Acerca do pensamento sistémico

Outro tema relacionado com os ecossistemas da procura:

"The circular economy uses understanding the system to give a better overall result. You can’t ignore the feedback, it’s real. Just because it is not in your model or idea – doesn’t take away the issue. So, systems thinking really is understanding bigger contexts over longer periods and looking at the connections, not the parts, for insights. We are looking for patterns not certainty, because certainty does not exist, but the pattern gives us insight about which direction to move in. A circular economy reflects this more contemporary scientific understanding of how the world works.
...
Lou: So how can people know where to start when it comes to systems thinking? How do we break free from habitual thinking and take things forward?
.
Ken: This indirect causation makes it difficult to know where to intervene in the system, because people expect visible action. They are used to reacting to cause and effect. Having a different perspective on how the world works doesn’t sound like taking action"

Trechos retirados de "What is systems thinking? And why does it matter for a circular economy?"

"dealing with unprofitable customers" (parte II)

Parte I.

Gosto desta linguagem da SDL para explicar o fenómeno dos clientes que destroem valor:

"By identifying and considering a range of stakeholders, firms can gain competitive advantage by engaging not only with customers but also other partners to encourage intergroup engagement [Moi ici: Ecossistema]
...
The SDL literature states that value is created within a service system. The firm uses its operant resources to interact with other actors in the service system and, in particular, engages with customers’ value creation as actor-to-actor. These interactions, providing they are positive, lead to an improvement in the well-being of the service system as a whole, wherein the customer and value co-creation become embedded.
.
Value destruction, however, arises from incongruent elements of practice, which depart from the shared understandings of practice among firm, customer and service system. If these understandings are not shared, value is destroyed rather than created and leads to the decline in the well-being of at least one of the systems and brings about an asymmetry in the service system. Instead of gaining competitive advantage through the action of the actors, the firm and the wider system are placed at a disadvantage.
...
Although it has been suggested that the firm thinks of its consumers as equipped with the full range of operant resources to co-create value, it may only be ‘good’ customers who are able and willing to apply the specialized skills and knowledge to gain value-in-use. The firm has customers or prospective customers who are unwilling to provide reciprocal resources who fail to understand the reciprocity of the value proposition, who are unable to acquire the skills and resources to be effective resource integrators or, who ‘may botch...’. All of these suggest that in terms of value co-creation, customer operant resources may not necessarily interact beneficially with the operand resources of the firm as required by SDL. In these circumstances, these customers may not gain value-in-use so that the firm’s service propositions will have negative value for them, both experiencing a loss. If certain customers are unwilling or unable to use their operant resources to co-create value, they cannot act as the fundamental units of exchange and hence collaborative value-creating partners. The firm may provide opportunities for these customers to learn how to develop their operant resources to co-create, but if it encounters repeated instance of value destruction, it may have to discontinue further investment in that customer and discourage further interactions.
...
The destruction of value is not limited to the firm/customer dyad but resonates throughout the service system."

Continua.

Trechos retirados de "Selective demarketing: When customers destroy value" publicado por Marketing Theory 1–18, 2016

Curiosidade do dia

À atenção dos fragilistas, "L’affondo di Schäuble: «Insolvenza automatica per i Paesi in difficoltà
che chiedono aiuto»":

