Of Elephants and Baboons: Five Company Stakeholders in Animal Form

World Bank professional Eva Schiffer divides stakeholders into 5 categories:

Elephants: high influence, positive
Meercats: low influence, positive
Snakes: high influence, negative
Mosquitos: low influence, negative,
Baboons: high influence, undecided (sitting on the fence).

The full article can be read here:
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/stakeholder-strategies-how-engage-elephants-avoid-snakes-eva-schiffer

There is another useful maxim in business organisations: When you are the boss and you are launching a new project, 20% of people will support you, 10% will be against you, and the remaining 70% won't care. However, the 70% will care how you treat the dissenting 10%.

In the world of elephants, snakes and baboons, the baboons are always watching out for elephants trampling on snakes, and for snakes biting elephants.

The plough was a double-edged sword for human society: economically productive but discriminatory to women

Positive technological advances sometimes lead to negative social change.
Discrimination against women stems from the invention of the plough.
By George ILIEV 

Some 8,000 years ago humans invented the plough. It was the perfect labour-saving device for efficiently bringing fresh nutrients to the surface from the soil layer below. Flipping the two layers not only buried the exhausted top layer of soil, but also covered weeds and the remains of previous crops, helping microorganisms to break down organic matter. Little did the early farmers know that, together with organic matter, this innovation was also breaking down their social structure.

Before the invention of the plough human populations lived in relative gender equality, as both men and women were economically significant contributors to society through their gender-specific occupations: hunting, gathering and primitive land tilling. The idea that women ruled the roost in a matriarchy before the dawn of agriculture has now fallen out of favour with anthropologists and archaeologist, but at least there was equality. However, the plough changed everything, as a 2011 paper by Harvard and UCLA researchers demonstrates (On the Origins of Gender Roles: Women and the Plough).

Ploughing requires upper body strength and men have a natural advantage in this. Having stronger shoulders not only allows you to exert the pressure needed for efficient ploughing but also helps in maintaining control of the domesticated animals that pull the plough. So men made better ploughmen than women and over time this gave them higher socio-economic status.

We can see vestiges of the plough in modern day gender discrimination around the world: societies that relied heavily on the plough have higher rates of gender inequality.

The plough only has one cutting edge but it became a "double-edged sword" for humanity for several millennia. Should we let the plough continue to influence our world, now that we are moving on to driverless cars and artificial intelligence?

(Picture: Ploughman with Woman Planting Potatoes, by Vincent Van Gogh)

Startup teams behave like packs of wolves. And that's a good thing!

George ILIEV's new TEDx talk explores what wolves, green bananas & bird shit can teach us about ourselves, human society and the corporate world:

In brief:

1. Wolves epitomise startup culture: teamwork and sharing. While dogs are a metaphor for corporate culture: hierarchy, domination and submission.

2. Fruit ripening is like lifelong learning. Some people keep learning new skills over their lifetime, just as some fruit (bananas, apples, mangoes) keep ripening after being picked. Others don't: oranges, strawberries and grapes can ripen no further once detached from the stalk.

3. Investment bankers have something in common with bird excrement. Seeds that go through a bird's digestive system are four times more likely to germinate. Similarly, high-pressure jobs make people resilient and release their full potential.

Think about it next time you have a cup of Kopi Luwak coffee.

For the full stories, watch the TED video.

Helpless human babies and pre-revenue startups make for clever parents

It takes clever parents to raise a helpless human baby to adulthood;
It takes clever entrepreneurs to make a pre-revenue startup a success.

By George ILIEV

All babies are vulnerable when they are born. Yet, many animals give birth to young who get on their feet in minutes. Why are human babies so helpless?

Research by Rochester University suggests an interesting hypothesis: humans have become so clever exactly because their babies are so helpless. Helpless babies need smart parents to be able to survive: the more helpless the baby, the smarter the parents need to be to raise them to adulthood. This creates an evolutionary loop which allows babies to be increasingly helpless, as long as their parents are getting increasingly smarter.

Now look at this analogy through the prism of the startup world. The Googles and the Facebooks of the last two decades were born as companies that didn't generate revenue. Many of them were moonshots that took many years to become self-sufficient. Yet, they had smart founders who managed to raise seed and VC capital to tide them over their first years.

At least this is the case in Silicon Valley, where venture capitalists will support a team of bright founders working on a promising idea. On the other hand, European investors are much more risk-averse. European VCs primarily tend to invest in startups that are already generating revenue or are close to that point.

This makes me wonder why the US startup ecosystem and Europe have diverged in their evolution and who bears the responsibility. If US startups are the human babies, are European startups the orangutans?

Photo Credit: Barry Bland

TEDx Kent talk on wolves, bananas and bird shit

By George ILIEV

The three stories in this 14-minute TED talk draw parallels between:

     1) Packs of wolves and startup culture (vs. dogs and corporate culture);
     2) Green bananas and lifelong learning;
     3) Bird excrement and investment bankers.

Metaphors helps us understand the world better because "only 1/6 of your eyeball faces the outside world."

Panda negotiations resemble interest-only mortgages

By George ILIEV

Pandas are China's national treasure: rare and precious. China used to send them as a diplomatic gift to other countries. The first recorded case was in the 7th century when a Chinese empress sent a pair of giant pandas to the Japanese emperor. Between the 1950s to the 1980s China shipped out 23 pandas in total, to great fanfare. However, since the 1980s, China has been giving giant pandas to other countries only under a 10-year loan and usually charging an annual interest of $1 million per animal. After that the panda has to be returned but usually the lease is renegotiated, resembling an interest-only mortgage.

