Necesitamos incorporar nativos digitales a consejos de administración

Hoy se han reunido en España los 37 empresarios más importantes del país con el presidente del gobierno. Según oía hablar de la “productiva” reunión con estos líderes, a los cuales admiro en muchos casos, pensaba en sus edades. Pocos de ellos en la cuarentena, muchos por encima de los 50. Al instante, me he planteado: ¿Si obama hiciera lo mismo, qué edades tendrían estos líderes empresarios? Estoy seguro de que Google, Facebook, Twitter, Foursquare…estarían representados en esa reunión, todas ellas empresas creadas por nativos digitales. Supongo que la media de edad bajaría al menos 10 años.

Después de ver la noticia en TV he visitado un par de webs, hasta que he llegado a un artículo del USA Today que titulaba “¿La edad importa cuando eres un CEO? En el cuál se habla de que si se compara a los 10 CEOs más jóvenes de grandes compañías con aquellos 10 más mayores, los primeros superaban el rendimiento de los segundos, a pesar de su inexperiencia y sus menores salarios. [enlace al artículo]

No seré tan irreverente como para clamar porque las empresas Españolas pongan a dirigir el país a jóvenes inexpertos, pero sí que me atrevo a decir que ha llegado la hora de que entren en el consejo de administración. Y lo digo porque es necesario que nuestros líderes entiendan que la realidad económica y social ha cambiado, y necesitan al menos a un nativo digital que les haga entender cómo de estratégico es este colectivo, cómo han cambiado su forma de vida, y cómo el futuro de la compañía depende de su adaptación a este cambio.

Para todos aquellos que quieran entender este cambio, les recomiendo el libro “Grown up digital” de Don Tapscott, el cual hace básicamente una reflexión de esta generación que ha crecido en internet y que ahora entra en el mundo laboral. Son los llamados “Nativos digitales” o la “Generación Net”, que sucede a la generación que creció viendo la TV, la llamada Generación X.

La generación Net comprende a aquellos nacidos entre 1977 y 1997,  y tiene unos patrones de comportamiento bien distintos a sus predecesores. Se trata de una generación que vive inmersa en la tecnología, que es como “el aire que respiran”, y no entiende a aquellos que tienen que “aprender a usarla”. Viven conectados, utilizan dispositivos que les permiten comunicarse al instante con su círculo social, al que valoran por encima de las aspiraciones políticas o económicas. No soportan sólo escuchar y acatar lo que se les dice, sino que quieren opinar y compartir con los demás lo que están pensando (Algo contrario a la generación TV, que sólo absorbía información, pero no producía), lo cual les hace muy malos trabajadores dentro de jerarquías. Eso sí, en un ambiente creativo y con un alto grado de libertad, son una generación responsable y con ambiciones muy altas, capaces de generar grandes movimientos sociales con repercusión mundial.

De hecho son grandes iniciadores, organizadores, escritores y estrategas, dentro de esta nueva realidad social turbulenta y cambiante. No es una generación peor, es una generación distinta. Sólo hay que comprenderla y entender sus reglas. Se trata de la generación educativamente más preparada de la historia, con una mente mucho más global y con grandes ambiciones. Dejémosles trabajar para que tengan impacto.

Esta semana tuve la gran suerte de escuchar a uno de las personas que lideran Telefónica, y utilizó una metáfora que me dejó impactado. Esta persona asistió a una Campus Party, y a la hora de preguntar a un jóven sobre su opinión acerca de Telefónica, éste le respondió: “¿Has visto la película de “el sexto sentido”? Pues bien, tú eres el niño que parece estar vivo, pero en realidad está muerto”. Esta metáfora le hizo darse cuenta de que algo tenía que cambiar en la compañía para adaptarse a este nuevo entorno, o sino, tarde o temprano, acabarían fuera del mercado. He de decir que ha sido una de las personas más inteligentes a las que he escuchado.

Muchos políticos se han dado cuenta de que esta generación es estratégica, y están tratando de comprenderles: Lula anunció esta semana que sería “Bloguero y twittero”, Barack Obama fue un ejemplo de cómo llevar a cabo una campaña electoral en la red…y en Europa, la comisaria Neelie Kroes dice cosas como esta cuando viene a Campus Party:

No obstante, por mucho que quieran entender a esta generación, sólo los que estamos en ella la llevamos en nuestro ADN. Las empresas y movimientos que están triunfando son aquellos que consiguen “conectar” con esta generación, que me atrevo a decir que es la más poderosa de la historia. Por eso creo que las compañías nos necesitan para interiorizar este cambio de entorno, y la que no nos deje “romper cosas” para construír otras mejores, acabará fuera de juego. No digo que seamos mejores que los que hay, digo que se necesita nuestro punto de vista. Y se necesita YA, o será tarde.

