This article is within the Rethinking organizations series, also if it is focused just on Turin, my birthplace in Italy where I was made to start working again in 2012, after being elsewhere since the mid-to-late 1980s, first in Italy and, from the late 1990s, abroad.
Why is not within the EU, Italy, Turin series? Because this article is really about transformation.
Aim: connecting posts and news items that shared across the last couple of weeks on my Linkedin and Facebook profiles, discuss three key elements about "talents"- management/development (which in my view should be the same thing), attraction, retention.
Why now? At last, Turin and its territory are accepting the reality: its automotive past built around just one company, that generated the nickname "European Detroit" is gone and will not come back, despite all the announces, etc.
Well, "accepting" up to a point: cognitive dissonance still reigns supreme- and more than asking is lecturing Italy and Europe on what should be done for Turin...
There is still life in the automotive universe, but Turin (and Italy) for now, looking at actions and not at words and announces, are marginal for the former local champion that ruled the territory as a "company town".
The key risk? Doing the typical Italian thing- hero one day, villain the next day- and with everybody "re-inventing" their past, as in the famous picture from the early days of the USSR, where one by one, in each reprint, those fallen out of favor where "edited out".
Coupled with another typical Italian element: paraphrasing what somebody said long before I was born- Italy was (structurally) too small to be a leading nation, and too large to play second fiddle.
Hence, that curious attitude that we Italians call "cerchiobottismo" and its consequences: striving to take all the sides when the situation is uncertain, just to equally try to prove that we were loyalists ante-litteram when a winner emerges, only to distance and even join those mud slinging when the winner falls.
There is another saying: "con la Francia o con la Spagna purché se magna"- going back to when France and Spain contended the control of an Italy partitioned in multiple minimal states, and therefore, we were used to routine invasions since the (supposed) fall of the (Western) Roman Empire, and developed that attitude as a cultural survival element.
Since the Italian unification in 1861, Italy got to that "too large, too small"- and trying to position itself to be again major league, often importing whatever was trendy but selecting bits here and there- and ignoring the source cultural context.
I shared in the past, and will share in the future articles about our attitude to generate Frankenlaws (yes, as in "Frankenstein") by assembling parts lifted from other jurisdictions.
Anyway, and this is another key risk now, we extend that also to reforms and transformation not just in politics, but also in business and society.
This article will be structured as a visual storytelling with connecting text, using the posts previously shared online, so that you can derive your own perspective.
As, while local and national cultural elements will be discussed, the redefinition of the concept of talent and talent lifecycle is something that does not affect just Turin or Italy- it is a common element.
The title summarizes the focus and case discussed, but the theme "talent lifecycle" is something that will become common fighting ground.
The sections in this article:
_ THEME1: Contextualizing some definitions about "talent"
_ THEME2: The local talent debate in Turin
_ THEME3: The "convitato di pietra"- AI and talents
_ THEME4: Repositioning a territory- Turin
THEME1: Contextualizing some definitions about "talent"
This section will be both the longest one and the less "visual"- as will set the landscape, context, tone for the narrative.
When I listed within the introduction the three elements of "talent", willingly ignored another curious side-effect of the Italian way to manage the "vertical social elevator".
It is not just nepotism, or the spoils system that described in previous articles.
In Italy, despite what even some Italian commentators write, the winner at the elections is expected to fill all the seats made available- including reshuffling to create more seats, demote the leftovers from the previous winners, or create "niches" for new appointees.
If it were just politics and nepotism, it would be damaging enough.
There is another structural element that, as since 2012 I have been mainly in Turin and Piedmont, has even more consequences for the focus of this article.
The tribal nature of Italy implies that appointments are also closely related to needs to balance and appease within and between tribes.
Instead of picking up some from the tribe that could cover a role, we Italians have a long-term approach: those that will be potentially appointed for roles actually are "groomed" for the role in a curious way.
Or: enter some roles (even as interns) were they are coached by insiders so that they can move to the next step, and then... keep doing all the way up- always surrounded by those who can provide what is lacking to move up to the next level.
I heard more than once in Turin in public events somebody commenting about "han creato lo scalino" (i.e. "made up a stepping stone"), or variants thereof, while somebody presented his/her own "career" that by chance included more than once being introduced to all the right people at the right time.
