"porque cresce o sentimento proteccionista na terra dos gringos"

Atendendo à descrição que faço aqui acerca de Mongo, eis algumas das razões porque cresce o sentimento proteccionista na terra dos gringos. Mongo é um mundo gigante-unfriendly:

"In the past few decades, however, the economy has come to resemble something more like a stagnant pool. Entrepreneurship, as measured by the rate of new-business formation, has declined in each decade since the 1970s, and adults under 35 (a k a Millennials) are on track to be the least entrepreneurial generation on record.
.
This decline in dynamism has coincided with the rise of extraordinarily large and profitable firms that look discomfortingly like the monopolies and oligopolies of the 19th century.
...
“markets are now more concentrated and less competitive than at any point since the Gilded Age.”
...
perhaps capitalism needs churn like some aquatic plants need a current. The free market is rheophytic. Bigger is not always bad, but if we’ve learned anything in the past three decades, it’s that a little froth is always good."

Como não recordar os caviares portugueses que suspiram por empresas grandes.

Trechos retirados de "America’s Monopoly Problem"

Mambo jambo de consultor ou faz algum sentido?

Ontem, a seguir ao almoço, a caminho de uma reunião numa empresa de calçado, passo por um antigo cliente. Uma fábrica de sucesso que terá crescido a sua facturação 7 ou 8 vezes desde que começámos a trabalhar juntos.
.
A quinta-feira deles é a sexta-feira de quase todas as PME portuguesas. Sem falsa modéstia foi uma das ideias que ajudei a introduzir na empresa. Carregar os camiões para exportação à quinta-feira é uma vantagem, por exemplo, a pressão sobre toda a cadeia de fornecimento começa mais cedo e não há "concorrência". As empresas com as calças na mão para fechar as expedições à sexta só vão atacar à ... sexta-feira. Também, a sexta-feira, já é tempo de planear a próxima semana. Mas adiante, o tema não é esse. Num dos cais de embarque estava um camião com uma lona fazendo publicidade da empresa. Além das cores, do logo, havia uma frase:

"Come and win with us"

Voltei a concentrar a atenção na estrada mas a frase não me saía da cabeça...
.
Quando cheguei à empresa, disseram-me que o empresário ainda ia demorar um quarto de hora. Sentei-me à mesa da sala de reuniões, abri a minha agenda, escrevi aquela frase, acrescentei um VS e uma nova frase:

"Let us win with you"

Agora que recordo isto, julgo que é o resultado da combinação da leitura de:

"So two years ago, they launched a new brand aptly called NoBull. "Our mentality is that our shoes are not going to make you fitter, jump higher, or run faster," Wilson explains. "The only thing that will make you fitter is you working hard every day.""

Trecho retirado de "Does The Sportswear Industry Ignore Serious Athletes? These Entrepreneurs Think So", artigo citado na parte I da série "Ilustração da narrativa de Mongo"

Com a leitura de "Customer-dominant logic: foundations and implications", citado em "Um ponto de vista diferente":

"In the CDL perspective, firms should be concerned with how they can become involved in customers’ lives instead of figuring out how to involve customers in the firms’ business: “There is a need to contrast the established provider-oriented view of involving the customer in service co-creation with a more radical customer-oriented view of involving the service provider in the customer’s life”."

Que acham disto? Mambo jambo de consultor ou faz algum sentido?
.
Em vez da mensagem, "nós somos vencedores, venham também vencer connosco", a alternativa "deixem-nos ajudar a sermos vencedores convosco"

Ilustração da narrativa de Mongo

A narrativa que ao longo dos anos desenvolvo acerca de Mongo, aqui e no meu trabalho com as PME, acerca daqueles que não querem ser tratados como plancton, acerca dos gigantes que querem servir tudo a todos e, por isso, são incapazes de servir tribos especializadas, está bem ilustrada neste artigo "Does The Sportswear Industry Ignore Serious Athletes? These Entrepreneurs Think So" e neste trecho que descreve bem a coisa:

"innovative brands producing specialized products. While the behemoths go wide, trying to appeal to as many consumers as possible, the upstarts go deep, focusing on particular groups of athletes"

E ao mesmo tempo que Mongo se entranha, estes grupos particulares, estas tribos, distanciam-se cada vez mais da média que os gigantes perseguem. E ao mesmo tempo, estes gigantes, dependentes da pressão de activistas mais ou menos influentes no mercado bolsista, vão-se esvaziando de competências, vão-se tornando nas tais carcaças com um marketing espectacular a suportar um produto tornado banal para ser fácil e barato de produzir.