"Era la sua ultima occasione e non l’ha sprecata. Nel gesto, prima ancora che nel suo contenuto, è racchiuso il messaggio che Wolfgang Schäuble ha voluto lasciare al resto d’Europa: io vado, ma le mie politiche restano. Le presento da solo, senza aspettare neppure la Francia. E prevarranno.
...
La differenza è che stavolta il «non paper» di Schäuble ha il pieno appoggio della cancelliera, anche nel prossimo mandato da leader. Washington, sotto Donald Trump, è presa da troppi problemi per notare cosa fa la Germania in Europa. E quel testo uscito ieri dalla cartella di Schäuble non è molto meno radicale di quello che, espellendo la Grecia, avrebbe trasformato l’area euro in un club in cui un Paese può sanzionarne un altro nel modo finanziariamente più duro.
...
L’obiettivo esplicito per la Germania è introdurre un fattore di disciplina che spingerebbe i governi a ridurre i debiti. L’obiettivo implicito sembra invece di ridurre l’esposizione tedesca a futuri salvataggi simili a quelli di Grecia, Spagna, Portogallo, Irlanda e Cipro. Berlino prevede infatti che i rimborsi dei titoli di Stato siano rinviati se un governo chiede aiuto all’Europa. Quindi, «gli investitori dovrebbero contribuire» (cioè subire perdite esplicite sui titoli di Stato) se l’emergenza non passasse."

Um pouco de estratégia na agricultura pode fazer toda a diferença

Há dias aproveitei passar perto de Estarreja e passei pelo casal de lavradores que me vende ovos caseiros de contrabando e sem factura (pica especial por chatear a ASAE e a AT em simultâneo). O lavrador contou-me que este ano foi um ano excepcional para a produção de milho. Há muito milho e, por isso, o máximo que consegue é que o comprem a 0,20 € por kilo. Daí que já tenha decidido usar o milho na alimentação dos seus animais.

Enquanto o ouvia pensei logo que ele deveria optar por outras culturas e abandonar o que não faz sentido para um pequeno produtor de um país com fronteiras abertas. Aposto que há muitas culturas alternativas, não tradicionais, que lhe dariam muito mais rendimento.

Voltei a recordar-me deste episódio quando ontem à noite descobri que o amigo Graça me tinha enviado este texto, "New England Is Cracking the Code to Farming — All Year-Long". Texto que me diz muito porque também faço parte de uma "community-supported agriculture, or CSAs", a AMAP Gaia.

Um pouco de estratégia na agricultura pode fazer toda a diferença:

"The community-focused process is especially fruitful in pastoral New England, which has a higher proportion of small operators and family farms than anywhere else in the country. The region doesn’t have a single representative in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s top 10 agriculture-producing states. “You’re never going to convince really large farmers to get away from the monoculture of planting 1,000 acres of corn,” says Greg Noden, USDA farm operations manager in Geneva, New York. But for a midsize or beginning farmer, it’s a viable shift. And that class of farmer, Noden adds, is “more prevalent in the Northeast than anywhere else.”
.
There are financial benefits for those who change up the typical farming equation. “If you can get people greens in December, not only will you have plenty of demand but you will be able to charge a premium,” says Jim Hafner, executive director of the Keene, New Hampshire–based nonprofit Land for Good. “That’s why you also see people moving into non-land-based farming, such as hydroponics.”"

Estas CSAs permitem:

• assegurar clientes-alvo;
• assegurar prateleira;
• assegurar mecanismo de desenvolvimento da relação;
• mudar de proposta de valor;
• mudar de preço;
• mudar de ecossistema da procura. 

"dealing with unprofitable customers"

Para quem descobriu as curvas de Stobachoff em 2011. Para quem acredita no tecto de vidro, para quem usa o marcador "clientes-alvo" desde 2007, é claro que o desafio de lidar com clientes que destroem valor é aliciante. Não esquecer Byrnes.

