????10年來，盡管發展中經濟體增長迅猛，但發達經濟體在全球最大企業的排行榜上仍然占據著主導地位。今年的《財富》（Fortune）世界500強排行榜上，75%的公司來自發達國家。如果不包括國有企業，這個數字將達到91%。現在，新興經濟體的增長速度正在放慢，這就是說來自這些地區的公司仍無法躋身世界500強。不過，不要馬上把這些公司拋諸腦后。企業排名可能會發生重大變化，這一點需要認真對待，原因如下：

????全球經濟局勢正在發生轉變：雖然國際貨幣基金組織（IMF）最近下調了新興市場的增長預期，但它仍然認為2012-2018年的全球經濟增長將主要來自這些國家和地區。許多行業的經濟重心已經明顯地向新興市場轉移。2000年，發達經濟體占全球汽車產量和銷量的85%，而現在發達和新興經濟體已經在汽車行業各占半壁江山，而且中國已經成為全球最大的汽車市場和首屈一指的增長引擎，動力要遠遠超過其他國家。就連制藥等業務依然集中在發達市場的行業也開始意識到，如果讓其他公司主導了新興市場的銷售和推廣，它們就很可能再也無法重新奪回這些份額。

????現有500強企業反應遲緩：來自發達國家的跨國公司在世界500強中所占的比重可能下降的另一個原因是它們對全球經濟增長趨勢的變化一直反應遲緩。咨詢公司麥肯錫（McKinsey）提供的數據顯示，2010年，總部設在發達經濟體的世界100強公司從新興市場獲得的收入只占各自總收入的17%——盡管新興市場占全球GDP的36%而且可能在2025年之前為世界經濟增長做出逾70%的貢獻。同時，新興市場公司比發達國家企業增長得快。從1999年到2008年，前者不僅在年均增速上超過后者——兩類公司的增長率分別為22%和12%——它們在新興市場中的增長水平更是勝過那些來自富有國家的公司，這兩個數字分別為31%和13%。

????高層全球化水平不足：就高級管理層的結構而言，大公司的全球化水平甚至還不如它們的銷售額。在財富世界500強中，375家公司來自發達經濟體，而它們的首席執行官中只有4%來自新興經濟體。最近，麥肯錫針對西方國家主要公司的調查發現，這些公司職位最高的200名員工中，只有2%來自亞洲新興市場。這是個大問題，因為一個人的眼光主要由他所來自的地區決定。當地公司帶來的激烈競爭讓聘用新興市場頂尖人才變得困難起來。盡管可以通過將管理職位轉移到新興市場來填補這個人才缺口，但波士頓咨詢公司（BCG）最近對大型跨國公司的調查顯示，這些公司的20名最高層成員中只有9%身處新興市場，而新興市場在其收入中所占的平均比重則達到28%。

????長途貿易的潛在成本高昂：對發達國家的跨國公司來說，在新興市場開展業務并不容易。和發達國家之間相比，發展中國家和發達國家簽訂自由貿易協議的可能性要低得多；而且發展中國家在法治、政治穩定性和腐敗方面的問題要比發達國家嚴重得多。目前，新興經濟體在整體上所呈現的等級制度特征更為明顯。就連地理特征也成了一種障礙：和發達國家之間的距離相比，發達國家到新興市場的距離往往比前者長三分之一。更遠的距離對所有的國際性互動都產生了不利影響，比如貿易、外商直接投資和信息交流。以美國為例，想想看，從那里向中國出口商品要比向加拿大出口商品遠多少??

????Despite rapid growth in developing economies over the past decade, advanced economies continue to dominate lists of the world's largest corporations, providing 75% of the companies on this year's Fortune Global 500 list, and fully 91% if one excludes state-owned firms. Now emerging economy growth is slowing, suggesting that companies from these economies will remain also-rans on the list. But don't count out these companies just yet. The possibility of a big shake-up in the corporate pecking order is worth taking seriously for a number of reasons:

????The global economy is shifting: Despite recently cutting emerging market growth rates, the IMF still forecasts that these countries will account for the bulk of global growth from 2012-2018. The center of economic gravity for many sectors has already made a big shift to emerging markets. In 2000 the auto industry manufactured and sold 85% of its products in advanced economies, but that split is now half-and-half between advanced and emerging economies, with China the largest single vehicle market in the world and by far the biggest source of global growth. Even sectors such as pharmaceuticals that still do most of their business in advanced markets are starting to realize that if they let others dominate sales and distribution in emerging markets, they'll probably never be able to win the share back.

????The incumbents are slow to respond: Another reason that advanced-country multinationals' share of the Global 500 list might shrink is that they have been slow to respond to this shift in global growth. According to McKinsey, 100 of the world's largest companies headquartered in advanced economies derived just 17% of their total revenue in 2010 from emerging markets -- though those markets accounted for 36% of global GDP and are likely to contribute more than 70% of global GDP growth through 2025. Emerging market companies are also growing faster than those from advanced nations. From 1999 to 2008 they not only grew more rapidly in developed markets -- 22% vs. 12% annually -- than companies from rich economies but outpaced them by even more in emerging markets: 31% vs. 13%.

????Lack of globalization at the top： When it comes to the makeup of their top management, large companies are even less global than they are with their sales priorities. Of the 375 companies from advanced economies in the Fortune Global 500, only 4% have CEOs from emerging economies. And a recent McKinsey survey of leading Western companies found that just 2% of their top 200 employees hailed from key Asian emerging markets. This is a major problem because perspectives are largely conditioned by where one is from. Hiring top talent in emerging markets has become difficult because of fierce competition from local firms. Although this talent gap could in principle be addressed by moving executives to emerging markets, according to a BCG survey of large multinationals, only 9% of the companies' top 20 leaders are located in these markets, vs. an average of 28% of their revenues.

????Long-distance trade can be costly: Doing business in emerging markets isn't easy for advanced nation multinationals. Developing nations are much less likely to have free-trade agreements with advanced economies than the latter are with each other, and rank significantly worse on rule of law, political stability and corruption. Culturally, emerging economies are generally more hierarchical. Even geography drives a wedge: On average, emerging markets tend to be more than one-third farther away from advanced markets than the latter are from each other. These greater distances dampen all kinds of international interactions: trade, FDI, or information flows. Consider from a U.S. perspective how much farther it is to export to China than Canada.