to figure out that he was still alive and I should go visit him! Really, though, there were two aspects that stood out as very difficult: 1) If I wanted to give an honest examination of the top, I had to write about race and gender, and those are very sensitive topics. I got my CV ready just in case I had to find a new job. 2) I learned that some of my own intuition about the world was incorrect. I learned how hard it is, even faced with the data, to change my mind about certain things I believed for a long time and wanted to continue believing. It just took me some time to come to terms with that and write honestly about the data. For example, the chapters about genetic diversity in Africa, and about how physiology influences the willpower to train, were at first hard for me to digest intellectually, because much of the information was contrary to my intuition. But, in the end, that is why we have science, because we can’t rely on our intuition. --------------------- Two-thirds of Koreans have the gene which can pass through the doping(prohibited substances) test? David Epstein’s book ‘The Sports Gene(Translated version p.213)’ contains dangerous content that can instill a false belief on a quite large number of athletes in this nation. Swedish scientist Jenny Jakobsson Schulz, utilizing data from both Sweden and Inha University Hospital in Incheon, found out a scandalising fact. Those who have a pair of the gene mutant ‘UGT2B17’, which has the ability to cheat the most common anti-doping screening test ‘T/E ratio’, were more commonly found in East asia. The team actually mentioned that especially two thirds of Kroeans have this mutant. The T/E ratio test which searches for the ratio of testosterone to another hormone called epitestosterone views the ratio of 1:1 as normal and if the ratio goes above 4:1, than that there is a possiblity of doping. The research team determined that a lot of people have a gene that influences how they excrete testosterone in their urine, and they can dope without the T/E ratio changing, so they will still pass the test. They recommend that for drug testing to be more effective, it would have to be genetically tailored. On the 23rd of the last month, I requested an authority from Korean Anti-Doping Association(KADA) about how much of this is true and how much information do the domestic researchers and the KADA have on this news. Epstein further explained on this by answering “When I too asked anti-doping officials about this work, some of them said, ‘Oh no, it’s fine, that’s not right.’ Or, ‘That’s very rare.’ But it is right, and it’s not rare, so they are in denial.” “The good news, though, is that the T/E ratio test is becoming less important, as technologies like the biological passport are taking over.” He added, “Christiane Ayotte, one of the top anti-doping scientists in the world, was more honest. She told me, ‘This is one reason why I can’t retire until we have a better screening test than the T/E ratio.’. KADA Education-PR deputy answered on the 3rd, ”T/E ratio is just a primary testing method and is not used as a decisive material for the doping judgement. For example, we use secondary test methods such as IRMS, and also a biological informational system with diverse information for making the final conclusion. So, passing the T/E ratio test does not mean that one can avoid the doping test.” Senior reporter Byong Sun Nim bsnim@seoul.co.kr

다음은 저커버그가 딸 맥스에게 보낸 편지 전문이다. A letter to our daughter 　Dear Max, 　Your mother and I don‘t yet have the words to describe the hope you give us for the future. Your new life is full of promise, and we hope you will be happy and healthy so you can explore it fully. You’ve already given us a reason to reflect on the world we hope you live in. 　Like all parents, we want you to grow up in a world better than ours today. 　While headlines often focus on what‘s wrong, in many ways the world is getting better. Health is improving. Poverty is shrinking. Knowledge is growing. People are connecting. Technological progress in every field means your life should be dramatically better than ours today. 　