"Selective demarketing is a strategic option for a firm to manage customers who are or are likely to be a poor fit with its offering.
...
these customers effectively destroy value by misusing or misunderstanding how to integrate their operant resources with those of the firm.
...
A firm interacts with selected customers to co-construct a consumption experience from which the customer gains value-in-use or co-creates value. The firm directs its marketing efforts at identifying new customers with whom it may be able to co-create value and seeks to extend value co-creation opportunities with existing customers. However, the business environment is far from static; changes occur for the firm, its customers and members of its network. The firm, as a result, may decide to withdraw from existing markets and/or to prioritize new customer groups. Such actions have been labelled selective demarketing, the aim of which is to reduce demand from certain classes of customer. These segments or customer classes may be considered relatively unprofitable or undesirable in terms of their impact on other valued segments of the market, becoming candidates for selective demarketing.
...
some customers effectively destroy value by misusing or misunderstanding how to integrate their operant resources with those of the firm. By destroying value, these customers may be suitable for selective demarketing.
...
Serving some customers may engender high psychological as well as financial costs such as disruptive or aggressive customers encountered by airlines prompting firms to seek ways of encouraging them to go elsewhere. Firms may have up to 30% of their customers making a negative contribution in B2C situations, rising to a half of customers, in a study of German engineering firms.
...
It has been asserted that resource allocation decisions at the market or segment level can result in suboptimal strategies; therefore, firms should allocate resources at the individual customer level instead
...
The firm can then identify those customers who do not generate a desired level of return and may encourage these customers to spend more or reduce the quantity of sales communications
...
By not dealing with unprofitable customers, the firm is failing to optimize its resources. This failure is likely to affect its stakeholders – it has already been noted that serving unprofitable customers raises costs for profitable customers – with costs resonating within the stakeholder system. Although the mandate for selective demarketing is increasingly being accepted, firms are caught in something of a dilemma. On one hand, they have a proportion of customers who generate insufficient revenue and affect stakeholders as well as the firm itself. On the other hand, the repercussions of eliminating these customers either directly or indirectly damages the firm’s reputation. It is, therefore, not surprising that firms may hang back from selectively demarketing but at the same time, the decision not to take action against unprofitable customers is damaging to the firm and its system."

Continua.

Trechos retirados de "Selective demarketing: When customers destroy value" publicado por Marketing Theory 1–18, 2016

Foco e mosaico de actividades (parte IV)

Parte I e parte II e parte III.

"The final two categories depict companies that are living a coherent identity:
.
10. Coherent companies have a powerful value proposition and a system of a few differentiating capabilities that support that value proposition. Their portfolio of products and services grows successfully because of the strengths they consistently bring to bear.
.
11. Supercompetitors use their coherence to shape their future. They apply their capabilities to a broader range of challenges and loftier goals, serve the fundamental needs and wants of their customers, and ultimately lead their industries. These companies are not just playing the game of business well — they’re changing the rules."[Moi ici: Recordar scripting markets, performativity, mercados como configurações]

Trechos retirados de "11 Types of Strategic Maturity: Which One Describes Your Company?"

"There is no silver bullet"

"That’s the problem with patterns. It is beyond our human capacity to swallow them whole, so we curate them to make them more comprehensible. In doing so, we eliminate important context and overfit selected elements of the past onto the future. That makes for a nice story, but fails to take into account the messy details of reality.
.
The truth is that patterns can never be validated backward, only forward. So it doesn’t matter how many success stories we can database and then squeeze into snazzy little graphs. The ugly little secret of business strategy is that you need to make your best guess in an uncertain context, manage resources wisely and see what works. There is no silver bullet."

Trecho retirado de "Don’t Bet On Someone Else’s Success Story"

Olhar para o ecossistema (parte II)

Parte I.

Pensar a nível de ecossistema passa por perceber que os mercados não existem, os mercados são seres vivos que vão existindo e evoluindo:

"the starting point is to view markets as emerging outcomes best understood by following the process of their practical realization
...
the idea of markets as plastic entities that are continously ‘in the making’
...
markets as ‘on-going socio-material enactments that organize economized exchanges’
...
by conceptualizing markets as continuous enactments rather than ready-made, CMS goes beyond simplistic stage models of market emergence, for example, formation–stability– change–dissolution. It stresses that markets are continuously shaped both by explicit efforts to create new markets or change existing ones, and by the everyday activities of buyers and sellers. This allows us to explore how users exert influence over markets beyond the initial commercialization of an offering."

Por exemplo:

"We conceptualize market shaping as five interrelated subprocesses in which users may be involved as agents: qualifying goods, fashioning modes of exchange, configuring actors, establishing market norms and generating market representations." 