It does not necessarily work, albeit it can work- by giving access to roles through a "fast lane" to those who, anyway, by breed, have already had access to the "toolbox" that will be useful later- they just need being exposed to reality in a controlled environment (the "supporting circle provided by the tribe").
E.g. if you are a son or daughter of somebody with deep expertise in an industry, you naturally develop Pavlovian reflexes on that- up to spotting to which joke to laugh on, and which faux-pas to avoid.
Some of those getting through this approach actually understand reality, also if claim to have obtained their roles only through their own merit (it is expected- it is the Italian way to "meritocracy").
Anyway, many develop an annoying sense of "entitlement": as in "I have been selected hence I am the best hence I deserve it"- and then go on lecturing everybody.
It worked pre-social media, as media anyway in Italy have always been part of the tribal system, frankly: if somebody is not in "premier league" anymore, piling up of mud from those who just few days before had nothing but praise for the target is common.
The funniest case is described within a book about the genesis of the movie "The Leopard" ("Il Gattopardo") in the 1960s, as at the time the Italian Communist Party (along with the Christian Democrats, one of the two "political churches" in Italy in the First Italian Republic, basically from after WWII to the early 1990s) initially disliked the book.
It is available on Amazon: Operazione Il Gattopardo - Come Visconti trasformò un romanzo di "destra" in un successo di "sinistra", unfortunately only in Italian.
I could share more cases, but, frankly, that one is funny to read, and represents quite well past (and present) flip-flopping in representation of "heroes and villains".
Now, in the social media era, already over a decade ago there was a case that was ridiculed eventually on traditional medias, when one of those "pushed up" through the usual tribal network, in pure sense of entitlement, lambasted those who did not achieve what he did achieve early- only to be then exposed when was reported that actually had got a fast lane through traditional connections.
Something that, if you were to read a bit of Ancient Rome history during the Republic (I mean- Caesar and before), you would see quite common: so, we Italians have historical continuity (and also the voting system while Rome expanded to Italy was quite interesting in its precursor of Gerrymandering).
Neither "pecunia" nor "clientes" olet- or: nobody will smell the rotten influence of monetary or connection-based influence, until is time to put in somebody else: welcome to Italy.
Another consequence of that "bestowed sense of entitlement" is when, without any fear of being ridiculed, those who get through that "lifting" preach that they are there through their work and results, and carry out pre-emptive attacks again those (in Italy we say "unknown geniuses" or "riserve della Repubblica") that could take their place.
You can actually read (also for free) on a book that published in late 2020 (available on both leanpub.com, archive.org, amazon.com) a couple of documented cases dealing with local bureaucracies- but there are many worth writing about, if I will have to postpone writing about more productive activities.
The key element is: skipping steps, and then, when that circumvention of rules is reported, use bureaucratic sandbagging Italian-style to avoid solving the issue promptly (if ever).
The point is: for people my age (say 50s to 60s), unless you are already in a tribe, whatever change will not alter the landscape, except opportunistically.
Or: because short-term you are needed: do not believe in promises, negotiate a revenue recognition schedule and deliver accordingly.
Been there repeatedly since the 1990s, and relying on promises does not work, also when would be in their own interest- "passata la festa, gabbato lo santo" is a local mantra, i.e. once a crisis is solved (or so they assume, which of course make understandable why the crisis developed in the first place), all the promises are forgotten.
I lost count of how often either locals did not pay commissions or activities, made up new rules to lower costs, tried to extract more than was agreed, and then, anyway, contacted me for an encore later- which routinely turned down, since the 1990s: fool me once...
Most of the people that in Turin claim to have "international experience" frankly never ventured outside the boundaries of the former local champion- just went in foreign branches; and, as happened for other companies from the territory, "imported" with them the local culture even after acquiring subsidiaries abroad- it is the "genius loci", you do not change it just by stating that you comply with whistle-blowing and salary transparency directives.
Actually, as shared in the past, while living in Brussels, had a look at "Glassdoor" to see the assessment of the foreign branches of some Italian companies- curious how for Turin the commentary was (from Germans) the same that had heard routinely in Turin.
As shared in the past (mainly a reminder for the locals) I did not return of my own volition to Turin (started working elsewhere in the late 1980s).
