????十幾年來(lái)，很多管理者一直夢(mèng)想著能在大公司中引入顛覆性創(chuàng)新者的創(chuàng)收能力。近些年，這種對(duì)創(chuàng)業(yè)者的崇拜更是達(dá)到了新的高峰。

????很多商業(yè)書(shū)籍都號(hào)稱能教會(huì)企業(yè)高層打造創(chuàng)新文化，培育出謝爾蓋?布林、馬克?扎克伯格、史蒂夫?喬布斯這樣富有遠(yuǎn)見(jiàn)卓識(shí)的人才。9月份的《哈佛商業(yè)評(píng)論》（Harvard Business Review）即將引爆一枚思想炸彈，刊登一篇題為《新車庫(kù)創(chuàng)新時(shí)代》（The New Corporate Garage）的文章，宣步一個(gè)新創(chuàng)新時(shí)代的到來(lái)：它具有“個(gè)人創(chuàng)業(yè)”的特征，同時(shí)背靠大公司的資源和規(guī)模，卻又不失初創(chuàng)企業(yè)的靈活。

????如今，海外競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手日益壯大、科技變革加速，在這樣的背景下，美國(guó)《財(cái)富》100強(qiáng)公司的高管們都希望從一些顛覆性的想法中尋找突破，這一點(diǎn)并不為怪。隨著一波接一波的新興企業(yè)成功挑戰(zhàn)大公司的市場(chǎng)主導(dǎo)地位，大公司自然也會(huì)有些擔(dān)心。收購(gòu)好斗的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手從來(lái)不乏失敗的案例，其中任何一個(gè)案例都表明，收購(gòu)創(chuàng)意引擎存在挑戰(zhàn)。另外，為了吸引最有才華的年輕人，大企業(yè)還需要戰(zhàn)勝這些年輕人心中成為下一個(gè)喬布斯或扎克伯格的夢(mèng)想。

????“幾乎每位管理者都認(rèn)識(shí)到市場(chǎng)變化迅速，循規(guī)蹈矩地經(jīng)營(yíng)已經(jīng)不夠。除了長(zhǎng)于經(jīng)營(yíng)，還必須勇于創(chuàng)新，必須要有與眾不同的想法，必須開(kāi)創(chuàng)新的業(yè)務(wù)，”創(chuàng)新公司Innosight的董事總經(jīng)理、上述《新創(chuàng)新時(shí)代》一文的作者斯科特?安東尼說(shuō)。

????但在一家大公司內(nèi)部做一個(gè)創(chuàng)業(yè)者，是不是有些矛盾？那些宣稱將培育創(chuàng)業(yè)精神的人們到底是在鼓勵(lì)尋常的創(chuàng)意思維，還是鼓動(dòng)性的銷售說(shuō)辭？（倒不是說(shuō)這有什么錯(cuò)。）即便是巴布森學(xué)院（Babson College）——布蘭克創(chuàng)業(yè)中心（Arthur M. Blank Center for Entrepreneurship）所在地——的院長(zhǎng)也承認(rèn)，很多圍繞所謂“內(nèi)部創(chuàng)業(yè)”的說(shuō)辭都是雷聲大、雨點(diǎn)小。

????“有些CEO甚至喊出了‘我們希望30萬(wàn)名員工人人都是創(chuàng)業(yè)者’這樣的口號(hào)，完全是胡扯，”巴布森學(xué)院院長(zhǎng)、《開(kāi)始吧》（Just Start）一書(shū)的作者林恩?施萊辛格說(shuō)。“現(xiàn)實(shí)情況是，你是在要求人們做出一些現(xiàn)有環(huán)境本質(zhì)上非常排斥的行為。”

????培育創(chuàng)業(yè)文化的挑戰(zhàn)和成功幾率幾乎堪比打造一家成功的初創(chuàng)公司，大多數(shù)初創(chuàng)公司都活不過(guò)4年。不可能像洛克希德?馬丁（Lockheed Martin）傳奇的創(chuàng)新機(jī)構(gòu)“臭鼬工廠”（Skunk Works）那樣把創(chuàng)新者隔離開(kāi)來(lái)：雖然這樣能保護(hù)他們不受現(xiàn)有官僚文化的侵蝕，但同時(shí)也阻止了他們獲取所在大公司的資源，這是他們相比靈活的獨(dú)立初創(chuàng)公司原本應(yīng)該具有的優(yōu)勢(shì)。另外，也不能期待每位員工都孜孜不倦地尋找下一個(gè)大目標(biāo)——大多數(shù)人必須將重點(diǎn)放在日常生產(chǎn)上。

????“走極端很危險(xiǎn)，”安東尼說(shuō)。“必須不偏不倚，找到一條中間道路，想辦法有選擇地、深思熟慮地借助能給予你優(yōu)勢(shì)的、真真切切的長(zhǎng)處。”

????那么，如何將說(shuō)辭與現(xiàn)實(shí)區(qū)分開(kāi)來(lái)呢？專家們各持己見(jiàn)，但大多數(shù)人同意，要想培育真正的創(chuàng)業(yè)精神，管理者必須采取以下四步。

