Il ruolo delle imprese - Tavola rotonda con Arabnia (Geico), Zorzella (AntaresVision), Altieri (IBM)

Good evening everyone. For now, stay standing—actually, sit down. I'll move around a bit. I'm very grateful to NAS for having invited me today, because I'm learning as I listen. Though I must say honestly, I'm a bit depressed because this first series of interventions has highlighted quite a number of critical elements. If I put on the hat of the promoter, I have some objective difficulty, because there are many problems, and we've heard many of them evoked. But I'm grateful because it now gives us the opportunity to fix something positive, since we have with us three representatives of that world who, despite what we've heard, make training a central element of their managerial and entrepreneurial development.

We've prepared a bit, and listening to a few more questions, I'll begin by trying to recall some of the concepts that were presented. We decided to start with the company that has the greatest seniority, and so with Luca Alfieri from IBM. And why? Because I've known him for more years, obviously, and because historically, also in my experience, I've always found great capability and great vision in this company. I was reminding Luca—who was very young then, he's no longer a kid now—that about thirty years ago, together with Alberto Grando, he launched a project that was called, within the MBAs that I was directing, a focus on information technology. That is, thirty years ago, they were thinking about training people who would have an MBA focused on IT development. This is an element on which so much else was later built.

But Luca, I wanted to ask you another initial question. At a certain point, artificial intelligence was mentioned, and the question is this: given that you cover the technological side extensively, how do you see the role of people first, and then naturally also of training, with this increasingly strong and demanding entry of artificial intelligence?

Well, it's inevitable, and so I also link back to the discussion that Professor Grando has been leading about this digital transformation that is now defining our era. There is a false myth: the false myth that men will be replaced by robots, that artificial intelligence will in some way steal our jobs. Now, this may be true in the short term, as Professor Grando said, but in the long term it's equally true that the World Economic Forum data tells us there will be growth driven by new competencies and new professions. So the real problem, as we also saw in Professor Ichino's work, is not so much asking whether robots, AI, and digital transformation will kill new professions, but rather what are the competencies, the skills, and the professions required today and in the coming years that will make the difference on the market, that will allow the world—and in our specific case, Italy and Italian companies—to ride the digital transformation and stay competitive on the market.

From your point of view, what are these competencies? Because earlier I heard that there's this big gap between what university and technical education offers and what you're looking for.

Well, the majority of new professions—nine out of ten—are in the digital area. So we have new professional figures such as data scientists, cybersecurity or cybercrime specialists, people responsible for programming artificial intelligence or robotics, just to name a few examples. Grando was right: will the person who works with a computer die, or will the computer die? Obviously both—in reality, someone who programs the computer is needed. So new professions are heading in that direction.

When we talk about hard skills, about the competencies the market will demand in the next five years, that's clear. But when we talk about soft skills, we don't stray too far from what is demanded today, because the job market—this is confirmed by analyses from the Institute for Business Value and also the World Economic Forum—says that from a soft skills standpoint, what will be required remains creativity, problem-solving, and what the Americans call agility, or let's say flexibility. Because we live in a job market strongly dominated by the speed of change—changes have always existed, but they've never been so rapid and fast as in this historical period. So the ability to adapt, to manage change, flexibility—these are soft skills that are increasingly demanded by companies. These are the profiles, from both a hard skills and soft skills standpoint, that will be increasingly required on the market.

How? First, I'll conclude with a question that comes naturally from what we've followed so far: where do you find these young people? But let's talk about recruitment—this gap between demand and supply, how do you experience it, and where do you search?

We search primarily in the university world, and then we also look in technical institutes and in high schools. We too have a significant gap between labor demand and supply in the Italian market. If we compare with IBM globally, the gap narrows a bit, but in the Italian market it's very wide, because young people graduating from universities, and especially from high schools and technical institutes, don't have the level of preparation and competence—and above all specialization—that IBM requires today, and that the job market requires.

