Bienvenidos, bienvenidos otra semana a las 3D Trainings de Ipnik, esto empieza ahora,
ahora tenemos a la veidina aquí a punto de empezar con su charla, deciros que estamos aquí todos los viernes
para charlar de ingeniería, de diseño, de business, de marketing, que estáis todos muy bienvenidos
que os podéis registrar en nuestra página web en Ipnik.net, en el apartado de eventos
y que estamos abiertos a todo tipo de recomendación, todo tipo de charlas
y tenéis ganas de también de participar, estáis más que bienvenidos
y bueno, que disfrutéis de la charla de veidina, que seguro que nos sorprenderá porque es súper bueno.
Pues antes de todo muchas gracias Chavis, me duraré a hablar de un rey,
que es mi plantesa que está aquí, y en charla salamos a partir de listas, ok.
So, my name is Betia, like I said, I'm right now leading the marketing department
en Comano, and today I'm talking about the life cycle of an organization.
I chose this, I came across this topic while writing my bachelor's thesis,
I studied European business, and at the end of the course I was interested in internet
and knowing a little bit more, so I wrote about growth factors and key effects of success
of the expansion, but before being able to look at this, I had to analyze
how does an organization evolve, and I think that's really interesting
and that's why I wanted to present it to you.
But before I start, I would like to know who you are, there's so many new faces
and you can just go around, say our names, I don't know what we're doing.
So it's no more personal, and afterwards while we discuss,
when there's questions, we, I don't know, can relate better to each other.
So for me it would be something like, hello, I'm Betia, I'm here with ethnic,
and I'm in the marketing department.
Do you want to go?
I'm Frances Gomez, I am marketing an organization of Amalun,
and also I work in...
I'm today, I'm a web developer,
and I'm interested in everything related to web enterprise.
I'm Alda, I work as English designer,
and I'm in a startup, so it's promising to me.
I'm Victor, and I'm a commerce manager,
and hope I start to work at Amalun soon.
I am Silvia, and I am doing an internship in Amalun,
in the department marketing department.
Hello, I'm Marta, and I'm a Amalun blogger.
I am Carlos, I work in marketing Amalun.
I'm a business, and I'm working at the account,
and I'm a business player in Amalun.
I'm sorry.
Hello, I'm Christian,
and I will be here again, because I work in Amalun.
And I'm a web marketing manager, I work at Amalun.
Hello, my name is Tommy, and I'm looking for a job.
I'm a business, and I'm a business owner.
Hello, my name is Alain, and I'm a CEO of Amalun.
I'm Roger, and I'm a CEO of Comize,
and I'm a CEO of Inink.
I'm a blogger, I'm a finance, and I work in marketing Amalun.
I'm Jorge, and I work at Inink.
I'm Pedro, and I work in marketing Amalun.
I'm Minés, and I work as well.
I do everything, and so on,
even though I'm the same.
Crazy, awesome.
I'm David, and I work in an operational department.
I'm Joan, and I'm a subordinate,
and I like being part of marketing,
and I'm a school graduate.
I'm Charles, and I'm a middle-class team member.
And also, there's a VIP,
and he's very kind of recording for this also.
Thank you very much.
Well, welcome again.
Ok.
So, I said, so most of you are in interaction
with the startup, are you working there,
or do you know un involving company?
So that's why I think this could be interesting to you.
We see our day-to-day meetings,
but there's changing going on.
There's always new people coming in,
and the organization is in constant evolution.
So, I decided to take you a theoretical look at it,
to look at it from a scientific point of view.
And I chose the work of Plaslin and Lipkin,
who are two scientists,
who developed a model of evolution
of an organization looking at it,
kind of from a biological point of view.
But we got to that later.
Ok, before I forget.
As you see,
English is not my native language.
So, if you have problems with my accent,
if I'm going to slow,
if you have any questions, please interact with me.
I like this to be as interactive as possible.
Ok, so let's get started.
Grow, grow.
I think this is the main goal for any company.
That's the biggest challenge.
An organization that has just started,
it doesn't grow, it's not going anywhere.
So, today, though,
we're not talking about growth,
where the underlying assumption of all of this
is that growth is possible.
So, we're not, we're looking at an innovative,
or we're assuming that we're talking about
an innovative and market-focused business model
that's creating value.
So, the question tonight is not
whether growth is possible,
but rather how it evolves.
So, this is the premises of all that's coming,
because it's sometimes a little bit theoretical.
I like to look at an organization
just like the being.
It evolves, no?
There are different types.
It starts from birth,
it goes to development and flourish,
and eventually it transforms into something,
or it dies.
And, as I said,
the scientists I named earlier,
Glass and Leafgood,
they came up with a similar system,
and they called it the four phases
of an organizational evolution.
It goes like this.
It goes from binary to differentiating,
integrating and associating.
And, this is what they see,
the lifecycle of any organization.
It doesn't matter if it has a hundred employees
or just two.
That's what a company goes through.
And in order to go from one phase to another,
there are crises, there are challenges,
there's a lot of work to do,
and that's what we're going to see tonight.
It doesn't run smoothly,
but rather there's always a crisis
that needs a new solution.
So, we have to adapt constantly.
And, on this transformation,
it affects our company as a whole.
I'd like to start with the pioneering.
At the beginning of any organization,
that's an idea.
There's a vision of a entrepreneur.
When the company is founded.
