Barcelona is an innovative city and home to many international congresses, one of which is Integrated Systems Europe (ISE), which this year has decided to create its own foundation to extend the impact of the event beyond the days of the fair. Glòria Boix assumes the general direction of the ISE Foundation, after more than four years at Barcelona Activa, where she was responsible for strategic projects and City Branding. Previously, she had worked for institutions such as Mobile World Capital Barcelona and Fira de Barcelona, building a career linked to events, city promotion, and digital transformation. She receives The New Barcelona Post at the offices of this new foundation, although she proudly confesses that they will probably have to leave because "they have become too small." With the executive, we talk about the audiovisual sector and integrated systems and, above all, she refutes the idea of verticality linked to traditional economic sectors. For her, her sector is transversal and very relevant, as in a few years it concentrates 14% of employment in Catalonia.
—Congratulations on the ISE Foundation. Before talking about the foundation, let's talk about the audiovisual sector you are entering and the ecosystem being created in Catalonia. Is it a growing market?
—The audiovisual and integrated systems sector—which are not quite the same—has been growing for years, about 5-10 years, since analyses have been available, because sometimes it's hard to have specific consecutive comparative data. It is a very relevant sector for Catalonia. It complements the arrival of ISE very well, but there was already a very powerful creative and audiovisual sector in the country. According to the latest study by the Generalitat, the sector represents almost 14% of employment, with 45,000 workers and 8,000 companies. Many are small, SMEs or micro-SMEs, but it is a very relevant sector in terms of economic value and employment.
—Who do we look up to? Is there a mecca?
—More than a mecca, each territory seeks its own space, because each territory has a specific DNA. There are learnings from other European or global territories that you can base yourself on, but I wouldn't say there's a specific place to mirror oneself in. You might think we should look at American audiovisual or that of other territories, but that wouldn't be true, because the base of companies and talent is different. This mirroring is difficult and I don't particularly like it. It does work in strategy, when you're trying to do a specific benchmark. In video games, for example, you can look at Berlin, Copenhagen, and London, and France also has a couple of very interesting locations, but we don't just mirror ourselves in one place.
The most important thing to explain, and what ISE has started to do and the Foundation will also try, is how integrated systems impact many sectors transversally. Traditionally, we all associate them with professional audiovisual, but they already significantly impact other sectors: video games, residential, hospitality, educational centers. The sector itself seeks new opportunities and has diversified. The surname "audiovisual" is complementary. These are solutions that were applied to audiovisual and are now also applied to other sectors, with this transversality in integrated systems.
The surname "audiovisual" is complementary. These are solutions that were applied to audiovisual and are now also applied to other sectors
—You mentioned DNA. Could you define the DNA of the Catalan audiovisual and integrated systems ecosystem?
—It's delicate, especially because I'd like to have more consistent data and studies. There are several well-done studies: at the territorial level, usually the Generalitat and Acció, and there are also local ones. A map of creative industries in the metropolitan area had been made. But defining the DNA is like talking about the specific brands of territories: they are very plural, all agents contribute, and definitions don't always help to have a consistent perspective, because it depends a lot on how you want to look at it. I think it would be very necessary now to do new analyses of how it's being implemented, because often the taxonomy is old and doesn't do justice to what's happening on the street.
—What would you say is the weakness of this sector?
—More than a weakness, the sectoral structure is an evidence, both in local and autonomous analyses, as well as in European ones: it is a very atomized sector, with micro-SMEs and SMEs. Evidently, there are some large companies, but, comparatively with other traditional sectors, the approach and the challenges vary substantially, because in other sectors there is normally a base of very large companies and a chain scaled in volume. Here the starting point is many very creative people with small companies, which have other requirements, whether to grow or to provide a specific improvement. I speak purely in economic terms. At a socioeconomic scale, I think it is a gift to have such a plural sector. Well coordinated, it can be a very powerful ecosystem, where development and wealth would be much more distributed. But there are specific challenges, because size affects when you want to grow or compete.
—Barcelona had become the city of start-ups and now we need the city of scale-ups. There must be companies that are not so small, or at least more diverse, that can achieve more.
