Polarização do mercado ou como David e Golias podem co-existir

Há muito que o fenómeno da polarização dos mercados me fascina. Por polarização entenda-se:

• tem sucesso quem vende o mais barato;
• tem sucesso quem vende caro;
• quem não se define e quer ir a todas as fatias de mercado e, por isso, oferece um produto médio... desaparece.

Daí os marcadores usados com alguma frequência aqui no blogue:

• polarização;
• middle market; e sobretudo
• stuck-in-the-middle (que é onde acaba quem trabalha para a média)

Dai postais como:

• A polarização dos mercados (2011)
• The vanishing middle market (2009) (o artigo da McKinsey citado tem umas imagens eloquentes)
• Quando se acorda atolado num pântano de indefinição... (2006)

Assim, foi com um sorriso de confirmação que vi as evidências do mesmo fenómeno a acontecer na agricultura americana, segundo o artigo "New Data Shows Fewer Farms, Richer Farmers":

"While the average size of farms increased slightly, to 434 acres from 418, the census shows a continuing hollowing out of midsized farms in America. The number of very small farms and very large ones remained constant." (Moi ici: Excelente figura a que se segue)

BTW, recordar de "Profiting from Proliferation" (página 10) este gráfico eloquente:

Tecnologia e salários

Há dias chamei a atenção para isto:

Pede-se aos teóricos sem skin in the game que olhem para as fotos da realidade. Por favor. Veja os empregos criados com curso superior pic.twitter.com/HTL4SdaRr2

— Carlos P da Cruz (@ccz1) June 21, 2017

Agora encontro:

"even more critically, the enabling technology view implies that any improvement in technology should lead to higher wages for all types of workers. But wage declines for low-education workers have been the norm not the exception over the past 30 years in the US labor market. [Moi ici: Acredito que grande parte desta tendência deveu-se à deslocalização?] In particular, the real wages of workers with less high school, high school or some college have all fallen sharply since the early 1970s. The inability of this conical framework to account for the pervasive phenomenon of declining real wages of certain groups of workers is one of its most jarring shortcomings.
...
In particular, wages at the bottom, median and the top move very differently over different time periods. Most notably, in contrast with simple skill-biased technological change view, we do not see an opening of the gap between median and bottom wages.
...
there is an extended period from the mid-1980s to the mid-1990s where wages at the bottom are increasing more rapidly than wages in the middle of the distribution.
.
In contrast to a view based on enabling technologies helping the most highly skilled workers, we see rapid employment growth at the bottom of the wage distribution both in the 1990s and 2000s. The picture that emerges is thus one in which the economy is generating considerably more employment in lower- paid occupations than in occupations in the middle of the wage distribution.
.
Finally, we can also verify that this is not just a US phenomenon. The middle-paying occupations have contracted in every European country between 1993 and 2006, strongly suggesting that the employment patterns we are witnessing in the United States are due to common technological trends rather than idiosyncratic US factors.
...
In contrast to the standard framework based on enabling technologies, replacing technologies can reduce wages. This contrasts with the predictions of the canonical model we discussed in the previous section. The key is the difference between enabling and replacing technologies.
...

• Even with a single type of labor competing against technology or capital, a set of tasks shifting from labor to capital can reduce wages. This effect is further strengthened if there are multiple types of labor, and new technologies directly take away some of the tasks performed by a specific type of labor (for example, semi-skilled manufacturing workers or operators).
• For the same reasons as articulated in the previous bullet point, replacing technologies displace workers, and may cause unemployment.
• If new technologies replace tasks in the middle of the pay distribution, they will cause polarization of employment. Intuitively, these new technologies will take away the middle paying occupations, and thus the overall wage distribution will have a smaller, in some sense ‘hollowed’ middle, causing wage polarization. Interestingly, because workers dislocated by technology from the middle of the pay distribution will compete with others, changes in employment structure may be divorced from wage growth patterns. As a result, we may expect to find faster growth of employment in lower- paying occupations as those dislocated by technology also seek employment in these occupations, which is confirmed by the changes in employment structure shown in the figure below, but this does not necessarily imply faster wage growth in these expanding occupations."

Trechos retirados de "Daron Acemoglu on: Will robots take our jobs?"

Testar a estratégia (parte I)

Excelente artigo do The McKinsey Quarterly "Have you tested your strategy lately?"
.
"Ultimately, strategy is a way of thinking, not a procedural exercise or a set of frameworks.
...
First, companies develop strategy in many different ways, often (Moi ici: Often? I believe is always) idiosyncratic to their organizations, people, and markets. Second, many strategies emerge over time rather than from a process of deliberate formulation. (Moi ici: Pena é que muitas vezes não se tome consciência dessa formula para a aperfeiçoar, para a melhor utilizar, para a forçar)
...
All companies operate in markets surrounded by customers, suppliers, competitors, substitutes, and potential entrants, all seeking to advance their own positions. That process, unimpeded, inexorably drives economic surplus—the gap between the return a company earns and its cost of capital—toward zero. (Moi ici: Isto aconteceria num universo fechado... Aprendi com Drucker que qualquer posição de liderança é transitória e com tendência a ser de curta duração. Aprendi com Schumpeter que os lucros só resultam da vantagem do inovador e desaparecem assim que aquilo que era inovador se torna rotina)
.
For a company to beat the market by capturing and retaining an economic surplus, there must be an imperfection that stops or at least slows the working of the market. An imperfection controlled by a company is a competitive advantage. These are by definition scarce and fleeting because markets drive reversion to mean performance. The best companies are emulated by those in the middle of the pack, and the worst exit or undergo significant reform. As each player responds to and learns from the actions of others, best practice becomes commonplace rather than a market-beating strategy. Good strategies emphasize difference—versus your direct competitors, versus potential substitutes, and versus potential entrants. (Moi ici: Diferenciação. Recordar este trecho e este outro só de ontem)
.
Market participants play out the drama of competition on a stage beset by randomness. Because the evolution of markets is path dependent—that is, its current state at any one time is the sum product of all previous events (Moi ici: O espaço de Minkowski), including a great many random ones—the winners of today are often the accidents of history.
...
To beat the market, therefore, advantages have to be robust and responsive in the face of onrushing market forces. Few companies, in our experience, ask themselves if they are beating the market—the pressures of “just playing along” seem intense enough. But playing along can feel safer than it is. Weaker contenders win surprisingly often in war when they deploy a divergent strategy, and the same is true in business"
.
Faz lembrar a primeira encarnação de Michael Schumacher... are you playing to playing or playing to win? Jogar por jogar, ou jogar a feijões?