Instead of founder,
they say pioneering in this case.
And I think that,
at this stage,
at this moment,
the organization is mainly influenced
by this pioneer,
versus one person,
his creativity, his vision,
his personality,
his leadership style.
It's autocratic.
So, what's going on at this stage?
Well, mainly,
there are no formalized rules.
There are no values that are written out.
Everything is passed on,
is learned from one situation to another.
And it's passed on from one employee
to another by word of mouth.
So, it's a very informal environment.
There's direct communication.
Everybody's on the same level.
The knowledge about the customer
is very intuitive.
We think,
okay, this could be like that,
could be like this.
There's a lot of guessing going on,
decisions of taking with the guy.
And, most importantly,
maybe the organization is built around people.
So, the work is not task-focused,
but rather people-focused.
We have this person,
with this interest,
with this skills.
So, he can do this.
This is the way this is all built around.
And this makes sense.
It makes the whole organization
very adaptable.
This is a quote I found from Prajada.
He's a professor at Howard.
And he said,
he said about a period in this period,
can I imagine the future?
He cannot create.
And I think that's what sums up this stage.
Because all the whole organization,
no matter how big it is,
it depends from one person.
And the main focus is on his version,
on where we're going,
to another situation right now,
but the future.
And it is a period
where that's all of the members
take part in this year's division.
And that's why I think
this stage of pioneering
is best described as a big family.
You'll see there will be a lot
of financial potential.
Okay.
So this,
but we're at this stage
in order to go forward.
And no,
this cannot always continue like this.
We reach a point
where there's a crisis,
where there are some obstacles.
Okay.
And the first symptoms of this crisis
is
that the environment becomes too fast.
It's too fast changing.
But if you are new in this team,
you can't keep the pace.
This could be, for example,
technological changes
in the IT environment.
This could be customer preference,
a set change
that are really unpredictable.
Or a new market,
a new,
yeah,
a new competitor
that enters the market,
so anything.
That's simply too fast.
The organization can't keep up.
Another problem,
another symptom,
um,
that we change,
is that there's very fast organic growth
within the organization
and with unknown customers.
So when,
before it was possible
to establish a close personal relationship
with the customers,
now it's all,
it's just gone too huge.
We can't,
we don't have any direct feedback anymore.
And that's what leads new hires
that don't match
the leadership style
of the,
of the,
um,
first pioneer of the first team.
There's simply,
now,
new people entering the organization
and it's losing its equilibrium.
This is,
there's a first symptom of the crisis.
Now,
in order to go forward,
the organization has to cope up with this,
has to deal with it,
and I has to,
I don't know,
to find,
in order to solve this problem.
I assume that this crisis
is an unavoidable step
towards the next step.
I think so.
I think you always have to,
in order to,
to transform,
and,
and that the,
in order,
that the,
in order for the organization
to have a new behavior
and a new structure,
it needs to go through a crisis.
If not,
it continues the same way
and it's,
I don't know,
kind of spreading out
and losing the focus
because the problems
are left on the side
but they're not dealt with.
So now having a crisis
is not a thing?
Yeah,
I think now having a crisis
means you're staying still.
Okay.
I'm not doing it.
No.
No.
So,
but there's a sort of
new crisis at the moment.
There are more.
So,
here is,
I think this picture describes
this step very well.
So we're in problems.
We're having difficulties.
There's something new growing
in the organization
and it's a problem.
This is some,
to,
three diseases.
I don't know anything about it
but I just thought it's,
it fits well,
know there's,
kind of like an intruder.
There's crisis,
there are problems
but it will eventually
y hacer algo, algo bueno.
No, no, es como lo que es, es como lo que es,
pero tiene que ser sobreviva.
Una de las primeras pasiones es
tomar una crisis más de la cara
a la nueva fase de desarrollo.
La más visível de la visión es
los profes.
En un punto, la edición de la edición,
no, en el principio la edición de la edición
era muy profunda.
El estimado de los precios
se han metido, todo el mundo es muy feliz,
pero en su momento, hay un punto
donde la edición no es tan profunda
ni más, donde se despliega.
Y entonces, normalmente,
esto viene como una sorpresa.
Se crea un gran estómago
dentro de toda la organización.
Y entonces,
el estómago dentro de todo
dice que los amplios
han podido confiar
en la intuición de la opinión.
Estan preguntando o preguntando
¿pueden ser realmente siempre,
este persona, no?
Y entonces, hay conflictos
dentro de la comunicación
con el estilo de liderazgo.
Simplemente, las personas empiezan a preguntar.
Comunicaciones, problemas
pueden ser que no todo el mundo
sabe todo.
Hay un poco de comunicación
en una parte
o una experiencia,
no hay una completa experiencia
más, como antes.
Y
esto crece la motivación de todos los empleados.
Algunas personas pueden ser left out
de todas las decisiones
que están tomando juntos.
Y en el final, los miembros
empiezan a seguir
la opinión de los empleados.
Estan preguntando o preguntando.
Y esto es cuando la organización
realiza la extrema y su flexibilidad.
Y creo que exactamente aquí
es el punto en el que
tenemos que mover de la opinión
a la estación de la diferencia.
Creo que esto es un importante.
Y
¿Cómo hacemos esto?
Bueno, creo que
este es el punto de discusión.
Creo que lo mejor que lo haga
o para mí es el manejo científico.
