All four companies made decisions that benefited them in the short term but came back to haunt them. And yet to describe the problem as short-termism, though true, is not to get quite to the heart of the problem.
这四家公司所做的决策有一个共同的特点:在短期内有利,却为日后带来麻烦。但如果说这些公司的问题是目光短浅,虽然没说错,却远未说到点子上。
Some commentators have suggested that the $3bn fine on GSK was less than the profits the company made from its misconduct. BP clearly made a bad call, but we say that with hindsight. On the strong balance of probabilities, the well would have been fine and the consequential damage was far larger than could reasonably have been expected. What would we think of GSK, or BP, if we discovered that the companies had weighed the costs and benefits and decided to go ahead anyway with doctors’ spa weekends and cutting corners on the rig installation?
一些评论人士指出,葛兰素史克被处以的30亿美元罚款尚不及该公司从不法行为中获得的收益。英国石油在事故发生时显然错误判断了形势,但说这话的人也不过是事后诸葛亮。从概率来看,发生事故的油井本有很大可能平安无事,而事故导致的损失规模也远远超出合理预期。如果我们发现,葛兰素史克在决定请医生去水疗中心度周末(或英国石油决定在钻井安装中偷工减料)之前,曾衡量过这样做的成本和收益,我们又会如何看待它呢?
【企业价值观不能计算】相关文章:
★ 施瓦辛格重返影坛
★ 中国走近算法交易
最新
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15
2020-09-15