精品国产_亚洲人成在线高清,国产精品成人久久久久,国语自产偷拍精品视频偷拍

首頁 500強 活動 榜單 商業 科技 領導力 專題 品牌中心
雜志訂閱

波音CEO“應該是個飛機迷,而不是會計”

空客前CTO給波音管理層的三條建議。

文本設置
小號
默認
大號
Plus(0條)

2月29日,法國西部南特附近,一名空客員工在空客A350飛機組裝線工作。圖片來源:SEBASTIEN SALOM-GOMIS - AFP - GETTY IMAGES

今年年底,波音(Boeing)公司將迎來新任首席執行官。領導層要在創紀錄的時間內領導激進的大規模文化變革,波音目前員工超過17萬名,其中工程師約5萬人。

現代航空運輸系統幾乎可以說是奇跡。飛機是人類創造最復雜的工程杰作之一,每天都有數千架飛機穿梭空中而且事故率很低,飛行也成了最安全的出行方式之一,僅次于乘電梯(比走路更安全,比開車更是安全太多)。其實這并不是奇跡,背后是一套精心積累的工程原則、質量流程和操作程序——全都靠著一套文化基礎作為支撐,確保切實且明智地執行。文化元素是實現奇跡的要素,也正是波音公司的問題所在。

2018年和2019年波音兩架737 MAX飛機相隔數月墜毀的悲慘事故就是案例。航空工程有一條重要原則,即安全關鍵系統不能存在任何故障點。波音工程師在紙面上說服自己和美國聯邦航空管理局(FAA)導致事故發生的MCAS系統不是安全關鍵系統。當然,事實證明MCAS正是安全關鍵系統。這是工程失誤,但從更重要和更系統層面來說,這是文化的失敗:相關責任人本應及時對假設正確提出質疑。

最近,阿拉斯加航空(Alaska Airlines)另一架波音737 MAX航班在飛行中艙門脫落,看起來是質檢流程錯誤(不過調查仍在進行中)。很大可能是,流程本身并沒錯,只是沒嚴格遵循。同樣,公司文化幾乎肯定是問題根源。今年2月,美國國會授權專家小組針對之前MAX墜機事件發布了關于波音安全系統的報告。其中寫道:“專家小組觀察到波音高管層與企業內其他成員在安全文化方面存在脫節?!?/p>

波音的公司文化怎么了,如何修復

過去20年里,波音刻意從工程導向轉型為更注重商業成果的公司。本世紀初,波音首席執行官哈里·斯通塞弗曾打趣道:“人們說我改變了波音的文化,其實這正是我的意圖,我想讓波音更像企業,而不只是偉大的工程公司?!?/p>

斯通塞弗的繼任者詹姆斯·麥克納尼更進一步:“每25年弄一次堪比登月的大項目……然后研發出707或787——這是飛機制造行業錯誤的經營方式。追求投入產出效益的世界不會給你機會打磨登月計劃的機會?!?/p>

實現股東價值與強大的產品和安全文化本質上并非對立關系。但股東回報不能被以犧牲員工、產品或公司的長期使命為代價。

我對波音董事會和新任首席執行官有三條具體建議,都來自我在空客(Airbus)擔任高管的親身經歷??湛偷奈幕彤a品也不是完美無缺。但這家歐洲公司有三件事做得很好:高管形象,關心員工,以及大膽嘗試的勇氣。

新任波音首席執行官應該是飛機迷,而不是會計師

波音決策層和高管層應該選擇志趣相投者,應該熱愛產品,熱愛波音制造偉大飛機的使命。

決策層討論的內容不應僅圍繞現金流和息稅折舊及攤銷前利潤,還應關心新產品、功能、客戶反饋,以及極為重要的安全問題實質。安全問題不能強制或造假。因為波音的產品非常獨特,領導團隊必須真正懷有熱情。