¿Sabes nada sobre el tailorismo?
Ok,
con Fredric Lutló-Taylor
en el principio de los 1900s
empezó
a mejorar
la eficiencia económica.
Él trabajaba en el plan de producción
y quería mejorar
la eficiencia económica.
Él dijo que hay que hacer una forma
para analizar el workflow.
Él dijo, ok,
tenemos que trabajar como Henry Ford
con la
línea de construcción.
No es lo que él estaba pensando
sobre.
Y su acción
que es still used today
y el manejo industrial
es básicamente análisis, fintal,
racionalidad, logic, eficiencia.
Y él también mencionó
la standardización de las prácticas.
Así que esto significa que,
cuando hayas encontrado una solución,
intenta formalizarla,
intenta la standardización,
y aplicarla a una situación diferente.
Es el juego de conocimiento.
Creo que es lo mejor que lo haga
para saber si es diferente o no.
¿Y qué es este backstage?
Bueno,
es como la antithesis
para el pioneering
en el estado de orden.
No, en el estado de caos,
tenemos orden.
Estamos buscando planos
en el estado de improvisación.
Tenemos una relación formal
antes de que estén informadas.
Necesitamos racionalismo
en el estado de la intuición que usamos
antes de tomar las actividades.
Entonces,
la producción de más productivas
empieza a llevar menos,
más productivas, más marketing.
La producción de más productivas
en el estado de las intuición
es la producción de más productivas.
Antes,
aplicábamos las reglas
de una situación a otra.
Ahora hay un sistema
sistemático
que está creado,
así que, sistemáticamente,
queremos ser uniformes.
Eso es lo que está pasando
en el diferenciamiento.
Ahora, el objetivo es la concentración principal.
Cuando hablabamos de los truquidos
que pueden llevar a ti
desde un organizador pionejante
para el diferenciamiento,
hablabas de los promesos aumentados.
Pero, ¿cuál es la compañía
que está bien?
¿Por qué la compañía que está bien
sigue en esa primera fase
y nunca ha pasado?
O, ¿cuáles son los truquidos
que pueden llevar a ti?
Creo que no es necesario
que hay un problema de incendio,
cuando detectas el profe de incendio,
la droga de la droga
que está descansando,
es lo que es lo que pasa
en la crisis.
Es algo que tenemos que hacer,
algo que tenemos que cambiar.
¿En las crisis adicionales
puede causar explosivos?
Es lo mismo.
Creo que este ciclo
es lo mismo.
No quiero decir en truquidos,
pero es como un principal.
Y puede ser
a muy rápido
o a un más rápido.
Y si es muy explosivo
o tal vez, no puedes
ir a un profe de incendio,
pero podrás tener otras crisis.
Estos son algunos ejámenes.
A ver si es más de la respuesta
a una crisis colectiva
respecto a lo que es la crisis.
Sí.
He justo estos tres,
porque creo que son los más comunes.
Decrease el profe
de conflicto con nuevas altitudes.
Los nuevos personas entrando
en el ecosistema existente.
Creo que estos son los tres
más comunes y problemas.
Pero es exhaustivo.
Estos son los más grandes.
Ok.
Si alguien tiene una pregunta,
simplemente preguntan.
Bueno,
como usted dijo,
la prioridad de la estandarización
es si el método
soltará
estas crisis.
No.
Es un camino
para volver.
No.
Creo que es el camino
de los ejámenes,
de los que están trabajando
sin ninguna estructura.
Creo que el manejo científico
de Taylorism aplica las propuestas
de estandarización.
No creo que sea necesario.
No.
Sí, todo es necesario.
Es necesario ir al siguiente paso.
Si no quieres ir al siguiente paso,
¿es como una empresa de familia?
No hay nada que hacer
con una empresa de familia.
Es solo decir
que traigo un orden
en la organización.
Ok.
Tenemos este problema A
y empezamos con esta solución.
Ok.
Si tienes el siguiente problema B
y lo veas.
¿Cómo se soltó el problema A?
Tú vienes a la conclusión
de que el problema B
necesita de la misma manera de solución.
Estás standardizado.
Estás creando procedimientos.
Esto es Taylorism.
Claro.
No sé.
Porque te estás diciendo que Taylorism es un logico pure
pero en mi opinión
Taylorism es un gran clases.
Es mucho más que el logico pure.
O sea,
puedes mirar a una organización
o algo así.
No sé.
Hay empresas que,
porque de su ambiente,
no consideran Taylorism
como un gran clases
pero aún son muy seguros
en lo que dices
de looking at patterns
y solucionando los problemas.
Eso es muy importante
pero Taylorism es
una cosa más grande.
Tal vez estoy wrong.
Porque creo que es muy común.
Todo el mundo sabe...
No, pero mucha gente no sabe
su trabajo y la influencia que tiene
en la industria y la consumo
y la construcción de hoy.
Lo que me acuerdo
fue el manejo científico.
No,
pero creo que
es un ejemplo
del manejo científico.
Ahora mismo,
creo que es una función transfuncional.
Y creo que es un ejemplo
del manejo científico.
Y creo que es un ejemplo
del manejo científico.
Y creo que es un ejemplo
del manejo científico.
Y creo que es un ejemplo
del manejo científico.
No sé.
Creo que en la base,
en el principio de todo esto,
es todo lo mismo.
¿Es esto lo que estoy haciendo?
