庫(kù)克的自衛(wèi)反擊戰(zhàn)怎么打?
????史蒂夫?喬布斯是個(gè)營(yíng)銷天才,但在公開披露信息這方面他就不那么出色了。他一貫以專制統(tǒng)治、嚴(yán)格保密和傲慢自大而著稱于世。眾所周知,蘋果一度始終拒絕披露其創(chuàng)始人的健康狀況細(xì)節(jié),哪怕這家公司的命運(yùn)和股價(jià)明明就和這位前首席執(zhí)行官的個(gè)人健康息息相關(guān)。 ????所以,在2011年8月,當(dāng)更和藹可親、也不那么咄咄逼人的庫(kù)克先生走馬上任成為蘋果掌門人時(shí),蘋果的評(píng)論家們普遍樂觀地預(yù)計(jì),蘋果會(huì)變得更善于溝通,更容易接近,也更深諳公關(guān)之道。 ????可是,在庫(kù)克先生治下,蘋果的公關(guān)水平不僅每況愈下,連一貫擅長(zhǎng)的營(yíng)銷手法也失去感覺了。這種情況是如此之糟,以至于當(dāng)蘋果股價(jià)從巔峰水平跌去了33%后,投資者又開始紛紛要求庫(kù)克下臺(tái)。那么,一頭霧水的庫(kù)克先生到底該怎么做才能避免臨了只能揣著3.78億美元的安慰獎(jiǎng)、最終還是被掃地出門的尷尬下場(chǎng)呢? ????先試試下面這些辦法如何: ????認(rèn)真對(duì)待自己的“形象”。 ????從各方面看,史蒂夫?喬布斯都是這個(gè)地球上最桀驁不馴、傲慢自大的人之一。他對(duì)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手伺機(jī)報(bào)復(fù),對(duì)員工口出惡言,而據(jù)蘋果首席設(shè)計(jì)師稱,他居然還不洗澡! ????不過喬布斯也是個(gè)杰出人物,所以他并不怎么在乎和媒體合作,比如他就認(rèn)為,蘋果會(huì)管好自己的形象。而很大程度上事實(shí)都證明了他的英明。 ????可是庫(kù)克先生就不同了,盡管謝天謝地他不像喬布斯那么狂妄自大,但卻也不具備籠罩著喬布斯、充當(dāng)其保護(hù)傘的那層“才華橫溢”的光環(huán)。最近,他甚至必須為了證明自己的“稱職”而度日如年。提前發(fā)布還未成熟的“蘋果地圖”,以及為其在中國(guó)的售后服務(wù)而道歉都充分表明,蘋果在庫(kù)克帶領(lǐng)下已經(jīng)失去了方向感。 ????所以庫(kù)克不能像喬布斯那樣對(duì)輿論置若罔聞,他得關(guān)注市場(chǎng)上對(duì)蘋果的各種說(shuō)法,還應(yīng)該努力去“影響”這些輿論,這樣投資者和其他人才不會(huì)對(duì)蘋果最終發(fā)布的言論感到泄氣或失望。 ????單就上周二這個(gè)發(fā)布會(huì)而言,當(dāng)整個(gè)市場(chǎng)都翹首盼望突破性產(chǎn)品及與中國(guó)移動(dòng)簽下大單時(shí),它卻變成蘋果高管在臺(tái)上的一通自我吹噓。這讓大家立刻得出結(jié)論:真是小題大做。 ????那些在乎自己公眾形象的聰明公司從來(lái)就不會(huì)讓股票分析師或記者抱有什么不切實(shí)際的期望。但蘋果好像對(duì)此毫不在意。 ????但它應(yīng)該在乎。 ????改善與媒體的關(guān)系。 ????史蒂夫?喬布斯很少會(huì)安排接受媒體圈小角色的訪問,蒂姆?庫(kù)克似乎也和他一樣對(duì)媒體不以為然,所以很少能看到庫(kù)克在媒體上拋頭露面。 ????與此同時(shí),蘋果的那些死對(duì)頭們——從到處兜生意的對(duì)沖基金經(jīng)理到言之鑿鑿的分析師——可以隨心所欲地隨時(shí)抨擊蘋果。由于蘋果對(duì)此從不還擊——電視主持人也很少還嘴——結(jié)果就沒人挑戰(zhàn)這些對(duì)頭們武斷的說(shuō)法,上周二這場(chǎng)自殺式的產(chǎn)品發(fā)布會(huì)就是如此。 ????公關(guān)界的格言是:“沉默就等于默認(rèn)”(Silence grants the point),而蘋果這樣一直保持沉默就是表明,公司面對(duì)這些非議沒有說(shuō)法。 |
????Steve Jobs was a marketing genius but less good when it came to public disclosure. Jobs was well known for his dictatorial control, secretiveness, and arrogance. Apple famously refused to share any details of the founder's health, even though the company's fortunes and stock price were materially linked to the CEO's personal well-being. ????So Apple observers were optimistic when the more affable/less intimidating Mr. Cook replaced his late predecessor in August 2011 that Apple would become a more communicative, more accessible, more public relations-savvy company. ????Not only has Apple's public relations gotten worse under Mr. Cook, it's also starting to lose its marketing touch; so much so that with Apple's stock back down 33% from its peak, investors are once again calling for the CEO's scalp. ????What can the confused Cook do to prevent the ignominy of getting canned and having to slink away with nothing but his $378 million compensation package as comfort? ????How 'bout these for starters: ????Take your "image" seriously. ????By all reports, Steve Jobs was one of the most arrogant human beings ever to grace the planet. He was vindictive to competitors, abusive to his employees, and, according to Apple's chief designer, didn't bathe! ????But Jobs was also brilliant, so he didn't much care about cooperating with the media, for example; Apple's image, he felt, would take care of itself. And largely he was right. ????Tim Cook, on the other hand, while thankfully not as arrogant as Jobs, doesn't possess the aura of "brilliance" that protected his predecessor. He's had a tough time recently proving he's even "competent." The premature release of not ready-for-prime time Apple Maps and the company's apology for customer service in China exemplify how Apple has appeared to waver on Cook's watch. ????So Cook, unlike Jobs, has to pay attention to what's being said about Apple in the market, and he should work to "influence" the conversation, so that investors and others aren't frustrated or disappointed in what Apple ultimately says. ????On Tuesday, when the market expected product breakthroughs and a contract with China Mobile, it got, instead, a lot of on-stage whoop-de-doing from Apple executives. Immediate verdict: Much ado about nothing. ????Smart companies, concerned about their public image, never let securities analysts or journalists get too far afield from realistic expectations. Apple doesn't seem to care. ????It should. ????Meet the media. ????Steve Jobs rarely deigned to be interviewed by hoi polloi in the media, and Tim Cook appears to share that disdain. So Cook media sightings are few and far between. ????Meanwhile, Apple's adversaries -- from self-promoting hedge fund managers to finally vindicated analysts -- are given free rein to bash Apple any time they want. With no resistance from the company -- and little pushback from TV anchors -- Apple enemies pontificate unchallenged, as was the case after Tuesday's suicidal product launch. ????The public relations axiom is that, "Silence grants the point;" and Apple's silence, accordingly, suggests the firm has no answer for its critics. |