"Deixar de ser uma Arca de Noé"

E volto à leitura de "The World of Work to 2030" para encontrar uma série de textos que parecem tirados deste blogue. Textos acerca de como competir em Mongo:

"You just won't see it coming 

Buyers, whether businesses or consumers, will become even more swamped by choice than they are today. This means you will have to fight harder to rise above the noise of the competition. [Moi ici: Uma paisagem cada vez mais enrugada, cada vez mais picos]

...

Focus and Size

The forces playing out mean that companies everywhere will face continual, relentless, competitive threats. This poses an obvious question: How to respond?

To succeed in the future, companies will be forced to think consciously about what they are and how they do it. With competition becoming incessant and global, companies will need to decide what they do, what market they will focus on and where they will specialize. Most importantly, at the same time, they will consciously decide what they are not, which markets they are not focusing on and where they will not specialize.

This merely echoes what Harvard Business School professor Michael Porter said when defining strategy: 'the essence of strategy, is choosing what not to do.'

...

Just say 'no' 

The challenge in business (and to a similar extent in our personal lives) is that we seek to do too much ourselves. When a customer calls us asking for help, or wanting a different product or a different service, we dislike saying no. The same thing happens in our personal lives where we seek to do everything - all the tasks that life presents us with, from gardening to decorating - and to be expert in them all. No business can be expert in everything. It is exceptionally easy to say 'yes' to a customer. But as we progress further away from what we are good at, from what we are known for and from where our expertise lies, the thinner the ice on which we are skating and the greater the risk in something going wrong.

...

To be successful, companies will not be able to be all things to all customers. They can't spread themselves too thin being, in effect, wide and shallow. If they do, competition will swarm around them, nibbling away and they will suffer the death of a thousand cuts. Rather, to succeed and protect themselves, businesses will define their purpose more narrowly, more specifically, and will then seek to achieve depth, seeking dominance of that narrow space. Going forward, successful businesses will no longer be generalists: average will no longer be enough, depth and specialism will be critical.

...

Being a generalist is not sustainable. Focus and depth of specialism, combined with scale in that specialism, is needed in order to be successful."

Como não recuar a 2006 e a "Deixar de ser uma Arca de Noé". 

Como não reflectir nesta incoerência recente e sinto que algo não bate certo. 

Como não ligar ao ainda fresco Os últimos moicanos.

Os últimos moicanos.

Há mais de 15 anos li o meu primeiro livro de Adrian Slywotzky, "Value Migration". Gostei tanto que nos anos seguintes li mais seis.

Era capaz de jurar a pés juntos que foi num desses livros que li um caso sobre um fabricante de televisores a preto e branco que em vez de fechar, ou de avançar para os televisores a cores, se focou em tirar o melhor partido possível dessa tecnologia "obsoleta", e fazer prolongar o tempo de vida. Já procurei e voltei a procurar e não consigo encontrar esse caso.

Penso muitas vezes nesse caso quando penso no futuro das empresas dos sectores tradicionais, num mundo em que os custos sobem e os preços não conseguem acompanhar. Algo ilustrado pelo já clássico triângulo dos "Flying Geese".

Segunda-feira passada voltei a recordar isto quando dei de caras com este artigo "When firms may benefit from sticking with an old technology".

O artigo sugere que as empresas podem alcançar um aumento de desempenho mantendo a tecnologia antiga em mercados com descontinuidades tecnológicas, aqui é mais incapacidade de subir margens, pelas seguintes razões:

• Mongo - Heterogeneidade de preferência do cliente: Em mercados onde uma descontinuidade tecnológica expõe a heterogeneidade de preferência latente do cliente para certos atributos da tecnologia antiga, as empresas que continuam a oferecer a tecnologia antiga podem atender a segmentos de nicho de clientes que ainda valorizam esses atributos específicos. Mais uma vez, aqui não é descontinuidade tecnológica, mas flexibilidade associada a acabamento e/ou design.
• Nichos Sustentáveis: A revelação de nichos sustentáveis para a tecnologia antiga, mesmo após o surgimento de uma nova tecnologia, pode ter implicações críticas de desempenho para as empresas. Esses nichos representam áreas onde a tecnologia antiga é persistentemente favorecida pelos clientes, apesar da disponibilidade de alternativas mais recentes.
• Recuperação do desempenho: Embora o declínio inicial no desempenho possa ser observado para empresas que aderem à tecnologia antiga quando surge uma nova tecnologia, há um aumento subsequente no desempenho à medida que as empresas se adaptam e inovam dentro das restrições da tecnologia antiga . Essa recuperação no desempenho pode levar a oportunidades potenciais de crescimento e expansão para empresas que optam por manter a tecnologia antiga.

