Five Paradoxes of the New Economy 新经济的五大悖论
大耳朵英语  http://www.bigear.cn  2006-07-13 00:05:03  【打印
David H. Komanshy (中文名:郭铭基),美林集团董事长兼首席执行官。1939年4月27日出生。毕业于迈阿密大学的会计专业。参加过哈佛大学的高级主管人员研修班。郭铭基具有惊人的演讲才华,加上其资深的金融行业阅历,被称为美国金融界的代言人。
美林集团具有100多年的历史,是全世界最大的全球性综合投资银行,主要为各类企业、政府机构以及个人投资者提供投资、融资、咨询及财务顾问等服务。在美国《幸福》杂志全球500强的证券投资业公司中排名第一。
本文是郭铭基先生宾夕法尼亚大学沃顿商学院的演讲。沃顿商学院是全球MBA排名第一的商学院。译文由付继锋先生提供。


"Five Paradoxes of the New Economy"
Wharton School of Business
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


I'm happy to be here at Wharton, traditionally a wonderful source of Merrill Lynch talent. But I'm not here on a recruiting trip. My purpose today is much broader. I'm here to talk about what I call the Five Paradoxes of the New Economy.

First, I'll talk about the underlying forces behind the new economy — how they're shaping my industry in general and my company in particular. Next, I'll try to convince you that the gulf said to exist between the Old Economy and New Economy has been greatly exaggerated. Finally, I'll talk briefly about how Merrill Lynch is leveraging these forces to achieve preeminence in financial services.

Some of you may be wondering whether a CEO of a major financial services firm is the best person to be lecturing about "The New Economy." You are not alone. Here, for example, is what one analyst tried to tell us last spring. He wrote:

"With a more progressive business model, we suspect consumers decreasingly view Merrill Lynch as a relic from the Cro-Magnon era of financial services."

Thirty years in this business and this is the respect I get!


But that was last year, and now, suddenly, many of the virtues of so-called "Old Economy" firms are being miraculously rediscovered. It's amazing what 12 months and a 1,600-point loss on the Nasdaq will do! Yes, a bad year for the tech sector has made a lot of experts wrestle over whose prediction was most accurate. But where they all agree is that the underlying trends of the New Economy are no fad. Globalization, deregulation and technology have introduced fundamental and permanent changes to the way every company does business.


Globalization
National borders have become almost irrelevant when it comes to asset management, investing, or mergers. Executing a strategy in different markets, with different languages, laws, and cultures is now a fundamental part of the financial services industry.

Take Merrill Lynch: Ten years ago, we were basically a two-sector business — brokerage and investment banking — with about $350 billion in client assets, and 13% of our revenues coming from outside the U.S. Today, we enjoy dominant market positions around the globe in three complementary businesses: Private Client, Investment Management and Investment Banking, supported by 850 research professionals in 26 countries. We hold $1.8 trillion in client assets, and 35% of our revenues come from outside the U.S.


Deregulation
We've benefited tremendously from deregulation, as has the entire industry. In every part of the world, financial markets are being remade. The EMU in Europe, and the Big Bang in Japan. In the U.S., we saw the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act — a watershed event for this industry.


Outdated barriers had always prevented us from offering our clients a federally insured bank account. Today we have not one but two banks, and can offer clients the full range of financial services — just as our European competitors have been doing for years.


Technology
It has transformed every industry, but probably ours more than any other. After all, the biggest-selling consumer item on the Internet is not music, not toys, not books or flowers. It's stock. Three years ago, we launched Merrill Lynch OnLine from a standing start. Today, many experts say our site is the best on the web. We're also using the power of the Internet to reshape how the institutional markets operate.


Globalization. Deregulation. Technology. These trends will be seen as the seminal events of the new economy. They will have far more lasting effects than the bubble in tech stocks or the flood of IPOs. They have taught us many lessons. The most important is that being successful in the new economy requires the proper blend of old and new economy virtues. That's just one of the great paradoxes of our time. In fact, today I want to offer what I call the Five Great Paradoxes of the New Economy.


Paradox 1: Scale Is as Important as Innovation

That's something no one expected a few years back. The way the business press wrote about it, if you were small and innovative, that meant you were creative, nimble and flexible. If you were large, that meant you were clumsy, slow to change and bureaucratic.

It can be rewarding to participate in a niche market. But if you want to take advantage of the changes in the global marketplace, if you want to invest resources in daring new ideas, then you have to have scale.

We are certainly seeing that in financial services. Consolidation, a fact we long predicted, has arrived: Morgan and Chase, PaineWebber and UBS, as well as Credit Suisse and DLJ. A few months ago, reading the business pages reminded me of that show Survivor. Before long, there will be just a handful of global players with the reach and the resources to bring real innovation to our industry. I welcome it.

