Spotting a Modern Business Crisis — Before It Strikes

企業(yè)深植于其社會和經(jīng)濟環(huán)境，無法分割。這意味著企業(yè)與嚴重影響社會的重大危機有著直接的聯(lián)系，從氣候變化、收入不平等到其他種種問題。? ?

Companies are embedded in their?social, economic,?and political context — not separate from it. That means they are directly connected to the major crises that engulf society, from climate change to income inequality and beyond.

研究還表明，年輕一代更傾向于將大企業(yè)視為可以對社區(qū)產(chǎn)生積極影響的社會力量。? ?

Further,?research?shows that younger generations are more likely than others to see large firms as sociopolitical actors that can have a positive impact on their communities.

不過，危機對于各企業(yè)的影響有大有小，企業(yè)可能很難識別哪些危機會對自身業(yè)務(wù)、員工、客戶和社區(qū)造成威脅。如今的危機也比幾十年前更為復雜、變化更快，最近的一個例子就是新冠疫情。? ?

But since not every crisis affects all companies equally, it can be challenging for organizations to identify which ones pose a threat to their businesses, their employees, their customers, and their communities. Today’s crises are also more complex and fast-moving than those from decades past, Covid-19 being the most recent example.

要更好地理解企業(yè)面臨著什么問題以及該如何應(yīng)對，《哈佛商業(yè)評論》向?qū)W者和從業(yè)者提出了四個問題。以下是他們的回答。稿件經(jīng)過編輯。

To better understand what companies are facing and how they can successfully respond to the challenges ahead, Harvard Business Review posed four questions to scholars and practitioners. Here’s an edited collection of their responses.

過去50年里，影響企業(yè)的危機發(fā)生了怎樣的變化？?

How have crises that affect businesses changed in the last 50 years?? ?

毅偉商學院戰(zhàn)略教授、商業(yè)可持續(xù)發(fā)展網(wǎng)絡(luò)（Network for Business Sustainability）創(chuàng)始人蒂瑪·班賽爾（Tima Bansal）：

Tima Bansal, professor of strategy at Ivey Business School and founder of the Network for Business Sustainability:

1997年的亞洲金融危機令人警醒——泰銖崩盤，似乎是距離我們很遙遠的一件事，讓整個亞洲的貨幣和股市變得不穩(wěn)定，而且很快影響了美國股市，說明一種新的現(xiàn)象：全世界金融市場已經(jīng)深刻地相互依存。?

The 1997 Asian financial crisis was a real awakening. A seemingly remote event — the collapse of the Thai baht — destabilized currencies and stock markets across Asia and quickly disrupted U.S. stock exchanges too, signaling a new and deep interdependence among financial markets worldwide.

之后幾十年，危機更加全球化、更加頻繁也更加易變，而且這種狀態(tài)似乎會繼續(xù)下去。最近的例子是新冠疫情：某個地方出現(xiàn)的公共衛(wèi)生危機，變成了一場全球災難。原因何在？因為如今產(chǎn)品、金融資產(chǎn)、人和信息都在快速流動，成本很低。交通和通信網(wǎng)絡(luò)創(chuàng)造了復雜且緊密聯(lián)系的世界。此外我們還看到了工業(yè)增長的極限。企業(yè)獲取自然資源的速度比資源再生的速度更快，生態(tài)系統(tǒng)瀕臨崩潰。由于資源有限，商業(yè)環(huán)境越來越動態(tài)、混亂且不可預料，很小的事件會被放大。?

In the decades since, crises have only become more global, more frequent, and more volatile, and this is likely to continue. Covid-19 is the most recent example: A public health crisis in a specific locality — Wuhan, China — became a global disaster. Why? Because products, financial assets, people, and information flow quickly and cheaply today. Transportation and communication networks have created a complex, interconnected world. What’s more, we’re now seeing the limits of industrial growth. Companies are extracting natural resources faster than the Earth can regenerate them, and ecosystems are being stretched to the breaking point. Given our finite resources, the business environment is increasingly dynamic, chaotic, and unpredictable and small events are amplified. ? ?

