""Why is a strong brand important?" one might say that it creates customer preference, lifts sales, or even makes the sales force's job easier. But the most important answer to this question is that a brand commands a higher price. And the stronger the brand, the higher the price.
...
Now consider the seemingly naive question, "What's the value of a higher price?" The answer is higher profits for the company that markets the brand.
Profit is the reason companies are in business - not sales, not revenues, not growth, but profit. And one thing trumps all others in the business mix when it comes to profitability: the pricing integrity of the brand.
...
Nothing can improve a company's bottom line better than protecting and enhancing its ability to command a higher price. This means that revenues are not the key metric of your firm's success; profits are. Profit is driven mostly by price. Price is driven mostly by brand perception. This makes brand building an activity central to the success of every professional firm.
...
Sadly, growth for the sake of growth has become enshrined as the goal of business. Wall Street wants its growth projections, and any company that is not consistently increasing market share is seen as an investment risk."
Isto não é unânime, alguns empresários torcem o nariz a esta argumentação.
"Principle 1. Value is created in production and innovation and realized in exchange.
...
Principle 2. Value is appropriated through competitive bargaining and pure bargaining.
...
Principle 3. Firms allow stakeholders to create value by offering a governance form to resolve the pure bargaining over the surplus created by team production and team innovation.
...
The fundamental insight to emerge from juxtaposing these analyses [Moi ici: De Schumpeter and Knight] is that (Ricardian) rent is a cross-sectional/equilibrium concept that explains payments above opportunity costs that derive from heterogeneity of individual resources, while (Schumpeterian) profit is a dynamic/disequilibrium concept that explains payments above opportunity costs that derive from heterogeneity of resource bundles.
...
In Schumpeter's (1934) analysis, profit is possible when the entrepreneur moves the economy away from a prevailing competitive equilibrium by combining resources in a new way. More specifically, entrepreneurship is the act of bringing new combinations to market alternatively referred to as "innovation." If (and only if) the new way of combining resources creates more value than before, this will result in an economic profit: the entrepreneur only needs to pay resource suppliers their opportunity costs and appropriates the residual.
...
There are three important things to note about entrepreneurial profit. First, as our simple example demonstrates, it does not require heterogeneous resources. The reason for the entrepreneurial profit is not that there is something special about any of the resources that are used, but that there is something special about the bundle of resources. Second, note that Schumpeter's analysis only holds under conditions of uncertainty (Knight, 1921). Without uncertainty, why would the entrepreneur be able to appropriate the value created by the bundle of resources that she assembles? The assumption is that the entrepreneur, in organizing resources in a new way, only needs to pay resource suppliers their opportunity costs. However, why would the residual between these opportunity costs and the prices paid for the new product not be subject to ex-ante bargaining between the entrepreneur and resource suppliers? In Knight's view, if the residual was generally anticipated, this is exactly what would happen: the economy would adjust its relative prices and the profit opportunity would disappear. Knight's fundamental insight was that entrepreneurial profit can only result when it is not generally anticipated. This insight also leads into the third point about entrepreneurial profit, which is that it is likely to be a temporary phenomenon. This is the case because once the entrepreneur's innovation proves successful, the previous uncertainty is eliminated. In that sense, we can understand successful innovation as revealing new productive knowledge. Unless there are "isolating mechanisms" that prevent the dissemination of this new productive knowledge, the economic system will adapt: imitation will eliminate the entrepreneurial profit. I
...
Principle 4. Profit is a disequilibrium phenomenon resulting from heterogeneity of resource bundles.
Principle 5. Rent is an equilibrium phenomenon resulting from heterogeneity of individual resources.
...
Principle 6. Economic profit is the result of resource bundles characterized by (1) novelty, (2) unique complementarities, and/or (3) scale advantages.
...
Principle 7. Stakeholder payments are the sum of (1) opportunity costs, (2) rent payments, and (3) the outcome of pure bargaining over economic profit."
Como se cria o desquilibrio? Com a inovação. O que é preciso para criar inovação?
Como se deslinda a incerteza? Só pondo a pele em jogo. Desconfiar de teóricos que sabem onde os outros devem pôr o seu dinheiro.
Acerca da incerteza, li há dias uma frase que era mais ou menos: Depressão é olhar para trás. A ansiedade é olhar para a frente. E depois: "Anxiety is the price you pay for your freedom."
"In my research I am surprised time and again by the sheer number of companies that generate losses. For some, that situation persists for years. Why do the banks remain quiet? One reason is that they are effectively held hostage by their own loans. If they call in a loan, the company could go bankrupt and in the worst case the loan would be a total loss for the bank.
The reasons behind these ongoing losses are numerous, but rarely are they due to a lack of effort on the part of the entrepreneur. Some struggle their entire lives and never earn a satisfactory margin. Profit not only has a financial side for entrepreneurs. It also provides personal validation, proof of their abilities, and fun at work. Those aspects contribute to profit as an important motivator.