Julgo que com as empresas dos sectores tradicionais falamos sobretudo de trabalhar a heterogeneidade de preferência do cliente e nichos sustentáveis. Isto implica repensar a missão e a identidade da empresa, como compete e, por isso, como deve operar.

Nash Equilibrium and Mongo

Oiço a explicação de Nash e visualizo a minha descrição de Mongo!

Acerca de Mongo:

• Criatividade e Mongo
• 1 Origem de uma metáfora
• Mongo é inevitável

Menos dor na transição

Esta semana apanhei nas notícias:

• Fábrica que fazia casacos de luxo fecha da noite para o dia (Têxtil de Penafiel despede 120 funcionárias por email na véspera do regresso ao trabalho. Encerramento justificado com falta de serviço) - JN de quinta-feira passada.
• Sapatos aclamados por Paulo Portas nas mãos da banca - JdN de quinta-feira passada.

Entretanto ontem no JdN: "Dinamarqueses contratam mil para uma nova fábrica":

"A Coloplast, cuja atividade inclui cuidados em ostomia, em continência e urologia, vai investir 100 milhões de euros em Portugal naquela que será a sua maior unidade industrial.

Na nova fábrica, que irá erguer em Felgueiras, conta vir a empregar mais de mil pessoas."

Já por várias vezes referi a Coloplast aqui no blogue, um praticante de Mongo na indústria farmacêutica. É uma boa notícia e um exemplo concreto da teoria dos Flying Geese. 

Alguns vão dizer:

- Não há pessoas para trabalhar, ainda para mais em Felgueiras, um concelho com pleno-emprego. 

A rentabilidade de uma empresa como a Coloplast permite-lhe pagar salários que os incumbentes em Felgueiras nunca conseguirão. 

Conseguem imaginar o aumento da produtividade de um trabalhador que sai da costura ou montagem de sapatos, para uma linha de montagem da Coloplast? Sem formação (lerolero ou caridadezinha) que não a dada pela empresa. Recordo daqui: 

"Há uma forma rápida de aumentar a produtividade de uma costureira! Basta despedi-la de uma fábrica subcontratada por uma marca para costurar T-shirts e, adimiti-la numa outra fábrica, na mesma rua, que tem marca própria e fabrica T-shirts para vender com essa marca"

Sabem o que isto faz? Contribui para diminuir a dor na transição referida em Falta a parte dolorosa da transição (Parte VI)

Heresias

Ando a ler Dominion de Tom Holland. É fascinante perceber como 150 anos depois de Cristo havia uma multidão de crenças e variantes acerca da pregação de Jesus. Só por volta do ano 180 nasceu a ideia de um canon. Só por volta do ano 325 apareceu o Credo de Niceia, mais por imposição política do imperador Constantino que queria aproveitar o cristianismo para uma religio de estado. Interessante perceber como evoluiu a relação dos cristãos ricos com a riqueza. 

Por exemplo, Santo Agostinho achava que os pobres não eram mais puros de coração do que os ricos. Para ele, todos estavam perdidos. "Abandonem o orgulho, e o dinheiro não fará qualquer mal."

Entretanto, ontem li "John Gray's The New Leviathans - is the world doomed to get worse?"e não pude deixar de pensar em Mongo e num postal sobre as ideias de Fukuyama, Mongo, tribos e política.

"They all have in their sights what Gray regards as a distinctively modern myth: the conviction that humanity is moving towards a common destination - a combination of liberal democracy, laissez-faire economics and scientific progress. Recent history - from the débâcle of nation-building in Iraq, through the global financial crisis to the sharpening of geopolitical tensions between the US and China - seems to encourage the conclusion that it will be later rather than sooner. [Moi ici: A minha convicção dos anos 70 e destruída pelos separatistas islâmicos das Filipinas algures a meio da década de 90 - 1 Origem de uma metáfora]

Central to most versions of liberalism, in Gray's sceptical view, is a faith in the "corrigibility and improvability of all social institutions and political arrangements". But it does not follow from this assault on liberal optimism that Gray believes social or political progress to be impossible. Rather, the hard lesson he wants readers to take from the new book is that it is always, and everywhere, precarious and provisional.

It is a fact of our natures that human beings have conflicting needs and demands; social peace "is a truce, partial and temporary, between humankind and itself." What political philosophers call the state of nature - in which, as the 17th-century English thinker Thomas Hobbes famously put it, life is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" - is never far away. [Moi ici: Interessante como isto se relaciona com as ideias de Tom Holland. O Cristianismo como uma força fundamental na formação da civilização ocidental, influenciando tudo, desde a política e a moral até a arte e a literatura. Quando como sociedade nos afastamos dele, recordar "Deus morreu!" de Nietzsche, o deslaçamento dos valores vai progredindo, da corrupção à celebração da barbárie nas ruas. Até aos "cabritas reis"]

...

