Unit 9 - The Key to Management
In this world constant changes are a fact of life. How to act in this changing world, then, presents a real challenge for executives of big businesses today. The leader of a big company shoulders great responsibilities. Naturally, he wants to be absolutely sure he is doing the right thing. But does it follow that he should never take a chance, that he can afford to delay action until he obtains all the information he needs? A good manager draws on the wisdom of committees. But can committees replace individuals? In the selection, the author, a successful businessman himself, expounds his views on these questions, throwing light on mature management.
The Key to Management
Lee Iacocca
If had to sum up in one word the qualities that make a good manager, I'd say that it all comes to decisiveness. You can use the fanciest computers in the world and you can gather all the charts and numbers, but in the end you have to bring all your information together, set up a timetable, and act.
And I don't mean act rashly. In the press, I'm sometimes described as a flamboyant leader and a hip-shooter, a kind of fly-by-the-seat-of-the-pants operator. I may occasionally give that impression, but if that image were really true. I could never have been successful in this business.
Actually, my management style has always been pretty conservative. Wherever I've taken risks, it's been after satisfying myself that the research and the market studies supported my instincts. I may act on my intuition -- but only if my hunches are supported by the facts.
Too many managers let themselves get weighed down in their decision-making, especially those with too much education. I once said to Philip Caldwell, who became the top man at Ford after I left: "The trouble with you, Phil, is that you went to Harvard, where they taught you not to take any action until you've got all the facts. You've got ninety-five percent of them, but it's going to take you another six months to get that last five percent. And by the time you do, your facts will be out of date because the market has already changed. That's what life is all about -- timing."
A good business leader can't operate that way. It's perfectly natural to want the facts and to hold out for the research that guarantees a particular program will work. After all, if you're about to spend $300 million on a new product, you want to be absolutely sure you're on the right track.
That's fine in theory, but real life just doesn't work that way. Obviously, you're responsible for gathering as many relevant facts and projections as you possibly can. But at some point you've got to take that leap of faith. First, because even the right decision is wrong if it's made too late. Second, because in most cases there's no such thing as certainty. There are times when even the best manager is like the little boy with the big dog waiting to see where the dog wants to go so he can take him there.
What constitutes enough information for the decision-maker? It's impossible to put a number on it, but clearly when you move ahead with only 50 percent of the facts the odds are stacked against you. If that's the case, you had better be very lucky -- or else come up with some terrific hunches. There are times when that kind of gamble is called for, but it's certainly no way to run a railroad.
At the same time, you'll never know 100 percent of what you need. Like many industries these days, the car business is constantly changing. For us in Detroit, the great challenge is always to figure out what's going to appeal to customers three years down the road. I'm writing these words in 1984, and we're already planning our models for 1987 and 1988. Somehow I have to try to predict what's going to sell three and four years from now, even though I can't say with any certainty what the public will want next month.
When you don't have all the facts, you sometimes have to draw on your experience. Whenever I read in a newspaper that Lee Iacocca likes to shoot from the hip, I say to myself: "Well, maybe he's been shooting for so long that by this time he has a pretty good idea of how to hit the target."
To a certain extent, I've always operated by gut feeling. I like to be in the trenches. I was never one of those guys who could just sit around and strategize endlessly.
But there's a new breed of businessmen, mostly people with M. B. A.' S, who are wary of intuitive decisions. In part, they're right. Normally, intuition is not a good enough basis for making a move. But many of these guys go to the opposite extreme. They seem to think that every business problem can be structured and reduced to a case study. That may be true in school, but in business there has to be somebody around who will say: "Okay, folks, it's time. Be ready to go in one hour." When I read historical accounts of Wolrd War II and D-Day, I'm always struck by the same thought: Eisenhower almost blew it because he kept vacillating. But finally he said: "No matter what the weather looks like, we have to go ahead now. Waiting any longer could be even more dangerous. So let's move it!"
