????哈佛商學(xué)院（Harvard Business School）副教授諾阿姆?瓦瑟曼認(rèn)為，公司創(chuàng)始人可分為兩類?！皣酢毙偷膭?chuàng)始人，希望建立自己的帝國并改變世界；“富有型”的創(chuàng)始人則希望在獲得財(cái)務(wù)收益的同時(shí)，發(fā)揮公司的成長潛力。

????在史蒂夫?喬布斯的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下，蘋果公司（Apple）成長為行業(yè)巨人，同時(shí)喬布斯仍然掌管著公司的生殺大權(quán)。許多企業(yè)家每看到這類成功故事，就想當(dāng)然地認(rèn)為，公司創(chuàng)始人既當(dāng)國王又腰纏萬貫，也并非不可能。然而事實(shí)上，“99%的公司創(chuàng)始人在某個(gè)時(shí)刻都將面臨‘二選一’的抉擇?！蓖呱硎?。“但愿他們能夠選擇與自己目標(biāo)和雄心更為一致的方向?！?/p>

????瓦瑟曼指出，理解并明確你最認(rèn)可哪一類創(chuàng)始人，以更好地把握企業(yè)家成長歷程中有可能面臨的關(guān)鍵抉擇，這一點(diǎn)至關(guān)重要。國王型創(chuàng)始人不僅很難與他人分享對(duì)公司的控制權(quán)，而且當(dāng)現(xiàn)實(shí)與其愿景不一致時(shí)，他們也會(huì)表現(xiàn)得固執(zhí)己見。富有型創(chuàng)始人奮斗的動(dòng)機(jī)是獲得作為企業(yè)家的現(xiàn)實(shí)回報(bào)，不管這回報(bào)是金錢還是自由，而且在公司成長及變化的過程中，他們更可能分享對(duì)公司的控制權(quán)。

????事實(shí)上，與喬布斯相比，蘋果公司聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人史蒂夫?沃茲尼亞克是更典型的國王型創(chuàng)始人，他的夢想就是要為普通大眾提供強(qiáng)大的計(jì)算能力。蘋果上市之前，他將自己的股份以低于市場的價(jià)格，賣給了他認(rèn)為應(yīng)當(dāng)在財(cái)務(wù)上受到獎(jiǎng)賞的核心早期員工，瓦瑟曼介紹說。

????“每個(gè)企業(yè)家都認(rèn)為自己與眾不同，獨(dú)一無二?！彼硎尽！暗?，這些形形色色的人從來都會(huì)面臨相同的問題，有可能犯相同的錯(cuò)誤?！?/p>

????賽格威公司（Segway）創(chuàng)始人迪恩?卡門和耐克公司（Nike）創(chuàng)始人菲爾?奈特也屬于典型的國王型創(chuàng)始人。這兩位一門心思地要保持對(duì)公司的掌控權(quán)，以至于公司坐失成長或者資本擴(kuò)充的良機(jī)。卡門堅(jiān)信，賽格威將徹底顛覆交通運(yùn)輸業(yè)，因而不顧一切地堅(jiān)持讓員工保守秘密，在正式上市前不能在市場上試銷賽格威汽車。上世紀(jì)80年代，奈特曾公開嘲笑彼時(shí)剛剛興起的有氧運(yùn)動(dòng)趨勢，并且堅(jiān)持認(rèn)為，耐克應(yīng)該繼續(xù)專門為精英運(yùn)動(dòng)員設(shè)計(jì)產(chǎn)品。如此剛愎自用的代價(jià)是，眼睜睜地看著銳步（Reebok）由于銷售女款運(yùn)動(dòng)鞋而取代耐克成為行業(yè)王者。