We will do our part to make this happen, not only because we love you, but also because we have a moral responsibility to all children in the next generation. 　We believe all lives have equal value, and that includes the many more people who will live in future generations than live today. Our society has an obligation to invest now to improve the lives of all those coming into this world, not just those already here. 　But right now, we don’t always collectively direct our resources at the biggest opportunities and problems your generation will face. 　Consider disease. Today we spend about 50 times more as a society treating people who are sick than we invest in research so you won‘t get sick in the first place. 　Medicine has only been a real science for less than 100 years, and we’ve already seen complete cures for some diseases and good progress for others. As technology accelerates, we have a real shot at preventing, curing or managing all or most of the rest in the next 100 years. 　Today, most people die from five things -- heart disease, cancer, stroke, neurodegenerative and infectious diseases -- and we can make faster progress on these and other problems. 　Once we recognize that your generation and your children‘s generation may not have to suffer from disease, we collectively have a responsibility to tilt our investments a bit more towards the future to make this reality. Your mother and I want to do our part. 　Curing disease will take time. Over short periods of five or ten years, it may not seem like we’re making much of a difference. But over the long term, seeds planted now will grow, and one day, you or your children will see what we can only imagine: a world without suffering from disease. 　There are so many opportunities just like this. If society focuses more of its energy on these great challenges, we will leave your generation a much better world. • • • 　Our hopes for your generation focus on two ideas: advancing human potential and promoting equality. 　Advancing human potential is about pushing the boundaries on how great a human life can be. 　Can you learn and experience 100 times more than we do today? 　Can our generation cure disease so you live much longer and healthier lives? 　Can we connect the world so you have access to every idea, person and opportunity? 　Can we harness more clean energy so you can invent things we can‘t conceive of today while protecting the environment? 　Can we cultivate entrepreneurship so you can build any business and solve any challenge to grow peace and prosperity? 　Promoting equality is about making sure everyone has access to these opportunities -- regardless of the nation, families or circumstances they are born into. 　Our society must do this not only for justice or charity, but for the greatness of human progress. 　Today we are robbed of the potential so many have to offer. The only way to achieve our full potential is to channel the talents, ideas and contributions of every person in the world. 　Can our generation eliminate poverty and hunger? 　Can we provide everyone with basic healthcare? 　Can we build inclusive and welcoming communities? 　Can we nurture peaceful and understanding relationships between people of all nations? 　Can we truly empower everyone -- women, children, underrepresented minorities, immigrants and the unconnected? 　If our generation makes the right investments, the answer to each of these questions can be yes -- and hopefully within your lifetime. 　• • • 　This mission -- advancing human potential and promoting equality -- will require a new approach for all working towards these goals. 　We must make long term investments over 25, 50 or even 100 years. The greatest challenges require very long time horizons and cannot be solved by short term thinking. 　We must engage directly with the people we serve. We can’t empower people if we don‘t understand the needs and desires of their communities. 　We must build technology to make change. Many institutions invest money in these challenges, but most progress comes from productivity gains through innovation. 　We must participate in policy and advocacy to shape debates. Many institutions are unwilling to do this, but progress must be supported by movements to be sustainable. 　