February 24, 2003 in the small town
from saulieu to the heart of burgundy on
the morvan plateau a drama is playing a
human drama a family drama
a man father of family heads
corporate is killing himself this man
is called bernard loiseau
he is the best known chef
in France the most media one who
carries the image of gastronomy
French
he kills himself for reasons
for reasons quite
personal next morning his teams
a hundred people are gathered at
this place in the restaurant and live these
dramas is trying to survive these dramas
somehow
and then decides to continue to continue
his work because they do not want
that bernard birds die a second
time
but behind that is this commitment to
continue to ask a question
fundamental is a kind of paradox a
daylight so quickly is that
all the teams to the conviction
they know how to do
sir the bird was enough a
aspiring sir the bird was
enough in a logic of
delegation so that they have the
conviction of knowing how to turn the
restaurant so they have the
conviction of knowing makes return
the hotel but nevertheless despite this
conviction he asks himself this question is
what we will be able to continue without
him this question has a scope a lot
more fundamental beyond this drama
corporate beyond this
business problem
this question to a problematic
fundamental has a much wider scope
fundamental that is the question that is
pose a lot of companies that are
faced with innovation today
to what extent the company
can the organization itself
bring innovation the ability
innovation
the question that arises is that of
relationship between the individual’s talent so
bernard loiseau who were all in
this company who was the leader
charismatic the one for whom we are
was rising in the morning who was the creator
he had great ideas
of plates to be that they were going to be
à la carte
the communicator the one who passes to the
radio on Sunday to tell people
come and to pass on his passion
and to convey to people the envied of
come and taste what makes and the manager
charismatic he was also obviously
the entrepreneur and so when this
individual talent disappears what is it
who stays in the company
what’s left of his capacity
of innovation what is left of his
creative ability
that’s the question that’s very, very
concretely to the company Bernard
the water is behind this question
it’s the question of the relationship between them
talent individuals and processes between the
individual dimension and dimension
collective of creation I was
questioned by this problem
company that echoed
much more fundamental issues like
I say that echoed in Chili
my background very young I was
passionate about two things first the
organizational thing how do we get
to make people work together this
which is what always fascinates me
much
and then fascinated by activities
particular which are the activities of
creation found in the kitchen
but also in the perfume in the game
fashion video in the cinema in the
design and I finally did I
built my craft around these two
activities on mission to understand
finally how organizations
get to build around this
creative activity and this drama in
the company bernard loiseau arrival
for me as a species of both
challenges and and buoys
challenge because in my course of
management researcher I was interested in
process to organizations and
finally putting a little bit to
the gap the individuals when we look
things with an eye managers
or organizers
finally individuals can be
considered as substitutable the notion
talent question is that it’s
what a talent we do not know too much so we
focuses instead on the on the
organizations and processes
alas this drama will bring back this question
talent ahead and saying that’s it
what room does this individual have for
report to the rest of the organization is
in fact the question arose
obviously of your senses what place what
role plays the organization and the
process in a company that is
creative then there after this commitment
the question one of the questions that will
pose and that’s who will replace bernard
in its various functions
and especially in cooking the function of
creation
and there the answer seems obvious
patrick bertrand and his second since 21
years old patrick bertron runs the kitchens
patrick bertron offers dishes that
are put on the map and patrick bertrand
has the reputation of making bernard
better than bernard loiseau
so obviously the question does arise
it hardly seems obvious
so I met all of
teams and notably patrick yet
when one asks when asked the
question he accepts but in his head
the question he asks himself is this
that I am capable
second paradox that echoes that makes
echo the first and why he does
would not he be able they were
all he creates he ran the kitchens
and his dishes were set to the map is in
does this fundamental question
is about the same as the one that
I asked earlier is to say the
role of the organization’s processes by
compared to talent when we analyze the
things we realize they
did almost everything he did
did not make patrick propose
dishes and ultimately the one who committed
to say it’s this dish the wii we go
put on the map
it was bernard loiseau
and all the disarray of the organization
in this context it’s finally the
disarray of an organization lost
person who had a vision and who
has to pass all its
teams and who was taking a whole