He is much more convincing, however, when he suggests that wokeism is a "footnote to Christianity" [Moi ici: Algo que julgo Tom Holland também partilha] sustained by the belief that the world is perfectible. In fact, on Gray's account of the "psychology of the political believer", the same is true of liberalism itself, which, like all large-scale projects of human emancipation (including communism and socialism), is so much spilt religion."

Heresia - “Heresy” comes from the Greek verb hairein, which means to choose. The idea is, heresy is the result of choosing one thing that is true and then running with it until it distorts everything else. Eu, que partilho das ideias liberais acredito que os seus maiores inimigos são os liberais sem freio.

O mundo é um lugar heterogéneo (Mongo)

Uma das citações na coluna das mesmas é:

"When something is commoditized, an adjacent market becomes valuable"

 Algo que escrevi aqui no blogue pela primeira vez em 2013.

Penso:

• nas televisões a cores que não mataram as televisões a preto e branco;
• nos discos de vinil;
• nas cassestes audio;
• nos filmes a preto e branco;
• nos catálogos em papel;
• nos jogos de tabuleiro;
• nas livrarias independentes.

Agora descubro, "When firms may benefit from sticking with an old technology":

"In some markets, the rise of a discontinuous technology, besides posing a substitute threat to the old technology, further exposes niche segments where customers continue to favor the old technology. This paper predicts that within such a market, as competitors increasingly adopt the new technology for varied motives, firms sticking with the old technology may see their performance declining before rebounding and potentially reaching new heights.

...

this paper further emphasizes the importance of attending to the inherent heterogeneity of a demand context in analyzing the dynamics of technological change and its performance implications at both the market and firm levels. Such demand heterogeneity, due to varied sources, may preserve niche opportunities in a market for an old technology, preventing it from complete displacement by the new technology. This subsequently makes it possible for firms sticking with the old technology to thrive for an unexpectedly long period despite the rise of a new technology with superior functionality."

O mundo é como o planeta Mongo, uma paisagem muito enrugada.  

Vantagem competitiva, capital intelectual externo e Mongo

Ontem, aproveitando uma viagem de ida e volta a Bragança iniciei a escuta do livro "The Coming Wave" de Mustafa Suleyman e Michael Bhaskar.

A certa altura, já no regresso fixei este trecho tão ao jeito de Mongo:

“The field of systems biology aims to understand the “larger picture” of a cell, tissue, or organism by using bioinformatics and computational biology to see how the organism works holistically; such efforts could be the foundation for a new era of personalized medicine. Before long the idea of being treated in a generic way will seem positively medieval; everything, from the kind of care we receive to the medicines we are offered, will be precisely tailored to our DNA and specific biomarkers. Eventually, it might be possible to reconfigure ourselves to enhance our immune responses. That, in turn, might open the door to even more ambitious experimentation like longevity and regenerative technologies, already a burgeoning area of research.” 

Ao ouvir isto pensei logo no que pode tornar obsoleta a indústria farmacêutica tal como a conhecemos. E foi então que a imagem de Roger Martin, "For me, the metaphor for competitive advantage is a long row of rooms. In this conception, every company, at any given point in time, exists in a room of its own making", publicada ontem no blogue me assaltou. Quando aqui escrevo sobre a importância do investimento directo estrangeiro, estou na verdade a abordar a possibilidade de capital intelectual vindo de fora permitir unidades de negócio que dão saltos na sequência da "row of rooms"

Um mindset diferente

Há anos escrevi sobre o caso da VW e a Deutsche Post, Mongo a bater à porta. Tão bom!!! 

Recordei logo ao ler "Six Mindsets to Help You Change the World" de John Mullins e publico no número de Outono da Rotman Magazine:

"MINDSET 1: Yes, We Can!

When a customer asks an entrepreneur to do something that they are not currently doing for them, the answer isn't, Sorry, we don't offer that'; instead they say, "'Yes, we can!' Then they figure out how to deliver on the promise.

Big companies almost never do this. Broadly speaking, leaders are advised to 'stick to their knitting': They are supposed to know what their organization's core competencies are, nurture them and do what they can to make them more robust. If a customer asks for something outside the box, they say, 'No, I'm sorry, we don't offer that.'

...

MINDSET 2: Problem-First, Not Product-First Logic 

Big companies are obsessed with their products, to a fault in some cases. Take for example, the laundry detergent category. My family and I have I used Tide detergent for many years, and every time a new brand manager comes along, they tweak the product: They might add green speckles to the powder, change the scent slightly or add more water so the liquid soap pours easier. Does any of this count as innovation? I don't think so. Entrepreneurs like Jonathan Thorne, in contrast, start with a customer problem. Thorne, the founder of Silverglide Surgical Technologies, had developed a technology that stopped the surgical instruments used in medical procedures from sticking to human tissue. He asked himself, 'What are the most common sticky-tissue problems?'

