????

??? “很怪。”

??? 這個詞就是自喬布斯去世后，阿特?萊文森管理蘋果公司（Apple）董事會的感受。萊文森2000年加入公司董事會，是傳奇人物喬布斯——蘋果創始人兼首席執行官的同事兼密友。他上周二表示，盡管公司不斷推新品、搞發布會，但終究很難讓人忽略喬布斯已經不在了的事實。萊文森說：“我還是沒辦法在走進董事會房間時不想起喬布斯。”而且，他也終于拿起《喬布斯傳》，不過目前還未讀完。“他是獨一無二的...... 很大程度上，公眾眼中的喬布斯和我知道的那個喬布斯是不一樣的。”

????上周二下午，在斯坦福大學商學院（Stanford's Graduate School of Business），萊文森暢談了喬布斯、蘋果近期的收益以及董事會在產品創新中的作用。這位蘋果公司的董事會主席在臺上接受了該校學生維姬?斯拉維娜的采訪，還參與了斯坦福學生的問答環節。

????整場對話還談及了萊文森在基因技術公司現任董事會主席兼前任首席執行官的角色。他反復強調，公司的短期收益——包括蘋果公司近期發布的收益狀況——其實并不重要。他將蘋果公司每季度131億美元的利潤和545億美元的營收稱為“現象級”表現。但這個可能會讓大多數高管彈冠相慶的結果卻依然讓投資人感到失望。財報發布后，蘋果公司股票在盤后交易中下跌了10%以上，與去年9月創下的歷史新高705.07美元相比，跌幅近35%。

????喬布斯離世后，投資人有所擔憂也可以理解。去年秋天的蘋果地圖風波使首席執行官蒂姆?庫克不得不出面致歉，同時鼓勵用戶下載競爭對手的應用程序，這愈發加重了投資人的疑慮。不論瑕疵產品，還是道歉認錯，都表明后喬布斯時代的蘋果正在悄然發生改變。盡管如此，萊文森對公司的長遠發展還是充滿信心。他說：“我們應當目光長遠，至于公司是賣出了4,700萬、還是4,800萬臺手機，還是讓其他人去操心吧。”

????那么，在新品開發中，蘋果公司董事會作用幾何呢？ 萊文森表示，雖然在新品投放市場前的6到18個月內董事會可以拿到樣機，但董事會的作用有限。如果時間充裕，公司會將董事會的意見納入考慮，那些精于某些產品領域的董事會成員也會因此發揮更大影響，他補充表示。但是，個別產品的審查并非董事會的管轄重點，公司的長期發展方向和規劃才是重中之重。“董事會不是用來定義產品規格的，”萊文森說。“它更像一個參謀和后援。最重要的是，董事會可以任免首席執行官。”萊文森表示，一個稱職的董事不會去妨礙首席執行官和管理團隊的工作，而現在許多公司的董事會卻并不是這樣。（財富中文網）

????"Weird"

??? That was the one-word answer given by Apple (AAPL) chairman Arthur D. Levinson when asked to describe his experience running the company's board of directors since Steve Jobs's death. Levinson, who joined the board in 2000, was a colleague and close friend to Apple's legendary founder and CEO. On Tuesday, he said that Jobs's absence remains tough to ignore even as the company has continued introducing new products and making fresh announcements. "I'm still not to the point where I walk into that boardroom and don't miss Steve," said Levinson, who finally started but has so far failed to finish reading Jobs's biography. "He was a one of a kind guy ... The Steve Jobs that was in the public eye was not, for the most part, the Steve Jobs that I knew."

????Levinson spoke openly about Jobs, Apple's recent earnings, and the board's role in product creation Tuesday afternoon at Stanford's Graduate School of Business. Apple's chairman was interviewed on stage by a Stanford student, Vicki Slavina, and took questions from an audience that consisted mostly of university students.

????Throughout the conversation, which also touched on Levinson's role as chair and former CEO of Genentech, he reiterated that a company's short-term earnings -- including those recently announcement by Apple -- mean very little. Apple reported $13.1 billion in profit on $54.5 billion in revenues in a quarter Levinson described as "phenomenal." But results that would likely be celebrated by most executives left Apple investors disappointed. The company's stock dropped more than 10% in after-hours trading following the announcement, and since its all-time high of $705.07 in September, the price has fallen nearly 35%.

????It's reasonable to associate investor worry with changes at Apple since Jobs's passing, most notably the company's botched Maps application this past fall that prompted CEO Tim Cook to issue an apology and encourage users to download competitors' applications. Both the defective product and the mea culpa were signs that Apple is indeed changing in a post-Jobs world. Not surprisingly, Levinson struck a confident note about the company's long-term pursuits. "There [are] long-term signs of how a company is doing and whether or not Apple sells 47 or 48 million iPhones -- let somebody else worry about that," he said.

????So how much input does Apple's board have in the creation of its new products? Not a whole lot, according to Levinson, though new products are presented to the board between 6 to 18 months prior to launch. If presented early enough, some board insights are taken into account, and those on the board with expertise in certain product areas may have more influence, he added. But while long-term direction and planning fall under the board's jurisdiction, individual product review isn't a top priority. "The board is not there to define product specs," said Levinson. "It's there as a sounding board. It's there as a resource. And ultimately, the board is there to hire and fire the CEO." If it's a good board, which Levinson said many companies are without, then it won't get in the way of the CEO and executive team.