Seaside stories

Summer. Time for holidays and chatting and reading on the beach. So why not talk about the time when Marilyn Monroe… or when Ian Fleming… or when Ingrid Bergman…. Yes indeed, because they’re the stars of these little summertime tales of ours about Pirelli holiday products. Because in over 140 years of manufacturing, Pirelli has produced countless articles for the holidays: from diving masks to inflatable mattresses and rubber dinghies to swimming costumes in Lastex yarn.

It was the summer of 1949 when a Californian photographer,  André De Dienes , immortalised a stunning girl in a bathing suit on Tobey Beach. The girl was  Marilyn Monroe.
“I had bought a couple of bathing suits. One white and one pink. And then two umbrellas; those ones that protect you from the sun. One white, and one red with white polka dots. And a bunch of silk scarfs. My idea was that, at a certain point, the model would take off the costume and cover herself only in silk. And dance for me, in the wind…”
A few years later, in 1952, when Marilyn was no longer just some unknown model but had already starred in four films, including Howard Hawks’s Monkey Business, with Cary Grant and Ginger Rogers, one of the shots was used to advertise a new material. This was an elastic yarn called Lastex, made by Pirelli Revere, which was also used to make bathing costumes. A selection of these models was published in Pirelli magazine in 1956 together with a story by  Gianna Manzini  called “Donne al mare” (Women at Sea).

And what happens when a beautiful actress (Ingrid Bergman) writes a letter like this to a famous director (Roberto Rossellini)?

“Dear Mr Rossellini, I saw your films  Rome, Open City  and  Paisà  and enjoyed them very much. If you need a Swedish actress who speaks English very well, who has not forgotten her German, who is not very understandable in French, and in Italian knows only ‘ti amo’, I am ready to come and make a film with you.”
And they really did make the film: Stromboli: Land of God – and the two of them fell in love. Between takes, Roberto showed Ingrid the wonders of underwater fishing. Who knows if it was the diving mask that caused the spark between them?

But the mask still had many a story to tell – but here we’ll let someone else tell it for us. His name? Ian Fleming, creator of the world-famous secret agent 007. In his 1966 book Octopussy he wrote: “‘You know what?’ said Major Dexter Smythe to the octopus. ‘You’re going to have a real treat today if I can manage it.’
He  had  spoken  aloud,  and  his  breath  had  steamed  up  the  glass  of  his   Pirelli  mask .  He  put  his  feet down to the sand beside the coral boulder and stood up. The water reached to his armpits.  He took off the mask and spat into it, rubbed the spit round the glass, rinsed it clean, and pulled the rubber band of the mask back over his head. He bent down again.”

Have a great summer!

[Best_Wordpress_Gallery id=”29″ gal_title=”estate Pirelli”]

A recently published book tells the story of the life of Giacomo Corno, an entrepreneur and man of many talents.

 There have always been businessmen who through their actions have provided us with valuable lessons. And there are still people like this today, often working unnoticed by the wider world, but capable of leaving their mark. It should be important for everybody to understand their way of acting and thinking. “L’uomo al centro dell’impresa. Giacomo Corno dalla Brianza al mondo” (The Man at the Centre of Enterprise. Giacomo Corno from Brianza to the World), written by Stella Casiraghi and recently published in Italian, is well worth a read, and will help anybody who wants to develop their understanding of entrepreneurial and managerial culture.

Casiraghi describes both the everyday and out-of-the-ordinary experiences garnered across several decades of working in a variety of enterprises – both economic and humanitarian – by an entrepreneur from Brianza, in the north of Italy, who was able to look far beyond his roots.

Giacomo Corno was born 31 March 1928 in the small town of Lissone, where he lived and started his career. At 18 he became a bookkeeper, at 20 he opened his first professional studio and at 23 he graduated with a degree in Economics and Trade from the Bocconi University of Milan. As a business accountant, he was involved in all aspects of the business of small and medium-sized companies. He was also a consultant for important industrial groups in Italy, managing delicate company restructurings, and was a member of the board of directors of important banking institutions. He didn’t only oversee finance, however: he was also interested in the dynamics of internationalisation, and organised various trade fairs and economic missions all over the world, directly involving company employees. He anticipated a habit that years later would be something widespread and commonplace: looking at the world outside the office window and immersing yourself in it.