So you're looking for specialization and having difficulty finding it, both at the high school and university level. But do you invest in relationships with these institutions? Have you managed in some way to influence them, to help them identify appropriate training solutions?

Yes, we invest and have been doing this for years. As you recounted, some time ago we worked with major universities creating bespoke degree programs. Today we substantially work on three main themes. The first is school-work alternation at the higher education level. We work with students to help them understand how the job market is changing, but we do this not by simply presenting what IBM is or how the world is changing—when we find an enlightened principal, because ultimately the difference is made by the institute... and I want to emphasize this: despite talking about public schools in general, you need an enlightened principal. School-work alternation—how can you do it? You go there, present your company, explain how the world is changing, spend some hours with the students. Or when it's an enlightened principal—and this has happened to us—what do you do? Maybe you organize a weekend where you bring in IBM students and teach them coding. Or perhaps in June, when school ends, you do two weeks of internship, bringing all the fourth and fifth-year students and having them spend two weeks with us, circulating a bit as Professor Vitale was saying.

From your side, this is possible. But it's logical that on the other side you need a counterpart that accepts this and is willing to bring in their students.

And I assure you that from a student's perspective, the satisfaction is maximum, because they understand concretely, touching with their own hands, what it means to work in a real corporate environment.

The second area we address is universities. Today we collaborate with more than 48 universities across Italy—from Piedmont to Sicily—both with degree programs and specializations, and with dedicated masters also touching future professions. I won't name specific universities, but with some we have cybersecurity and cybercrime courses, with others we have programs to train new data scientists, these future professional figures or AI experts. And last but not least—and we're particularly proud of this—we recently launched a program called P-TECH, which comes from America, and we did it in Taranto with the University of Taranto and four local high schools, including technical institutes and a liceo. What is P-TECH? It's the will to create what Grando called a 'system'—uniting institutions, the school world, and companies to work as a system, to help understand the professions of the future and create future professions. In practice, IBM works with these institutes and the university to define the curriculum that students will follow during the year, a study program close to what the job market requires. IBM provides volunteer tutors who go to the technical institutes, the liceo, and the universities, working alongside students, following those who want to participate in this program, serving as true mentors and tutors. Together with them, internships and training periods within the company are organized. This is what we took from the German model, because it's true, as Ichino said, that the important thing is to observe, have data, and understand where the job market is going. But the difference comes when all of us—as Vitale also said—work together, when none of us shirks their responsibilities.

If we return to the topic of training—which is very close to my heart—for people already in the workforce, and also to respond to Bruno's point about youth unemployment, I would now pass the floor to Rezza, who has very recently become president of IVI—Istituto del Valore d'Impresa—taking over from Dottoressa Ghillì. So from this standpoint too, I'd like to ask you a bit about values. Let's start from what we've heard—what was your reaction?

Good evening everyone. We have a video later—when we show it, to talk about genius, with a video of mine it would be too long, and I don't like making comments. Everything thanks to Emidio and Professor Vitale for inviting me. But just now I was about to freeze hearing my professor friends. Now I'm about to freeze because we do a field, we do half—it's fine—but I ask myself: how is it possible, with all this negativity being talked about in Italy, that we need to learn from the Germans? We're not talking about the English or Americans—we're talking about everything that's going on, but we don't ask ourselves a question that I think is very important: we have a country with strangely anti-enterprise laws, we pay incredible taxes, extremely high labor costs, we have a union system that's gone beyond its limits, we have politicians—let's not even mention the minister of industry, one who made people buy a house and didn't even know he'd bought a house, and this person is supposed to manage the country. Another one who had never worked a day in his life became minister of industry. All these characters—half the country is at a standstill, taxes that aren't paid, leading companies of the country, the locomotives of the country that have no sense of responsibility toward the country, who don't do what the Germans do among themselves. Let's talk about the Italian mafia. We have to go learn something from them, having all of this? How is it possible that this country, which still has no natural resources, with the reputation of being one of the top ten economies in the world—a question that, if we don't ask it—I'm addressing my professor friends—if you don't ask this question and don't do research on it, you lose an important opportunity.

