Acerca das exportações (parte I)

O valor mensal das exportações no passado mês de Novembro foi o segundo mais alto de sempre, só ultrapassado pelo recorde de Julho de 2015.

Um excelente desempenho das PME. Quando excluímos as exportações de combustíveis e lubrificantes constatamos que Novembro de 2016 foi recorde absoluto de exportações:

Claro que a maioria dos comentadores e políticos, da oposição e da situação, não sublinham estes recordes para não prejudicar a sua narrativa do país-coitadinho, vítima do euro, que lhes dá munições para o seu capital de queixa e reivindicação perante Bruxelas.

Em Pre-suasion, encontrei uma história deliciosa e ao mesmo tempo preocupante:

"often try to convey to various audiences is that, in contests of persuasion, counterarguments are typically more powerful than arguments. This superiority emerges especially when a counterclaim does more than refute a rival’s claim by showing it to be mistaken or misdirected in the particular instance, but does so instead by showing the rival communicator to be an untrustworthy source of information, generally. Issuing a counterargument demonstrating that an opponent’s argument is not to be believed because its maker is misinformed on the topic will usually succeed on that singular issue. But a counterargument that undermines an opponent’s argument by showing him or her to be dishonest in the matter will normally win that battle plus future battles with the opponent."

Depois disto vamos à história:

"perhaps the most effective marketing decision ever made by the tobacco companies lies buried and almost unknown in the industry’s history: after a three-year slide of 10 percent in tobacco consumption in the United States during the late 1960s, Big Tobacco did something that had the extraordinary effect of ending the decline and boosting consumption while slashing advertising expenditures by a third. What was it?
...
On July 22, 1969, during US congressional hearings, representatives of the major American tobacco companies strongly advocated a proposal to ban all of their own ads from television and radio, even though industry studies showed that the broadcast media provided the most effective routes to new sales.
...
[Moi ici: Cá vai a solução para o mistério] In 1967, the US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) had ruled that its “fairness doctrine” applied to the issue of tobacco advertising. The fairness doctrine required that equal advertising time be granted on radio and television—solely on radio and television—to all sides of important and controversial topics. If one side purchased broadcast time on these media, the opposing side must be given free time to counterargue.
...
That decision had an immediate impact on the landscape of broadcast advertising. For the first time, anti-tobacco forces such as the American Cancer Society could afford to air counterarguments to the tobacco company messages. They did so via counter-ads that disputed the truthfulness of the images displayed in tobacco company commercials. If a tobacco ad featured healthy, attractive, independent characters, the opposing ads would counterargue that, in fact, tobacco use led to diseased health, damaged attractiveness, and slavish dependence.
.
During the three years that they ran, those anti-tobacco spots slashed tobacco consumption in the United States by nearly 10 percent. At first the tobacco companies responded predictably, increasing their advertising budgets to try to meet the challenge. But, by the rules of the fairness doctrine, for each tobacco ad, equal time had to be provided for a counter-ad that would take another bite out of industry profits. When the logic of the situation hit them, the tobacco companies worked politically to ban their own ads, but solely on the air where the fairness doctrine applied—thereby ensuring that the anti-tobacco forces would no longer get free airtime to make their counterargument."

Imaginem o que seria um anónimo como eu confrontar Ferreira do Amaral com números que desmascaram a sua narrativa da falta de competitividade portuguesa com o euro.

Curiosidade do dia

"Daniel Bessa, antigo ministro da economia, defendia em 2015 que “o regime mudou” no dia da “nega redonda” do governo a Ricardo Salgado para a CGD salvar o Grupo Espírito Santo. Em 2017 mantém que só essa decisão “permite que continue a depositar dinheiro na Banca portuguesa”.
.
“A questão da Banca é um tema tão sério quanto o do equilíbrio das contas do estado. O equilíbrio das contas do Estado é um tema muito sério e se há tema com idêntico grau de seriedade é o das contas da banca. E quando estes dois temas se cruzam as coisas tornam-se muito complicadas”, diz Daniel Bessa.
...
Daniel Bessa acentua as críticas. “Isso é muito sério: eu perguntava quem são os portugueses dispostos a emprestar ao Estado português e, qualquer dia, estou a caminho de perguntar quem são os portugueses a depositar dinheiro na Banca portuguesa. Porque se a coisa vai tão longe como, às vezes, parece que vai então nós estamos muito mal”.
.
“Para dizer que se Pedro Passos Coelho disse não a Ricardo Salgado em 2014 fez muitíssimo bem. Fez muitíssimo bem. Porque essa é a única razão para eu continuar a emprestar dinheiro à Banca portuguesa e - quem sabe - poder um dia voltar a emprestar dinheiro ao Estado português”, pontua Daniel Bessa."