...

MINDSET 3: Think Narrowly, Not Broadly, About Your Markets 

Big-company wisdom is straightforward: 'If we're going to trydoing something new, it has to be for a big market.' Any new product or service has to be big enough to 'move the needle' for the company. Otherwise, why bother? The best entrepreneurs, on the other hand, don't worry about how big the target market is at the outset. They realize that if they build a foundation in a narrow market from which they can learn, good things will happen. They start out thinking narrowly, not broadly. After all, it's far easier to solve the problems of a narrowly defined target market than to make one product that attempts to serve all."

Mongo e o "Bud Light Fiasco"

O planeta Mongo da série de banda desenhada Flash Gordon é o lar de várias tribos e reinos com culturas, tecnologias e sistemas distintos. Da mesma forma, a economia pós-século XX é marcada pela complexidade e diversidade da oferta e procura cada vez mais atomizada e apaixonada. Foi disso que me lembrei em 2007 para criar uma metáfora que dura até aos dias de hoje (A cauda longa e o planeta Mongo).

Seth Godin usa uma imagem interessante, o século XX via os clientes como plancton, uma massa homogénea. Eu vejo o século XXI como o tempo de Mongo, ou do Estranhistão, terra de Um número infinito de nichos.

Em Novembro passado escapou-me este artigo sobre Mongo, "Strategy in a Hyperpolitical World":

"So what does that mean for strategy?

We define strategy as the art of making informed choices in a competitive environment. Choices are important when differing paths lead to differential risks and rewards. When the social environment is broadly favorable to business, a company's strategic choices can be justified in purely business terms or, as necessary, finessed with carefully crafted press releases. Today, however, choices must be made on an expanded playing field. They are often complex because the underlying ethical, social, and political issues are constantly evolving and defy simple analysis. To make and implement the best strategic choices in this environment, leaders will have to (1) develop robust principles to guide strategic choices, (2) address ethical issues early, (3) consistently communicate and implement their choices, (4) engage beyond the industry to shape the context, and (5) learn from mistakes to make better choices."

Entretanto, há dias li "The Strategy Lesson from the Bud Light Fiasco": 

"A company’s goal should be to present an offering — supported by compelling messaging — that has advantaged appeal to the biggest circle possible. That may be a relatively small circle — Red Bay Coffee — or a relatively big one — Starbucks Coffee. But it should be as big a circle as the offering can support.

The Temptation

In pursuing the biggest circle supportable, companies are forever tempted to send different messages to different parts of their audience — whether inside or outside the confines of their current circle — in an attempt to strengthen and/or enlarge their circle.

...

this kind of thing is getting ever more dangerous with ever increasing transparency,

...

In this age of fuller transparency, brands must think a lot more thoroughly and carefully about the heterogeneity of their Where to Play (WTP), which hangs together now and produces their current market share. But under its apparently calm surface, that overall share hides fault lines — those customers aren’t all the same even if they buy the same product. If a brand isn’t careful, it can take those fault lines that lie benignly beneath the surface and turn them into giant fissures with its actions.

...

The naïve idea — not an unusual one but naïve nonetheless — was that Bud Light could keep all its current customers, and, with this terrific new message, could appeal to some new ones (whether light users or non-users). This kind of naivety has always been dangerous. But it has gotten a lot more so in this hyperpolitical and transparent world.

The Particular Challenge for Broad-Based Companies

It is particularly challenging for broad-based companies and going to get more challenging. The broader-based a company is, the greater heterogeneity its customer base is likely to embody. Every company will have heterogeneity in its customer base. But a giant retailer, like Target, will likely have a greater level of heterogeneity in its customer base than tiny LGBTQ+-friendly clothing retailer, WILDFANG. Ultra Right Beer was launched to woo disaffected Bud Light customers and seemed deliriously happy to hit the $1 million mark in sales. But that is one-five thousandth of the (pre-fiasco) sales of Bud Light. With great size comes more dangerous and pronounced fault lines."

Como não recuar a 2014 e a "-Tu não és meu irmão de sangue!"

O século XX económico (da inauguração da linha de montagem da Ford até à queda do Muro de Berlin) foi um acidente histórico que agora estamos a corrigir, o futuro não é de homogeneidade, mas de heterogeneidade. E mundos heterogéneos não são meigos para com os gigantes. Nunca esqueço: Too big to care.

Num cenário polarizado ...

Há muitos anos que aqui no blogue, praticamente desde a primeira hora, escrevo sobre a importância de seleccionar os clientes-alvo e trabalhar para eles. Por exemplo, em 2006 escrevia sobre o perigo de ser uma Arca de Noé:

• Deixar de ser uma Arca de Noé
• Porque não podemos ser uma Arca de Noé!

