微软重组只是第一步

    微软（Microsoft）传闻已久的重组终于到来了，接下来的问题变成了这次巨大的变革能否足以让公司实现CEO史蒂夫•鲍尔默 “同一个微软”的愿景。

    重组后，这家位于华盛顿州雷德蒙德的科技巨头旗下的各团队将把精力集中于操作系统、应用服务、云技术和设备方面，同时还将致力于从Windows到Xbox的公司所有核心产品。几名高管也从中受益。Windows部门的前领导朱莉•拉森•格林将成为硬件部门主管——该部门近期曾由如今社交游戏公司Zynga的CEO唐•马特里克领导，Windows团队则将由Windows Phone的副主管特里•迈尔森将接管。其他高管如萨蒂亚•纳德拉将领导公司的云服务，Skype董事长托尼•贝茨将管理业务拓展和宣传部门，负责公司战略和开发业务的范围。如此调整，鲍尔默不仅旨在让微软变为“设备和服务”公司——就像他去年秋天承诺的那样，也旨在促进整个公司史无前例的合作。

    弗雷斯特研究公司（Forrester）分析师大卫•约翰逊认为，通过这些调整，微软在公司内部认可和奖励了优秀的领导。“大公司最重要的是能够整合不同领域的资源来做好事情，这就是微软正在尝试做的。”他特别以纳德拉来举例。作为微软服务和工具部门的前总管，纳德拉带领这个年盈利190亿美元的部门在最新季度使销量提升了11%。【在这之前，他还负责必应（Bing）搜索部门和广告业务。】

    高管领导战略公司Kotter International的执行副总裁兰迪•奥廷格称：“这是个开门红，不过尚不足以实现‘同一个微软’的目标。真正的问题是，这次重组之后，如何真正改变公司文化。重组不会改变他们的行为方式，因为多年来，他们在经营理念上一直各自为政。”

    奥廷格指的是微软臭名昭著的“强迫排名”系统。它要求每个单位都按照一定比例给员工的表现评级：顶级、优秀、一般和糟糕。根据去年夏天《名利场》杂志（Vanity Fair）披露的公司档案，这个机制让员工滋生了“适者生存”的心态，最终阻碍了微软的脚步。（一名软件工程师回忆道，员工们花费了大量时间来准备应付半年的检查，而不是专注于产品开发。）

    约翰逊对此表示赞同：“它对创新而言不啻于癌症。”他对推行强迫排名机制的首席运营官凯文•特纳在这次人事变动后仍居原位表示惊讶。“一旦员工们明白，无论如何，他们当中每年都有人要遭殃，自然就会开始彼此竞争。我认为，这让公司内部滋生了不当行为。不过显然，史蒂夫仍然从中发现了一些价值。”（财富中文网）

    译者：严匡正

    Now that Microsoft's long-rumored reorganization is here, the question becomes whether the massive changes are enough to achieve CEO Steve Ballmer's vision of "one Microsoft."

    Under the restructuring, teams within the Redmond, Wash.-based tech giant will focus their efforts on operating systems, apps, the cloud, and devices but also contribute to all of the company's core products, from Windows to Xbox. Several top executives also benefit. Julie Larson Green, the former head of the Windows division, will now serve as hardware chief -- a role occupied recently by Don Mattrick, now Zynga (ZNGA) CEO -- with Windows Phone VP Terry Myerson running the Windows group. Others like Satya Nadella will now spearhead the company's cloud services, and Skype president Tony Bates will manage the Business Development and Evangelism group, leading corporate strategy and developer outreach. In doing so, it's not just Ballmer's aim for Microsoft (MSFT) to become the "devices and services" company he promised last fall but to also encourage unprecedented collaboration across the company.

    "The most important thing for a large company is to be able to coordinate resources across a whole bunch of different domains to get something done, and that's what Microsoft is attempting to do," explains Forrester (FORR) analyst David Johnson, who argues that Microsoft has embraced and rewarded good leaders internally with the move. He points to Nadella in particular as one example. As president of Microsoft's Server and Tools previously, Nadella led a $19 billion-a-year division that saw sales climb 11% during the company's most recent quarter. (Before that, he also ran the Bing search group as well as the advertising business.)

    "It's a great first step but won't get them to 'One Microsoft,'" says Randy Ottinger, EVP of the executive leadership strategy firm Kotter International. "The real question is what are they going to do post-reorganization to actually change the culture. The re-org will not change the way they behave and act because it's been years and years of doing business in a different way."

    Ottinger is referring to Microsoft's notorious "forced ranking" system which mandates that every unit declare a certain percentage of employees as top performers, good performers, average, and poor. According to a revealing Vanity Fair company profile last summer, it's a program that has bred a survival-of-the-fittest mentality among many employees and ultimately slowed Microsoft down. (To wit, one software engineer recalled employees spending much of their time planning for their six-month reviews instead of focusing on product development.)

    "It's a cancer for innovation," agrees Johnson, who expressed surprise that COO Kevin Turner, the executive behind forced ranking, kept his role after the shuffle. "When employees know that someone on their team is going to take a bullet every year regardless, competition between people is a natural result. I think it fosters the wrong behavior within the company but Steve obviously still sees some value within that."