如果董事會和高管層把產品和安全當成首要任務,全公司都會感受到。這一點空客做得很好。上一任首席執行官堅持從空客新型A400M運輸機上跳傘,還親自駕駛平流層滑翔機。現任掌門曾是直升機測試工程師。從首席執行官辦公室和董事會會議室都能看到空客飛機測試跑道全景。空客總部明顯有種“航空迷”的氛圍。我見過的航空公司首席執行官當中有些熱衷財務數據,也有飛機愛好者。其中區別非常明顯,造成的氛圍會在公司里迅速傳播,而且很重要。

讓員工成為股東

波音不必為強調股東回報而道歉,但應該明確告訴員工,公司不會犧牲員工利益,而是為員工爭取最大利益。

如今,絕大多數大型工業公司里,權益報酬僅限于高管層。私募股權公司KKR在工業行業投資的少數幾家公司部署了一項戰略,確保所有員工都擁有一定股份,連車間小時工都要持股。結果令人震驚。哈佛商學院(HBS)針對一家此類公司的研究報告稱,息稅折舊攤銷前利潤率立即躍升8%,同時安全事故率減半,產品質量也明顯提升。

讓員工像老板一樣思考,員工在改善公司運營和交付優質產品方面就會承擔更多責任。工會關系也會因此改善,過去這一直是波音的痛點。當然,這一點空客其實別無選擇。法國和德國的勞動法規定了員工至上的文化。每個重大決策都必須與員工代表費力協商。我記得曾與一位非常資深的空客高管談話,我提出公司的目標就是為股東創造價值,他對這一“非常美國化”的判斷提出質疑。我滔滔不絕談及著名的道奇訴福特案,稱之為美國公司法的原則,他卻嗤之以鼻?!澳阏f說公司的目標是什么?”我問道?!盀闅W洲創造更多就業機會,”他回答說。

幫波音實現新目標

波音最新一款飛機787的研發于20年前啟動(報道稱,一位吹哨人要求停飛,目前該飛機正接受審查)。737設計超過半個世紀(第一架737-100于1967年首飛),通過十幾種衍生設計逐漸改進,變成了今天的MAX。將現有品牌貨幣化從而避免設計新飛機產生的費用,確實是深思熟慮的策略。然而從波音學到的教訓來看,該策略不可持續,最終會影響股東的價值。

例如,MAX墜機事件中的MCAS系統就是737缺乏現代數字飛行控制系統的直接后果。一系列事故也讓很多員工沮喪,他們原本希望進入航空領域制造全世界最酷的產品,勇敢解決重大問題,站在人類創新的前沿,結果卻在改進父母一代可能曾參與設計的老飛機。

新目標可能什么樣?航空業有個骯臟的秘密,即隨著交通運輸量增長遠遠超過飛機效率提高,未來幾十年航空業二氧化碳排放量將大幅增加。波音用碳補償和所謂“可持續”航空燃料給旗下產品營造綠色形象,所謂“可持續”燃料是指生產過程中將燃燒碳氫化合物時排放的一小部分二氧化碳重新捕獲。使用這一方法,波音省下了制造新飛機的費用,將氫能、柔性燃料、混合動力和開放式旋翼等清潔飛行技術的領先地位拱手讓給了空客,而空客顯然很樂意成為行業創新者。

不妨挑戰波音用美國載人登月計劃的時間交付真正的零排放飛機(順便說一句,當年這項大計劃中波音曾發揮重要作用)。員工熱情會非常高。而且他們肯定能做到。

我小時候最大的夢想就是去波音當總工程師。我幻想新飛機的樣子,貪婪地閱讀關于傳奇飛機設計師的書,在波音在線禮品店訂購每件周邊。哪怕我跟隨職業的腳步前往大西洋彼岸的空客工作,我仍然對波音這家美國標志性企業懷有深厚感情,也對其目前深陷困境很難過。我相信,只要讓真正熱愛飛機的人掌舵,推動員工為公司的成功拼命努力,勇于為將來大膽下注,波音就能重現往日輝煌。