Yet this was not enough: in the 1980s he founded CIS, the Centre for Enterprise Studies at Valmadrera near Lake Lecco, a permanent headquarters of training and research for the development of companies and NGOs, and taught International Economics for 20 years at the State University MGU of Moscow and at the Plekhanov Russian University of Economics.

But still Corno was not satisfied, and he began founding a series of social enterprises which worked to help with adoption, as well as the elderly and the disabled, and the careful management of essential services in local government.

The book recounts all this in a light but impassioned tone, recounting conversations with those who knew Corno best and revealing an intimate side of this genuine character, a person who was an entrepreneur but above all a man of many talents, attentive to the accounts and at the same time to people, and who was famous for his rages but left a void in all those who knew him. Stella Casiraghi’s book is no simple elegy; it is a story to be read by everybody. As is the preface from Father Antonio Mazzi.

As Giacomo Corno would say: “You should be, at the same time and according to necessity, both doers and leaders.” A statement which is valid for all entrepreneurs and leaders. And, to be honest, for everybody else as well.

L’uomo al centro dell’impresa. Giacomo Corno dalla Brianza al mondo (The Man at the Centre of Enterprise. Giacomo Corno from Brianza to the World)  

Stella Casiraghi

Guerini e Associati, 2016

A piece of research from the Bank of Italy analyses reactions from businesses faced with recession on the basis of their age and size

Companies produce goods and create employment. It is, however, necessary to have an in-depth understanding of the modes of growth and job creation in order to identify potential paths to later development. It is a question of both organisational and managerial technique, but also of company culture, with approaches towards business varying according to the type of company concerned.

“Net Employment Growth by Firm Size and Age in Italy” by Francesco Manaresi (a researcher at the Bank of Italy) is a useful analytical starting point for understanding the issue of company growth in relation to job creation.

The paper – recently published by the Bank of Italy in Questioni di economia e finanza (Occasional Papers) – is a study of how growth in employment can change between companies of varying age and size. The research was carried out by assessing all private Italian companies with at least one employee (covering the period 1991 to 2009 and using data from INPS, the Italian social security agency), and shows that the size of the company is not a significant determinant of business growth, once controls have been made by correlating this parameter to the age of the companies.

The crux of Manaresi’s reasoning is that companies have a higher rate of growth in the first three years and have slightly higher departure rates than older businesses. At the same time, during periods of crisis older companies see a greater reduction in employment growth, whereas the impact of recessions on younger companies is in part limited by them being more selective during the formation of the company. With age taken into account, the size of the company has no significant correlation with employment trends during recessions.

The analysis of INPS data by the Bank of Italy supplies “quantitative proof” of the difference significance that the impact from a crisis can have on companies, and that this significance depends on both the company’s structure and its history, but under which there lies variations in the configuration of the culture of production.

Net employment growth by firm size and age in Italy

Francesco Manaresi

Questioni di economia e finanza, Bank of Italy, no. 298, 2015

More development, less austerity. Or to put it another way, a new economic culture which assesses the quality and quantity of growth, and by focusing on this dimension unlocks the key to our understanding of how to win the battle against inequality while balancing state spending. A mirage? An illusion? A post-Keynesian fairy tale? There is a wide range of economic literature which suggests that it can be done (recent books include The Industries of the Future by Alex Ross, a tech guru close to Obama, the Clintons and Italy’s Matteo Renzi, and Capitalism: Money, Markets and Morals by John Plender, a columnist for the Financial Times). And now in the political world too, something meaningful is beginning to stir.

In an era of ever deeper and increasingly alarming uncertainty, the major countries of the global economy have finally begun to understand that the way out of this ongoing crisis isn’t through restricting state spending at any cost, but in the politics of growth, public investment and by combatting disproportionate wealth and inequality. “The general feeling is that the outlook remains uncertain. There is now broad consensus that what the global economy needs is growth, not austerity”, argues Jacob Lew, US Secretary of the Treasury. The American administrator was speaking at the G20 summit in Chengdu, China, at the end of July, in the presence of economic ministers and the governors of the central banks of the G20. “The discussions here have focused on how best to achieve that outcome,” he added. Respected commentators summarised it as “Another step forward towards the end of the era of austerity.”