And the training we want to do for our young people for the future—now let's talk about something that's very trendy right now: digitalization and all that, which is true, absolutely true. But we could be led down the wrong path. We cannot copy others. I am—I speak with maximum freedom—of Persian origin, but the company is everywhere in the world, and I'm not saying this for applause, but the creativity, the imagination, the capability that I find in Italy, I don't find anywhere else in the world. And how is it possible that we don't understand this and don't reward this, and instead constantly look for the negative things in our country? There are extremely positive things here. I say to many times, when I see young people who are cold toward their country, who say they'd prefer to go to Australia to be waiters rather than work in an office here, I tell them: look at your country, go around, look at what you see—half of the world's most important monuments are in your country, built for the most absurd reasons. Forget what was behind them—go see the architect, the entrepreneur, the worker, the artisan who built these things. There should be some pride in that, that benchmark, that passion that led to creating these things, the passion that drives entrepreneurs to travel the world despite all the problems they have on their backs. I believe there is something that professors need to learn and extract from this, structure it, and teach it.

But your company, Wenzel, has decided to take on a significant investment in training anyway, investing in these young people—noting our incapacity or our errors, joking of course, not entirely—but has decided to invest directly, to take responsibility for a space that has remained unfilled. What do you do to train these young people who likely have qualities, have potential? What kind of investment do you make to offer these young people opportunities?

We are an engineering company—we used to do complete turnkey plants, and naturally in the automotive world these are very significant plants. We are one of the most innovative companies in the world in our sector, but our technological innovation starts from our cultural innovation. I've worked for a very long time—almost fifteen years ago, when we bought the company from the Comao group in the Fiat world—working on culture. We created an internal academy: every Friday afternoon we dedicated it to two courses—one course on culture, ethics, work behavior, company values, and another course that was technical, which with the times was called Six Sigma; we called it 'MIKE'—rationality, emotivity, analytical intelligence and emotional intelligence—finding a balance between the two, working with people. From there we worked and we arrived at today, where we still have this Friday afternoon dedicated to training, to the internal academy of the company.

Another thing we did: we took our young people—we hire young people regardless of training—and gave them half a day a week at their disposal to think freely. They can go to a pizzeria, they can go wherever they want, they can stay at the company freely. They have to think and come up with ideas, even superficial ones, because they shouldn't be influenced by anyone with more than three years of tenure. They come up with innovative ideas on how we can improve the company at an operational level, streamlining and cutting all power-exercise stations and bureaucracies, working on technologies and the work environment—how it can be improved. This is something that the 22, 23, and 24-year-old guys come up with—magnificent ideas. Not all are applicable, because with everything on the internet available to them, they come up with incredible ideas, but they can really give an incredible contribution to the improvement of the company.

Always returning to this vocation of also taking responsibility, you started some years ago to invest in your territory. I believe it would be interesting to briefly recount this project and what came of it, how it continues to develop, even in terms of the relationship, because it's important—as we were saying before—a role of development not only tied to one's own company.

With all due respect for politics—I don't believe in politics, and I don't believe in governments, unfortunately. I come from a country that taught me very early not to rely on these things. But I feel the responsibility—youth unemployment can't just be left there, simply saying it's a state problem. We started bringing in young people into the company, even though we didn't need them. We did something symbolic: 20 young people, from 20 different regions, with permanent contracts, so that before the Jobs Act they could find their footing—go get a mortgage, start a family. But what happened was that these guys, who were extraordinary, started giving an incredible contribution to the company. And I felt guilty—I said, I thought I was doing a generous act, instead everything is coming back to me. So we decided to create a foundation and go find young people who were having difficulty finding work, find serious companies in our territory that were having difficulty hiring, and match these young people into these companies that had nothing to do with us, paying six months of salary—so neither the company nor the young person risked anything. If they were hired, we also gave a bonus. This was a project that by 2020 was supposed to reach 100 people—we're already at 140, 146.