"In a post-athleisure world, companies like Nike and Adidas are increasingly designing clothes for casual fitness activities, like going to the gym or a studio class, rather than hardcore athletes.
...
But three years ago, he decided to strike out on his own to launch a clothing label called Tracksmith, designed with serious runners in mind. His brand uses cutting-edge technical fabrics engineered specifically for serious male and female runners,
...
Taylor's not the only executive who has defected from a sportswear Goliath to create a brand with a different point of view. Three years ago, a former Reebok executive started ISlide, which creates customized slide sandals for sports teams to wear when they're off the court or field.
...
In 2014, two other Reebok employees left the company to launch NoBull, which makes high-tech shoes for CrossFit training. Like Tracksmith, these brands are reaching out to particular niches of athletes whose needs are not being met by the mainstream brands.
...
[Moi ici: O trecho que se segue é a descrição perfeita da nossa narrativa] The new generation of sportswear founders believe that there is room for innovative brands producing specialized products. While the behemoths go wide, trying to appeal to as many consumers as possible, the upstarts go deep, focusing on particular groups of athletes. [Moi ici: Que melhor descrição de porque é que Mongo não é um mundo amigável para os gigantes]
...
Tracksmith creates many products like this, with details that only a runner would appreciate.
...
"The big sportswear brands have failed to speak to competitive runners," Taylor says. "In an effort to capture as much of the market as possible, they're not responding to individual communities of athletes."
...
responding to what they deem an unmet need among CrossFitters: shoes that perform well in activities such as weightlifting, interval training, and calisthenics (all central to CrossFit workouts), but also look fashionable. Nike and Reebok have begun to make CrossFit shoes, for example, but to the NoBull founders, they're nothing much to look at, usually with few colors and patterns. "In the CrossFit community, style is very important," Wilson says. "They take it seriously and so do we.""

Isto é o mesmo tema do postal sobre os iogurtes artesanais. Quem trabalha para nichos pode dar-se ao luxo de oferecer algo diferente da média que os gigantes são obrigados a vender, porque querem chegar ao cliente médio ao mais baixo custo.

PME e a armadilha de ser ágil

Uma mensagem adequada a muitas PME.
.
A vantagem das PME em Mongo é a sua agilidade potencial. Mongo não se compadece com organizações incapazes de mudar e lentas a reagir a um entorno cada vez mais acelerado. Por isso, Mongo é um destruidor de Torres de Babel e um local pouco aconselhável para os gigantes.
.
Infelizmente, muitas PME continuam sem uma estratégia consciente e sem alinhamento organizacional e, quando questionados sobre o tema, os empresários costumam desculpar-se sublinhando a necessidade de ser rápido, de ser ágil, de ser flexível e associam estratégia a uma camisa de forças.
.
Por isso, esta mensagem é adequada:

"Tactics can be agile.  Your ability to move quickly on new ideas or opportunities can be agile.  But behind that agility needs to be a strong strategy – with firm objectives, strong customer/target personas, and a general sense for how you’re going to market.
.
Strategies can be agile as well, there’s no value in sticking with something if the market and your results are telling you it simply isn’t working.[Moi ici: O fuçar é, quase sempre esta busca de uma nova estratégia]  But agility itself is just spinning.[Moi ici: Sintoma de spinning? Não ter definido quem são os clientes-alvo e qual é a proposta de valor!]
.
You might get lucky and happen to spin in the right direction, but I wouldn’t take those chances."

Trecho retirado de "Agility is not a replacement for strategy"

Mongo, experiências, emoções, significados e tribos

Há dias referi em "Há 46 anos... que capacidade de previsão" a previsão feita por Alvin Toffler acerca do advento da economia das experiências.
.
Em "Online conjugado com a economia das experiências" referi a evolução das caixas de um produto com um perfil perfeitamente funcional para um outro cada vez mais emocional.
.
Entretanto, li Ulwick em "“Emotional vs Functional Jobs: The Basics of Messaging”"

Agora, em "What You Buy Is Who You Are" leio:

"The industry’s pioneers were outdoor enthusiasts like Barker. They developed the specialized products they wanted to use themselves, including gear suited for the American West rather than European terrain. They taught customers how to rock climb and cross-country ski and even how to get passports for “adventure travel.”
.
Navigating the Outdoor Retailer show’s maze of display booths, you get the idea that the industry is selling stuff, and lots of it. But when the industry association boasts that U.S. consumers spend $646 billion a year on outdoor recreation, that figure includes four times as much money for travel and related expenses as for products. The gear is there to enable the experiences -- and, at least as important, to make customers feel like the people they want to be.
.
The industry is just one example of the shift from function to meaning as a source of economic value. It’s a change with enormous cultural ramifications for how we think about consumption and employment. It transforms what once was, or at least appeared to be, the value-neutral marketplace into a competition among ideas. Instead of at most signaling wealth (“conspicuous consumption,” “keeping up with the Joneses”), what we buy now carries value-laden significance.
.
When outdoor enthusiasts shell out for the latest odor-killing socks or that solar-powered phone charger, they aren’t just buying functional products. They’re buying meaning: the “freedom to pursue the adventure of life,” the “right to roam,” the “freedom to travel” and “discover your world,” among just a few of the inspirational slogans bedecking booths. Yes, the goods solve technical problems, but they also express aspirations and identity.
...
The meaning economy poses an unavoidable dilemma. [Moi ici: Atenção ao que se segue. É algo que nunca vi escrito desta forma tão transparente a não ser aqui no blogue. É por causa do que se segue que defendo há muito tempo que o futuro não é dos Golias. Os Golias procuram o que é comum, procuram uniformidade, procuram eficiência] Consumers hold diverse views and attitudes, and they derive real value from expressive consumption. But abandoning lowest-common-denominator branding feeds tribalism and cultural conflict. A diversity of workplaces lets workers find more interesting, congenial employment. Yet that diversity requires more homogeneity within a given organization or even a whole industry -- this one is “family friendly,” that one “macho,” this one embodies “Christian values,” that one expects employees to be “fun and quirky.”"

