????讀到這里，大家可能會(huì)想，這份研究到底是誰(shuí)做的，這個(gè)名次是根據(jù)什么排出來(lái)的。給出這份排行榜的是明略行咨詢公司（Millward Brown），它是總部位于倫敦的廣告業(yè)巨頭WPP集團(tuán)的子公司。這家公司自稱與全球90%的頂尖汽車品牌都有戰(zhàn)略和績(jī)效方面的合作。至于做這份排行榜的數(shù)據(jù)是怎么來(lái)的，首先它們來(lái)自明略行對(duì)全球100多萬(wàn)名消費(fèi)者的采訪，其次來(lái)自對(duì)每家公司的財(cái)務(wù)和業(yè)務(wù)業(yè)績(jī)的分析。

????出于好玩，我決定把明略行的這張排行榜與另外兩張排行榜進(jìn)行一下對(duì)比。第一個(gè)對(duì)比對(duì)象是倫敦的品牌金融公司（Brand Finance）給出的排行榜，這家公司自稱是“全球領(lǐng)先的品牌評(píng)價(jià)咨詢公司”。我其實(shí)并不理解它的排行榜是怎樣排出來(lái)的，暫且引述該公司的如下原文：“該方法使用了一種折現(xiàn)現(xiàn)金流法，根據(jù)一個(gè)適當(dāng)?shù)恼郜F(xiàn)率，對(duì)未來(lái)的商標(biāo)使用費(fèi)進(jìn)行折現(xiàn)，以得出一個(gè)商標(biāo)及其相關(guān)知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán)的凈現(xiàn)值，也就是它的品牌價(jià)值。”

????方法雖然不同，結(jié)果卻差不多。在品牌金融公司的排行榜上，豐田依然占據(jù)頭名，但是寶馬卻跌至第三位，亞軍被大眾公司（Volkswagen）摘走。我比較驚訝的是，本田公司作為一個(gè)不僅生產(chǎn)汽車，也能生產(chǎn)高性能摩托車、摩托艇、噴氣式飛機(jī)和割草機(jī)的品牌，它的排名居然排在已經(jīng)在美國(guó)苦苦掙扎了多年的三菱（Mitsubishi）的后面。和整個(gè)歐洲車市一樣不景氣的標(biāo)志汽車（Peugeot）在品牌金融公司這份排行榜上的排名竟然穩(wěn)居雪佛蘭（Chevrolet）和奧迪之前。不過(guò)看到下面這個(gè)更不靠譜的排序，我或許就不會(huì)再覺(jué)得驚訝了——最近一度破產(chǎn)的通用汽車（General Motors）居然排在了梅塞德斯-奔馳的母公司戴姆勒（Daimler）的前面。

????我的疑惑越來(lái)越多，于是我決定向可能是最知名的一份品牌地位調(diào)查報(bào)告尋找答案。這項(xiàng)調(diào)查是由國(guó)際品牌公司（Interbrand）執(zhí)行的，它的總部也是在倫敦，而且它也毫不謙虛地稱自己是“全球領(lǐng)先的品牌咨詢公司”。它給出的排名基于三個(gè)要素：財(cái)務(wù)業(yè)績(jī)，品牌在采購(gòu)流程中的重要性，以及數(shù)學(xué)計(jì)算。這份排行榜選取了每個(gè)品牌的10個(gè)屬性，按照百分制進(jìn)行打分。聽(tīng)起來(lái)似乎很多數(shù)字都是用來(lái)粉飾主觀看法的，不過(guò)沒(méi)關(guān)系。

????在國(guó)際品牌公司給出的“全球汽車百?gòu)?qiáng)排行榜”上，豐田再次拔得頭籌，寶馬再次名列第三，不過(guò)這次是梅塞德斯-奔馳摘得亞軍。但是本田戰(zhàn)勝了大眾升至第四，全行業(yè)利潤(rùn)最高的保時(shí)捷（Porsche）則排在了福特（Ford）和現(xiàn)代的后頭。

????我被這些公司的各種算法搞得一頭霧水，最后只得求助一個(gè)我熟悉的、也是長(zhǎng)期受到信任的信息來(lái)源——《消費(fèi)者報(bào)告》（Consumer Reports）。在對(duì)1764名成年人進(jìn)行電話采訪后，《消費(fèi)者報(bào)告》給出了它的“2013年最佳汽車品牌感知度調(diào)查”，從安全性、質(zhì)量、價(jià)值、性能、設(shè)計(jì)、技術(shù)/創(chuàng)新、友好性/環(huán)保七個(gè)方面反映了美國(guó)消費(fèi)者對(duì)各大汽車品牌的感知度。《消費(fèi)者報(bào)告》給每個(gè)品牌都打了分，但同時(shí)也警告讀者，感知度與現(xiàn)實(shí)并不是一回事。“感知度是一個(gè)被動(dòng)的指標(biāo)”，而且“每個(gè)產(chǎn)品線的表現(xiàn)都有一定的差異，不是每款車型都代表了一個(gè)品牌的最高水平。”