Por mais anos q passem sempre agradecerei a Passos Coelho a coragem de dizer Não! A Ricardo Salgado. https://t.co/wCj02kwd0O

— Carlos P da Cruz (@ccz1) January 9, 2017

Trechos retirados de "Álvaro Almeida: “Velho regime económico volta quando se paga a quem investiu 500 mil euros no GES""

BTW, "Nacionalizar o Novo Banco é uma má ideia"

"don’t quit or chase them"

"The reality of sales is that there will always be competition. But if you can keep the foundation of why you do what you do in focus and strategize thoughtfully, the sting of cutthroat competition is lessened. When you face a competitor in your field, don’t quit or chase them. Find your premium offering and wow your customers in an unexpected way."

Como não recordar mais uma vez os Dick Dastardly e os observadores de motards. Como não recordar as empresas mais preocupadas em vigiar e seguir a concorrência do que ter uma vida própria.

Como não recordar Hermann Simon em "Manage for Profit, Not for Market Share: A Guide to Greater Profits in Highly Contested Markets" e aquele segundo capítulo: "Learn to Compete Peacefully"

Trecho retirado de "3 Ways To Win By Competing On Quality, Not Price"

Uma novela sobre Mongo (parte XII)

 Parte I, parte II, parte III, parte IV, parte V, parte VI, parte VII, parte VIII, parte IX, parte X. e parte XI.

Segue-se outra previsão, de "The Great Fragmentation : why the future of business is small" de Steve Sammartino, que vem ao encontro do que escrevemos aqui no blogue há muitos anos acerca dos prosumers e da tendência para empresas mais pequenas:

"The laptop corporation.
The story of access isn’t limited to production and digital services. This is true for all the major elements that go into the business marketing mix. We also have access to new ways of raising finance, … And we have access to an audience, ... A more accurate and wider view is that we’re all laptop corporations if we want to be. If anyone has access to an entry-level, $500 device and an internet connection, they also have access to a media production facility, a media distribution facility, low-cost labour markets, the world’s manufacturing districts, global banking and payment systems, and even bespoke capital-raising techniques from crowdfunding websites. In real terms, anyone with access to the network has access to all of the important factors of production.
.
Access to technology and information creates access to an everything state.
Information not only changes what we can know and what we can do, it changes where we’ll get it. We’re entering the age of the infinite store, where you, I and everyone else can retail.
…
What it means for business
Everything a company can do, a person can do now too. Having a large corporate infrastructure is no longer an advantage."

Uma grande vénia ao recentemente falecido Alvin Toffler que escreveu sobre as electronic cottages do futuro no distante ano de 1980:

O meu exemplar, herdado de casa dos meus pais.

Estratégias ajustadas e desajustadas

A leitura de "The Jobs-to-be-Done Growth Strategy Matrix" fez-me voltar a encontrar esta figura:

Que tinha descoberto e referido em "JTBD e estratégia".

O reencontro com a figura fez-me pensar em várias conversas da semana passada:

Os jornais e os media tradicionais em geral, acossados pelos "chineses" da internet, responderam de forma errada querendo actuar como disruptores quando deviam ter apostado na diferenciação para servir os clientes underserved que continuariam a comprar jornais com melhores conteúdos.

O sector do leite protesta contra as importações de leite. O leite importado para Portugal é mais caro que o leite exportado de Portugal, sinal de que os compradores nacionais desse leite importado não encontram cá certos tipos de leite para o qual o preço não é o mais importante.

Muitas mercearias morreram ao longo das últimas duas décadas porque não se definiram, em vez de competir pelo preço com os "chineses" dos hipermercados, podiam ter optado pela diferenciação e especialização ou pela proximidade e relação.