In this context, how the entrepreneurs think and how they motivate themselves play an important role. Do they understand that profit is more important than revenue? Do they want to appear “big” to the outside world and become the center of attention, or keep to themselves and enjoy their profit? A favorite saying of a friend of mine gets straight to the point: “Revenue makes you proud, but profit makes you rich.”
...
an analysis of the world’s current profit situation revealed that a considerable portion of companies earn only modest profits. Many do not generate an economic profit, which means that they do not recover their costs of capital.
...
Why does one company go under while an apparently similar firm not only survives, but prospers?
...
Wrong Goals
...
revenue, volume, and market share goals serve as proxies for long-term profit orientation, but are not sufficient as stand-alone goals. So practically speaking, how do companies deal with goal setting? In my experience, only a few entrepreneurs and managers truly put the highest priority on profit. That certainly applies to their real behavior, though not necessarily to their official declarations during investor conferences or shareholder meetings. Key metrics such as margin, returns, or the absolute level of profit often get short shrift."
Trechos retirados de “No Company Ever Went Broke Turning a Profit” de Hermann Simon.
Comentar vídeos destes numa rede social é meio caminho andado para equívocos e extremar de posições. Meia dúzia de caracteres de cada vez não chegam. Assim, aqui vai via blog uma tentativa de expressar a minha opinião.
1º O lucro é vital para as empresas. As empresas têm de ter lucro, ponto!!!
Não é só no Portugal socialista que esta ideia tem de ser defendida e proclamada. Até na Alemanha é preciso fazê-lo. Daí que está agora a fazer um ano que um dos meus heróis, Hermann Simon, publicou um livro com o título "Am Gewinn ist noch keine Firma kaputtgegangen". Já li algures Hermann Simon, numa entrevista, referir que o título tem a ver com um ditado alemão. Algo como, nunca ninguém ficou pobre por ganhar dinheiro.
Quantas vezes, desde 30 de Julho de 2006, já escrevi aqui no blogue aquela expressão?
"Volume is Vanity
Profit is Sanity"
Por exemplo, em Portugal os economistas estão sempre a falar na necessidade imperiosa das empresas crescerem, para serem mais rentáveis, para serem mais produtivas. Hermann Simon diz-nos:
"In Germany people believe that the net profit margin, after all costs and all taxes, is 23%. The real margin over many years is 3.4%. Similar in the US. The believe is 32% net profit margin, the reality is 4.9%. The record holders are the Italians. They think that the margin is 38%, the reality is 5%. There are two messages: Real net margins are 5% or less, typically. Furthermore, people overestimate profit margins by 600%. That’s unbelievable."
E:
"large corporations are not more profitable. The median of the net margin of the Fortune Global 500 is 4.49%. This tells us that half of these giants earn less than 4.5%. Most likely they don’t make an economic profit, meaning that they don’t recover their cost of capital. That’s the case for half of the Fortune Global 500. The public perception is misguided by a few profit stars.
...
profit always depends on the combination of three profit drivers and there are only those three: price, volume and cost."
Sem lucro as empresas são como Portugal, um país sem autonomia, sempre a passear-se pelos areópagos internacionais como pedinte profissional.
2º Para que servem os lucros?
A maior parte das pessoas pensa que o lucro é importante para remunerar os accionistas. Sim, o lucro serve para remunerar o risco de quem empreende. No entanto, as empresas que se ficam por isso não têm futuro.
Final dos anos 80(?) estava eu em Valongo, numa sala à espera de uma entrevista de emprego na UTA e lia um dos livros de Peter Drucker. Não recordo o título, tenho e li tudo o que encontrei dele, mas nesse livro Drucker apresentou-me a mim, engenheiro com formação básica de gestão, mais um austríaco que eu não conhecia: Joseph Schumpeter.
Com Schumpeter aprendi que o lucro é fundamental para pagar os custos do futuro! Ainda esta semana sorri e recordei esta ideia. A trabalhar numa empresa, estivemos a sistematizar a metodologia de qualificação inicial de subcontratados. A empresa referia-se a eles como fábricas, contudo também recorrem a outros subcontratados que não podem ser apelidados de "fábricas". Então, apostarm no termo "unidade de produção". Gente mais nova não tem essa memória, mas eu tinha mais de 10 anos quando foi o 25 de Abril de 1974, na minha cabeça apareceu logo a expressão "unidade colectiva de produção". Tinham um pecado original, focavam-se na gratificação imediata e nunca acumulavam capital para pagar os custos do futuro. Recordar que este Schumpeter é o mesmo que nos apresentou a destruição criativa. Quem não quer ser destruído tem de investir no seu futuro.
3º Como se obtém o lucro?
