摩根大通CEO危机管理失败

    摩根大通（JP Morgan）最近（突然）宣布出现20亿美元交易巨亏，一时舆论哗然。杰米•戴蒙和他的公关团队应对得如此狼狈，给了我们几个“活生生的教训”：

    先了解事实，再摆明态度。一个月前，当有关“伦敦鲸”交易员的报道见诸报端，而且这名交易员与摩根大通有关联时，戴蒙竭力否认，称这不是什么大事。据《华尔街日报》（the Wall Street Journal）报道，戴蒙不了解公司交易员交易活动的真正范围和这对公司构成的风险，我也同意这一点。快进至当前：他看起来就像一名糟糕的领导，允许交易员进行这个星球上有史以来风险最大的交易，却不知这会对公司财务构成怎样的影响。为什么他要在还没有真正了解这些活动的影响时，就对该交易员的活动发表声明？他典型的瞎逞强做法这次终于搬起石头砸了自己的脚。他本应听到这些传言，对事实进行细致深入的调查，总结出观点，然后同媒体进行沟通。但他没有选择这样做，结果遭到痛批。活该如此。他违反了危机管理的基本原则。或许，他本应学习一下强生（J&J）处理泰诺（Tylenol）感冒药致命危机的案例。虽说摩根大通的这起事件可能无关性命，但鉴于戴蒙曾经孤注一掷地否认有任何问题（而现在问题已经暴露了），他的公关工作可真是一团糟。

    避免自以为是。在谈到自己使尽招数并抓住机会带领摩根大通度过整个金融危机时，戴蒙一直吹嘘自己重视风险管理和审慎地承担风险。他特别想把摩根大通描绘成与贝尔斯登（Bear Stearns）、雷曼（Lehman）和其他投资银行那些“不诚信的家伙”有显著区别的公司。具有更好的多元化。更大的业务广度。更好的风险控制。这些就是摩根大通身上世界无敌的标识，也使得它基本上不受大批同行所面临的问题困扰。导致巨额损失的两项因素：沟通失败和缺乏风险控制，与戴蒙对摩根大通的描述可谓格格不入。如果你把自己置于希腊圣山奥林匹斯山上，而一旦信息与现实错位，你就很容易栽大跟头——就像这个案例一样。

    With the web afire with criticism over JP Morgan's recently announced (and unexpected) $2 billion trading loss, a few "life lessons" came to mind as to how Jamie Dimon - and his PR department - bungled this badly:

    Know the facts before taking a stand. When news of a "London Whale" came to light a month ago, and this trader was linked to JP Morgan, Dimon issued a strenuous denial that this was a big deal. According to the Wall Street Journal, and I'd tend to agree with them, Dimon didn't understand the true extent of his trader's activities or the risks it posed to the firm. Fast-forward to today: he looks like a terrible leader, one who allowed a trader one of the biggest risk books on the planet without knowing how it was impacting the firm's financial position. Why on earth would he make a statement about this trader's activities without truly understanding their impact in depth? His typical bravado backfired in this case. He should have heard the rumblings, did a deep forensic dive into the facts, developed a view and then communicated to the media. He chose not to follow this approach and got absolutely skewered. And deservedly so. He failed Crisis Management 101. Perhaps he should have learned from J&J's handling of the Tylenol scare. Lives may not be at risk here, but given how far out on a limb he had gone in denying any problem (and now knowledge of the problem) his PR morass is pretty hairy.

    Avoid taking self-righteous positions. For all the skill and opportunism with which Dimon navigated JP Morgan through the financial crisis, he has long touted his emphasis on risk management and on prudent risk-taking. He specifically sought to paint his firm as distinctly different than those "cowboys" at Bear Stearns, Lehman and the other investment banks. Better diversification. Greater breadth. Better risk controls. These were the hallmarks of JP Morgan (JPM) as a world-beater, largely immune to the troubles of its bulge bracket peers. Both the communication breakdown and lack of risk controls giving rise to this massive loss are completely at odds with his characterization of the firm. If you put yourself on the top of Mt. Olympus, you are always prone to a nasty fall if messaging and reality are found to be mis-aligned - as they are in this case.