風投大佬本?霍洛維茨暢談五大管理經驗

????3. 福利固然好，但并不等同于文化

????人們在描述科技公司的企業文化時，往往會關注一些外在跡象：谷歌（Google）或社交網站Facebook提供的來自當地的免費有機食物，游戲公司Zynga可以帶寵物狗上班的政策，以及幾乎每個稍有野心的硅谷創業公司都會提供的瑜伽班、冥想室或全方位服務健身房等。霍洛維茨說，這些福利固然令人羨慕，卻不屬于企業文化。企業文化的特征是，它能夠幫助公司達成目標，在公司發展中幫助保持自身的價值觀，同時讓員工喜歡上這份工作。例如，亞馬遜（Amazon）公司將廢棄的門板做成了辦公桌，這種做法強化了公司的一種觀念，那就是：如果亞馬遜想盡可能為顧客提供更多的價值，就必須注重節約。而風投公司安德森?霍洛維茨嚴格執行著一項罰款政策：員工在會見企業家時，每遲到十分鐘就罰款10美元。這種政策明確了公司最看重的是什么。（“如果你覺得企業家沒有風險投資家重要，那你根本就沒資格在安德森?霍洛維茨工作，” 霍洛維茨在書中寫道。）而在Facebook公司，馬克?扎克伯格的格言是“快速行動，打破常規”。它幫助員工認識到：創新至高無上，但常常伴隨著風險。“理想的情況是，某種文化看似微不足道，卻對人們的行為影響深遠。”

????4. 直面困難，絕不逃避

????大多數公司在發展過程的某個階段都會遭遇對手步步緊逼、前途堪憂的可怕局面。“公司面臨的境遇十分可怕，很多人都想盡辦法逃避困難，”霍洛維茨寫道。“他們會去尋找其它途徑、尋找所有出路或理由，避免這場死戰。”霍洛維茨自己的公司Opsware也曾面臨過這樣的挑戰。當時，競爭對手的產品比他們的要更出色。這時霍洛維茨告訴自己的團隊，現在不是轉型的時候，也不是逃避的時候。也就是說，沒有別的高招，只有改進產品這一條路。他寫道：“經過九個月艱苦卓絕的努力，熬過一個極為艱難的產品周期之后，我們贏回了市場領導地位，最終還打造了一家價值16億美元的公司。”霍洛維茨以一種熱愛困難的態度結束了這個話題：“任何公司在發展過程中都會面臨需要為生存而戰斗的時刻。如果在應該挺身而出的時候你卻想要逃避，你就該問問自己：‘我們公司真的完全沒有成功的可能嗎？要不要干脆關門大吉？’”

????5. 甄別候選人的動機

????在某種程度上，員工們都是從自身的角度來看待問題。但霍洛維茨還是建議經理們在挑選下層管理者的時候，注意甄別候選人是將個人利益置于公司之前，還是關注個人與公司的共同成長。涉及在前一家公司的工作經歷，前一種人只會將它拿來為自己的簡歷增光添彩，而后一種人則會承擔自己在這段失敗的求職經歷中應該承擔的責任，同時詳細說明自己在哪方面出現了誤判。前一種人往往會吹噓以前取得的成績，但在細節上卻語焉不詳；后一種人則會把成就歸功于團隊。挑選管理者，特別是重大崗位管理者的時候，甄別候選人的動機至關重要。霍洛維茨說：“總有個別員工會優先考慮個人的事業發展，這無可厚非。但如果高層管理者也懷著這個目的，你想指望他們做出正確的決定就是非常危險的想法。”（財富中文網）

????譯者：朱毓芬/汪皓

????

????3.) Company perks are good, but they are not culture.

????People describing the culture of tech companies often focus on outward signs: the free, organic, and locally sourced meals at Google (GOOG) or Facebook (FB); the dog-friendly policies at Zynga; the yoga classes, meditation rooms, or full-service gym at, well, just about every ambitious Silicon Valley startup. Horowitz says those are all nice to have. But culture is defined by traits that help a company achieve its goals, preserve its values as it grows, and make employees feel like they want to work there. Examples? The desks made out of doors at Amazon (AMZN) helped to cement the notion that frugality was essential if Amazon was to deliver every penny of value it could to its customers. The strictly enforced $10-per-minute fine for being late to a meeting with an entrepreneur at Andreessen Horowitz laid out the firm's priorities. ("If you don't think entrepreneurs are more important than venture capitalists, we can't use you at Andreessen Horowitz," Horowitz writes.) And Mark Zuckerberg's "move fast and break things" maxim helped to establish that, at Facebook, innovation is paramount and goes hand in hand with risk. "Ideally, a cultural design point will be trivial to implement but have far-reaching behavioral consequences," Horowitz writes.

????4.) There are only lead bullets.

????Most companies at some point in their lives face a rival who is beating them in the market and putting their future at risk, and it's bound to be scary. "So scary that many in the organization will do anything to avoid facing it," Horowitz writes. "They will look for any alternative, any way out, any excuse not to live or die in a single battle." When his own company, Opsware, faced such a challenge from a rival with a better product, Horowitz told his troops it was not the time to pivot or look for an escape hatch. In other words, there were no silver bullets. They had to fix their product. "After nine months of hard work on an extremely rugged product cycle, we regained our leadership and eventually built a company that was worth $1.6 billion," he writes. Horowitz ends this lesson with the following tough-love message: "There comes a time in every company's life where it must fight for its life. If you find yourself running when you should be fighting, you need to ask yourself, 'If our company isn't good enough to win, then do we need to exist at all?'"

????5.) You must screen for the right kind of ambition.

????At some level, every employee views the world through his or her own eyes. Still, Horowitz advises managers to look for signs that indicate whether a candidate will put personal goals ahead of the company's or focus on collective success. The former may excuse a stint at a prior company that failed as a step to build his resume, while the latter will take responsibility for the failure and describe his own misjudgments in detail. The former may brag about prior successes but be vague on the details, while the latter will credit his team. Screening for the right kind of ambition, especially for positions of great responsibility, is essential, Horowitz says: "While it may work to have individual employees who optimize for their own careers, counting on senior managers to do all the right things for all the wrong reasons is a dangerous idea."