—This is not exclusive to Barcelona or Catalonia. It has happened all over Europe, and not only in this sector: Europe has learned and done its homework in company generation. There have been many policies and good aids, but there has also been a private sector, and public-private interactions have made us all learn what the shortcomings and challenges were and how to address them. This has led to the growth of large digital hubs in Europe, and Barcelona has known how to take advantage of it and is one of them. But scalability is a European, continental challenge, because it is not even resolved from a state point of view: due to competition in a globalized environment, you are always in almost continental terms. That is why aid, support, financing, and investment rounds must be approached from another perspective.
—We are talking about this single market that is also demanded in other sectors, a single European market where everyone can enter and play.
—Again, in this sector and in many others, it would be favorable to speak in terms of European development, growth, and competitiveness. I believe it is evident, with enough analyses both at the continental level and at the scale of each of the European areas, that they could play a very relevant role from a global point of view.
—In Catalonia, should audiovisual and integrated systems be a country strategy?
—Given the high percentage of occupation and what it represents in the economic sphere, I think so. And not only in the economic part, but also in the social and demographic part. Creativity drives innovation. It has been seen that initially more disadvantaged areas, when artists and creators arrive, come to have a much higher economic development and a much more cohesive social part. We are not just talking about having more companies and them earning more, which is one of the clear desires of many of us, but also about a cultural offer, more beautiful and aesthetic environments, and a much higher social integration. The creative sector has both assets. That is why I believe that there is a strong commitment to it and it has been tried for many years, but, precisely because the idiosyncrasy is a little different from that of other sectors, different strategies and lines of action must be sought.
—Do you notice this public will in public-private collaboration? One thing is for companies to see it as a country strategy, but does the public sector also have this will, or at least to move towards it together?
—I think so. Both the indicators and what we receive from large and not so large companies, international or local, that participate in the ISE, as well as from the public administration and other public and private agents. Collaboration is a very relevant asset. I believe that territorially Catalonia has done its homework and has learned to make this public-private contribution. In fact, the international people who come to us, and not only in this sector, see us as an example of this collaboration and this exploitation, of this legacy that we like so much in Barcelona, of what extrapolation it has had, not only economically but also for the territory and socially. This has been analyzed from abroad for many years, and we can be proud of it.
—Let's talk about the ISE Foundation. The first context I had of this type of foundations is the Mobile World Capital, which arose from the arrival and consolidation of the Mobile World Congress. I understand that it is similar: a congress of this level sets up a foundation here. Is it a way to generate impact on the residents of Barcelona and Catalonia? Why is a foundation created as a result of such a congress?
—The ISE, AVIXA and CEDIA own this foundation, have supported it and have found its vision, obviously with the CEO of ISE, Mike Blackman. The vision is analogous or parallel to the MWC: from a great event, a great gathering, the aim is to create a positive impact on the territory. It is a way of giving something to a territory that, paraphrasing the founders, "has treated us very well": the public sector has made them do much better as a business, and they want to have a return to the environment that has welcomed them. There is the perspective of being a contributing part for the territory and a second facet: to be so that the sector also does better. If we put the two together, we have the birth and the foundational part of the ISE Foundation.
—What can the ISE Foundation specifically bring to Barcelona?
—We gather the potential of ISE, which is the most important fair in its segment of integrated systems, with all the industry, knowledge and content part. Every year very relevant people from each sector come, and it diversifies and grows more and more every day. In fact, this year Fira de Barcelona is becoming too small and Palau 8 of Montjuïc is opening with two new initiatives: Spark and EdTech, within an agreement with the Educational Cluster of Catalonia. It is, on the one hand, an initiative to integrate these technologies and integrated systems in the educational field, and on the other, they are solutions for creatives. The Foundation's will is to extrapolate what happens during four days and take advantage of these opportunities throughout the year, with specific lines and initiatives to happen here throughout the year: challenges in education, generation and growth of companies, applications of these solutions.