A reforçar esta mensagem de focalização nos clientes-alvo, tenho desenvolvido aqui também a metáfora de Mongo, um mundo pleno de variedade e de tribos numa paisagem enrugada:

• 1 Origem de uma metáfora
• Criatividade e Mongo
• Covid, empresas, estratégias e paisagens enrugadas

Às vezes criticam-me porque supostamente no mundo actual as empresas tanto podem servir em simultâneo gregos como troianos. No entanto, continuo na minha, ainda na semana passada li, "Why Mushroom Leather (and Other New Materials) Are Struggling to Scale":

"Compare the number of venture capital firms funding software to the number of venture firms specialising in material innovation or fashion. There are far fewer.

The reasons for the chasm are structural. Once a software solution is invented, the marginal cost to distribute the second, third and one millionth sale are close to zero. By contrast, once a new material is invented, the marginal costs for subsequent units are nearly the same. It is only with learning and scale that costs begin to decrease.

At the same time, building the capacity to produce new materials often requires considerable capital expenditure to build out infrastructure."

Entretanto, ontem li "The Myth of the Mainstream":

"Chasing the mass market is a losing proposition for marketers in a polarized culture. Allying with the subculture that loves you is the best way to drive brand success.

...

For years, McDonald's seemed to embody everything that was wrong with the American diet. The brand had become a symbol of food choices that were driving escalating rates of obesity and hypertension.

The company spent more than a decade trying to fight this perception among American consumers by targeting them with messaging about its updated menu, which offered healthier alternatives more in line with contemporary diet trends - but to no avail. Year over year, McDonald's sales declined, and its brand perception continued to spiral downward.

...

Finally, the company decided to go on the offensive. Instead of combating the opposition's hate and attempting to win over those in the middle, McDonald's decided to focus on its fans - the people who self-identify as McDonald's devotees despite the vitriol directed at the brand. 

...

In doing so, it tapped into what these devotees love about McDonald's and not only activated their collective consumption but also inspired them to spread the word on behalf of the brand. The result of this strategy was a 10.4% increase in global revenue for McDonald's from 2018 to 2021 and the return of dormant customers: more than a quarter of those who came in to buy the Travis Scott meal, for example, hadn't visited the chain in over a year. Seemingly overnight, McDonald's went from being a cautionary tale to the darling of brand marketing and a case study for advertising effectiveness.

If you want to get people to move, you must choose a side. The notion that you can win by playing to the middle is a misleading myth.

What's going on here? Conventional wisdom would tell us that in a world of increasingly polarized opinions, our best bet is to appease the middle, if only because that's where the majority of the market is. That also seems like a safe bet to many companies, as a middle-of-the-road position is less likely to alienate potential customers.

...

The middle doesn't adopt new products with any urgency. They are not the first to respond to marketing communications, nor are they likely to weigh in on a debate between advocates and detractors. They mitigate their own risk of moving out of step with what might be considered generally acceptable by stepping back and observing other people's responses first.

The red herring is that we perceive this indifference as an opportunity to persuade them to one side or the other. But the truth is, they are not typically convinced by any marketing communications. Instead, they, too, take cues from other people - sometimes those who are for you, and at other times those who are against you.

Our chances of successfully influencing behavior increases when we choose to address the people who are most likely to take action.

With this in mind, it becomes abundantly clear that in a polarized scenario, the chances of marketers getting people to move are far greater when we activate the collective of the willing as opposed to trying to convince detractors or even persuade the indifferent."

Sobre a polarização do mercado, recordo Polarização do mercado ou como David e Golias podem co-existir. 

É impressionante a diferença de ritmo entre os dois lados do Atlântico.

Uma série de postais nos últimos 30 dias aqui no blogue sobre o tema do reshoring:

• Outros sintomas de que o mundo está a mudar 
• Mais sintomas de como o mundo está a mudar
• Sonho ... deliro.

No Domingo passado publiquei o tweet:

"76.3% - Increase in U.S. construction spending, mostly on factories, in May from a year earlier."

Consequências da I.R.S.?

— Carlos P da Cruz 🇺🇦🚜🇳🇱🇬🇪 (@ccz1) July 9, 2023

Ontem apanhei este vídeo de Peter Zeihan:

Além do tema do tweet acima, o vídeo acaba com a referência a dois temas interessantes: 

• a relação entre inflação e reshoring (É transitória ...); e
• Mongo

"doubled construction stuff spending again. So, we were already at record levels three years ago, we've now doubled the record and this is going on from there. Now this does mean we're going to have some more inflation in the short in the midterm because there's no way you double the size of the industrial plant without that, but once we get to the back side of this a few years from now, we will have a supply chain system that is local, that is employed by locals, that serves local customers and uses less energy and less water and has fewer steps and it's largely immune to International shocks"

Algo que me faz pensar no regresso da indústria às cidades. 