Associada a esta pergunta está uma outra: A parte do lucro que se distribui, por quem sem se distribui? Pelos accionistas ou pelos stakeholders (partes interessadas)?
E aqui, no vídeo, refere-se a ideia do Milton Friedman sobre a importância do lucro e da sua maximização. Esta ideia de Milton Friedman expressa em “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits” está ultrapassada. Ao longo dos anos que escrevo sobre isso, mas sem criticar Friedman. Há muitos anos que uso esta imagem aqui no blogue:
A economia é muito diferente da física ou da química. Acho que Friedman escrevia para um tempo que já passou. Recordo que a Economia não é como a Física newtoniana ou galilaica.
Começo o meu livro:
Com uma explicação sobre a grande revolução ocorrida no mundo ocidental algures na década de 70 do século passado. Por essa altura, a oferta passou a ser maior que a procura. E quando isso aconteceu... foi mesmo uma revolução.
Quando a procura é maior do que a oferta quem manda é quem produz. Quem produz pode concentrar-se em ser eficiente porque tudo o que "vomitar" tem saída garantida.
Quando a procura é menor do que a oferta quem manda é quem compra. Então, não basta produzir! Há que orquestrar um ecossistema de parcerias, de partes interessadas, para que todos ganhem:
"Quanto mais crescer o interesse e vantagem em trabalhar a nível de ecossistema, em que os ecossistemas que ganham são os que maximizam o valor a ser criado pelo conjunto dos actores, e não por um em particular."
Acredito que Friedman hoje pensaria de forma diferente. Hoje, o lucro tem de ser visto como um objectivo obliquo. É tão absurdo, aos meus olhos, eleger o lucro como um objectivo directo como ouvir um político eleger como objectivo directo a redução do desemprego. Dá sempre asneira.
Como objectivos oblíquos, o lucro ou a redução do desemprego são consequências de outras coisas. O lucro é uma consequência de clientes que se ganham, clientes satisfeitos e de clientes que continuam a trabalhar connosco.
Ganhar, satisfazer e desenvolver a relação com os clientes é fruto de se trabalhar bem a montante: E quem trabalha?
"Cada vez mais, o sucesso de uma empresa exige que se tenha em consideração as necessidades e expectativas de outras partes interessadas que podem contribuir para a sustentabilidade do desempenho. É claro que os clientes são uma parte interessada, afinal são eles que nos dão o dinheiro com que pagamos as contas, preparamos o futuro e suportamos a impostagem. No entanto, podemos identificar outras partes interessadas:"
O conceito de ecossistema é-me muito caro, uso-o na consultoria desde 2004, não porque li, mas porque emergiu no meu trabalho.
"When investors of the direct-to-consumer shoe brand Birdies pressured the start-up to burn through the $10 million it raised by buying more online ads and doubling the employee headcount, founders Bianca Gates and Marisa Sharkey resisted. . “Our investors [were] like, ‘Spend the money!’ and intuitively, we were like, ‘This is silly,’” Gates told BoF. “Why grow faster if it costs us more to acquire customers than to sell the product?” . But the sentiment among investors seems to be shifting, Gates said. “It was like a one-eighty. Now more than ever, there’s pressure to show profitability and product-market fit.” ... Few startups in the product category have been able to secure lucrative exits for their investors. Many are stuck on a cycle of aggressive forced growth, followed by fundraising higher and higher rounds to facilitate that growth — all without regard to profit. ... “You have this double whammy of increased customer acquisition costs and more competition, and this combination can be deadly,” ... As a result, venture capitalists — especially those investing in later stages — are shifting their strategy to invest more cautiously, favouring profit over revenue and organic marketing over Instagram ads, industry sources say. ... As valuations drop, the metrics that determine these figures are also shifting. Revenue used to be the prime indication of valuation for brands, said Frederic Court, founder of Felix Capital. “But eventually, these businesses will have valuations driven by profitability… it’s about generating a healthy profit margin.” . Eventually, these businesses will have valuations driven by profitability. . Investors today are less focused on growth metrics and topline numbers and more focused on the bottom line"
Quanto menos vigorar o paradigma do século XX, que pressupunha que o poder estava nas mãos dos produtores.
Quanto mais crescer o interesse e vantagem em trabalhar a nível de ecossistema, em que os ecossistemas que ganham são os que maximizam o valor a ser criado pelo conjunto dos actores, e não por um em particular.
"In February 2016, Emmanuel Faber, chief executive of Danone, put a radical proposal to the French food multinational’s senior US executives at a meeting in White Plains, New York. . Against the grain of agricultural production in the US, where the vast majority is genetically modified, Mr Faber proposed shifting about half Danone’s products — representing some $1bn of yoghurt sales — to non-GMO ingredients. He argued that this was an important change that would improve soil health and biodiversity. ... The pledge triggered vocal protests from some US farm and dairy groups. It did not harm sales. Despite a price rise, the children’s yoghurt brand Danimals, now certified as containing only non-GMO ingredients, has increased its US market share from 30 to 40 per cent."
