過(guò)去十多年，F(xiàn)acebook、谷歌、蘋果、亞馬遜、微軟、特斯拉和Uber等科技巨頭占據(jù)了整個(gè)商業(yè)世界。僅在去年，相關(guān)股票看起來(lái)還能保持無(wú)限漲勢(shì)。

但今后不會(huì)持續(xù)了。

去年大型科技公司遇到各種困難，2019年只會(huì)更具挑戰(zhàn)。新一年里，隨著特別檢察官羅伯特·穆勒的調(diào)查持續(xù)，將出現(xiàn)更多關(guān)于俄羅斯間諜利用Facebook廣告系統(tǒng)影響美國(guó)大選的報(bào)道。聯(lián)邦貿(mào)易委員會(huì)可能對(duì)谷歌、Facebook和亞馬遜掌控?cái)?shù)字廣告收入采取反壟斷措施。

此外，參議院商業(yè)委員會(huì)主席約翰·圖恩告訴科技業(yè)領(lǐng)頭的公司，聯(lián)邦隱私保護(hù)法已經(jīng)“獲得兩黨大力支持”。

技術(shù)時(shí)代的先驅(qū)能否跟上公共政策問(wèn)題的步伐，還是并未察覺(jué)？進(jìn)入2019年，科技公司面臨五大必須解決的問(wèn)題，如果處置不力，結(jié)果可能是政府和公眾幫著它們解決：

1. 隱私

2. 反壟斷

3. 員工抗議

4. 電子產(chǎn)品上癮

5. 領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力和治理

隱私

Facebook面臨一系列丑聞：俄羅斯情報(bào)機(jī)構(gòu)利用Facebook廣告影響選舉，再加上Facebook有爭(zhēng)議的數(shù)據(jù)合作關(guān)系和隱私政策。去年春天，英國(guó)《衛(wèi)報(bào)》曝出劍橋分析公司利用Facebook網(wǎng)站獲取用戶數(shù)據(jù)，包括連接到相關(guān)網(wǎng)站的Facebook好友數(shù)據(jù)，從而影響2016年美國(guó)大選，也在政界和媒體圈引發(fā)嚴(yán)重的反應(yīng)。

馬克·扎克伯格如何回應(yīng)？他躲了五天，F(xiàn)acebook的常規(guī)員工會(huì)議上還派副總法律顧問(wèn)代替。等他真正出現(xiàn)在公共場(chǎng)合，又把所有問(wèn)題推給劍橋分析。六個(gè)月后，扎克伯格仍未解決實(shí)際問(wèn)題，新問(wèn)題出現(xiàn)則繼續(xù)辯解。由于他處置不力，引發(fā)各界對(duì)Facebook批評(píng)聲不斷，媒體也越挖越深。Facebook回應(yīng)的方式則是，聘請(qǐng)攻擊型公關(guān)公司對(duì)付批評(píng)者。

Facebook真正的問(wèn)題可不只是劍橋分析公司。這是一家已經(jīng)積累了21億用戶的免費(fèi)網(wǎng)站。大多數(shù)用戶沒(méi)有意識(shí)到Facebook會(huì)利用私人信息創(chuàng)建非常詳細(xì)的用戶檔案，然后賣給廣告主。

解決隱私問(wèn)題很簡(jiǎn)單，可以讓用戶選擇允許或不允許Facebook收集信息，如果選擇不許就每月繳納費(fèi)用。然而Facebook并未解決問(wèn)題，說(shuō)明扎克伯格更主要的動(dòng)力是追逐收入和利潤(rùn)增長(zhǎng)，而不是保護(hù)用戶隱私。

蘋果公司的首席執(zhí)行官蒂姆·庫(kù)克不太看好Facebook的做法。他認(rèn)為數(shù)據(jù)隱私是一項(xiàng)人權(quán)。至于監(jiān)管方面，他指出，“不得不承認(rèn)有時(shí)自由市場(chǎng)起不了作用……存在一定程度的監(jiān)管不可避免?！?/p>

2018年5月，歐盟啟動(dòng)了《通用數(shù)據(jù)保護(hù)條例》（GDPR），其中大部分條款可能加入美國(guó)法律。如果GDPR要求用戶明確選擇允許或拒絕信息收集，F(xiàn)acebook的用戶數(shù)量可能下滑。