歐亞集團CEO馬齊亞·米諾維 （Maziar Minovi）：

Maziar Minovi, CEO of Eurasia Group:

過去半個世紀的大部分時間，西方世界都享有相對的和平與繁榮。觀點、信息、資金、商品、服務(wù)和人的自由流動，使得數(shù)十億人擺脫了貧困。于是富裕國家的大型企業(yè)里足有兩代風險管理者不必對政治考慮太多。? ? ??

For most of the past half century, the West enjoyed relative peace and prosperity. The free movement of ideas, information, money, goods, services, and people lifted billions out of poverty. As a result, large corporations in rich countries were populated with two generations of risk managers who didn’t have to think much about politics.

那個能讓我們自鳴得意的時代結(jié)束了。對于不公平問題的關(guān)注，使得民粹主義的憤怒和難以預測的政治活動在西方許多地方出現(xiàn)。我們的全球金融相互聯(lián)系，放大了這些動態(tài)。因此中國關(guān)于在技術(shù)或金融領(lǐng)域加強管控的決策會影響新加坡、奧斯汀和倫敦的企業(yè)，而今天一名美國議員對某個法案的投票可能會顛覆法蘭克福和東京明天的戰(zhàn)略計劃。

That age of complacency is over. We’re in a world where the soon-to-be-largest economy, China, is dominated by a small group of people who make decisions in secret and have the power to direct government policy toward their political survival rather than economic dynamism. Meanwhile, rising concerns about inequality have given rise to populist fury and unpredictable politics in many parts of the West. Our global financial interconnectedness magnifies these dynamics. It’s why China’s decision to tighten control of its technology or financial sector matters to businesses in Singapore, Austin, and London, and a vote from a single U.S. senator on a bill today can upend strategic plans in Frankfurt and Tokyo tomorrow.

華威商學院商業(yè)倫理學教授瑪麗安娜·弗塔基（Marianna Fotaki）：

Marianna Fotaki, professor of business ethics at Warwick Business School:

全球化造成了前所未有的針對勞動力和機遇的競爭，因此有了跨國企業(yè)的指數(shù)級增長。在地方層面，這種跨界經(jīng)營的便利讓一些公司獲得了異常巨大的力量，能夠影響當?shù)卣魏椭卫?。出現(xiàn)這種情況時，企業(yè)承擔了制定政策的主要角色，而政策決定會影響社會里的眾人，這個區(qū)域的民主和公益可能因此受到損害。諷刺的是，缺乏強有力的能夠推進民主和公益的立法機構(gòu)，可能會影響社會穩(wěn)定，反過來影響企業(yè)經(jīng)營。? ??

Globalization has created unprecedented competition for labor and opportunities, leading to exponential growth for transnational businesses. At the local level, this ease of doing business across borders has allowed some companies to acquire disproportionate power to influence local politics and governance. When that happens, they assume a dominant role in making policy decisions that affect people in a society — which can then undermine democracy and public good in the region. Ironically, the lack of strong legislative institutions, which makes all this possible, can be a cause of instability in society, affecting businesses in turn.

在全球?qū)用?，沒有強力的經(jīng)濟監(jiān)管機構(gòu)確保公正公平的商業(yè)行為，意味著企業(yè)的規(guī)模和影響力沒有限制。結(jié)果行業(yè)被壟斷或出現(xiàn)寡頭，巨頭企業(yè)讓新企業(yè)無法進入市場。如果放任不管，這種反競爭的行為可能會加劇富裕國家和欠發(fā)達國家之間的不平等，造成全球差距。

At the global level, the absence of strong economic regulatory institutions to ensure equitable and fair business practices means that corporations have no limits on their size and influence. The result is industries turning into monopolies or oligopolies, and giant companies preventing newer ones from entering the market. When left unchecked, these anticompetitive behaviors can exacerbate inequalities between rich and less developed countries, creating global disparities.

紐約大學斯特恩商學院副教授辛茲亞納·多羅班圖（Sinziana Dorobantu）：

Sinziana Dorobantu, associate professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business:

更高效的供應(yīng)鏈、互聯(lián)網(wǎng)和社交媒體等現(xiàn)代技術(shù)，不僅加快了商業(yè)變化的節(jié)奏，也讓人們更加注意商業(yè)對社會的影響。50年前，企業(yè)的監(jiān)管主要是由監(jiān)管機構(gòu)和專門的消費者團體負責的。? ??