What has always struck me about this project, beyond the vision—it starts by saying we're looking for young people who obviously have talent but can't find the right opportunity. What's the reason, in your opinion, that they weren't finding it, and yet through this project they do find a concrete opportunity?

If there's any entrepreneur here who would like to do something like this, I'll tell you right away—but be careful, because the commitment is quite significant. To reach 146 people, there were over 6,000 contacts, and of those, perhaps 250 were available to come for an interview—people who didn't have a job. And then there's the phenomenon of the 'NEETs'—young people aged 18, 20, 25, who aren't working and aren't studying, and are lost. This is a responsibility that we, as entrepreneurs, must feel—to find a solution. And this was one of the reasons we did this.

I believe it's a cultural, educational issue, at the family level, at the social level, more than a matter of type of study—though the type of study is important. What I mean is this: when a young person comes to you and says, 'I don't know, but I want to see ten years from now what position I'll have,' and when he says that what you offer—1,000 euros a month—isn't even what his father gives as pocket money for going out, it doesn't interest him. When they start asking 300 questions about the job itself, when they want to do this—this comes from the fact that these young people were only children, or one of two children, whose parents—perhaps not university-educated or whatever—put it in their heads that just studying and getting a degree would find them work. Expectations were created for these young people that our generation wasn't able to satisfy. And we can't satisfy their emotional expectations, because many times they speak rationally, but their expectations are emotional.

Let me give you a truly quick example. A brilliant female engineer, who did everything perfectly up through her master's in engineering—magnificent, doing an excellent job, doing very well with us. But she came to tell me: 'Doctor, at the end of the year I'm finishing because I want to go travel for a year to find myself.' And I didn't know what to do anymore. We have a philosopher in the company who helps the young people, we have a psychologist who helps them, we're very attentive with these young people—but when you hear something like that, you really don't know what to say. 'You need to have a chat with the psychologist, you need to—' But it's truly something particular. A girl who did everything perfectly, because she says: 'I did everything perfectly because I wanted to satisfy my parents. I've also worked very well, I'm very happy, almost an enthusiast about my work,' but she says, 'I don't feel right, I don't know what to do, I need to find myself.' This is an emotional discussion, not a rational one.

We'll come back to talk also about the people who have been in the company for more years. But I have another question for you: you mentioned the young people coming in, and the relationship with those who've been there longer. Your company is relatively young on average, so how is the relationship between your more senior collaborators and all these young people you've inserted?

This is an old story—the time of Seneca, who said young people don't want to do anything. This thing recurs, it always comes up. I remember when I wanted to promote some 40-year-olds fifteen years ago, the 60-year-olds said 'Too young! How can he be a manager at 40?' And now those same 40-year-olds from those times are 55, and they're telling me the same thing about the 30-year-olds: 'Too young! If we put him in a managerial position, he's too young and we'll burn him.' It's important to understand that things are in good faith, because when the concern is honest, then you can sit down. We do intergenerational courses, create interdisciplinary teams, intergenerational workshops. If instead it's bad faith, I send them away.

Thank you, Emidio Zorzella. Now the last company, which is the youngest in the sense that it was founded recently, but has grown enormously—both developing internally a great deal through innovation and also looking externally at what could strengthen your activity. From this standpoint, how relevant is training for you as well? You're a very young company by average age. Where do you find your people, how do you insert them, what kind of people do you look for, and how do you train them?

In this case with BM, even the two technical ones—it's you who are driving our world. Yes, there's no doubt we need to restart from the training of young people.

I have a second quick round of questions. The premise is something all three mentioned, and that Bruno Trentin evoked by citing a well-known quote: training is important for those who enter, but it's fundamental for those already in the company. Because I want to tell you about an episode I experienced at a similar conference years ago, which made me react very badly.