organization
behind this vision a vision
perfectly subjective dish best
that others is not a direction
better than another but he had
functions and this ability to
take the teams behind their vision
subjective
is patrick bertrand able to do
that he himself does not know because he
has never been in a position to do it
from the moment I have to decide if
the dish I have designed deserves to be
the map
the phrase he uses is what
my palace will live up to a
three-star restaurant he never
been in this situation to decide so
he doubts that he lives understands himself
easily
and that tells us a lot about the ability
creative organizations it’s based
also about those individuals who have this
ability claimed a voice a
subjectivity so patrick bertron
takes over the kitchens first creates
started to reproduce the recipes of
bernard loiseau to reassure for
ensure the entire environment and
little by little since it is a
ordination of creation is brought to
propose new dishes and then
a few months after a new drama that
does not have the same magnitude as the previous one
obviously is played in this same
business
the right arm of Bernard Loiseau
who runs the restaurant starts to
retry the dishes of patrick bertrand
No, it’s not Bernardian
do not respect the identity of the
restaurant and so these two people
who are confronting two people who
were companion bernard drive
folks of people who have it
accompanied for over 20 years and
each with a very perception
different from what to do with this
we must do
where is the truth there is no truth
absolutely no truth no judge of
peace the only justice of the peace
unfortunately passed away
and so the question that all this poses
that’s how in this context where there is
has no truth that’s needed objective
how to organize the decision in his
creative activities the choice that was
done is to say the house must
move forward must go forward we have
decided we had a creator and so
it is given free hands and so to
from that moment it is he who
must decide the director of the restaurant
history was sidelined
second drama or third drama for
this house and then the establishment
continued to continue his adventure
when we look a little more
precisely on how this product
the creative activity in fact it’s a
collective activity
in any case in the operation of
patrick today he relies on two
seconds of young people who are very
talented who have very very beautiful
course in big houses that
will feed him bring their ideas
bring their knowledge to bring
their expertise that is a bit different
of hers because in a little less
of experience and the process is the
next patrick bertron offers a theme
which is often around a star product
the products we expect to find
in a big restaurant like that of
the gold coast to saulieu for example the
maury and then the ideas fuse and the
second input different ideas on
what techniques on which
accompaniment on which way of
stay and that’s all in a game of
going back and forth very very fast in
which chief patrick bertron has a role
particular
they play a kind of role
of sorting guys so the ideas he has them
take he hears them and reads yes no yes
no, maybe yes but you have to dig
we deepen and again we see
to appear is to draw what is the
role of the creator in relation to the
collective
so we are in a collective activity
but in which an individual has a role
particular
and this role of the creator is this
final decision
the decision who ultimately
appears throughout the process that
is to assemble take
pick ideas and digging in
digging with him what he appears and
what is the basis for this decision on
several elements first an expertise
technique is that you are the product does not
will not work with such mode of
cooking and that’s an experience
accumulated that relies on one at a time
a huge knowledge and a great
opening which drives all of
creators to always renew themselves
there is always getting rich from
new knowledge and then
comes a second dimension that
is a dimension perfectly
subjective and he has in his head a
more or less precise line on this
that he wants to do who knows more or
less formalized and the proposals that
they are brought in or not in
this line and they play this role of
guarantor of a guideline that still
once is formalized also over
water and this subjectivity is
fundamental why because in the
creation there is a form of comfort to
to assume comfort is no truth
such the idea was the best that of
colo than any other name but at a time
given there is a consistency is the only
guarantee of consistency it’s me and my
intimacy and my deep subjectivity and
my deep story and so we see ourselves
draw this
this balance between the dimension
collective dimension based on
process and an organization of the
creation and the individual dimension
with this essential role given to the
subjectivity
I was talking about vision just now
Bernard Loiseau took his teams
as part of a vision it’s not about
see the future the creators do not see
the future the creators proposes a path
in which they take their team
and the bottom line is that the teams
adhere to this horse to another one
another characteristic of the creators
it’s that they are finally confronted
to in this discomfort to 3 reality the
first reality that of matter
that is, when you have an idea
will have to make sure that this idea
