Jim Collins: Certainly, one them anyway. One of them. Ok, so let's, this was a great question that got me thinking. So first of all, let's just kind of review the essence of what it is.
Thomas D. Gorman: Right.
Jim Collins: When we looked at the companies that made this inflection, and then sustained it long enough that they earned a position in the analysis. They had a dynasty era. They got very clear on how to channel their energy right into the middle of these three intersecting circles.
One thing is they had great passion. Second is, things that they could truly be the best in the world at. And third is, what truly was the key value the drives the economic engine.
Now, if you think about that, I don't know if this would translate into Chinese well.
If you think about it on an individual level, right?
If you do something that you really love to do and you're passionate about, and you're really good at it. And you add value for what people will pay you, that's a good place to be. And it doesn't strike me that this is something that would go away over time. 200 years ago, 200 years from now, in different part of the world, in the United States, doing things for which you have great passion, because nothing great happens without passion, doing something in which you have a distinctive ability to be exceptional and doing something that you add value that the world will compensate you for so you can actually turn the flywheel, seems to me to likely to apply.
Now, look at this particularly with companies and I'm going to come to a second point, though, about in today's world or in different parts of the world, how this might morph.
I still absolutely believe in the passion and the best sense in the economic circle. I would argue they are even more important.
The world is going to be uncertain, unstable and out of our control and increasingly exhausting. So, if you don't actually have a deep reservoir of passion for what you're doing, an incredible sense of it, no matter how hard this is, I still really believe in it and I really like it, you're going to get destroyed. Because you simply won't have the endurance. Or, you'll quit when you can.
The second is the notion of, doing what you can be the best at, and I very much agree with Michael Porter, you have to define that very clearly and terms of where you have a distinctive and unique capability.
And in today's increasingly brutal world, if you don't have a distinctive and unique capability that really makes you stand out, in some way,that you can't be exchanged for some other alternative; then you're going to get beat. And I believe that's even more true today, so the irony is actually that the Hedgehog's going to be more important.
The third is, adding value that drives your economic engine. It's increasingly difficult to build an economic engine. And it changes in so many different ways and it gets ripped away by growth, or global forces, or technology changes, or whatever it happens to be. And yet, you have to be able to go back and find the real economic engine or at some point you'll perish.
So, you look at what's the challenge immediately today, you can't just have two or three circles, you can have passion and what you can be best at, but if you don't have the economics, (then it's not enough), right?
So you got to find all three, one way or another. So, those I think will be more important.
How I started thinking about, and I don't know if this is true, but I'm wondering if you went into other cultures whether you might see an addition in the Hedgehog Concept.
And this is speculative, but I wonder if what happens as you go from culture to culture that the three circles go across all of them? But, that you might have a cultural specific fourth circle, that is very relevant to that particular environment. So perhaps, it might be that you go into a given country and the fourth circle is your relationship to government. Or the fourth circle might be, relationships, right? And what you have is not only passion and "best at" and the key set of economics, but relationships.
Cause I know, my friends from India have described for me about, relationships that may go back 15 generations, which will trump economics. So in India, what you might have is, you got to have passion and "best at", and the set of economics and then relationships may really have something to do with that fourth circle.
As I stand back and think about this across different cultures, I would not be surprised to discover that there is a culture-specific, a national-specific fourth circle, wherever you might go. And then I started thinking about, well what might that fourth circle be for the United States, it's sort of invisible to us?
But, if we would actually look across multiple cultures, you would see it for the United States. And I think for the United States it's quite possibly our fundamental relationship to the ethic of our entrepreneurship as uniquely ours perhaps. And how that ties into building companies. But, I have to think about it.
But, I think that we may not see the fourth circle, because we're just looking at American companies in contrast to other American ones. Across cultures, I would not be surprised to see a variable fourth circle.
Thomas D. Gorman: That's fascinating.
Jim Collins: I don't know if that makes any sense...
Thomas D. Gorman: I think it does. I think it does. I think you may very well be on to something. I hadn't thought about it before.
Jim Collins: Well you had, because you asked me the question.
Thomas D. Gorman: That's true.