Já o calçado português, incapaz de competir com os chineses genuínos salvou-se optando por estratégias baseadas na diferenciação (moda por exemplo) ou na proximidade/flexibilidade.

Que outros exemplos acrescentaria?

"There are no pricing problems; only segmentation problems"

"What is the most important thing you can share about pricing?

• There are no pricing problems; only segmentation problems. [Moi ici: Qual é mesmo a segmentação que a sua empresa faz?]

• Think about your end-customer first.

• Value is in the perspective of the person with whom you are talking.

• The value changes in context as well.

...
How does a price war destroy value?

• War results in destruction and casualties and price war leads to value destruction. – Dropped Mobile Profits

• There is a misconception of success when you capture market share.

• The causation effect is lost in the minds of people during a price war.

• Market share at any cost is chasing the wrong target.

• Which comes first, market share or profit?

• Profit comes first as it creates value for the customer; value comes first."

Trechos retirados de "The Ethics of Price Discrimination with Rags Srinivasan"

Curiosidade do dia

"Não tenhamos, pois, ilusões: 2017 não será o ano em que deixamos o passado lá atrás. A resposta é chutar para a frente. Que não funciona é tão certo como a minha mãe não fazer anos todos os dias. Mas a maioria quer e é o que vamos ter. Assim, o meu desejo limita-se a que, aos com discernimento, lhes seja permitido não contrair mais dívida dos outros; consigam ser responsáveis pelos seus actos, sem que isso seja considerado egoísmo, mas mera justiça. Já seria muito.
.
Para muitos até demais."

Trecho retirado de "A minha mãe não faz anos todos os dias"

Marcas em tempos de saída do armário

"Brands can be a source of comfort, regardless of product or service category. That’s a power I contend we as brand marketers under value, especially in uncertain times. And it’s especially a power that brand skeptics certainly have no appreciation for; it’s pretty difficult to “take comfort” in a generic, no matter how cheap.
.
Why and how does this develop? I contend that when life is uncertain or in crisis, our survival instincts are hard-wired to gravitate toward the “tried and true” versus the unknown. Why take a chance? Brands, by their very nature, are created to be a “known commodity” to their constituency. Being known is the first requirement of trust. With consistency brands become a rock for the customer in very unsatisfying or uncertain circumstances – and can justify a premium for that."

Isto é verdade. Concordo. É mais uma razão para sublinhar "The opposite of unpredictable is strategic"

No entanto, há uma perspectiva que me assaltou logo: os tempos são de incerteza também por causa das pessoas. As pessoas não são estáticas, as pessoas não estão definidas. Cada vez mais as pessoas são projectos em desenvolvimento, são projectos em constante redefinição. Ah! Recordo um congresso de Marketing em Lisboa em 2007... em que ouvi Charles Schewe a falar sobre as "cohorts.

E recordo a empresa de calçado em 2009... as quasi-avós de hoje que nos anos 80 abanaram o capacete a ouvir Nina Hagen no pavilhão do Académico do Porto não terão os mesmos gostos que as suas avós.

E recordo Seth Godin, o mercado de massas não foi uma criação da procura, foi uma criação da oferta.

Os tempos são de incerteza para quem estava habituado a trabalhar para o meio-termo, para a grande massa da maioria estável no Normalistão. Mas as pessoas estão a abandonar por vontade própria o Normalistão estão a sair do armário e a assumir as suas especificidades.

Num mundo em que cada vez mais somos todos weird as marcas vão ter de se definir, vão ter de abandonar o meio-termo.

BTW, esta semana ao descer a Avenida da Boavista numa zona que julgo que ainda é in, Pinheiro Manso, vi uma loja de uma marca que não conhecia: Code. Ontem, sábado, fui a Rio Tinto e entrei num Pingo Doce para levantar dinheiro. E vi uma loja da mesma marca que desconhecia até à passada Terça-feira. A minha mulher informou-me que era uma marca do mesmo grupo que detém o Pingo Doce.

Weird... uma das duas localizações estará errada. Como não entrei não sei qual.

Trecho retirado de "How Brands Become A Source Of Comfort"

Depois, a culpa é do euro.

“I recommend that the Statue of Liberty on the East Coast be supplemented by a Statue of Responsiblity on the West Coast.”

Depois, a culpa é do euro.