Continua.

"Listen very carefully, I shall say this only once."

Ontem, ao final do dia li um relatório da IHRSA, sobre o fitness na Europa e nos EUA, em breve terei de escrever sobre ele.
.
Hoje, li "Près de 10 % des élevages sont « au bord du dépôt de bilan », selon Stéphane Le Foll", outro texto que merece uma reflexão futura.
.
E, enquanto inspeccionava o estado das amoras silvestres da zona onde caminho, a minha mente fez uma viagem ao passado, recuando quase 10 anos. Foi no último trimestre de 2005 que recebi esta revista:

O número 4 de 2005 da revista The McKinsey Quarterly.
.
Nas primeiras páginas encontrei um curto artigo que, tal como o de Marn e Rosiello na HBR, mexeu com o meu mindset e ainda hoje o alimenta.

O artigo é este "The vanishing middle market" de Trond Riiber Knudsen, Andreas Randel, e Jørgen Rugholm (escrevi sobre ele no blogue em 2006).
.
A ideia do artigo, escrito antes da Grande Recessão iniciada em 2007, a ideia da polarização dos mercados, ajuda a perceber, a interpretar os sinais sobre o futuro do fitness, ou as alternativas para sair da espiral compressora que persegue os produtores de carne e leite.
.
O artigo incluía umas figuras que todos os empresários deviam conhecer:
"Executives recognize that premium and no-frills offerings are squeezing middle-of-the-road products and services in many industries. Our study of 25 industries and product categories in Europe, North America, and on the global level shows the extent of this phenomenon, known as market polarization. We found that, from 1999 to 2004, the growth rate of revenues for midtier products and services trailed the market average by nearly 6 percent a year.
...

Que fatias do mercado cresciam?
Que fatia do mercado decrescia?
.
Onde estão os Davids?
Onde estão os Golias?
Golias e David competem entre si, ou pertencem a campeonatos diferentes?
Que vantagens competitivas tem quem está no mercado do meio-termo?
Onde está o low-cost puro?
Onde estão os nichos e boutiques?
.
Este exemplo retirado do mercado da refrigeração na Europa é bem elucidativo:

Que fatias crescem em unidades vendidas?
Que fatias crescem em vendas?
.
O que é que o século XX sempre protagonizou? O que é que da mentalidade do século XX se impregnou como senso comum nas mentes dos empresários, académicos, políticos e paineleiros?
.
Trabalhar, produzir, servir a norma, servir o mercado de massas:

O que está a acontecer ao mercado de massas no século XXI?
.
.
.
.
Está a encolher e a transferir-se para o low-cost.
.
Isto gera uma espiral de eficientismo desenfreado que premeia uns poucos e esmaga a maioria dos produtores, prisioneiros mentais do século XX e do mundo onde nasceram e cresceram.
.
Qual o mercado que cresce?
.
O dos nichos, o das boutiques, o da especialização:

Analisemos então, o casos dos produtores de carne e de leite.
.
Continua.

A evolução da ideia de mosaico estratégico (parte III)

Continuado daqui: parte I e parte II.
.
Em Novembro de 2005 chegou-me às mãos um artigo que merece ser recordado nesta série: “The vanishing middle market”
.
O mercado do meio-termo está a desaparecer, o mercado dos produtos médios está a desaparecer.
.
Outro artigo na mesma onda foi publicado em Novembro de 2006 “Escaping the middle-market trap: An interview with the CEO of Electrolux”:
.
Ou se compete pelo preço mais baixo, ou se compete pelo melhor desempenho… quem procura estar na média está condenado… já não há clientes médios para produtos médios.
.
Paralelamente, como bem documenta o livro “A Stitch in Time” assistimos a uma proliferação de produtos e a produtos com ciclos de vida mais curtos, o que acarreta um aumenta da incerteza no planeamento das necessidades e da produção. O aumento da incerteza, como demonstra David Birnbaum, estica ao limite as longas cadeias logísticas e põem a nú a sua rigidez o que as torna demasiado caras, com cerca de 40% dos custos do ciclo de vida a perderem-se em saldos e sell-outs não repostos.
.
Os consumidores e as empresas estão em co-evolução, quanto mais se avança mais a diferença, mais a variedade, mais a rapidez é compensada. Há como que um espicaçar mútuo.
.
Esta explosão de variedade câmbrica na mente dos consumidores impõe uma variedade de abordagens por parte das empresas. As empresas têm de escolher a quem se dirigem, quais os clientes-alvo onde se concentram
.
Porter no artigo “What is Strategy?” publicado pela HBR em Stembro de 1996 escreve acerca das escolhas:

“Choosing a unique position, however, is not enough to guarantee a sustainable advantage. A valuable position will attract imitation by incumbents, who are likely to copy it in one of two ways.
…
But a strategic position is not sustainable unless there are trade-offs with other positions. Trade-offs occur when activities (Moi ici: Recordar a parte II desta série) are incompatible. Simply put, a trade-off means that more of one thing necessitates less of another.
…
Trade-offs create the need for choice and protect against repositioners and straddlers.
…
trade-offs arise from activities themselves. Different positions (with their tailored activities) require different product configurations, different equipment, different employee behavior, different skills, and different management systems. Many trade-offs reflect inflexibilities in machinery, people, or systems.
…
Positioning trade-offs are pervasive in competition and essential to strategy. They create the need for choice and purposefully limit what a company offers.
They deter straddling or repositioning, because competitors that engage in those approaches undermine their strategies and degrade the value of their existing activities.”