Jim Collins: I hadn't thought about it, till you asked the question. |
|
吉姆·柯林斯：“当然，这最重要的概念之一。”这是一个发人深省的问题。首先，我们来看一下到底什么是刺猬理念。
高德思：好。
吉姆·柯林斯：看一下那些经历过拐点的公司，在经历拐点之后继续表现出色，最终成为我们的分析对象。他们都曾辉煌过。他们非常清楚，如何将精力正确投入到三环的重叠部分（刺猬理念的核心）。
首先，他们充满热情。第二，他们都有所擅长，并在所擅长的领域可以做到最好。第三，理解驱动经济引擎的真正核心价值所在。
我不知道这些话能不能很好地译成中文。
我们从个人的角度来思考。如果做自己喜欢的事，你就会做得很好。别人为你支付报酬，你能为别人提升价值，这就是一个好的方向。我认为这不会随时间的推移而消逝。无论是两百年前，还是两百年后；无论在世界各地，还是在美国都要做让自己充满热情的事，因为没有热情就无法创造卓越；要做自己擅长、并有天赋的事；要做你能够带来增值的事，这个世界因此会给予你回报。你就可以因此而推动一个（巨大而沉重的）飞轮，在我看来这个理论是适用的。
现在，从公司角度来看。我要谈谈第二点，即在当今世界的不同地方，应该如何因地制宜地运用刺猬理念。
我依旧坚信“热情”和“悟性”在经济轮回中起到的重要作用。现在他们甚至变得更为重要。
世界会变得越来越不确定、不稳定、难以控制，并且令人精疲力尽。所以，不论多么困难，如果你对所做的事没有热情，或者没有足够的悟性，我觉得你一定会被摧毁。 因为你不会有足够的忍耐力。或者说一旦坚持不住，你就会放弃。
第二点，要做你最擅长的。我非常同意迈克尔•波特（Michael Porter）的观点。他说，你一定要清晰地定位自己，认识到自己独特的优势。
在当今这个日益残酷的世界，如果你没有一技之长，无法做到让你自己与众不同而不被他人替代，那么你就会被淘汰。我相信这个道理在如今越来越适用了。所以讽刺的是，刺猬理念将变得越来越重要。
第三，通过增加价值来驱动经济引擎。现在建造经济引擎的工作变得越来越难。它以各种方式变化着，同时受到经济增长、全球化的力量、技术变革和其它各种外力的影响。然而，你必须能够找到真正的经济引擎，不然你早晚会失败。
所以，看看当今的挑战，不可能只有两个环这么简单。你可能有足够的热情，并做着自己擅长的事，但如果没有经济引擎，（还是不够的，）对吧？
所以你无论如何要把这三个环全找到。我觉得这些是更重要的。
虽不知是否正确，但我在想当你研究其他文化时，刺猬理念是不是有了更多的含义？试想，当你跨越了文化，这三个环是否依然能够涵盖一切？还是会有与当地环境紧密相关的第四个环。比如说，在某个国家，第四个环就是和政府的关系。或者说各种类型的关系？你不仅要有热情、特长、主要的经济驱动力，还要有关系。
我的一些印度朋友跟我讲过有些商业关系可以追溯到15代人以前，这些关系甚至超过经济的作用。所以在印度，你要有激情、特长和经济驱动力，同时还要有关系，这也许就是第四个环。
回想这些不同的文化背景，自然会发现这第四个环与特定的文化、国情相关，必须考虑进去。然后我就开始思考，这第四个环对于美国意味着什么。它对我们来说就是无形的吗？
如果观察一下其他文化，我们不难发现它对于美国的意义。对于美国，这第四个环就是我们与企业家商业道德的基本关系，这是独一无二的。而这又是怎么和打造公司关联起来的？我需要考虑一下。
现在我们可能看不到第四个环，因为我们只是在美国公司之间做互相比较。如果跨越了文化，我们就不难发现各种各样的第四个环。
高德思：这非常有意思。
吉姆·柯林斯：我不确定这是否能够成立…
高德思：我认为这个观点是成立的。我觉得你正在揭示一些重要的规律。此前，我可能未曾想过这些。
吉姆·柯林斯：你应该是思考过了，因为正是你向我提出了这个问题。
高德思：事实如此。
吉姆·柯林斯：在你提问之前，我倒是未曾考虑过这些。 |