反壟斷

反壟斷當(dāng)局正加大力度，調(diào)查科技巨頭有沒(méi)有控制市場(chǎng)。去年夏天，歐盟判定谷歌濫用安卓操作系統(tǒng)，罰款51億美元。特朗普總統(tǒng)在2018年11月表示，政府“非常認(rèn)真地”考慮針對(duì)亞馬遜、谷歌和Facebook提起反壟斷訴訟。連亞馬遜的首席執(zhí)行官杰夫·貝佐斯也承認(rèn)公司存在漏洞，員工表示政府監(jiān)管是可能影響公司前景的重大問(wèn)題。

員工抗議

大型科技公司的員工正發(fā)揮強(qiáng)大的影響力，迫使領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者適應(yīng)新環(huán)境。2017年，谷歌工程師詹姆斯·達(dá)莫爾攻擊了公司的平權(quán)計(jì)劃，遭首席執(zhí)行官桑達(dá)爾·皮查伊解雇。2018年11月，超過(guò)20,000名谷歌員工罷工，抗議公司處理性騷擾不力。

Facebook一系列高管叛逃，至少10名高級(jí)管理人員宣布離職，其中包括Instagram的聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人凱文·斯特羅姆和麥克·克雷格。Uber的創(chuàng)始人特拉維斯·卡蘭尼克被迫離職之后，繼任者達(dá)拉·科斯羅薩西重新調(diào)整了高管團(tuán)隊(duì)和公司文化，應(yīng)對(duì)性騷擾事件，緩和Uber犀利的文化。

電子產(chǎn)品上癮

過(guò)去一年，媒體報(bào)道不斷報(bào)道過(guò)度使用手機(jī)對(duì)用戶產(chǎn)生的負(fù)面影響，甚至可能影響大腦。努力吸引用戶使用的科技公司如何應(yīng)對(duì)？舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，現(xiàn)在蘋果每周向用戶發(fā)送手機(jī)使用時(shí)間的情況。

領(lǐng)導(dǎo)和治理

科技巨頭中的大多數(shù)公司仍然由創(chuàng)始人控制，董事會(huì)由創(chuàng)始人主導(dǎo)。采取兩級(jí)股權(quán)制度可以保證創(chuàng)始人對(duì)公司及董事會(huì)的控制權(quán)。從表面上看，創(chuàng)始人的理由比較充足，因?yàn)樗麄兿Ｍ麑Ｗ⒂陂L(zhǎng)期增長(zhǎng)和投資，但權(quán)力過(guò)度集中可能讓創(chuàng)始人感到無(wú)可匹敵。扎克伯格、卡蘭尼克和特斯拉的埃隆·馬斯克都需要明智的建議，但他們經(jīng)常不愿聽(tīng)。

扎克伯格總說(shuō)公司處于“戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)狀態(tài)”。到底是他自己，還是他的戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)思維導(dǎo)致高管、員工和用戶不斷疏離？Uber的創(chuàng)始人卡蘭尼克嚴(yán)格控制董事會(huì)，結(jié)果全公司都得疲于應(yīng)付他火爆的風(fēng)格。他從不接受公眾和內(nèi)部的批評(píng)，一直到股東最終強(qiáng)迫他辭去首席執(zhí)行官職位。最近美國(guó)證券交易委員會(huì)提起證券欺詐指控后，才華滿腹的埃隆·馬斯克也被禁止擔(dān)任特斯拉的主席。與此同時(shí)，馬斯克反復(fù)無(wú)常的風(fēng)格也導(dǎo)致幾位高管辭職。

問(wèn)題還出在董事會(huì)，現(xiàn)在董事會(huì)更像顧問(wèn)，沒(méi)怎么承擔(dān)治理的職責(zé)。最近，一位曾經(jīng)擔(dān)任過(guò)Facebook主管的人士聲稱，創(chuàng)始人主導(dǎo)的公司確實(shí)不一樣?！霸谄胀ǖ纳鲜泄?，董事會(huì)是老板?！彼f(shuō)，但Facebook董事會(huì)成員更多擔(dān)任顧問(wèn)的角色。不管由誰(shuí)創(chuàng)立，只要是上市公司就需要強(qiáng)有力的治理。如果Facebook、Uber和特斯拉的董事會(huì)更認(rèn)真地治理，就有可能在陷入危機(jī)前避免一些嚴(yán)重的問(wèn)題。在Uber動(dòng)蕩中，董事會(huì)成員阿里安娜·赫芬頓主導(dǎo)了改組董事會(huì)，協(xié)商卡蘭尼克離職，并尋找接任人選。