Também Terry Hill e Skinner escreveram e defenderam a importância de estabelecer uma coerência interna, uma disciplina de valor para oferecer a proposta de valor com vantagem mais sustentada.

Quando se identifica um conjunto de clientes-alvo, quando se faz a caracterização dos factores que os farão ficar satisfeitos:

A vantagem competitiva sustentada tem de assentar numa conjugação, numa sinergia de opções que se reforçam

e baralham mesmo quem está de fora sobre qual a relação entre os factores a montante e o desempenho da empresa.

E voltando a Porter: “Positioning choices determine not only which activities a company will perform and how it will configure individual activities but also how activities relate to one another. While operational effectiveness is about achieving excellence in individual activities, or functions, strategy is about combining activities.
…
Fit locks out imitators by creating a chain that is as strong as its strongest link.
…
The importance of fit among functional policies is one of the oldest ideas in strategy. Gradually, however, it has been supplanted on the management agenda. Rather than seeing the company as a whole, managers have turned to “core” competencies, “critical” resources, and “key” success factors. In fact, fit is a far more central component of competitive advantage than most realize. Fit is important because discrete activities often affect one another.
…
There are three types of fit, although they are not mutually exclusive. First-order fit is simple consistency
between each activity (function) and the overall strategy.
…
Consistency ensures that the competitive advantages of activities cumulate and do not erode or cancel themselves out. It makes the strategy easier to communicate to customers, employees, and shareholders, and improves implementation through single-mindedness in the corporation.
…
Second-order fit occurs when activities are reinforcing.
…
Third-order fit goes beyond activity reinforcement to what I call optimization of effort.
…
Strategic fit among many activities is fundamental not only to competitive advantage but also to the sustainability of that advantage. It is harder for a rival to match an array of interlocked activities than it is merely to imitate a particular sales-force approach, match a process technology, or replicate a set of product features. Positions built on systems of activities are far more sustainable than those built on individual activities.”

Porter recorre, no artigo, a três exemplos de empresas que competem pelo preço sem nunca referir a necessidade de salários baixos, pelo contrário os tripulantes da Southwest são dos mais bem pagos da indústria:
.
Em

lá está “High compensation of employees” para não perder gente motivada, gente treinada, gente produtiva.
.
Esta combinação criativa de actividades adicionada à incerteza e ao atraso entre a escolha e o resultado complexificam o espaço competitivo, a competição deixa de ser um jogo claro e transparente entre quem tem mais ou menos recursos tangíveis e fazem o jogo evoluir para um novo nível, e fazem o jogo distribuir-se por vários campeonatos.
.
Reduzir a análise a um único campeonato combatido com regras antigas é uma simplificação tremenda. Basta pensar nesta realidade:
.
Existe mais variabilidade na distribuição das produtividades intra-sectoriais, do que entre a distribuição de produtividades inter-sectoriais.
.
Interessante como o meu conhecimento empírico comanda a pesquisa em busca de confirmação/rejeição.
.
Continua.

"the annihilation of the mid-market"

O Armando recomendou-me a leitura de "Interview: Jim Graham, former COO of The Gym Group, gives his thoughts on the industry" e não pude deixar de recordar os salami slicers e Bruce Jenner ao ler:

"The establishment of a scaled-up low-cost segment, as well as the after-shock of the 2008 recession, has forced people to think differently. Burning platforms and in-flows of new money always brings about change. Adapt or die, I guess.
.
The major change has been the annihilation of the mid-market. It’s all but complete now, and that has to be a good thing since many of the assets were poor, the product tired and lacking relevance to the mass market it once owned.
.
We’re also seeing material new investment in technology to deliver a digital component to the physical experience. In the long-run this is a good thing for the consumer, but the digital ecosystem is ostensibly chaotic and in the short-term there’s questionable value to the customer from a lot of the early offerings. There are some interesting new niche products in play, but I’m not sure many will scale effectively."

Como não recuar a 2006 e a "Porque não podemos ser uma Arca de Noé! (II)" ou a "Quando se acorda atolado num pântano de indefinição..." e a "The vanishing middle market".

Foram estes textos, conjugados com o livro de Berger e com os primeiros casos de sucesso que acompanhava, de quem procurava alternativas ao modelo que tinha tido tanto sucesso antes da chegada da China à OMC, que me orientaram para a visão optimista que alimento desde então.

Continua.

A polarização dos mercados

A polarização dos mercados é um fenómeno que não surgiu com esta crise.
.
Por exemplo, em 1996 Adrian  Slywotzky escreveu "Value Migration" de onde retirei:
.
"1. Customers in many industries, becoming more sophisticated, are less apt to pay high prices simply to stay with a know brand if a less-costly, high-quality substitute is available.
2. The competitive circle has expanded. An increasing number of international and entrepreneurial competitors with innovative business designs can provide superior utility to customers.
3. Advances in technology, which have made it far easier to produce lower-cost substitutes for many manufactured goods and components, have created more cross-category competition than existed in the past.
4. Many businesses are becoming less scale intensive. Lower-cost information, extensive use of outsourcing, and a trend away from manufacturing intensity are all reducing barriers to entry.
5. Improved customer access to information has lowered switching costs.
6. New competitors have easier access to capital, removing the advantage of a large existing cash flow associated with an established position."
.
Em Novembro de 2005 o The McKinsey Quarterly publicou o artigo "The vanishing middle market" de Trond Riiber Knudsen, Andreas Randel, e Jørgen Rugholm que mostrava e exemplificava o desaparecimento do mercado do meio termo.
.
Em 2006 Michael Silverstein escreveu "Treasure Hunt" de onde retirei logo da mensagem inicial ao leitor:
.
"This book tells the story of how middle-class consumers around the world are reshaping the consumer-goods market by trading down to low-price products and services, trading up to premium ones, and avoiding the boredom and low value that incresingly characterize the middle."
.
É natural que a crise que vivemos tenha influenciado esta polarização dos mercados. No entanto, não a criou!
.
Ontem o Financial Times abordou o tema com o artigo "Unequal recovery":
.
"Markets can tell you how the world has changed before statisticians have even printed their questionnaires. Consider that since the end of the US recession in June 2009, shares in Tiffany and Saks, which both sell mostly to the rich, have risen 108 and 186 per cent respectively; shares in discount retailers Family Dollar and Costco are both up about 50 per cent; but shares in mid-range retailers Walmart andBest Buy are up 3 and down 15 per cent respectively. European markets tell the same story: companies that sell to the very rich or the very poor are prospering; those selling to the middle are not."