O artigo refere o clássico artigo de Friedman, “The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits” e a recente alteração de posição do grupo Business Toundtable:
"“While each of our individual companies serves its own corporate purpose, we share a fundamental commitment to all of our stakeholders” — customers, employees, suppliers, communities and — last in the list — shareholders."
Acho que Friedman escrevia para um tempo que já passou. Recordo que a Economia não é como a Física newtoniana ou galilaica.
No ano em que Milton Friedman publicou o artigo, os produtores ainda detinham um poder tremendo. Os produtores podiam, então, comportar-se como o governo português, ainda hoje, a gerir o serviço nacional de saúde ou a educação, com utentes-reféns.
Hoje, com a concorrência, com o poder nas mãos de quem compra, e com a explosão de grupos "intolerantes" ou com paixões assimétricas, impõe-se o uso da obliquidade.
"The article begins by fatally limiting the possible choices into “two camps”: . “The first believes the company’s goal is to maximize shareholder value. Countries that operate under common law, including the United States and the United Kingdom, lean in this direction. . “The second advocates that the company balance the interests of all stakeholders. Countries that operate under civil law, including France, Germany, and Japan, tend to be in this camp.” . The professors miss the third option enunciated by Peter Drucker as long ago as 1954: that the purpose of a firm is to create a customer by continuously delivering value to customers, as shown by the experience of firms like Apple, Google and Amazon. ... Bezos could hardly be clearer. At Amazon, shareholder value is the result, not the operational goal. [Moi ici: Recordar a obliquity e o nossa velha diferença entre objectivos e consequências] Amazon’s operational goal is market leadership."
Comecei de pé atrás com a leitura de "Too Much Profit Can Doom Your Company" ainda para mais fazendo de herói a Amazon.
.
Contudo, depois percebi a mensagem:
"an excessive focus on profits can compete away investments that could lead to creating the next big thing."
Em Dezembro de 2013 no Twitter, meti-me numa conversa e escrevi:
"O objectivo das empresas é satisfazer clientes, como consequência podem, ter lucro"
Outro colega meteu-se na conversa e respondeu-me:
"O objectivo das empresas é ter lucro, como estratégia devem satisfazer os clientes."
No que foi apoiado pelos intervenientes na conversa inicial.
.
Volta e meia recordo estes diferentes posicionamentos.
.
Julgo que a segunda frase podia ter sido proferida pelo Kevin O'Leary:
Por que recordei aquela conversa de 2013?
.
Por causa da leitura de "The Best Management Article Of 2014".
.
BTW, em Mongo, com quem é que os clientes preferirão trabalhar, com os da primeira frase, ou com os da segunda frase?
Isto é muito bom!!!
.
Dedicado à tríade e ao seu dedo no gatilho do baixar-preço:
"Some managers tend to think that managing for profit consists of tight control of expenditure, and maximizing sales and profit margins. These measures are the weaponry available to improve current, short-term results. They are of little relevance, however, to strategy. . The impact of competitive strategy on profitability is widely underestimated. There is only limited scope for improving this year’s results for an offering that has a poor competitive position. A poor competitive position inevitably means low operating margins. We can and should tighten our cost controls, redouble our sales effort, and generally strive to produce the best possible short-term results. Yet all this fire-fighting, necessary as it is, can at best bring about marginal improvements. It cannot make an uncompetitive offering competitive. We could and should have attended to its competitive position some years ago, when we made either bad strategic decisions or none. . Much more can be done for the profitability of our offering at the time of its design, in the framing of the competitive strategy. A competitive strategy positions an offering in a unique triangular relationship with customers and competitors. The measure of its attraction is its financial value. In this sense, the job of a competitive strategy is to target profitable customers. This positioning of the offering will affect profits much more powerfully than any short-term measures that can be taken after the triangular relationship has become a commitment."
Trecho retirado de "Creating Value Successful business strategies" de Shiv S. Mathur e Alfred Kenyon.
"There is a link between organizations that instill a sense of purpose and their long-term success, says a new survey just released by Deloitte. Yet, businesses are still not doing enough to create this sense of purpose and make a positive impact on all stakeholders.
...
Companies that are singularly focused on exceeding customer expectations tend to fall into this category. “So there is an empirical financial benefit to organizations that instill a purpose-driven culture,”
... businesses have a bigger issue than just the standard challenges of profit and loss. Most suffer from a lack of a clear purpose in the minds of customers. Punit began devoting himself and his firm to understanding the issue as a driver of financial outcomes
...
Building a purpose focused culture is also not just about supporting social responsibility activities. “It first comes from treating customers well. It’s not about transactions, but about building a relationship that exceeds expectation,”"
Qual é o propósito da sua empresa?
