調(diào)整全球化戰(zhàn)略的5個(gè)好辦法

????真正的全球化公司是否應(yīng)該在所有的主要市場(chǎng)開展業(yè)務(wù)呢？我在金融危機(jī)前曾經(jīng)發(fā)起過一項(xiàng)調(diào)查，結(jié)果，64%的受訪者認(rèn)同這個(gè)可疑的主張。一些公司仍然堅(jiān)持這樣一種觀點(diǎn)，即全球化等同于無處不在。想一想通用汽車（GM）到目前為止對(duì)歐寶（Opel）的“不離不棄”吧，盡管它在歐洲可怕的過剩產(chǎn)能不大可能在短期內(nèi)通過市場(chǎng)增長(zhǎng)得到釋放。通用汽車的市場(chǎng)份額在所有汽車制造商中排名第四，品牌形象較弱。即使歐寶能夠在2015年實(shí)現(xiàn)其收支平衡的樂觀目標(biāo)，一些分析師估計(jì)，這家公司自2000年以來的虧損額累計(jì)將達(dá)200億美元。然而，通用汽車的首席執(zhí)行官丹?埃克森還是說：“歐寶是非賣品。”

????不過，很多公司在金融危機(jī)之后收縮了戰(zhàn)線，這里指的并不僅僅是撤離希臘這些受困于經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退的市場(chǎng)。鈴木（Suzuki）正在退出美國(guó)汽車市場(chǎng)，它在那里經(jīng)營(yíng)的時(shí)間已經(jīng)接近30年。根據(jù)2012年的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查，進(jìn)入中國(guó)市場(chǎng)的歐洲公司中有22%正在考慮撤離，其中電器零售商萬得城（Media Markt）已經(jīng)退出，就像家得寶（Home Depot）一樣。針對(duì)財(cái)富世界100強(qiáng)企業(yè)的分析表明，這些公司最近呈現(xiàn)出一種減持其國(guó)際聯(lián)營(yíng)公司股份的趨勢(shì)。

????不過，比這種趨勢(shì)更加有趣的是各家公司正在采用的不同戰(zhàn)略方針。聰明的公司會(huì)采取下面這些做法來收縮戰(zhàn)線，調(diào)整全球市場(chǎng)戰(zhàn)略：

????斬去枯枝。即使在金融危機(jī)之前，一項(xiàng)針對(duì)16家跨國(guó)公司內(nèi)部財(cái)務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)的分析表明，其中8家公司擁有尾大不掉的區(qū)域業(yè)務(wù)單元——這些單元實(shí)現(xiàn)的營(yíng)收最多占到公司總營(yíng)收的四分之一——在把財(cái)務(wù)費(fèi)用計(jì)算在內(nèi)之后，它們反倒在摧毀價(jià)值（而不是產(chǎn)生價(jià)值）。金融危機(jī)之后，資本成本普遍變得更高，而經(jīng)濟(jì)增長(zhǎng)預(yù)期普遍被調(diào)低。在這種情況下，公司應(yīng)該斬去的“枯枝”變得愈發(fā)粗壯了。跨國(guó)公司開始以更加嚴(yán)苛的目光考察自身分布各國(guó)的生意，同時(shí)淘汰失利的業(yè)務(wù)。舉例來說，雅芳公司（Avon）最近就已經(jīng)宣布將退出韓國(guó)和越南市場(chǎng)。

????善用紐帶。這種方法的理念在于，公司不僅僅根據(jù)財(cái)務(wù)業(yè)績(jī)進(jìn)行收縮，更要聚焦于這樣一些國(guó)家，它們與公司的天然紐帶能夠幫助公司降低成本和復(fù)雜性。什么樣的紐帶能夠簡(jiǎn)化業(yè)務(wù)流程呢？舉例來說，據(jù)我估計(jì)，一個(gè)國(guó)家在另一個(gè)國(guó)家FDI（外國(guó)直接投資）中的占比會(huì)出現(xiàn)下面這些變化：如果兩國(guó)官方語言相同，那么比例會(huì)增長(zhǎng)60%；如果一國(guó)曾是另一國(guó)的殖民地，比例會(huì)增長(zhǎng)將近275%；如果兩國(guó)同為某個(gè)地區(qū)貿(mào)易協(xié)定的成員國(guó)，比例會(huì)增長(zhǎng)30%；而國(guó)家間的地理距離每縮短一半，比例就會(huì)增長(zhǎng)150%以上。印度制藥公司瑞迪博士（Dr. Reddy's）利用一套模型將其二級(jí)市場(chǎng)的數(shù)量從36個(gè)縮減到了5個(gè)，這套模型會(huì)優(yōu)先考慮與印度存在紐帶（依照上述維度）的市場(chǎng)。

????Should the truly global company aim to compete in all major markets? 64% of the respondents to a survey I ran before the financial crisis agreed with this dubious proposition. Some companies still cling to this view of globality-as-ubiquity. Think of General Motors (GM) hanging on (so far) to Opel, despite horrible over-capacity in Europe that is unlikely to be filled any time soon by growth. GM ranks 4th on market share, and has a weak brand image. Even if Opel meets its optimistic target of break-even by mid-decade, some analysts estimate that its losses since 2000 will cumulate to $20 billion by then. Yet according to GM CEO Dan Akerson, "Opel is not for sale."

????But many companies have since pulled in their horns, and it's not just firms exiting recession-plagued markets like Greece. Suzuki is pulling out of the U.S. car market after almost three decades. According to a 2012 survey, 22% of European companies in China were considering exiting, and electronic retailer Media Markt has already left, as has Home Depot (HD). And analysis of the Fortune Global 100 indicates a recent tendency to reduce their equity stakes in their international affiliates.

????Even more interesting than this trend, though, are the various strategic approaches companies are employing. Here are five techniques smart companies are using to narrow their focus and adjust their global market strategies:

????Chopping deadwood. Even before the crisis, an analysis of internal financial data from 16 multinationals indicated that eight of them had large geographic units -- units bringing in as much as one-quarter of their revenues -- that destroyed value after accounting for their financing costs. Post-crisis, with generally higher capital costs and lower growth forecasts, the deadwood to be chopped should be even larger. Multinationals are starting to take a harder look at the P&Ls of their country businesses with an eye toward shedding the losers. Avon (AVP), for example, recently announced that it would exit South Korea and Vietnam.

????Manning the bridges. This is the idea of cutting back not just based on financial performance but to focus on sets of countries whose natural connections can help firms cut down on costs and complexity. What kinds of bridges ease business flows? Some examples: I estimate that one country's stock of FDI in another is boosted nearly 60% by a common official language, nearly 275% by a colony-colonizer link in their past, 30% by common membership in a regional trade agreement, and more than 150% by a halving of the geographic distance between them! Indian pharmaceutical firm Dr. Reddy's narrowed its secondary markets from 36 to 5 using a model that gave priority to markets sharing connections to India along such dimensions.