Concorrência vs cooperação em Mongo

Considerem a metáfora de Mongo onde reina a concorrência imperfeita.

Concorrência imperfeita significa que não se podem fazer comparações directas entre as ofertas da empresa A e as ofertas da empresa B, porque elas são diferentes, destinam-se a necessidades diferentes ou a contextos diferentes, ainda que possam ter designações semelhantes.
.
Fazendo o paralelismo com a biologia recordo esta história com maçãs em "Mongo também passa por este regresso ao passado" e, esta outra em "Qual é o verdadeiro produto que a nossa agricultura pode oferecer? (parte II)" que me fez descobrir que há maçãs todo o ano e que uma Spartan não concorre com uma Braeburn ou uma Golden Delicious.
.
Ontem, o @pauloperes recomendou-me a leitura de um texto de Esko Kilpi "Redefining work" onde se pode ler:

"But what if high performance is incorrectly attributed to competition and is more a result of diversity, self-organizing communication and non-competitive processes of cooperation?.
Competitive processes lead to the handicapping of the system that these processes are part of. This is because competitive selection leads to exclusion: something or somebody, the losers, are left outside. Leaving something out from an ecosystem always means a reduction of diversity. The resulting less diverse system is efficient in the short-term, competition seems to work, but always at the expense of long-term viability. [Moi ici: Recordar Valikangas e o valor da diversidade para enfrentar os choques violentos do inesperado] Sustainability, agility and complex problem solving require more diversity, not less.
...
In games that were paradoxically competitive and cooperative at the same time, losers would not be eliminated from the game, but would be invited to learn from the winners. What prevents losers learning from winners is our outdated zero-sum thinking and the winner-take-all philosophy.
.
In competitive games the players need to have the identical aim of winning the same thing. Unless all the players want the same thing, there cannot be a genuine contest. Human players and their contributions are, at best, too diverse to rank. They are, and should be, too qualitatively different to compare quantitatively. Zero-sum games were the offspring of scarcity economics. In the post-industrial era of abundant creativity and contextuality, new human-centric approaches are needed.[Moi ici: Mongo!!!]
...
[Moi ici: Este trecho que se segue é muito interessante] The games we play have been played under the assumption that the unit of survival is the player, meaning the individual or a company. However, at the time of the Anthropocene, the reality is that the unit of survival is the player in the game being played. Following Darwinian rhetoric, the unit of survival is the species in its environment. Who wins and who loses is of minor importance compared to the decay of the (game) environment as a result of the actions of the players."[Moi ici: Desconfio que esta citação me vai acompanhar muitas vezes]

Percebo isto e penso isto há muitos anos, os consultores "meus concorrentes" são minhas testemunhas. Entretanto, numa caminhada ao final da tarde li "Brewing Together Works Better in the Craft Beer Industry" e pensei:
.
- UAU! Que grande encaixe!!!

"“I will return a call from anyone in the craft-beer industry who wants to talk,” he says. “Fritz and the other early craft brewers set that tone.”
.
Fifty years after Maytag bought Anchor Brewing and introduced craft beer to America, the sector’s esprit de corps extends well beyond friendly chats. Craft brewers open their doors to others. They share equipment and help train one another’s staffs. Trade secrets? Craft brewers take pride in having none.
...
cooperation fuels the growth, he says, not the other way around. Brewers have created a virtuous cycle that other industries ought to copy.
...
Any business sector that can be described as “craft,” “artisan” or “local” can benefit from collaboration among competitors,
...
Collaboration set the stage for the current craft-beer boom. “The craft category would not be what it is today if craft brewers hadn’t collaborated,” says Mike Kallenberger, a former Miller Brewing executive who now consults with craft brewers. “This category grew almost entirely by word-of-mouth, with virtually no advertising at all. The more they helped each other, the more people drank craft beer.”"

Separo o trecho que se segue porque suspeito que é outro que me vai acompanhar de futuro:

"Cooperation makes sense when “a segment needs to share knowledge to legitimize itself and increase sales in a battle against a common enemy,” says Sutton, citing the open-source software developers who created their collaborative culture to battle Microsoft’s dominance of the industry. “With a named enemy, an industry segment becomes a social movement.”"