成人小说亚洲一区二区三区,亚洲国产精品一区二区三区,国产精品成人精品久久久,久久综合一区二区三区,精品无码av一区二区,国产一级a毛一级a看免费视频,欧洲uv免费在线区一二区,亚洲国产欧美中日韩成人综合视频,国产熟女一区二区三区五月婷小说,亚洲一区波多野结衣在线

《財(cái)富》雜志不久前宣布，作為世界上最有價(jià)值的上市公司，蘋(píng)果連續(xù)第十年成為全球最受贊賞的企業(yè)。這并不意外，即使看起來(lái)確實(shí)非常不公平——就像一個(gè)小孩既是中學(xué)里最有錢(qián)、最聰明的，又是長(zhǎng)的最好看的。這就給我們帶來(lái)了一個(gè)重要而又顯而易見(jiàn)的問(wèn)題：我們能從蘋(píng)果身上學(xué)到哪些東西呢？“聘請(qǐng)史蒂夫·喬布斯當(dāng)CEO”是個(gè)挺好的主意，但不實(shí)用。盡管如此，蘋(píng)果的成功在很大程度上都源自三項(xiàng)極不尋常的管理政策，這些政策可供其它公司借鑒。

-蘋(píng)果只有一張損益表。想想看，去年收入2160億美元，在《財(cái)富》500強(qiáng)中排名第三的巨無(wú)霸只有一個(gè)凈利潤(rùn)數(shù)據(jù)。大家立即就能發(fā)現(xiàn)這項(xiàng)政策怎樣讓決策變得簡(jiǎn)單，怎樣把力量集中起來(lái)，又是怎樣減少權(quán)力爭(zhēng)奪的（盡管沒(méi)什么東西能消除這種行為）。在任何大公司，編制多張損益表都很有誘惑力。有抱負(fù)的經(jīng)理人喜歡這樣做，激勵(lì)他們變得更簡(jiǎn)單，資源配置也會(huì)更加輕松，至少表面上如此。但蘋(píng)果在很久以前就斷定這樣做弊大于利。由此產(chǎn)生的結(jié)果難以辯駁，而與之相關(guān)的另一項(xiàng)罕見(jiàn)特性是……

-蘋(píng)果的產(chǎn)品線仍然出奇地短。人們?cè)缇桶l(fā)現(xiàn)，蘋(píng)果所有產(chǎn)品的所有模型可以擺滿一張會(huì)議桌。雖然這張桌子不斷變大，但一家以產(chǎn)品為基礎(chǔ)的公司能通過(guò)如此之少的產(chǎn)品實(shí)現(xiàn)這樣的規(guī)模依然令人驚嘆。為什么大多數(shù)公司都不是如此的專注呢？我猜這是因?yàn)楣浪惝a(chǎn)品線擴(kuò)張帶來(lái)的收益要比估算將大量時(shí)間和精力投入少數(shù)幾種產(chǎn)品帶來(lái)的收益更容易。和進(jìn)行主觀判斷相比，大多數(shù)經(jīng)理人都覺(jué)得基于數(shù)字來(lái)做決定更讓人放心。這可能是個(gè)典型的錯(cuò)誤。就像沃倫·巴菲特說(shuō)的那樣：“近似的正確好過(guò)精確的錯(cuò)誤?！彪m然增長(zhǎng)需要新產(chǎn)品，但CEO蒂姆·庫(kù)克基本上保持著讓自己近似正確的勇氣。

-蘋(píng)果以不尋常的方式開(kāi)發(fā)產(chǎn)品。喬布斯把這個(gè)過(guò)程稱為“整合”。這個(gè)想法很簡(jiǎn)單，那就是把消費(fèi)者體驗(yàn)中各種元素的構(gòu)建者召集在一起，包括硬件、軟件、界面、網(wǎng)絡(luò)甚至包裝，然后指定一個(gè)人負(fù)責(zé)整合，由他來(lái)監(jiān)督所有的開(kāi)發(fā)工作，以便讓他們組合出一份完整的體驗(yàn)。聽(tīng)起來(lái)一目了然，但大多數(shù)公司都不這樣做。它們通常召集的是成本經(jīng)理、收入經(jīng)理和損益經(jīng)理，而不是體驗(yàn)的創(chuàng)造者。決策往往按順序做出，而不是同時(shí)進(jìn)行。其結(jié)果總是不夠理想。正如直言不諱的喬布斯所說(shuō)：“整合是我得以創(chuàng)造完美產(chǎn)品的唯一途徑。”

效仿這些做法也許并不容易，特別是在老牌大企業(yè)中。但存在這種可能。它并不需要遠(yuǎn)見(jiàn)卓識(shí)的創(chuàng)始人動(dòng)用他妙不可言的天賦。你的公司也許永遠(yuǎn)也不會(huì)成為世界上最受贊賞的企業(yè)（但誰(shuí)知道呢？），不過(guò)它可以從蘋(píng)果那里學(xué)到怎樣朝著這個(gè)方向邁進(jìn)。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

作者：Geoff Colvin

譯者：Charlie

審稿：詹妮

Apple, the world’s most valuable publicly traded company, is also the World’s Most Admired Company for the tenth consecutive year, as Fortune announced yesterday. This is not exactly a surprise, even if it does seem unfair—like one kid being the richest, smartest, and best-looking in high school. But it raises an important, obvious question: What useful lessons can the rest of us learn from Apple? “Hire Steve Jobs as CEO” is a valid lesson but not useful. Nonetheless, much of Apple’s success derives from three highly unusual management policies that are available to any company:

-Apple has only one P&L. Think of it—$216 billion of revenue last year, No. 3 on the Fortune 500, yet just one bottom line in the whole vast enterprise. You can immediately see how this policy simplifies decision-making, focuses effort, and diminishes turf battles (though nothing can eliminate them). In any big organization the temptations to establish multiple P&Ls are powerful. Ambitious managers like it, incentivizing those managers is easier, and resource allocation can also be easier, or at least it can appear to be. But Apple decided long ago that the benefits aren’t worth the costs. The results are hard to argue with. A related, rare trait is that…

-Apple still has a remarkably small product line. It has long been observed that every model of every product Apple makes would fit on a conference room table. While the table is getting bigger, it’s still astounding that a product-based company can achieve such scale with so few items. Why aren’t most companies so tightly focused? I suspect it’s because estimating the benefits of broadening the product line is easier than estimating the benefits of concentrating enormous time and energy on a few products. Most managers are more comfortable making a decision based on numbers than making a judgment call. This can be a classic error. As Warren Buffett says, “It’s better to be approximately right than precisely wrong.” While growth requires new products, CEO Tim Cook has largely maintained the courage to be approximately right.

-Apple develops products in an unusual way. Jobs called the process “integration.” The idea is simple: Bring together the people who create the various elements of the customer experience – hardware, software, interfaces, online experience, even packaging—and assign one person, the integrator, to oversee development of them all so they combine into one knockout complete experience. Sounds obvious, but most companies don’t do it that way. They typically bring together cost managers, revenue managers, and P&L managers, not experience creators. Decisions are often made sequentially, not simultaneously. The result is always sub-optimal. As Jobs said, with characteristic immodesty, “Integration is the only way I could create perfect products.”

Emulating these practices may not be easy, especially in big, old organizations. But it’s possible. It doesn’t demand the ineffable genius of a visionary founder. Your outfit may never become the World’s Most Admired (though who knows?), but it can learn from Apple how to move in that direction.