—There is a quite controversial point, also in other sectors, which is the transfer of knowledge. We have large research centers in Catalonia and many times companies talk about a gap between what is studied and what is assembled. Is this also seen in this sector, or is there more communication between the private innovative part and these centers?
—I believe they don't go separately, neither in this sector nor in any other. What happens is that start-ups and spin-offs born in a research center usually have a much longer profitability cadence. We have all learned quickly, at a European level, to make a rapid transfer in digital sectors, where the market arrival cadence is shorter, 3 to 4 years until you make the start-up profitable. In contrast, in specific spin-off sectors, we usually talk about 6 to 8 years. In the sector we are talking about, this transfer or the willingness to transfer is there. The other thing is that it is costly and slow, and we often want results very quickly or we look for them in too tight a way. I think it is done reasonably well, but here it is not how many start-ups emerge, but how many are maintained and how many we manage to get, perhaps in some scalability program, to gain in volume of workers and turnover. This should be everyone's will.
—In terms of talent, do we have enough Catalan talent to supply this sector in Catalonia?
—Companies ask us for two things. One is volume of talent, because in certain specific profiles there seems to be a shortage. Does this mean we have few people? This is a part we need to analyze well, because technologies, not only in this sector but in general, solutions, or where you apply them, advance very quickly. I think it has to be a mix. On the one hand, promoting sectoral vocations. On the other, professional training: that professionals who are now training and those who are already in the sector acquire new competencies, a kind of reskilling constant, which is almost a mandate that has fallen to our generation in technological terms, wherever you work. You have to keep up to date and make constant reactualizations. And then there is all the existing talent, even from other sectors, that could enter: data analysis, artificial intelligence... There are many areas that intersect, with a lot of intersection, it is multisectoral. A lot of talent that perhaps exists is not looking or not thinking directly about the sector, and does not reach the relevant places.
A lot of talent that perhaps exists is not looking in the sector, and does not reach the relevant places
—Is this due to a lack of clarity in training spaces?
—Not so much a lack of clarity. As we said about the sectoral analysis, and I want to elevate it beyond our sector, we start from relatively verticalized taxonomies, and the transversality that technology has brought us in the last 20-30 years has meant that, in some cases, these taxonomies have fallen short or are partial. I think the same thing happens in the training part: technology advances very quickly, probably faster than curricular lines can adapt. Furthermore, today's jobs have nothing to do with those of 30 years ago. Among all of us, we must understand what training we need according to the type of tasks, and not so much what specific training serves to enter a sector. This is everyone's job, not just our sector, but many.
—What role can, or do you want, the ISE Foundation to play in this training space?
—Since the foundation is born now, this summer (we started in July), we are in a phase, so to speak, of zero: of building the structure and governance models, talking with many, many people, public and private, who would like to accompany us in this vision. But ISE had already started some return or social impact activities, and we will continue to do some of them. From now until the end of the year, we have proposed three initiatives in talent and training and three to help innovation and company generation, more focused on entrepreneurship.
In terms of training, ISE can provide technical knowledge and content updates. We work with AVIXA and CEDIA, which annually conduct a sectoral analysis of audiovisual and integrated systems applied to many sectors, and they also have the training component, meaning they have the great experts in 'the advancement of these new technologies. We have already started: in July we conducted training aimed at teachers, with the aim of updating some audiovisual concepts. Now we are also working with the Department of Education of the Generalitat to try to help propose a professional audiovisual curriculum, with international or national professors, who can accompany vocational training students, special regime students, etc. AVIXA has a certification, the CTS, which is the globally accepted certification as the highest or the one that provides the greatest update. Normally, it is valid for 3 years and those who have it must constantly update themselves. These are some of the concepts that ISE wants and is eager to bring so that there are better professionals who can enter the sector, or people who can consider entering it.
—And on the other side, in entrepreneurship, what does ISE want to contribute when it comes to starting companies and start-ups?