Frase atribuída a Viktor Frankl

Narrowing Your Focus

"Narrowing Your Focus
.
What is the most important thing you can share about pricing?
.

• The foundation of your ability to increase your prices is your ability to deliver more value to your customers.
• The key to delivering more value is your willingness to restrict or narrow who you serve and what you do for them.
• Narrowing is difficult because it triggers a survival instinct."

Trecho retirado de "How to Create Value Through Positioning with Philip Morgan"

Curiosidade do dia

"of all the bad things that happened to people in hospitals, the one that most preoccupied Redelmeier was clinical misjudgment. Doctors and nurses were human, too. They sometimes failed to see that the information patients offered them was unreliable—for instance, patients often said that they were feeling better, and might indeed believe themselves to be improving, when they had experienced no real change in their condition. Doctors tended to pay attention mainly to what they were asked to pay attention to, and to miss some bigger picture. [Moi ici: Recordar Pre-suasion e a importância desmesurada daquilo a que se chama a atenção] They sometimes failed to notice what they were not directly assigned to notice."

Trecho retirado de "Michael Lewis’ The Undoing Project: How do ER surgeons avoid dumb, deadly mistakes? Ask their doctor."

Mais do que o custo

"Our research into business model innovation in Asia uncovered two distinct, yet overlapping, waves of innovation: one decades old and still going, and one that ... is evolving now.
...
The first wave, as we call it, primarily exploited differences in labor and other input costs between developed and developing markets. By contrast, the second wave is driven primarily by business model innovation and typically leverages new technology. [Moi ici: Em tom quasi irónico direi que apostam em dumping legislativo. Sociedades mais abertas à mudança e com menos direitos adquiridos pelos incumbentes] These companies are characterized by extensive and often radical reconfigurations of the profit formula, resources, processes, and relationships within a broader stakeholder ecosystem.
...
The first wave of innovation from emerging markets in Asia has been predicated on the replication of existing business models at lower cost. As the model has evolved, it has become increasingly sophisticated,
...
Nonetheless, we believe the second wave could be even more disruptive than the first wave was. There are three reasons why, all of which reveal the ability of second-wave companies to achieve scale while remaining nimble.
.
The first reason is that second-wave companies fundamentally reimagine various facets of the business model. The second is that second-wave companies find new, often digitally enabled, ways in which resources and processes can be leveraged, ... The third is that second-wave companies identify creative ways for partners, stakeholders, and customers to be involved in value creation and capture, [Moi ici: Co-criação e ecossistemas]
...
If you want to reimagine your own business model, the first step is challenging the fundamental assumptions about what it means to be a business, employee, partner, or customer."

Trechos retirados de "The Next Wave of Business Models in Asia"

Que acham da capacidade dos humanos? (parte II)

Parte I.

Há anos li um texto, (era capaz de jurar que o li em "Thinking, Fast and Slow" de Daniel Kahneman...mas também poderia tê-lo lido em "Risk Savvy: How To Make Good Decisions" ou em "Gut Feelings: Short Cuts to Better Decision Making" de Gerd Gigerenzer), que ilustrava como duas pessoas observando o mesmo jogo, observando as mesmas imagens, chegavam a conclusões honestas completamente diferentes porque cada uma processava as imagens de forma diferente em função da sua preferência clubística.

Como não recordar as palavras equivocadas do candidato Cavaco Silva:

"dois adultos, (de boa-fé acrescentava eu, perante os mesmos factos chegam às mesmas conclusões"

Assim, foi com um sorriso que encontrei estes trechos em "Pre-suasion":