Six years ago, at the G20 summit in Toronto, the common view was that the great crisis which exploded in 2008 was in the process of being overcome, and that with the downturn behind us it would be possible to carry on as before: balancing finances and reducing debt, traditional laissez-faire economics, a combination of state austerity and market dynamics. A serious mistake. The crisis was structural, not cyclical. And despite the presence of a vast range of respected economic literature on the need to make radical transformations to the current models of production, consumption, environmental relations and social relations, governments have made few real changes. Austerity has remained the prevailing dogma, above all in the EU, under the influence of Germany.

But growth has not come.  In fact, global prospects are steadily worsening, even if this is also due to factors which are not strictly economic, but geopolitical: terrorism, huge mass migration, and alarm about climate change. To combat these great, widespread fears, which dramatically affect the economy, courageous reform was necessary. Not an adherence to prevailing assumptions, poor fiscal policy and scarce attention paid to investment.

The IMF estimate for worldwide growth in 2016 is 3.1%. Not a lot, and in the process of being reduced. EU countries are being left behind. Brexit will have a negative effect not only on Great Britain and in the EU as a whole, but also on international trade (after Brexit the IMF cut its estimate by 0.1%). Which is why new political choices must be made.

The final document from the G20 recognises the necessity for change (a good sign, politically) but does not indicate what that change should be (despite insisting on the need of action against the impractical shortcut of protectionism, a method unfortunately  very dear to Donald Trump,  a powerful candidate for the White House). International bodies are losing their influence, to the advantage of a wretched and ugly neo-nationalism. The general uncertainty is deepening.

Looking at several of the G20 countries, the US and EU included, it is clear that action must be taken to fight several trends which are now all too evident: productivity is stagnating, despite the presence of huge technological innovations (as discussed in this blog two weeks ago);  timid “recoveries” fail to bring new jobs; a focus on exports is not a comprehensive solution (and is an approach which steals growth from the most fragile countries in the EU zone, a sport of which Germany is the champion); social and economic inequality is increasing within even the richest countries, affecting the middle class in particular; the living conditions of various sections of the population are worsening, and expectations of prosperity have resulted only in disappointment (above all for the younger generation). The economy is stagnating. And politics has been unable to restart it.

Yet these inequalities and the spreading frustration are not free of political consequences. Ruling, economic and social elites are losing their gamble of trusting in the future. Populism is on the rise, wounding (between disinterest and radical protest) the traditional assets of democratic governance.

This is why we must again start talking about the politics of growth. And in every country try to build on the changing outlook of the G20. Do away with ideological austerity (though without cultivating populist inclinations of deficit spending and welfare spending), and make a decisive move to strong supply-side economics: state investment in innovation, research, training, infrastructure, energy and the environment, while also stimulating private investment. No more sanctions for countries who do not have their “finances in order” (the decision of Brussels not to sanction Spain and Portugal for their budgetary imbalances is a step in the right direction, but the various decisions made towards a Greece already on its knees are not). Above all else, a long-term EU development strategy. A turning point, to be exact. A kind of “new Delors Report”. Without the dogma and current orthodoxy which have until now been failures, but instead with educated politics of sustainable development. Virtue lies in growth, not stagnation.

A piece of research which has recently been published shines the light on the role of the Competence Broker as a fundamental element in company growth

A company also grows thanks to new technology and research. But this must be sought out, understood and put into practice.  Something which is not easy to do for many big corporations. It depends upon a culture of productivity, certainly, but that is not all. It is nevertheless true that in order to welcome innovation one needs a company culture which is appropriate and people who within the corporate context are open to the acceptance of new ideas. This is the responsibility of the role of the Competence Broker which derives precisely from the need to connect and bring closer together two worlds which otherwise would be miles apart and would each risk going their separate ways: corporations, and the world of research.

