字體：小 中 大 |
|
|
|
| 2010/07/21 15:39:50瀏覽449｜回應0｜推薦2 | |
Jeffrey E. Garten 在他那本書(The Politics of Fortune, 2002) 中寫道 “ In the world after September 11, 2001, and the world after the Enron scandals, the education of tomorrow’s business leaders requires reexamination.” 到底缺些什麼內容呢？他提出 Future’s executives not only will need to be technically in the basics such as finance, marketing, and operations, but will require a knowledge of government---how it works, and how to work in partnership with it. 所以除了911恐怖分子攻擊(terrorist attack), 恩隆醜聞外, 作者還點明該書的重點之一, politics, 不只是政治學而已, 更指政治手腕, 政治事業(如 He entered politics at the age of 30.), 也暗指各種勾心鬥角的事情。另外像對各種國際組織 (international organizations) 及對非官方組織 NGOs(nongovernmental organizations) 的了解, 均甚重要, 諸多活動及內容如：how to operate in a world of multiple jurisdictions with different political and legal system and a multitude of cultures and customer preferences, 不僅要知道文化差異, 顧客偏好, 更需深入瞭解該國之法律環境, 尤其司法制度(jurisdiction)。 身為商學院的院長, Garten 心中所繫當然是如何教育未來的領導者(future leaders), 他立即指出, 想把我們學生在未來生活與工作中, 做判斷能將涉及技能與價值的部份予以區分, 不僅只是挑戰, 更是不可能之事。 (I find it impossible to separate the challenge of identifying the skills and values that our students will need from our judgment about the world in which they will live and work.) 原本像美國這麼繁榮的資本主義國家, 自1980 年代便一直沈浸在黃金時代當中, 卻因2001年的恐怖分子攻擊美國事件, 以及二個月後發生的恩隆醜聞(Enron scandal), 基本上已大大改變整個情境(have fundamentally altered the landscape)。因為 Each of these events creates new risks for business. 於1776年出版的國富論(The Wealth of Nation)中, Adam Smith 所揭櫫的想法叫 laissez faire, 亦即經濟上的自由放任主義, 亦即管得越少的政府便是最好的政府, Smith 還引用英國的古諺 “ The road to hell is always paved with good intentions.” (到地獄之路是常鋪滿善意的” 。 而 Garten 今日則認為需要 a knowledge of government---how it works, and how to work in partnership with it. 也就是要暸解政府的運作方式, 甚至如何與政府合作愉快。對美國政府, 他也寫到 “ The U.S. government could initiate policies with good intentions but with unintentioned consequences, raising the cost of doing business and undercutting opportunities for risk and innovation.” 是否與Adam Smith 所說頗雷同？進一步而言, 為監控恐怖分子而蒐集安全資料, 最後卻成為妨礙個人隱私與自由(What begins as a necessary effort to gather information on suspected terrorists and to monitor their movements ultimately threatens personal privacy and civil liberties.) 另有一位頗有意思的學者, Charles Handy, 寫了一本 “大象與跳蚤” (The Elephant and Flea), 寫資本主義下的某些不滿(子標題為 Reflection of a reluctant capitalist), 由小跳蚤奮力想爬上大象背的繽紛歷程, 開始他先提出很棒的人生態度“Today really was going to be the first day of my life.” , 雖然他要失業了, 但因為是他自己的抉擇, 所以他不說 I would be unemployed. , 反而用 I was ‘ going portfolio’. 那是他自創之用語, portfolio 是公事包, 中間有許多夾層, 好比人有許多地方可去, 沒什大不了, 換換位置而已。如果用 portfolio selection 指的是一個人的資產組合。Handy 很快提出他喜歡的哲學家叔本華(Arthur Schopenhauer) 說的話 “ All truth passes through three stages. First it is ridiculed, Second it is opposed. Third it is accepted as being self-evident.” 挺值得深思, 真理蛻變三部曲: 先被視為荒繆, 其次被反對, 最後被接受且視為當然。 Handy 認為謊言不值得, 因為它終將回過頭來, 像廻力鏢(boomerang)一般, 傷到自己(Lies aren’t worth it. They boomerang on you.) 對於世界上一些已發生的事件, 他也提出世事難料的精湛看法, 比如 “ Communism was already a failed ideology in 1981 but no one then foresaw the fall of the Berlin Wall and the demise of the Soviet Empire.” 的確如此, 世人總視萬事為當然, 日子總是一樣過, 共產主義的失敗, 柏林圍牆的倒塌, 蘇聯帝國之崩解, 回顧歷史不都是同一檔事嗎, 怎沒真知灼見之人士出現？同樣的, 在1981年, 誰又能洞見 internet 如排山倒海的影響力？無怪乎Handy 要說“ In the light of this experience it might be thought a little hazardous, even ridiculous, to try to gaze a further twenty years into the future. 想預測二十年後的未來, 實在是危險(hazardous), 荒繆(ridiculous)之事。接下來他寫道 “ Global capitalism also makes a few of us happier. Ironically it is the poor rather than the rich who say that wealth brings happiness.” 奇怪, 原來是沒財富的窮人望梅止渴, 高喊財富應為快樂之源。更絕的是, “In a series of surveys around the world there is some evidence that a per capita income of $ 10,000 a year is the point of diminishing returns.” 真的嗎？每年每人320,000 台幣就會產生報酬遞減(diminishing returns) 的現象? 低於該水準, “Below that level, roughly, where Greece and Poutugal are today, more money buys more of the basic comforts of life and increase one’s satisfaction.” 像希臘與葡萄牙人, 更多的錢可以更多基本生活物品, 增加滿足感; “ Above that level, any additional dollars don’t appear to make us more cheerful, probably because we are now into rat-race territory, comparing ourselves with our neighbors, or with what we could be , rather than where we came from.” 咦, 沒有舉例哪國人啦？但更多的錢不會使我們心情更愉悅, 因為我們會陷入拼命與他人比較的深淵, 不斷向上比, 反而更煩惱, 其實這種心境是頗為真確的, 人類常會過度專注其所缺, 而忘記他早已擁有的幸福。誠然！ 誠如Handy 所說, “資本主義是條洪流”(Capitalism is a powerful river.), 他花十年使自己的事業起飛(It took ten years for my working life to take off.) 因為他寫的第四本書The age of unreason(無理由的時代), 遇到好的出版社與好編輯, 最重要的, 他寫給廣大的一般讀者(General readers), 他完成一項社會教育, 這使他from flea to elephant, 該書最後係以中國諺語做終結 “ Happiness is having something to do, something to hope for and someone to love.” 。 而 Jeffrey E. Garten 則寫出壯志與宏論：“ In a world of increasing violence, we ought to look to them to keep up the drumbeat for economic progress and development. In a world in which government power is expanding, we should look to top corporate executives to push for promarket regulation. In a world where hundred of millions of people are investing in markets for their future security, we have a right to expect that business leaders see themselves as stewards for the future. Business education ought to be dealing with both the development of the individual and the needs of the nation and the global economy.” 的確, 在一個暴力漸增的世界, 吾人當為經濟進步與發展奮力擊鼓。 在一個政府權力不斷擴增的世界, 吾人當仰賴企業高階推動合宜的規章。在一個影響億萬人未來投資安全的市場, 吾人當仰賴企業領袖捍衛大家的未來。企業教育不僅需滿足個人的發展, 更需符合國家及全球經濟的需求。
|
|
| ( 知識學習｜語言 ) |