Panda negotiations between a foreign zoo and the Chinese Government can take time. However, on the side, zoos also have to negotiate with domestic environmental campaigners and animal rights groups and convince them that the "panda loan interest" payments will be spent by China for panda conservation programmes. Other interests may get entangled in the negotiations as well, e.g. political and trade lobbying. So most panda negotiations start to resemble an iceberg or, even more aptly, a polar bear: part of it above water and part of it under the surface.



When a zoo finds the price of a giant panda too high to bear (no pun intended), it can resort to a favourite tool of the finance industry: hedging. The zoos in Toronto and Calgary decided to hedge their panda exposure by signing a 10-year contract for one specimen and then taking turns to host it for five years each.

I wonder why the zoos that cannot afford a giant panda don't settle for a lesser panda. They are even cuter and need much less bamboo.

"Life after death" springs eternal in nature, science and the real economy

The death of an old tree leads to a spurt of growth of young saplings; The death of a leading scientist brings new names on stage.

"Science advances one death at a time" - Niels Bohr

By George ILIEV

The death of a tree in a forest opens up the canopy and allows young sapling access to sunlight.

A similar phenomenon has been proven to exist in the various branches of science, according to MIT research (In death, there is life: Big-name scientists may end up stifling progress in their fields, reported by The Economist). It turns out that "the death of a dominant mind in a field liberates others with different points of view to make their cases more freely". This positive effect is not the result of redistribution of research funding that may previously have been monopolised by the famous scientist. It is rather due to the attention of the scientific community that the established authority used to attract ("intellectual oxygen") and possibly the unwillingness of younger scientists to challenge the established authority. This supports a century-old quote by Physics Nobel Prize winner Niels Bohr: "Science advances one death at a time."

Thus, in the forests of science, it is not access to nutrients underground that spurs the outburst of new growth; it is the open space above.

A similar phenomenon exists in macroeconomics and was first observed by US economist Mancur Olson. He explained the post-war economic miracle in West Germany, Italy and Japan with the destruction of ossified socio-economic institutional hierarchies. A sharp institutional break (such as defeat in war and occupation by a foreign power) spurs economic growth by destroying the existing distribution coalitions, i.e. vested interests. But then several decades later, new distribution coalitions will have emerged and, in turn, would need to be reformed or destroyed to let the economy move forward.

The king is dead. Long live the king.

To make your startup a success, do not plant trees in the Arctic!

Lack of market kills companies; Lack of sunshine kills trees.
By George ILIEV

Millions of small companies and organisations lead a meagre existence: corner shops in the age of the supermarket, startups that grow old without making it big, charities with a handful of employees, street sellers making $3 a day. These are like the stunted trees (known as krummholz) that grow above the treeline in the Arctic and in high mountains.

The treeline separates the areas suitable for tree growth (with an average annual temperature of over 5 °C) from the areas too cold for trees (below 5 °C). Yet, it is not a sharp line but rather a band that may stretch up to 150 km wide in the forest-tundra transition zone in northern Canada. This is the zone where trees fade into krummholz.


Stunted trees cannot grow tall for one of two reasons:
1) lack of sufficient solar radiation and warmth, in the polar areas and high up in the mountains;
2) lack of rain in the transition zone around deserts.

In a similar way, many companies and organisations never make it big for two analogous reasons:
1) lack of a market for their products or services;
2) lack of investment.

"The Number 1 company-killer is lack of market," says US investor Marc Andreessen. Companies that only have a micro-market (e.g. a mom-and-pop store that caters to two streets) resemble the stunted trees that can only survive high in the mountains in a tiny ecological niche, usually sheltered by a rock.

 

If stunted trees are micro-companies, bonsai trees are our hobbies

The bonsai tree is an exceptional member of the stunted tree category. These miniature trees exist in this form because we, humans, want them to be like this and intentionally deny them nutrients.

In the human world of businesses and organisations, the bonsai trees are not companies. They are our hobbies. They are rarely meant to be businesses: they are the blogs that do not profit from advertisement or the flower gardens maintained for pleasure rather than for commercial use.

Sometimes bonsai trees and krummholz get confused in the startup world. Both arise from a personal passion and never make it big. However, there is a crucial difference. The bonsai is never meant to grow big: you don't need a 10 ha flower garden in your back yard. While a flower-growing business that produces cactus leaves to put in flower bunches is clearly making the wrong product for the wrong market and is unlikely to sell much for Valentine's Day (though it might be more successful in sales for April Fools' Day). A hobby can be pursued independently of the external environment because its practice is made possible by cross-subsidising, while a startup always has to start from a market need and can only draw resources from its market.

Humans have one advantage over trees. We pick where to plant them, while the trees have no choice where they happen to be. So, if you want to grow your tree tall, do not plant it in the Arctic. And if you want your company to succeed, find a market first.

Shakespeare might have used this last sentence to wish success to all budding entrepreneurs with the following piece of advice: "Neither a stunted tree, not a bonsai be!"

When stars collide, teamwork suffers. Why teams with many stars often lose?