Somebody would question why, despite the official title of my local missions since the 2010s, accepted to extend the portfolio of activities for no compensation (actually, in some cases, even reduced compensation after piling up further activities).
Reason? The same that pushed me in Brussels from 2008 initially to lower my expectations and role, by looking for roles as project manager- settling.
The rationale is: if you are good enough, you will raise again (I was still young), otherwise- will work with startups to help others develop.
Each mission since my return in Italy was supposed to turn into long-term roles, but then each time was already earmarked for others, once the critical phase was done.
Meaning: either was opportunistic, or simply all my experience abroad is not useful in Italy expect in some phases- hence, did a couple more tries, and then decided that it was a pattern- no tribe, no revenue recognition, hence consider each mission a short-term mission that has to have its own balance.
For somebody who, routinely, while working outside Turin or abroad, was mistaken by customers and suppliers as a manager within my partners' or customers' organization because did not sound as a consultant, it is annoying, but in Rome, do the Roman way.
So, any change is not for myself or others my age returning or made to return from abroad- for us "grey wolves" collectively, it is at best a case, if you have children, of promises to take care of them (i.e. will be co-opted within a tribe) if you accept to be part of that invisible "ring of support" when asked.
Otherwise, choosing to move again abroad, or retiring in Italy and writing yet another book (I will write more books, but do not plan to retire- open for serious missions, but no more "gifts").
So, the key purpose of this article is to help to attract, manage/develop, retain talent that will build up resilience and competitiveness for the future Turin (and Italy).
Because, as you can read if you search for articles about "Turin" on this website, routinely wrote that I think that there is still potential.
And, instead of squandering the local banking foundations assets to support more non-productive "support" activities, would make sense to have a more focused "seeding" of future potentially productive activities (service or manufacturing or product, does not matter- the current obsession with AI is generating already too many "wrappers").
Anyway, shared few days ago ">on a post on Linkedin relaunching an old cartoon from Bruno Bozzetto that compared Italy with other "ordinary countries", where I explained why all the "image rebuilding" actions ongoing in Turin I am skeptical that will produce results (unless sponsored) in an open competition with other locations.
I will discuss in the next article, while talking about Italian politics and reforms, the blending of organized crime and local "genius loci"- as was reported repeatedly, and even shared publicly, not too long ago by somebody taking over the lead of specific judicial offices in Turin- "omertà" is coupled with gossip and collusion way too often.
Now, with that cultural background, which is even stronger in a territory that I nicknamed "Macondo-am-Po" (yes, Garcia Marquez), Turin, a territory that quite often seems to really believe to be a kind of Asimov's Trantor (the center of a galactic empire), all the ongoing debate about "talent" and "repositioning" to increase attractiveness of the territory acquires a different dimension.
I will discuss that in the next section, but first, now that you got a bit of the "filter" through which to read all that marketing paraphernalia (I use a lot the concept of "Potemkin Village"), time to explain a bit what shared within a Linkedin post:
As you can see, "talent grooming" Italian-style is not part of my list.
Because I think that a first element to de-tribalize Italy is to generate the conditions to allow talent to self-develop by giving equal opportunities.
If you follow my Facebook profile, you saw that I quoted a couple of books in Italian about bureaucracy and democracy (but I read many more in the past and am reading soon another one).
When you work in cultural and organizational change long enough, whenever and wherever you go is a learning opportunity- and "closed" communities are an interesting subject of study.
Specifically, I am a boring reformer and bipartisan (meaning: I am center-left but closer to the "Vulcanian" described by some- just because something is not maximizing my benefits, if in the aggregate maximizes the benefits for a large plurality, I am fine with it, not because of my pointed earlobes).
When you design organizational structures or (re)design processes, this implies that, beside looking for the "instantaneous" feasibility, you consider also the potential evolution, decay, and how to maintain a level of performance by ensuring that some key elements go across generations.
I will keep this "dictionary" side short, and look at two elements: talent and its lifecycle.