¿Tiene sentido?
Creo que es la base
del manejo científico.
Y lo que Taylor escribió
fue un protocolo.
Dicimos que esto es lo mismo.
Y creo que es...
para mí, es la forma en la que
estás avanzando.
No sé cómo
lo implementaste.
No sé.
Porque no sé.
No lo sé.
Ok.
¿Cuál es la base del manejo científico?
Creo que estamos hablando
de la fase de diferenciación.
¿Cómo es diferente
del manejo científico?
¿Cómo hay orden y estructura
en lugar de la intuición?
Creo que es lo que estamos hablando de.
Ok, vamos a moverlo en esta dirección.
Esto es
la fase de diferenciación
en la que estamos creando procedimientos.
Hay mecanización, de formación,
todo esto en formación.
Los procesos están inventados
y implementados por todo el mecanismo.
Y estamos mirando
de una forma rara
del manejo científico.
El concepto de homenopinámico
está en aquí.
Y estamos creando procedimientos esténeles.
Ok, sí.
Entonces,
como antes,
en la fase de diferenciación,
hay un momento
en el que se encuentran problemas.
No todo lo está pasando
como antes.
Y creo que los símptomas de la crisis
aquí están en flexibilidad.
El organismo
no se reacciona
tan rápido como antes
porque hemos implementado la formalización.
Tiene una tipo de bureaucracy.
No puede ser tan flexible
como antes.
Estos son problemas de coordinación.
No es necesariamente una organización grande,
pero es desconocido.
Hay una nueva estructura.
La estructura ha sido creada.
A veces es difícil de coordinar.
Y hay problemas
de interno y de comunicación vertical.
Hemos creado un tipo de hipertensión.
Entonces,
es más fácil que la información de mercado
pase todo el camino.
Todo es un poco más rápido.
Estos son problemas de procesos.
Hemos creado nuevos procedimientos.
Tal vez
las intersecciones
no se acercan exactamente.
Tal vez las personas no sienten responsables.
Ellos dicen que no es mi parte.
Esto es tu.
No hay nada que hacer.
El manejo normalmente
empieza a
no ser capaz de
confiar en las personas
que el sistema controlado
está implementado.
Esto crea la motivación.
Porque las personas
están controlados, superados,
y no nos sienten gratis.
Y el mundo es muy especializado.
Hemos creado un procedimiento.
Es especializado y formalizado.
Esto crea la motivación.
Y tal vez,
esto puede ser un comportamiento dysfunctional,
un comportamiento unethical.
Si hay grandes tiros fixados,
tal vez es posible
que un comportamiento unethical
se despliega
para lograr tarjetas y costos.
Simplemente para lograr
los riesgos rivales entre los partidos.
Y sólo
hay algunos símptomas
que pueden mostrarles.
Ahora, tenemos que tomar algunas cosas.
No sé, ¿pueden ir a la campaña?
En esta situación
cuando hay riesgos rivales
con los problemas de comunicación
en los que los procesos
no van tan bien a su plan de ir.
Creo que aquí,
en ordero de la fase de diferenciación
a la fase de integración,
necesitamos la intervención.
Tenemos que hacer todo el acto
como si fuese su propio entorno.
Todo el mundo toma responsabilidad
y iniciativa.
Creo que es la mejor manera.
Por supuesto, como he dicho,
estoy seguro de que hay tantas formas.
Esa es la manera en que creo que es la mejor.
Sí.
Antes de ir a la campaña
con los riesgos,
creamos la instrucción de diferenciación.
El diferenciación es,
para mí, el entorno es para la campaña,
porque todo eso fue creativo
y el riesgo no es estructural.
Cuando estamos moviendo a la integración,
creo que hemos alcanzado la sintesis.
Pero usamos toda la creatividad
y la libertad que hay en la campaña,
y usamos las procedencias standardas,
las eficiencias que tenemos en la diferenciación,
usamos esto como un gran sentido
para ser muy, muy buenos en la integración.
En esta fase, creo que es la mejor
y optimista fase de la organización.
Es por eso que todo está bien,
hay creatividad,
hay buena comunicación,
información de comunicación,
comunicación directa,
pero también hay algunas reglas,
hay algunas generalizaciones.
Ok.
Just like I said,
this phase creates a character,
as a symptoms.
There is horizontal orientation.
We are focusing on workflow,
not on the supervision that we are focusing on before.
All employees now, they thrive to fulfill within the,
so they thrive to find fulfillment within the job,
they are doing the best,
they are acting intelligently in the sense of the whole system,
because they know it,
because the communication is good,
because it is transparent.
Goals, missions, values,
everything is transparent,
or everybody is in, I don't know,
a person who is going in one direction, basically.
And here, for me,
the leaders goal is to give a helping hand
upon request, to give proposal,
to give support, to be there.
And this phase, for me,
I see the organization as a living organism.
Like this.
Now you see the tree with the mushrooms,
it's working togetherness and justice.
It's living organism is decentralized
and autonomous teams.
And these teams,
they work with the correct allocation of information,
so the person that needs to know something knows it.
They work higher,
they work higher autonomously,
they are responsible,
they are self-controlled and self-initiative.
So we have,
like a federal state, no?
It's a big organism,
with little subdepartments,
they are working autonomously.
Here at this stage,
we have achieved everything.
We have achieved one and a third
of the life of the organization,
and we can move to the next phase,
rather smoothly.