resists the material if I want to cook
the emory in such a way
it will then when concretely
when we cook the emory that it
works
will have to be cooking teams at
moment of the shot when the customers
are there being able with their
skills with the time they have of
realize the the second proposition
reality that imposes itself against the creators
it’s the reality of the organization
and that’s what we see when patrick
bertron offers dishes dassieu taxes
who may be coming out of the line
historical from laon to the bird and that
the organization arrives and tells him no
it’s not the bernard loiseau
this return is classic in any
which organization
yesterday that the organization well you
remember that you are in the process of
away from everything we did by the
past and the third reality that
is imposed to creators to patrick in
the occurrence is that of the market it is
to say that he can say a line
particular his subjectivity put his
precise idea
make sure that they are realized
that the organization does not destroy it
then on to the sanction of the market
that is, the customers will adopt or
not the proposal and all that translates
by this terrible discomfort and who
even defines the creative activity
and that consists of making choices in
a situation of perfect uncertainty and
that’s an extremely rare quality and
extremely difficult the lafa is not there
to make history but the following of
the story what is it fifteen
years after the establishment to lose a
star for different reasons than
teams do not necessarily have yet
still in the meantime patrick
bertron had kept the stars
for at least 13 years so even more
that bernard loiseau the group bernard
Loiseau has given up two restaurants to
buy or recreate two more
restaurants committed last year
in an extremely ambitious project
daring to create another
restaurant in saulieu next to the
historic restaurant called
the sessions bird and who is a
restaurant focused on both health and
pleasure is leaning against a huge spa that
gave rise to 1500 square meters
which gave rise to investments
considerable
is that these choices were relevant
it was bold choices in the
extent they are known there is always
there are always reasons for them
challenge
but it’s choices that have been made
by the house today on which
have engaged all the teams
with rather positive results and this
which shows that if we come back on
the starting question that was this is
that now that Bernard Loiseau is
the more we still have this capacity by
go ahead to make decisions
to be creative or innovative following
history has shown that yes this
company today has managed this
extraordinary challenge
[Applause]
from saulieu to the heart of burgundy on
the morvan plateau a drama is playing a
human drama a family drama
a man father of family heads
corporate is killing himself this man
is called bernard loiseau
he is the best known chef
in France the most media one who
carries the image of gastronomy
French
he kills himself for reasons
for reasons quite
personal next morning his teams
a hundred people are gathered at
this place in the restaurant and live these
dramas is trying to survive these dramas
somehow
and then decides to continue to continue
his work because they do not want
that bernard birds die a second
time
but behind that is this commitment to
continue to ask a question
fundamental is a kind of paradox a
daylight so quickly is that
all the teams to the conviction
they know how to do
sir the bird was enough a
aspiring sir the bird was
enough in a logic of
delegation so that they have the
conviction of knowing how to turn the
restaurant so they have the
conviction of knowing makes return
the hotel but nevertheless despite this
conviction he asks himself this question is
what we will be able to continue without
him this question has a scope a lot
more fundamental beyond this drama
corporate beyond this
business problem
this question to a problematic
fundamental has a much wider scope
fundamental that is the question that is
pose a lot of companies that are
faced with innovation today
to what extent the company
can the organization itself
bring innovation the ability
innovation
the question that arises is that of
relationship between the individual’s talent so
bernard loiseau who were all in
this company who was the leader
charismatic the one for whom we are
was rising in the morning who was the creator
he had great ideas
of plates to be that they were going to be
à la carte
the communicator the one who passes to the
radio on Sunday to tell people
come and to pass on his passion
and to convey to people the envied of
come and taste what makes and the manager
charismatic he was also obviously
the entrepreneur and so when this
individual talent disappears what is it
who stays in the company
what’s left of his capacity
of innovation what is left of his
creative ability
that’s the question that’s very, very
concretely to the company Bernard
the water is behind this question
it’s the question of the relationship between them
talent individuals and processes between the
individual dimension and dimension
collective of creation I was
questioned by this problem
company that echoed
much more fundamental issues like
I say that echoed in Chili
my background very young I was
passionate about two things first the
organizational thing how do we get