Não somos plancton

"If we had to highlight a single cause for the rise in inflation, it must be the over-reliance of central banks on what goes by the name of workhorse macroeconomic models. This is not a prediction failure at its heart. It goes deeper. Modern macroeconomics has lost the ability, if it ever had it, to understand the dynamics of the 21st-century global economy."

Em Mongo os clientes não gostam de ser tratados como plancton. 

Retirado da revista The Economist.

A lente macro é tão ...

"When the world's business and political leaders gathered in 2018 at the annual economic forum in Davos, Switzerland, the mood was jubilant. Growth in every major country was on an upswing. The global economy, declared Christine Lagarde, then the managing director of the International Monetary Fund, "is in a very sweet spot." Five years later, the outlook has decidedly soured.

...

A lot has happened between then and now: A global pandemic hit; war erupted in Europe; tensions between the United States and China boiled. And inflation, thought to be safely stored away with disco album collections, returned with a vengeance. But as the dust has settled, it has suddenly seemed as if almost everything we thought we knew about the world economy was wrong. [Moi ici: Mas quem é que achava que estava tudo bem?]

The economic conventions that policymakers had relied on since the Berlin Wall fell more than 30 years ago - the unfailing superiority of open markets, liberalized trade and maximum efficiency look to be running off the rails. [Moi ici: Este blogue sempre achou errada a crença absoluta na maximização da eficiência, basta recordar os marcadores eficiência, eficientismo e denominador]

...

Globalization, seen in recent decades as unstoppable a force as gravity, is clearly evolving in unpredictable ways.  [Moi ici: Outra tema caro a este blogue, há mais de 17 anos que escrevemos aqui sobre as forças a minar a globalização. Recordo O regresso dos clientes, Especulação - um epílogo?] The move away from an integrated world economy is accelerating. And the best way to respond is a subject of fierce debate.

...

As the consulting firm EY concluded in its 2023 Geostrategic Outlook, the trends behind the shift away from ever-increasing globalization "were accelerated by the Covid-19 pandemic - and then they have been supercharged by the war in Ukraine."[Moi ici: Nunca esqueço de Maio de 2020 - El coronavirus actúa como acelerador de cambios que ya estaban en marcha]

...

Associated economic theories about the ineluctable rise of worldwide free market capitalism took on a similar sheen of invincibility and inevitability. Open markets, hands-off government and the relentless pursuit of efficiency would offer the best route to prosperity. [Moi ici: Recordo aquilo a que chamo a doença anglo-saxónica, recordo as críticas que fazemos há anos à automatização - Especulação sobre mais um falhanço da automatização, recordo o que escrevo sobre Kevin O'Leary]

...

The story of the international economy today, said Henry Farrell, a professor at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, is about "how geopolitics is gobbling up hyperglobalization. [Moi ici: O que me impressiona nestas análises é que me parecem demasiado macro. Há mais de uma década que a globalização está a recuar por causa de Mongo, por causa do fim do modelo do século XX, por causa de "We are all weird"]

...

"Ignoring the economic dependencies that had built up over the decades of liberalization had become really perilous," Mr. Sullivan, the U.S. national security adviser, said. Adherence to "oversimplified market efficiency," he added, proved to be a mistake." [Moi ici: O que me impressiona nestas análises é a crença de que a economia é como a física newtoniana, quando a economia é a continuação da biologia"]

Trechos retirados do artigo, "Failures of Globalization Shatter Long-Held Beliefs", publicado no NYT do passado Domingo. 

Cuidado com o eficientismo

Há anos que escrevo sobre os que olham para a Economia como se olha para a ciência de Galileu ou de Newton. Em Economia o que é verdade hoje amanhã é mentira, e vice versa.

"By concentrating production in large facilities, companies can achieve economies of scale that lower the costs of production. [Moi ici: Racional típico do século XX em que que a competição pela eficiência e custo unitário era a única possibilidade de ser bem sucedido] Large-scale equipment can be operationally more efficient than smaller units.

...

To be sure, scale does not automatically translate to lower costs. In some industries, production might be undertaken on a small scale with little or no disadvantage, and it’s possible to attain economies of scale at medium-sized production units. At times, scale can even be a problem. [Moi ici: Em Mongo a variedade é mais importante que a eficiência]

...

As we’ve seen during the pandemic, overly centralized production can create fragile supply chains

...

Research has found that companies that are big but less centralized — for instance, ones that own facilities spread across the country or around the world — enjoy more limited advantages. This type of scale can yield benefits in the form of lower costs, as a distributed network can avoid the need to transport goods over long distances, and spreading out production across multiple facilities can mitigate the consequences of a disruption at a single plant. 

...