At Merrill Lynch, it is precisely our global presence and scale that has permitted us to bring a new level of innovation to our business.

In just the past year, we established a joint venture with HSBC, launching a new online banking and brokerage business in the U.K., Australia and Canada. Ultimately, we'll be operating in 20 countries. I believe this will prove to be an important milestone for Merrill Lynch. It required us to think about our business model in a new way — to create a new company, instead of buying one. It also required a sizable global footprint.

Still, scale is only part of the story.

Paradox 2: In a World of Endless Choices, Reputation Matters

In the bottomless well of websites, consumers are looking for familiar names they know and trust. I think that's why no one has been able to knock Amazon from the top spot in online retailing. They are one of the only household names online.

If you don't think brand matters, think about this: It's been said that if you dismantled the Coca-Cola Company and left the managers with only the brand name, they could rebuild the entire company in under five years. On the other hand, if you left them with all their assets but took away the brand, in five years they'd be gone altogether.

In the new economy, more than ever, a global brand name and a trusted reputation are indispensable. Yet in our business, it's not all about being well known. It's about how well you know your clients.




Paradox 4: Age Doesn't Matter — Seeing Opportunities Does

Let's give credit where credit is due: Amazon, Yahoo, eBay, Dell — these companies led the first wave of the New Economy.

They changed the rules. They introduced new ways of thinking. They created new models for buying and selling. Ten years ago, they didn't even exist. But they didn't succeed simply because they were new. Nor should we assume, with so many dot-coms crashing, that companies are now going to succeed simply because they are established. Age doesn't matter.

In the years ahead, what will matter is not only the ability to create change, but to build on it. That means not just worrying about what's next. It means having a broader vision of your entire industry, and the resources and management skills to execute it.

That's why the next wave of the New Economy really won't distinguish between old and new companies, or even tech companies and manufacturers. What will matter is your ability to understand the implications of all the new things springing up around us.

Let me give you some examples of how Merrill is riding that next wave. As I mentioned earlier, we're using e-commerce to change the business model for capital markets and investment banking. Recently, we joined with six other of the largest investment banks to create The Markets.com, a portal for commingled equity research, news, and market data.

We also pioneered, along with other securities firms, a new trading platform for fixed income securities called BondBook. These consortia and commingled sites are perhaps the industry's most seismic shift to date.

In each of these instances, the technology is impressive. But more critical is the way we're using technology to create value as the industry shifts. This requires building relationships we previously never would have considered.


Relationships, as I've suggested, can't be created by technology. They demand human capital, which brings me to my final paradox.


Paradox 5: In the New Economy, the Most Satisfying Job Experiences Can Be Found in Traditional Places

Despite all the hype about the unconventional workplace, the best place for a rewarding career — especially for someone with your training — is probably going to be one of the large, global firms that some were once writing off as "behind the curve."

It's easy for me to say, of course. I started at a large financial house and 32 years later became CEO. But I believe that some of the young New Economy firms focused on attracting talent through short-term perks, rather than long-term value. You've all read about them: name your own job, 23-year-old CEOs, wear shorts to work — believe me, I've never even considered it.

Now, as the dust of 2000 is settling, more professionals recognize that what they want out of a job is something a little deeper — a greater sense of professional satisfaction that is harder to come across at a struggling young start-up.

Don't get me wrong. Workplace features of the new economy have been good for all of us. An improved focus on diversity, a more casual workplace, greater flexibility and faster decision-making.

We're proud to have received more than our share of awards for progressive policies for telecommuting, disabled workers and working mothers, just to name a few. The diversity of our talent pool is second to none, and we work hard to create a culture that places no limits on individual achievement. But we know the most successful companies are those that offer other advantages, too, including a workplace that is both financially and intellectually rewarding.

The paradoxes of the New Economy I've outlined today tell me that, at the end of the most prosperous and creative decade in American history, Merrill Lynch is better positioned than ever to be the preeminent financial management and advisory company in the world.

How do we define preeminence? In five simple ways:
Client focus second to none.
The leader in our chosen markets.
The best managed company.
The best shareholder return. During the past year, our stock price has delivered the highest return among all our major competitors.
And, of course, the best place to work.
Client focus second to none; the leader in chosen markets; best managed company; best shareholder return, and the best place to work. Some might read that list and accuse us of sticking to Old World values. My response: guilty as charged.

During the height of the tech boom, I think the business community and the press tended to forget what made a great company over the long term. I'd like to think that at Merrill, we never lost sight of these enduring values.

Don't take my word for it. Look around. What you will find is that, in the final paradox of the New Economy, the freshest thinking is going on in places you may never have imagined.

So, in conclusion, let me verbalize what should be very apparent to each of you. Dreams and aspirations have never gone out of style. My suggestion to you is, come dream with us.



