WE

教学素材 | 懂得何时该卸任

职场双语阅读考研六级

较难 47

Knowing When to Quit

懂得何时该卸任

词汇：六级 | 句法：六级 | 文本：考研

刘立军供稿

Deciding when to quit is relatively straightforward early in a career. If the thought of going to work on Monday morning feels more depressing than a Lars von Trier film, it’s time to leave. If you’ve exhausted all learning opportunities at your current organization, it’s wise to seek more stimulating prospects elsewhere.

在职业生涯早期，决定何时退出相对简单。如果想到周一早上要去上班比看拉斯・冯・提尔的电影还要令人沮丧，那么是时候离开了。如果在当前公司已经耗尽了所有的学习机会，明智的做法是去别处寻找更能激发自身潜能的前景。

However, knowing when to quit becomes more challenging when you’re in a role that offers significant status, novelty, and purpose. This decision is particularly difficult when it might be your last major job.

然而，当你处于一个地位重要、有新鲜感和使命感的职位时，知道何时退出变得更具挑战性。尤其当这可能是你最后一份重要工作时，这个决定更为困难。

What holds true for American presidents also applies to chief executives. For instance, Bob Iger has mastered the art of not leaving Disney. At JPMorgan Chase, being named Jamie Dimon’s successor is the surest way to ensure you won’t succeed him. Both Iger and Dimon are stars, and their firms have reasons to keep them. The same cannot be said for Dave Calhoun, Boeing’s CEO, who will lead the company until the end of the year despite the significant reputational damage it has suffered under his leadership. Calhoun was supposed to have left years ago, but Boeing raised the mandatory retirement age to allow him to stay.

适用于美国总统的原则同样适用于首席执行官。例如，鲍勃・伊格尔掌握了不离开迪士尼的艺术。在摩根大通，被指定为杰米·戴蒙的接班人是能确保你不会接替他的最可靠的方法。伊格尔和戴蒙都是明星，他们的公司有理由留住他们。但波音公司的首席执行官戴夫・卡尔霍恩的情况则不同，尽管在他的领导下公司声誉受到了严重损害，他仍将继续领导公司到年底。卡尔霍恩本应在几年前离职，但波音公司提高了强制退休年龄，才让他得以留任。

The incentives for CEOs and other leaders to remain in their positions are both material and psychological. They enjoy perks like assistants, chauffeurs, and private jets. Psychologically, those who reach the top often have strong egos and may find it hard to accept that someone else could do their job well. Michael Watkins, a professor at IMD Business School in Switzerland, calls this “the aura of indispensability.” The prospect of retirement can be particularly daunting — one week, a farewell trip to Davos; the next, organizing the spice rack.

CEO和其他领导者留任的动机既有物质上的，也有心理上的。物质上，他们享受诸如助手、司机和私人飞机等福利。心理上，那些登上顶峰的人通常有着强烈的自我意识，可能难以接受别人也能做好他们的工作。瑞士IMD商学院的教授迈克尔・沃特金斯称之为“不可或缺的光环效应”。对于他们而言，退休的前景尤其令人生畏——本周还在达沃斯进行告别之旅，下周就要整理香料架了。

Research can help bosses determine how long to stay in a role. A study by Francois Brochet of Boston University and his co-authors examined the relationship between CEO tenure and firm value to identify an optimal period in charge. They found that firm value typically starts to decline after a CEO has been in the job for 14 years. However, this figure isn’t particularly helpful due to the vast differences between executives, firms, and industries. Many CEOs are ousted much sooner, while some deserve more time.

研究可以帮助管理者确定在一个职位上应该待多久。波士顿大学的弗朗索瓦・布罗谢和他的合著者进行的一项研究考察了CEO任期与公司价值之间的关系，以确定最优的任期周期。他们发现，CEO任职14年后，公司价值通常会开始下降。然而，由于高管、公司和行业之间的巨大差异，这一数字参考价值并不高。许多CEO更早地被解雇，而有些人本应获得更长的任职时间。

More usefully, the researchers confirmed a hump-shaped curve in firm performance. Performance improves as CEOs master their roles but declines as they become set in their ways and accumulate power. Similar patterns have been observed in college basketball and Hollywood.

更有用的是，研究人员确认了公司业绩会呈现驼峰形曲线。随着CEO对其角色的掌握，业绩会提升，但随着他们逐渐墨守成规、权利不断积累，业绩便会下降。类似的规律也在大学篮球和好莱坞行业中观察到。

Changes in circumstances can shorten this performance hump. Research by Bradley Hendricks of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and Travis Howell, then at the University of California, Irvine, suggests that firms led by founder-CEOs have a valuation premium when they first go public, but this premium vanishes within three years as the demands of the job evolve.

环境的变化可能会缩短这一业绩高峰。北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校的布拉德利・亨德里克斯和当时在加利福尼亚大学欧文分校的特拉维斯・豪厄尔开展的研究表明，由创始人担任CEO的公司在首次上市时享有估值溢价，但这种溢价会在三年内随着岗位要求的变化而消失。

If bosses often misjudge when to quit, what can be done? Blunt instruments like mandatory retirement ages and term limits exist but have drawbacks. CEOs may be at their peak when forced to leave, and those nearing the end of their terms might be seen as lame ducks. Knowing their tenure is ending can also alter a CEO’s behavior in unhelpful ways.

如果管理者们经常误判卸任的最佳时机，该怎么办呢？向强制退休年龄和任期限制等硬性手段是存在的，但它们也有其缺点。有些CEO正处于巅峰状态时，却被迫离任，而那些接近任期结束的人可能会被视为“跛脚鸭”（指即将卸任，执行能力下降的领导者）。知道自己的任期即将结束，还可能导致CEO做出一些不利于公司的行为。

Research by Sam Yul Cho of Oregon State University and Kim Sang Kyun of Sungkyunkwan University in South Korea suggests that firms led by CEOs with short “career horizons” (i.e., nearing retirement) generate fewer big innovations. Another study by Dirk Jenter of the London School of Economics and Katharina Lewellen of the Tuck School at Dartmouth found that firms are more likely to be taken over when a CEO is at retirement age, as retiring CEOs are less concerned about job loss.

俄勒冈州立大学的萨姆・尤尔・乔和韩国成均馆大学的金相均的研究表明，由职业前景较短（即临近退休）的CEO领导的公司产生的重大创新较少。伦敦政治经济学院的迪尔克・詹特和达特茅斯塔克商学院的凯瑟琳娜・卢埃伦的另一项研究表明，当CEO达到退休年龄时，公司更容易被收购，因为即将退休的CEO对失业的担忧会大大降低。

Rigid rules are not the best defense against overstaying one’s welcome. More important are institutional constraints on CEO power — like a strong, independent board — and self-aware bosses who recognize that everyone has a natural shelf life. One of the first questions to ask a potential senior hire is how long they think they should stay.

僵化的制度并不是防止超期留任的最佳方案。更重要的是对公司CEO权力施加制度性约束，比如建立一个强大的独立董事会，并且管理者要有自知之明，明白每个人在某个职位上都有“自然保质期”。因此询问潜在高级雇员的第一个问题之一应该是：“你认为自己在这个岗位上应该任职多久？”