????如果你真的著眼于某個有價值的東西，你就會以它為目標(biāo)，派遣最得力的人手，同時投入最多的資金。

????這個觀點(diǎn)已經(jīng)是老生常談，但管理者真的把它付諸實(shí)踐了嗎？麥肯錫（McKinsey & Company）研究了1,600多家美國公司在15年間（1990-2005年）的表現(xiàn)，結(jié)果顯示大多數(shù)公司每年分配給各項(xiàng)業(yè)務(wù)的資金都差不多，出于這個原因它們一直處于低速增長狀態(tài)。與之相反，在重新分配資金方面最為積極的公司在各項(xiàng)業(yè)務(wù)之間調(diào)配的資金量占自身資金總額的56%以上，它們帶給股東的總回報也比前者多30%。

????簡而言之，順利完成這項(xiàng)工作說起來容易做起來難。但它至關(guān)重要。

????如果向全世界的管理者們提出第二個問題——目前最有價值的是什么？那么在他們的答案中，抓住新興市場的增長機(jī)遇必然會排在最前面，或者比較靠前的位置。麥肯錫對其中的價值做了這樣的估算：到2025年，新興市場消費(fèi)者將增加30億左右，消費(fèi)規(guī)模將超過30萬億美元（183.9萬億元人民幣）。在此期間，全球近一半的GDP增量將來自440座新興市場城市。

????但認(rèn)識和行動之間總是存在差異。目前，雖然新興市場占全球GDP的38%，但就總部設(shè)在發(fā)達(dá)市場的公司而言，新興市場對其收入的平均貢獻(xiàn)率只有17%。

????跨國公司可能會在新興市場正在崛起的一代中尋找管理人才和經(jīng)營思路，有意思的是，這樣做也許會有助于著手解決上述問題。和總部設(shè)在發(fā)達(dá)經(jīng)濟(jì)體的對手相比，總部設(shè)在新興市場的公司在富裕地區(qū)的增長率是前者的兩倍，在新興市場的增長率是前者的兩倍半，這主要是因?yàn)樗鼈冋诟e極地把資金調(diào)整到今后的高增長領(lǐng)域。

????跨國公司在經(jīng)營管理方面能承擔(dān)更多風(fēng)險并更加關(guān)注增長嗎？答案是肯定的。借助最近公布的《財富》美國500強(qiáng)名單，我們站在新興市場的角度對這些公司去年的董事會結(jié)構(gòu)進(jìn)行了分析。結(jié)果表明，只有57%的公司至少有一名來自新興市場的董事（在此我們采用了廣義概念，包括擁有新興市場公民身份，在新興市場接受過管理教育或者有過工作經(jīng)歷）。整體來看，來自新興市場的董事只占這些公司全部董事的9%。

????當(dāng)然，問題并不僅限于董事會。根據(jù)我們的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，許多公司在組織結(jié)構(gòu)方面都成功地嘗試了各種各樣的措施，目的都是確保管理團(tuán)隊(duì)能夠體現(xiàn)出新興市場日益增長的重要性。一些全球性消費(fèi)品公司已將業(yè)務(wù)部門以及研發(fā)等核心機(jī)構(gòu)轉(zhuǎn)移到新興市場，少數(shù)幾家公司甚至把總部也遷到了那里。大型國際性金融服務(wù)企業(yè)和自然資源公司都為董事會設(shè)立了專門針對新興市場的咨詢部門，為的就是利用他們的專長。顯然，要全面彌補(bǔ)新興市場缺口，只采取某一項(xiàng)措施還遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠。

????但就像我們在其他領(lǐng)域中學(xué)到的那樣，多元化真的很重要，高層確立的基調(diào)也是如此。一位高級管理者最近這樣對我說：“這是個大問題。雖然我們公司的大多數(shù)增長都來自新興市場，我們的管理團(tuán)隊(duì)卻不是來自那里。”他說的對。既然這就是問題所在，那么以更快的速度在新興市場聘請更多的董事和高管人員可能會是個好的開始。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????作者是麥肯錫全球總裁，他將在6月6-8日在四川成都召開的《財富》全球論壇上發(fā)表擔(dān)任演講嘉賓。

????譯者：Charlie

????If you truly have your eyes on the prize, then you deploy your best people and biggest investments against that goal.

????But are executives really putting this truism into practice? McKinsey & Company studied the performance of more than 1600 US companies over a 15 year-period (1990-2005). Most companies doled out roughly the same amount of capital to business units as they did the previous year—and cruised forward in low-gear as a result. By contrast, the most aggressive re-allocators—companies that shifted more than 56% of their capital across business units over that period—delivered 30% higher total returns to shareholders.

????In short, getting this right is easy to say and hard to do. But it matters big-time.

????Now ask almost any global executive a second question—What's the biggest prize out there today?—and capturing emerging markets growth would surely rank at or near the top. Here's how McKinsey sizes this particular prize: By 2025 consumption in emerging markets alone will surpass $30 trillion as some 3 billion new members of the consuming class come online. Just 440 cities in emerging markets alone will account for nearly half of global GDP growth over that period.

????But once again, there's a mismatch between awareness and action. Today, while 38% of global GDP comes from emerging markets, companies headquartered in advanced markets on average earn only 17% of their revenue from these countries.

????Interestingly, one place multinationals might turn for the executive talent and management mindsets that could help begin to address this problem: the rising generation of emerging markets champions themselves. Companies headquartered in emerging markets are growing twice as quickly in wealthy countries as their rivals who are based in advanced economies and 2.5 times faster in emerging markets. And the main reason, it turns out, is because they are reallocating capital more aggressively into tomorrow's high-growth businesses.

????Is there an opportunity to get more of that risk-taking, growth-focused executive DNA into multinationals? Yes. For the recent issue of the Fortune 500, we ran an analysis of the previous year's board composition using an emerging markets lens. As it turns out, only 57% of companies in the Fortune 500 have even one board member from an emerging market (broadly defined as someone with either emerging market citizenship or extensive education and work experience in those countries). Overall, only 9% of board members of Fortune 500 companies met this cut.

????It's not just about boards, of course. In our experience, we've seen a number of companies experiment successfully with a range of organizational initiatives aimed at ensuring that their leadership teams reflect the growing importance of emerging markets. Some global consumer products companies have relocated business units, core functions, such as R&D, and in rare cases their headquarters to emerging markets. We have also seen large, international financial services and natural resource companies build advisory councils to their boards that have a deliberate skew towards emerging markets, in order to capture that expertise. Clearly closing our collective emerging markets gap requires far more than pulling one lever.

????But as we have learned in other areas, diversity really matters, as does the tone from the top. "It's a big problem," as one senior business leader told me recently, "that while most of my growth is in emerging markets, my management is not from emerging markets." He's right. And since that's the case, moving faster to recruit more board members and senior executives from emerging markets seems like a good place to start.

????Dominic Barton is the global managing director of McKinsey & Company and a featured speaker at the Fortune Global Forum in Chengdu, China, June 6-8.