network cad3d designers in italy

[maxopus]

I'd be there, too, the idea is interesting... but I'm addicted.
but then I get a question:
If I declare myself capable of designing a nuclear submarine and then in reality I don't even know how to inflate the canton?

If I declare that I know how to model and reverse for the automotive industry, I show the works performed and I would also predict a kind of admission exam:biggrin: .... so much in the committee examiner we know who to put, other than recovery credits:biggrin:

 

[Matteo]

apart from the crappy guys.
What if you're going to throw down a draft regulation on which to reason?
the least tell me according to you which can be the criticalities to regulate.
If the thing has to be done you have to start right away, because it will still go away of time and I don't like it.

I follow the thread and I will try to make my contribution.
something like that I'm doing it in (very) small.

for me: simulation fem and cfd

 

[Exatem]

If I declare that I know how to model and reverse for the automotive industry, I show the works performed and I would also predict a kind of admission exam:biggrin: .... so much in the committee examiner we know who to put, other than recovery credits:biggrin:

Well, I have no limits to the powers of the committee, nor to that of providence. for an accurate and objective "examination" you would need to have skills in all sectors you have appointed.
but online is easy bluffing. . .

 

[Matteo]

some questions that might help:

1. what is the manageable size (no members of the consortium)? in my opinion no more than 10-20
2. What to do in case of overlap (e.g. two people/studies who do the same service in the same area)?
3. how to manage the "passage of jobs/clients" from one partner to another? I thought and perhaps the only way is that the incoming works pass by people who work as a commercial office and have margins as a percentage, but every other solution is well accepted.
4. which structures/instruments would be in common, i.e. property of the consortium/cooperative? attention that in case of failure of consortium or cooperative common goods go to the state

 

[Matteo]

the important thing will be the "head" (commercial) that will have to do as a collector for all activities and the "tail" (reportation) to properly redistribute the charges (and therefore the "sounds").

is more or less what I think

 

[Meccbell]

Guys, I'm the person who wants you!

So, first point: for about 2 years I have been part of a group of people who are creating a network of companies in the metalworking industry and therefore I know practically all the critical and "sofferent" points of putting together to do something that goes beyond the "botteguccia" of the house.http://www.va.camcom.it/progetto_mech-net/888second point: whatever form you want to give to the acrocchio (consortium, network of enterprises, temporary hire of businesses, 4 friends at the bar... - then let's talk about it) one of the crucial steps, looking good in the balls of the eyes and above all speaking straight away, is to understand if this thing you want to do only to find the way to "wheel" of someone else better/structured/lucky, etc. or if instead there is a "vision" and a project.
in the first hypothesis better stop immediately and greet, as long as you can still stay friends.
in the second one must know that it will be like being enlisted in a same army, in which or you win together, or you die together.

third point: before deluding to go out on the street and stop the first general contractor of great orders that passes there, it is necessary to start to know others, I would say almost as if you were yourself, that is: how they work, as they reason, their times and operating methods and also, alas, their costs and margins of income.

Therefore, after the first informal evenings, in which he tells us the story of the wolf and other amenities, two essential steps must be made:
1) clear pacts, long friendship. that is cards on the table and reasonings made as much as possible "opensource".
Clearly that for the moment the peculiarities of each, like certain procedures or even the nomination of some customers, can well remain in the shadow, but from that day you must understand that in prospective your own personal bowl will become a little smaller and the rest of the food will come from the common bowl.
2) before "going out in open sea" it is appropriate to make a little undercoast navigation and above all on known seabeds. therefore better start working for each other, exchange of work perhaps already known and therefore reproducible without too much problems, or sharing "one to one" some phase of some small task.
In this way, first of all, the truthfulness of the information collected on the common table above, we get used to working in team, especially for those who now do the "one man show", and then we see also if the team work for the "internal system" can already bring some small advantage at cost and/or times and availability of technological equipment.

fourth point: the rules of the game and the legal form.
from the first meeting of the common table you must start thinking of giving yourself a minimum of rules, clear and shared. these will serve immediately to start working for each other and in perspective to put black on white the contractual form that will serve to formalize the group.
legal form: personally, for past experiences, I regret to form a consortium, not so much so that it does not go well to work together and acquire joint orders, as for the fact that it could become complicated to manage, especially in the presence of members distributed throughout the peninsula. For example, being the consortium a type of company based on quotas, at the time when a member enters or exits it would serve to start procedures, sale and quota prelation, or even increase of the capital, which concern all other members and which require bureaucratic fulfillments sometimes of a certain weight, as assemblies in the presence of a notary.
a form a little, but only a little, leaner is that of the cooperative, but there the risk is that if you give minimal goods to the society then, in case of dissolution, it is practically impossible to return in possession and then, with the latest reforms, in case you preview the redistribution of profits the load of taxes is practically equal to that of any srl, with the difference of having some not negligible administrative rigidities and all
It was for me that I would be on the network of companies, which has just been more precise and more responsive to the needs of small businesses and also professionals.