Modern technologies such as more-efficient supply chain operations, the internet, and social media have not only increased the pace of change in business but have also drawn more attention to its impact on society. Fifty years ago, oversight of companies was largely the domain of regulatory agencies and specialized consumer groups.

公眾知道什么，在很大程度上取決于企業(yè)被要求披露什么。然而現(xiàn)在對于企業(yè)的公眾認知受到不同的利益相關(guān)者影響——消費者、活動家、地方或國家政府、非政府組織、國際機構(gòu)，以及宗教、文化與科學團體，等等。我的研究表明，如果企業(yè)在高度透明的社會運營，有新的媒體技術(shù)和新聞自由，那么即使是沒有連在一起的分散的事件，也很容易升級為企業(yè)的重大危機。

What the public knew was largely defined by what businesses were required to disclose. Today, however, public perception of businesses is affected by a diverse range of stakeholders — consumers, activists, local or national governments, nongovernmental organizations, international agencies, and religious, cultural, or scientific groups, among others. My own?research?shows that when businesses operate in a highly transparent society with new media technologies and a free press, even decentralized, uncoordinated events can easily escalate into a significant crisis for the firm.

公司如何識別將來可能面臨的危機？

How can companies identify the crises they’ll likely face going forward?

堪薩斯大學商學院威廉與朱迪·多金教席教授吳章云（Chang Hoon Oh）：

Chang Hoon Oh, William and Judy Docking Professor of Strategy at the University of Kansas School of Business:

企業(yè)識別風險的方法有幾種。一是借助保險和咨詢公司等外部專業(yè)機構(gòu)識別社會政治或氣候風險；二是聘請合適的人才進行風險管理；三是依靠政府機構(gòu)、媒體、行業(yè)內(nèi)的特定機構(gòu)或企業(yè)領(lǐng)導者的風險感知經(jīng)驗。如果可能的話，最保險的是這三種機制一起使用。? ?

There are a few ways businesses can identify risks. One, externalize expertise through insurance and consulting companies that identify sociopolitical or climate risks. Two, hire the right talent for risk assessment. Three, rely on government agencies, media, industry-specific institutions, or business leaders’ own experience of risk perception. A fail-safe approach is to use all three mechanisms in tandem, if possible.

??

不過，風險評估只是第一步。如果公司沒有做好準備，一切不確定事件和風險都可能造成危機。比如2011年日本的福島第一核電站事故，我與同事珍妮弗·奧策爾進行了相關(guān)的研究。雖然造成事故的是自然災害——地震和海嘯，但許多人指出，放射性物質(zhì)泄露是由于預測失誤。?

That said, risk assessment is only the first step. Any uncertainty or risk can become a crisis if the company is not prepared for it. Take the?2011 Fukushima Daiichi?nuclear disaster in Japan, an event my colleague Jennifer Oetzel and I have been studying. While it was triggered by natural events — an earthquake and a tsunami — many argue that the spillover of radioactive elements from the nuclear plant happened due to an error in foresight.

斯坦福商學院高級副院長、組織行為學莫格里德教席教授薩拉·索爾（Sarah A.?Soule）：

Sarah A. Soule, senior associate dean and Morgride Professor of Organizational Behavior at the Stanford Graduate School of Business:

社交媒體興起，識別危機更加容易。聰明的領(lǐng)導者會留意當前的熱點趨勢，預測這些問題可能對自己公司產(chǎn)生的影響。例如一些企業(yè)早在2019年12月就通過社交媒體和其他來源密切關(guān)注中國出現(xiàn)的新冠病毒，而此時政府尚未關(guān)注。另一個例子是美國的“黑人的命也是命”運動，特別是在喬治·弗洛伊德（George Floyd）被殺害后，迫使企業(yè)重新評估對利益相關(guān)者的責任，從外部（如營銷）和內(nèi)部（如關(guān)注多樣性、包容性和公平）兩個角度調(diào)整戰(zhàn)略。

The rise of social media has made it easier to identify crises. Smart leaders are paying attention to what’s trending to anticipate how these issues impact their businesses. For example, some businesses were carefully tracking the emergence of the Covid-19 virus in China in December 2019 through social media and other sources, even as governments seemingly failed to do so. Another example is the?Black Lives Matter?movement in the U.S., which, especially after the killing of George Floyd, has forced companies to reevaluate their responsibility to stakeholders and change their strategies both externally (such as marketing efforts) and internally (such as increased focus on diversity, inclusion, and equity).