Fundamental perceber que se pode ser um arquitecto de paisagens competitivas.

Trechos retirados de "How users shape markets" publicado por Marketing Theory 1–24, 2016

Foco e mosaico de actividades (parte III)

Parte I e parte II.

"Four archetypes refer to companies that have developed a coherent strategy but struggle to execute it:
.
6. Distracted companies have defined a coherent identity for their company, but they have a hard time resisting diversions. They pursue market opportunities that aren’t in line with their strategy.
.
7. Resource-constrained companies struggle to find the funds to execute their strategy. Building differentiating capabilities is difficult and expensive, and the executives at these companies don’t think their financial situation allows them to make the bold moves they need.
.
8. Capability-constrained companies lack the knowledge, skills, or technology needed to build out their capabilities to a world-class level, or to scale them throughout the organization.
.
9. Overstretched companies have defined a coherent identity for themselves, but it is so far away from the company’s current status — and their ability to enlist customers, employees, and investors on their behalf — that they can’t successfully realize their goals."

4 pecados capitais!

Qual será pior, a incapacidade de ter disciplina, muitas vezes por causa da inveja sobre o que outros estão a conseguir, ou o desenho de uma estratégia que não tem em conta a realidade de uma organização.



Trechos retirados de "11 Types of Strategic Maturity: Which One Describes Your Company?"

Olhar para o ecossistema

E volto a "Strategy for a Networked World" de Ramírez & Mannervik para olhar para esta figura.

Várias unidades de negócio da mesma entidade (Scania, a azul).

Compradores do serviço realizado pelos veículos da Scania.

Operadores do serviço realizado pelos veículos da Scania.

Fornecedores e concorrentes de peças para veículos da Scania.

Oficinas que intervêm nos veículos da Scania.

Distribuidores de veículos da Scania e de concorrentes.

Fabricantes de carroçarias.

...

Tal como Normann escreveu...

"take stock of what (one has), yet distance (oneself) from it and explore new territory"

Olhar para o ecossistema actual ou desenhar um ecossistema potencial para subir na escala do valor.

Está tudo relacionado

Está tudo relacionado.

Este texto, "Starbucks Closes Online Store to Focus on In-Person Experience", tem tudo a ver com "How Not to Fail at Retail" e com perceber o papel das interacções e da co-criação de valor.

Tudo o que, por exemplo, o jornalismo mainstream nunca percebeu.

Se os "chineses" do retalho, as lojas online, têm preços e diversidade de oferta imbatível, não adianta tentar competir com eles nesse campeonato (good old Kasparov), não adianta entrar numa guerra entre cães, mais vale mudar para gato.

"O truque está no jogador reconhecer aquilo que faz melhor. Se é melhor na espera e numa estratégia de paciência, então é esse o caminho que deve seguir; se é melhor num ataque poderoso, deve criar condições para o fazer. O elemento chave para uma estratégia de sucesso é assegurar que, no ambiente que está criado, somos muito melhores do que o nosso concorrente. Trata-se de forçá-lo a cometer erros.
...
é preciso conhecer a nossa natureza e a do nosso adversário. Reconhecer as forças e as fraquezas de cada um. E assegurar que a luta se processa num território no qual as nossas fraquezas são menos importantes, enquanto que as do adversário são flagrantes.
...
Se o meu exército tem cavalaria, convém que a batalha seja num vale; mas se a cavalaria for do adversário é melhor que o confronto seja nos montes. Trata-se de encontrar o campo de batalha que potencia a nossa vantagem competitiva e no qual as potenciais vantagens do adversário encontrem contrariedades. Acredito que a maioria das batalhas - na história militar, nos negócios ou no xadrez - são decididas por manobras prévias e que as grandes vantagens competitivas são acumuladas antes da batalha propriamente dita." [Moi ici: Claro que há que dar um desconto à visão dos negócios como uma guerra ou um jogo. Não devemos ser como o Dick Dastardly e darmos demasiada importância à concorrência. Nos negócios o objectivo não é eliminar o concorrente, o objectivo é  seduzir de forma sustentada um cliente]