"Imagine that you are in a café enjoying a cup of coffee. At the table directly in front of you, a man and a woman are deciding which movie to see that evening. After a few minutes, they settle on one of the options and set off to the theater. As they leave, you notice that one of your friends had been sitting at the table behind them. Your friend sees you, joins you, and remarks on the couple’s movie conversation, saying, “It’s always just one person who drives the decision in those kinds of debates, isn’t it?” You laugh and nod because you noticed that too: although the man was trying to be diplomatic about it, he clearly was the one who determined the couple’s movie choice. Your amusement disappears, though, when your friend observes, “She sounded sweet, but she just pushed until she got her way.”
.
Dr. Shelley Taylor, a social psychologist at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), knows why you and your friend could have heard the same conversation but come to opposite judgments about who determined the end result. It was a small accident of seating arrangements: you were positioned to observe the exchange over the shoulder of the woman, making the man more visible and salient, while your friend had the reverse point of view. Taylor and her colleagues conducted a series of experiments in which observers watched and listened to conversations that had been scripted carefully so that neither discussion partner contributed more than the other. Some observers watched from a perspective that allowed them to see the face of one the parties over the shoulder of the other, while other observers saw both faces from the side, equally. All the observers were then asked to judge who had more influence in the discussion, based on tone, content, and direction. The outcomes were always the same: whomever’s face was more visible was judged to be more causal.
...
No matter what they tried, the researchers couldn’t stop observers from presuming that the causal agent in the interaction they’d witnessed was the one whose face was most visible to them. They were astonished to see it appear in “practically unmovable” and “automatic” form, even when the conversation topic was personally important to the observers; even when the observers were distracted by the researchers; even when the observers experienced a long delay before judging the discussants; and even when the observers expected to have to communicate their judgments to other people. What’s more, not only did this pattern emerge whether the judges were male or female, but also it appeared whether the conversations were viewed in person or on videotape."

O que pensar dos programas sobre repetição de imagens de lances polémicos no futebol?

"The opposite of unpredictable is strategic"

Há mais de 15 anos ouvi Robert Kaplan contar a razão porque a Mobil era clara e transparente com a sua estratégia. Só a intervenção dos advogados é que impediu que até as metas na perspectiva financeira fossem publicadas.

Se os trabalhadores não conhecerem a estratégia como a irão executar? Como estarão alinhados com ela? E se os concorrentes a quiserem copiar ... será que ela é a adequada para a sua realidade? Cuidado com os observadores de motards podem ter o mesmo sucesso que Dick Dastardly.

"My clients and students assume that competitors should surprise one another with their strategies. Your competitors, they think, should have no idea what you’re going to do.
.
I predict many of you will say: Of course. Being unpredictable is a competi­tive advantage.
.
Not so fast.
.
Keeping secrets can protect competitive advantage.
.
But secrecy is not the same thing as unpredictability. Secrecy creates an incentive to invest in assets, especially intellectual ones. Unpredictability bluffs, postures, and palters to gain advantage through uncertainty and misdirection. Unpredictability can put another party off-balance. It can confuse them, cloud their thinking, cause them to waste time and effort, and trick them into making a mistake.
.
There are times when, at least in theory, the potential benefits of unpredictability can exceed its costs. But in my experience with competitive strategy in the real world, they aren’t common.
...
In business, the opposite of unpredictable isn’t predictable. The opposite of unpredictable is strategic.
...
becoming un­predictable required abandoning a major opportunity: the opportunity to lead.
...
I mean “lead” in the sense of shaping events, of taking initiative, of showing not-a-chicken commitment. You lead by influencing others, even, maybe especially, if they are not your friends. You may lead well or you may lead badly, but unpredictability does not lead at all.
...
Leadership lets you choose the game to play and shape how you play it. If you don’t, someone else will."

BTW, estratégia e táctica são coisas distintas e imprevisibilidade não é o mesmo que segredo.

Trechos retirados de "Why Being Unpredictable Is a Bad Strategy"

"It’s a human behavior one." (parte II)

Parte I.

E até que ponto fica claro, preto no branco, que comportamentos e porquê devem acontecer?

Uma estratégia ao ser executada traduz-se em:

Resultados que decorrem naturalmente de acções e de comportamentos.

Quem exibe esses comportamentos?

Quem actua além das máquinas e dos algoritmos?

Começamos por relacionar estratégia com processos e identificamos os processos críticos e os de contexto. Depois, identificamos as competências, comportamentos e resultados que as pessoas têm de ter, exibir ou gerar em cada um dos processos que contribuem para a execução da estratégia:

• Desenvolver indicadores para a perspectiva Recursos & Infra-estruturas (parte 2 de 4) (Abril de 2007)
• Desenvolver indicadores para a perspectiva Recursos & Infra-estruturas (parte (2+1/2) de 4) (Abril de 2007)
• A perspectiva de Recursos & Infra-estruturas (Agosto de 2008)
• Será isto original? (Março de 2009) 
• Acerca da cultura que sustenta uma estratégia (Outubro de 2015)
• BSC vs ISO 9001 (parte VI) (Janeiro de 2016)
• BSC vs ISO 9001 (parte VII) (Janeiro de 2016)

Formular uma estratégia. Perceber que processos são críticos para a sua execução. Perceber que funções em cada processo contribuem para a execução da estratégia e traduzir a estratégia nas actividades elementares e comportamentos evidenciados durante o processo. É preciso ser terra-a-terra e mostrar como se quer que a diferença se faça. Depois, as pessoas arranjarão a forma de chegar a Paris mas primeiro as pessoas têm de perceber que o objectivo é tomar Paris.