Si.
Do you think it's possible to move to a binary
or integration,
to not rest into the second step?
No, I don't think so.
If you can move from binary,
you can move from binary
to integrating without differentiating.
I don't think so.
I think they're, in order,
they need to think.
Even if we were not looking at people,
but at machines,
they can't work together,
if there's not a protocol,
if there's not a route given.
No?
Basically what you do in differentiating,
you think we're going from this place to this phase,
and we do it like that.
And even if it's a machine,
how can they know by itself,
which way to go,
which way to go,
and which way is the best way to go?
So you think the bureaucracy is necessary?
It's not bureaucracy.
It's just...
I like the word standardization, formalization.
Okay.
Could you use all the knowledge that you have gained?
Okay.
In, I don't know,
maybe this is after a couple months,
maybe this is after a couple years,
but anyhow,
you have gained a lot of knowledge.
You know your processes,
you know your people.
And I think not using it,
no, you need this information to create a system.
It's a waste.
Because then,
every time you have to reinvent the wheel,
every time you have to ask yourself,
okay, which is the best way to go?
Best way to go.
But if you have created a kind of system,
a procedure,
then you don't have to waste the time
when thinking about it,
because you already know.
Of course, you can put it into doubt
and rethink about it.
I'm not saying that, but...
What do we have to do with differentiating?
What is the name?
What is the name?
What is the name?
What is the name?
What is the name?
Yeah.
If it's long,
if it's very long,
maybe you can just say it like that.
It's the way I remember it.
You're creating a difference
from all the games.
Okay.
Everybody is in games, no?
And by implementing some kind of rules,
by some kind of protocol,
you're making it different.
You just turn the whole thing upside down.
But it's a concept using a flight to the market.
How you position your product on the market.
You have different shape from your competitors.
I think here it means you're differentiating from yourself.
From the first.
It's like the intricacies, okay?
You're taking all you have before and pioneering,
and you're making it different.
That's how I see it.
I think that a good example,
typical of your engineering style
is not having departments.
Typical change would be dividing the organization of all-cares
into very differentiated departments.
That's a good example.
So it doesn't have to be like a bad thing.
No.
A differentiating organization.
It just means a style that is more structured
and defined than the other style.
But I also think that there are good things
in your style.
No, of course there are good things.
But you reach a point where you need a change,
where you need to enter a new phase
in order to grow,
in order to make the most of what you have.
I think that's what this is about.
Hmm.
Okay.
We're pretty ready.
We reached the point where we have a living organization
where everything is working in difficulties
and I don't know,
kind of like an electric brick or whatever.
And right now,
we don't want to reach the last phase,
which is associating.
This phase is reached to a border dissolution.
Okay.
We are going through a shift of paradigm right now.
Before, we were looking at the value creation stream
of only one organization.
Now, in associating,
we are looking at the whole supply chain
and the value of credits.
So instead of looking at one company,
we are looking at a lot of companies.
In order to do this,
borders have to vanish for dissolution.
Yes.
We were linking our organization to a system
so that it can proactively interact
with the environment,
with other companies and so on.
Hmm.
Okay.
For an example,
what we're,
so the company enters in contact
with other companies,
with the whole environment
and we are,
you can see this,
or we are creating trust-based relationship
with other stakeholders.
This could be your supplier.
Something like this, for example.
Okay.
And there's a change,
a shared exchange of interest.
For example, profit share.
And all of this,
Chris is creating a company by a dose.
Yeah.
Everybody is looking at Jamana for the credit.
So all of this works
kind of like the Japanese credit system.
A different company is all linked together.
It's way more way better
and a lot more detail than me.
But this is the idea,
to have a biotome.
No.
Not just looking at one company,
but at the whole.
How is everything working together?
A big biotome.
And from this quote,
I thought it was really fitting.
We have to not only focus on our competitors,
but also on our collaborators and complimentors
to create one system.
Okay.
And at the point,
when the scientists I mentioned earlier
started this research,
it was the 1970s.
At that point,
this was kind of revolutionary.
Now it is the most common thing to do.
We are all proud sourcing.
It's really normal to be in interaction
with the environment and to look,
not only at one company,
but at the whole system.
But at the moment,
these four phases were elaborated,
this was new.
It was kind of revolutionary.
So in the end,
at the last stage of development,
we have a living organization of biotome.
Organizational biotome.
I think that it is normal.
Yes.
We have accomplished the whole life cycle.
I think you didn't mention
like crisis symptoms
between integrating and associating.
No, why?
Okay.
Because I think that at this point,
we have reached,
all we can reach within the company.
I think we have reached the perfect company,
the perfect entities
of the two first phases.
In integrating.
In integrating.
Yeah, here.
I think.
In associating,
it's just linking to your environment.
I don't think,
of course there are...
It's just growing.
Everything is good.
No.
I think once you are integrating,
you can grow freely.
No, no, you're okay.
You have established
a good basis.
No, you can grow.
But,
in order to go to associating,
you have to get in contact
with other companies.
You have to create.
No, you don't have to.
I think it's a good way to do it.
No, I think it's good
to create biotome.
Kind of like a working group.
No.
It's a company of this best.
I know this best.
Okay, let's do it together.
So you're building
a relationship with other
organizations.
You're building,
when I said sharing profits, okay?
You're building one,
maybe creating value together
and sharing profits,
sharing other interests.