The same lesson applies to corporate life. There will always be those who will want to take an extra month or two to do further research on the shape of the roof on a new car. While that research may be helpful, it can wreak havoc on your production plans. After a certain point, when most of the relevant facts are in, you find yourself at the mercy of the law of diminishing returns.
That's why a certain amount of risk-taking is essential. I realize it's not for everybody. There are some people who won't leave home in the morning without an umbrella even if the sun is shining. Unfortunately, the world doesn't always wait for you try to anticipate your losses. Sometimes you just have to take a chance -- and correct your mistakes as you go along.
Back in the 1960s and through most of the 1970s, these things didn't matter as much as they do now. In those days the car industry was like a golden goose. We were making money almost without trying. But today, few businesses can afford the luxury of slow decision-making, whether it involves a guy who's in the wrong job or the planning of a whole new line of cars five years down the road.
Despite what the textbooks say, most important decisions in corporate life are made by individuals, not by committees. My policy has always been to be democratic all the way to the point of decision. Then I become the ruthless commander. "Okay, I've heard everybody," I say. "Now here's what we're going to do."
You always need committees, because that's where people share their knowledge and intentions. But when committees replace individuals -- and Ford these days has more committees than General Motors -- then productivity begins to decline.
To sum up: nothing stands still in this world. I like to go duck hunting, where constant movement and change are facts of life. You can aim at a duck and get it in your sights, but the duck is always moving. In order to hit the duck, you have to move your gun. But a committee faced with a major decision can't always move as quickly as the events it's trying to respond to. By the time the committee is ready to shoot, the duck has flown away.
参考译文——管理的关键