.
Peter Drucker já respondeu a essa pergunta:
"There is only one valid definition of a business purpose: to create a customer."
Max Planck dizia que a ciência avança funeral atrás de funeral, ou seja, à medida que os defensores das velhas ideias morrem e deixam as suas cátedras e outros locais de influência.
.
Nassim Taleb em "Antifragile" chama a atenção para onde estão as fronteiras do conhecimento:
"The error of naive rationalism leads to overestimating the role and necessity of the second type, academic knowledge, in human affairs—and degrading the uncodifiable, more complex, intuitive, or experience-based type.
...
the Baconian linear model, after the philosopher of science Francis Bacon; I am adapting its representation by the scientist Terence Kealey (who, crucially, as a biochemist, is a practicing scientist, not a historian of science) as follows:
.
Academia → Applied Science and Technology → Practice
.
While this model may be valid in some very narrow (but highly advertised instances), such as building the atomic bomb, the exact reverse seems to be true in most of the domains I’ve examined.
...
So we are blind to the possibility of the alternative process, or the role of such a process, a loop: Random Tinkering (antifragile) → Heuristics (technology) → Practice and Apprenticeship → Random Tinkering (antifragile) → Heuristics (technology) → Practice and Apprenticeship …
.
In parallel to the above loop, Practice → Academic Theories → Academic Theories → Academic Theories → Academic Theories …
(with of course some exceptions, some accidental leaks, though these are indeed rare and overhyped and grossly generalized)."
Primeiro vêm a prática, só depois as teorias académicas.
.
Por isso, tantas vezes me interroguei aqui sobre o porquê da cegueira da tríade (não confundir com a troika)
.
O mundo muda, quem está no terreno, os pragmáticos, os práticos, têm de arranjar novas formas de lidar com a nova realidade com que deparam. Muitas tentativas iniciais falham até que uma ou mais novas abordagens resultam e começam a generalizar-se entre a comunidade de práticos. Entretanto, os teóricos continuam a pensar e a enformar novas gerações a pensarem sobre como lidar com o mundo antigo que já desapareceu.
.
Assim, não é de admirar esta previsão:
"So here’s my wager on how long it will take for what even Jack Welch sees as ‘the world’s dumbest idea’, i.e. maximizing shareholder value, to become the minority view:
.
“Major thought leaders: end 2014.
.
All major businesses and business schools: 2020.”"
Depois, esta sequência é muito rica:
"In fact, shareholder value is part of a web of obsolete management ideas that no longer fit the 21st Century. As I noted in an article last week, other once-sacred and self-evident truths are also falling by the wayside:
The search for the holy grail of strategy—sustainable competitive advantage—is recognized by Professor Rita McGrath of Columbia Business School as futile: competitive advantage is at best temporary. (Moi ici: Claro que muitos dirão que isto é perigosa propaganda neoliberal)
The “essence of strategy” seen as “coping with competition”, as argued by legendary guru Professor Michael Porter, is now obsolete: the essence of strategy is about adding value to customers.
It transpires that the raison d’être of a firm is not only, as Nobel Prize winner Ronald Coase argued, because it can reduce transaction costs, but also because it can add value for customers.
The uni-directional value chain—the very core of 20th Century management thinking (Moi ici: Aqui a tríade está tão atrasada... ainda pensa na produção sem pensar na relação com os clientes, sem pensar no ecossistema da procura) developed by Professor Porter—is being replaced by the concept of multi-directional networks, in which interactions with customers play a key role.
The extraordinarily generous compensation afforded to senior executives is recognized in an HBR article by Professor Mihir Desai, the Mizuho Financial Group Professor of Finance at Harvard Business School to be a giant “financial incentives bubble”, accompanied by an unjustified sense of entitlement.
The short-term gains of large-scale off-shoring of manufacturing are recognized to have caused massive loss of competitive capacity: new heuristics for outsourcing have emerged.
Supposed distinctions between leaders and managers, as argued by leadership guru Professor John Kotter, are dissolving: managers are leaders and leaders must be able and willing to get their hands dirty and manage.
As a result of a failure of many firms to recognize and respond to these changes, a study by Harvard Business School has concluded that the US has lost much of its capacity to compete.
Whereas the traditional management pursued an ethos of efficiency and control, a new paradigm is being pursued by many firms that thrives on the ethos of imagination, exploration, experiment, discovery, collaboration and self-organization. (Moi ici: Mongo, Mongo, Mongo!!! Benvindos ao Estranhistão!!! Benvindos à terra da diversidade e das tribos!!! Outra falha clamorosa da tríade)
Whereas traditional management often treated both employees and customers as inanimate “things” to be manipulated, the new management paradigm respects employees and customers as independent, thinking, feeling human beings. (Moi ici: O poder da interacção, da co-produção, do co-design. da co-criação, ...)