参考译文

新经济的五大悖论
演讲人:David H. Komanshy (郭铭基)


很高兴来到沃顿,这里向来是美林公司理想的人才库。然而,我此行并非是招募新人,今天我有更大的目的。我在此要谈一下我所谓的“新经济的五大悖论”。
首先,我想谈一下新经济所蕴涵的力量,以及这些力量如何影响整个行业以及我的公司。其次,我希望你们确信新经济和旧经济之间存在的鸿沟其实是被过分夸大了的。最后,我简要谈一下美林将如何充分运用这些力量在金融服务业中追求卓越。
也许有人正在怀疑,一个大金融公司的首席执行官是不是“新经济”问题的最佳演讲人。心怀疑问的并非只有你们。例如,一位分析师曾试图告诉我们说:
“由于采取了更进取的商业模式,我们猜测消费者会逐渐不再将美林视作金融业克罗马农时代(译者注:远古时代)的遗物。”
在此行业干了30年,这就是我得到的敬重!
然而,这是去年的事情了。如今,所谓“旧经济”企业的优势突然奇迹般地被人重新发现了。那斯达克12个月居然狂跌1600点,真叫人不可思议!没错,科技概念股一年来的糟糕表现使许多专家在其最确信的预测上大跌眼镜。但是,他们也都认同新经济潜在的趋势并非一时狂热。全球化、放松管制和科技正为每一家公司的经营方式带来根本、永久的变化。

全球化
国界在资产管理、投资或兼并业务上已经成为无关紧要的概念。在不同市场,以不同的语言、法律、文化来实施经营策略已是目前金融行业的基本部分。
以美林为例,十年前,我们有两方面的基本业务:经纪和投资银行,拥有3500亿美元的客户资产,13%的收入来自美国以外的地区。如今,在遍布26个国家850位专业研究人员的支持下,我们在三大互补的业务上拥有全球市场的支配地位:私人客户、投资管理和投资银行。我们拥有1.8万亿的客户资产,35%的收入来自美国以外的地区。

放松管制
放松管制使我们与整个行业受益非浅。在世界各地,金融市场正在重塑。欧洲的欧洲货币联盟(EMU),日本的金融大爆炸。在美国我们看到了《格拉斯—斯第戈尔法》(译者注:该法要求商业银行、投资银行、保险公司和储蓄银行实行分业经营)的废除,此事可以看作是整个行业转折点的事件。
过时的分业经营曾使我们无法为客户提供联邦保险银行帐户。如今,我们拥有两家银行,可以象我们欧洲的竞争者多年来一贯的那样,为客户提供全方位的金融服务。

科技
科技改变了每一个行业,而对我们行业的影响比其他行业更大。总之,互联网上销售量最大的商品并非音乐、并非玩具,并非图书和鲜花,而是股票。三年前,我们推出了美林在线。如今不少专家称之为最好的互联网网站。我们同时正运用互联网技术重塑机构市场的运作方式。

全球化、放松管制、科技,这些趋势将被视为新经济形成和发展的基本因素。他们会比科技股泡沫和IPO(新股发行)热潮更具深远影响。我们从中获得许多经验和教训。最主要的经验是,要在新经济中得到成功,需要将新旧经济中的优势有机结合起来。这仅仅是我们时代的一个大的悖论。实际上,今天我要提出我所谓的新经济五大悖论。

悖论一:规模与创新同样重要
这是几年前很少有人想到的。财经报道往往如此来描述:如果企业小而新,则意味着创造性、灵活性和可塑性。如果企业庞大,则意味着笨拙、迟缓和官僚。
在参与尚无竞争者的小市场时,这一观点也许还有价值。然而,如果要在全球性市场中把握发展机会,如果要投入资源实现大胆全新的理念时,必须要具备规模。
我们在金融服务业中更加确信这种看法。我们一直预言的合并终于变成了现实:摩根(Morgan)与大通(Chase),普惠(PaineWebber)与瑞士联合银行(UBS),瑞士信贷(Credit Suisse)与帝杰(DLJ)。几个月以前,阅读财经资料会让我联想到《生还者》这个节目。不久将来仅仅会有少数几家全球性的金融机构,凭借其势力范围和各类资源,为我们的行业带来真正的变革。
在美林,正是由于我们全球性的参与和规模,才能够为我们的业务带来更高水平的创新。
就在去年,我们与汇丰银行成立了合资公司,在英国、澳大利亚和加拿大推出全新的网上银行和经纪业务。最终会在20个国家开展此类业务,我坚信这将是美林的一个重要的里程碑。这要求我们以全新的方式思考业务模式——组建新的公司,而不去收购一间公司,这也要求一个相当规模的全球业务网。
当然,规模只是成功的部分原因。