It is the time for “the flock of birds management”

I would like to start clarifying that what you are about to read is going to seem quite annoying. It should be in that way because it is a breakdown. It changes the way of thinking, and maybe it makes no sense for you at the moment. Take your time and it will.

What I would like to talk about is what I think it is the organization of the future: It is called the flock of birds organization. It came to my mind when I read the book, “The wisdom of crowds” by James Surowiecki. Let me give you a short overview:
“A flock of birds breaks up, re-forms, breaks up, re-forms… its motion creating an indecipherable but beautiful pattern. In the process, the hawk becomes disoriented, since no individual starling ever stays in the same place, even though the flock as a whole is never divided for long.

From the outside, the flock´s movements appear to be the result of the workings of one mind, guiding the flock to protect itself. At the very least, the starlings appear to be acting in concert with each other, pursuing an agreed-upon strategy that gives each of them a better chance to survive. But neither of these is true. Each starling is acting on its own, following four rules:

1) stay as close to the middle as possible
2) stay two to thre body lengths away from your neighbor
3) Do not bump into any other starling
4) If a Hawk dives at you, get out of the way
No starling knows what the other birds are going to do. No starling can command another bird to do anything. The rules alone allow the flock to keep moving in the right direction, to resist predators and to regroup when divided.

It is safe to say that anyone who is interested in group behavior is enamored of flocking birds. A flock is a wonderful example of a social organization that accomplishes its goals and solves problems in a bottom up fashion, without leaders and without having to follow complex algorithms or complicated rules. Watching a flock move through the air, you get a sense of what the economist Friedrich Hayek liked to term “Spontaneus order”. It´s a biologically programmed spontaneity – starlings don´t decide to follow these rules, they just do. But it is spontaneity for all that. No plans are made. The flock just moves.”

In my opinion, this is the perfect organization for the times we live in. My father used to say when I was young “Look at the birds, they do not cultivate anything and they eat every day”, the answer was there, but I could not see it. Maybe you still can´t, but I ensure you will start understanding what I am talking about.

First. Why should anyone always lead?

Nowadays, companies have CEOs. They are always the same people.  Sometimes they have brilliant minds that have an outstanding way of look at the world, sometimes they don´t. The real question here is: Should be the leadership determined in advance? In my opinion, leadership emerges in critical situations (Usually umpleasant situations), when decisions have to be made. Should always the same person take that decision? I don´t think so. I believe in an organization where the leadership is demonstrated instead of being determined. Imagine again the flock of birds. Is the first bird always the same bird? Wouldn´t be better to lead sometimes, and let others lead in other occasions?

Second. Are we prepared for being birds?

It is ironic. I am writing this post while flying from Madrid to Mexico. Today we live in a world where we can work anywhere, anytime. The most efficient way to distribute work is working when you are ready for it. Say goodbye to work from 9 to 5. Who cares when you work? the only premise is that you have to finish your work on time for others. I don´t care where or when you did it. So please don´t feel bad if you don´t go to the office 3 days in a row if you feel that you are being more productive at home. Now we have the tools to work while visiting Hong Kong, taking care of your children, or your grandparents. Being able to maximize your personal life gives you the power to be more productive for your work.

Third. Will people cheat on me?

Results will tell you. If you did not report on time, you failed. If you outperform the market, you did it great. What managers should focus on, instead of controlling the behavior, the time or the place, should be the productivity. “He never comes to the office, but he sells every single product we have” I would love to hear that. “I don´t know how is he doing that, but our system is more efficent, more robust, and the errors are lower than ever”. You are right, it doesn´t matter how is he doing it, but it does. As the birds, we always need our nest where we collaborate with others. But we need to be alone if we want to fly. Offices should be meeting points, instead of staying points.

Four. Don´t work for the enterprise, work for your enterprise.

There is something that I do not understand. Why should we work for others? Yeah it is right. For money. Ok but let´s give a second thought. Would we work with the same intensity, with the same passion, if it was your company? I am sure that your response is NO. Then, why not, for the benefit of everybody in the company, be one of the owners of the company? I know that it seems to be ridiculous, but think about it. What if every single worker had a fraction of the company? That would change the sentence “I work for ______” to ” I work in my ______ “. The results would be amazing. I am sure.

Five. Should we choose in what we want to work?