保羅·埃雷緬科曾在空客和聯合技術公司(United Technologies)擔任首席技術官。(財富中文網)

譯者:梁宇

審校:夏林

今年年底,波音(Boeing)公司將迎來新任首席執行官。領導層要在創紀錄的時間內領導激進的大規模文化變革,波音目前員工超過17萬名,其中工程師約5萬人。

現代航空運輸系統幾乎可以說是奇跡。飛機是人類創造最復雜的工程杰作之一,每天都有數千架飛機穿梭空中而且事故率很低,飛行也成了最安全的出行方式之一,僅次于乘電梯(比走路更安全,比開車更是安全太多)。其實這并不是奇跡,背后是一套精心積累的工程原則、質量流程和操作程序——全都靠著一套文化基礎作為支撐,確保切實且明智地執行。文化元素是實現奇跡的要素,也正是波音公司的問題所在。

2018年和2019年波音兩架737 MAX飛機相隔數月墜毀的悲慘事故就是案例。航空工程有一條重要原則,即安全關鍵系統不能存在任何故障點。波音工程師在紙面上說服自己和美國聯邦航空管理局(FAA)導致事故發生的MCAS系統不是安全關鍵系統。當然,事實證明MCAS正是安全關鍵系統。這是工程失誤,但從更重要和更系統層面來說,這是文化的失?。合嚓P責任人本應及時對假設正確提出質疑。

最近,阿拉斯加航空(Alaska Airlines)另一架波音737 MAX航班在飛行中艙門脫落,看起來是質檢流程錯誤(不過調查仍在進行中)。很大可能是,流程本身并沒錯,只是沒嚴格遵循。同樣,公司文化幾乎肯定是問題根源。今年2月,美國國會授權專家小組針對之前MAX墜機事件發布了關于波音安全系統的報告。其中寫道:“專家小組觀察到波音高管層與企業內其他成員在安全文化方面存在脫節?!?/p>

波音的公司文化怎么了,如何修復

過去20年里,波音刻意從工程導向轉型為更注重商業成果的公司。本世紀初,波音首席執行官哈里·斯通塞弗曾打趣道:“人們說我改變了波音的文化,其實這正是我的意圖,我想讓波音更像企業,而不只是偉大的工程公司?!?/p>

斯通塞弗的繼任者詹姆斯·麥克納尼更進一步:“每25年弄一次堪比登月的大項目……然后研發出707或787——這是飛機制造行業錯誤的經營方式。追求投入產出效益的世界不會給你機會打磨登月計劃的機會。”

實現股東價值與強大的產品和安全文化本質上并非對立關系。但股東回報不能被以犧牲員工、產品或公司的長期使命為代價。

我對波音董事會和新任首席執行官有三條具體建議,都來自我在空客(Airbus)擔任高管的親身經歷。空客的文化和產品也不是完美無缺。但這家歐洲公司有三件事做得很好:高管形象,關心員工,以及大膽嘗試的勇氣。

新任波音首席執行官應該是飛機迷,而不是會計師

波音決策層和高管層應該選擇志趣相投者,應該熱愛產品,熱愛波音制造偉大飛機的使命。

決策層討論的內容不應僅圍繞現金流和息稅折舊及攤銷前利潤,還應關心新產品、功能、客戶反饋,以及極為重要的安全問題實質。安全問題不能強制或造假。因為波音的產品非常獨特,領導團隊必須真正懷有熱情。

如果董事會和高管層把產品和安全當成首要任務,全公司都會感受到。這一點空客做得很好。上一任首席執行官堅持從空客新型A400M運輸機上跳傘,還親自駕駛平流層滑翔機?,F任掌門曾是直升機測試工程師。從首席執行官辦公室和董事會會議室都能看到空客飛機測試跑道全景。空客總部明顯有種“航空迷”的氛圍。我見過的航空公司首席執行官當中有些熱衷財務數據,也有飛機愛好者。其中區別非常明顯,造成的氛圍會在公司里迅速傳播,而且很重要。