Voltando ao tema da transição do funcional para o emocional como não recordar esta experiência pessoal relatada em "Um sonho" e este trecho:

"Não podemos continuar a vender produtos, temos de trabalhar para os clientes-alvo que valorizam as experiências que podemos dar com vantagem competitiva diferenciadora."

Retirado de "Alargar os horizontes" que relata a situação que gerou o "Um sonho".

Tive pena do caso MonteCampo. Ainda tentei desafiar a empresa a fugir do século XX mas não tive engenho comunicativo para o conseguir.

E porque não somos plankton (parte VII)

E porque não somos plankton (parte VI)

"Understanding why Dollar Shave Club was cheap means understanding why its blades are cheap, and understanding that means understanding just how precarious the position of P&G specifically and incumbents generally are in the emerging Internet economy.
...
For their part, Unilever is fortunate they don’t have a shaving business to protect, because being an incumbent is going to increasingly be the worst place to be. Dollar Shave Club’s motto may be “Shave Money Shave Time,” but just how many shareholders and policy makers are prepared for the shaving of value that this acquisition suggests is coming sooner rather than later?"

Uma conclusão que espelha uma reflexão feita neste blogue há muitos anos. Mongo não é um lugar bom para os gigantes, Mongo não é um bom lugar para os incumbentes. Incumbentes rimam bem com mass-market e mal com tribos aguerridas.
.
Só em 2016, escrevemos:

• Mongo não é um mundo gigantes-friendly (parte III)
• Decididamente Mongo não é para gigantes
• Acerca do futuro dos gigantes
• Mongo é uma espécie de final Cretáceo para os gigantes
• Acerca de Mongo
• Isto é poesia para quem acredita na vantagem de Mongo para as PME

Qual o perigo para a Unilever? Recordar "Quando Golias compra um David"

Trechos retirados de "Dollar Shave Club and The Disruption of Everything"

Isto é poesia para quem acredita na vantagem de Mongo para as PME

Para quem segue este espaço de reflexão, há muito que aqui se escreve sobre Mongo. Mongo é a metáfora de um mundo económico pouco amigável para os gigantes. Ainda ontem escrevemos "Acerca de Mongo".
.
Agora, descubro na revista The Economist outro texto, "Invasion of the bottle snatchers", com uma mensagem já habitual por aqui:

"Smaller rivals are assaulting the world’s biggest brands
...
trouble lurks for the giants in consumer packaged goods (CPG), which also include firms such as General Mills, Nestlé, Procter & Gamble and Unilever. As one executive admits in a moment of candour, “We’re kind of fucked.”
...
From 2011 to 2015 large CPG companies lost nearly three percentage points of market share in America, according to a joint study by the Boston Consulting Group and IRI, a consultancy and data provider, respectively. In emerging markets local competitors are a growing headache for multinational giants.
...
For a time, size gave CPG companies a staggering advantage. Centralising decisions and consolidating manufacturing helped firms expand margins. Deep pockets meant companies could spend millions on a flashy television advertisement, then see sales rise. Firms distributed goods to a vast network of stores, paying for prominent placement on shelves.
.
Yet these advantages are not what they once were. Consolidating factories has made companies more vulnerable to the swing of a particular currency,
...
The impact of television adverts is fading, as consumers learn about products on social media and from online reviews. At the same time, barriers to entry are falling for small firms. They can outsource production and advertise online. Distribution is getting easier, too: a young brand may prove itself with online sales, then move into big stores.
...
Most troublesome, the lumbering giants are finding it hard to keep up with fast-changing consumer markets.
...
In America and Europe, the world’s biggest consumer markets, many firms have been similarly leaden-footed. If a shopper wants a basic product, he can choose from cheap, store-brand goods from the likes of Aldi and Walmart. But if a customer wants to pay more for a product, it may not be for a traditional big brand. This may be because shoppers trust little brands more than established ones. One-third of American consumers surveyed by Deloitte, a consultancy, said they would pay at least 10% more for the “craft” version of a good, a greater share than would pay extra for convenience or innovation. Interest in organic products has been a particular challenge for big manufacturers whose packages list such tasty-sounding ingredients as sodium benzoate and Yellow 6.
.
All this has provided a big opening for smaller firms. In recent years they contributed to a proliferation of new products
...
EY, a consultancy, recently surveyed CPG executives. Eight in ten doubted their company could adapt to customer demand. Kristina Rogers of EY posits that firms may need to rethink their business, not just trim costs and sign deals. “Is the billion-dollar brand,” she wonders, “still a robust model?”"