fifth point: if you decide to "molate the moorings", let yourself be helped by some "tremoners", expert in the path of conception, formation and convergence of participants towards the new entity.
otherwise look at that it is a moment to take the stubborn against the wall or fall into an open grave.
we with mech-net did so and I will never end up being happy with the choice made. also because it is from this path that then comes the leadership of the group, that you will have to take charge of carrying out the work as chief commit. and if you are mistaken the choice of the person/s then they are cabbages gone wrong.

sixth point: money and resources. everything has a price, especially building something that maybe at first does not bring back, or gives it in a very marginal way. then prepare to put on the table each his whistle of chips. Perhaps not necessarily in the form of tickets from 100 euros, but also and above all in terms of time to devote to the thing, knowing that necessarily not everything can be done in the evening or in the weekend, but that often it will be necessary to "stack" from your work to gather, discuss, go to talk to people, companies, etc..
and already that we are on the subject, look around, ask, consult category associations, chambers of commerce, regional branches, that there are around a little money available to those who want to try to put on a network or something that resembles us.


Okay, these "tips" and the "warnings" I generously gave you.
do what you want, but do something about it.

 

[Meccbell]

some questions that might help:

1. what is the manageable size (no members of the consortium)? in my opinion no more than 10-20
2. What to do in case of overlap (e.g. two people/studies who do the same service in the same area)?
3. how to manage the "passage of jobs/clients" from one partner to another? I thought and perhaps the only way is that the incoming works pass by people who work as a commercial office and have margins as a percentage, but every other solution is well accepted.
4. which structures/instruments would be in common, i.e. property of the consortium/cooperative? attention that in case of failure of consortium or cooperative common goods go to the state

nice questions essential and centered. and also good answers.

Good, good. start to "domandate", that for "return" there is always time... :biggrin:

 

[maxopus]

Guys, I'm the person who wants you!

I had no doubts:

Okay, these "tips" and the "warnings" I generously gave you.
do what you want, but do something about it.

so mecc, prejudge all the criticalities you have listed with expertise, are you also convinced that if such a project is addressed with seriousness can bring positive results?

 

[Meccbell]

which structures/instruments would be in common, i.e. property of the consortium/cooperative? attention that in case of failure of consortium or cooperative common goods go to the state

2 small inaccuracies:
1) the assets of dissolved cooperatives do not automatically go to the state, more specifically to a fund at the Ministry of Labour.
we go only and exclusively in 2 cases: if the cooperative is dissolved by bankruptcy (this case remains very little to be transferred) or if it is dissolved by office from the provincial directions, always of the Ministry of Labour, because of serious and repeated failures regarding the regulations governing the life of the cooperatives, for example not having held for more than 3 years the annual assembly, not having renewed the expired cda, not having deposited the inspection balances, not having passed for two years
Instead, in case of consensual dissolution or for terms of statute (famous and omnipresent 99 years...) it is possible to liquidate the assets of the cooperative, but on condition of conferring them to other cooperative that performs the same type of activity and that they are not "sold" (then on this last bond hundreds of methods have flourished to circumvent the obstacle. the Italian genius... )

As for the consortia, they are capital companies with all intents and therefore can be opened, closed, loose and/or merged with others without too many problems, provided that the statutory conditions and constraints of the civil code are respected.
The only problem is that the consortium is a kind of social pact which, as it was born, must die, except for the case, but very controversial, of being transformed into a cooperative.
therefore it is impossible to transform a consortium in srl or spa without previewing its contextual closure, nor to make it "retract" from one of the associates.

That's all. right for completeness and accuracy of data information.
:smile:

 

[Meccbell]

so mecc, prejudge all the criticalities you have listed with expertise, are you also convinced that if such a project is addressed with seriousness can bring positive results?

Orca boia, I'm convinced! :smile:

In fact, I would say that this is the future for our country, which has an undoubted burden of work and innovation, but too fragmented in small "molecular" entities, often, on the contrary, almost always, in fierce competition among themselves.

 

[linch]

Guys, I'm the person who wants you!