to make people work together this
which is what always fascinates me
much
and then fascinated by activities
particular which are the activities of
creation found in the kitchen
but also in the perfume in the game
fashion video in the cinema in the
design and I finally did I
built my craft around these two
activities on mission to understand
finally how organizations
get to build around this
creative activity and this drama in
the company bernard loiseau arrival
for me as a species of both
challenges and and buoys
challenge because in my course of
management researcher I was interested in
process to organizations and
finally putting a little bit to
the gap the individuals when we look
things with an eye managers
or organizers
finally individuals can be
considered as substitutable the notion
talent question is that it’s
what a talent we do not know too much so we
focuses instead on the on the
organizations and processes
alas this drama will bring back this question
talent ahead and saying that’s it
what room does this individual have for
report to the rest of the organization is
in fact the question arose
obviously of your senses what place what
role plays the organization and the
process in a company that is
creative then there after this commitment
the question one of the questions that will
pose and that’s who will replace bernard
in its various functions
and especially in cooking the function of
creation
and there the answer seems obvious
patrick bertrand and his second since 21
years old patrick bertron runs the kitchens
patrick bertron offers dishes that
are put on the map and patrick bertrand
has the reputation of making bernard
better than bernard loiseau
so obviously the question does arise
it hardly seems obvious
so I met all of
teams and notably patrick yet
when one asks when asked the
question he accepts but in his head
the question he asks himself is this
that I am capable
second paradox that echoes that makes
echo the first and why he does
would not he be able they were
all he creates he ran the kitchens
and his dishes were set to the map is in
does this fundamental question
is about the same as the one that
I asked earlier is to say the
role of the organization’s processes by
compared to talent when we analyze the
things we realize they
did almost everything he did
did not make patrick propose
dishes and ultimately the one who committed
to say it’s this dish the wii we go
put on the map
it was bernard loiseau
and all the disarray of the organization
in this context it’s finally the
disarray of an organization lost
person who had a vision and who
has to pass all its
teams and who was taking a whole
organization
behind this vision a vision
perfectly subjective dish best
that others is not a direction
better than another but he had
functions and this ability to
take the teams behind their vision
subjective
is patrick bertrand able to do
that he himself does not know because he
has never been in a position to do it
from the moment I have to decide if
the dish I have designed deserves to be
the map
the phrase he uses is what
my palace will live up to a
three-star restaurant he never
been in this situation to decide so
he doubts that he lives understands himself
easily
and that tells us a lot about the ability
creative organizations it’s based
also about those individuals who have this
ability claimed a voice a
subjectivity so patrick bertron
takes over the kitchens first creates
started to reproduce the recipes of
bernard loiseau to reassure for
ensure the entire environment and
little by little since it is a
ordination of creation is brought to
propose new dishes and then
a few months after a new drama that
does not have the same magnitude as the previous one
obviously is played in this same
business
the right arm of Bernard Loiseau
who runs the restaurant starts to
retry the dishes of patrick bertrand
No, it’s not Bernardian
do not respect the identity of the
restaurant and so these two people
who are confronting two people who
were companion bernard drive
folks of people who have it
accompanied for over 20 years and
each with a very perception
different from what to do with this
we must do
where is the truth there is no truth
absolutely no truth no judge of
peace the only justice of the peace
unfortunately passed away
and so the question that all this poses
that’s how in this context where there is
has no truth that’s needed objective
how to organize the decision in his
creative activities the choice that was
done is to say the house must
move forward must go forward we have
decided we had a creator and so
it is given free hands and so to
from that moment it is he who
must decide the director of the restaurant
history was sidelined
second drama or third drama for
this house and then the establishment
continued to continue his adventure
when we look a little more
precisely on how this product
the creative activity in fact it’s a
collective activity
in any case in the operation of
patrick today he relies on two
seconds of young people who are very
talented who have very very beautiful
course in big houses that
will feed him bring their ideas
bring their knowledge to bring
their expertise that is a bit different
of hers because in a little less
of experience and the process is the
next patrick bertron offers a theme
which is often around a star product