Especialistas versus generalistas

"As we’ve previously discussed in analyses of startups unbundling Procter & Gamble, unbundling the bank, or even unbundling PetSmart, emerging companies often focus on tackling specific categories or verticals, rather than attacking incumbents broadly (hence the term “unbundling”)."

Lindo! Belo!
.
Os "Salami slicers" e "A sua empresa tem cada vez menos espaço para ser um Bruce Jenner" a funcionar. A propósito da Procter & Gamble recordar a série "Porque não somos plankton (parte V)"

Trecho retirado de "Disrupting The Auto Industry: The Startups That Are Unbundling The Car"

"Experiences cannot be mass-produced"

Por isto é que Mongo é gigantes-unfriendly:

"not all experiences are created equal. the Anthropology of Experience tells us that we create our identities through performances where we tell stories about ourselves to each other. if brands want to stage powerful experiences that resonate, these experiences must allow for the creation of meaning on a personal level. Experiences cannot be mass-produced; they must allow for the expression and projection of personal identity. not unlike the difference between watching a baseball game and playing one, brand experiences that allow us to project our beliefs, values, desires, abilities, and motivations to ourselves and each other will have the most power and resonance."

Trecho retirado de "How to Win in the Experience Economy"

A economia não é um jogo de soma nula

"Although there is nothing wrong with commitment and perseverance, I, however, think sport (much less war) is often an unhelpful analogy. Good management is not like a competitive sport. And managing your company as if it is, can lead your business astray – or at least create a mighty corporate mess.
...
A more useful comparison is that of a builder of communities, with investors, suppliers, partners and, most of all, your employees.
.
At the end of the day, organizations are collections of people; this means that superior organizations need more effective ways for them to cooperate and work toward a common goal.
...
Research backs this up. Several studies have examined the characteristics of resources that, over time, lead to superior performance. The conclusion of this stream of research is that these resources are usually intangible and community based, such as relationships, trust, culture, identity, or knowledge sharing. That is because, ultimately, competitive advantage comes from people, rather than products or patents."

Recordar porque deixei de considerar o David vs Golias mas o David e Golias: "David tem tudo a ganhar em fugir de um confronto directo com Golias"
.
Recordar:

• É muito mais do que o confronto de um jogo de soma-nula
• A economia não é um jogo de soma nula
• Não faz sentido, para uma PME, procurar "ser o melhor" (parte IV)
• A economia não tem de ser um jogo de soma-nula

Trechos retirados de "Stop Comparing Management to Sports"

A verdadeira diferenciação

Quando escrevo sobre Mongo e sobre o seu impacte nos gigantes deste mundo (por exemplo aqui, aqui e aqui) penso na continua explosão de tribos cada vez cientes da sua identidade e teimosas nas suas escolhas assimétricas. Por isso, acredito pouco no sucesso de médio-prazo das marcas compradas pelos gigantes para tirarem partido dessa boleia para o crescimento orgânico.

"A company that can show it is different from other companies, in a way that is relevant to customers, gains a major competitive advantage.
...
we are also regularly reminded of the lack of true differentiation in most mainstream global companies — and of the opportunities they are thus squandering.
.
The problem starts with the way many business people think about differentiation. To them, the unit of differentiation is an individual product, service or brand. That’s what customers see, after all, relative to what the competition can provide.
.
But differentiation needs to be sustainable; it shouldn’t live or die with individual offerings. The heart of differentiation therefore is your company’s ability to develop and promote distinctive products, services, and branded experiences on a consistent basis. It’s not the output that sets you apart, but the way that everything you do supports the product and gives it context. With truly differentiated companies, much of the distinction goes beyond the product itself.
...
Your differentiation challenge is to set apart your company as a whole, instead of staking your future on one or two isolated products. This requires you to build distinctive capabilities – to learn to do a few things really well, that few, if any, other companies can do.
...
starting in the early 2000s, the advantages of scale were mostly eliminated, in large part because of globalization, deregulation, and the rise of digital technology. [Moi ici: A tríade ainda não percebeu isto e continua a crer no Deus Único da escala como sinónimo de vantagem competitiva] It became easier and easier for small enterprises to gain customer reach and awareness (along with working capital). Large companies found themselves competing against a much larger group of rivals, and a more global group, than ever before.
...
Moreover, when you differentiate by product, you risk incoherence — because different products may require different capabilities, and that can pull your company in too many directions at once.
...
The most effective companies don’t rely on distinctive products, services or brand for differentiation; instead, they focus on creating an enterprise so distinctive that it can create many products, services and brands, each more compelling than the next."