More recent research supports ... that aggregating many production units under common ownership does not yield significant operational efficiencies. And if local and regional markets are best served through a network of local and regional distribution and production facilities, what is the public benefit of a single national corporation consolidating its ownership in place of many local and regional firms? Scale tied to the aggregation of assets comes with organizational challenges that can cause significant inefficiencies. Top-level management may have a harder time directing a dispersed team of managers, necessitating the creation of additional layers of administration to ensure that the corporation and its disparate parts are run effectively. [Moi ici: Por isso há muito tempo que escrevo que a cultura portuguesa não lida bem com as exigências de gestão das organizações grandes] And this bureaucracy can add costs and be a source of inefficiency on its own."

Trechos retirados de "To Regulate Big Corporations, Understand How They Got That Way"

De volta a alguma racionalidade ...

Julgo que tenho acertado numa série de previsões ao longo dos anos, mais do que as vezes que falho. Onde costumo falhar é quando se mete o custo do dinheiro. A manipulação do custo do dinheiro pelos políticos, leva a comportamentos irracionais, ou a exageros exuberantes.

Este artigo, "Why There May Never Be a Gen-Z Glossier or Warby Parker", por um lado, veio-me recordar estas falhas, por outro fez-me voltar a Mongo e aos seus nichos.

"Millennial brands kicked off a decade-long direct-to-consumer gold rush, only to watch their prospects collapse with rising interest rates and the end of the pandemic’s e-commerce boom. Now, Gen-Z brands are trying to avoid the same mistakes.

...

If millennial products were known for their sleek packaging in muted colours, their Gen-Z successors tend to go bold, with splashy fonts in vibrant hues and often an intentionally kitschy vibe. Brands like Everlane and Bonobos were for everyone; skincare brand Topicals, swimwear label Raq Apparel and other Gen-Z companies are all about owning their niche.

...

 Gen-Z brands are coming of age in a difficult economy where “free money” is an increasingly distant memory. Investment in apparel and beauty brands fell by 50 percent globally, to $2 billion last year, according to Pitchbook. That figure is on pace to fall another 40 percent this year. And that cash comes with more strings: a clear, and short, path to profitability matters as much as growth.

...

Whether it's by necessity or design, Gen-Z brands may be setting themselves up for a less-bumpy run than their predecessors. Going after niche audiences is a tried-andtrue way to build a business. It's also cheaper - hyper-local Instagram ads and payouts to micro-influencers are more realistic for brands whose backers have them on a tight leash. So is relying on a big retailer for exposure rather than going it alone. Owning a niche can mean better serving customers - such as providing skin care for textured skin prone to flare-ups (Topicals) or producing undergarments for a range of sizes and gender identities (Parade) - to connect with a generation of values-driven shoppers.

...

“This young cohort of founders are going to have to do a lot more with less,” said Bill Detwiler, managing partner at Fernbrook Capital Management, which invests in e-commerce brands and software and services firms. “You’re going to see a more resilient class of companies come out of this.”

...

Still, investors say Gen-Z brands as a group appear to be scaling at a slower pace, but achieving profitably faster.

...

"The real unicorn in the world today is one that is profitable.""

Volume is vanity, profit is sanity. 

"Time to zag"

Há anos que escrevo sobre Mongo, como o que está a emergir sobre os escombros do modelo do século XX.

Lembro o que escrevi sobre a "suckiness" dos gigantes, uma série com 15 episódios: "Giants invariably descend into suckiness" (parte XV).

Agora em "The age of average" sublinho:

"I believe that the age of average is the age of opportunity.

When every supermarket aisle looks like a sea of sameness, when every category abides by the same conventions, when every industry has converged on its own singular style, bold brands and courageous companies have the chance to chart a different course. To be different, distinctive and disruptive.

So, this is your call to arms. Whether you’re in film or fashion, media or marketing, architecture, automotive or advertising, it doesn’t matter. Our visual culture is flatlining and the only cure is creativity.

It’s time to cast aside conformity. It’s time to exorcise the expected. It’s time to decline the indistinguishable.

For years the world has been moving in the same stylistic direction. And it’s time we reintroduced some originality.

Or as the ad agency BBH says.

When the world zigs. Zag."

Um número infinito de nichos

Ao longo dos anos tenho escrito aqui sobre as plataformas e o "não é winner-take-all". Por exemplo:

•  “It’s a difficult proposition to be all things to all people, as opposed to doing one thing really well” (Agosto de 2021)
• Estratégia em todo lado - não é winner-take-all (parte IV) (Junho de 2021)
• "Scale vs trust" (Janeiro de 20219)
• Estratégia em todo lado - não é winner-take-all (parte V) (Abril de 2017)
• Estratégia em todo lado - não é winner-take-all (parte IV) (Janeiro de 2017)

Sorri ontem ao ler no Twitter:

“The opposite of broadcast: the distribution economics of the internet favor infinite niches, not one-size-fits-all.”
~ David Shields