—A year and a half ago, with the desire they already had to set up the foundation, they wanted to generate this impact and were looking for the formula. Finally, they saw that a foundation would be pertinent for this annual cadence and for things to happen throughout the year. Until then, however, within the event they created the Innovation Park, which has several facets. It is a physical part located in the middle of the fair, where there is a specific call for start-ups with a jury that selects which ones can participate. A high degree of innovation is sought, and start-ups can only repeat one year: every two years they are renewed. Many of them end up doing well and can be in other spaces. It is a boost to showcase companies that normally could not be at ISE, due to costs and space.
In parallel, a hackathon is organized with students from most local universities and also international universities. There is significant accompaniment and follow-up of the challenges and prechallenges, and now we are in this process of selecting prechallenges. The objective is for the large companies participating in ISE to be able to detect both specific companies and relevant talent, at a European level.
There is another activity that does not take place within the fair but at the top, the Investors Forum. Also a year and a half ago, it was parallel, and these three activities were modeled to bring solutions to the challenge presented by the sector from a business point of view. A group of investors has been created who participate annually in the ISE, and the mission is for more to come, of greater magnitude, or for other investors who until now had not considered investing in this sector to do so and consider it a relevant sector in which to invest.
—Has it been understood by investors that this is a relevant sector?
—I believe that there are increasingly more investors who were not in these segments and now are, and the great challenge is for there to be more and with greater purchasing power. That is what everyone ultimately wants, and the foundation wants to contribute firmly to it. After the February fair, we would like to continue with activities in these three lines of innovation throughout the year. Now, mentoring is concentrated at the event, but we believe it can be done throughout the year, as can the work with investors and with start-ups. We are building within the 3-year strategic plan, from 2027 to 2029, which will specify the specific lines we will follow.
—We have talked about a sector of SMEs and micro-SMEs, without a large company behind it. Following this DNA: is it necessary to have large companies for the sector to grow, or can it continue to grow and be relevant with an ecosystem of small and medium-sized companies, as is the case in Catalonia?
—I think so, precisely because it is becoming multi-sectoral, and there are some large ones. The issue is the specific application and whether they are located here or not. We should specify which territory we are talking about: Catalonia, metropolitan area, national or European. It is relevant because sometimes, when it suits us, we segment territorially and, when it doesn't, we don't, and that doesn't help. The sector is growing and evidently needs more investment and scale; any sector wants this, because it is the goal of any company. Do we need large companies? There are already some. Do we want more? Yes, but it is not my place, from a foundation, to say so: it is a question that administrations would answer more.
—It wasn't whether we want more, as if they are necessary for growth not to stop, or if one can live without large companies?
—The analogy that happens in other sectors does not happen here. In our sector, it has other rules of the game because the base is different. It is difficult to say if they are necessary, because here the necessity is usually investment. From there, the market does its job. If they then acquire each other... it's a question I don't know how to answer, nor would I dare.
—The last question, artificial intelligence. In the audiovisual sector, there has been fear of images that can be generated alone and that are constantly improving, and the production part is modified. And in integrated systems, like residential, AI can help control everything from a single space. What role does AI play? Is it seen as a threat or as a great tool?
—AI is seen as both. There is a lot of social concern, and it's good that there is, and it's not only applied to our sector, which has also been impacted in a very relevant way. Technology, according to the European vision at least, must help humans to do certain things and to improve, automating what a human should not have to do. How it is used and where it is applied is everyone's job, and it involves a lot of politics, a lot of interrelation, and a lot of public-private consensus. It is difficult to say if it is an opportunity or a threat, because what happens is that it has impacted us in a revolutionary and critical way, and we are slower to think about how we want to use it than the actual use we all make of it. That is why there is the joy of some, the threatening voice of others, or both at the same time in many of us, when it comes to understanding how, what, and when it should be used.
There is a part that is very relevant for creators and must be said: image rights, royalties. The regulatory part is always subsequent to the use that has already been made, and many creatives feel ignored because this use has been improper or because there was no legal or juridical void that covered it as many would like. I don't have a position, but I believe that we all need to talk about it a lot, because it impacts all of us, in any sector, to try to accelerate this period of reflection. We are always lagging behind: use overtakes us before we ponder why we want to use it.