So, first point: for about 2 years I have been part of a group of people who are creating a network of companies in the metalworking industry and therefore I know practically all the critical and "sofferent" points of putting together to do something that goes beyond the "botteguccia" of the house.http://www.va.camcom.it/progetto_mech-net/888second point: whatever form you want to give to the acrocchio (consortium, network of enterprises, temporary hire of businesses, 4 friends at the bar... - then let's talk about it) one of the crucial steps, looking good in the balls of the eyes and above all speaking straight away, is to understand if this thing you want to do only to find the way to "wheel" of someone else better/structured/lucky, etc. or if instead there is a "vision" and a project.
in the first hypothesis better stop immediately and greet, as long as you can still stay friends.
in the second one must know that it will be like being enlisted in a same army, in which or you win together, or you die together.

third point: before deluding to go out on the street and stop the first general contractor of great orders that passes there, it is necessary to start to know others, I would say almost as if you were yourself, that is: how they work, as they reason, their times and operating methods and also, alas, their costs and margins of income.

Therefore, after the first informal evenings, in which he tells us the story of the wolf and other amenities, two essential steps must be made:
1) clear pacts, long friendship. that is cards on the table and reasonings made as much as possible "opensource".
Clearly that for the moment the peculiarities of each, like certain procedures or even the nomination of some customers, can well remain in the shadow, but from that day you must understand that in prospective your own personal bowl will become a little smaller and the rest of the food will come from the common bowl.
2) before "going out in open sea" it is appropriate to make a little undercoast navigation and above all on known seabeds. therefore better start working for each other, exchange of work perhaps already known and therefore reproducible without too much problems, or sharing "one to one" some phase of some small task.
In this way, first of all, the truthfulness of the information collected on the common table above, we get used to working in team, especially for those who now do the "one man show", and then we see also if the team work for the "internal system" can already bring some small advantage at cost and/or times and availability of technological equipment.

fourth point: the rules of the game and the legal form.
from the first meeting of the common table you must start thinking of giving yourself a minimum of rules, clear and shared. these will serve immediately to start working for each other and in perspective to put black on white the contractual form that will serve to formalize the group.
legal form: personally, for past experiences, I regret to form a consortium, not so much so that it does not go well to work together and acquire joint orders, as for the fact that it could become complicated to manage, especially in the presence of members distributed throughout the peninsula. For example, being the consortium a type of company based on quotas, at the time when a member enters or exits it would serve to start procedures, sale and quota prelation, or even increase of the capital, which concern all other members and which require bureaucratic fulfillments sometimes of a certain weight, as assemblies in the presence of a notary.
a form a little, but only a little, leaner is that of the cooperative, but there the risk is that if you give minimal goods to the society then, in case of dissolution, it is practically impossible to return in possession and then, with the latest reforms, in case you preview the redistribution of profits the load of taxes is practically equal to that of any srl, with the difference of having some not negligible administrative rigidities and all
It was for me that I would be on the network of companies, which has just been more precise and more responsive to the needs of small businesses and also professionals.

fifth point: if you decide to "molate the moorings", let yourself be helped by some "tremoners", expert in the path of conception, formation and convergence of participants towards the new entity.
otherwise look at that it is a moment to take the stubborn against the wall or fall into an open grave.
we with mech-net did so and I will never end up being happy with the choice made. also because it is from this path that then comes the leadership of the group, that you will have to take charge of carrying out the work as chief commit. and if you are mistaken the choice of the person/s then they are cabbages gone wrong.

sixth point: money and resources. everything has a price, especially building something that maybe at first does not bring back, or gives it in a very marginal way. then prepare to put on the table each his whistle of chips. Perhaps not necessarily in the form of tickets from 100 euros, but also and above all in terms of time to devote to the thing, knowing that necessarily not everything can be done in the evening or in the weekend, but that often it will be necessary to "stack" from your work to gather, discuss, go to talk to people, companies, etc..
and already that we are on the subject, look around, ask, consult category associations, chambers of commerce, regional branches, that there are around a little money available to those who want to try to put on a network or something that resembles us.


Okay, these "tips" and the "warnings" I generously gave you.
do what you want, but do something about it.

I read everything with great interest, but I would like to ask you to explain in detail(if you can) the type of intervention carried out by "mech-net".
congratulations anyway for the exhibition.

 

[PaoloColombani]

Well, I have no limits to the powers of the committee, nor to that of providence. for an accurate and objective "examination" you would need to have skills in all sectors you have appointed.
but online is easy bluffing. . .

not only online I would say, it is not rare to have firms that milliard extraordinary skills, then it happens that the results disprove them. who never saw anything like that? Unfortunately this does not only happen by minor companies, I have in mind also some excellent name of the Italian industry, it is the case of a supply of railway carriages to the Danish railways, a flop tremendous, I do not know how many wagons that lie unusable somewhere. and yet this company has always made trains, then it may be that incompetence had slipped into the corporate staff.
I can't say anything because it happened to me years ago to fail a result, at least for the time required. Good luck was something recently. In the first person, however, we always try to have the situation under control because personal responsibility is directed, being in many I would be more afraid as it says fulvio of colare una bell di Lead. I trust that the max selection should avoid that qvalche impreparten combin cassaten!