悖论二:在选择众多的世界,声誉至关重要
在浩如烟海的互联网站中,消费者总是在寻找他们所知并信任的熟悉名称。我认为这就是为什么没有一家网站可以击败网上零售之王亚马逊的原因。他们的名称在网上是家喻户晓的。
如果你认为品牌不是至关重要的,可以思考一下这个现象。有人曾经说,假如将可口可乐公司解散,仅仅给管理人员留下其品牌名称,他们可以在不到五年的时间内重建整个公司。相反,假如将品牌拿走,把其他资产都留给管理人员,五年后,他们肯定早已各分道扬镳、各奔前程了。
在新经济中,全球性的品牌名称和令人信服的声誉,比以往任何时候都显得必不可少。然而,在我们的业务中,不仅仅要为人所知,更需要知晓客户。

悖论三:在信息充斥的世界,人际关系至关重要
研究人员迈克尔·施拉格指出,新经济的关键并不在于数据和信息,而是“人们如何评价和权衡人际关系。”
当互联网不断将信息转化为商品时,消费者将寻求这样的公司,其员工可凭其才智和诚信来帮助消费者对信息进行判别。在快速变化的市场环境中尤其如此。
这就是为什么我们坚信那些只提供交易而不提供咨询的金融公司前景黯淡的原因。随着越来越多的公司在其原有业务中引入顾问业务内容,这一点就更加明显。

悖论四:年头长短无关紧要,寻求机会更重要
让我们客观评价一下亚马逊、雅虎、eBay、戴尔,这几家公司引发了新经济的第一波浪潮。
他们改变了规则,他们引入了新的思考方式,他们建立了新的买卖模式。十年前,他们根本不存在,但并不因为新,他们就不成功。随着众多点com公司的倒闭,我们不会再认为成立了公司就一定会迈向成功。年头长短并不重要。
今后几年中,重要的不仅仅是变革的能力,而是要在变革的基础上发展。这不仅意味着考虑下一步的问题,还意味着要具备对整个行业更全面的视野,拥有资源和管理水平去实施。
这就是为什么新经济下一浪不是去区分新旧公司,不是去区分科技公司和传统制造业公司。重要的是理解周围新事物真正含义的能力。
让我举几个美林如何驾御下一个浪潮的事例。上面我曾提到我们用电子商务改变在资本市场和投资银行的业务模式。最近,我们与其他六家最大的投资银行一起创建了Market.com,这是一个证券研究、新闻、市场数据的综合入门网站。
我们还和其他证券公司一起,率先建立了一个固定收益债券的交易平台,叫做BondBook。这些联合的综合网站也许给整个行业带来最大的地震。
在上述事例中,科技的作用显而易见。但更重要的是我们在行业变化时用科技来创造价值的方法。这要求建立我们以往从未考虑到的人际关系。
我们提到的人际关系无法用技术来建立。人际关系需要人力资源,这就引出下一个悖论。

悖论五:在新经济中,传统行业可以提供最令人满意的工作经历
虽然关于非传统职业的宣传令人眼花缭乱,但是,可以获得理想职业的最好地方还是在国际性的大公司,对于受过专业训练的人士尤其如此。尽管大公司曾一度被看作待选职业,遭人冷落。
当然,我说这番话很轻松。我一开始就在一家大型金融公司工作,32年后成了首席执行官。但是,我相信有些所谓的新经济公司是以短期的高薪招揽人才,而不关注长期的价值。大家都看到过这类消息:自己命名工作职务,23岁的首席执行官,穿短裤上班。相信我,这种念头我动都不动。
现在,更多的专业人士意识到,他们要从工作中得到的东西具有更深层的意义——更大的专业满足感。这在一个苦苦挣扎的初创企业中是很难求得的。
不要误解我的意思。新经济的职业特征对我们大家都有益:更关注多样性、更轻松的工作环境、更多的灵活性、更快的决策。
人才的多样性至关重要。我们努力创造不限制个人成就的文化。但是,我们也清楚,最成功的公司还提供其他优惠条件,提供在财力和智力两方面均有收获的工作场所。
在美国历史上最繁荣、最具创造力的十年结束之际,美林具备前所未有的能力,成为全球最卓越的金融管理和顾问公司。
我们如何阐释“卓越”一词呢?简单说来,有以下五方面:
客户至上
即定市场的领导地位
管理最完善的公司
最大的股东回报
当然还有,最好的工作环境
有人看到这几条,也许会指控我们死抱着旧经济的价值观。我的回答:罪名成立。
在科技热浪的高温中,商界和媒体似乎忘记了是什么可以长期维持一个大公司的运作。我想,在美林我们从未忽视这些永恒的价值观。
从新经济最后的一个悖论中,大家可以认识到,最新的思想往往产生于令人意想不到的地方。
在演讲结束之际,我想说一下大家都应清楚的一点,梦想与渴望永不过时,愿诸位与我们一同追逐梦想。


文章来源:大耳朵英语--免费实用 http://www.bigear.cn