讓員工成為股東

波音不必為強調股東回報而道歉,但應該明確告訴員工,公司不會犧牲員工利益,而是為員工爭取最大利益。

如今,絕大多數大型工業公司里,權益報酬僅限于高管層。私募股權公司KKR在工業行業投資的少數幾家公司部署了一項戰略,確保所有員工都擁有一定股份,連車間小時工都要持股。結果令人震驚。哈佛商學院(HBS)針對一家此類公司的研究報告稱,息稅折舊攤銷前利潤率立即躍升8%,同時安全事故率減半,產品質量也明顯提升。

讓員工像老板一樣思考,員工在改善公司運營和交付優質產品方面就會承擔更多責任。工會關系也會因此改善,過去這一直是波音的痛點。當然,這一點空客其實別無選擇。法國和德國的勞動法規定了員工至上的文化。每個重大決策都必須與員工代表費力協商。我記得曾與一位非常資深的空客高管談話,我提出公司的目標就是為股東創造價值,他對這一“非常美國化”的判斷提出質疑。我滔滔不絕談及著名的道奇訴福特案,稱之為美國公司法的原則,他卻嗤之以鼻?!澳阏f說公司的目標是什么?”我問道。“為歐洲創造更多就業機會,”他回答說。

幫波音實現新目標

波音最新一款飛機787的研發于20年前啟動(報道稱,一位吹哨人要求停飛,目前該飛機正接受審查)。737設計超過半個世紀(第一架737-100于1967年首飛),通過十幾種衍生設計逐漸改進,變成了今天的MAX。將現有品牌貨幣化從而避免設計新飛機產生的費用,確實是深思熟慮的策略。然而從波音學到的教訓來看,該策略不可持續,最終會影響股東的價值。

例如,MAX墜機事件中的MCAS系統就是737缺乏現代數字飛行控制系統的直接后果。一系列事故也讓很多員工沮喪,他們原本希望進入航空領域制造全世界最酷的產品,勇敢解決重大問題,站在人類創新的前沿,結果卻在改進父母一代可能曾參與設計的老飛機。

新目標可能什么樣?航空業有個骯臟的秘密,即隨著交通運輸量增長遠遠超過飛機效率提高,未來幾十年航空業二氧化碳排放量將大幅增加。波音用碳補償和所謂“可持續”航空燃料給旗下產品營造綠色形象,所謂“可持續”燃料是指生產過程中將燃燒碳氫化合物時排放的一小部分二氧化碳重新捕獲。使用這一方法,波音省下了制造新飛機的費用,將氫能、柔性燃料、混合動力和開放式旋翼等清潔飛行技術的領先地位拱手讓給了空客,而空客顯然很樂意成為行業創新者。

不妨挑戰波音用美國載人登月計劃的時間交付真正的零排放飛機(順便說一句,當年這項大計劃中波音曾發揮重要作用)。員工熱情會非常高。而且他們肯定能做到。

我小時候最大的夢想就是去波音當總工程師。我幻想新飛機的樣子,貪婪地閱讀關于傳奇飛機設計師的書,在波音在線禮品店訂購每件周邊。哪怕我跟隨職業的腳步前往大西洋彼岸的空客工作,我仍然對波音這家美國標志性企業懷有深厚感情,也對其目前深陷困境很難過。我相信,只要讓真正熱愛飛機的人掌舵,推動員工為公司的成功拼命努力,勇于為將來大膽下注,波音就能重現往日輝煌。

保羅·埃雷緬科曾在空客和聯合技術公司(United Technologies)擔任首席技術官。(財富中文網)

譯者:梁宇

審校:夏林

By the end of the year, Boeing will have a new CEO. They will need to lead an aggressive cultural transformation on a massive scale–the company has over 170,000 employees of whom about 50,000 are engineers–and in record time.