 

[maxopus]

Orca boia, I'm convinced! :smile:

In fact, I would say that this is the future for our country, which has an undoubted burden of work and innovation, but too fragmented in small "molecular" entities, often, on the contrary, almost always, in fierce competition among themselves.

So you guys didn't hear?

as much as I do not personally know mecc, I observe and read carefully all that he writes, because there is never pressapochism from one to the kilo in his words.

I trust him, because his thoughts are always based on reasoning, articulation (necessary in today's world, problems always conceal unexpected difficulties) and common sense.

so, after his words, I am even more convinced that aggregation of skills makes the difference.
even if I had to be unsuitable to participate in the project (can happen) I would be happy if this went on.

mecc has spoken of network of enterprises, start to sprout some information:
http://www.retidiimprese.it/

 

[Fulvio Romano]

Orca boia, I'm convinced! :smile:

In fact, I would say that this is the future for our country, which has an undoubted burden of work and innovation, but too fragmented in small "molecular" entities, often, on the contrary, almost always, in fierce competition among themselves.

I'm in full!

what meccbell says, especially in the prolix how juicy explanation of before, it seems very sensible to me. What has not yet been mentioned is the decision-making structure.
I try to say mine, based on some years of experience, but not too many.

at decision-making level it is necessary to identify a rather clear hierarchical structure. for example a group of up to two or three persons making decisions for the whole consortium; under these, two hierarchical structures, one of technical type organized for skills (e.g. mechanics, plants, automation, etc.) and one of commercial type organized by area.
These structures, as they descend downwards, and thus increase the level of detail to which they are addressed, identify layers. each layer must be able to freely transfer information horizontally, but it should be limited as regards making decisions relating to a higher or lower level of detail than it belongs to.

It may seem fried air, but I have often experienced projects in which one gets his hand taken by the imaginary "brainstorming" in which everyone says everything, and then the right doesn't know what makes the left, they make decisions all right, but contrasting, and then...crash.

How do you see it?

 

[maxopus]

not only online I would say, it is not rare to have firms that milliard extraordinary skills, then it happens that the results disprove them. who never saw anything like that? Unfortunately this does not only happen by minor companies, I have in mind also some excellent name of the Italian industry, it is the case of a supply of railway carriages to the Danish railways, a flop tremendous, I do not know how many wagons that lie unusable somewhere. and yet this company has always made trains, then it may be that incompetence had slipped into the corporate staff.
I can't say anything because it happened to me years ago to fail a result, at least for the time required. Good luck was something recently. In the first person, however, we always try to have the situation under control because personal responsibility is directed, being in many I would be more afraid as it says fulvio of colare una bell di Lead. I trust that the max selection should avoid that qvalche impreparten combin cassaten!

your considerations express fears more than founded.

I think you wouldn't just have an online knowledge.

If a person/society wants to be part of the network, he must demonstrate what he says he knows how to do.

we will find the way to assess the skills of those who propose.

 

[Exatem]

As I cannot be part of the exciting project, I would like to ask, as a consolation, to be part of the committee that will select ... the secretaries :biggrin:
to vs. good heart, thank you.

 

[Fulvio Romano]

we will find the way to assess the skills of those who propose.

I worked for a whole year with people without being able to say that they know their way of working and trust me. . .

I try.

if accreditation happened as for "exclusive" circles?
if I take a random person in the forum, can you find at least another user who worked with him?
If yes, you might think that to enter the consortium you must be "presented" by a partner, who guarantees for him. If the mutual esteem chain does not break at any point, perhaps you could pull into the right people with a lower error rate than other techniques. . .

 

[maxopus]

I worked for a whole year with people without being able to say that they know their way of working and trust me. . .

I try.

if accreditation happened as for "exclusive" circles?
if I take a random person in the forum, can you find at least another user who worked with him?
If yes, you might think that to enter the consortium you must be "presented" by a partner, who guarantees for him. If the mutual esteem chain does not break at any point, perhaps you could pull into the right people with a lower error rate than other techniques. . .

Sounds like a good idea.
among a little for example, there will be references on our activity (not alone) by users of the well-known forum :biggrin:

 

[maxopus]

As I cannot be part of the exciting project, I would like to ask, as a consolation, to be part of the committee that will select ... the secretaries :biggrin:
to vs. good heart, thank you.

Don't say it.
I would really hope that there was a break for your industry.

 

[maxopus]

This is a consultancy company specialized in business networks.
I really like the idea of the business network.
http://www.sinaptic.it/