????在《消費(fèi)者報(bào)告》的調(diào)查中，豐田仍然名列第一，這應(yīng)該沒(méi)有什么好奇怪的了。本田名列季軍，福特排在第二位，雪佛蘭排在第四位。沃爾沃（Volvo）的產(chǎn)品線雖然稍顯過(guò)時(shí)，而且銷售表現(xiàn)也半死不活，但是仍然排到了第六名的位置，這也從一個(gè)側(cè)面說(shuō)明了受訪者對(duì)于汽車安全性的重視。這份調(diào)查里也有一些奇怪的地方，比如《消費(fèi)者報(bào)告》的試駕員在試駕了道奇（Dodge）的車型后給出了差評(píng)，但是在這份調(diào)查里，道奇的排名卻越過(guò)了雷克薩斯和斯巴魯，同時(shí)林肯（Lincoln）和克萊斯勒（Chrysler）也排在了Smart的后頭，盡管Smart在美國(guó)的銷量一落千丈。

????那么，我從這些排行榜上明白了什么道理呢？首先，盡管我也喜歡各種排行榜（甚至我自己都排過(guò)幾個(gè)），但我們應(yīng)該以批判的眼光來(lái)看待排行榜。其次，對(duì)于按數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行的排名來(lái)說(shuō)，如果它的基礎(chǔ)邏輯有問(wèn)題，那么這種排名很難說(shuō)有什么價(jià)值。第三，老百姓的眼光一般要強(qiáng)于武斷的評(píng)價(jià)。另外，在讀完所有這些分析和調(diào)查之后，我還是不明白豐田到底哪里特殊和與眾不同。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：樸成奎

????By now you're wondering who conducted this study and how the rankings were determined. It was pulled together by marketing consultant Millward Brown, part of advertising giant WPP and based in London, which claims to work with 90% of the world's leading brands on strategy and performance. As for those precise-appearing numbers on which the ratings were somehow derived, they came first from interviews with more than one million consumers globally and, second, from an analysis of the financial and business results of each company.

????Just for fun, I decided to compare those Millward Brown findings with two other brand ratings. First up was another London-based shop, Brand Finance, which calls itself the "world's leading brand valuation consultancy." I don't really understand how it compiled its own ratings, but here is its verbatim description: "The methodology uses a discounted cash flow technique to discount estimated future royalties, at an appropriate discount rate, to arrive at a net present value of the trademark and associated intellectual property: the brand value."

????Different strokes, similar results: Toyota also claimed the top of the car-brand heap in Brand Finance's global ranking, but BMW slipped to third place, overtaken by up-and-coming Volkswagen. I was surprised to find that Honda, whose brand adorns high-performing motorcycles, outboards, jet airplanes, and lawn mowers in addition to cars, was ranked behind Mitsubishi, whose vehicles have been struggling in the U.S for years. And Peugeot, which has cratered along with the European car market, had a solid lead on Chevrolet and Audi in the Brand Finance rankings. But perhaps I shouldn't be surprised after being faced with the following glaring inconsistency: Recently bankrupt General Motors (GM, Fortune 500) came out ahead of Mercedes-Benz's corporate parent, Daimler.

????My confusion growing, I sought clarification from perhaps the best known brand stature survey, the one conducted by Interbrand. Yet another London-based outfit, Interbrand also describes itself in superlatives as the "world's leading brand consultancy." It bases its rankings on three factors: financial performance, the brand's importance in the purchase process, and a mathematical calculation. This third rating is derived by grading the brand on 10 individual attributes on a scale of one to 100. Sounds like a lot of numbers are being used to dress up subjective opinions, but never mind.

????On Interbrand's list of the Top 100 global brands, Toyota completed a trifecta by again gaining the top car slot, and BMW once again finished third, this time behind Mercedes. But Honda climbed back into fourth place over VW, and Porsche, possessor of the richest profit margins in the business, fell behind Ford (F, Fortune 500) and Hyundai.

????My head spinning from all these global brand mathematics, I finally retreated to a familiar and long-trusted source: Consumer Reports. After phone interviews with 1,764 adults, CRdeveloped its 2013 Best Car Brand Perception Survey to reflect how U.S consumers view a car brand in seven categories: safety, quality, value, performance, design/style, technology/innovation, and friendly/green. CR assignedc a score to each brand -- at the same time warning readers that perception is not the same thing as reality: "Perception is often a trailing indicator," and "every product line has a spectrum of performance -- not every model represents the brand's best efforts."

????It won't be much of a surprise to learn that Toyota was still number one with CR's survey subjects, and Honda was number three, but Ford claimed the second spot and Chevrolet was now fourth. Revealing the importance of safety to the CR respondents, Volvo placed sixth despite its outdated product line and moribund sales performance. And there were other oddities as well: Dodge, which CR's own test drivers have dismissed as clunky and substandard, finished ahead of Lexus and Subaru, while Lincoln and Chrysler came in behind Smart, which has been a resounding flop in the U.S.

????What lessons, if any, did I learn from this exercise? One, while I love lists and rankings (and have even composed a few of my own), they should be viewed with a skeptical eye; two, numerical ratings have little value if the logic on which they are based is skewed; and three, common sense is often a better guide than arbitrary evaluations. Besides, after all this analysis, I still don't know what about Toyota is special and different.