????與此相反，教育社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)Grockit的創(chuàng)始人法布德?尼維卻甘愿辭去首席執(zhí)行官的職務(wù)，并招募能帶領(lǐng)公司再上一個(gè)臺(tái)階的人擔(dān)當(dāng)此職?！澳軌蚱溉蔚骄邆湎喈?dāng)才干的人的唯一辦法，就是我辭去首席執(zhí)行官的工作?！蹦峋S表示?！叭绻闵形醋龊脺?zhǔn)備，明白有一天你的公司會(huì)取得巨大成功，而你會(huì)感覺力不從心，無法繼續(xù)勝任領(lǐng)導(dǎo)職務(wù)，那你不免有些短視或者窄視了?！?/p>

????無論國王型模式還是富有型模式都并非最佳，瓦瑟曼指出。企業(yè)家應(yīng)該始終如一地堅(jiān)持自己的奮斗目標(biāo)。比如說，如果讓國王型企業(yè)家放棄對(duì)公司的控制權(quán)，再眼看著公司在別人的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下，身價(jià)飛漲至幾十億美元，成為婦孺皆知的成功傳奇，然而到頭來，其最初的愿景并未實(shí)現(xiàn)，那他們也不大可能對(duì)最終結(jié)果感到心滿意足。

????1992年，凱利?坎貝爾在美國北卡羅萊納州的羅利創(chuàng)建了軟件開發(fā)公司Interface Technologies Inc。他的夢想是要用設(shè)計(jì)得美輪美奐的技術(shù)去改變世界。然而自那時(shí)起，他開始認(rèn)識(shí)到，在這個(gè)創(chuàng)新代表一切的行業(yè)，分享控制權(quán)是確保公司生存和發(fā)展的根本。

????“我經(jīng)過了多年才完成這一轉(zhuǎn)變，也就是你不必控制每件事，相反，你可以把控制權(quán)交給內(nèi)部員工或者客戶?！笨藏悹柋硎尽！捌鋵?shí)這與技術(shù)沒多大關(guān)系，或者說跟我們用技術(shù)做事的能力關(guān)系也不大，關(guān)鍵是你如何應(yīng)用技術(shù)解決具體問題，幫助客戶實(shí)現(xiàn)需求。經(jīng)歷過這種轉(zhuǎn)變之后，我不再是掌控欲十足的人了?！?/p>

????在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)繁榮時(shí)期，坎貝爾的同時(shí)代人紛紛創(chuàng)建企業(yè)，然后再將它們以幾百萬美元的高價(jià)出手。而他卻更愿意建立一家企業(yè)，并讓這家企業(yè)，無論是在繁榮期還是即將來臨的衰敗期，都不停止茁壯成長?！吧鲜兰o(jì)90年代末，人們嘲笑我經(jīng)營的是家生活方式企業(yè)?！彼硎荆骸叭欢鴥扇旰螅虑榫蜎]那么可笑了。”

????大衛(wèi)?威韋羅曾在瓦瑟曼的課上學(xué)過創(chuàng)始人模式理論，但他不確定自己到底屬于國王型還是富有型。2009年，他創(chuàng)建了RentJuice公司，為的是要實(shí)現(xiàn)自己的愿景：幫助房地產(chǎn)經(jīng)紀(jì)人與地產(chǎn)管理專業(yè)人士實(shí)現(xiàn)高效互連。

????“我對(duì)自己的公司充滿了感情，無法割舍。從這個(gè)角度說，我永遠(yuǎn)也不會(huì)把它賣掉?！蓖f羅表示。盡管如此，他仍然四處尋找風(fēng)險(xiǎn)資本支持，以有足夠的資源去實(shí)現(xiàn)自己的愿景。而且，他也熱情歡迎投資者貢獻(xiàn)各自的經(jīng)驗(yàn)和信息。

????如果硬要選擇的話，他說他更愿意將自己歸入國王型?！按蟾庞捎谖要?dú)自推銷這款產(chǎn)品時(shí)間過久的緣故，我沒有將自己視為需要分裂的單細(xì)胞組織。”威韋羅表示：“我需要調(diào)整自己的定位，當(dāng)個(gè)雇傭者、指導(dǎo)者以及補(bǔ)償者。這于我而言可是個(gè)巨大的轉(zhuǎn)變。如果我能早點(diǎn)認(rèn)識(shí)并完成這一轉(zhuǎn)變的話，也許我們公司還能成長得更快?！?/p>

????譯者：大海

????Company founders fall into two categories, according to Noam Wasserman, an associate professor at Harvard Business School. The "king" wants to build an empire and change the world, while a "rich" founder is motivated by financial gains and unleashing a company's growth potential.