A better understanding of this function can be useful. This can also help to drive a wider cultural and organisational awareness within the company. This is why it is worth reading  “Competence Broker: la creazione di collaborazioni vincenti” (Competence Broker: the creation of winning partnerships) which Giulia Guggiari has written as her Bachelor degree thesis at the professional university School of Italian Switzerland, Department of company, health and social economics

This piece of research seeks to organise, from a theoretical and empirical perspective, our understanding about the aspects of this role which, perhaps even in a hidden manner, is nevertheless present in a large number of companies and represents for them an important organisational and cultural feature.

The purpose of the Competence Broker is, as has been stated, to act as the go-between linking the industrial world with the academic one. This role therefore has the task of helping companies to take advantage of all the opportunities in terms of innovation in such a way that they can increase their own capability for innovation. After situating her subject within its theoretical context, therefore, the author assesses its actual reality through an analysis of six corporations from the Ticino Canton which are largely similar to other companies with the same type of organisation within the corporate manufacturing environment of our country and of the rest of Europe. Over and above the specific analysis itself, it is also interesting to note the description of the profile, with its competencies and characteristics, which the broker should possess; characteristics which boil down to a strong sensitivity to things which are new and different, a deep understanding of company idiosyncrasies and a strong ability for negotiation and mediation.

Something else which emerges from the research by Giulia Guggiari, is the recognition of the wide dissemination of this role within companies which, however, are often unaware that they even dispose of capabilities and functions of this type. In this analysis a very different aspect of the culture of manufacturing and of growth has been identified, which deserves to be studied and understood in greater depth.

Competence Broker: la creazione di collaborazioni vincenti (Competence Broker: the creation of winning partnerships)

Giulia Guggiari

Bachelor degree thesis at the professional university School of Italian Switzerland, Department of company, health and social economics

A book written by two Nobel prize-winners analyses the rules of the market in a sobering way and reveals how even companies should take a great deal of care

Corporations, workers, entrepreneurs and managers act within a distinct social system which conditions them and which is itself conditioned by their own actions. This is also what applies for the rules of the economy. To understand the true nature of economic rationality and, above all, how this can be tricked for purposes which are not just simply those of an optimum allocation of resources, is important for everyone. This leads to the need for appropriate readily available instruments for such understanding. One of these, for example is “Ci prendono per fessi. L’economia della manipolazione e dell’inganno” (“They take us for idiots. The economy of manipulation and deceit”) – a fine book written by the two Nobel Prize-winners for Economics, George A.  Akerlof and Robert J. Shiller.

“They take us for idiots” is on the face of it a humorous text which methodically takes apart all the fundamental principles of classical economics (it is no accident that in the opening lines we encounter Adam Smith, the founding father of a good part if not all of economic theory as it has evolved since the 18th Century). In reality what has been written by Akerlof and Shiller is a detailed analysis of the negative aspects of economic mechanisms, as well as an explanation of the evolution of what everyone’s careers – including entrepreneurs and managers -, involve when they are “caught up” by the distorting cogs of rules of economics

Ever since the era of Adam Smith – this is the gist of the authors’ analysis -, economic thinking has sung the praises of the free market which, as if it were governed by an invisible hand, should manage to reconcile the pursuit of personal interest with the good of the entire society, turning individual advantage into common good. This is the idea of a “good” economy, which has not only been completely bulldozed by the countless events of past and present times, but also by the normal human condition.

George Akerlof and Robert Shiller in fact look at the transformation of the idyllic conception of the economy as something entirely different: they explain that the markets cause us as much damage as they do us good, and far from being fundamentally harmless they are intrinsically crawling with traps and lures which we end up being caught in. Even if we are entrepreneurs.

Akerlof and Shiller therefore apply to the entire sphere of the economy that notion of phishing which came about at the onset of the Internet to define on-line scams, “fishing for naive users” from whom to extract information, data and, in the end, money. Yet while what happens on the Web is illegal, the two explain that in the economy it is a common and undisputed practice.

With a witty and in some places quite comical pen, the Nobel prize-winners therefore analyse multiple aspects of the economy from their original point of view. The book is extremely valuable: it explains the economic theory using a simple language and with the right examples. They mention the market success of companies founded on a single product, but also of major groups created on complex financial architectures. They write about phishing applied to the automotive, food, and industry markets, but also to politics, to the pharmaceutical world and to credit cards. Without neglecting tobacco and alcohol, or banks for that matter.