多年前，谷歌、蘋果和微軟等成熟的科技巨頭決定成立強(qiáng)大的董事會(huì)，由首席執(zhí)行官和經(jīng)驗(yàn)豐富的高管組成，因此避免了其他公司遇到的許多問(wèn)題。谷歌的創(chuàng)始人拉里·佩奇和謝爾蓋·布林非常明智地招徠埃里克·施密特?fù)?dān)任首席執(zhí)行官，后來(lái)2015年施密特?fù)?dān)任母公司Alphabet的董事會(huì)主席。

2019年科技行業(yè)將面臨更嚴(yán)格的審查，科技公司高管普遍的傲慢態(tài)度可能迫使政府介入。一項(xiàng)提案建議對(duì)兩級(jí)股權(quán)結(jié)構(gòu)限制時(shí)間，而另一項(xiàng)提案則要求創(chuàng)始人控制的公司里設(shè)立獨(dú)立的董事會(huì)主席。雖然創(chuàng)始人往往很想控制公司，但如果加強(qiáng)與利益相關(guān)者合作，借鑒各種觀點(diǎn)打造更持久穩(wěn)固的公司，成功的幾率也會(huì)提升。

打造充滿活力的創(chuàng)新型經(jīng)濟(jì)時(shí)，谷歌、微軟、亞馬遜、蘋果和Facebook等科技公司都發(fā)揮著重要作用。希望各家公司首席執(zhí)行官和董事會(huì)能加強(qiáng)治理，實(shí)現(xiàn)高效流程，并組建執(zhí)行力強(qiáng)大的管理團(tuán)隊(duì)。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

比爾·喬治在哈佛商學(xué)院擔(dān)任高級(jí)研究員，曾任美敦力的董事長(zhǎng)兼首席執(zhí)行官，還著有《真北——全球172位頂尖創(chuàng)新型領(lǐng)袖的真誠(chéng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力告白》一書(shū)。

譯者：馮豐

審校：夏林

For the past decade, the technology giants—Facebook, Google, Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Tesla, Uber—have dominated the business world. Just last year, their stock prices appeared to be on an endless upward trajectory.

No longer.

The past year presented the major technology companies with multiple difficulties, and 2019 promises to be even more challenging. Expect extensive news coverage of how Russian agents used Facebook advertising to influence the U.S. election as special counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation continues. The Federal Trade Commission may take antitrust action as Google, Facebook, and Amazon dominate digital advertising revenue.

Additionally, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) has told leading technology companies that a federal privacy law “enjoys strong bipartisan support.”

Will the pioneers of this technology era keep pace, or remain oblivious to the public policy issues they are creating? Entering 2019, tech companies have five major issues they must address—or governments and the public will do it for them:

1. Privacy

2. Antitrust

3. Employee revolts

4. Device addiction

5. Leadership and governance

Privacy

Facebook faces a series of scandals: Russian agents using Facebook advertising to influence elections, its controversial data partnerships, and its privacy policies. Last spring, the Guardian broke stories on Cambridge Analytica’s use of Facebook sites to gain access to user data, including Facebook friends connected to these sites, to influence the 2016 U.S. election, triggering extreme political and media reactions.

Mark Zuckerberg’s response? He went into hiding for five days, even sending his associate general counsel to replace him at Facebook’s regular employee town hall. When he did appear in public, he tried to blame everything on Cambridge Analytica. Six months later, Zuckerberg still hasn’t addressed the real issues and continues to react defensively as new issues arise. His distortions and deflections incited Facebook’s critics and invited the media to dig deeper. In response, Facebook hired attack dog PR firms to go after its detractors.

Facebook’s problems are much deeper than Cambridge Analytica. It has amassed 2.1 billion users with the offer of a free site. But users are largely unaware that Facebook takes their private information to create highly detailed user profiles to sell to advertisers.