出現(xiàn)危機時，企業(yè)要對誰負責？

To whom are businesses responsible when crises occur?

班賽爾：將企業(yè)的責任限制在股東或利益相關(guān)者范圍內(nèi)是不夠的。我認為企業(yè)要對社會中的所有人負責——不僅是現(xiàn)在的人們，還包括接下來幾代人。這是因為在大部分情況下，危機會經(jīng)過數(shù)年醞釀，其影響可能只有在未來才會被人們發(fā)現(xiàn)。而且可能很難找到造成危機的是誰——責任方可能有很多個。例如，孕婦胎盤里檢測到塑料微粒，是在陸地和水中累積塑料數(shù)十年后發(fā)生的。碳排放問題現(xiàn)在才開始討論，溯其根源則是工業(yè)革命。比起只關(guān)注危機的具體原因，更重要的是企業(yè)要找到廣泛支持社區(qū)的方式。???

Bansal:?Limiting the responsibility of companies to their shareholders or stakeholders is not enough. I believe that companies are responsible to all people in society — not just today but for generations to come. That’s because, in most cases, crises simmer over years; their impact may only be noticeable in the future. And it can be hard to know who caused the crisis — there may be many perpetrators. For example,?microplastics?are being detected in the placentas of pregnant women after decades of plastics accumulating on land and in water. The effects of carbon emissions are only being discussed now, despite their roots dating back to the Industrial Revolution. Instead of just focusing on the exact cause of a crisis, it’s important for businesses to recognize the broader ways in which they can support communities.

2005年颶風卡特里娜沖擊美國墨西哥灣沿岸，沃爾瑪率先提供災后救援。沃爾瑪員工為新奧爾良受災的數(shù)千人提供食物、水和住所。時任CEO的李·斯科特（Lee Scott）做出這個決定，不是因為對利益相關(guān)者很重要，而是因為沃爾瑪有能力提供幫助。?

When Hurricane Katrina ravaged the Gulf Coast of the U.S. in 2005,?Walmart was among the first organizations to provide disaster relief. Walmart employees brought food and water and offered shelter to thousands of people in New Orleans who were affected. Lee Scott, the CEO at the time,?seems to have made the decision?not because it mattered to stakeholders but because Walmart could help. ??

弗塔基：公司并非存在于真空中，而是在社會中形成的，即使最終成為跨國企業(yè)也不例外。企業(yè)造成的結(jié)果，無論是正面（如提升就業(yè)率）還是負面（如環(huán)境污染）都影響著每一個人，和是否參與商業(yè)活動無關(guān)。例如全球氣候危機，就是企業(yè)經(jīng)營造成的會影響每一個人的后果。企業(yè)在一定程度上造成或助長了問題，就有責任協(xié)助解決。? ??

Fotaki:?Businesses do not exist in a vacuum. Rather, they grow out of societies, even if they ultimately turn into transnational corporations. And business outcomes, both positive (such as increased employment) and negative (pollution) affect everyone, whether they participate in the business activity or not. The global climate crisis, for instance, is a consequence of doing business that affects everyone. Companies helped create it and so have a responsibility to help fix it.

多羅班圖：危機之中，企業(yè)必須關(guān)注目標。目標應(yīng)當在本質(zhì)上與企業(yè)服務(wù)的客戶、讓企業(yè)得以實現(xiàn)服務(wù)的員工和供應(yīng)商、允許企業(yè)運營的社區(qū)和公共機構(gòu)相關(guān)?！拔覀?yōu)楹味嬖凇彼坪跏莻€很大的問題，但思考這個問題能讓企業(yè)投入財力和運營資源實現(xiàn)其目標，對社會產(chǎn)生積極的影響。? ??

Dorobantu:?During crises, businesses need to focus on their purpose, which should be intrinsically linked to the customers they serve, the employees and suppliers that make that service possible, and the communities and public authorities that give consent to operate. “Why do we exist?” may seem like a very big question, but it allows businesses to direct financial and operational resources to serve their purpose and make a positive impact on society.