Por um lado:

"“Every retailer that is going to win in this new environment must become an experiential destination,” Mr. Schultz told investors in April." [Moi ici: O mais provável é que o máximo que o comércio online possa fazer seja "permutar". O comércio online é muito bom para artigos padrão, é muito bom para artigos permutados, não é bom para quem procura algo à sua medida, para quem procura algo que ainda não existe, para quem não sabe o que procura]

Acerca da evolução da vantagem competitiva

Este artigo "Pay Attention To Your ‘Extreme Consumers’" aparece-me numa altura em que ando a fermentar uma ideia.

Neste postal recente apresentei um insight poderoso:

"Customers often think we are different not because we are different, but because we recognize what makes them different."

 Há dias num artigo qualquer alguém recordava a falência da Monitor fundada por Porter e declarava-a como sinal do fim das vantagens competitivas. No entanto, não consigo engolir essa afirmação.

Acredito é que o material das vantagens competitivas agora é outro. No apogeu do século XX a grande massa de plankton estava disposta a comprar o que a produção lhes oferecia. A competição era pela eficiência, a vantagem competitiva era o preço.

Há medida que convergimos para Mongo e que a massa de plankton diminui para dar lugar a cada vez mais tribos apaixonadas, e se a vantagem competitiva passa agora pela capacidade de co-criar valor através de interacções preciosas? E se a vantagem competitiva passa agora não pelo que cada um tem mas pelo que resulta da interacção entre o que cada um tem?

O artigo inicial remete-me para o número crescente de tribos de consumidores extremistas, os tais assimétricos de que falava Taleb, gente que valoriza uma interacção com gente do mesmo sangue.

o potencial de subida na escala de valor ...

Um título que diz tudo "The World's Worst Pricing Model":

". . . is also one of the world’s most popular. It is cost-plus. I’m talking about anything where the price is based on a mark-up applied to costs.
...
Cost-plus pricing has many apparent advantages. It is simple to use, appears systematic, even “scientific” and can be easily audited. It avoids the need to get to grips with the psychology of pricing. On the debit side, though, it can leave huge amounts of money on the table and in some cases destroy a business.
...
you need to understand what value you actually provide to customers. This can surprisingly hard because if you have been operating cost-plus you have been able to avoid thinking about it. It needs an understanding of context.
...
Secondly, you need to be sufficiently different from your competitors that they will pay for the value you create. If you are just one of the crowd, it makes no difference how much value you create; one of your competitors will be stupid enough to quote a daily rate or other cost-plus amount and you will have to match it. All that extra value you create is captured by the customer.
.
So there are the two things you need to do:
.
Develop distinctive skills;
Understand and communicate the full value of what you do.
It’s surprisingly rare to find businesses that are really good at this, but if you could develop these two skills maybe you also could raise your margins from 25% to 70%."

E este é o método mais usado em todo o mundo... o potencial de subida na escala de valor

A experiência é o truque

"Whoever gets the experience right will be the winner, because people don't always want the least expensive thing, and early majority and late adopter customers don't appreciate the newest technology, but everyone wants a great experience. Since experience can be improved in any product or service, in any industry or situation, the opportunities to improve customer experience are virtually unlimited, and simply waiting for the right entrepreneur or innovator to come along."

Trecho retirado de "Why You Should Spend Bigger on Customer Experience Innovation"

Foco e mosaico de actividades (parte II)

Parte I.

"Two archetypes describe companies that aspire to a coherent strategy but struggle to develop one:
.
4. Portfolio-constrained companies offer a diverse group of products and services, which makes it very difficult to agree on company-wide priorities (although they’d like to do so).
.
5. Unfocused companies are pretty good at a lot of things, but not great at anything [Moi ici: Como não recordar Bruce Jenner] — and thus, although they value coherence, they struggle to choose which capabilities to prioritize."