We must back the strongest and most independent leaders in each field. Partnering with experts is more effective for the mission than trying to lead efforts ourselves. 　We must take risks today to learn lessons for tomorrow. We’re early in our learning and many things we try won‘t work, but we’ll listen and learn and keep improving. 　• • • 　Our experience with personalized learning, internet access, and community education and health has shaped our philosophy. 　Our generation grew up in classrooms where we all learned the same things at the same pace regardless of our interests or needs. 　Your generation will set goals for what you want to become -- like an engineer, health worker, writer or community leader. You‘ll have technology that understands how you learn best and where you need to focus. You’ll advance quickly in subjects that interest you most, and get as much help as you need in your most challenging areas. You‘ll explore topics that aren’t even offered in schools today. Your teachers will also have better tools and data to help you achieve your goals. 　Even better, students around the world will be able to use personalized learning tools over the internet, even if they don‘t live near good schools. Of course it will take more than technology to give everyone a fair start in life, but personalized learning can be one scalable way to give all children a better education and more equal opportunity. 　We’re starting to build this technology now, and the results are already promising. Not only do students perform better on tests, but they gain the skills and confidence to learn anything they want. And this journey is just beginning. The technology and teaching will rapidly improve every year you‘re in school. 　Your mother and I have both taught students and we’ve seen what it takes to make this work. It will take working with the strongest leaders in education to help schools around the world adopt personalized learning. It will take engaging with communities, which is why we‘re starting in our San Francisco Bay Area community. It will take building new technology and trying new ideas. And it will take making mistakes and learning many lessons before achieving these goals. 　But once we understand the world we can create for your generation, we have a responsibility as a society to focus our investments on the future to make this reality. 　Together, we can do this. And when we do, personalized learning will not only help students in good schools, it will help provide more equal opportunity to anyone with an internet connection. 　• • • 　Many of the greatest opportunities for your generation will come from giving everyone access to the internet. 　People often think of the internet as just for entertainment or communication. But for the majority of people in the world, the internet can be a lifeline. 　It provides education if you don’t live near a good school. It provides health information on how to avoid diseases or raise healthy children if you don‘t live near a doctor. It provides financial services if you don’t live near a bank. It provides access to jobs and opportunities if you don‘t live in a good economy. 　The internet is so important that for every 10 people who gain internet access, about one person is lifted out of poverty and about one new job is created. 　Yet still more than half of the world’s population -- more than 4 billion people -- don‘t have access to the internet. 　If our generation connects them, we can lift hundreds of millions of people out of poverty. We can also help hundreds of millions of children get an education and save millions of lives by helping people avoid disease. 　This is another long term effort that can be advanced by technology and partnership. It will take inventing new technology to make the internet more affordable and bring access to unconnected areas. It will take partnering with governments, non-profits and companies. It will take engaging with communities to understand what they need. Good people will have different views on the best path forward, and we will try many efforts before we succeed. 　But together we can succeed and create a more equal world. 　