經(jīng)濟動蕩：商界急需喬布斯式的勇氣
|
不要輕率裁員 ????經(jīng)濟前景不確定時，大規(guī)模裁員看起來是難以抗拒的選擇——承擔(dān)一筆遣散費之后，節(jié)省成本的效果立竿見影。上次經(jīng)濟危機的時候隨處可見超級大裁員，如今它們又再次流行了起來?？纯淬y行業(yè)的情況吧：匯豐銀行（HSBC）將裁員30,000人，美國銀行計劃裁掉3,500-1,0000人，瑞銀集團（UBS）裁3,500人，荷蘭銀行（ABN Amro）2,350人。 ????有時候裁員確實是無法避免的，但是勇敢的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人深知裁員的長期后果，以及在困難時期與員工同舟共濟的長遠效益，這些效應(yīng)的影響往往遠超過裁員在短期內(nèi)帶來的成本節(jié)約。 ????經(jīng)理人們再次喊冤，稱華爾街逼迫他們通過裁員來大幅降低開支，這同樣并非事實。貝恩咨詢公司（Bain & Co.）的研究顯示，如果某公司最近進行了收購，為整合而炒掉一批冗員，那投資者或許會表示贊許?？扇绻兇獍巡脝T當成降低成本的手段，正如眼下許多公司的做法，那華爾街只會認為這暗示公司陷入了麻煩，結(jié)果導(dǎo)致股價走低。 大舉行動 ????面臨危險時，怯懦的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人往往無所事事，他們擔(dān)心任何行動都有風(fēng)險，因此寧愿什么都不做，但這么做并不見得更安全。動蕩時期的贏家都是英勇之士，而輸家往往是謹小慎微的騎墻派。 ????或許你正致力于繼續(xù)在創(chuàng)造價值的項目上進行投資，哪怕會影響近期利潤——這很好；或許世道艱難促使你警醒，發(fā)現(xiàn)公司虛耗了太多費用，準備借此機會深度削減成本，并優(yōu)化整個組織——那也很不錯。麥肯錫（McKinsey）的研究表明，在以往的衰退中，采納上述兩種策略的公司表現(xiàn)都很好，而表現(xiàn)最糟糕的正是那些怯懦的中間派——那些只敢因形勢所迫而削減一些開支，而沒有遠大戰(zhàn)略的公司。這給我們的啟發(fā)是：判斷自己的公司現(xiàn)在到底需要什么，然后鼓起勇氣大舉行動。 ????亞里斯多德曾把勇氣稱為第一種美德，塞繆爾?約翰遜則稱之為最偉大的德行。他們的理由如出一轍：勇氣使其他所有德行成為可能。勇氣意味著承擔(dān)風(fēng)險，這一點在宏觀環(huán)境本身的風(fēng)險急劇增加時變得困難得多，眼下正是這樣的時刻。正因為此，目前的時局才使贏家和輸家之間的差距如此明顯。 ????眼下，承擔(dān)風(fēng)險令人恐懼。不過，正如喬布斯、巴菲特和其他商界精英不斷向我們揭示的那樣，甘冒風(fēng)險是目前唯一的希望所在。 ????譯 小宇 |
Rethinking layoffs ????Mass firings seem irresistible in uncertain times -- after the company takes a charge for severance costs, the savings are immediate. Huge layoffs were everywhere in the last recession, and they're definitely in fashion again. Look at banking: HSBC (HBC) will lay off 30,000, Bank of America 3,500 to 10,000, UBS (UBS) 3,500, ABN Amro 2,350. ????Sometimes layoffs are truly unavoidable. But brave leaders know that the long-term costs of layoffs, and the long-term benefits of keeping employees through tough times, are often far greater than any near-term savings from firing workers. ????Here again, managers claim Wall Street forces them to whack expenses through layoffs, and again it isn't true. Investors might reward a firm for firing people as it combines with a recently bought company, says Bain & Co. research. But if you're laying off employees strictly as a cost-cutting measure, like many companies today, Wall Street will likely see it as a sign of trouble and send your stock down. Going big ????What fearful leaders often do in perilous times is nothing. Worried that any action is risky, they sit still. But they aren't safe. The winners in uncertain times are the bold, and the losers are often the cautious hedgers. ????Maybe you're committed to continuing to spend on value creating projects, even if reported profits take a hit -- that's great. Or maybe the tough times have awakened you to your company's insanely bloated spending, and you're seizing this opportunity to slash costs deeply and rationalize the whole organization -- that's great too. McKinsey research shows that in past recessions, companies that followed either path did best. It was the timid middle -- those that cut just enough to get by without forming a larger strategy -- that did worst. The lesson: Decide what your business needs now, and be brave enough to go big. ????Aristotle called courage the first virtue, and Samuel Johnson called it the greatest. Their reasoning was the same: It makes all the other virtues possible. Courage means taking risks, and that becomes much more difficult when the environment itself becomes dramatically riskier, as it is now. That's why times like these so violently separate winners from losers. ????Taking risks now is frightening. But as Jobs, Buffett, and other business champions keep showing us, it's your only hope. |
最新文章