Stars in some sports compete among themselves, rather than against their opponents
By George ILIEV

Research published in Psychological Science finds a satiation threshold of stardom in various sports: having too many stars on a team often hampers the overall success of the team. In a sport like football (soccer), having more than 75% stars on the team turns out to be counter-productive. In basketball the threshold is even lower, at 60%.

When individual stardom turns into collective martyrdom

Having too many stars become a hindrance when the roles in a given sport are not highly specialised. Ten of the 11 players in a football (soccer) team run and kick the ball pretty much the same way. All five basketball players dribble and pass similarly.

On the other hand, in sports with highly specialised roles such as baseball (where one is using a bat and the other a glove), there is no harm in piling on more and more stars… until they fill up the night sky.


Game Theory explains internal competition within "zero-sum" games

When the roles in a team are not highly specific, as in basketball and football (soccer), play degenerates into an individualistic performance where each player views their activity within the team as a zero-sum game. This gives them an incentive to keep the ball longer, to the detriment of fellow team-mates who might be in a better position to score a goal. As a result, instead of competing against the “competition”, the team starts to compete within itself, leading to the poorer performance of "star-spangled teams".

On the other hand, in baseball the players have an incentive to cooperate all the time as each player’s success is a win-win for all team-mates (i.e. a non-zero sum game).

Competition trumps cooperation in the corporate tug-of-war

This sports analogy is directly observed in the business world. Consulting and investment banking teams composed of multiple star performers often fail when the team roles are homogeneous in design and start to overlap. This means a degree of hierarchy may actually make a team more productive: a team composed of a director, a manager, executives and coordinators divides the responsibilities and focus on different tasks, so the team members do not compete against each other. Otherwise, in a high-pressure environment, you end up hearing stories about one flight attendant hitting another with a tray in front of all passengers.

Two key take-aways:

1) To achieve team success, it is plainly not enough to have diversity of backgrounds; diversity of roles needs to complement team design.

2) When stars collide some teams lose out. And I am not talking astrology here. Rooney and Gerrard: take note!

To make the best use of exec education, eat snow like a camel

Executive Education is an expensive resource. So is snow as a source of water for Asian camels.
By George ILIEV

Snow and camels don't usually go together in our mind. Yet they do in the real world. The two-humped Bactrian camels in western China and Central Asia regularly eat snow in the winter or at high altitudes to satisfy their water needs. This is largely true of all animals living above the snowline, as the only water that exists there is in the form of snow and ice. However, the problem of eating snow is that, once ingested, it takes a lot of food calories to melt and heat up the water to body temperature, as the latent heat of snow and ice is very high. This energy sacrifice requires that camels pace themselves and eat only small amounts of snow at a time.

Education and training have a role in the corporate world analogous to the physiological role of water in an animal's body. Without knowledge and skills, it would be impossible for organisations to function. And while mainstream universities provide "liquid education" below the snowline (i.e. for young employees), after a certain age Executive Education remains the primary source of new knowledge and skills that is available and suited to the needs of a busy professional. 

Executive Education courses are delivered by both the leading business schools and the in-house corporate universities of large multinationals (where they exist). Yet, these courses are a very expensive resource irrespective of the channel in which they are delivered. This is why business units pace themselves and use them sparingly, within the limits of their employee development budgets. Getting your company to sponsor you for an Advanced Management Programme is invariably a very competitive process, as the programme fee can be up to $80,000 for this 50-day course at Harvard.

Whether you are a Bactrian camel or a corporate workhorse, you would probably enjoy equally eating snow and taking courses at Harvard. But that's life above the snowline.

Path-dependent ants and the dangers of the pheromone trail

Ants always follow other ants; Thank god humans sometimes stray from the beaten path
By George ILIEV

Ants are famous for following each other's pheromone trail. This is how ants find their way home or to a food source. If given two possible paths, the shorter path ends up winning because more ants will follow it in a given time and more of them will leave their pheromone trace. Thus the signalling on the shorter trail will become more pronounced and this route will trump the longer trail.

An interesting conundrum, however, is presented to ants when a new food source appears that is not on their path. The ants still keep following their old path and rarely manage to reach the new food source. This form of stigmergy leads to absurd situations known as an "ant mill" where ants that have lost their original pheromone trail end up marching in a circle following each other and eventually die of exhaustion.

Human organisations and societies are different thanks to the existence of dissenting groups. In feudal times these were called rebels. Nowadays they are called "inventors", "early adopters" or "divergent thinkers" - people who do things differently.

Many prominent thinkers, from George Bernard Shaw to Elon Musk, have encouraged people to be different and start new things. G. B. Shaw says: "Do not fear to be eccentric in opinion, for every opinion now accepted was once eccentric."

Yet, often times human society has found itself following the wrong pheromone trail. You may recall the VHS versus Betamax videotape format wars in the early 1980s, in which VHS won not because it was the superior standard but because more customers and producers had chosen it originally.

Another prominent case of path dependence in business is the establishment of the QWERTY standard of typewriters over another more modern standard.

We could even broaden the path dependence argument to religions. Once established they profoundly shape human culture and turn an area's population into conformist collaborators working towards the religion's objectives. Groupthink is not confined just to small groups but applies to entire societies.

So after all Kafka was right: at times we are human but there are times when we turn into insects. Beware of the pheromone trail.