The modern air transportation system is nothing short of miraculous. Airplanes are some of the most complex feats of engineering created by humans, and yet thousands of them fly daily with so few incidents that flying is one of the safest modes of travel, second only to taking an elevator (and safer than walking, not to mention driving). It is not a miracle but a meticulously accumulated set of engineering principles, quality processes, and operating procedures–all underpinned by a set of cultural mores to ensure that they are faithfully and intelligently implemented. This cultural element is the magic ingredient. And it is what’s broken at Boeing.

Take, for example, the tragic crashes of two Boeing 737 MAX aircraft a few months apart in 2018 and 2019. A key aviation engineering principle is that safety-critical systems cannot have a single point of failure. Boeing engineers convinced themselves (and the FAA) on paper that the MCAS system, which was found to be the culprit, was not safety-critical. Of course, it turned out to be. This is an engineering error–but more importantly and systemically, it is a failure of culture: The right people should have felt empowered to question the right assumptions at the right time.

The recent in-flight loss of a door plug on another Boeing 737 MAX Alaska Airlines flight looks to be a quality process error (although the investigation is ongoing). Most probably. the process itself wasn’t wrong–it just wasn’t followed. Again, culture is almost certainly the culprit. In February, a Congressionally-mandated panel of experts convened in the wake of the earlier MAX crashes released its report on Boeing safety systems. It wrote that “[t]he Expert Panel observed a disconnect between Boeing’s senior management and other members of the organization on safety culture.”

What happened to Boeing’s culture and how to fix it

For the last two decades, Boeing has undergone a deliberate transformation from an engineering-driven company to one more focused on business results. Harry Stonecipher, Boeing’s CEO in the early 2000s, famously quipped: “When people say I changed the culture of Boeing, that was the intent, so that it is run like a business rather than a great engineering firm.”

Stonecipher’s successor, James McNerney, took this even further: “Every 25 years a big moonshot… and then produce a 707 or a 787–that’s the wrong way to pursue this business. The more-for-less world will not let you pursue moonshots.”

Delivering shareholder value is not inherently antithetical to a strong product and safety culture. But shareholder returns cannot be perceived as coming at the expense of the employees, the product, or the company’s long-term mission.

I have three concrete suggestions for Boeing’s board and new CEO. These come from my own experience in the Airbus C-suite. Neither Airbus’s culture nor its products are flawless. But the European company has consistently gotten three things right: the profile of the people at the top, a focus on its employees, and the willingness to make bold bets.

The new Boeing CEO needs to be an airplane geek, not a bean counter

Boeing should fill the C-suite and executive ranks with like-minded people who love the product and Boeing’s mission to build great airplanes.

C-suite discussions should revolve not just around free cash flow and EBITDA, but around new products, features, customer feedback, and–importantly–the nitty gritty of safety issues. And it can’t be forced or faked. Because Boeing’s products are so unique, the leadership team must have a genuine passion for them.

If product and safety are routinely the top priorities at the board and C-suite level, the whole company will feel it. This is something that Airbus has done well. Its last CEO insisted on parachuting out of Airbus’ new A400M transport plane and piloting a stratospheric glider. The current one is a former helicopter flight test engineer. The CEO’s office and corporate board room has a panoramic view of the runway where Airbus planes are tested. There is a distinct “AvGeek” aura at headquarters. I’ve witnessed first-hand aerospace CEOs who are bean counters and others who are airplane geeks. The difference is stark, it cascades quickly through an organization, and it matters.

Make all employees shareholders

While Boeing need not apologize for emphasizing shareholder returns, it should signal to employees that it is not at their expense but in their best interest.

Today, equity compensation at most large industrial companies is limited to executive ranks. The private equity firm KKR deployed a strategy at a handful of companies in its industrial portfolio of giving all employees–including shop floor hourly workers–a meaningful ownership stake in the business. The results were staggering. An HBS case study on one such company reported an immediate 8% jump in EBITDA margin while halving the safety incident rate and improving product quality.