Trechos retirados de "Your Whole Company Needs to Be Distinctive, Not Just Your Product"

Mais pedras para a construção do Estranhistão

"For these reasons, big companies with the conventional advantage of being vertically integrated will be the first to go. Traditional propositions like “one-stop shop” or “supply chain optimization” will become commonplace, easily achievable by small players or new entrants in a number of industries."

Trechos retirados de "AlphaGo and the Declining Advantage of Big Companies"

"This had led smaller business to leverage more and more web-based apps to make sure they are connected and engaged when and where their buyers are making purchasing decisions.
...
Middleware is changing what's possible for small and medium businesses who'd rather spend budget on sales and marketing, over application development. The opportunity to combine affordable, best-of-breed solutions is exciting for SMBs with fewer than 500 workers that make up 99.7 percent of the 5.68 million employer firms in the U.S.
.
The benefits of middleware to small business are still in their infancy." 

Trechos retirados de "SMBs Winning with the Middleware Advantage"

Mais pedras para a construção do Estranhistão, um mundo para empresas mais pequenas, muito mais focadas e para clientes que não gostam de ser tratados como plankton. Daí isto e isto.

A paisagem vai estar menos ocupada

Nestes tempos em que se fala de Industria 4.0 (aqui e aqui):

"We’re at a critical time for the digital economy. Digital is no longer the shiny front end of the organization – it’s integrated into every aspect of today’s companies. As digital technologies continue to transform the economy, many leaders are struggling to set a digital strategy, shift organizational structures, and remove the barriers that are keeping them from maximizing the potential impact of new digital technologies."

O que pensar ao olhar para a figura?
.
Ai os dirigentes da área industrial são os que menos receiam a disrupção digital? Talvez porque a manufactura nos Estados Unidos está pelas ruas da amargura e, as mentes mais brilhantes não vão para o sector?
.
A minha mente contrarian olhou para a figura e pensou:
- É na Indústria que haverá mais retorno do que se fizer a nível de "é meter código nisso". Porquê? Por que pouca gente está a apostar nisso. Logo, a paisagem vai estar menos ocupada.

Imagem e trecho retirado de "The Industries That Are Being Disrupted the Most by Digital"

"a human touch becomes more important than ever"

Porque acredito em Mongo, a minha posição tem sempre sido de alguma cautela acerca do Big Data, há muitos anos que apelo ao olhar olhos nos olhos e a ter cuidado com os fantasmas estatísticos:

• Curiosidade do dia (Maio de 2013)
• Big Data (Junho de 2013)
• Big Data, pois (Outubro de 2013)
• Big data e PMEs (Dezembro de 2013)
• Cuidado com o Big Data (Abril de 2014)

Muita da conversa de "Achieving Hyper-Segmentation To Reach Personalization At Scale" é demasiado técnica para mim. No entanto:

"With the rising adoption of machine learning and automation, a human touch becomes more important than ever. Companies that have figured out how to utilize data to create deeper personalization are not only improving the overall customer experience by talking in a language customers appreciate; they’re also winning more deals and generating more revenue dollars.
...
[Moi ici: Depois, o artigo começa a dar uma receita para optimizar o Big Data] Prioritize Segments And Personalize Outreach
Both prioritization and personalization are key when it comes to your hyper-segmentation strategy. Rather than creating a few rigid personas or a large list based on broad firmographic characteristics, hyper-segmentation allows you to use all of your customer data to pinpoint specific marketing problems you can solve for smaller customer groups, aka a “segment of one.” [Moi ici: Oh, wait! Com segmentos de um para que preciso de Big Data? Esta é a vantagem das PME!!!]
...
With a highly segmented profile, you can speak to each prospect as an individual [Moi ici: Deve haver algo aqui que me escapa. Ignorância minha certamente, como é que gigantes conseguem lidar com segmentos de um?]"

Um outro artigo, ainda mais interessante e sobre o mesmo tema "Here’s How An Old Pair of Sneakers Saved Lego":

"As accurate as big data can be while connecting millions of data points to generate correlations, it is often compromised whenever humans act like, well, humans. As big data continues helping us cut corners and automate our lives, humans in turn will evolve simultaneously to address and pivot around the changes technology creates. Big data and small data are partners in a dance, a shared quest for balance - and information.
.
In our small data lies the greatest evidence of who we are and what we desire, even if, as Lego executives found out more than a decade ago, it’s a pair of old Adidas sneakers with worn-down heels."