the products we expect to find
in a big restaurant like that of
the gold coast to saulieu for example the
maury and then the ideas fuse and the
second input different ideas on
what techniques on which
accompaniment on which way of
stay and that’s all in a game of
going back and forth very very fast in
which chief patrick bertron has a role
particular
they play a kind of role
of sorting guys so the ideas he has them
take he hears them and reads yes no yes
no, maybe yes but you have to dig
we deepen and again we see
to appear is to draw what is the
role of the creator in relation to the
collective
so we are in a collective activity
but in which an individual has a role
particular
and this role of the creator is this
final decision
the decision who ultimately
appears throughout the process that
is to assemble take
pick ideas and digging in
digging with him what he appears and
what is the basis for this decision on
several elements first an expertise
technique is that you are the product does not
will not work with such mode of
cooking and that’s an experience
accumulated that relies on one at a time
a huge knowledge and a great
opening which drives all of
creators to always renew themselves
there is always getting rich from
new knowledge and then
comes a second dimension that
is a dimension perfectly
subjective and he has in his head a
more or less precise line on this
that he wants to do who knows more or
less formalized and the proposals that
they are brought in or not in
this line and they play this role of
guarantor of a guideline that still
once is formalized also over
water and this subjectivity is
fundamental why because in the
creation there is a form of comfort to
to assume comfort is no truth
such the idea was the best that of
colo than any other name but at a time
given there is a consistency is the only
guarantee of consistency it’s me and my
intimacy and my deep subjectivity and
my deep story and so we see ourselves
draw this
this balance between the dimension
collective dimension based on
process and an organization of the
creation and the individual dimension
with this essential role given to the
subjectivity
I was talking about vision just now
Bernard Loiseau took his teams
as part of a vision it’s not about
see the future the creators do not see
the future the creators proposes a path
in which they take their team
and the bottom line is that the teams
adhere to this horse to another one
another characteristic of the creators
it’s that they are finally confronted
to in this discomfort to 3 reality the
first reality that of matter
that is, when you have an idea
will have to make sure that this idea
resists the material if I want to cook
the emory in such a way
it will then when concretely
when we cook the emory that it
works
will have to be cooking teams at
moment of the shot when the customers
are there being able with their
skills with the time they have of
realize the the second proposition
reality that imposes itself against the creators
it’s the reality of the organization
and that’s what we see when patrick
bertron offers dishes dassieu taxes
who may be coming out of the line
historical from laon to the bird and that
the organization arrives and tells him no
it’s not the bernard loiseau
this return is classic in any
which organization
yesterday that the organization well you
remember that you are in the process of
away from everything we did by the
past and the third reality that
is imposed to creators to patrick in
the occurrence is that of the market it is
to say that he can say a line
particular his subjectivity put his
precise idea
make sure that they are realized
that the organization does not destroy it
then on to the sanction of the market
that is, the customers will adopt or
not the proposal and all that translates
by this terrible discomfort and who
even defines the creative activity
and that consists of making choices in
a situation of perfect uncertainty and
that’s an extremely rare quality and
extremely difficult the lafa is not there
to make history but the following of
the story what is it fifteen
years after the establishment to lose a
star for different reasons than
teams do not necessarily have yet
still in the meantime patrick
bertron had kept the stars
for at least 13 years so even more
that bernard loiseau the group bernard
Loiseau has given up two restaurants to
buy or recreate two more
restaurants committed last year
in an extremely ambitious project
daring to create another
restaurant in saulieu next to the
historic restaurant called
the sessions bird and who is a
restaurant focused on both health and
pleasure is leaning against a huge spa that
gave rise to 1500 square meters
which gave rise to investments
considerable
is that these choices were relevant
it was bold choices in the
extent they are known there is always
there are always reasons for them
challenge
but it’s choices that have been made
by the house today on which
have engaged all the teams
with rather positive results and this
which shows that if we come back on
the starting question that was this is
that now that Bernard Loiseau is
the more we still have this capacity by
go ahead to make decisions
to be creative or innovative following
history has shown that yes this
company today has managed this
extraordinary challenge
[Applause]
Please follow and like us: