我們很多人已經(jīng)被訓(xùn)練出了一種慣性思維，覺(jué)得在影響商業(yè)的每個(gè)積極和消極的因素背后，都是科技在作祟。比如數(shù)字化轉(zhuǎn)型使部分衰退行業(yè)出現(xiàn)了一批超大規(guī)模的企業(yè)（如Facebook對(duì)于出版行業(yè)），另外連一些變化腳步太慢的知名科技企業(yè)也被掃進(jìn)了歷史的垃圾堆（比如蘋(píng)果對(duì)于諾基亞、黑莓、摩托羅拉等。）

所以當(dāng)我看到菲爾·沃赫拜為新一期《財(cái)富》雜志撰寫(xiě)的一篇關(guān)于百貨商場(chǎng)的末日的文章《一件不留》（Everything Must Go）時(shí)，我還以為文章的主旨是在說(shuō)亞馬遜等電商對(duì)各大零售業(yè)巨頭的影響。不過(guò)我在這里需要?jiǎng)⊥敢幌拢簛嗰R遜等電商對(duì)零售業(yè)的影響早已是個(gè)老生常談的話題。但很多人可能沒(méi)有注意到，像梅西百貨、西爾斯百貨、科爾士百貨以及J.C. Penny等大型實(shí)體零售企業(yè)其實(shí)也在做電商生意，而且還做得相當(dāng)不錯(cuò)。因此，沃赫拜在他的文章中指出，實(shí)體零售業(yè)江河日下的原因遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不只是由于電商的沖擊，它還受到很多其它因素的影響，比如過(guò)度折扣導(dǎo)致的利潤(rùn)低下（這種現(xiàn)象是由于各大商場(chǎng)千人一面的商品結(jié)構(gòu)導(dǎo)致的），以及由于過(guò)于依賴服飾銷(xiāo)售而忽視了對(duì)新項(xiàng)目的追求，此外甚至還包括供貨商的反彈，因?yàn)樗麄儞?dān)心把自己商品放在這些行將就木的百貨商場(chǎng)里賣(mài)，甚至可能會(huì)連累到自己的品牌。

順便說(shuō)一句，實(shí)體零售業(yè)的萎縮并不是一個(gè)新問(wèn)題。沃赫拜指出，早從20世紀(jì)30年代起，百貨商場(chǎng)就已經(jīng)“奄奄一息”了。零售行業(yè)的專家們認(rèn)為，有一種方法可以讓百貨商場(chǎng)起死回生，那就是要做到“體驗(yàn)為王”，給購(gòu)物者一個(gè)到這家商場(chǎng)逛街上的理由——比如經(jīng)常舉辦一些活動(dòng)或有趣的展覽，或是擺出一些不常見(jiàn)的商品。

這種方法之所以能吸引顧客回流，主要是因?yàn)閮蓚€(gè)原因。首先，體驗(yàn)恰恰是百貨商場(chǎng)起初的長(zhǎng)項(xiàng)，我有生之年永遠(yuǎn)也不會(huì)忘記第一次去芝加哥市中心的馬歇爾菲爾德商場(chǎng)旗艦店時(shí)，它那舊世界的魅力留給我的奇妙印象——而且那里的那種感覺(jué)并非只有在圣誕節(jié)前后才有。另外，作為我們這個(gè)時(shí)代最優(yōu)秀的零售商之一，蘋(píng)果公司也深曉用戶在實(shí)體店里獲得的美妙體驗(yàn)對(duì)于公司的價(jià)值。蘋(píng)果雖然是一家賣(mài)技術(shù)的公司，但它卻是在以一種極為個(gè)性化的方式賣(mài)技術(shù)。

技術(shù)既不是能夠解決所有問(wèn)題的萬(wàn)靈藥，也不是會(huì)吞噬所有企業(yè)的魔鬼。有時(shí)，人的因素才是重要的。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

譯者：樸成奎

We’ve been trained to think that technology is behind every positive and negative factor affecting business. Digital transformation creates mega-cap businesses in decaying industries (Facebook in publishing) and zaps even established technology players that move too slowly (see Apple vs. Nokia, BlackBerry, Motorola, etc.)

And so when I started reading Phil Wahba’s important feature in the upcoming issue of Fortune, “Everything Must Go,” about the demise of the department store, I assumed the storyline would be about the damage Amazon has inflicted on retail behemoths. Spoiler alert: What Amazon has wrought is old news. The department stores—Macy’s, Sears, Kohl’s, J.C. Penney, and others—are doing a rather brisk business in e-commerce. No, their true problems, writes Wahba, go far deeper. These include excessive discounting; a phenomenon retailers call “an ocean of sameness” in product offerings; an overreliance on apparel at the expense of novelty items; and even a revolt by their own vendors, panicked that pushing their wares in dying emporiums will drag them down too.

It’s not a new problem, by the way. Wahba notes that department stores have been “dying” since the 1930s. Retail experts suggest that one way to revive the stores is to focus on experiences, to give shoppers a reason to visit, like events or interesting displays or unusual merchandise.

This is amusing for two reasons. First, it’s what department stores were really good at in their prime. I’ll never forget visiting the flagship Marshall Field’s store in downtown Chicago for its wondrous old-world charm—and not just at Christmastime. This also resonates because one of the great retailers of our time, Apple, understands perfectly well the value of a magical experience in its stores. Indeed, though Apple is selling technology, it has done it in an exceedingly personal way.

Technology is neither the solution to all problems nor the ogre that will eat all businesses. Sometimes the human element is what matters most.