The volume is also dedicated to entrepreneurs: the two authors explain that they also wrote their book for them, who are “often disheartened by the cynicism of some” colleague “and forced to adapt due to economic need”.

Ci prendono per fessi. L’economia della manipolazione e dell’inganno (“They take us for idiots. The economy of manipulation and deceit”)

George A. Akerlof and Robert J. Shiller

Mondadori, 2016

A University of Naples study explores corporate museums as a means of explaining the culture of production

Each organisation tells its own story, no one doing it in the same way. Each is an echo of the organisation’s own individual culture, a product of  its specific experiences over the years. Moreover,  the methods these organisations choose to present their stories – in text and images – provide unique insights into how production is organised. This is a point to be explored if we are to fully understand the true fabric of the entrepreneurial spirit underpinning production.

One of the most popular methods businesses choose to tell their stories is the “corporate museum”.  A medley of objects, images, sounds, texts and colours, these museums throw light on who and what the organisation is.

To gain a better understanding of how effective corporate museums can be, a useful place to start is “Quando il museo comunica l’impresa: identità organizzativa e sensemaking nel museo Salvatore Ferragamo” [Museums communicating enterprise: organisational identity and sense-making in the Salvatore Ferragamo museum], written by Floriana Iannone (PhD, Economics faculty, Second University of Naples) and recently published by “Il capitale culturale” [The cultural capital].

Floriana Iannone bases her thesis on this premise: corporate museums are a kind of organisational memory which can and must be used responsibly in building and communicating corporate identity and image.

In developing her argument, the author starts by exploring the theory underlying sensemaking, namely the process by which organisations give meaning to their business then convey it through museums.  This is followed, later in the book, by a specific study of the Ferragamo museum encompassing interviews with museum employees, company managers and a large sample of the public.

The picture that emerges confirms the potential of corporate museums, when well-organised and managed – to convey corporate identity, in some cases, going as far as to establish a sort of dialogue within the company and with the outside world, helping to strengthen and transmit the values underpinning the organisation and driving its growth.

One of the employees made this pertinent comment: “We would like to see emotional bonds forged with the brand although our main objective is to help boost culture in our field.”

The language may not always be the easiest, but the article detailing Floriana Iannaone’s research is an excellent example of how to explore “applied” business culture.

Quando il museo comunica l’impresa: identità organizzativa e sensemaking nel museo Salvatore Ferragamo  [Museums communicating enterprise: organisational identity and sense-making in the Salvatore Ferragamo museum]

Floriana Iannone

“Il capitale culturale” [The cultural capital], XIII (2016), pages 525-553 

This book narrates a collection of unusual approaches to business, touching on visions of the economy, society, manufacturing and much more.

They share a pinch of recklessness and an aptitude for risk assessment (perhaps unconscious) as well as the ability to deal with the unexpected. Together, such skills form the genetic code of the successful entrepreneur – or even manager – who come up with an idea for a business then make it happen. Even today. Even now that forecasting and analytical tools, management and scheduling systems, are even more powerful and critical than ever before. Even though everything’s apparently been done or invented already. The realization that there’s so much left be done, so much still be invented is further bolstered in this newly-published book “Portami oltre il buio. Viaggio nell’Italia che non ha paura” [Take me beyond the darkness. A trip around Italy, a country that has no fear] by Giorgio Boatti – journalist, writer and commentator on contemporary history.  The book portrays Italy as a country that has been shaken but not broken by the difficulties of the past few years. The country is portrayed as willing to step into the ring, with grit and enthusiasm, and to seize change, rising above fear and self-denigration.