The privacy issue can be easily overcome by requiring users to opt in or opt out of permitting Facebook to profile their information, and charging monthly fees for opting out. Facebook’s failure to address this issue suggests Zuckerberg is driven more by revenue and profit growth than by protecting users’ privacy.

Apple CEO Tim Cook takes a dim view of Facebook’s approach. He believes data privacy is a human right. Regarding regulations, he notes, “We have to admit when the free market is not working…It’s inevitable that there will be some level of regulation.”

In May 2018, the European Union launched the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the bulk of which may find its way into U.S. law. When GDPR required users to explicitly opt in or out, Facebook saw declines in its user base.

Antitrust

Antitrust authorities are ramping up investigations of the tech giants for market dominance. Last summer, the European Union fined Google $5.1 billion in an antitrust action for misusing its Android operating system. In November 2018, President Trump said his administration is “very seriously” considering antitrust action against Amazon, Google, and Facebook. Even Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos acknowledged his company’s vulnerabilities, as his staff say government regulation is a major concern for the company’s outlook.

Employee revolts

Employees at the big tech companies are exerting strong influences of their own, forcing leaders to adjust to the new environment. In 2017, Google engineer James Damore attacked the company’s affirmative action program and was dismissed by Google CEO Sundar Pichai. In November 2018, more than 20,000 Google employees staged a walkout to protest the company’s handling of sexual harassment cases.

Facebook has faced a series of high-level executive defections, with at least 10 senior executives announcing their departures, including Instagram co-founders Kevin Systrom and Mike Krieger. Following Uber founder Travis Kalanick’s forced departure, his successor Dara Khosrowshahi revamped his executive team and company culture to address outrage at sexual harassment incidents and Uber’s sharp-elbowed culture.

Device addiction

In the past year, media coverage has relentlessly detailed the ways that excessive phone usage negatively impacts users—perhaps even rewiring the brain. How will tech companies, which all work hard to keep users on site, respond? Apple, for instance, now sends users weekly updates of their device time.

Leadership and governance

Most of these tech giants are still controlled by their founders and have founder-dominated boards. Creating two classes of stock has enabled their founders to retain control of the company and their boards. On the surface, their rationale—to focus on long-term growth and investment—appears sound, but the concentration of power can lead founders to feel invincible. Zuckerberg, Kalanick, and Tesla’s Elon Musk have needed wise counsel, and they haven’t always listened.

Zuckerberg says his company is at “war.” Is he really, or is his wartime mindset responsible for alienating executives, employees, and users? Uber founder Kalanick controlled his company’s board, which struggled to tame his abrasive style. He remained impervious to public and internal criticism until shareholders finally forced him to resign as CEO. The talented Elon Musk was recently banned from chairing Tesla after the Securities and Exchange Commission pressed securities fraud charges against him. Meanwhile, Musk’s erratic style has caused scores of Tesla’s top executives to resign.

The problem also resides with their boards, who serve more as advisers than as governors. Recently, a former Facebook director claimed that founder-led companies are different. “At an ordinary public company, the board is the boss,” he said, while noting that Facebook’s board members play more of an advisory role. Public companies—regardless of who founded them—require strong and effective governance. If the boards of Facebook, Uber, and Tesla had taken governance more seriously, they could have averted some serious problems before they turned into crises. In Uber’s case, Arianna Huffington stepped up to transform its board, negotiate Kalanick’s departure, and recruit his successor.

The more mature tech giants like Google, Apple, and Microsoft decided years ago to build strong boards filled with CEOs and experienced executives, which has enabled them to avoid many of the problems experienced by others. Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin had the wisdom to recruit Eric Schmidt as CEO until he became board chair of parent company Alphabet in 2015.

As the tech industry faces even greater scrutiny in 2019, hubris among technology executives may force the government to step in. One proposal would impose time limits on two-class ownership structures, while another would require independent board chairs of founder-led companies. While founders feel the need to control their companies, they increase their odds of success when they engage other stakeholders who bring different perspectives to help create more durable, long-term enterprises.

Tech companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, and Facebook play an important role in building a dynamic, innovative economy. Let’s hope their CEOs and boards step up to establish strong governance, effective processes, and aligned executive teams.

Bill George is a senior fellow at Harvard Business School, former chairman and CEO of Medtronic, and the author of Discover Your True North.