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. 

Para reflexão

A propósito de "Howard Schultz Stepping Down as Starbucks CEO to Focus on Higher-End Shops".

Vários pontos a reter:

• subir na escala de valor;
• apostar nas experiências;
• focalização

A propósito de "Middle-Market Woes Inspire Starbucks’s Bet on Luxury Coffee":

"Starbucks plans to open 20 to 30 giant Starbucks Reserve Roastery and Tasting Room outlets—where rare, exotic coffee grown in small batches will be roasted on site and prepared using a variety of brewing methods—as well as up to 1,000 smaller stores under the Starbucks Reserve brand.
.
“We’ve seen so-called ‘indies’ selling cups of coffee for a lot more than we’re charging and creating an interesting buzz,” Mr. Schultz said last week in an interview.
.
Some experts say the company’s plan to create a subbrand of luxury coffee shops aimed at the affluent is a good strategic move, given consumers’ growing interest in better-quality coffee.
...
Erich Joachimsthaler, chief executive of brand-strategy consulting firm Vivaldi, likens what is happening in the coffee business to what has happened in the beer industry, which has been hurt by the rise of craft breweries. “They never protected themselves on the high end,” he said of beer companies. “I think Starbucks sees that the middle is slowing down.”
.
It isn’t just wealthy consumers who might be willing to pay more for coffee marketed as a more gourmet product.
...
Starbucks created the high-end coffee category but the landscape has changed drastically in recent years. Starbucks now finds itself in the middle of the market, with independent coffee shops and larger companies such as Blue Bottle Coffee Co. serving an ever more discerning customer while McDonald’s Corp., Dunkin’ Brands Group Inc.’s Dunkin' Donuts chain and convenience stores are offering coffee and espresso drinks on the cheap."

Como não recuar a 2006 e ao fenómeno da polarização do mercado. Como não recuar a 2010 e perceber a aterragem da Starbucks no ponto 4 quando estava entretida a subir para o ponto 3:

Promoção da batota de criar ou descobrir, e alavancar a imperfeição no mercado

Há anos que promovemos descaradamente a batota de criar ou descobrir, e alavancar a imperfeição no mercado.
.
Assim, é sempre interessante descobrir gente que usa a mesma linguagem que nós:

"For a company to beat the market by capturing and retaining an economic surplus there must be an imperfection that stops or at least slows the working of the market. An imperfection controlled by a company is a competitive advantage. The best companies are emulated by those in the middle of the pack, and the worst exit or undergo significant reform. Good strategies emphasize difference—versus your direct competitors, versus potential substitutes, and versus potential entrants.
...
Know your competitive advantage, and you’ve answered the question of why you make money (and vice versa).
...
The need to beat the market begs the question of which market. Research shows that the unit of analysis used in determining strategy (essentially, the degree to which a market is segmented) significantly influences resource allocation and thus the likelihood of success: dividing the same businesses in different ways leads to strikingly different capital allocations.
.
Defining and understanding segments correctly is one of the most practical things a company can do to improve its strategy."

Trechos retirados de "Have you tested your strategy lately?"

The Age of Precision Markets

Ontem, por causa deste comentário:
.
"Gostava de ver, por exemplo um curso profissional, com o nome de "gestão aplicada aos têxteis", em que fosse estudado o sector têxtil de uma forma profunda, em que os tais gestores saiam com uma ideia precisa do que é necessário fazer para catapultar as empresas do têxtil para o sucesso. É disto que as empresas precisam, desde que leccionados por pessoas que saibam o que as empresas precisam.... refiro-me à gestão, mas é apenas um exemplo...."
.
Recordei este trecho lido durante a manhã:
.
"most companies' policies and processes reflect each company's situation three to five years ago. However, because supply chains involve long-lived facilities and equipment, in many companies they actually are designed to address the company's operating needs from ten to twenty years earlier"
.
Pois é John, a velocidade a que mudam os factores abióticos é muito superior à velocidade a que a lei da vida muda os catedráticos nas escolas. Ainda hoje há doutorados a chefiar linhas de investigação e a ensinar, que se doutoraram antes do 1º choque petrolífero... como estão longe da vida real...
.
E os economistas que foram educados no tempo em que a oferta era inferior à procura? Continuam a teimar seguir algoritmos formulados num mundo que já não existe.
.
Ou seja, aquilo que é necessário para catapultar uma empresa têxtil para o sucesso ... está sempre a mudar!!!
.
Encontrei estes dois artigos de Jonathan Byrnes que são absolutamente deliciosos e preciosos, em sintonia com o que defendemos neste blogue e, sobretudo, prevendo o sucesso da hipótese MONGO.
.
"You Only Have One Supply Chain?" (Moi ici: Uma das razões para o regresso dos clientes estrangeiros a Portugal no B2B. Staple products podem continuar a vir da China, se os chineses continuarem interessados, seasonal e fashion products devem ser produzidos mais perto do consumo por causa da incerteza e da volatilidade da procura)
.
"The Age of Precision Markets" (Moi ici: A nossa pregação missionária acerca dos clientes-alvo, da proposta de valor, da concentração... )
.
"Toward the middle of the twentieth century, mass markets had developed to the point where their submarkets, or segments, were large enough to support efficient-scale production and market development. These segments were defined by demographics and psychographics (e.g., children's aspirin, jogging shoes). In response, mass marketing companies adapted or differentiated their products to fit these markets in a sort of "theme and variations" strategy. For ease of exposition, I'll refer to both the earlier mass markets and these large segmented markets as "mass markets."
The rise of mass markets created huge benefits for society, and also formed the dominant paradigm of how companies are managed today.
All that is changing.
...
The shift from mass markets to precision markets is manifested along several dimensions. It is a shift (1) from product-driven competition to account-driven competition; (2) from product innovation to supply chain innovation (including related services); (3) from broad-market targeting to precision account targeting; (4) from standardized, broad market engagement to focused, aligned, flexible market engagement; and (5) from functional department separateness with periodic budgetary and planning alignment to functional integration with overlapping responsibilities and ongoing alignment.
Like all paradigm shifts, the old will not simply go away; rather, it will be subsumed, enriched, and extended by the new. The essential difference between the old and the new is what each leads to operationally. Mass markets accommodate "silo" management, and the management focus is primarily on marketing and product positioning.
Precision markets offer a new way of thinking about a business, where marketing is just one of the main components. Even though a precision market will be defined around a "segment," which may be just an account, developing these markets requires an organic, whole-business response that goes far beyond classical marketing."
.
Quem é que nas universidades está a estudar este fenómeno e as suas implicações em Portugal?

