Thomas D. Gorman: First of all, I want to thank you for taking time to be with us today and particularly I know you're in "monk mode", as it has been described, and it's a very special generosity that we appreciate.

Jim Collins: I am in monk mode.

Thomas D. Gorman: This really is as I see it, a continuation of a conversation that we began very briefly in 2001.

Jim Collins: 2001.

Thomas D. Gorman: After you gave an inspired and I think an inspiring presentation to the Fortune Global Forum, which was held that year in Washington, DC. And 2001 stands out because you had published "Good to Great".

Jim Collins: Yep.

高德思：首先我想向你表示感謝，謝謝你今天抽出時(shí)間接受我們的采訪，我知道你正處于“閉關(guān)”的思考狀態(tài)，所以我們對(duì)此尤為感激。

吉姆·柯林斯：我確實(shí)是在“閉關(guān)”思考。

高德思：在我看來(lái)，這次對(duì)話可以看作我們2001年那次簡(jiǎn)短談話的延續(xù)。


吉姆·柯林斯：2001年。

高德思：那一年，在華盛頓舉辦的《財(cái)富》全球論壇（Fortune Global Forum）上，你做了非常精彩、而且非常鼓舞人心的發(fā)言，然后我們簡(jiǎn)短交談過(guò)。之所以強(qiáng)調(diào)2001年，是因?yàn)槟阍谀且荒瓿霭媪恕稄膬?yōu)秀到卓越》。


吉姆·柯林斯：是的。

Thomas D. Gorman: And that was the subject of your presentation, which was a very memorable presentation. 2001 was of course also a very momentous year for China, it was the year that China entered the World Trade Organization, and that was a historic catalyst for all kinds of changes, including in the economics sphere, investment sphere and in terms of integration of China with the world economy.
Looking back to that period of time, we had ten Chinese companies on the Fortune Global 500 list. By contrast in 2009 we had 37. That's incredible growth, obviously, in a very short period of time.
And in that same time span -- 2001 to 2009 -- 50%, actually more than 50% growth in the number of publicly listed Chinese's companies. Whether listed abroad or in the domestic market, so also a lot of change there. Meanwhile, we've just been through the most turbulent period the world economy has seen in living memory.

Jim Collins: Yeah.

Thomas D. Gorman: So all of these things strike me as giving us a very opportune moment in which to consider the principles of greatness that you have written about, so eloquently, how they may apply to this phenomenal growth of the Chinese corporate universe, and also, in the context of the current turbulence that we're living through, which I know is the subject of the book you're working on now.

Jim Collins: It's sort of about the permanent turbulence I think we'll be in.

Thomas D. Gorman: Right. So I thought this would be a great place to revisit some of these subjects and I can't think of a better place to start, than the first sentence of "Good to Great" which is of course, "Good is the enemy of great" and I'd be interested in your thoughts about the universality of that. Do you think that applies as much to companies in China or any other country as it does to the (U.S. company) research set that lead you to that observation?

Jim Collins: Well, we were speaking a moment ago about the rise of the business group in China today, and how there are business leaders who want to build a great company.
And there's a big difference between having a good company that is successful or just being a successful person, or just making a lot of money, and building a great institution, a great company, something that in my mind, a really great company is all about, in the end is a company that delivers such exceptional results. And makes such a distinctive impact on the world it touches. Whether it's a small world or a big world, that if you took it away, it would leave an unfillable hole that couldn't be filled by any other institution. That you've built something that is truly distinctively special and exceptional in how well it performs.
And that you can't do by simply saying, good enough is, you have to say, no, in order to really be indispensable, to truly reach that point, where something would be lost if we went away.
That requires a dedication to building something far more than just successful, which is: a great company.