You're just getting in contact
with your stakeholders,
with people around you
in the environment.
Why I didn't put
symptoms of crisis?
I don't think there are any symptoms.
I don't think there's a point
that tells you.
I don't think there's
something that you'll see
that tells you,
okay, now you have to get in contact.
Okay.
Another question
about that phase.
I'm just curious,
because
when you're like
talking about
the relationship
between the individual
and the group
or the isolated
state
or the collective
community,
there's an interesting conflict,
which is
what is really,
what goal
are we talking about?
Because if it's
the individual's
best interests,
sometimes
they will be aligned
with the collective
and sometimes
they won't be.
So sociologically,
sometimes it's
in your best interest
to act
in your own
isolated best interests
and sometimes
it's best to collaborate
with the group
and the group
and the group
and the group
and the group
because sometimes
it's not.
I think
all of this
has like
an underlying hypothesis
that we're all going
in the same direction
if they're individuals
in the organization
that are sort of different.
No, but I'm talking about
the individual as a mean
of the organization.
Okay, okay.
Okay, okay.
I think then
we just have to
change the truth.
Okay,
you're not going to form
an association with your competitor.
You're going to form it
with a collaborator,
who can complement you.
So,
you have to find
a way
so
that
what you're doing
is moving
in the same
correct direction
for both of you
that you're not creating
complement.
Okay, but the question is really
is that next
associating phase
really what every company
should do
or is that interesting
for certain companies to do?
I think it's interesting
for every company.
I can't think of an example
right now
where isolating
is the best solution.
I simply can't think of it.
I'm isolating
as an isolation by
associating
a certain level
of autonomy
and thus
a decision-making power,
no?
No,
if you look at it
as a small scale
you can just
establish a good
relationship
with your supplier
if you're making chairs.
You can establish
a really good relationship
with your wood
provider.
And then
getting a good...
So are you not
hyper consolidating
companies in the world?
No, no, no, no.
I'm talking about
staying in the same environment
about
yeah, just linking
one company to the next
and it can just be
a discount.
No?
Okay, you say,
okay, I'm always going
to buy my work from you
but you give me
a case discount.
It can be like
something small like
sure.
You're going to say
something right now
No, no, no, no.
We're comparing
companies
to biological
organizations.
Yeah.
And biological
organisms are never
fixed.
They're always going
from equilibrium
to non-equilibrium
and they have
a tendency
to for
equilibrium.
So I think
it's the same way
that individual
versus
collective
it's like
a political
thing
which I think
happens in organizations
as well
and in
organizations.
So nothing
is fixed
or
in one way.
There are tendencies
and impulses
going in different places.
So
I mean it's changed.
We're always changing
and I think organizations
are the same.
So it's just how
you cope
with these
recurring
crisis
and different
investments
and how
you can learn from models
like this
to be able to
react to change.
Exacto.
It's always happening.
So within
your organization
and with other
organizations.
No.
Perna.
No,
I don't understand how
it's a stage for a company.
I mean...
Ok.
I think
it has a shading
that can be
a very first stage
for a company.
I mean
when you look at
when it has structure.
Ok, ok.
We can look at it that way.
We can say
where it takes everywhere.
I put it at the last stage
but you can't think
that the organization
has to grow fully
before getting into
contact with others.
Ok?
I think
of course you can
create associations
and bonds
at the pioneering stage.
Thank you.
You have.
Ok.
In the big association
you leave
when you
become a deployment
and you are
going to the market
where you are
to the market.
Where?
At a small shop
I am not going to us
to
MREU
to
to paint all the band
with my company.
But if I
buy a microphone
maybe I can do it.
It will be good for a day
and it will be good for me.
But I need to have a microphone
to propose
this kind of things.
Ok.
But that's
the way to see it.
For instance
if you are
at the beginning
of your
first stage in your company
and you have strength
to build yourself
or
you might find a partner.
I know
in this part
it's an association
like a
small association
like
we
we share a lot
of something
or maybe
I can do
if for you
a local market
or something like that.
Correct.
But this might be
even more important
in the beginning
when you are
not set
at the beginning
to really
don't know
what you are
or
there are some startups
that don't know
what they are
what is your market
because
there are some who know
so you need the other buy
you need to
say ok that's our market
that's our target of people
to share
or that's what
we are doing
That's precisely why
as a Shady
it's a very good thing
to do
this stage
because
since you don't know
what will be the future
it's about
counting
upon
partners
for doing this for you
maybe in the future
you will see that this
might be integrated
but not
since you don't know
if you are managing
but
she's trying to say
sorry
I'm trying to give you
a clue
because I think
on what you are saying
it's very true
ok
I'd like to look at it this way
these three phases
by integrating
is what you can do
on your
this so you can grow intrinsically
ok
and then there's a certain way
where you don't have
you can't adapt
much more to change
because you have
reached a synthesis
what I said
not of order
of chaos
and creativity
and destruction
on the other side
so there really is much more
you can do intrinsically
so this is when
you go to look for partners
you try to grow in another way
in establishing
connection with the environment
I think it's going on everywhere
all these phases
are mixed of course
it's a living organism
it's not
it's nothing very linear
it's just
no
I don't know
Is there a face?