Boatti has collated a series of true and positive stories that look “beyond the darkness”, as stated in the title.  The introduction reads, “The crisis has been so long and so harsh that it’s become almost impossible to imagine life in Italy “on the other side”. Not anymore. Boati’s search for people who have succeeded in looking forward and reaching beyond the crisis in their actions, introduces the reader to a collection of stories that touch on society, the economy, manufacturing and much more. Geographically, his trip takes us from Monferrato in Piedmont to the Parco dei Paduli in Salento, from Matera to the suburbs of Genoa, from Chianti and Mount Amiata to Rome and from the heart of Emilia Romagna’s food valley to Asti and the Jesi hills. The list of activities encountered range from catering and hospitality to craft and industrial production, tourism and culture. All are emblems of an unexpected way of doing business. Each location offers a different story – all of which are true, complete with the names and surnames of the real people populating them – teaching us, principally, two main things. Firstly, that Italy is not a mess and the future really has just begun. Secondly, that this future doesn’t have to be built on big technology and big investment by the lucky few.

Giorgio Boatti’s book is undoubtedly a visionary account that holds the attention from start to finish. It’s also a very optimistic account with its feet firmly on the ground. It also ends with this wonderful thought: “It was dawn and of the darkness there was no longer any trace.”

Portami oltre il buio. Viaggio nell’Italia che non ha paura [Take me beyond the darkness. A trip around Italy, a country that has no fear]

Giorgio Boatti

Laterza, 2016

“The paradox of the digital era”, says the OECD, the phenomenon whereby the more technological we become the less productive we are. We are surrounded by a constant stream of technological  innovation with associated production systems and sophisticated new economy services which have radically changed the way we work, live, consume and communicate. But all the while, productivity (namely the amount produced per hour worked) is dropping. And the world’s most industrial areas are growing at a notably slower pace. This is the picture to emerge from recently published OECD data which showed, namely, that between 1970 and the end of the 20th century, productivity rose by 1.5%-2.5% per year on the back of technological innovation, new machinery and the IT boom.  Then, just as the digital economy started to take hold, growth lost speed. Current forecasts for the USA, the home of high-tech, estimate that productivity will start to drop in 2016, for the first time in thirty years, after slowing down to 1.12% between 2004 and 2014.  In Germany, the driving force of European industry, productivity growth of 1.90% in the 1980s has been seen to drop to an average of 0.86% for the period from 2004 to 2014. The same trends are happening in Korea: from 7% to 3.58% in the same period.

What’s gone wrong? There are two possible explanations. Either we have yet to feel the full effect of new technologies  (in industry as much as the finance, insurance and service sectors). Or, with the “digital paradox” mentioned earlier, we have entered a new season of slower growth (or “massive stagnation” as the more pessimistic economists call it.) The issue is a complex one and many economic leaders, scholars, business people and bankers are currently racking their brains to understand it. Most likely, we have reached the end of an extended cycle of economic development. In OECD countries, traditionally stronger and more industrialized, we have to get used to the idea of lower productivity and slower growth, in a world in which advances in digital technology, rather than determining quantitative growth, actually have more effect on the quality of development, the sustainability of the economy and standards of living. We are seeing a paradigm change. A metamorphosis that affects both business and society. Debate is ongoing.

In this context, Italy has its own negative story to tell.  Why? Because despite a global situation of faltering growth and recession, the situation is even bleaker in Italy. If we take productivity indexes from 1990 to today (using 100 as the base value added per hour worked in 2000), we see that Italy expanded until 2000 then stopped progressing any further than 100 over the next fifteen years (dipping to 98 in 2009 at the peak of the Great Recession) while USA reached 124, Germany and Spain 116 and France 114. Italy is undoubtedly paying the price of its unproductive  public administration, inadequacies in the justice and tax systems, and limited public investment in research, training and innovation (discussed in a recent blog). But if we take a closer look at trends in productivity across different sectors (Assolombarda analysis of OECD data), it emerges that manufacturing (an area of excellence in Italy), again using 100 as the base value, expanded to 117 in 2000. This was higher than the national average but less than France (149), Spain (134) and Germany (133). In other industrial sectors, such as ICT, Italy’s 131 was contrasted with 163 in Germany, 152 in France and 137 in Spain.  So even in the industrial world, our competitors are more productive than we are. The poorest growth (below the national average) was seen in the professional services sector: 68 in Italy compared with 99 in France, 82 in Germany. The adverse effects of this on industry are widespread.