高德思：那也是你發(fā)言的主題，讓人難以忘懷。當(dāng)然2001年對(duì)中國(guó)來(lái)說(shuō)，也是非常值得紀(jì)念的一年。中國(guó)加入了世貿(mào)組織，這對(duì)各種變革來(lái)說(shuō)都是歷史性的催化劑，作用于經(jīng)濟(jì)、投資以及中國(guó)與世界經(jīng)濟(jì)大環(huán)境融合等各個(gè)方面。

回首那一時(shí)期，有10家中國(guó)企業(yè)名列《財(cái)富》世界500強(qiáng)排行榜。形成鮮明對(duì)比的是，到2009年，這個(gè)榜單上有了37家中國(guó)企業(yè)。在如此短的時(shí)間內(nèi)，實(shí)現(xiàn)這樣的增長(zhǎng)讓人感到難以置信。

在相同的時(shí)間跨度里，從2001年到2009年，中國(guó)的上市公司數(shù)量增加了50%還要多，包括在國(guó)外和國(guó)內(nèi)上市的，同樣產(chǎn)生了巨大的變化。與此同時(shí)，我們經(jīng)歷了當(dāng)代人記憶中世界經(jīng)濟(jì)最為混亂的時(shí)期。









吉姆·柯林斯：是的。

高德思：這些變化都深深地觸動(dòng)了我們，讓我們利用這個(gè)適宜的契機(jī)，去思考你寫到的“卓越”的基本原則，思考如何將這些原則應(yīng)用到中國(guó)快速成長(zhǎng)的商業(yè)環(huán)境中，或是用這些原則來(lái)解釋當(dāng)前動(dòng)蕩的大環(huán)境，而我知道，這也是你手頭正在創(chuàng)作的那本書的主題。





吉姆·柯林斯：在我看來(lái)這種經(jīng)濟(jì)動(dòng)蕩會(huì)一直持續(xù)下去。

高德思：對(duì)。所以我想，現(xiàn)在我們可以重溫其中的一些主題。我能想到的最好的開場(chǎng)白，莫過(guò)于《從優(yōu)秀到卓越》書中的第一句話：“優(yōu)秀是卓越的敵人。”我很想知道，你是否認(rèn)為這句話是放之四海而皆準(zhǔn)的。通過(guò)觀察一組美國(guó)公司，你得出了這些結(jié)論。你是否認(rèn)為這一原則也適用于中國(guó)或其他任何國(guó)家的企業(yè)？





吉姆·柯林斯：我們剛剛談到了當(dāng)今中國(guó)商業(yè)集團(tuán)的崛起，談到許多商業(yè)領(lǐng)袖想要建立卓越的企業(yè)。

做一家成功的公司、做一個(gè)成功的人、或掙一大筆錢，與建立一家卓越的機(jī)構(gòu)、一家卓越的企業(yè)之間存在著很大的區(qū)別。在我看來(lái)，一家真正卓越的企業(yè)，歸根結(jié)底就是能夠產(chǎn)生優(yōu)異的業(yè)績(jī)，并且對(duì)其所接觸的領(lǐng)域會(huì)產(chǎn)生巨大的影響。無(wú)論這個(gè)領(lǐng)域是小是大，一旦這家企業(yè)不在了，它將留下一個(gè)無(wú)法填補(bǔ)的空洞，其他任何機(jī)構(gòu)都無(wú)法填補(bǔ)。因?yàn)檫@家企業(yè)的表現(xiàn)超凡脫俗，它建立起了真正與眾不同的、特殊的價(jià)值。

為了實(shí)現(xiàn)“卓越”，你不能說(shuō)“我們已經(jīng)夠好了”。你必須得說(shuō)“還不夠”，如此才能讓你的企業(yè)變得不可或缺，才能在你們離開時(shí)，讓大家覺得缺少了什么。

這需要企業(yè)家身全心投入進(jìn)去，建立一家遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)超越“成功”這個(gè)層次的企業(yè)，也就是我們所說(shuō)的卓越的企業(yè)。

Thomas D. Gorman: You've written that every good to great company had a level 5 leader, as you called them, at the pivotal point of transition.

Jim Collins: Yep.

Thomas D. Gorman: And I'd like to have you explain a little bit about, what are the key attributes of a level 5 leader?

Jim Collins: Yeah.
Well, first I want to sort of go back for where that idea came from. And on two dimensions, first just kind of something about how we look at the world and then how that led us to see this thing that I wasn't looking for. And it's very important to start with, this wasn't something I wanted to find, expected to find, anticipated finding, it was a surprise. But, it's a surprise that came out of a very empirical approach that we take in our work.