Photo: Ant trail. Source: Wikipedia

Natural selection drove violin design in Renaissance Italy

Market pressure resembling natural selection forced unwitting Italian violin makers to lengthen their violin holes
By George ILIEV

Violin holes kept evolving in 16th-century northern Italy
Early Italian violin makers designed their instruments with a round hole in the middle. None of them knew that this was sub-optimal. Acoustics and sound resonance improve not by increasing the size of the hole but by lengthening the edge of the orifice, according to a study in the Proceedings of the Royal Society. Gradually, customer feedback influenced the workshops of the Stradivari and Guarneri families in Cremona during the Renaissance. Through trial and error they kept increasing the length of the hole's edge until we now have the optimal known design with a typical "f" shaped hole.

Market selection resembles natural selection
Interestingly, the feedback loop of the market closely resembled natural selection: a process entirely based on customers choosing violins that they perceived as having the best acoustics. This, rather than conscious R&D attempts by the makers to "fiddle" with the sound, made the producers prosperous and ensured that the successful designs would be passed down the next generation in the luthier's family.

Unwitting violin makers did not know the recipe for their own success
The producer of the violins with the best sound would simply be favoured by the buyers, even if the producers themselves didn't know why. Violin-making is a complex art of tweaking multiple variables, so the luthiers may have thought that the varnish or the strings they used made their product superb. Yet, in the end it all boiled down to the hole.
---

Violin photo attribution: Wikimedia Commons

If you enjoyed reading this article and would like to leave a comment, you may do so below or on Twitter @CorporateNature

In times of corporate crisis: domesticate corn!

On bleeding and seeding in companies, animals and plants
By George ILIEV

When someone is seriously injured, bleeding is often the primary cause of death. When a company is in crisis, employees leave en masse. What makes the situation worse is that the best employees are the first to leave.

An analogous phenomenon called shattering can be observed in the wild cereal plants, though a bit earlier in their life cycle: the seeds break off from the corn cob (or the wheat ear) as soon as they have ripened. This evolutionary adaptation of the plants works well for them in the wild, as the seeds are scattered in all directions, but this makes their harvesting by humans almost impossible.

Domestication of corn

This is why when prehistoric farmers at the dawn of agriculture set about domesticating cereal crops, the first trait they bred out of maize (corn) and wheat was exactly shattering. Only after they had managed to hold the seeds together for harvesting could they focus their attention on other traits for selective growing such as drought resistance and improved nutrition.

Image contribution: Wikipedia


Lessons for the CEO:

The first thing medics do  when someone is wounded is try to stop the bleeding. When a company is in crisis, stopping shattering is the prerequisite for corporate recovery.

Damned with great success: antibiotic overkill and overshooting torpedoes

By George ILIEV

Antibiotic overkill

There was a little noticed but most astonishing facet of the groundbreaking story about the discovery of the first antibiotic in almost 30 years: the deep initial disappointment of the research team who first thought they had discovered yet another detergent or bleach - so powerful an antiobiotic that it would kill any living cell and hence serve no use as a medicine. Later tests showed to their jubilation that they were wrong and the new compound, teixobactin, only affects germs. So a little less of the killer sauce seems to be a good thing.

Torpedoes that overshoot the target

From germs to warfare: in the 60s the US developed the Mark 45 nuclear torpedo: so powerful a weapon that it would destroy not only the targeted submarine but also the very submarine that launched it. The only way the weapon could be used was to explode the torpedo way after it had passed by the targeted submarine, so that the blast effect on the launch vessel would be reduced to tolerable. Yet, these overshooting torpedoes were just as effective at destroying the enemy target.

Lesson learned: take one less hair of the dog that bites you and you'll be just fine.

Photo attribution: Wikipedia

Leave a comment below or @GeorgeILIEV

How to stay hidden, yet visible: lizards and private companies know the trick

Having two faces is never a bad idea in business or nature
By George ILIEV

The advantages of staying private

Companies that stay private achieve two conflicting objectives: they can be as visible as they want to their customers but can hide strategic information from their competitors. A public listing on the stock market opens up a company for scrutiny by competitors, as the regular reporting to the stock exchange will disclose competitive information and strategic moves.

Lizards playing with colour

The male Iberian emerald lizard achieves the same double effect with the colouration of its head, according to recent research reported by The Economist. The bright blue colouring is iridescent: 

- when seen from above (by a predator bird) it reflects the surrounding landscape and blends in with the environment;

- when seen from ground level (by other lizards), the blue stands out against the landscape, potentially attracting mating partners.

(Photo: Iberian emerald lizard. Source: Wikipedia)

Aircraft privacy intrusion

In a starkly competitive move, Boeing bought 17 new Airbus planes from Singapore Airlines in 1999 in order to replace the Airbus batch with Boeing planes and keep the Singaporean flag carrier a loyal Boeing customer. In addition to getting the planes delivered (to be resold to other airlines), Boeing also received all the technical documentation that goes with an Airbus plane, thus gaining competitive intelligence directly from the horse's mouth. 

Competitors posing as customers to gain insight into their rival's business are not a new phenomenon. However, hawks have not yet cottoned on that they need to start hunting from ground level to catch a male Iberian lizard.

Further reading

The topic of how and why animals and companies operate in stealth mode is covered in my June 2014 blog post:

Stealth mode among companies and animals: Crickets and spiders learn to lie low 

(Crickets give up chirping, spiders disguise as bird poo, companies slip under the radar to avoid corporate predators.)

Do you work in a Wolf or Dog culture?

If you answered the question you probably gave the wrong answer. Startup culture is wolf culture, while dogs revel in “corporate-style” hierarchy.

(By George ILIEV)

The phrase "dog-eat-dog" was coined for a reason. Counterintuitively, dogs do not cooperate among themselves. Wolves do. Dogs dominate or obey each other in a strict hierarchy of submission, whereas wolves are the ones who “discuss” to make group decisions. If you work for a startup, you are likely working in a “wolf culture”, grounded in cooperation and tolerance. If you work at a big corporation, your environment is probably a “dog culture”, based on domination and pecking order.

Photo: Pack of Wolves (Source: Wikimedia)

EXPERIMENT 1: Top dog dominates in "dog-eat-dog" hierarchy

Recent experiments in Austria show that a top dog will monopolise all food and will not let a lower-ranking dog eat from its bowl. A lower-ranking dog would be so intimidated it would not even dare attempt to eat with the top dog. In contrast, the same experiment with wolves shows that both high-ranking and low-ranking pack members share access to the food. There is a simple explanation why dogs have diverged so far from the cooperative nature of wolves. Dogs were bred for their obedience to man, who is seen by the dog as the “top dog”. Humans mistakenly perceive this as cooperation but from the dog’s perspective this is submission, not cooperation. A dog’s true (beige-to-grey) colours shine through when left in a group of its own.

EXPERIMENT 2: Dogs are poor at independent problem-solving

The domestication of the dog, over around 10,000 years of selective breeding, has reinforced the dog’s hierarchical perception of the world and the micro-society of the pack. This appears to impact the dog’s problem-solving skills. Experiments with dogs and wolves show that 80% of wolves manage to open a can of sausages, while no adult dogs manage to achieve this under the same conditions. The exception are dog puppies, who manage to open the can with a similar success rate as the wolves. This shows that the lack of independence in dogs is increased by their cohabitation with humans as puppies grow up.

THREE LESSONS FOR THE BUSINESS WORLD

Lesson 1: Companies are no democracies

The results of the group-feeding experiment bring to mind a well-known fact: No matter how much we praise democracy as the most sophisticated system for ruling a country , corporations are not democracies. Corporations are authoritarian organisations with an established hierarchy, just like an army, a police unit and a pack of dogs.

Lesson 2: Do not confuse submission with cooperation

Corporate executives can learn from the psychology of the dog. Your corporate subordinates might be very cooperative in their interaction with you (their boss), but that does not mean they see themselves as cooperating. Instead, they may be perceiving themselves as Yes-men who have to act submissively. This model may work for subordinates without strong independent thinking but if you want to keep the real problem-solvers working for you, you have to empower them and treat them like wolves treat each other, with a degree of equality. Otherwise your subordinates may leave for a less hierarchical organisation or for a startup.

Lesson 3: Corporations institutionalise their employees

Corporate culture institutionalises its employees just like the human “top-dog” reduces the problem-solving skills of his/her pet as the puppy grows up. Conversely, startup culture encourages problem solving and independent thinking in ways similar to what the wolf experiments show.

Hope at the end of the dog kennel

Let’s not give a dog a (completely) bad name. Corporations come in all shapes and sizes and corporate cultures vary hugely. In a similar way, there is variation among dog breeds: Labrador retrievers and poodles are more hierarchical and aggressive towards lower-ranking pack members than German shepherds are. It may be no coincidence that German shepherds physically resemble wolves much more closely.

In the corporate world, Google and Facebook have a “less-hiearchical” hierarchy than oil and mining giants like ExxonMobil and BHP Billiton. In the end, both Google and Facebook were born as startups 10-15 years ago. Would another 10,000 years of selective breeding change that?

I look forward to your thoughts in the comments below or @GeorgeILIEV

Entrepreneurship, Consulting and the MBA: The Three Stem Cells of the Business World

Three ways to maintain versatility in the age of uncertainty

By George ILIEV

An undergraduate student at the business school I graduated from recently approached me for career advice. "Is there a way you can keep your options open throughout your career?", she asked. The article below summarizes my advice to her:

Many things in life are path-dependent:
- Your second job depends on your first job;
- your first job depends on your internship;
- your internship depends on your university degree;
- your university depends on your high school,
- and so on all the way to kindergarten and even before that, possibly to the kindergarten of your parents and grandparents.

There are opportunities to get out of the rut and change direction from one stage to the next but the probability of this happening naturally is very low. Even a smaller cross-industry lateral move (say from retail manager to supply chain manager) requires a lot of effort in rowing against the current... and a dose of luck.

The Three Stem Cells of the Business World

There are three tracks in business that are immune to path-dependency and can lead naturally to a variety of different industries and functions. I call these “the three stem cells of the business world”, as they contain a high degree of versatility and can be moulded into almost anything, just like the stem cells of an embryo multiply and grow into different tissues and organs:

1. Entrepreneurship is the most functionally-versatile profession as an entrepreneur (on the business side) will perform a variety of functions. These include marketing, business planning, business development, PR (blogging), finance (raising capital), accounting, legal and at least half-a-dozen other functions before the startup grows big enough for these roles to be filled by specialists.

2. Consulting, unlike entrepreneurship, is not functionally versatile but is instead extremely industry-versatile. Management and operations consultants often clock up projects in a dozen different industries, which is the essence of consulting and the main source of value creation: the cross-pollination effect.

3. The MBA gives a graduate both functional and industry versatility, as it combines condensed educational and professional experiences in a number of fields. However, the MBA is a “stem cell” with an expiry date: after your first post-MBA job, you can no longer rely on its versatility and will invariably start specialising in your new pathway (unless you go into post-MBA entrepreneurship or consulting).

These three stem cells of the business world are crucial in our age of uncertainty. The sheer number of unemployed finance professionals after the 2008 crisis shows how path-dependent business can be. And though the trio is not entirely ploripotent, (i.e. the three cannot lead to absolutely any outcome), they are the closest we get to a business world version of the stem cell.

Energy, mass and the speed of light

If you remain unconvinced by the biology metaphor above, here is a memorably superficial analogy from physics. Einstein's fundamental equation E=MC2 (energy equals mass times the speed of light squared) has the same three elements: E(ntrepreneurship), M(BA) and C(consulting). Now, who would argue with Einstein?

(Photo credit: Stem cell, Wikipedia)

Does changing jobs make you an orangutan?

Changing jobs and moving through the jungle canopy share the same activity pattern

George ILIEV

The best avatar for someone changing jobs is the orangutan. Imagine an orangutan suspended from a tree, grasping the branches with its long arms, swinging effortlessly from tree to tree. Now imagine this orangutan is you, the branches are the different corporate departments and the trees are the different companies you will swing between in your career. If only changing jobs was always as smooth as the swinging of the organgutan.

Photo: Orangutan (Source: Wikipedia)

The corporate world and the jungle

In the corporate world you swing, rather than hop, between companies: businesses are not a flat surface for hopscotch but a hierarchical jungle canopy, with many levels up and down. Trees lumped together are companies in the same industry, so it is fairly easy for your esteemed orangutan to swing between companies while staying in the same industry. Trees far apart are companies in different industries and it takes a bigger effort to traverse a larger distance.

Losing your job and falling to the ground

The main rule in the orangutan's jungle is not to fall to the ground. In corporate speak this means not to lose your job, or else you risk entering a downward spiral.

Recruiters often cite a well-known paradox: "the most important factor for getting a job is having a job in the first place." Even without access to recruiter advice, the orangutan does exactly that: it rarely lets go of its branch before it has grasped the next one.

Once in a while the orangutan may be forced to "fly" between trees in a long jump, the equivalent of leaving a company before you have another job offer in your hand. However, in such a forced jump, the orangutan is likely to land lower than its starting position and may occasionally drop to the jungle floor.

If you've had enough of the orangutan analogy, think of the swift, one of the fastest birds in the world. The remarkable thing about the swift is it never lands on the ground. If it did, its short wings would not be able to generate the lift needed to take off again. You need to be perched somewhere high to be able to fly out to somewhere higher.

The MBA: a shortcut through the jungle

The MBA degree is one of the few shortcuts in life. It is a walkway above the jungle canopy that allows you to move to a different patch of trees (a new industry or new location), which would otherwise be either impossible, or would take a whole series of consecutive moves.

If you are ever in doubt about your career, take your cues from the orangutan: 

1) Move between trees and branches in a planned succession; and

2) If you ever lose your job, get another one as soon as you can.

On Proteges and Tidal Locking: the dangers of being too close to a star

Proteges get "tidally locked" in an unequal way. Startup co-founders get locked-in as equals.
By George ILIEV

1. Protégés
In my article on mentoring and the V-formation of flying birds, I had a passing definition of the protégé: someone who follows blindly and sycophantly their boss in order to advances in their wake. The minus side of being a protégé is that one gains protection and advancement at the expense of losing their independence.

2. Tidal locking & tidal "licking"
In planetary terms there is a related phenomenon known as tidal locking: when a planet gets too close to the star it is orbiting, it loses its own rotation and gets locked in with the star. An example to this is the Moon, which is locked in with the Earth so that only one side of the Moon always faces the Earth. The Moon plays the role of the Earth's protégé by losing its independent rotation: as a protégé it now rotates always facing its master. In the corporate world or the world of politics, tidal locking can be summarised as "tidal licking". You get the meaning.

3. Startup Co-founders
There is an "honourable" version of tidal locking when the two participants are relatively equal. When two planetary bodies of a similar size are close enough to each other, they can be tidally locked so that both rotate facing each other always with the same side. An example to this are Pluto and its satellite Charon: Charon is locked in with Pluto just as Pluto is locked in with Charon. An analogy in the business world are startup co-founders who get locked in with each other, without losing their identity and independence.

Photo: Full moon (Source: Wikipedia)

Stealth mode among companies and animals: Crickets and spiders learn to lie low

Crickets give up chirping, spiders disguise as bird poo, companies slip under the radar to avoid corporate predators.
By George ILIEV

Two recent science stories exemplify the evolutionary importance of disguise:

1. Crickets vs. Killer flies
Crickets in Hawaii have lost their ability to chirp in order to avoid attracting the attention of killer flies, their North American predator, BBC Science reports. In less than 20 generations, a mutation in their wings (the chirp-producing organ) has spread to more than 90% of the crickets on the island of Kauai. As a result, the crickets are now unable to rub their wings and produce chirping sounds but in return they survive unnoticed by the killer flies.