O medo de deixar alguns clientes para a concorrência... ai a curva de Stobachoff


Trechos retirados de "11 Types of Strategic Maturity: Which One Describes Your Company?"

Curiosidade do dia aka Não perca o "The making of: O próximo enorme aumento de impostos"

Ao que acrescento, retirado de "O adeus de Passos Coelho":

"Vivemos numa embriaguez pós-crise que pode sair-nos cara mas que parece impossível de evitar. Quem estiver sóbrio será sempre acusado dos mais variados defeitos. São assim as euforias, tal e qual como nos mercados financeiros, enquanto a música estiver a tocar todos terão que dançar.
...
Hoje podíamos escolher a forma de resolver alguns desses problemas, controlar a solução, minimizar os danos. Mas ninguém quer. Tal como no passado quisemos acreditar que estávamos ricos e podíamos encher o país de auto-estradas e viver de crédito bancário, hoje voltamos à mesma crença do crescimento infinito de rendimentos, sem que se diga que para isso é preciso produzir mais e melhor.
...
Ninguém quer saber do passado como também dizia esta semana na SIC Pedro Santana Lopes. Como também ninguém quer saber do futuro. Cansados de crise, queremos viver o presente. A história agradecerá a Passos o que fez pelo país. Esperemos que os portugueses não tenham também de se lembrar dos avisos que fez. Porque os problemas estão lá, à espera de serem resolvidos para não empobrecermos. Com esta solução governativa, já percebemos, não serão resolvidos, não existem condições políticas para isso. António Costa sabe isso como saberá também o novo líder do PSD. Até à formação de uma maioria diferente desta continuaremos nesta ilusão de infinita reposição de rendimentos que levou ao adeus de Passos Coelho."

O povo gosta de fragilistas. Espero que o próximo "Passos" deixe o regime rebentar antes de começar a reconstrução.

BTW:

• Hospitais deixaram mais 307 milhões por pagar até Julho
• Bruxelas diz que é preciso compensar em 2018 custo com reformas antecipadas

Já imagino o Cortes a pedir mais impostagem para salvar a sua milionária pensão. eheheh Vai ter azar, vai tudo ser corrido a Rendimento Básico Universal e a esquerda ainda não percebeu o que anda a cavar.

Foco e mosaico de actividades

"We equate maturity with progress on the path to coherence. Companies are coherent when they align their value proposition and distinctive capabilities system with the right marketplace opportunities — and their whole portfolio of products and services. This typically means identifying the few things your company needs to be really good at, and then developing those few complex capabilities until they’re world-class and interlocking. [Moi ici: Recordar os mosaicos de actividades] If you can do this, the market rewards you with outsize returns.
.
These days, most companies recognize the value of this strategic approach, but it isn’t always easy to get from today’s incoherence to tomorrow’s focused strategy.
...
The first three archetypes represent companies that are not concerned about coherence at all. They have not tried to establish focus and consistency in their portfolio of products and services, their capabilities, or value propositions, and they are not visibly moving in that direction:
.
1. Strategically adrift companies are either failing or lucky. They don’t have a meaningful strategic direction or a clear view of how they create value. The market generally does not perceive them as being advantaged.
.
2. Undifferentiated companies have products and services that compete effectively, but they lack a focused identity that sets them apart. Because individual products are relatively easy to copy, their advantage generally isn’t sustainable.
.
3. Underleveraged companies have a relevant strategic direction and good execution; they do many things right. But their strategy lacks coherence — it is based on following multiple directions, even if they fit together poorly. These companies risk losing to more focused competitors."

Até dói. Todos os meses encontro empresas que cabem nestes três grupos... o potencial de valor destruído.

Continua.

Trechos retirados de "11 Types of Strategic Maturity: Which One Describes Your Company?"