高德思：你曾寫到，每一家從優(yōu)秀到卓越的公司，都有一位“第五級(jí)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者”，在這種轉(zhuǎn)變過(guò)程中起到了關(guān)鍵的作用。


吉姆·柯林斯：是的。

高德思：我希望你能解釋一下，一位第五級(jí)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者的關(guān)鍵特征是什么？


吉姆·柯林斯：好的。

從兩個(gè)方面來(lái)看。首先是關(guān)于我們?nèi)绾慰词澜?，以及這種世界觀如何引領(lǐng)我們發(fā)現(xiàn)這個(gè)理論。必須先說(shuō)明的是，這并不是我當(dāng)初想要尋找的方向，而是個(gè)意外的發(fā)現(xiàn)。然而，由于我們?cè)诠ぷ髦校捎昧艘环N非常實(shí)證主義的研究方法，才有了這個(gè)意外的發(fā)現(xiàn)。

Thomas D. Gorman: Am I right that you found that those level 5 leaders, virtually all of them, had the personal attribute of humility as well? Or, is it more that they were overshadowed by institutional ambition?

Jim Collins: They were, I would say, that it was, they had a form of humility in the sense, I want to be really clear, is not a kind of humility that is necessarily an external package that you can see. We found a lot of different types.
Let's just pause on this point, because I think it's very important.
It's not about your external demeanor. Most of the level 5's were in fact this is what got us thinking about them -- most of them were more, sort of, plow horse than show horse. Often they were shy, often they were not particularly magnetic personalities, they were people who were socially awkward.

高德思：你是否覺得這些第五級(jí)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者幾乎都具有謙卑的品質(zhì)？還是說(shuō)他們更多地被籠罩在企業(yè)目標(biāo)的陰影之下？




吉姆·柯林斯：他們的確都具有某種形式的謙卑品質(zhì)，我想特別說(shuō)明的是，他們的這種謙卑，你不一定從外表上看得出來(lái)。而且我們發(fā)現(xiàn)了許多不同的表現(xiàn)類型。

讓我們對(duì)此多言幾句，因?yàn)槲矣X得這一點(diǎn)非常重要。

這種謙卑和一個(gè)人的外在舉止無(wú)關(guān)。大部分的第五級(jí)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者都是實(shí)干型，而不是做秀型，這一點(diǎn)引起了我們的沉思。他們中的許多人很害羞，許多人的個(gè)性非但不具有吸引力，甚至不太善于社交。

Jim Collins: I mean, Darwin Smith at Kimberly Clark, was just kind of strange. He's idea of a good social event was to sit by himself on a tractor and move rocks from one end of the property to another. I mean, that was his idea of a good time. That was his idea of socializing, right? To move rocks about, and when asked about his style, he just simply said, "eccentric." He's not your sort of smooth guy and yet he was one of these great leaders.
But on the other hand, you have someone like Anne Mulcahy, of Xerox, who is somebody who I greatly admire, who was dealt a very difficult set of cards. Company in real difficult straights, may be going away, company with great historic track record. And Anne really brought Xerox back and she though, she is magnetic, she's social. I've seen her in front of hundreds and thousands of people having them like weeping and stomping and cheering and with a sense of goose bumps.
And you ask yourself, what is the awkward Darwin Smith riding around on his tractor, and Anne Mulcahy, who is this magnetic, wonderful person, who just makes you feel good when you walk into a room, what do they share in common, that makes them different?
It's not about them. And, that is really the difference.
Both of them care deeply about doing whatever it took to build or to rebuild something into a great stature that would go on beyond them. And that in the end, really stood for something.
Their extra little personality traits, really different. But, that inner drive and the steely determination -- same.
You meet Anne Mulcahy and she's a nice person, but boy, whatever difficult decisions need to be made to save Xerox, she would make them, and they were very painful. She said, "I don't ever want those decisions to become easy." It's not that they were easy, it's just they had to be done.
And when Darwin Smith sold the mills, hundreds of years of company history, it's not that is was easy, but as he said, "If you have a cancer in your arm, you have to have the guts to cut off your own arm." Right?
So the level five is someone, we don't want to sort of get caught up on the fact, that they are necessarily, self-effacing, necessarily shy, that they necessarily have a charisma by-pass. They may or may not have those external attributes, but it's the internal drive, it's not about them, they have the relentlessness to make very painful decisions.
And finally, the humility comes in the form of never feeling they've got all the answers worked out, and always feeling they're on the edge of potential catastrophe. And that helps keep their edge, that they are very aware of the brutal facts all the time.