- talent
- it is not static and it is contextual: a talent, if crystallized, can be an asset today, and a liability tomorrow, e.g. when shifted to policy roles where that "talent" will act as gatekeeper, and try to project her/himself, instead of assessing what the context demands and will require in the future; it is the flip-side of talent: many end up being so focused, that consider their own focus to be "the" focus, and actively discourage or even gaslight what they do not understand- look at what happened to relativity and quantum at the beginning
- lifecycle
- search for "innovation" and "lifecycle" (not just on this website), and you will find few shared points, and many different proposals; to make a long story short, in this article will consider "lifecycle" something that is not pre-ordained, but that "emerges" across, needs to be monitored, and, when an asset turns into a liability (yes, again), it is time to manage a phase-out (of the old) and a phase-in (of the new); this implies that even before rolling out a new "talent lifecycle", you start thinking and monitoring the emergence of new options
And repeatedly had foreigners report to me how actually they were surprised of the speed of gossip in Turin
Well, a town that lives by gossip and gaslighting is easy to spot for foreigners, easier than many Italians think.
Those two elements, joined with others, generate a potential for decay, not for development- as local presence becomes opportunistic, not development-oriented.
Would you invest where, as soon as something is becoming too independent, it starts getting that treatment to bring it back under control? Read local newspapers, or the news items I shared on Facebook, to see examples- old and new.
For younger people, all that ballast, as soon as they start building something, just to "clip the wing and retain control" is a large incentive to... scale up elsewhere, also if they start locally and with local support and subsidies.
I wrote in a previous article about the The bureaucracy of innovation: moving forward and looking backward- so, I will not repeat what I wrote there.
Again: the focus of this article is about what I could call a series of dots about the "talent" dimension, looking at the potential.
THEME2: The local talent debate
Now that the longest section of the narrative is done, time to shift to what inspired this article.
Since 2012, first in Turin and Milan, then just in Turin or remotely, I saw that there was limited or no potential to return working at the level was working before.
I had plenty of events locally where was invited by a tribe, while observers from another tribe were nearbly listening, and the former tried to bring me into the fold bad mouthing the latter, and, of course, received invitation to reciprocate.
Initially found that infantile and disrespectful, but then understood that, again, is the "genius loci": you need to be "tribalized".
Anyway, once you start in my line of business (change+data, interfacing business and technology), it becomes a lifestyle to study and observe and summarize- you cannot just set it aside.
Hence, extended my online publishing since 2012, and attended as many local events as possible about innovation, foreign direct investment attraction, etc.
If anything, to share online, while working on local missions (as I wrote above).
And to keep skills alive.
In a previous life (actually, started already well before my first official job in 1986), designed training courses and was used to assess and identify the target audience: too many experts make the "projection" mistake of talking to others in what they assume would be a simplified version of their own framework, "dumbing down" instead of tailoring.
Which is what could define "the vanity of the experts": to still sound as an expert, and try to obtain more praise that understanding and "embedding".
I am boring- I prefer to convey knowledge or experience so that can be reused and absorbed by the audience- I do not really care if other experts will complain about "tweaking" or "oversimplifying".
Anyway, it is much easier when you design presentations or courses for a well-identified audience, as did e.g. in the 1980s, 1990s, 2000s, around Europe.
I was used to do a "pre-emptive briefing" before each presentation or training session delivery, to "tailor" some messages or at least integrate audience-specific examples.
While writing online, I use links to allow "digging deeper".
Now, as I wrote above and in previous articles, Turin has still potential, and, thanks to its past role as a "company town" for the largest Italian manufacturing multinational, has also a significant ecosystem of companies, organizations, services.
There was a report on Turin that for 20 years was published, a data-driven assessment of Turin: and when, in the late 2010s, attended few annual presentations, the most common theme was how the "knowledge content" was decaying, e.g. how the service industry was shifting to Milan its management consulting side.
Service is a service- but I think that anybody can accept that burger-flipping has less knowledge content and higher fast "replaceability" than management consulting.
Anyway, found interesting the agenda of this event about competencies and talents, hosted by the ILO/UN training office in Turin:
I think that you can find recordings and materials online- if you are considering Turin as a potential target location for e.g. reusing premises and infrastructure vacated from manufacturing and logistics, could be useful to have a minimal SWOT (better, PESTEL- yes, I put environmental before legal) of the territory.
In Italy, we have a structural issue: smaller companies are more common than elsewhere, and this influences also their aggregation, e.g. the industrialists' association, in their messages and attitudes.