The “plant within a plant” (PWP)

Nestes tempos de incerteza em que o middle-market traiçoeiro está a aumentar as suas fronteiras, as fronteiras de retornos financeiros medíocres, julgo que faz todo o sentido regressar aos clássicos e procurar paralelismos entre o que se vive hoje e o que se viveu no passado.
.
Assim, recomendo vivamente a leitura do artigo de Wickham Skinner "The Focused Factory" publicado originalmente na revista Harvard Business Review em Maio de 1974.
.
O artigo pode ser acedido aqui.
.
Um trecho sobre como caminhar para a fábrica focada e dedicada:
.
“In my experience, manufacturing managers are generally astounded at the internal inconsistencies and compromises they discover once they put the concept of focused manufacturing to work in analyzing their own plants.
.
Then, when they begin to discern what the company strategy and market situation are implicitly demanding and to compare these implicit demands with what they have been trying to achieve, many submerged conflicts surface.
.
Finally, when they ask themselves what a certain element of the structure or of the manufacturing policy was designed to maximize, the built-in cross-purposes become apparent.
.
At the risk of seeming to take a cookbook approach to an inevitably complex set of issues, let me offer a recipe for the focused factory based on an actual but disguised example of an industrial manufacturing company which attempted to adapt its operations to this concept.
.
Consider this four-step approach of, say, the WXY Company, a producer of mechanical equipment:
.
1. Develop an explicit, brief statement of corporate objectives and strategy. The statement should cover the next three to five years, and it should have the substantial involvement of top management, including marketing, finance, and control executives.
.
In its statement, the top management of the WXY Company agreed to the following:
.
“Our corporate objective is directed toward increasing market share during the next five years via a strategy of (1) tailoring our product to individual customer needs, (2) offering advanced and special product features at a modest price increment, and (3) gaining competitive advantage via rapid product development and service orientation to customers of all sizes.” (esta abordagem de certa forma faz a empres voltar aos seus tempos de arranque em que tinha poucos clientes e poucos produtos e, por isso, era extremamente enfocada no essencial, a empresa não tinha recursos para desperdiçar em floreados)
.
2. Translate the objectives-and-strategy statement into “what this means to manufacturing.” What must the factory do especially well in order to carry out and support this corporate strategy? What is going to be the most difficult task it will face? If the manufacturing function is not sharp and capable, where is the company most likely to fail? It may fail in any one of the elements of the production structure, but it will probably do so in a combination of some of them.
…
3. Make a careful examination of each element of the production system. How is it now set up, organized, focused, and manned? What is it now especially good at? How must it be changed to implement the key manufacturing task?
.
4. Reorganize the elements of structure to produce a congruent focus. This reorganization focuses on the ability to do those limited things well which are of utmost importance to the accomplishment of the manufacturing task.
…
The reader may perceive a disturbing implication of the focused plant concept—namely, that it seems to call for major investments in new plants, new equipment, and new tooling, in order to break down the present complexity.
.
For example, if the company is currently involved in five different products, technologies, markets, or volumes, does it need five plants, five sets of equipment, five processes, five technologies, and five organizational structures? The answer is probably yes. But the practical solution need not involve selling the big multipurpose facility and decentralizing into five small facilities.
.
In fact, the few companies that have adopted the focused plant concept have approached the solution quite differently. There is no need to build five plants, which would involve unnecessary investment and overhead expenses.
.
The more practical approach is the “plant within a plant” (PWP) notion in which the existing facility is divided both organizationally and physically into, in this case, five PWPs. Each PWP has its own facilities in which it can concentrate on its particular manufacturing task, using its own work-force management approaches, production control, organization structure, and so forth. Quality and volume levels are not mixed; worker training and incentives have a clear focus; and engineering of processes, equipment, and materials handling are specialized as needed.
.
Each PWP gains experience readily by focusing and concentrating every element of its work on those limited essential objectives which constitute its manufacturing task. Since a manufacturing task is an offspring of a corporate strategy and marketing program, it is susceptible to either gradual or sweeping change. The PWP approach makes it easier to perform realignment of essential operations and system elements over time as the task changes.”

Há que escolher!!!

A revista The McKinsey Quarterly em 2005 publicou o artigo "The vanishing middle market", também Bruce Chew no artigo "The Geometry of Competition" desenvolveu o mesmo tema.

.

O espaço competitivo em que as empresas cada vez mais competem é uma paisagem que já não dá vantagem a quem compete na média, no meio termo. Ou se é bom no nicho topo de gama, ou se é bom no grande volume de preço mais baixo e ponto.

.

Muitas empresas, apesar da abertura de fronteiras com a adesão à UE, continuaram na modorra de produzirem para os mesmos clientes de sempre, na média, para conseguir ir a todas ("Você está a dizer que é preciso dizer que não a alguns clientes?!")

.

Com a polarização dos mercados só há uma forma de agir.

.

Escolher!

.