We were at a conference with some politicians, and we were discussing people who at a certain age were being excluded. A consultant from a very important international consulting firm said, 'Because you know, at 50 a man is obsolete.' I didn't take it well—honestly, I was quite rude because the word 'obsolete' associated with a human being made me snap.

Let's talk about people. This was unfortunately said. So to all three—what do you do for those already in the company? Because we're people who are 49, 50, 55—sometimes it's already worrying about human obsolescence. Let me start with Emidio, and then I'd like to hear about the word Rezza used: responsibility.

As you said, we're a company—I prefer to say historical rather than old—a historical company on the market for over 100 years. Our first product, for those who don't know, was scales. So imagine—we started selling scales and today we're talking about artificial intelligence. But let's focus on the last ten years—up to 2,500 employees.

Many still recognize IBM as the company that makes PCs. When you go to Zara and pay, you see the terminal—and IBM. We haven't done that since 2005. We went from 1,500 employees to no more PCs, no more printers, no more hardware—entering increasingly into the world of software, services, and today's digital technologies with artificial intelligence, blockchain—all those names we hear daily on the news.

In 15 years, we made an epochal shift. You can only make this shift if there's training—the right people. You can hire externally, but that has a cost—the hiring cost and then there's a drop in productivity because the young person needs to be trained. There's a certain period before they become productive.

Given that in Italy the retirement age is what it is, we find ourselves with many people who may be considered obsolete but we have to keep. So reskilling is extremely important. IBM has always strongly focused on reskilling in the last 10-15 years, because otherwise we wouldn't have managed to evolve.

Also because the possibility of going to the market for cost reasons is limited, so we must invest in internal resources. We've done it, evolving over time. We've turned to external companies in the past, we've created university courses that we still participate in—both as professors and as listeners—and we train ourselves using new technologies.

We have an e-learning platform. As was mentioned, the national contract provides 24 hours—we've set a much higher target: each IBM employee must complete at least 40 hours of training per year. 24 over three years, but 40 hours on defined critical competencies of the company.

Critical competencies defined based on what? Based on what the market requires—not something we invent ourselves. Second, we have a program dedicated to future skills. We're working with research institutes to understand what new competencies are needed in a timeframe of a couple of years.

Remember, today we talk about data scientists, but two years ago this role didn't exist. It's useless to tell our children what job will exist in five years. We need to be flexible like reeds—so when the wind comes, instead of being destroyed, we bend and rise again. We need to keep our minds open to adapt to new competencies.

We have this future skills program, and not least—I brought a short video, not so much for IBM but to show something we use internally based on artificial intelligence. So if you could play the video, it's very quick.

So now, my question—this is related to the future and adapting to change.

A video that we also used cleverly as marketing to promote the use of this tool internally. What is it? It's a virtual coach based on artificial intelligence—augmented intelligence as we call it.

It defines for each IBM employee their education path for the year and the following year, by interpolating a whole series of information and data about the individual—their experiences, seniority, competencies already developed within the company, their current role, the role they'd like to do, defined together with their management, and competencies required by the market.

So effectively it's a person who follows you 24/7, guiding you in your education path. I must say it works so well that other companies have asked for it—it's now becoming one of our products and solutions on the market.

A mind that has never believed—and I believe it's absolutely fast. Thank you. What do you do for those 45, 50 years old? I'm 49 already—it's dangerous, I must say.

Well, we—let's say—we take care of them. I'm 64 years old, and next year at this point I'll already be in retirement—not state retirement, but from my company Geico. My son, who is 35, will take my place.

This seven-year succession process was planned. He's been working for 11-12 years, but significant work went into this—sending him to China, having him manage alone in America for the company, and so on. Then the team he chose—I wasn't involved—there was an external committee, and we did it with our Japanese partners too.

