????人們總是說要給高管團隊注入新鮮血液，但一些像JC Penney、寶潔（P&G）這樣步履蹣跚的大牌公司卻正在寄望于前高管的拯救。請回這些知根知底的老將或許看起來有失遠見或缺乏人才儲備，但商界歷史表明，啟用老將確實有它的意義。

????“如果公司需要一個人能迅速有效地解決非常具體的問題，這樣做就能奏效，”哈佛商學院（Harvard Business School）企業管理教授、歷史學家南茜?科恩表示。著名的案例包括史蒂夫?喬布斯重振蘋果（Apple）、霍華德?舒爾茨拯救星巴克（Starbucks）等。

????科恩說：“他們融合了巨大的激情與旁觀者清的理性，因此能說砍就砍，只要確實有必要——像霍華德?舒爾茨，先是關店，然后是裁員，不再發布同店銷售額數據。”

????“他可以迅速行動，因為他清楚癥結在哪里，也可以直接跳過新官上任三把火樹立威望的階段。這個階段是人性使然，但它的確很費時間?！?/p>

????總部位于辛辛那提的寶潔為了重振消費品業務，請回了現年65歲的前CEO雷富禮。但為了平息由此引發的外界對其高管更替計劃失敗的指責，寶潔接著又很快宣布將現有的4位高管升任新職。

????雷富禮在執掌寶潔近10年后于2009年退休，他選定的繼任者麥睿博在動蕩的經濟環境下勉力把穩這家消費品巨頭的航向。以往寶潔一直是從內部人員中挑選CEO，但沒有公開保證過會繼續這么做。

????哈佛商學院領導力、策略與創新教授羅莎貝絲?M?坎特指出，“雷富禮的回歸將延續一項成功的策略，”，麥睿博“不得不應對金融危機和很多的動蕩，而雷富禮回歸后將加速重組，應對動蕩”。

????坎特說：“這樣做是有意義的?！笨蔡匾彩枪鸫髮W高級領導力計劃負責人，出版過多本專著。自麥睿博時期以來，寶潔一直在推進一項100億美元的重組計劃。

????前CEO重新出馬不一定就馬到成功——已故的肯尼斯?萊就是一個例子。杰夫?斯基林短暫領導安然（Enron）一段時間后，肯尼斯就被重新請了回來，希望能重振安然。結果很糟。施樂（Xerox）的情況不同，但結果也令人難堪。曾任9年CEO的保羅?阿萊爾在2000年被董事會召回，服務了一段時間。

????For all the talk of new executive blood, some big, but flailing, companies like JC Penney (JCP) and P&G (PG) are looking to former top executives for their rescue. Turning to the tried-and-true can seem like a failure of vision or lack of a talent net but corporate history shows that grabbing the familiar old ring actually makes sense.

????"When the company needs someone who can fix very specific things quickly and effectively, it can work," says Nancy Koehn, a historian and professor of business administration at Harvard Business School. Famous examples include Steve Jobs at Apple (AAPL) and Howard Schultz at Starbucks (SBUX).

????"It's a combination of great passion and detachment, so they are able to cut what needs to be cut -- like Howard Schultz who first closed stores, then laid off people and stopped reporting same-store sales," Koehn said.

????"He could move quickly because he knew where all the bodies are buried, and was able to move past that jungle posturing that always accompanies a new executive and the people around him. It's necessary anthropology, but it's very time consuming."

????To revive its consumer products business, P&G brought back former CEO A.G. Lafley, 65, but the Cincinnati-based giant quickly moved to quell any criticism that it failed at succession planning by making known that four current executives would be moving into major new roles.

????Before retiring in 2009 after nearly a decade at P&G's helm, Lafley chose his successor, Robert McDonald, who struggled to right the giant goods purveyor in the unsettled economy. In the past, P&G has chosen its CEOs from its own ranks, although there is no public guarantee that will continue to be the case.

????"Lafley is coming back to continue a successful strategy," noted Rosabeth M. Kanter, a professor of leadership, strategy and innovation at Harvard Business School. Johnson "had to deal with the financial crisis and a lot of volatility," and Lafley's return will see him "accelerating restructuring to respond to that volatility.

????"That makes sense," said Kanter, who also is director of the Harvard University Advanced Leadership Initiative, and author of several books. P&G has been undergoing a $10 billion revamp, begun under McDonald.

????Recycled CEOs don't always work out - the late Kenneth Lay being a major case in point. He was brought back to revive Enron after a brief stint under Jeffrey Skilling's leadership. That ended badly. A different, but embarrassing, scenario beset Xerox, when nine-year veteran CEO Paul Allaire was called back, by the board, in 2000 for a stint.