Or: if your "electoral base" is small companies, and the membership fees are based on size, de facto the smaller ones dictate what to do do via the associations also when does not make sense for the larger ones.
Smaller companies have, as discussed in plenty of previous articles, limited (human) resources available to focus on the future, on experiments, etc- hence, they prefer attracting "ready to use" people.
Over the last decade, routinely heard in workshops and webinars the request to "accelerate" release of students, including by cutting down curricula.
So, while in other countries the focus is on expanding the systemic perspective, critical thinking, the ability to unlearn/relearn/learn, in Italy too often seems as if we are trying to replicate Chaplin's "Modern Times".
More details, more ready-to-use instruction, less open-mindedness, more focus.
Anyway, during the event that I shared above, at least some reported and shared those now common trends above as needs also for Italy and Turin.
The post is in Italian, but I think that it is easy to understand its gist: PMI recently announced on Linkedin the structure of the new version of the project management certification exam- and the "systemic" side is getting more weight than just the mere "paint-by-numbers" that in our certification-obsessed times is common:
There is a key element that still, anyway, sounded of the "old" mindset: here and there, the point was pre-planning, pre-organizing, keeping control.
As shared in this post, what I was in mid-2000s while living in Brussels was different:
Yes, it was part of my "let's start again as project manager (the first time was hired as senior project manager was in... 1990), but meanwhile let's keep alive the other skills by joining the local ecosystem".
It was interesting to see the approach (I joined also a meetup on information architecture, to keep "talking data" and "business data").
Anyway, the concept should be: the local talent debate should involve the talents, not just talk about them.
Moreover, should give them opportunities and resources to develop, invest, experiment, if you want the next generation to emerge, and not just cross the Ts and dot the Is prepared by the previous generation.
I am 61 but walk my talk: also if I worked with, adapted, delivered methodologies since the late 1980s, whenever I do one of my AI experiments/projects to generate value in my activities (mainly, to save time now that I can, so that in the future will have already tested potential issues), I work and iterate with AIs based upon my designs and purposes.
Then, when I move toward another "increment", use the "state of the art" of my rummaging (be it documents, software, databases, whatever) and...
... ask AIs (in some cases, multiple AIs) to review that material under a "best practices" and "explanatory" perspective: why reinvent the wheel?
Many are proposing to offer material and access to companies- and, considering that they are small, i.e. lack the resources, it is laudable.
Still, I am skeptical that many small companies will really send their best people and remove them from operational activities.
Hence, again, I think that could generate more value having a kind of "resource-rich sandbox" to have students and those about to graduate experiment so that they are aware, and, when exposed to processes within organizations, could contribute the "what" to the "why" and "how" already provided by those that they are supposed to learn from.
And this brings about the next theme.
THEME3: The "convitato di pietra"- AI and talents
Yes, this map is not exactly flattering, for Italy:
Look also at the text: it is stating that most of the uses are personal uses.
As shared in previous articles, the lack of awareness on the proper use of AI and maintaining the "segregation of duties" is already generating issues- delegation of activities to AIs without human accountability, as "human in the loop" for many means a kind of "quality control" (at the end), not "quality assurance" (along the whole process).
I remember how I learned the difference between the two in practical terms in my second official project, the completion and delivery of a new general ledger for a major Italian bank, in 1987-1988.
I started there as developer, but eventually the manager asked me to help to do what today would be called PMO/QA/QC: number crunching on status, progress, quality, and also compliance with process and steps, so that nothing was "rushed out".
You can control at the end the object- when it is too late, notably when you are talking about software that has to be "pushed into production" (i.e. made active on the customers' systems).
Or you can can look at the whole lifecycle: at the time, formally we had a "waterfall" methodology (blueprint, functional analysis, technical design, implementation, unit test, integration test, system test, release).
Informally, in reality, being a large body of work, it was more in "waves"- albeit initially with some cutting the corners- and my role was to avoid that "cutting the corners", which implied that started crunching numbers and looking at software components declared "ready to go", and then started moving upstream.
Eventually, my "bonus" was being shuttled to the data center of the customer, where my working day as "cerberus" on release management started around 830 in the morning, and ended up around 2-3 in the morning (meaning: I left home at 6am, returned around 3am).
If that seems "old timer"- think again.