在这个世界上，不断的变化是生活的事实。如何在这个不断变化的世界中行动，对当今大企业的高管们来说真是个挑战。大公司的领导责任重大，当然，想确保自己所做之事绝对正确。但这是否意味着他永远不该冒险，可以推迟行动，直到获取他所需的全部信息才能行动？一个好的管理者会利用委员会的智慧。但委员会能取代个人吗？本文作者自己就是一位成功的商人，他阐述了他对上述问题的看法，帮助我们理解什么是成熟的管理。
管理的关键
李·艾柯卡
如果要用一个词来概括一个好经理的品质，我会说这一切都取决于果断。你可以使用世界上最先进的计算机收集所有的图表和数字，但最终你必须把所有的信息汇集在一起，制定时间表，然后采取行动。
我并不是指草率行事。在媒体上，我有时被描述为一个浮华的领导者和一个鲁莽行事者，一个凭直觉行事的人。我可能偶尔会给人留下这样的印象，但如果我真是这种人，我是不会有今天的成功的。
事实上，我的管理风格一直相当保守。每次我要采取冒险行动时，我都要看研究情况和市场调研是否支持我的直觉。我可以凭直觉行事——但前提是我的直觉必须得到事实的支持。
很多管理者，尤其是那些受过很多教育的管理者，在做决策时让自己感到压力重重。菲利普·考德威尔在我离开福特公司后成为了该公司的头号人物，我曾对他说：“菲尔，你的问题是你上过哈佛，在那里他们教你在掌握所有事实之前不要采取任何行动。你已收集了百分之九十五的事实，但你还需要六个月才能拿到最后的百分之五。当你开始行动的时候，你将发现收集到的事实已经过时，因为市场已经发生了变化。你将错失那个最重要的因素——时机。”
一个好的商业领袖是不能这样做事的。为了保证项目的有效性，了解事实并坚持研究是可以理解的。毕竟，如果你要在一个新产品上花费3亿美元，你必须确保你在正确的轨道上行进。
理论上这样做很好，但现实生活中并非如此。显然，你有责任收集尽可能多的相关事实和预测。但某些情况下，你得改变一下你的这一信念。为什么这么说？首先，即使是正确的决定，如果做得太晚也是错误的；其次，大多数情况下，没有所谓的“绝对正确”。有时候，即使是最好的经理也会像一个牵着一只大狗的小男孩，等着看大狗想去哪里，然后带它去那里。
对于决策者来说，什么构成了足够的信息？不可能给出一个数字。但很明显，当你只掌握了50%的事实时，你的胜算不大。这种情况下，除非你非常幸运，否则你会产生一些可怕的预感。有时需要进行这种赌博，但这肯定不是经营铁路的办法。
同时，你永远不会百分之百地知道你需要什么。像现在的许多行业一样，汽车行业也在不断变化。对我们底特律人来说，最大的挑战总是要弄清楚三年后什么会吸引顾客。现在是1984年，但我们已经在计划1987年和1988年的车型了。我需要预测三、四年后的什么车卖得好，尽管我连下个月消费者想要什么车型都吃不准。
当你没有掌握所有的事实时，你有时不得不借鉴你的经验。每当我在报纸上看到有人报道李·艾科卡喜欢鲁莽行事时，我对自己说：“嗯，也许他已经投篮很长时间了，现在，他已经非常清楚如何投中了。”
在某种程度上，我总是凭直觉行事。我喜欢待在战壕里。我从来不是那种坐在那里没完没了地制定战略的人。
但也有一些新一代的商人，大多是拥有工商管理硕士学位的人，他们对直觉决策持谨慎态度。在某种程度上，他们是对的。通常情况下，凭直觉行事并不是一个好的做法。但其中很多人走向了另一个极端。他们似乎认为可以将每一个业务问题结构化并简化为案例研究。在学校可能是这样，但在商业领域，必须有人说：“好了，伙计们，是时候了。准备好一小时后出发了！”每当我阅读二战和诺曼底登陆的历史资料时，我总是有这样的想法：“艾森豪威尔几乎把事情搞砸了，因为他一直犹豫不决。但最后他说：’不管天气如何，我们现在都得继续。再等下去可能会更危险。所以我们走吧！’”
同样的教训也适用于企业经营。总会有人想多花一两个月的时间对新车的车顶形状做进一步的研究。虽然这项研究可能会有所帮助，但它可能会对你的生产计划造成严重破坏。过了一段时间，当大多数相关事实都收集到位时，你将会发现自己不得不面对收益递减定律的作用。
这就是为什么一定程度的冒险是必要的。我意识到这不适合每个人。有些人早上不带雨伞就不会出门，即使阳光明媚。不幸的是，这个世界并不总会留给你时间让你去预测你要承担的损失。有时候，你只需抓住一个机会，在前进的过程中不断改正错误。
在20世纪60年代和70年代的大部分时间里，这些事情不像现在那么重要。在那些日子里，汽车工业就像一只金鹅。我们几乎不费吹灰之力就赚了钱。但如今，无论是有关一个不称职的员工的决定，还是一条全新汽车生产线的五年规划，很少有企业能承担得起决策缓慢的后果。
不管教科书上怎么说，企业经营中最重要的决定都是由个人做出的，而不是由委员会做出的。我的策略是在做决策之前的过程一直采用民主方式，在做决策那一刻，我就变身为无情的指挥官——“好吧，我已经听到了你们每个人的声音，”我说，“现在我们要做的是……”
任何时候你都需要委员会，因为那是人们分享知识和意愿的地方。但当委员会取代个人时——如今福特的委员会比通用汽车多——生产率会开始下降。
总结一下：这个世界上没有什么东西是静止的。我喜欢去猎鸭，猎鸭过程中要面对不断的运动和变化。你可以瞄准一只进入你的视线的鸭子，但是鸭子总是在移动，为了击中鸭子，你必须移动你的枪。但是一个面临重大决策的委员会不可能总是像它试图应对的事件那样迅速行动。当委员会准备射击时，鸭子已经飞走了。
注：博主基于百度翻译校译而成。
参考资料：
扫一扫
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