• • • 　Technology can’t solve problems by itself. Building a better world starts with building strong and healthy communities. 　Children have the best opportunities when they can learn. And they learn best when they‘re healthy. 　Health starts early -- with loving family, good nutrition and a safe, stable environment. 　Children who face traumatic experiences early in life often develop less healthy minds and bodies. Studies show physical changes in brain development leading to lower cognitive ability. 　Your mother is a doctor and educator, and she has seen this firsthand. 　If you have an unhealthy childhood, it’s difficult to reach your full potential. 　If you have to wonder whether you‘ll have food or rent, or worry about abuse or crime, then it’s difficult to reach your full potential. 　If you fear you‘ll go to prison rather than college because of the color of your skin, or that your family will be deported because of your legal status, or that you may be a victim of violence because of your religion, sexual orientation or gender identity, then it’s difficult to reach your full potential. 　We need institutions that understand these issues are all connected. That‘s the philosophy of the new type of school your mother is building. 　By partnering with schools, health centers, parent groups and local governments, and by ensuring all children are well fed and cared for starting young, we can start to treat these inequities as connected. Only then can we collectively start to give everyone an equal opportunity. 　It will take many years to fully develop this model. But it’s another example of how advancing human potential and promoting equality are tightly linked. If we want either, we must first build inclusive and healthy communities. 　• • • 　For your generation to live in a better world, there is so much more our generation can do. 　Today your mother and I are committing to spend our lives doing our small part to help solve these challenges. I will continue to serve as Facebook‘s CEO for many, many years to come, but these issues are too important to wait until you or we are older to begin this work. By starting at a young age, we hope to see compounding benefits throughout our lives. 　As you begin the next generation of the Chan Zuckerberg family, we also begin the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative to join people across the world to advance human potential and promote equality for all children in the next generation. Our initial areas of focus will be personalized learning, curing disease, connecting people and building strong communities. 　We will give 99% of our Facebook shares -- currently about $45 billion -- during our lives to advance this mission. We know this is a small contribution compared to all the resources and talents of those already working on these issues. But we want to do what we can, working alongside many others. 　We’ll share more details in the coming months once we settle into our new family rhythm and return from our maternity and paternity leaves. We understand you‘ll have many questions about why and how we’re doing this. 　As we become parents and enter this next chapter of our lives, we want to share our deep appreciation for everyone who makes this possible. 　We can do this work only because we have a strong global community behind us. Building Facebook has created resources to improve the world for the next generation. Every member of the Facebook community is playing a part in this work. 　We can make progress towards these opportunities only by standing on the shoulders of experts -- our mentors, partners and many incredible people whose contributions built these fields. 　And we can only focus on serving this community and this mission because we are surrounded by loving family, supportive friends and amazing colleagues. We hope you will have such deep and inspiring relationships in your life too. 　Max, we love you and feel a great responsibility to leave the world a better place for you and all children. We wish you a life filled with the same love, hope and joy you give us. We can‘t wait to see what you bring to this world. 　Love, 　Mom and Dad