Especializar-se na gama alta do mercado, ou especializar-se na gama baixa do mercado. (A Electrolux soube como jogar com as duas realidades ... Ah! Isto faz-me lembrar a Saloio... aqui e aqui)

.

A estrutura-base da economia alemã é composta pelas empresas pequenas que apostam no nicho da gama alta (há 20 anos interrogava-me "Como é que as empresas alemãs podem ter sucesso se são mais caras e arrogantes?" Hoje percebo muito bem. E a arrogância que eu via não era arrogância, era concentração no cliente-alvo e não entrar pela customização que o cliente não está disposto a pagar) e pelas gigantes (como a VW) normalmente concentradas no negócio do preço (comparar a diferença nos lucros entre a VW e a Porsche... bem me dizia um colega da indústria automóvel, há cerca de 15 anos "A industria automóvel é a indústria do tostão")

.

Voltando ao livro de Hermann Simon "Hidden Champions of the Twenty-First Century":

.

"Numerous hidden champions take their market definitions even further and specialize in extremely narrow niches. Some “create” their markets so that there are no real competitors and they have 100% market share. The list of such companies adds up to hundreds."

.

Especialização é a receita, e especialização é uma outra forma de identificar e concentrar tudo no cliente-alvo.

.

Na base da especialização estão abordagens como:

• "patent protection,
• powerful trademark or logo,
• intensive relationships and familiarity with customers, and
• artistic designs with frequent updates."

Especialização não é volume:

.

"Superniches limit growth opportunities and make the deliberate decision not to grow, ..., an obvious choice. Size and niche can conflict with one another."

.

Não é preciso ser gigante.

.

Perante este cenário o que é que aconteceu, os alemães colhem o mercado da gama alta e os chineses o da gama baixa. As empresas que não se especializam... ficam presas e atoladas no pântano do mercado do meio-termo e levam porrada de um lado e do outro.

.

A teoria de Helena Garrido, de Vitor Bento e de Daniel Amaral entre outros é que é preciso baixar salários... para competir com os chineses.

.

A teoria de Medina Carreira ontem no Plano Inclinado é a do proteccionismo...

.

Não resulta!

Mongo e a liberdade de escolher

"Henry Ford’s first great contribution to America was the Model T, which rolled off the assembly lines at his Highland Park, Michigan, plant at the rate of one every 24 seconds. At the time, it was an amazing display of industrial efficiency. By streamlining automation in his factories, Ford advanced an era of mass production that built his fortune and brought the automobile within reach of an emerging middle class. But while the miracle of mass production delivered the goods, it didn’t adapt easily, so all Model T’s looked alike. Ford’s approach can be summed up in what he said about the car’s exterior: “The consumer can have any color he wants so long as it’s black.”
Ford’s take-it-or-leave-it attitude wouldn’t cut it in today’s economy. 

...

...
This proliferation of products, models and styles isn’t capitalism run amok. Variety shouldn’t be dismissed as a trivial extravagance. It’s a wealthy, sophisticated society’s way of improving the lot of consumers. The more choices, the better. A wide selection of goods and services increases the chance each of us will find, somewhere among all the shelves and showrooms, products that meet our requirements.
...
Until 1914, Model T’s were available in red, blue, green, gray and black. The move to all black was a concession to mass production that made the car a commodity of sorts, but standardization wasn’t a winning strategy in the long run. By 1927, competition forced Ford to rethink variety. The Model A came in several body styles and an array of colors. With each decade, Ford gave consumers more choices,
...
They do it because pleasing the customer isn’t just about producing more stuff. It’s about producing the right stuff.
Just what is the right stuff? It’s more of what we do want and less of what we don’t want. The economy provides more of what we do want by customizing products to our particular tastes.
...
The economy’s progression to customization isn’t a fad. It arises from the free market’s relentless drive to bring what we buy closer to what we want. What we buy yields a lot more utility when it exactly matches our needs, and Americans are reaping enormous benefits as new tools help business cater to markets of one. We’re getting more for less, helping keep inflation in check.
.
There’s just one glitch in this otherwise serendipitous story: traditional measures of the economy may not reflect how much our living standards are improving. Conceived in an era of mass production, the nation’s GDP and productivity statistics may ably count more stuff, but they give little credit for right stuff. Mass customization and prevention—just like variety— deliver their gains in important but subtle ways, so gross domestic product and productivity statistics fail to capture the extent of our progress."

Estes trechos retirados de um texto de 1999, "The Right Stuff", foram escritos antes da entrada da China no mercado mundial, algo que atrasou a tendência de Mongo, a tendência para esta variedade de produtos.

Interessante conjugar isto com:

• "Corbyn fails yet again to grasp the magic of competitive markets"

"What Corbyn doesn’t understand is that competition is what makes the economic world go round.
.
It is what has given us civilisational wonders like iPhones and Teslas and the Greggs vegan sausage roll. It is what makes companies work in your interests, rather than their own. It is why Pret a Manger can’t charge you £10 a sandwich – because it knows that there’s an Eat down the road.
.
And here’s the big problem. Across America, Britain and Europe, competition is falling and market concentration is increasing, as big firms get remorselessly bigger."

• "Freedom of Choice—Not Competition—Is What Sets Capitalism Apart"

"Capitalism is not “a system of competition” any more than any other system. Capitalism (at least in its free-market, laissez-faire ideal) is a system of the voluntary exchange of goods and services in the absence of physical coercion, theft, compulsion or fraud, predicated upon the fundamental right to own and accumulate property.
...
The miraculous wonder we miss when we focus our attention upon the competition, which derives from choice, is the ability to choose, itself.
...
The primary feature of free-market capitalism is not competition, but choice.
.
Because people make choices with scarce resources and limited time, competition will be an inherent part of any economic system so long as there is scarcity. The primary feature of free-market capitalism is not competition, but choice. Rather than moderate the amount of competition in an economy, state intervention will replace competition to serve customers and convince them to voluntarily spend their money on a wide array of ever-expanding goods and services. We can contrast this with other systems in which competition rages over who can gain the favor of those who control the levers of government. That is where the real “tooth and nail” begins."