例如新冠疫情流行初期的全球礦業(yè)公司。礦業(yè)公司的目標是開采原材料，原材料對于制造醫(yī)療器械、電子電氣設(shè)備和汽車零部件等等各種制造業(yè)都至關(guān)重要。為了實現(xiàn)目標，礦業(yè)公司不止要關(guān)注公司的運營和財務(wù)方面，還要關(guān)注人和所在社區(qū)——在危機之中失去了其他分銷渠道的時候尤其如此。這樣可以實現(xiàn)多方共贏：當?shù)卣梢砸揽康V業(yè)公司向當?shù)氐娜藗儼l(fā)放食品和藥品等必需品，社區(qū)的基本需求得到滿足，礦業(yè)公司則得以繼續(xù)經(jīng)營。

Take the example of?global mining companies?during the early months of the Covid-19 pandemic. The purpose of mining firms is to extract raw materials that are critical for the manufacturing of medical devices, electrical and electronic equipment, and automobile parts, among other things. To do this, mining companies need to not only focus on the operational and financial aspects of their business but also take care of the people and communities in which they operate — especially when they are cut off from other distribution channels during a crisis. Doing so is a win-win for everyone: Local governments can rely on mining companies to deliver essential supplies like food and medicines to the people in the area of operation, communities’ essential needs are fulfilled, and mining companies can continue their business operations.

新冠疫情流行，對領(lǐng)導者應(yīng)對危機的方式造成了怎樣的影響？

How has the Covid-19 pandemic changed the way leaders will handle crises going forward?? ? ?

LedBy基金會創(chuàng)始人魯哈·沙達布（Ruha Shadab）博士：

Dr. Ruha Shadab, founder of LedBy Foundation:

我們已經(jīng)看到，必須關(guān)注社會效益，而非問題。危機是企業(yè)重新思考自身使命、思考組織驅(qū)動力并提升靈活度和敏捷性以履行使命的機會。從這個角度講，危機可以幫助你更快地適應(yīng)改變。我自己的社會企業(yè)就是這樣。? ??

We’ve seen that we need to be wedded to the cause, not the problem. Any crisis is an opportunity to reevaluate your mission, rethink what drives your organization, and become flexible and agile to achieve that mission. When you do, it helps you adapt more quickly to change. I’ve seen this with my own social venture.

??

疫情開始時，我們80%線上、20%線下的混合制職業(yè)發(fā)展培訓轉(zhuǎn)為100%線上培訓。我們不得不重新審視自己正在解決的問題（在服務(wù)行業(yè)女性失業(yè)率提升的時期，為女性提供就業(yè)技能培訓），并重申我們的使命（幫助女性提升就業(yè)能力變得比以往更重要）。這種措施促使我們制定了新的線上培訓方法，比如新的課程材料、用時更短的研討會和更多的線下家庭作業(yè)。

When the pandemic started, our hybrid professional-development training — 80% virtual, 20% in-person — had to go 100% virtual. We had to revisit the problem we were solving (training more women to be workforce-ready at a time when female unemployment in service-sector jobs was rising) and reiterate our mission (it was more important than ever for us to help women become more employable). That pushed us to strategize a new approach to virtual training, such as creating new course materials, shorter workshops, and more offline homework.

我們學到的另一點是同理心。一切都與人有關(guān)——特別是與你共事、為你工作的人。要意識到公司員工、團隊成員和同事并不只是“資源”而是人，在工作之外有生活。這些人是你最初的盟友。建立這種同理心，需要信賴和透明度，首先要坦陳危機時刻支持公司的人面臨的難題、風險和機遇。這樣可以為所有人建立一個有支持、有回報的環(huán)境。? ?

The other lesson is empathy. Everything is really about people — especially those who work with (and for) you. Recognize that your employees, team members, and colleagues are not just “resources” but humans with lives beyond their jobs. They are your first set of allies. Building this empathy requires trust and transparency, and that starts with being honest about the challenges, risks, and opportunities for the people supporting your business in times of crisis. When you do this, it’s likely to create an enabling and rewarding environment for everyone.