With our current AI, routinely I read on Linkedin of some who "launched" AI models that worked overnight doing in a night what would have required days.
Fine- but who controls not just the quality at the end, but the process? Which is not just controlling that works, but also that can be properly managed as an asset.
If you get software or product designs that are made by AIs but are "spaghetti code", how much is going to cost to make them into a final product? Or to evolve?
E.g. routinely had to pick solutions and ask to "unbundle", something as simple as having all the constants defined in one place, not across, and, if the result was a document, to have something more structured instead of a long, long document where the same material is spread across in five different ways for pages upon pages.
Fine if your customer expects 200 pages, but will never read them...
The new trend also locally is generating a structural rethinking of the organization and capabilities of support structures: there are too many of the latter, and too few startups that "scale up".
So, if you read the first theme of this article, you can understand that some "restructuring" is ongoing, e.g. the Politecnico takes over fondazione links (to support startups).
The obsession with "unicorns" is now becoming local- but, frankly, I would rather have a company that is valued 100mln EUR and generates a long-term unique blend of product and service, than a "flame" that in 1-2 years is values 11bln EUR, and whose revenue streams are then wiped out by a major AI platforms that:
1. replicates their user interface
2. generates new processes that optimize those offered
3. bypasses them and goes directly to the data sources they use.
As shared on Linkedin:
I still see around too many "monoliths"- but probably the future, if you want to avoid being replaced by each new release of an AI platform, is to be "composable", i.e. have an architecture that leverages on your strengths, integrates elements, but is not just those off-the-shelf (what "wrappers" do) elements:
Interestingly, this generates an additional issue.
I am currently my own products/projects/whatever that support my own publication activities also as a better learning tool than just following training and replicating exercises- which is useful, but limiting: only when you do something that you "need" you get past the surface and into usability.
I use different models- online and offline, but when I saw that "Claude Architect Certification" started becoming a real think, asked directly Claude.
Believe or not, the way I asked was similar to when I was actually selling training: only, this time was the customer, and asked Claude to by the seller.
What it did, was what I did back then: went digging into memory, and, based on our past conversations, projects, objects, documents, etc, cross-referenced what is needed to obtain that certification vs. my experience that he/it saw and knew about (as often each model is involved in one or more "review phases" of what other models prepare), offering a customized learning and preparation roadmap.
Now, I was supposed to start in April, but, frankly, postponed to the summer, as wanted before to carry out some of projects that would cover part of the other suggested learning.
And, anyway, I have to wait for when the certification will be available also for non-partners.
What matters here is the lifecycle: I wonder how that certification will work, considering that Claude is evolving at least on a monthly basis: will it generate yet another cottage industry of certifications?
Or will it have a kind of "review and update" certification on the certification available or mandatory only when there are major changes?
Will it have a public registry, stating when, how, and if still active?
When we talk about "talents", often the discussion is about "static talents"- or, at least, the mental framework adopted is akin to that of the "guilds" that existed centuries ago (well, in Italy, are still active- called "albi").
We should instead consider, again, the concept of lifecycle.
The "convitato di pietra" within the title is from the "Don Giovanni": it is something that we Italians quote often whenever there is something akin to a more probable risk than a mere Damocle's sword above our head.
Artificial Intelligence is still an afterthought in many discussions about talent- attraction, management/development, retention.
We seem to willingly ignore that, as wrote in a previous section and within the title of this article, we need to consider, both as individuals and at an aggregated level, the lifecycle.
Gone are the times when you could learn a skill, and hand it over to your children.
And even the times, that in Turin way too often since 2012 was told by many around half my age, when having a degree in whatever was enough for a lifetime.
The narrower your formal learning (i.e. if you remove all the critical thinking, learning ability etc), the shorter the "talent" lifespan.
Yes, there will still be areas where you can learn a skill, and hand it over to your children "as is".
Still, they will have to evolve it, not just replicate.
The basic lifecycle assessement should be: continuously monitor if your activity is structured enough to be replicable.
Then, assess how the surrounding technology (AI but also robotics) is evolving in terms of "adaptability".
Then, plot both across the timeline- when they will meet, it your tipping point: either to shift to the QC/QA side, or to another domain.
In both cases, you have to consider the time needed to do either, and plan accordingly.