E é pena que não compreendam que a sua paixão é uma vantagem competitiva

Mongo por todo o lado:

"When Randy Komisar walks around his house, he sees the future of retail quite clearly. ... about two-thirds of the objects in his house are commodity products: paper towels, socks, toothpaste, and a whole pile of other things that can be bought at Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) or on Amazon.com (AMZN). The remaining third of his stuff is more distinctive and harder to procure: high-end cowboy boots, custom-made bicycles, New Belgium beer. That slim, specialized slice of commerce is arguably the best place to cultivate a retail company these days.

Turning out a noncommodity product is the only antidote to the economies of scale powering the modern retail behemoths. [Moi ici: Não nos cansamos de o escrever e defender e, por isso, apreciamos Mongo]
...
there’s room in the market for a whole new wave of specialized, hyperfocused retailers.
...
1. Amazon Can’t Be Stopped … The supply chains of the retail giants, at this point, are too massive and technologically advanced to beat. Unless a product is distinctive in some way,
...
2. … but Amazon Can Be Survived. There are plenty of things that giant retailers don’t do well, particularly connecting with consumers and selling small-batch stuff.
...
3. Technology Makes It Possible for Small Retail to Thrive.
...
4. The “Mushy Middle” Is a Wasteland. The future will get increasingly bleak for companies that don’t have the scale of Amazon or the unique wares and agility of e-commerce startups. [Moi ici: A polarização dos mercados continua, o middle-market continua a esvair-se. Esta frase provocatória exprime bem o que muitas vezes sinto "Look past the logos and you’ll find they are merely managers of vast real estate and marketing operations.". E é pena que os apaixonados empresários de muitas PME não compreendam que a sua paixão é uma vantagem competitiva]
...
5. Turning Commodities Back Into Specialized Products. The true opportunities for retail entrepreneurs—the so-called white space—lie in improving products people have long considered commodities.
...
6. All You Need Is Other People’s Love. Make a product people love. Provide customer service they love. And keep costs low, so prices will be equally lovable."

Agora, tentem encontrar pontes entre estas marcas, estas boutiques, estas lojas, independentes e a série "E quem puder dar esse acompanhamento superior"

Trechos retirados de "A Retail Playbook for How the Small Can Survive the Age of Amazon"

Please read this!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Desespero de falar nisto nas empresas e não me levam a sério!!!
.
Desta vez não sou eu, é Seth Godin "Cost reduction for high-end markets":
.
.
"If you sell at the top of the market (luxury travel, services to Fortune 500 companies, financial services for the wealthy...) you might be tempted to figure out ways to cut costs and become more efficient.

After all, if you save a dollar, you make a dollar, without even getting a new customer.

Resist.

The goal shouldn't be to reduce costs. It should be to increase them.

That voice mail service that saves you $30,000 a year in receptionist costs--it also makes you much more similar to a competitor that is more efficiently serving the middle of the market.

Go through all the ways you serve your customers and make them more expensive to execute, not less. Your loyalty and your market share will both grow. People who can afford to pay for service often choose to pay for service."
.
O negócio do "high-end market" não é a eficiência... é a eficácia, é a diferença!

A importância de escolher uma proposta de valor

O semanário Expresso, na página 14 do seu caderno de Economia, do passado dia 24 de Março, publicou um artigo intitulado "Vocacionados para calçado de luxo".
O artigo, assinado por Margarida Cardoso, refere:
"Portugal faz dos sapatos mais caros do mundo e, no "ranking" dos maiores exportadores mundiais de calçado, apenas a Itália consegue bater os preços da indústria nacional, que começa a assumir sem complexos uma nova vocação para calçar "pés de luxo". Nas estatísticas do sector, o preço médio do calçado "made in Portugal" (16,16 euros/par) é oito vezes superior ao da China e está a conseguir estabilizar as vendas, um sinal claro de que as empresas estão a ganhar a aposta na tecnologia, no marketing e no design."

Este artigo, é um exemplo concreto que vem corroborar a ideia da importância de optar por uma proposta de valor, como condição cinequanon para o sucesso. Em mercados muito competitivos, temos primeiro de identificar os clientes-alvo, diferentes clientes-alvo procuram e valorizam coisas distintas, algumas contaditórias entre si.
Quem quer ser tudo para todos... não é nada para ninguém, nunca se consegue distinguir, atolado na lama do "stuck-in-the middle" como escrevemos aqui.

"The McKinsey Quarterly", número 4 de 2005, traz um artigo muito, muito interessante, nesta linha "The vanishing middle market". Por fim, ainda um outro artigo segundo a mesma orientação "The geometry of competition".

The Better You Understand Economics, the More You Realize that Money Isn’t All that Matters

O título deste postal foi roubado a Don Boudreaux no "Cafe Hayek".
.
E foi roubado porque é uma grande verdade que muitos desconhecem:
.
"The Better You Understand Economics, the More You Realize that Money Isn’t All that Matters"
.
O dinheiro, o preço, não é tudo.
.
E os empresários do futuro são os empresários que trabalham para aumentar os preços do seu serviço-produto.
.
Como?
.
Concentrando-se no que está para lá do dinheiro trocado na transacção... concentrando-se na experiência que os clientes vão viver.
.
Os sinais estão por todo o lado, por exemplo em "Manufacturing’s Wake-Up Call":
.
"debate over the future of U.S. manufacturing is intensifying. Optimists point to the relatively cheap dollar and the shrinking wage gap between China and the U.S. as reasons the manufacturing sector could come back to life, boosting U.S. competitiveness and reviving the fortunes of the American middle class.
...
Instead, for the foreseeable future, manufacturing will largely be regional. (Moi ici: Há anos que o marcador "proximidade" marca presença neste blogue... recordar também Ghemawatt e a semi-globalização)
...
But for many manufacturers, economics and market dynamics increasingly suggest that they locate factories close to their major markets, including the United States. This type of region-oriented footprint is a clear way to provide adequate scale and volume, minimize transportation and logistics costs, increase market responsiveness and innovation, and customize products for the unique preferences of different regions and cultures. If factory labor costs and currency rates were the sole enablers of manufacturing success, then the West could not compete with emerging nations or offshoring. More and more, though, these factors play a smaller part in manufacturing decisions. (Moi ici: Claro que os políticos e os académicos, longe da realidade, não percebem esta mudança estrutural) Four other considerations, all more complex, drive manufacturers’ choices about where to place and expand factories:

1. The skill level and quality of factory employees, especially for high-tech facilities. 
2. The presence of high-impact clusters, in which many companies can learn from one another and innovate more readily. 
3. Access to nearby countries with emerging consumer markets and lower-cost labor (for the U.S., this means building a future with Mexico). 
4. A reasonably competitive regulatory and tax environment (for the U.S., this means simplifying and streamlining the current tax and regulatory structure).

...

With unit labor costs playing a smaller part in manufacturing decisions, (Moi ici: Entretidos com a TSU, com o ataque ao euro, com a impressão de bentos, não percebem como é que isto pode acontecer...) other factors — including talent availability, market accessibility, innovation, regulations, intellectual property protections, barriers to entry and exit, and scale of operations — increasingly drive decisions about where to place and expand factories. Based on the relative economics for each segment, we charted which U.S. industries can compete as exporters, which can be dominant in the regional North American market, which can survive but are threatened by foreign competitors, and which are already mostly overseas but can still manufacture in the U.S. to serve niche markets. (Moi ici: A divisão é interessante e permite pensamento estratégico... ver as figuras)
...
designing production systems that align employees’ activities with the company’s overall strategy (Moi ici: A mensagem deste blogue, do nosso trabalho, dos nossos livros... concentrar uma organização no que é essencial, alinhar recursos, vontades, motivações, ideias) and that empower employees to improve manufacturing processes can unlock the productivity and innovation potential of the well-educated U.S. workforce."

A estabilidade é mesmo uma ilusão (parte III)

Na sequência de "A estabilidade é mesmo uma ilusão (parte II)" (Parte 0 e parte I).

"IT'S been one of the hottest economic questions for at least the last few decades: what sort of jobs will provide a comfortable, secure, middle-class lifestyle for the next generation of Americans?"

Qual seria a resposta se fosse procurada neste blogue?

"future “good” middle-class jobs will come from the re-emergence of artisans, or highly skilled people in each field. Two examples he mentioned: a contractor who installs beautiful kitchens and a thoughtful, engaging caregiver to the elderly. He reckons the critical thinking skills derived from a liberal arts education give people who do these jobs an edge. The labour market will reward this; the contractor who studied art history or the delightful caregiver with a background in theatre will thrive.
.
This is consistent with a shift in the labour market I've observed. It seems the market now rewards individual more than firm-specific capital. That's economic jargon for the idea that it's better to be really good at your job than merely good at being an employee. There's less value in being the company man; you must be your own man possessing a dynamic skill set applicable in a variety of ways.
...
What Mr Katz describes is a world where a good job is not lifetime employment, where your employer takes care of you from age 20 until death (with a very generous pension). He describes people responsible for their own economic destiny. That may seem unsettling, because the old regime appeared to offer more stability, though that stability may have been an illusion. Actually the new way may offer more certainty because people look out for themselves, rather than being vulnerable to changes that impact their employer. The nature of work constantly evolves. The company man was a post-war construct. The self-sufficient artisan is actually more consistent with historical labour markets.
...
But in order to build your human capital and be that modern, competitive worker it seems you must believe you're a little special. The company man was content to be a cog in the machine, the modern worker must take pride in his talents.
...
Believing you're exceptional and in control maybe a necessary characteristic of modern workers. But it must be balanced with realistic expectations and humility. It's not enough to take pride in what you do; modern workers must be open to applying their skills in a variety of different and ever-changing ways"

Se vamos a caminho de Mongo (o Estranhistão), se "we are all weird", se o futuro passa pela co-criação e pela co-produção, se o futuro passa pela customização e personalização, então, o futuro são os artesãos. O futuro é voltar ao passado, é desmassificar a produção, é olhar para a segunda metade do século XX e perceber o "post-war construct" como uma anormalidade histórica a que nos habituamos e que temos medo de abandonar porque é a conhecida.
.
Trechos retirados de "The return of artisanal employment"

A versão chinesa da polarização do mercado

Em 2005 este artigo "The vanishing middle market" deliciou-me, passou a ser um referencial para mim.
.
Hoje o The McKinsey Quarterly lança mais uma acha com uma versão da polarização na China com "China’s new pragmatic consumers" onde se pode ler:
.
"They spend more in categories they highly value, and they generally trade down in less compelling ones.
...
Increasingly, Chinese consumers are behaving like their counterparts in the developed world. They are more demanding and pragmatic than ever as their horizons expand beyond basic concerns about product features. Also, they are willing to pay for better value and quality and are spending more time researching and are exploring product nuances.
...
Chinese consumers remain brand conscious but, unlike shoppers elsewhere, they focus on value so intensely that brand loyalty is often secondary.
...
Most intriguingly, though, China’s consumers prioritize purchases across different product categories by trading off among them: the Chinese maximize their buying power by spending more in the categories they care about most and less in others.
...
Chinese shoppers are also moving in the direction of consumers elsewhere in that emotional considerations increasingly influence purchase decisions. ... Another fast-growing key buying factor is the “what fits me” (or “what’s good for me”) category emerging in China’s younger (and more affluent) mass-market demographic. These shoppers are less concerned about following the crowd or the way what they buy defines them in the eyes of others than about how specific products fit their real-life needs. This factor is the main reason consumers trade up when their circumstances change and also explains why they tend to be more satisfied with better products."
.
A polarização é essencial para eliminar o mercado do meio-termo e obrigar a abandonar estratégias híbridas, e obrigar as empresas a fazerem opções, e permitir estratégias viradas para nichos, para o elevado valor acrescentado associado ao pertencer a uma tribo.