Making employees think like owners made them take greater personal responsibility for improving company operations and delivering a good product. It will also improve union relations, which has historically been a sore point for Boeing. Airbus, of course, has no choice in the matter. It’s an employee-first culture by virtue of French and German labor laws. Every major decision has to be painstakingly negotiated with employee representatives. I recall a conversation with a very senior Airbus executive where he challenged my “very American” assertion that the purpose of the company was to deliver shareholder value. After I pontificated about the famous Dodge v. Ford court case which enshrined this as a principle of U.S. corporate law, he scoffed. “What is its purpose then?” I asked. “To create good European jobs,” he replied.

Commit Boeing to a bold new goal

The development of the last new Boeing airplane–the 787–was launched two decades ago (and the aircraft is now also coming under scrutiny after a whistleblower reportedly called for its grounding). The 737 was designed over a half-century ago (the original 737-100 first flew in 1967) and has morphed into today’s MAX through more than a dozen derivative designs making incremental improvements. This has been a deliberate strategy to monetize the existing franchise and avoid the expense of a new design. Such a strategy is not sustainable and, as Boeing is learning the hard way, is ultimately detrimental to shareholder value.

The MCAS system at issue in the MAX crashes, for instance, was a direct consequence of the 737 lacking a modern digital flight control system. It is also demotivating to the employees who went into aerospace to build some of the world’s coolest products, help tackle big audacious problems, and be on the bleeding edge of human innovation to be working with ancient tools on the same airplane their parents might have helped design.

What might such a bold new goal look like? Aviation’s dirty secret is that the industry’s CO2 emissions are set to increase significantly in the coming decades, as traffic growth far outpaces incremental improvements in airplane efficiency. Boeing has hidden behind carbon offsets and so-called “sustainable” aviation fuels–where a fraction of the CO2 emitted when burning the hydrocarbon is recaptured during the fuel production process–to greenwash its product portfolio. This approach has allowed the company to avoid the expense of building a new airplane. But in doing so, Boeing ceded the lead in developing clean flight technologies such as hydrogen, flex-fuel, hybrid-electric, and open rotor to Airbus, which has been only too happy to pick up the mantle as the industry’s innovator.

Challenge Boeing to deliver a true-zero-emissions airplane in the time it took the U.S. to land a man on the moon (incidentally, this was a moonshot in which Boeing played a significant part). The employees will love it. And they will almost certainly deliver.

My dream job growing up was to be chief engineer at Boeing. I fantasized what my new airplane would look like, devoured books about legendary airplane designers, and ordered every piece of Boeing swag in its online gift shop. And while my career took me to the planemaker on the other side of the Atlantic, I feel a deep fondness for the American icon that is the Boeing Company–and sadness at its current malaise. I am confident that it can regain its magic by putting airplane geeks at the helm, giving its employees a direct stake in the company’s success, and making a bold, ambitious bet on the future.

Paul Eremenko is a former Chief Technology Officer at Airbus and at United Technologies.

財富中文網所刊載內容之知識產權為財富媒體知識產權有限公司及/或相關權利人專屬所有或持有。未經許可,禁止進行轉載、摘編、復制及建立鏡像等任何使用。
0條Plus
精彩評論
評論

撰寫或查看更多評論

請打開財富Plus APP

前往打開

            主站蜘蛛池模板: 宁城县| 蒲城县| 常德市| 银川市| 涟源市| 台南市| 淳安县| 松阳县| 宣化县| 铁岭县| 玉田县| 大邑县| 西昌市| 桓台县| 探索| 华容县| 山东| 黎城县| 拉萨市| 彭泽县| 三穗县| 富源县| 常熟市| 内丘县| 绥芬河市| 英山县| 广东省| 广昌县| 兰西县| 新竹市| 耒阳市| 全椒县| 蒙自县| 舟山市| 盐亭县| 松桃| 同江市| 衡东县| 鄢陵县| 济宁市| 久治县|