Example: on Linkedin, Facebook, Instagram probably all of you saw that video of when some soldiers were sent to fool surveillance cameras.
Somersaults, hiding behind a cardbox, drunk walking, etc: all fooled cameras.
For now- as were trained for "perfect walking conditions".
You can keep joking, but that inability to identify people eventually is going to be fixed- and already the invasion of Ukraine generated significant innovation within the automated weapons domain.
Which is, actually, something that has been a routine since cavemen started using tools.
Now, all the previous sections were just to prepare the landing point: repositioning a territory.
THEME4: Repositioning a territory
I will start with a point closely related with the first theme: look at the results of this search.
I know- it is a kick in the belly.
Still, it is useful- as any assessment, if you then show what you are doing about it.
If you pretend that an issue does not exist within a territory, because it is shameful, and focus just on branding with a projection of your own (inflated) self-image, then unfortunately you will attract, but then lose at the first opportunity.
Anyway, I think that, despite all the local criticism about the new logo and branding campaign (also- locally was not liked that was assigned to a company in Milan), I think that it is better than the Munchausen style of the previous "so much of everything", which was really Trantor-esque.
I do not know if I will be still in Turin to look at the results, but I stand with my initial comment:
Anyway, while focusing on branding and announces (the next round of local elections is not too far away), better to remember what happened over yet another year full of announces about new investments, new foreign entities coming here, a relaunch of the local presence of Stellantis and overall automotive, new activities within the defense domains, etc etc etc:
Too many marketeers, too few managers and developers (beyond the real estate and building industry- but those are "covered" by announces and events to put the town on the map).
It is curious how tribal Italy is: of course there are forthcoming elections and, being the incumbent center-left, the center-right potential candidate intervened at a workers' event nearby Turin:
Anyway, it made sense: as he is also covering the specific portfolio for the Region Piedmon (where Turin is based).
Anyway, the reaction from some of the Trades Unions was not positive: as if only the center-left should care of the development of the territory, and the need to looking beyond a dreamed return to 1970s automotive in Turin.
Disclosure: I never voted for any of the political parties in the center-right coalition, and traditionally I voted for the center-left, specifically the Partito Democratico- still, I think that Trades Unions should decouple from political parties, center, left, right.
Repositioning the territory to attract investments implies also doing something more than subsidizing the incumbents:
I think that it is correct that local industrialists remembered that there is an ongoing local crisis: too many local politicians (not just the incumbent Mayor) focus on branding and events, as if Turin were had 40,000 inhabitants, not a decline from over 1mln to less than 900k, and with a trend that also official projections saw not positive overall (shared official projections and other data in previous articles).
When visited Turin just before the 2006 Winter Olympic Games, and to see it while the games were going on (my attendance was limited to... pub crawling to mingle with foreign people- and had an evening with each one of three leading hockey teams: Canada, Russia, USA), my first comment on the new roads and building was that they were preparing a town for a couple of millions, not for a contracting town.
And, frankly, for a while, the cognitive dissonance was blatant: more than lifting spirits, the 2006 Games lifted the already stellar pride- albeit then came reality, when for a while a potential issue was that the leftover buildings would not even generate enough revenue to pay for maintenance.
Still, Turin has plenty of industrial infrastructure and supporting services: what is missing is direction, a consensus on something more than routinely stating that it is the natural location for whatever bureaucracy worldwide is looking for a new location.
Today will go and have a look at the exhibition presenting the new plan for Turin- again, brick and mortar, but, from what I read so far, that brick and mortar is also part of a different concept of town.
Frankly, it is still to be seen how much of those announces is just focused on the forthcoming elections, and will just result in creating more offices and bureaucrats on the territory, and how much instead will do what, as showed in that book in late 2020 (see here), is still missing.
Or: bringing about a really more open, more transparent, more accountable town that is attractive not because it says so, but because outsiders says so.
Otherwise: will just get more foreigners who find attractive its architecture and potential for lower taxes and free healthcare services, while increasingly becoming a kind of large constellation of gated communities extending to the whole center to avoid spillover effects from decay that has not been managed, on its way to halve its population within this century.
Talent? Think again about its lifecycle, but considering also the socio-economic context, not just the technology side.
Have a nice week-end.