Para pessoas e para PME

Aqui no blogue escreve sobre o advento do Estranhistão (ou Mongo). Ainda esta semana sublinhava uma mensagem da CEO da IBM que parecia retirada daqui:

"And value will be for individuals not for segments.
...
You will see the death of average ... and instead you will see an era of YOU"

Esta tendência suporta uma narrativa deste blogue: a vida no futuro será cada vez mais difícil para os gigantes, porque as pessoas não querem ser tratadas como plankton e acham os gigantes "Too Big To Care".
.
Talvez porque habite em Portugal, concentro-me em chamar a atenção das PME para o potencial que o Estranhistão carrega consigo. Para muitos pode parecer loucura mas para mim é tão claro que o futuro será muito mais risonho para as PME que com uma estratégia assumam a interacção, a co-criação de valor, as plataformas, os ecossistemas.
.
Esko Kilpi, talvez porque habite na Finlândia, está um pouco mais à frente e já não pensa nas PME mas na etapa seguinte, nas pessoas, nos freelancers, nos empreendedores.
.
Primeiro, a Finlândia. Enquanto a geração egoísta cá do burgo se empertigava toda por causa da reacção da Finlândia ao empréstimo a Portugal nós escrevíamos vários postais, desde 2009 até ao de Agosto de 2015 em "A lição finlandesa". A revista The Economist do passado dia 6 de Fevereiro traçava um retrato da actualidade finlandesa em "Permafrost". Não é um ambiente bonito. O velho continua a morrer e o novo ainda não mostra a sua graça, ou seja, os finlandeses ainda estão a fuçar, à procura de alternativas.
.
É neste ambiente que Esko Kilpi escreve e é influenciado. E gostei muito de "A new agenda connecting people and business":

"The definition of an employee is “somebody who works for another person or a company for pay”. It is then not about you, but about what the other people want of you, and, they don’t really want you, but what you can do, your competences.
.
The post-industrial revolution is a revolution in power. More and more opportunities are democratized. The new power is vested in knowledgeable people. Just as the industrial revolution catered to managers and firms, the post-industrial world rewards individuals and networks.
...
[Moi ici: Acho interessante, na argumentação usada para as pessoas, o facto de eu a usar há anos aqui para as PME. Diferenciação, saber que há sempre uma alternativa ainda que tenha de ser construída, formulada, trabalhada] “Onlyness is what only that one individual can bring to a situation. It includes the journey and passions of each human.”
.
I interpret “Onlyness” as a form of responsibility that grows from your own context. [Moi ici: Muito de effectuation também] Response-ability, the ability to choose what you do is one of the key work skills in the future. [Moi ici: O trecho que se segue é precioso. Quantas vezes aqui no blogue escrevemos sobre o discurso do coitadinho, o discurso do locus de controlo no exterior, o discurso da vítima...]  It is the polar opposite of the learned helplessness created during the industrial era. Learned helplessness is a belief that we are at the mercy of external forces, the managers, the employers, the markets, and not in control of what is happening to us. Martin Seligman claims that this feeling is not only learned but built in as a feature in many of our social systems, [Moi ici: Lê.se e como não recordar Constança Cunha e Sá e a sua indução de cortisol] where somebody else, by default, tells us what we should think and do. In the post-industrial world we need to make a conscious effort to clear our minds of learned helplessness. [Moi ici: O que pode passar por desistir dos media]
...
[Moi ici: Reparar a seguir no paralelismo com o que escrevo para as PME em "Estratégia e pontos fortes, o ovo ou a galinha"] What would work be like if your own life, your own context would be the starting point? Should individuals then think like firms do? Just as companies today dissolve their boundaries and erase their hierarchies, so must the individual be ready to invent and reinvent herself. Many people have already started thinking this way.
...
Knowledge of your abilities, interests, strengths and weaknesses is essential to becoming response-able in choosing and changing your career. These are the important personal criteria. However, the overwhelming majority of job seekers react to purely external criteria, the conditions created by employers or financial pressures. Huge life decisions often turn on external factors instead of one’s own directions for the future and the strongest practical skills one has. [Moi ici: Como não recordar esta lição] The legacy of the industrial age is strangely passive workers simply falling into their jobs. Too few people actively make a connection between what they are good at and what they do for a living. It is ironic that we wonder why people are not engaged.
.
No human being is exactly like another. We are all unique combinations of talents and experiences that never existed before and will never exist again in quite the same way. No one has ever done precisely what you are now doing. No one has ever faced your future. But life is not something to step back from and admire. We never get it quite right. It is never perfect. Therefore it should always be under construction."

Vantagem é uma classificação subjectiva

Ontem, ocorreu-me uma relação que julgo que merece ser sublinhada outra vez. Por um lado, a mensagem do livro "David & Goliath" de Malcolm Gladwell.
.
Mensagem que referi em "Acerca das desvantagens" e a que acrescento:

"what is learned out of necessity is inevitably more powerful than the learning that comes easily."