接受冒險(xiǎn)和失敗

????在很多公司，員工都是“穩(wěn)”字當(dāng)頭，因?yàn)樗麄冎溃∫淮尉妥阋詧?bào)銷整個(gè)職業(yè)生涯。顯然，在教育巨頭培生（Pearson）公司中情況不是這樣，培生CEO 馬喬里?斯卡迪諾要求員工“要勇敢、富于想象力，而且要出色”。2008年，時(shí)任高級(jí)副總裁的帕特里克?蘇潘克在和斯卡迪諾一起候機(jī)時(shí)說(shuō)，他非常擔(dān)心培生在利用一些教育科技新機(jī)會(huì)方面行動(dòng)不夠快。三個(gè)月后，斯卡迪諾就要求蘇潘克提交拓展這一未知領(lǐng)域的方案。培生批準(zhǔn)了一批種子資金。2010年，培生成立了教育軟件公司Alleyoop，與一系列內(nèi)容提供商（包括一些培生的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手）合作，幫助青少年為未來(lái)的大學(xué)生活做好準(zhǔn)備。

????Alleyoop是培生一個(gè)獨(dú)立的部門，它由蘇潘克任總裁，向由培生高管組成的一個(gè)委員會(huì)匯報(bào)。“這是一個(gè)冒險(xiǎn)的舉動(dòng)，”他說(shuō)。“如果企業(yè)希望培育創(chuàng)業(yè)精神，它們需要在員工經(jīng)歷一系列失敗的過(guò)程中實(shí)實(shí)在在地給予他們自主權(quán)、時(shí)間和支持”。

????For over a decade, the promise of bringing the revenue-driving ability of disruptive innovators into a large corporation has tempted many a business leader. But in recent years, the cult of the entrepreneur has reached new heights.

????Plenty of business books purport to teach top management how to create a culture that nurtures visionaries like Sergey Brin, Mark Zuckerberg, and Steve Jobs. A "Big Idea" article set to be published in September's Harvard Business Review heralds the dawning of a new age of innovation marked by individual "catalysts" that leverage the resources and reach of a large enterprise without losing the nimble agility of a startup.

????It's no surprise that Fortune 100 leaders are looking for a game-changing concept to offer hope in the face of ever-escalating competition from overseas rivals and the pace of technological change. With wave after wave of entrepreneurial ventures successfully challenging corporate titans for market dominance, the establishment is right to be afraid. Any of the number of failed acquisitions of scrappy competitors demonstrates that buying the creative engine brings its own challenges. Moreover, to attract the most talented young people entering the workforce, big business needs to compete with the dream of becoming the next Jobs or Zuckerberg.

????"Just about every leader recognizes that the pace of change in markets means that business as usual isn't enough. It's not enough to be a great operator, you have to be innovative, you have to think differently, you have to give birth to new businesses," says Scott Anthony, managing director for innovation boutique Innosight, and author of the forthcoming Harvard Business Review article, "The New Corporate Garage."

????But isn't it a contradiction in terms to be an entrepreneur within a large corporation? Are those who claim to be instilling entrepreneurialism merely encouraging garden-variety creative thinking or even just a killer sales mentality? (Not that there's anything wrong with that.) Even the president of Babson College, home of the Arthur M. Blank Center for Entrepreneurship, acknowledges that much of the rhetoric around so-called intrapreneurs promises more than it delivers.

????"Some CEOs go so far as to say, 'We want all of our 300,000 employees to be entrepreneurs.' It is just complete nonsense," says Len Schlesinger, Babson's president and author of Just Start. "The reality is that you're asking people to display a set of behaviors in an environment that, by its very nature, tends to be very hostile to those activities."

????Cultivating an entrepreneurial culture is almost as challenging -- and rare -- as launching a successful startup company, the majority of which won't see their fourth birthday. You can't simply wall off the innovators, as in Lockheed Martin's (LMT) legendary "Skunk Works," because by protecting them from being corrupted by the operational, bureaucratic culture, you also block them from the large-company resources that would give them an advantage over nimble independents. Nor can you reasonably expect that every worker will be constantly on the hunt for the next big thing -- the majority will need to focus on routine production.

????"The extremes are dangerous," Anthony says. "You have to strike a very careful medium where you find ways to very selectively and thoughtfully borrow the true capabilities that will give you advantages ... without corrupting either side."

????So how do you separate rhetoric from reality? Experts differ, but most agree that to have any hope of cultivating true entrepreneurship, leaders must take these four steps.

Make risk-taking, and failure, acceptable

????In many companies, employees play it safe because they know a single failure can end a career. Not so, apparently, at education giant Pearson (PSO), where CEO Marjorie Scardino urges employees "to be brave, imaginative and decent." In 2008, then-senior vice president Patrick Supanc found himself worrying out loud to Scardino as they waited together at an airport that Pearson wasn't moving quickly enough to exploit some new opportunities in educational technology. Three months later, Scardino asked him to prepare a pitch on the unknown territory he'd like to chart. The company approved seed funding and in 2010 Pearson launched Alleyoop, an educational software company that prepares teens for college in partnership with a range of content providers -- some Pearson competitors.

????Alleyoop is an independent division of Pearson, with Supanc as president, reporting to a board comprised of top Pearson executives. "This was a risky move," he says. "If corporations want to foster entrepreneurship, they really need to commit to the autonomy and the time and the willingness to support folks as they move through a series of failures."