yeah of course there are faces
but they're all into
they're all a little bit mixed
and in theory
you have to establish them clearly
but what's going on
in day to day base
of course it's me
we're human beings
I think associating
just like you said
can and should happen everywhere
but
maybe after
after living in integration places
that's where you focus most on associating
because you said
ok now I've grown as a whole
you're like an adult
no, like a human being
now you're an adult
you grow
you don't grow any taller
but you can grow an environment
around yourself
maybe like
maybe you look like
this like a human being
no
in the beginning
the child doesn't understand much
it's just going on intuition
inventing things
differentiating the work
seems a little clearer now
he's making up his head
where do I want to go in my life
when you reach
I don't know, 25
it depends
let me see
no, I'm here
no
and you started interacting with the environment
grow your family
yeah, it's a good metaphor, no?
chau
I think that it's a good way to do it
and I'm always going to say
in a very early age
very early stage company
because afterwards
I think that
interact with these groups
after associating
associating means when
it's marriage to companies
and then you have to standardize
things and do
I hear you say
I think when there's two companies emerging
it all starts again
no, that way we need new rules
that's why it's straight and stores
and then you have to integrate the things
but I don't know
because at the end you have to organize people
that we don't discuss
I don't think associating is only emerging
it can be just a simple relationship
I don't know
we're working on establishing a good relationship
with the action
so that they deliver our products correctly
and they don't throw it in a way
I think that's a form of associating
where we need to
I think
I'd like to look at it like a small escape
the environment of a company, no?
All the other organizations
it is in contact with
and for us the action is a service provider
it delivers the government packages
to the door of the customers
and in associating
we have to create a good relationship with them
so we can trust them
and we have
in this case we have a shared interest
we want our products to be delivered correctly
and the action wants his name to be associated
with the correct delivery
so we're going in the same direction
we are in the same environment
like a supply chain, no?
The only thing that's important
in the stage
for instance, it's right now
and the stage it wasn't in
I mean, yeah, the share
That's what we said before
I think it's always important
but I think a company can
fully focus on it
on associating
once it itself has grown completely
What if there was a human being
not an example of us growing up
I don't know
It's a constant discussion
It's not all so linear
just as it is shown here
So the way you feel it is that
once you solve all your growing problem
the only thing left is
trying to work on the ecosystem
around your company
on submitting this product
No, this is not growing
this is evolution, okay?
It doesn't mean that you're growing inside
it doesn't mean that you're changing
that you're adapting
You can grow
you can continue growing intrinsically
but at one point
there's just not much more to do
you have to go to
Yeah, I mean, at some point
the growth itself is the standard life
so, I mean, it's not
initially growing more, no?
I don't understand
I mean, at some point
you're writing the problem
because you start growing
and you have to react to this
but after a while
you used to grow
I mean, if you were working
for a company
each week
at some point
you're going to have a pressure
for that
and a way to integrate them
so the growth itself
is not going to be easy
we see it's going to be
more external to the company
so that's what you're suggesting
Not necessary
No, yeah, yeah
I'm just considering one word
not for answering
Not necessary
I mean, there's always two forms of growth
Well, growing from the inside
yourself, organically
or growing from the company
by creating from two companies
one
but this is not what
associating is about
associating is just about
going into contact with your environment
I can change your paradigm
in the first three stages
we were always looking at
one organization
not closely
we didn't think about
if they were talking to other people
we were just looking at one
and now
you're taking this organization
and linking it to the environment
and yes
I'm not saying
you can do it before
but I just think
now at this point
when the organization is complete
it's the main focus
Because there are continuous
plans to do it now
Growing there will continue growing
but in the stage of evolution
there's nothing more to do
Have you said that this area is from 70?
Yes, I'm in 3
Maybe it's what it's wrong here
No, I mean that's what I'm trying to do
I'm sorry to
I'm sorry to
I'm sorry to
You are the one that is
You say that
because I think that
two are the ones who are
diagonal lines
You are the personal type of people
and are diagonal lines
I mean the difference is that
you are qualified in the police
because in the end
the first time you
write a code
you have to write it
afterwards
you have to save it
and you use it in the future
we have the necessity
of coming to the time of the game
and that's terrorizing
digital terrorizing
the only difference is that
you are not using people
just time and save
but that's why I agree
we will continue
and say that in the post
there is a question of complexity
as much common as a situation
you have to do all that procedures
at the end
in the 19th century
when the people
now with the code
are in the same concept
and the other phase
is a question of complexity
because at the end
is a question that you are running
complexity of people
and as much people
or as much complexity
component is the
conversations
you have to move forward
because crisis at the end
is not bad
the necessity of change
and a very unstable situation
and we assume
that
unstable is bad
I think that the term is
people
people thought that
company
was the most important thing
but
just for selling things
nowadays
we think that companies
are something that
or at least in the beginning
we are associating
and we are using media
maybe I am an entrepreneur
and I want to talk with
a business agent
since the beginning
yes
when they came up with this phase
it was something revolutionary
now it's
yeah it's normal
but nevertheless it's recommendable
even though we already know that we are doing it
we can look at it in a more focused way
we say now
but the focus is this
this is a way we can improve
ourselves even more
this is a way we can evolve
I think it's enough
this cycle is reversible
reversible
why do you want reversible
I am just asking
because from the first two phases
maybe
when you are in crisis
maybe you can go back
maybe
you can start by associating
and
I think
you are not going to be a manager
you are not going to be a manager
yeah
try to mix up what it doesn't
simply doesn't
you are not born
as an adult
no?