Curiosidade do dia

"Os juros da dívida a 10 anos ultrapassaram os 4%. O problema não está num facto como este, que até pode ser isolado e pouco duradouro. A questão está quando se olha para a tendência. E esta não se vê por um dia, uma semana ou mesmo um mês. É um facto que no último ano os juros que os investidores exigem para comprarem dívida pública portuguesa tem subido de forma regular e, aparentemente, sustentada. A subida é generalizada e uniforme na zona euro? Não. E esse é o segundo sinal preocupante para Portugal. O diferencial de juros entre a dívida portuguesa e as alemã e espanhola alargou-se nos últimos meses. Isto significa que mesmo quando uma parte das razões para a subida dos juros vem de fora, o impacto percebido pelos investidores em cada economia é diferenciado. Por exemplo, os efeitos da política económica que se adivinha venha a ser a de Donald Trump serão maiores e mais negativos em Portugal do que noutras economias. Porquê? Porque o país baixou o défice mas não a dívida, porque a economia não sai da anemia e até está a crescer menos do que em 2015, porque o investimento não arranca, porque há muitas políticas que são olhadas com desconfiança e recuos incompreensíveis em algumas medidas. Isto apesar do défice mais baixo da democracia – mas que não deixa de ser um défice e, por isso, gerador de mais dívida
...
Porque 2010 está demasiado vivo na nossa memória, sabemos que o problema começa quando nos tornamos no primeiro sítio de onde os credores querem sair quando o circo começa a arder. É isso que faz de nós o elo mais fraco. E é contra isso que, nesta fase, já pouco podemos fazer. O que será, será."

Trechos retirados de "Era uma vez um país sem custo para os contribuintes…"

Uma novela sobre Mongo (parte XI)

 Parte I, parte II, parte III, parte IV, parte V, parte VI, parte VII e parte VIII, parte IXe parte X.

Ontem, numa caminhada matinal li:

"For most of the industrial era the only option for having goods and services was to own them. If we wanted to have anything, we had to buy it. This was also the way industrial society was set up. It moved society away from the traditional ideas of shared resources into consumption silo mode. The industrial era made many things affordable for the first time. The rational choice was to purchase and own, so we accumulated goods and stored them at home for when they were needed. Being able to have everything we needed, and places to store it all (fridges, cupboards, spare rooms and garages), reduced a lot of the friction that existed before industrial communities came into being and resources were shared.
...
Much of the friction of sharing is now coming back out of the commercial system. While vehicles gave us access to vast geography on demand, the internet is giving us access to vast information, entertainment and even physical goods on demand. Many of the things we had no choice but to buy if we wanted access to them are changing the way they come to market. Increasingly, we have an option to buy or to simply access an asset on demand. We are choosing the latter."

Depois, à hora do almoço encontrei "The Original Sharing Economy" e fiquei a pensar no potencial do modelo de negócio da Sharing Depot.

Agora pensem no impacte disto no emprego, na impostagem e no PIB.

Trechos iniciais retirados de "The Great Fragmentation"

Que acham da capacidade dos humanos?