The new management embraces the increased complexity inherent in the shift as an opportunity to be exploited, rather than a problem to be avoided." (Moi ici: Abraçar a mudança)
"The problem with industrial capitalism today is not the profit motive; the problem is how the profit motive is usually framed. There is a persistent myth in the contemporary business world that the ultimate purpose of a business is to maximize profit for the company’s investors. However, the maximization of profit is not a purpose; instead, it is an outcome. We argue that the best way to maximize profits over the long term is to not make them the primary goal.
.
Profits are like happiness in that they are a byproduct of other things. (Moi ici: Regressar a Janeiro de 2009 com "o lucro é uma consequência, nunca se trabalha directamente para o lucro")
.
Purpose is not about corporate strategy or tactics; these are both means to ends. Purpose is also not about social responsibility, which is simply a tool for managing reputation. Purpose is not even about corporate mission, which might be nothing more than an aspiration to dominate a particular marketplace. Rather, purpose is a spiritual and moral call to action; it is what a person or company stands for."
"Portugal sempre teve um problema de consciência com os lucros: como se fosse mal tê-los. Quando, há dias, a Caixa Geral de Depósitos apresentou os piores lucros dos últimos anos, revelou-os quase mostrando alívio. Como a Galp, que os viu cair para metade. A EDP, a campeã dos resultados líquidos (mais de mil milhões), repetiu ontem à exaustão que em Portugal os lucros não cresceram, só no estrangeiro."
...
"Mas o definhamento do lucro em Portugal não é um acto de justiça social, é uma condenação do futuro. A saída para outros países está a ser a oportunidade, a aventura, mas também o escape. Haja lucro, concorrência, investimento, e haverá economia e emprego. Daqui toda a gente sai viva. O pior é quem fica."
.
Veio-me à memória o pensador que melhor me explicou o conceito e a importância do lucro: Joseph Scumpeter.
.
O lucro e o custo do futuro. Se não há lucro como ter dinheiro para o custo do futuro? Se não há lucro onde arranjar dinheiro para investir num futuro melhor?
.
Nas palavras do homem que mudou a minha vida e me deu a conhecer Schumpeter:
.
"As soon, however, as one shifts from the axiom of an unchanging, self-contained, closed economy to Schumpeter's dynamic, growing, moving, changing economy, what is called profit is on longer immoral. It becomes a moral imperative. Indeed, the question then is no longer the question that agitated the classicists and still agitated Keynes: How can the economy be structured to minimize the bribe of the functionless surplus called profit that has to be handed over to the capitalist to keep the economy going? . The question in Schumpeter's economics is always, Is there sufficient profit?Is there adequate capital formation to provide for the costs of the future, the costs of staying in business, the costs of "creative destruction"? This alone makes Schumpeter's economic model the only one that can serve as the starting point for the economic policies we need. Clearly the Keynesian - or classicist - treatment of innovation as being "outside," and in fact peripheral to, the economy and with minimum impact on it, can no longer be maintained (if it ever could have been). The basic question of economic theory and economic policy, especially in highly developed countries, is clearly: How can capital formation and productivity be maintained so that rapid technological change as well as employment can be sustained? What is the minimum profit needed to defray the costs of the future? What is the minimum profit needed, above all, to maintain jobs and to create new ones?"
...
BTW, "And it is a total fallacy that, as Keynes implies, optimising the short term creates the right long-term future."
"It is widely believed that restructuring has boosted productivity by displacing low-skilled workers and creating jobs for the high skilled."Mas, e como isto é profundo:"In essence, creative destruction means that low productivity plants are displaced by high productivity plants." Por favor voltar a trás e reler esta última afirmação. . "Lovaglia’s Law: The more important the outcome of a decision, the more people will resist using evidence to make it."
"If an organisation is too stable it can ossify, but if it is too unstable it can disintegrate. Successful organisations work between these two conditions or states, in what Stacey called ‘the chaos zone’."
"If the customer doesn't care about the price, then the retailer shouldn't care about the cost," “It's not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what's required”. "Das Leben, das uns gegeben ist, ist uns nicht als etwas Fertiges gegeben, sondern wir müssen es uns gestalten, und zwar jeder sein eigenes." "Eine Regierung, die nichts wert ist, kostet am meisten." "Forget trying to persuade them; light their pants on fire." "O futuro é o que importa. O futuro é a base do significado, é de onde vem o projecto que alguém tem para si próprio" "The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent; it is the one that is most adaptable to change.”
"o Marketing só existe a partir do pensamento estratégico, caso contrário "não resulta"" "It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it" "Perder diversidade é como arrancar páginas de um livro. Quantas páginas poderemos arrancar até deixar de compreender o enredo?" The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic. Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."