E:

"These are David's opportunities: the occasions in which difficulties, paradoxically, turn out to be desirable. The lesson of the trickster tales is the third desired difficulty: the unexpected freedom that comes from having nothing to lose. The trickster [Moi ici: Interessante o uso desta palavra. Recordar como usamos a palavra batota e batoteiro] gets to break the rules." 

Como se refere no postal acima mencionado:

"What do we mean when we call something a disadvantage? Conventional wisdom holds that a disadvantage is something that ought to be avoided - that it is in a setback or a difficulty that leaves you worse off than you would be otherwise. But that is not always the case." 

Aquilo que para uns é visto como uma desvantagem, pode ser trabalhado por outros como uma vantagem. Agora, recordo estes postais "Do concreto para o abstracto e não o contrário" e ""analisamos os meios que temos e imaginamos futuros possíveis" (parte II)" e mesmo o recente ""analogia para muitas PME"".
.
Uma PME olha para o que tem, e o que tem pode ser visto e classificado por outros como desvantagem, mas a PME sabe que algo daquilo que tem tem de ser uma vantagem, tem de ser encarado como uma vantagem, tem de ser transformado numa vantagem. Vantagem ou desvantagem é uma classificação subjectiva feita à posteriori.

Curiosidade do dia

Acerca de Davos e de algum provincianismo que detecto neste título "Davos, a elite mundial está aqui e Portugal marca presença" [Falha certamente deste anónimo da província].
.
Com um sorriso malandro recordo os pintores Impressionistas:

"we strive for the best and attach great importance to getting into the finest institutions we can. But rarely do we stop and consider - as the Impressionists did - whether the most prestigious of institutions is always in our best interest."

Até que ponto Davos não é uma espécie de Salon dos nossos tempos?
.
Como nos recorda Malcolm Gladwell em "David & Goliath":

"David’s opportunities: the occasions in which difficulties, paradoxically, turn out to be desirable. The lesson of the trickster tales is the third desirable difficulty: the unexpected freedom that comes from having nothing to lose. The trickster gets to break the rules.[Moi ici: Será que Davos ouve batoteiros? Será que os verdadeiros batoteiros querem ir a Davos?]
...
You see the giant and the shepherd in the Valley of Elah and your eye is drawn to the man with the sword and shield and the glittering armor. [Moi ici: Com todo o respeito, suspeito que Davos está cheio de Golias, de adoradores de Golias e de seguidores de Golias. Putos vestidos de pastor e sem estirpe não entram] But so much of what is beautiful and valuable in the world comes from the shepherd, who has more strength and purpose than we ever imagine." 

Mongo não é fácil para os gigantes

Um excelente texto, "How to Grow Without Losing What Makes You Great". Um texto que vem reforçar a minha teoria de que em Mongo a vida é muito difícil para os gigantes. Recordar o padrão Mongo.
.
Mongo é a terra das tribos, dos apaixonados por causas e por estilos de vida. Os gigantes, valorizam eficiência, normalização, e abominam quer a variabilidade, quer a variedade.

""Companies that scale well have sacred constraints, things they can never screw up,"
...
In their book, Sutton and Rao argue that scaling isn't just about getting bigger. It is also about getting better. It's about spreading exceptional ideas, systems, or business models, and then persuading--ideally inspiring--others to make them their own. "The question we started with is, How do you spread something good from the few to the many, or from those with to those without?" says Sutton. "It starts with, You've got something good."
...
"Companies grow well and scale badly when they focus on running up the numbers but not the quality," says Sutton. "They get bigger and start to look like just any organization. And there goes the value."
...
In 2007, Howard Schultz lamented the "watering down of the Starbucks experience" as the business ballooned to 13,000 stores. "They made all these decisions about efficiency and standardization and cost that seemed sensible at the time," says Sutton. "They didn't step back to see how the buildup was damaging the brand."
...
To protect their brands, Sutton advises companies to spread not just a "footprint"--their geographic and market presence--but also a "mindset"--the deeply ingrained beliefs and behaviors of their people."

BTW, e esta frase para os políticos da oposição e da situação:

""If you are getting big, before you add a new meeting, figure out which meeting you can kill. Before you put in a new rule, see which rule you can kill."