2. Spiders vs. Wasps
Spiders in Taiwan have learnt to disguise themselves in a decor resembling bird excrement, Discovery News reports. The spiders drag onto their web a pile of desiccated insect bodies, eggs and plant detritus to make themselves resemble bird droppings and thus avoid the attention of predator wasps.

3. Stealth mode in the corporate world
Companies of all sizes use disguise to avoid the attention of powerful competitors. Apple and Google develop new products under code names and in secretive locations, while startups often spend years in "stealth mode" to slip under the radar of large competitors. The most fascinating recent example is Google X: Google's semi-secret facility in California where at least eight new technologies are being developed.

There is only one thing Google hasn't thought of: covering up the facility in bird poo.

The Google Campus in Mountain View, California 

(Photo: Wikipedia)

IBM and the Octopus: adaptability and the benefits of severing a limb

Agility in nature and the business world sometimes requires a sacrifice:"Life and limb" becomes "life or limb".
By Nathan Hartman (nathan@hartmanprivatelaw.com)

1. The octopus has the ability to change the color and texture of its skin, and uses this ability to attract mates and increase the survivability of its young.

One of the primary defenses developed by the octopus is the ability to camouflage or hide itself by changing the color and texture of its skin. An octopus can change the tone of its skin to varying shades of yellow, orange, brown, and black to blend in with its surroundings and avoid the notice of potential predators. The octopus also uses its color-changing ability to attract mates, and the more colors an octopus can display the more likely it is to attract a mate. This then ensures that young octopi will have maximum color-changing potential, thus increasing the likelihood that they will survive into adulthood.

2. The octopus also has the ability to autotomise: it can spontaneously sever its limbs when threatened.

When threatened, and octopus can also purposefully detach its limbs to distract predators, an ability known as autotomy. The detached limbs can still move and react to touch, drawing the attention away from the fleeing octopus.

3. IBM utilizes the strategies of the octopus in the business world: it remains highly adaptable to the current economic environment and is willing to cut off portions of its business when appropriate.

IBM is one of the world’s most recognizable companies and the second largest in the United States in terms of number of employees. The company has remained flexible, developed 7 service arms, and been involved in many different enterprises, including computer development, space exploration, early forms of artificial intelligence, and weapons manufacturing. Just as the octopus changes its skin tone to increase its survivability, so too does IBM change the face of its company to remain current and innovative in the business world. More so, IBM has shown a willingness to cut parts of its business when threatened, even when those parts were strongly associated with the company. In 2005, IBM sold its personal computer business to Lenovo, ending more than 30 years of involvement in the personal computer market.

Photograph of an Octopus (Source: Wikipedia)

Rafts of ants and investment banks in distress stay afloat by "banking" on their young

Ant colonies and banks "employ" their young to improve survival chances
George ILIEV

1. Ants build floating rafts using their eggs in the foundation:
When threatened by flooding, ants build floating rafts using their own bodies and put their eggs in the foundation of the raft to increase the buoyancy of the structure. This does not damage the chances of survival of the unhatched ants in the eggs.

2. Investment banks retain the most junior people in mass redundancies:
The youngest recruits are the cheapest employees, which justifies the investment banking practice of retaining these people when cost-cutting requires mass redundancies. It is rare that the new recruits would be let go before the higher-earning mid-ranking employees.

3. Next generation often serves the present generation:
The young exist for reasons beyond merely as a vehicle to pass on your genes (or corporate culture) to future generations. In the two cases above, the young are employed to increase the chances of survival of the present generation... which isn't too different from the traditional family model where children would work on the family farm from a very young age. The ants just take it to a new level of utilitarianism - using the generation that hasn't hatched yet.

Photo: Ants (Source: Wikipedia)

(Blogging style guide: Here)

Human memory does not prioritise retaining positive experiences. Customer feedback sites: beware!

Humans remember and recognise less attractive faces better. What about a great shopping experience?
George ILIEV

Psychologists used to assume that attractive faces are remembered better and recognised more easily. It turns out they were wrong. Scientists in Jena, Germany, recently proved with experiments on test subjects that we remember unattractive faces better than attractive ones. (Read the details here.) Humans do prefer to look at a beautiful face longer, but the emotional influence actually reduces the precision of recognising this face later on.

Attractive faces also lead observers into another trap: false positives in recollection. We are more likely to think that we recognise an attractive face, even if we have never seen this face before.

All this makes sense from an evolutionary perspective. A positive experience for an animal can be finding abundant food or meeting a receptive sexual partner, while a negative experience can be dying at the claws of a predator. The positive experience can be enjoyed but only up to the point of satiation, after which life continues as normal. Whereas the negative experience may lead to a terminal outcome. Since the negative experience shapes to a bigger extent the survival chances of the animal, one would expect that evolution will remove from the gene pool those animals which do not prioritise avoiding unpleasant experiences. Thus remembering positive experiences "takes the back seat".

In a figurative way this principle applies to collecting customer feedback. Internet forums are full of irate customers who share at length their negative experience with a product or service, while much fewer stories are shared about a positive experience. It might be because customers don't remember the positive experiences as well as the negative ones. Or it might be a typically human example of selfless cooperation where irate customers try to alert fellow customers. Yet the parallel exists: a positive shopping experience can rarely be as indelibly printed in our mind as a negative experience would be. Just think of the feedback you would leave about a restaurant that gave you food poisoning.