"By strategy, I mean a cohesive response to a challenge. A real strategy is neither a document nor a forecast but rather an overall approach based on a diagnosis of a challenge. The most important element of a strategy is a coherent viewpoint about the forces at work, not a plan."
"Un desastre està punt de succeir a Espanya. El malentès de la gravetat de la crisi costarà car als inversors, ja que tindrà profundes conseqüències per a tot el sistema bancari europeu", afirma.
Entre d'altres coses, Mauldin diu que "els inversors estan fumant crack si creuen que els bancs espanyols són entre els més forts d'Europa, ja que estan amagant les seves pèrdues".
“… there are no “sunset” industries condemned to disappear in high wage economies, although there are certainly sunset and condemned strategies, among them building a business on the advantages to be gained by cheap labor”
"o vencedor da vida, o optimista que vive em incesto com o próprio ego, é o traço mais frágil do líder"
"We shall not grow wiser before we learn that much that we have done was very foolish." You may not be able to change the world but can at least get some entertainment & make a living out of the epistemic arrogance of the human race.
"I wanted you to see what real courage is, instead of getting the idea that courage is a man with a gun in his hand. It's when you know you're licked before you begin but you begin anyway and you see it through no matter what. You rarely win, but sometimes you do."
“Trust your guts. But not too much!”
"Customers will try 'low-cost providers,' because the majors have not given them any clear reason not to." "
"Natal é quando as Crianças pedem e os Pais pagam. Défices é quando os Pais pedem e as Crianças pagam."
"A imprevidência dos povos é infinita, a dos governos é legal"
"What a man sees depends both upon what he looks at and also upon what his previous visual-conceptual experience has taught him to see"
“The leaders first task is to be the trumpet that sounds a clear sound”
"lamented the lack of any systematic data on the scale of unfunded IOUs that care-free politicians have handed out like confetti."
"Let them call me rebel and welcome, I feel no concern from it; but I should suffer the misery of devils, were I to make a whore of my soul..."
O problema não é o consumo. O problema é o consumo assente em endividamento."
"There are designations, like "economist", "prostitute", or "consultant" for which additional characterization doesn't add information."
When it becomes more difficult to suffer than change, you will change"
"Hope is not a strategy and a crisis is a terrible thing to waste"
The more you can see of the present, the more you can see of the future"
Yes, You can change the future, but only changing the present"
"Entrepreneurship is 'Having aspirations greater than your resources'"
“The single biggest reason companies fail is they overinvest in what is, as opposed to what might be."
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool. So you have to be very careful about that"
"A estabilidade é uma ilusão"
"When we create the conditions of possibility, the universe becomes our co-conspirator"
Thinking about doing is not doing. Talking about doing is not doing. Doing is doing."
"'God has created me to do him some definite service. He has committed some work to me which he has not committed to another'.
...
"Each of us has a mission, each of us is called to change the world, to work for a culture of life, a culture forged by love and respect for the dignity of each human person.
"As our Lord tells us in the Gospel we have just heard, our light must shine in the sight of all, so that, seeing our good works, they may give praise to our heavenly Father."
"The future is not there waiting for us. We create it by the power of imagination."
"confusing testosterone with strategy is a bad idea"
"Much consulting involves the application of models to a system, as opposed to getting involved in the system as a positive change agent""
"O Portugal que pára sem orçamento é precisamente aquele que vive dele e que há todo o interesse em parar."
"credibilidade da política financeira e dos seus executores está ao nível da credibilidade de uma barraca das farturas"
"The role of the manager is thought to be reduction of uncertainty rather than the capacity to live creatively in it"
"today an entrepreneur is closer to artists than managers"
"A business without a path to profit isn’t a business, it’s a hobby"
"If no one’s upset by what you’re saying, you’re probably not pushing hard enough. (And you’re probably boring, too.)"
"Storytelling isn’t just how we construct our identities, stories are our identities"
"'He who has a why to live can bear almost any how' "
"They can because they think they can"
"Se há coisa que não suporto é misturar catequese com negócios, é a incapacidade para calçar os sapatos do outro e só pensar na nossa posição de coitadinhos, pobres vítimas indefesas dos maus e que por isso precisamos do Estado todo poderoso para nos proteger e, nem percebem na volta, os juros que o Estado cobra por esse serviço mafioso de protecção que, ainda por cima não resolve nada."
"Empathy is like a universal solvent. Any problem immersed in empathy becomes soluble."
"In victory, do not brag; in defeat, do not weep"
"Value it's a feeling not a calculation"
"An economist is someone who has had a human being described to him, but has never actually seen one."
"Don't finish first--it's not about running a rat race. Start with a better ending in mind."
"If you sit in on a poker game and don’t see a sucker, get up. You’re the sucker.”
"The 'value added' for most any company, tiny or enormous, comes from the Quality of Experience provided."