????Many entrepreneurs look at company founders like Apple's (AAPL) Steve Jobs -- who managed to grow his company into a behemoth while also maintaining control -- and assume it's possible to be both a king and rich. In reality, "99% of those founders are going to be facing, at some point, a choice between one and the other," Wasserman says. "Hopefully they're picking the fork in the road that is much more consistent with what their goals and aspirations are."

????It's important to understand what type you identify with most to navigate the key decisions that will arise during any entrepreneurial venture, Wasserman says. King founders find it difficult to share control and can be very stubborn when facts on the ground challenge their vision. Rich founders are motivated by the practical rewards of entrepreneurship, whether it's money or freedom, and are more likely to share control as their venture grows and changes.

????In fact, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak is a better example than Jobs of a king, motivated by a dream of bringing computing power to the masses. When Apple was about to go public, he sold his own shares below-market to the key early employees he thought should be rewarded financially, Wasserman says.

????"Every entrepreneur thinks they're unique and idiosyncratic," he says. "Those very diverse people are consistently facing the same issues and same potential missteps."

????Segway founder Dean Kamen and Nike (NKE) founder Phil Knight are other examples of kings, so intent on maintaining control of the company that they missed out on growth opportunities or access to capital. Kamen's conviction that the Segway would revolutionize the transportation industry made him fanatical about secrecy, limiting his staff's ability to test market the device before its release. Knight scoffed at the 1980s aerobics trend and kept Nike focused on designing for elite athletes, only to see Reebok overtake his company by selling sneakers to women.

????By contrast, Farbood Nivi, founder of educational social network Grockit, agreed to step aside as CEO and recruit an executive who could take the company to the next level. "The only way to get someone of high enough caliber was to give away the CEO job," Nivi says. "If you're not set up to think that your company is going to be so successful that it's going to outperform you, you've got your sights set the wrong way."

????Neither the king nor rich model is best, Wasserman says. Entrepreneurs should act consistently with their motivations. King entrepreneurs, for instance, would likely be less satisfied with the outcome if they gave up control and saw the company become a multi-billion dollar success story without them -- and without fulfilling their vision.

????In 1992 when Kelly Campbell started Interface Technologies Inc., a software development company in Raleigh, North Carolina, his dream was to change the world with beautifully designed technology. Since then, he's come to see that sharing control is essential for a company in such a creative industry.

????"That's been a shift for me over the years, that you don't have to have control over everything, that you can involve people internally and customers," Campbell says. "It's not so much about the technology or our ability to do things with technology that really matters. It's about how you can apply it to solving a specific problem and getting things done for people. That's sort of a shift into a less controlling position."

????During the Internet boom, Campbell's contemporaries launched businesses and sold them for multi-million dollar paychecks; he was content to build an enterprise that would thrive during the boom and busts to come. "In the late 90's I got laughed at for being a lifestyle business," he says. "A couple of years later, it wasn't so funny."

????David Vivero isn't sure whether he falls into the king or rich model, which he studied in Wasserman's class. He launched RentJuice in 2009 to fulfill his vision of efficiently connecting real estate brokers and property management professionals.

????"There's an emotional attachment and connection to my business. I would never sell it at this point," Vivero says. Still, he sought venture capital financing to have enough resources to execute his vision, and he welcomes the experience and input of his investors.

????When pushed, he says that he likely falls into the king model. "I probably sold the product on my own too long instead of thinking of myself as this single cell organization that needs to split," Vivero says. "I needed to change my position to being a hirer and mentor and compensator. That was a big transition for me. We probably would've had a faster growing enterprise if I had done that sooner."