"It is rousing and worrisome (depending on whether you are playing offense or defense) to recognize that these persuasive outcomes can flow from attention- shifting techniques so slight as to go unrecognized as agents of change.
...
[Moi ici: A estória que se segue é deliciosa] Suppose you’ve started an online furniture store that specializes in various types of sofas. Some are attractive to customers because of their comfort and others because of their price. Is there anything you can think to do that would incline visitors to your website to focus on the feature of comfort and, consequently, to prefer to make a sofa purchase that prioritized it over cost?
...
In an article largely overlooked since it was published in 2002, they described how they were able to draw website visitors’ attention to the goal of comfort merely by placing fluffy clouds on the background wallpaper of the site’s landing page. That maneuver led those visitors to assign elevated levels of importance to comfort when asked what they were looking for in a sofa. Those same visitors also became more likely to search the site for information about the comfort features of the sofas in stock and, most notably, to choose a more comfortable (and more costly) sofa as their preferred purchase.
.
To make sure their results were due to the landing page wallpaper and not to some general human preference for comfort, Mandel and Johnson reversed their procedure for other visitors, who saw wallpaper that pulled their attention to the goal of economy by depicting pennies instead of clouds. These visitors assigned greater levels of importance to price, searched the site primarily for cost information, and preferred an inexpensive sofa. Remarkably, despite having their importance ratings, search behavior, and buying preferences all altered pre-suasively by the landing page wallpaper, when questioned afterward, most participants refused to believe that the depicted clouds or pennies had affected them in any way."

Que acham disto?

Que acham da capacidade dos humanos?

Entretanto, ontem à noite ao preparar uma sessão de trabalho numa empresa visitei o seu sítio na internet e encontrei como missão:

"É nossa missão oferecer serviços, a um preço justo e ..."

O primeiro tópico a que chamam a atenção é ... o preço! No entanto, nos testemunhos sobre o que fazem e para quem aparecem nomes ligados ao segmento do luxo.

Trechos retirados de "Pre-suasion"

A vantagem da ignorância

Em "This is The Value of Ignorance to Your Creative Process" encontro algo que logo relaciono com aquilo a que chamo "fuçar":

"Creativity is a surprising process. Left unchecked, too much application of prior knowledge can stifle innovation and hinder creative work. "Not knowing" can be your most important asset if you can use it to your advantage. Without placing importance on not knowing, you run the risk of damaging the integrity of your creative work with your own bias.
...
Real creativity is a revision in progress, always. It proceeds in fits and starts of ignorance. Creative professionals cannot work without knowledge, skills, and experience. It's the basic requirement to thrive in any field. But the only way you can surprise yourself and deliver your most amazing work is to embrace creative ignorance.
.
Start every creative process with fresh eyes and set aside your assumptions.
...
"The only way to be creative over time -- to not be undone by our expertise -- is to experiment with ignorance, to stare at things we don't fully understand."
.
By all means envision and have a plan of action, but adapt and adopt new ideas as you progress.
...
'All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence, and success is sure.' Ignorance is not a barrier to action."

Quando falo da tríade, falo de supostos conhecedores, gurus, sábios que tudo sabem e prevêem que vem aí o diabo e que as PME portuguesas não têm futuro sem o escudo. Afinal não passam de Muggles.
Porque estão presos a modelos concebidos para explicar o passado não conseguem perceber que quando o mundo muda esses modelos ficam obsoletos e é preciso testar novas abordagens.

Quando refiro o fuçar:

• A velha academia não percebe nem tem guião (Abril de 2011)
• É a vida! (Julho de 2012)
• Fuçar, uma espécie de humildade (Outubro de 2014)  
• "We find our way by getting lost." (parte II) (Julho de 2016)
• Cuidado com as fantasias do Excel (Agosto de 2016)
• Fuçar e a quebra dos tabus (Outubro de 2016)

BTW, recuar a Abril de ... 2009 e a "Parte VII – Zapatero e os outros."

"It’s a human behavior one." (parte I)

"Which is precisely what he should be worrying about. However hard it is to devise a smart strategy, it’s ten times harder to get people to execute on that strategy. And a poorly executed strategy, no matter how clever, is worthless.
.
In other words, your organization’s biggest strategic challenge isn’t strategic thinking — it’s strategic acting.
...
while strategy development and communication are about knowing something, strategy execution is about doing something. And the gap between what you know and what you do is often huge. Add in the necessity of having everyone acting in alignment with each other, and it gets even huger.
.
The reason strategy execution is often glossed over by even the most astute strategy consultants is because primarily it’s not a strategy challenge. It’s a human behavior one."

E até que ponto fica claro, preto no branco, que comportamentos e porquê devem acontecer?

Onde isto nos vai levar.

Trechos retirados de "Execution Is a People Problem, Not a Strategy Problem"


Continua.