"Crediting government with the success of entrepreneurs is like crediting the guy who built Bill Gates’ garage with the success of Microsoft."
"I have found that assuming social scientists understand the difference between correlation and causality is not generally a good one."
"Promising never to raise taxes, without reaching a deal on spending, really means a high and rising commitment to future taxes."
"Some things are so foolish that only an intellectual could believe them, for no ordinary man could be such a fool"
"os bancos não financiam a economia, a poupança sim"
"I do not know the key to success, but the key to failure is trying to please everybody"
"Never be afraid to try, remember... Amateurs built the ark. Professionals built the Titanic."
"terms such as 'experiment' and 'observation' cover complex processes containing many strands. 'Facts' come from negotiations between different parties and the final product - the published report - is influenced by physical events, dataprocessors, compromises, exhaustion, lack of money, national pride and so on."
"'science in the making' is 'the consequence of [a] settlement' of 'controversies'."
"If the state wishes to spend more, it can do so only by borrowing your savings or taxing you more. And it's no good thinking someone else will pay, that someone else is you."
"All failures of strategy are rooted in the assumption that outcomes are predictable."
"Doing things like your bigger competitors is how to get killed in the wars out there"
“Uma moeda boa e forte é como a saúde. Só lhe damos verdadeiramente valor quando não a temos.”
"Life’s tough. It’s tougher if you’re stupid"
"O homem de bem exige tudo de si próprio; o homem medíocre espera tudo dos outros"
"Change is a threat when done to me, but an opportunity when done by me."
"As elites foram deixando de falar das exportações à medida que se foi percebendo que o país consegue exportar sem elas"
"Your toughest competition is the little voice inside your head telling you to stop"
"Pain is just weakness leaving your body"
"Built to last" is bad economics. Built to do something great" is the better idea. Think: "Creative destruction."
"the world is an uncertain place no matter how many Greek letter equations you affix to a problem."
"You never change things by fighting existing reality. To change s.th., build a new model making the existing model obsolete"
“No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical.”
"Success is not a destination. It's the trail you leave behind you."
"Winners make a habit of manufacturing their own positive expectations in advance of the event."
“You’ve got to start with the customer experience and work back toward the technology – not the other way around”
"Strategy as the "smallest set of - intended or actual - choices and decisions sufficient to guide all other choices and decisions sufficient to guide all other choices and decisions."
"When something is commoditized, an adjacent market becomes valuable"
"nature evolves away from constraints, not toward goals"
"There aren't any textbooks on what to stop doing!"
"With great power comes great irresponsibility "
"Weird things happen when you take price out of the equation for consumers"
"‘It’s so damn complex. If you ever think you have the solution to this, you’re wrong and you’re dangerous.’"
"Saruman believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check, but that is not what I have found. I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay. Small acts of kindness and love."
"Increasing stuff that doesn't add value dilutes existing value."
"O federalismo não é a alternativa à troika, é a troika para sempre."
"Never underestimate the difficulty of changing false beliefs by facts"
"Stressors are information"
“If you hear a “prominent” economist using the word ‘equilibrium,’ or ‘normal distribution,’ do not argue with him; just ignore him, or try to put a rat down his shirt.”
"The advantage of experiences over things for most of us is that we can make them seem unique, which = scarce, which = value"
"Pedras no caminho?
Guardo todas, um dia vou construir um castelo"
"Without risk, faith is an impossibility."
"Não posso com quem vive a achar que os outros lhe devem sempre alguma coisa."
"In a world of increasing automation, our ability to perform tasks is not nearly as important as our ability to dream. The questions we need to ask are not ones of action, but ones of meaning"
"Me arrancam tudo a força e depois me chamam de contribuinte."
"Letting people vote for expensive programs that “somebody else” will finance is a good recipe for getting people to vote irresponsibly"
"what's fairness gotta do with pricing based in value?"
"The epic battle of our generation is between the status quo of mass and the never-ceasing tide of weird."
“Price is emotional”
"There will always be a reason why you can't pursue it, until competitors create a reason why you must."
"The most important thing to study is opening theory"
"The greater the contrast, the greater the potential"
“Customers don't care about your solution, they care about their problems.”
"Todos querem conhecer a verdade, mas o que desejam é que lhes contem uma mentira em que não sejam protagonistas."
"Execution efficiency strangles innovation in the crib, but not with malice, by default.”
"Our obsession with scalability is getting in the way of unleashing the potential of the 21st century."
"The system is optimized to mitigate risk, not create value"
"Champions are made when no one is looking"
"Don't bargain on value. Half as expensive is often twice as cheap."
"Customers care about outcomes, not effort, technology, or originality."
" I can't believe it. That is why you fail."
"You don't have to pick between 1) playing the game and 2) not playing the game. You can *change* the game."
""The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." "