Photo: Gisele Bundchen (Source: Wikipedia)

Photo: Sean O'Pry (Source: Wikipedia)

Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking, Fast and Slow" seen through the eyes of mantis shrimps and humans

Mantis shrimp's vision of only 12 basic colours allows it to act fast. Humans see complex colours - conducive to more deliberative decisions.
George ILIEV

As scientific trivia go, it is well known that the mantis shrimp has 12 receptors for colour in its eyes (including several in the ultraviolet spectrum), while humans and honey bees only have three and dogs have two. I used to envy this 30-cm crustacean for the myriad of colour combinations that it could potentially see. However, recent research published in the journal Science shows that the shrimp cannot see myriads of colours. Not even a hundred colours. All it can see is 12 colours, while all the variations between the 12 colours are lost on it.

Managers and CEOs are sometimes accused of being two-dimensional: of seeing things as black and white. That's an overstatement. However, even seeing in 12 finite ways would be a gross oversimplification of the world around us.

Why does the shrimp need 12 receptors? They probably evolved as a shortcut giving the shrimp a speed advantage. It is a lightning-fast predator, so by sacrificing accurate colour definition, it gained a quick way of detecting basic colours and creating a simplified image of the world. Using direct chemical/neural signals from the receptors is faster than adding the extra stage of brain simulation - as the human brain does e.g. when simulating the perception of purple from mixing red and blue. Thus the shrimp can rapidly detect prey or other predators in the coral reefs while saving the little brainpower that it has.

Shrimp vision versus human vision is exactly the same dichotomy as laid out by Nobel Prize-winning economist Daniel Kahneman in "Thinking, Fast and Slow". The shrimp deploys a fast and instinctive system while humans resort to slower and more deliberative brain simulations, which capture the world in its complexity. The lesson from all this: if it is not about shattering crab shells, better spend some time poring over your important decisions.

Photo: Mantis shrimp (Source: Wikipedia)

Startups can learn how to "fail forward" from mantis shrimp's layered clubs

Nature prevents big failures by allowing small failures. Startups succeed if they "fail fast, fail often".
George ILIEV

The mantis shrimp is a fascinating 30-cm crustacean in the tropical oceans. It is famous for its unusual colour vision (with 12 colour photoreceptors in the eyes) but also for the brutal force and lightning speed with which it stuns and catches its prey. The shrimp's sudden and powerful blow to mollusc or crab shells shatters them to pieces. It is even known to break aquarium glass with its massive clubs.

Research into the structure of the shrimp's claws carried out at the University of California, Riverside, shows that the clubs are composed of three separate layers of bony tissue. The big differences in orientation, stiffness and hardness between the layers allows small cracks to appear in each layer but stops these cracks from spreading across the entire structure. Counterintuitively, "nature prevents catastrophic failures by allowing local failures."

In the terminology of probability theorist Nassim Taleb, this would be the perfect example of anti-fragility, as described in his 2012 book "Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorder". In the field of biomimicry, the multiple-layer structure is giving rise to bulletproof materials.

In the startup world, the principle of allowing small cracks is known as "fail fast, fail often". Small failures are part of establishing product/market fit and have saved many a startup from doom. The entrepreneurs who "fail forward" are forced to pivot towards new products, markets and business models and are thus more likely to succeed.

Photo: Mantis shrimp (Source: Wikipedia)

V-formation model aids bird flight, Asian industrialisation and mentoring

In multiple fields the first player helps the one behind – but only if lined up in strict order: slightly sideways

George ILIEV

Birds flying in V-formation need 20%-30% less energy than when flying alone. Big birds such as geese, storks and pelicans minimise their energy expenditure by capturing the uplift generated at the wing tips of the bird flapping in front, research published in the journal Nature reveals. However, for this mechanism to work, the second bird has to be located sideways from the leading bird. If flying directly behind, the follower would have to counteract a downdraft coming down the back of the leading bird.

The V-formation is clearly visible in the five-tiers of economic development of East Asia - the famous Flying Geese paradigm. As Asian countries industrialised after the 1960s, they moved in the wake of Japan and sequentially took on the older low-tech industries that Japan had outgrown. Textiles, toys, chemicals and steel, in which Japan once led the region, moved first to the four tigers (South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore); then to a third tier of countries - Malaysia and Thailand; then to China; and now increasingly to Vietnam and India. Thus Japan created macroeconomic uplift for the four tiger economies behind it; they in turn passed on updraft to the ones following them and so on. And yet, the model worked so well because these countries did not exactly copy each industry but introduced slight variations - the sideshift seen in the V-formations of  birds.

Mentoring in a similar way creates metaphorical uplift for the “disciple” being mentored by a leading figure. And it is exactly the V-formation that distinguishes a "mentee" from a "protégé". The mentor-mentee relationship works best when the two are not in the same industry or organisation, i.e. when located sideways in V-formation. Otherwise when a "mentee" is moving immediately in the wake of the mentor in the same organisation, the mentee is more fittingly described with the unflattering term "protégé".

Rolled out on a grander, “open-access” scale, this model can even apply to the Linkedin influencers category, where 500+ influencers like Richard Branson and Jack Welch trample the road with their thoughts and wisdom for thousands of others to follow. A giant V-formation of birds indeed, numbering 3.5 million followers in the case of the No 1 influencer, Richard Branson.

Photo: Flying goose (Source: Wikipedia)

Photo: V-formation (Source: Wikipedia)