Consequently, he will be my successor. So at 35, he'll be the new head of Geico. When he speaks—when they have discussions among themselves—I don't understand a single word of what they say. They use abbreviations—I can't keep up.

But I've always been lucky in that I know what I know how to do, and above all, what I don't know how to do. The humility to admit what I can't do, the courage to find people who know how to do what I can't do—not being afraid they'll overshadow me.

I didn't think they'd fire me, but without fear of being put in the shade. That's what I try to do continuously with my friends who are a bit older. Because it's like this—at 25, 35 there are certain capabilities; from 35 to 45, that's usually the best moment of your life.

From 45 to 55, problems start arriving—teenage children, parents beginning to have issues, loss of concentration. People think they can no longer advance. So I hired a philosopher in the company to talk with them—ten sessions—to try to rekindle the fire that may be going out.

From 55 to 65, I'd say those are easier times because you've understood that life is this. All these phases need accompaniment—different kinds at each stage. If a company has this awareness, it finds the right tools to help these people give their best for their own satisfaction.

I always say—and I repeat myself, I apologize—people like us should feel truly privileged. There are many people who are as intelligent as us, who work a hundred times harder than us, but life opportunities don't match their effort.

If we've had economic and social satisfaction, we must realize we're privileged, and this privilege carries a particular responsibility—to take things a bit more seriously, to understand that you affect the people who work with you.

It's not about productivity, not about profit—it's about what you can give in your own small way, even microscopically, as a contribution to improving society. Truly, sincerely, concretely, and consistently. Don't get discouraged by the occasional blow you'll receive along the way.

If you can't bear people's ingratitude, you shouldn't do this—there will always be someone who's not grateful, who doesn't understand, who gives you a stab. But you must feel a strong social responsibility. These things don't discourage you—whether you're 50 or 40.

We don't only work on those inside the company. We also have a project called 'New Hope' for those outside—helping people who lost their jobs at 45 or 50, who are completely lost, find work in companies unrelated to ours, financing six months of salary.

Antares charges are finished. Instead, for you, the elderly at 35—35 is when it starts getting tough. As you said, we're reducing the average age, so our business is increasingly projected toward young people because we work precisely in digital transformation.

Thank you. Before concluding, I want to ask our host—because we've heard the entrepreneur, we've heard the earlier presentations—for you, how does the training issue present itself? I'll pass you the mic.

For us, training is one of our company's strengths. Our company was born with training as a foundational value—we deal with payroll and personnel administration. Having over 70 years of history, we've had to reinvent ourselves many times—then came IT, digitalization.

For us it's a strength, and the transformations are constant—fundamentally because our client base grows and entrusts to us all their digitalization needs, asking us to substitute them in processing, services, and especially quite complex services.

We need more and more people who are application software consultants, who are on the technical side for processing payroll, personnel administration, and so on. On the other hand, we've always expanded our software offering, so we need more and more IT and software experts.

These are the profiles we must find on the market—they're extremely difficult to find because there are few competencies. Sometimes even our competitors have this problem. So how have we solved it? Partly through external training for young people.

We pair them with our seniors—and the average age is indeed dropping significantly. Working and operating throughout Italy, we have to look for talent everywhere. Then, with an increasingly international outlook, we also have internal training—growing competencies within to reskill our internal teams.

This pairing between seniors and juniors is very important for both sides. Obviously for the juniors who bring something different, a different world. But also for the seniors—creativity in young people needs to be developed, favored, and facilitated.

Because people who settle into a job just coast until retirement—and that's incredibly boring. Since we spend a third of our lives working or more, the last thing I care about is stagnation.

Our interpretation of the school-to-work pathway with our academy: we invite young people from professional institutes with affinity to our world to participate in courses where we train them in competencies they never receive at school but that are useful regardless of what they do.

Knowing about payroll, HR management—this is important for anyone entering a company. This is our proposal. Now we'll extend it further with our academy for the fourth and fifth year of high school, with the idea of also placing them in the company—which has already happened.