Why are things so bad? Aside from the negative influence on the system we mentioned earlier, Assolombarda cites “skills mismatching”, namely a “misalignment” between what workers are capable of and what organisations actually need (leading to distortions in the deployment of labour-resources). This situation could be overturned “with appropriate education and lifelong learning policies” and by “facilitating occupation in more productive organisations, making this happen by introducing  organisational bargaining mechanisms” (linking salaries to productivity so that workers earn more as  productivity rises). This would have a positive effect on the country as a whole: “According to ECB estimates, such “reallocated” productivity could be worth 30% more than productivity in Italy.”

There’s another factor, though, which is adversely affecting  our productivity and which Assolombarda draws attention to: the limited role played by women in the labour market. The current employment in Italy is 64.9% compared with 77.7% in Germany, 75.3% in Spain, 72.7% in USA and 71.3% in France. But when we look specifically at female occupation, the situation is drastic: just 55.2% compared with 72.9% in Germany and 67% in France and USA.  The fewer women who work, the lower our productivity. This is yet another economic and social factor to be addressed.

In conclusion, drawing on figures recently published in the “Annual Innovation Report” by Cotec (foundation for technological innovation), published in June 2016: “From 2000 to 2011,  Italy presents a negative adjustment of -0.44% with respect to total production of all factors, and this proved to be the biggest barrier to economic growth in the country.  Of the main industrialized nations, the only ones to present similarly negative figures, although less so than Italy, are Portugal (-0.19%) and Spain (-0.07%). All other countries have positive indices: France 0.38, UK 0.52, Japan 0.76, Germany 0.77, USA 1.27.” A gap exists and it’s getting wider, to our own detriment. In a world of diminishing productivity, Italy is hurting the most. In terms of competitiveness, labour, wealth and the quantity and quality of growth.

A recently published book written by several authors compares production to satisfy needs with the financialisation of the economy

 Producing genuine services and things. With a keen eye on efficiency, but also on the effects of the activities which every company conducts. It is the application of good corporate culture that makes factories and businesses not just entities that are disconnected from reality but indeed fundamental elements of successful cohabitation. These ideas are apparently endorsed and applicable but, nevertheless, they have been through some difficult times over the years. The financialisation of the economy and the ensuing “disconnection” of companies from the reality of needs have hit hard, and still today they fight for space and attention in the role of manufacturing.

Reading “Il capitale quotidiano. Un manifesto per l’economia fondamentale” (Everyday capital. A manifesto for the fundamental economy) written by several authors and co-ordinated by Filippo Barbera, Joselle Dagnes, Angelo Salento, Ferdinando Spina (sociologists from the Universities of Turin and Salento) will help you better understand how important it is to pay attention to the role of real production and especially to production that meets the fundamental needs of people regardless of their income such as food, healthcare, education, transport, energy, water and gas distribution, telecommunications and waste collection. These things are apparently simple, yet fundamental – in fact – for the creation and upkeep of a balanced society.

The authors immediately start by stating they have nothing against innovation and new technology but instead they convey a different way to look at the economy, focused more on people, on their real needs, on the ability to satisfy them. A far cry from major finance and pure monetary profit.

To explain all this, the book first considers the transformations that have led to the financialisation of the economy and then investigates its effects on companies. Subsequently, the authors take a closer look at the vicissitudes of segments of the economy that are linked to the fundamental needs of society, and then lay out the “self-defence” responses that have arisen as a reaction to the changes and lastly they set out a more organic action plan that will bring economic action closer to the social context.

A crucial part of the book explains: “The point is that, in reality, success is not governed by an intentional rationality but by a complex of actions within each context, but it is tied to circumstances, in other words to external conditions that are, in fact, contingent”. Which is just like saying: you need to take other factors beside the rationality of economic calculation into consideration. In other words, it is the unforeseen nature of how real things take place, but also, we add, the ability to react and the inventiveness of prudent entrepreneurs and attentive managers.

“Il capitale quotidiano” makes for a good read to learn about the existence of a different context in which companies can act.

Il capitale quotidiano. Un manifesto per l’economia fondamentale (Everyday capital. A manifesto for the fundamental economy)

Filippo Barbera, Joselle Dagnes, Angelo Salento, Ferdinando Spina (written by)

Donzelli, 2016