I don't think how you can go backwards
you say you take the money
and you will start something new
if you want to reverse the thing
you say everything and you start something new
but it's not reversible
because
I think in integrating
you are using the potential
the creative potential of the vision
of the pioneer
and the formalization
I think that's what comes together in integrating
and then during step back from that
to differentiating
to creating rules
it simply doesn't make sense
I don't really understand your question
you think
only in one way cycle
of course
for a different solution
if it's a cycle
then you have to start again
we have done
all the transition
so the problems
the image of the cycle
I should eliminate this
I guess
maybe it's
I think it's a constant
that's why I told it
now we have to explain
the transition
because we are changing as for shading
and by your name
I don't think there is a transition
imagine an organization
we are associating
we are getting into contact with our environment
and then we have a new idea
we are building a new product
we are taking a new department
and then we have to start everything again
that's why I put the cycle
I don't think that we have to transition
because we are not changing at the whole
but we are just adding something
and of course adding something
always creates a new
needs a new evolution
maybe acquisitions
when for example Google
some company
maybe start again
the process
do you think of this cycle
how they are on the project
what's the name cycle
it's an S for them
instead of being a full circle
it's more S
I think they are very useful
but every time you make a circle
you make it much faster
you need 3 years to learn how to work
or use amounts
to know how to jump
it's because
every time you make a process
in every department
or in a new product
you do it more fast
because there are things that you know
and you don't need all the time to optimize
things
to make the same way
because you can optimize
something that you don't start
to do it
you need to do it back
to then optimize it
I think that they really use
all the things on the product
but then
maybe instead of a circle
it's kind of a spiral
you do the same
but it's not necessary
to pass all the
stages
I mean when you buy a model company
you move
towards differentiating
or integrating
same situation coming again
a different context
because I mean
being a parent
it's when
it's starting to have a scene
and start some tool for people
that have the same
the same object
it's your own company
all of them push
towards innovation
as much people
came to the project
at the end they are employees
so the focus is different
if you are a team of 12 people
everybody will push
if you are 100 people
some of them will be focused
the companies always
will be focused just in keeping
their own place
so that's why you have to
have more complexity
and you have to move towards
the
you should just let me go on
at the end
at the end
at the end of the line
if we are comparing all the time
in the price of weeks life
and in life there is death
how do you explain death
or
I hope that
after negotiating
of course a company can die
a lot too
for example
do you think that a company
could die
because of excessive differentiating
for example
excessive bureaucracy
or a problem with integration
what phases do you think
a company could die
I don't think there is any rule to it
whenever
something unknown is going wrong
you are detecting that you have to change
that you have to adapt
you never know
in that sense it is a lot different
because
when you are young
the company
tends to be quite low
the company is quite low
because if you start and you are chimpedad
and every month
you are spacing
because
nowadays in the hospital
it doesn't matter
if we are human beings
if we are like a bee
maybe a bee has a high immortality
I don't know
I think we don't die young
if we prevent it
like 100, 200, 300 years ago
it was the opposite
no, the kids were
I don't know the life expectancy of 30 years
I think that it is a problem
the parents of the other social group
are rather keeping bay alive
and when you make a company
I think
I don't think that
exactly we think that
we think that
parents taking care of the
children
yeah, like a mentorship program
I mean, it doesn't exist
so, seeing from your point of view
how can we
activate this
information
we can upload a video
and we can make a track
on our website
community
I wanted to show this to you
because I think it's very useful
I think it gives guidance
it tell you, what are you doing
where are you right now
what have you achieved so far
it's normal that I'm going through these crisis
it makes sense, ok
I just have to do something to overcome
Yo creo que eso es lo que nos da. ¿Cómo podemos activar y decirlo?
Creo que la química es simply taking conscience to keep our eyes open.
I don't know if it makes sense, just as we do now.
You see, this is a problem.
When you take a theory, it's just a model.
It's just an invention from two sides.
There may be wrong, I just like them all.
But it helps you to look at things more in a more structured way,
to look at them from a more rational viewpoint.
You have like a scheme and you apply your current situation
and you can like overlap it.
See, okay, this is more or less.
And you can take action upon that knowing what's coming next, maybe.
I think that for each day, one thing is wrong to look for the stability of the company.
Because if the company is like an animal, it has life.
In life, stability means definition.
And the other one is when you take crisis, it's an opportunity to move on.
Not a problem.
When you are in the crisis, every time there is a crisis, you will find it.
We never celebrate crisis.
And in this model, we should celebrate crisis.
Yeah, that's what I learned today.
I have another question.
How far can you go pioneering?
How far?
I mean, this study says that you have to go from pioneering to differentiating.
And because there's going to be a crisis, there will be good news,
because the company is moving, it's moving.
But why not just stay there?
I mean, maybe the company grows a lot and it will be great,
and that's all we want to do.
I think you have to move on, because you can do the things much better.
No, what do you think?
Yeah, he's talking about like a news business.
I don't know.
I think it's going to raise our business.
No, no, no, that's it.
I mean, there's a crisis.
So, you don't think it's going well, but nothing is out of control.
The house is good, management is good, and the horizon is good.
You think so, okay.
Sometimes you have to wear a portrait.
Oh, sometimes you have to wear a portrait.
Maybe it's not.
But it's possible.
What did you think?
I don't think it's right.
No.
Thank you so much.
Gracias.