"humans and machines will work together"

Um dos livros que recomendaria hoje a qualquer pessoa é o "David and Goliath: Underdogs, Misfits, and the Art of Battling Giants" de Malcolm Gladwell.
.
Quase dois anos depois da sua leitura e julgo-o cada vez mais um convite ao optimismo e à obliquidade, ao pensar de forma alternativa e ao não tentar resolver desafios estratégicos com força bruta.
.
Há uma corrente de estudo do empreendedorismo chamada effectuation, desenvolvida por Saras Sarasvathy, que se baseia em 5 princípios. O primeiro traduzo-o como "Mais vale começar com o pássaro que se tem à mão do que com dois a voar". Um empreendedor deve começar, deve recomeçar com o que tem à mão.
.
Agora, juntemos as duas coisas: o primeiro princípio e o optimismo de pensar que o que temos tem de servir para alguma coisa, o que temos tem de ser um ponto forte, tem de ser uma vantagem competitiva num certo contexto.
.
Recordo o que escrevi recentemente sobre as agências de viagem, outra vítima da internet "Sugestão para as agências de viagem subirem na escala de valor".
.
Recordo algo que li de Kasparov sobre a vantagem do jogador mediano com o auxílio de um computador, contra um super-jogador sozinho, ou contra um super-computador sozinho, "O truque é a interacção, a co-criação. Os robots não têm hipótese!".
.
Acho que esta introdução serve para este artigo "In a Self-Serve World, Start-Ups Find Value in Human Helpers":

"“A lot of companies pushed hard on the idea that technology will solve every problem, and that we shouldn’t use humans,” said Paul English, the co-founder of a new online company called Lola Travel. “We think humans add value, so we’re trying to design technology to facilitate the human-to-human connection.”
...
Mr. English isn’t allergic to tech. He co-founded and served as the chief technology officer of Kayak, the booking site acquired by Priceline in 2012 for nearly $2 billion. But Mr. English often manned the customer service phone line at Kayak, and would get calls from people who had grown frustrated with online booking.
.
“I tried to create the best travel website on the market,” he said. “But as good as we thought our tech was, there were many times where I thought I did a better job for people on the phone than our site could do.”
.
You’ve most likely experienced the headaches Mr. English is talking about. Think back to the last time you booked anything beyond a routine trip online. There’s a good chance you spent a lot more time and energy than you would have with a human.
...
“At one time the Internet scared travel agents because our customers had access to all of this information and they didn’t need us,” said Joe McClure, the president of Montrose Travel, a large travel agency based in Southern California. That fear was justified: There are now about half the number of travel agents working in the United States as there were in 2000, and the number is expected to continue declining, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.[Moi ici: Li há dias uma citação qualquer que dizia uma grande verdade]

Still, Mr. McClure said his business has lately been thriving. “What’s happened is information overload,” he said. “There is so much information out there that people research themselves into a circle and they get confused. And then they call one of my agents and say, ‘Would you just help me out?’ ”
...
The Internet’s great magic is what a business school professor would call “disintermediation.” By surfacing all of the world’s information and letting each of us act on it, computers help us bypass the expensive human brokers and service people who once sat in between consumers and suppliers.
...
An economist would praise the great disintermediation for its efficiency. As a customer, you may have a different reaction: Look at all the work you’re now being asked to do. Was it really wise to get rid of all those human helpers?
.
In many cases, yes, but there remain vast realms of commerce in which guidance from a human expert works much better than a machine.
...
[Moi ici: E terminamos com a referência a Kasparov] The rise of computers is often portrayed as a great threat to all of our jobs. But these services sketch out a more optimistic scenario: That humans and machines will work together, and we, as customers, will be allowed, once more, to lazily beg for help."

O padrão Mongo

Para mim, faz tudo parte de um mesmo padrão:

• A decisão da P&G de emagrecer (aqui e aqui)
• A decisão da fusão da Anheuser-Busch InBev's com a SABMiller (aqui)
• Esta notícia de ontem Dow/Du Pont: eat yourself thin
• As notícias cada vez mais frequentes de Stock Buybacks (quando as empresas não encontram melhor aplicação para o seu dinheiro do que comprar as próprias acções)

Um padrão chamado: o caminho para Mongo:

• Mongo não é um mundo gigantes-friendly!
• E porque não somos plankton (parte VI)

"XVIII 187. There are three types of large corporations: those about to go bankrupt, those that are bankrupt and hide it, those that are bankrupt and don’t know it."

• Mongo e os Golias
• Porque não somos plankton... (parte V)
• O mundo de Golias a esboroar-se

Um padrão referido por Esko Kilpi em "The Future of Firms. Is There an App for That?":

"The existence of high transaction costs outside firms led to the emergence of the firm as we know it, and management as we still have it. A large part of corporate economic activity today is still designed to accomplish what high market transaction costs prevented earlier. But the world has changed.
.
What really matters now is the reverse side of the Coasean argumentation. If the (transaction) costs of exchanging value in the society at large go down drastically as is happening today, the form and logic of economic entities necessarily need to change!
...
For most of the developed world, firms, as much as markets, make up the dominant economic pattern. The Internet is nothing less than an extinction-level event for the traditional firm.  ... Very small firms can do things that in the past required very large organizations."

O título é uma espécie de oxímoro, em Mongo não há um padrão. Delícias da língua portuguesa e do significado que se dá a padrão.