Permutar não é arte

"It’s no secret that the world of in-person, store-based retail is losing a major portion of its business to online retailing.  This isn’t surprising. Any store can lose business when competitive stores open up, especially when those competitors offer advantages it can’t offer, such as breadth of selection, price and convenience.
.
But online retailing doesn’t hold all of the advantages. If brick and mortar retailers want to survive – and even thrive – in this new marketplace, it’s important they play to their strengths and not to the strengths of their online competitors.
Let’s start with in-person retailing most important competitive advantage: It’s in person.
...
A store sales person has the opportunity to engage a customer, learn about them, and customize the dialogue in way that is personally relevant to that customer.  An amazon.com page may be able to offer a buyer products that are relevant based on past browsing or purchases, but amazon.com is unable to help the customer form a nuanced, personalized, meaningful story about how a certain product is a great choice for them. [Moi ici: Daí a importância das interacções essa magia que sublinhamos vezes sem conta nesta vida] As amazing as it is, amazon.com is essentially the world’s biggest, most high-powered vending machine.
...
This is the first element that can distinguish an in-person store experience: the feeling that a real person is working with you to accomplish what you are trying to accomplish. [Moi ici: E com uma "real person" há a possibilidade de criar algo de novo, há a possibilidade da arte. Customização matemática, permutar materiais e cores, não é o mesmo que arte]
...
Brick and mortar retailers have lost many of the advantages they once had, including providing better access to products and the convenience of “location, location, location.” But they still have the advantage of proximate, meaningful human contact, which, in many situations, is a competitive advantage that can win the love – and loyalty – of customers."

Trechos retirados de "How Not to Fail at Retail"

Quantos decisores corariam?

1º Considerar a transição para aquilo a que chamamos de Mongo, a evolução para o Estranhistão = um mundo com cada vez mais tribos apaixonadas e menos gente dentro da caixa da normalidade. Cada vez mais gente que não quer ser tratada como mais um, como plankton.

2º Há anos que escrevo aqui e prego, muitas vezes no deserto, acerca das consequências desta evolução para as empresas, um perigo para as empresas grandes, uma exigência crescente para mais empresas mais pequenas para serem focadas num grupo específico de clientes. Pois, salami slicers em vez de Bruce Jenner! E recordar este insight poderoso:

"Customers often think we are different not because we are different, but because we recognize what makes them different"

O trecho que se segue encaixa-se perfeitamente nesta linha de raciocínio:

"Customers are often more heterogeneous than the companies that serve them. Trying to be a one-stop shop and attempting to appeal to a wide spectrum of customers, isn’t necessarily a smart strategy."[Moi ici: Quantos decisores corariam se lessem este trecho e intuissem o que é que ele significa?]

Poucos acreditam num engenheiro da província que faz previsões sobre um futuro a que apelida de Mongo. No entanto, ... muito à frente.

"If you are in an industry where most firms are alike, and the norm is to offer value to a wide spectrum of customers, I predict that at some point – maybe not too far into your future – someone will disrupt your industry by developing a superior value proposition for a very particular customer segment. It’s in those industries where innovation is most feasible and plausible.
...
Focusing your value proposition – whether it is the one for customers or the one for employees – on a specific group of people can empower you to make innovative trade-offs. It can enable you to eliminate traditional trappings that are no longer to everyone’s liking and do a better job across different dimensions.
.
In this way, homogeneity in your industry allows you to stop doing certain things that have become outdated. It frees you up to stop offering services and products that target everyone. This opportunity for innovation is not about emulating the awe-inspiring, hi-tech Silicon Valley firms, instead, it’s about making smarter use of the heterogeneity in your business."

Isto é tão claro, tão inevitável para mim...

Imaginem o impacte que isto terá para as empresas grandes...

Pensem nos hummer da Volvo.

Trechos retirados de "Strategy - stop doing what everyone does"

Estas coisas não lembram à corte lesboeta (parte II)

Parte I.

Outro exemplo avançado do futuro que nos espera, a falta de mão-de-obra, "Calçado tem mais de 800 empregos aprovados no 2020 e queixa-se de falta de trabalhadores".

Veremos isto generalizar-se cada vez mais.