吉姆·柯林斯：金佰利公司的達(dá)爾文•史密斯就是一個(gè)有些奇怪的人。在他看來(lái)，如果讓他一個(gè)人坐在拖拉機(jī)上，把石頭從一塊地的這頭運(yùn)到那頭，就算是一次很好的社交活動(dòng)。這就是他心目中的愜意時(shí)光，就是他的社交觀念。當(dāng)人們問(wèn)他是什么風(fēng)格的人，他只是簡(jiǎn)單地回答：“（我是）特立獨(dú)行的人”。顯然他不是一個(gè)善于社交的人，但是這不妨礙他成為一位卓越的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者。

不過(guò)卓越的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者中也有像施樂公司（Xerox）的安妮•馬爾卡希（Anne Mulcahy）這樣的人物。我對(duì)她非常欣賞。她面對(duì)的是一個(gè)棘手的爛攤子。她當(dāng)年擔(dān)任CEO時(shí)，施樂這樣一家曾經(jīng)十分輝煌的公司正深陷困境，而且還有破產(chǎn)的可能。不過(guò)安妮卻將施樂從破產(chǎn)的邊緣挽救了回來(lái)。她是一個(gè)富有魅力、并非常擅于社交的人。我曾經(jīng)見過(guò)她面對(duì)成百上千的聽眾，令他們激動(dòng)得時(shí)而流淚、時(shí)而跺腳、時(shí)而又歡呼。

我會(huì)問(wèn)自己：這位不善交際、開著拖拉機(jī)瞎轉(zhuǎn)悠的達(dá)爾文•史密斯，還有這位迷人的、讓所有人如沐春風(fēng)的安妮•馬爾卡希女士，他們身上究竟有什么共性使得他們?nèi)绱伺c眾不同？

答案就是，他們的奮斗目標(biāo)都不在于自身。這就是真正的區(qū)別。

他們更為關(guān)注如何建立或重建某項(xiàng)事務(wù)，然后將其提升到一個(gè)卓越的、超越自身的高度，為此不惜付出任何代價(jià)。這就是最終起作用的因素。

他們的性格也許各有不同。但重要的是他們都有內(nèi)在的驅(qū)動(dòng)力和鋼鐵般的決心。

安妮•馬爾卡希是個(gè)非常溫和的人，但如果為了挽救施樂公司，不管要做多么艱難的決策，她都不會(huì)皺一下眉頭，而這些過(guò)程往往是非常痛苦的。她說(shuō)：“我從不指望這些決策會(huì)變得簡(jiǎn)單。”這些決策從來(lái)沒有簡(jiǎn)單過(guò)，但是再艱難也非做不可。

比如，達(dá)爾文•史密斯賣掉了公司所有的造紙廠。這不是一個(gè)容易的決定，這些造紙廠代表著金佰利公司幾百年的歷史。然而他指出：“如果你的胳膊上長(zhǎng)了惡性腫瘤，你就必須有膽量切掉整只胳膊。”對(duì)嗎？

所以第五級(jí)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者是這樣一種人，我們不能只專注于他們的外在層面，比如他們是否謙遜、是否害羞、或是魅力四射。他們完全可能沒有這些外在屬性，因?yàn)樗麄兊膬?nèi)在驅(qū)動(dòng)力與這些外在特點(diǎn)無(wú)關(guān)。關(guān)鍵是他們可以堅(jiān)忍不拔，義無(wú)反顧地做出極為痛苦的決定。

最后，他們之所以謙遜，是因?yàn)樗麄儚牟徽J(rèn)為已經(jīng)解決了所有的問(wèn)題，而是永遠(yuǎn)如履薄冰。這種態(tài)度令他們一直處于領(lǐng)先優(yōu)勢(shì)，因?yàn)樗麄儗?duì)現(xiàn)實(shí)的殘酷程度一直保持清醒的認(rèn)識(shí)。