科羅拉多大學丹佛商學院教授薩拉·科伍爾-米斯拉（Sarah Kovoor-Misra）：

Sarah Kovoor-Misra, professor at CU Denver Business School:

這場疫情讓我們明白，利己的個人主義無法應(yīng)對危機。例如，必要行業(yè)的從業(yè)者及其組織在危機中必須合作，彼此支持，才能拯救生命、滿足需求，這說明團結(jié)和利他是很重要的。領(lǐng)導者要建立鼓勵合作和正面行為的文化，對正面行為予以獎勵。此外還必須更加關(guān)注員工的心理健康，保護員工免于職業(yè)倦怠——危機中和危機過后都要注意。過去的一年半里，我們明白了危機對人的精神和社會都有影響，而且我們的生活不是只有工作。關(guān)注員工在職責和工作任務(wù)以外的需求，比如提供員工協(xié)助項目、育兒補助、育兒支持、包容性的休假政策以及靈活的工作安排，是這個方向積極的一步。???

The pandemic has taught us that an individualistic, self-interested approach is not effective in a crisis. For instance, essential workers and their organizations have had to collaborate and support each other through the crisis to save lives and meet needs, demonstrating that collective and altruistic efforts matter. Leaders need to develop cultures that support collaboration and positive behaviors in the workplace and reward these behaviors. In addition, they must pay greater attention to their employees’ mental health and protect them from burnout — both during and after a crisis. The last year and a half has shown us that crises have psychological and social consequences, and that we’re all more than the work we do. Paying attention to their employees’ needs outside their job roles and tasks, such as by providing employee assistance programs, childcare benefits, caregiving support, inclusive leave policies, and flexible work schedules, is a positive step in that direction.

米諾維：這場疫情說明現(xiàn)在的危機是高度互聯(lián)的。政策制定者、投資者和企業(yè)決策者必須找出一級和二級緊急情況中的許多聯(lián)系，仔細考慮在當?shù)睾腿虻挠绊?。領(lǐng)導者必須有敏捷的洞察力，設(shè)想各種可能出現(xiàn)的情況，防備意外的沖擊。必須在將來會制定企業(yè)治理規(guī)范和標準的全球論壇保持活躍。最后，企業(yè)不能只顧給自己貼金，必須制定戰(zhàn)略應(yīng)對可能引發(fā)危機的問題。??

Minovi:?The pandemic has demonstrated just how interconnected today’s crises are. Policy makers, investors, and business decision-makers must spot the many connections among first- and second-order emergencies and think carefully about both their local and global implications. Leaders must become perceptive and game out many potential scenarios for unexpected shocks. They must stay active in the global forums that will set the rules and standards to govern business in the future. Finally, corporations need to move away from virtue-signaling and create strategies to address possible triggers for crises.

吳：領(lǐng)導者能不能吸取新冠疫情流行初期的經(jīng)驗教訓還有待觀察——危機過后人們不一定能吸取教訓。舉例來說，去年因為供應(yīng)鏈受限，汽車行業(yè)半導體芯片不足。這樣的芯片短缺，在福島事故之后也有過。那次事故過后，企業(yè)準備了替代選項和可靠的供應(yīng)鏈合作伙伴。然而沒有了可預見的威脅，人們很快就忘記了以前的教訓，結(jié)果2020年又被打了個措手不及。? ??

Oh: It remains to be seen whether leaders will remember the early lessons from the pandemic — something that doesn’t always happen after a crisis. For example, since last year, there has been a shortage of semiconductor chips in the automobile industry due to restricted supply chains. The industry experienced the same kind of shortage following the Fukushima disaster. In the aftermath of that crisis, companies developed alternative and reliable supply chain partners. But in the absence of predictable threats, they later forgot the lessons they learned — leaving them unprepared in 2020.

??

這個例子給領(lǐng)導者上了重要的一課：要改善企業(yè)適應(yīng)性和韌性，就要在危機來襲之前做好準備。這需要不斷主動思考和預測，無論是否有危機即將到來。

This example highlights one of the key lessons for leaders: To improve business adaptability and resilience, prepare for crises before they strike. Doing that requires an ongoing strategy of proactive thinking and foresight — whether there is a crisis on the horizon or not.

拉克什塔·阿爾尼·拉維尚卡爾（Rakshitha Arni Ravishankar）|? 文

拉克什塔·阿爾尼·拉維尚卡爾是Ascend副主編。

原文見《哈佛商業(yè)評論》中文版2022年4月刊。