Of course. I think it is overwhelming how we dismiss such a talented people just because he or she is not prepared, or because somebody thinks that he or she doesn´t fit the job. Why dont we hire people because of they are extremely talented, and let them choose which projects are the ones that they are excited with? Wouldn´t be more productive? I know that we have built some rules during the last century, and I am questioning the system that worked for more than two hundred years. But I think it is time to question everything.

Trying to reach conclussions: I believe that you should work always in something that is exciting for you, where and when you want. And you have to be part of it, you must be the owner. The way of organizing work should be based in objectives, deadlines and results. But those objectives should not be determined by one person, but by the leader of each project the company has. That would make everything more engaging, fulfilling, and fun.

How are you managing your 24 hours in a day?

Is your lifestile balanced? That is the question you should answer after reading this article. I really think that there is not just one correct option, but I do think that some our nowadays lifestyles are wrong. Deeply wrong.

I have been thinking lately about how we manage our time, one of the most scarce resources we have to deal with in our daily life. I dont have the correct answer to the question, but I think I have some thoughts that need to be heard. Let´s take a look at the 24 hours we have to spend in a day, and we will discover some interesting facts…

What I am going to expose is a personal point of view of the minimal requirements for what I consider that is a balanced life. In my opinion, that concept should mix passive activities with active ones, using as many parts of our body as we can. Isn´t it the best way to achieve the balance?

Ok, let´s start with the passive hours. I will call passive hours the time we are not actually producing anything. That does not mean we are being unproductive, it just mean that we are not generating outcomes.

8 hour sleep. That´s considered the time you need to renew the energy of your body. I use to say that it is your battery charger, if you don´t fill it 100% you will not have the appropriate energy to face up the active tasks you need to accomplish in order to feel balanced. So please, take the rest when you have to.

1 hour sport.  It is hard, I know. But it is necessary. The time you invest on doing any sport is necessary to be tired when you have to go to sleep. Pick the one you like the most, or the one you can share with others ( That always help). But I am convinced that any day without sport is an unbalanced day.

2-3 hour feeding. The time you dedicate to the act of feeding should not be below 3 hours. In the mediterranean culture, we have 4 to 5 meal times along the day (And I would suggest that 5 is the perfect number) and we have to think about them as the “break” times. Production is not a permanent task, we have peaks where we feel we give our best, but others we feel we could not accomplish any task we have to do. So please, use that time to grab some food, charge the battery again, and keep yourself active. Being relaxed while you are eating will give you time to enjoy the food, helping your digestive system to impove it´s performance, and, if you manage it with care, giving you time to stop thinking about work.

I would like to add here the time dedicated to spiritual needs. The soul also needs to be fed…

1 hour learning. This hour is the one that keeps you up to date. That can be learning any language, studying something related to your work (or not related to your work at all), but please do not forget this hour or you will get stucked before you think. The time to know what is happening in your environment is needed to be competitive and move forward. Imagine you stopped learning in the 90s, then you wouldnt know how to use the internet, and that would make you less and less competitive.

3 hour of social life. This is the time we use to call or “free time” with friends, family, couple… We have so many people we love in our lives, please enjoy the time you share with them. Have fun! Sometimes our worries at work are transferred to our private life, and that is the worst attitude we should take. To feel self confident, willing to achieve your goals and happy to go to work you need their support. And more important than that, they also need your support for their lives. Do not give your back to them. Your happinness is at stake.

And then we arrive to the Active hours, that is, the time we spend in our lifes producing something. Generating wealth.

8 hour work. It is the standard, and I am not really sure that it is perfect. I always mantain that motivation comes first, and then comes the productive outcome. Sometimes I feel that I could be working all the night, the entire weekend or the whole evening. And I do it. There is something about inspiration and work. Why dont we let ourselves work when we are more productives? Why should we still work from 9 to 5? Are we all more productives during that period of time?

The 21st century business is the one that keeps the workers productive when they are productive. Forcing them to work in uncomfortable atmospheres, stressing situations or tight rules is, in the end, damaging the balance of the people at work. If someone feels that his or her well being is not being appreciated, their perception of the employer will be negative and the performance at work will be lower. On the contrary, enterprises taking care of the employees generate an affective relationship that will make the worker much more productive even when the company has bad results. And it is because it is not yet  the company, it is their company. And It also applies for civil servants, non profits…

This article is far from trying to tell anyone how we should live. It is just a modest approach to what I think it is needed to reach a balanced lifestyle, and I am sure that if I ask you about your approach will be different but with common points. What I just wanted to tell you is that you HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF about how you would like to live to achieve your balance. If you dont ask, you won´t get the answer.

Take a look to this video of Tim Ferris, the author of the book “4 Hour workweek” and you will understand that we should start thinking differently about work. Enjoy!