핀란드는 인구 520만명에 불과한 유럽의 작은 국가이지만 스위스 국제경영개발원(IMD)이나 세계경제포럼(WEF) 등의 국제경쟁력 평가에서 항상 최상위권을 유지하는 강소국이다(2004년 IMD 경쟁력순위 8위,WEF 경쟁력순위 1위). 핀란드의 경쟁력을 뒷받침하는 요인에는 여러 가지가 있지만 과학기술과 교육훈련에서의 경쟁력이 핵심요인이다. 핀란드는 과학기술강국, 인적자원강국으로서의 입지를 공고히 하고 있다. 핀란드의 혁신역량과 교육시스템, 대학배출인력의 질, 기업의 재직근로자 교육훈련 등은 세계적으로 가장 우수한 수준으로 정평이 나 있다. 그러나 핀란드의 노동시장이 문제가 없는 것은 아니다.2003년 현재 핀란드의 노동인구는 약 260만명, 실업률은 9.1%이다. 프랑스나 그리스 등 일부 유럽국가에 비해서는 실업률이 낮지만, 미국(6.0%)이나 경제협력개발기구(OECD) 국가 평균(7.1%)보다는 높다. 장기실업은 줄어들고 있지만 구조적 실업이 여전해 인력부족 속에서도 실업 문제가 대두되고 있다. 이에 따라 핀란드 정부는 고용증대를 경제 및 노동정책의 최우선 목표로 삼고 있다. ●실업 완화, 고급 노동력 공급에 초점 핀란드에서 실업은 주로 저학력층에 집중돼 있다. 실업자의 40% 이상이 기초교육과정만을 이수한 저학력층이다. 지식정보화가 빠르게 진전되는 가운데 근로자의 능력과 전문성에 대한 수요가 증가하면서 단순인력에 대한 수요는 줄어들고 있기 때문이다. 따라서 실업 해소방안으로서 교육훈련의 중요성이 강조되고 있다. 핀란드 노동시장의 또다른 문제는 인구 고령화로 인한 인력부족의 심화 가능성이다. 베이비붐 세대의 대거 은퇴와 출산율 저하에 따라 2015년까지 100만명의 노동력이 줄어들 전망이며, 이는 현재 취업인구의 절반에 해당한다. 핀란드 정부는 이러한 문제에 대한 해결책으로서 취업률 제고, 근로자의 직무능력 향상을 통한 생산성 제고, 외국인 숙련노동력의 유입 확대를 추진하고 있다. 인력부족에 대한 해결방안으로서 역시 교육훈련을 통한 노동력의 질적 제고가 강조되고 있다. 2003년 10월 핀란드 노동부는 구조적 실업의 완화와 노동공급 촉진을 위해 ‘노동정책전략 2003∼2010’을 채택했다. 프로그램의 주요 목표는 구조적 실업의 축소와 예방, 숙련노동력의 확보 및 인구구조 고령화로 인한 인력부족에 대한 대응, 은퇴시기 지연 및 취업기간 연장 유도, 노동생산성 및 작업조직 향상과 직무만족 증대 등이다. 이러한 목표의 달성을 위해 공공 직업안정서비스의 개혁, 노동시장 지원정책의 적극 활용, 적극적 노동정책 프로그램 및 교육훈련 강화, 취업기간 연장 등의 정책방안이 추진되고 있다. 최근의 경제성장 둔화 속에서도 실업률이 높아지지 않고 있는 것은 교육훈련과 같은 적극적 노동정책(active labor policy)에 기인하는 것으로 해석된다. 결국 실업 해소, 인력부족 완화, 노동력의 질적 제고를 통한 생산성 향상과 근로복지 증대라는 모든 과제가 교육훈련투자의 확대와 질적 제고라는 측면으로 귀결된다. ●교육훈련 제공자로서의 기업의 역할 강조 핀란드에서 성인 대상의 교육훈련은 재직근로자 훈련(PT·Personnel Training), 자기주도적 성인 직업훈련(SMT·Self-Motivated Adult Training), 노동시장훈련(LMT·Labor Market Training)으로 구분할 수 있다. 투지아 레미넨 핀란드 노동부의 노동력개발·지도팀장은 “과거에는 이들 훈련과정이 각각 독립적으로 작동했으나, 최근에는 이 세 가지 영역이 중첩되는 분야가 늘어나고 있는 추세”라고 설명했다. 재직근로자 훈련은 평생학습 시스템 아래 기업에서 제공되는 교육훈련을 의미한다. 지식정보화 사회에서 기업의 경쟁력은 결국 인적자원의 경쟁력에 좌우된다는 점에서, 과거와 같이 교육훈련의 최종수요자로서가 아니라 적극적인 교육훈련의 제공자로서의 기업의 역할 변화가 요구된다. 근로자의 지속적인 능력개발을 위해서는 평생학습이 중요하며, 평생학습의 장으로서 기업 내 교육훈련이 강조되고 있는 것이다.2004년 IMD보고서는 핀란드를 재직근로자에 대한 기업의 교육훈련이 가장 활발히 이루어지는 국가로 꼽았다. 핀란드 수출액의 3분의 1을 담당하는 노키아(Nokia)의 경우 인적자원개발은 기업의 핵심전략으로서 강조된다. 안나 타비스 노키아 인사담당 부사장은 “최고의 인재들을 채용, 지속적인 교육훈련을 제공함으로써 최고의 인력을 확보하는 것이 노키아의 인사관리 전략”이라고 말했다. 총급여액의 3∼4%를 교육훈련비로 투입하며, 근로자 1인당 연간 70시간 안팎의 교육훈련을 제공한다. 교육방식은 정규교육훈련과 상급자의 지도(mentoring), 현장학습(talent management system)으로 이뤄진다. 근로자와 상급자, 인사담당 관리자간의 상호 유기적인 연계에 의해 맞춤형 교육을 실시한다. 또 대학 교과과정이 산업현장의 수요를 반영할 수 있도록 주요 대학들과 다양한 산학협동 프로그램을 운영하고 있다. 그러나 핀란드에서도 중소기업의 교육훈련투자는 대기업에 비해 상대적으로 미흡하다. 따라서 핀란드 정부는 중소기업 근로자의 교육훈련 확대를 위한 별도의 지원방안을 제공한다. 중소기업은 인력부족 때문에 근로자를 생산현장에서 빼내 교육훈련을 제공할 만한 여유가 없다는 점에서 노동부는 ‘직무순환(Job Rotation)’ 프로그램을 통해 정부 차원에서 대체인력을 지원하고 있다. 이 프로그램은 대체근무에 대한 비용지원 프로그램으로서, 중소기업이 근로자를 외부기관에 위탁교육 보내는 동안 정부가 실업자 풀(pool)에서 대체인력을 투입해준다. 이와 함께 개별 중소기업에서 교육훈련을 하기 어려우므로 소규모 사업장의 훈련수요를 취합, 훈련기관에서 수요에 적합한 맞춤형의 집합적 교육훈련을 제공하고 있다. ●사회적 기본권으로 학습권 규정 자기주도적 성인 직업훈련도 활발히 진행되고 있다. 핀란드에서는 성인 단계에서도 사회적 기본권으로서의 학습권이 확립돼 있어 평생학습이 상대적으로 쉽게 이뤄질 수 있다. 재직 중인 근로자라고 하더라도 본인의 필요에 따라 ‘학습휴가’를 요청할 수 있으며, 원칙적으로 기업은 요청을 받아들여야 한다. 휴가기간 중 고용은 보장된다. 노동의 유연성이라는 면에서 기업에는 부담으로 작용할 수 있으나 핀란드에서는 이러한 시스템이 자연스럽게 작동하고 있다. 학습휴가 동안에는 기술직업대학인 폴리테크닉(Polytechnic)이나 대학에서 정규교육을 받거나 기타 직업교육훈련과정을 이수하기도 한다. 대학·폴리테크닉은 기업과의 산학협동이 활발해 교육훈련의 현장성이 높은 것으로 평가된다. 노동시장훈련은 적극적 노동시장정책의 일부로서 성인 인구의 직업능력 향상, 인력수급의 균형 유지 및 촉진, 실업과 인력부족 해소 등에 목적이 있다. 노동시장훈련은 근로자들이 노동시장의 양적·질적·지역적 수요변화에 신속하고 효과적으로 대응하게 함으로써 노동시장의 기능을 향상시키는 역할을 한다. 근본적으로 성인들이 노동시장에 계속 머물러 있거나 되돌아올 수 있는 기회를 향상시키려는 데 목적이 있으므로, 노동시장의 요구에 부합하는 맞춤식 직업훈련의 성격을 갖는다. 주로 실업자 대상의 훈련이지만 노동시장에 진입하지 않은 사람이나 재직근로자도 훈련대상이 될 수 있다. 노동시장훈련은 현재 200개 이상의 다양한 직업 영역에 걸쳐 연간 4000∼5000여개의 훈련과정이 제공되고 있다. 노동부의 재정지원 하에 성인훈련센터나 폴리테크닉, 기타 직업교육기관 등에서 연간 6만 4000여명이 훈련에 참여하고 있다. 노동시장훈련은 숙련수요에 대한 분석을 기초로 지역 단위에서 설계되며, 훈련과정의 70%가 전적으로 혹은 부분적으로 자격제도와 연결돼 있다. 훈련 이수생들은 피드백 시스템을 통해 훈련과정을 평가하는데 3분의 2 정도가 긍정적인 평가를 하고 있다. 훈련과정 이수 3개월 뒤의 목표실업률 40%는 대체로 지켜지고 있다. ●지식기반사회 대비한 시스템 구축해야 핀란드는 평생학습 시스템이 잘 구축돼 있고 성인 인구의 평생학습 참여율도 매우 높다. 재직근로자에 대한 기업의 교육훈련투자가 활발하고 자기주도적인 성인 직업훈련도 활성화돼 있다. 노동시장훈련도 적극적 노동시장정책으로서 정책의 우선순위를 차지하고 있다. 이러한 각각의 훈련시스템은 상호 유기적으로 연계되어 효율적으로 이루어지고 있다. 인적자원강국으로서의 핀란드의 면모는 이러한 평생학습 시스템을 바탕으로 하고 있다. 21세기 지식기반사회는 사람이 경쟁력의 원천이 되는 사회이며 평생학습을 통한 인적자원의 경쟁력 확충은 국가경쟁력 제고를 위한 핵심과제이다. 우리의 여건에 맞는 평생학습 시스템의 구축을 서둘러야 할 때이다.