— Jim O'Shaughnessy (@jposhaughnessy) February 18, 2023

Um número infinto de nichos ... afinal o que é Mongo? Pois, E porque não somos plankton (parte VII)

Postais mais lidos em 2022

Fiquei surpreendido com a lista de postais mais visualizados em 2022. Top 10, do menos lido ao mais lido:

• de Outubro de 2022 - A brutal realidade de uma foto
• de Junho de 2022 - Curiosidade do dia 
• de Agosto de 2022 - Produtividade - escala vs preço
• de Janeiro de 2022 - Empresários e escolaridade ou signaling
• de janeiro de 2022 - Criar as condições para que as empresas do futuro surjam
• de Abril de 2016 - Dois pormaiores
• de Janeiro de 2011 - Inovação e Mongo de braço dado
• de Janeiro de 2011 - Acerca de modelos mentais
• de Abril de 2010 - Para reflexão
• de Março de 2009 - The “plant within a plant” (PWP) (59% do total de visualizações foram em 2022)

"think again of your biology as economic"

Vervaeke has done it again!!!

Episódio 30 - - Awakening from the Meaning Crisis - Relevance Realization Meets Dynamical Systems Theory

A partir do minuto 32 já ouvi o vídeo três vezes!

A relação entre biologia e economia, tão cara a este blogue, expressa em toda a sua força.

A certa altura sorrio e percebo uma analogia que nunca tinha feito. A teoria da evolução não requer a existência de um Arquitecto Celeste capaz do design inteligente. E eu pensei nos que acreditam que um qualquer governo sabe qual é a melhor estratégia a seguir pelos negócios. 

O que se segue é poesia bio-económica:

"… what I want to argue is: there's no essential design on fitted ness.

Some things are fitted in this sense precisely because they are big, some because they are small, some because they are hard, some because they are soft, some because they're long-lived, some because they are short-lived, some because they proliferate greatly, others because they take care of a few young, some are fast, some are slow, some are singular cellular, some are multicellular. [Moi ici: Isto é sobre Mongo!!! Uma paisagem competitiva super enrugada. Cada vez me convenço mais que o modelo económico do século XX foi um fenómeno passageiro. BTW, os despedimentos em curso em organiações como a Meta fazem-me recordar o que escrevi sobre as plataformas e o "não é winner-take-all"]

Like nothing. Nothing because the answer for that of course is deep and profound because the environment is so complex and differentiated and dynamically changing that niches, ways in which you can fit into the environment in order to right promote your survival autopoietic, are varied and changing. See, this is Darwin's insight, there is no essence to design, and there is no essence to fitted ness. If you try and come up with a theory of how organisms have their design, I'm using this in quotation marks, in terms of trying to determine or derive it from the essence of design you are doomed because it doesn't exist.

Darwin realizes; he didn't need such a theory. He needed a theory about how what's relevant, in this biological sense, but a theory about how an organism is fitted. How it is constantly being designed, and redefined by a dynamic process. See, fitted ness is always redefining itself, reconstituting itself, it is something that is constantly within a process of self-organization because there is no essence, and there is no final design on fitted ness. [Moi ici: Isto é voltar ao meu Verão de 2007 e à leitura de Beinhocker - "So who was the winner? What was the best strategy in the end?"]  Fitted ness has to constantly be redesigning itself in a self-organizing fashion so it can constantly pick up on the way a in which the world is constantly varying and dynamically changing. [Moi ici: Se mais empresas percebessem isto ... se mais empresas percebessem a mensagem da Red Queen - Tem de se correr para ficar no mesmo sítio!!! Se mais empresas percebessem que a sobrevivência não é mandatória e que há que trabalhar para merecer um futuro. Um futuro que será necessariamente diferente do presente. Um futuro que sorrirá a quem melhor se preparou para ele. Se mais empresas percebessem que têm de correr como o Legolas da imagem acima, porque é mesmo isto que acontece, mesmo quando o "mar parece calmo"] 

There is no essence to fitted ness, but I don't need a theory of fitness all I need is a theory of how fitted ness is constantly being realized in a self-organizing fashion. That's exactly what the theory of evolution is."

Depois, próximo do minuto 43:

"think again of your biology as economic. This is again part of Darwin's great insight. Now you know, don't be confused. Here, when a lot of times when people hear economic they hear financial economy, but that's not what an economy is, an economy is a self-organization, a self-organizing system that is constantly dealing with the distribution of goods and services."

Perante uma variedade de escolha tremenda

Este artigo, "‘There’s endless choice, but you’re not listening’: fans quitting Spotify to save their love of music", é super interessante e tem algo de Mongo nele.

Perante uma variedade de escolha tremenda, por um lado ficamos paralisados, mas é algo mais do que isso. É o não querer uma vida sem agência, por exemplo.  .