日韩中文字幕在线一区二区三区,亚洲热视频在线观看,久久精品午夜一区二区福利,精品一区二区三区在线观看l,麻花传媒剧电影,亚洲香蕉伊综合在人在线,免费av一区二区三区在线,亚洲成在线人视频观看
          首頁 500強 活動 榜單 商業 科技 商潮 專題 品牌中心
          雜志訂閱

          辦公室戀情可能帶來什么后果?看看雀巢CEO

          Lila MacLellan
          2025-09-09

          雀巢公司前首席執行官傅樂宏因與一名員工不正當關系而遭解雇。

          文本設置
          小號
          默認
          大號
          Plus(0條)

          圖片來源:Getty—AFP/Fabrice Coffrini

          這場人事變動來得干脆利落,就像掰斷一塊奇巧(Kit Kat)巧克力一樣。

          上周,市值2440億美元的食品巨頭雀巢(旗下擁有多個全球最受歡迎的糖果與咖啡品牌)宣布,上任僅一年的首席執行官傅樂宏因違反公司行為準則遭解職。

          雀巢表示,調查已證實傅樂宏(Laurent Freixe)與直屬下屬存在不當關系的報道。目前,這家在行業內表現欠佳、股價持續下滑的公司已任命菲利普·納夫拉蒂爾(Philipp Navratil)為新任首席執行官,他是從內部提拔的高管,此前負責雀巢旗下奈斯派索(Nespresso)業務。新聞稿的潛臺詞很明確:此事無需過度解讀。

          然而,盡管沒有“親吻鏡頭”(體育賽事里攝像機在觀眾間游走并挑選需接吻情侶的娛樂環節)的曝光,也沒有名人鬧劇的加持,這起事件仍持續吸引著公眾關注,引發了一系列討論:雙方自愿的辦公室戀情在倫理層面暗藏著哪些微妙爭議?企業處理此類事件的規范正在發生怎樣的變化?以及對首席執行官個人行為的評判標準究竟是什么?

          雀巢首席執行官被解雇事件帶來以下關鍵啟示:

          不當戀情可能招致嚴重后果

          與二三十年前相比,當下董事會對首席執行官不當行為(如辦公室戀情)的容忍度更低,且通常會迅速撤換那些引發爭議的領導者。相較于領導者因業績問題而被撤職,此類丑聞引發的離職所遭受的懲處往往要嚴厲得多——業績不佳遭撤職者通常還能獲得“黃金降落傘”(高額離職補償)。正如我的同事伊娃·羅伊特堡(Eva Roytburg)報道的那樣,傅樂宏離開雀巢時,未獲得任何離職補償。

          這種“嚴格執行紀律”的轉變,在一定程度上源于對公司形象的擔憂。“審查既來自內部,也來自外部,”施洛策(Schloetzer)表示,并補充道,這已經超出了股東的范疇。“還包括董事會、高管層同僚以及中層管理者。所有人對‘正確行為’的認知都在提升,而對‘越軌行為’的容忍度正不斷降低。”

          關鍵在于披露的細節

          雀巢的新聞稿指出,這位前首席執行官遭解雇,不僅是因為存在婚外情,還源于其未披露這段關系。(據報道,傅樂宏曾兩次接受調查,且在首次問詢中否認了這段婚外情。)

          那么,若他當初如實披露,是否就能避免被解雇呢?

          對首席執行官這一職位而言,答案很可能是否定的。多數企業對首席執行官與員工戀情采取零容忍政策——無論職級高低,權力失衡的狀況都過于顯著,難免會引發對首席執行官決策能力和職業操守的質疑。“我的意思是,人力資源部門和董事會必須采取極為嚴格的緩解措施,才能消除人們對偏袒、報復或騷擾的擔憂。”喬治城大學麥克多諾商學院副教授杰森·施洛策(Jason Schloetzer)表示。

          話雖如此,職場過去是、如今依然是人們相識的常見場所(盡管如今已不再像上世紀后半葉那樣,每五段戀情中就有一段在職場萌生)。對于非首席執行官級別的高管而言,公開戀情有時能解決問題——此外,企業還能通過調整組織架構,避免處于戀愛關系中的兩名員工存在“上下級”關系。

          董事會素來對高績效者的不當行為視而不見

          盡管明星首席執行官因婚外情而下臺,但施洛策指出,也存在另一種情況:當首席執行官表現未達預期時,董事會可能以“企業政策”為幌子,設法讓其離職。這位教授向《財富》雜志透露,在進入學術界之前,他就意識到“企業為達成預設結論而采取針對性行動,這種情況屢見不鮮”。

          “比如,我可能會突然決定審計費用報銷單,聲稱此舉是為了確保所有人都能遵守公司報銷規定,”他舉例道,“隨后便會發現某人確實違反了規定——這樣一來,我便有理由解雇他了。”

          波士頓大學凱斯特羅姆商學院商業法與倫理學臨床教授卡布麗娜·張(Kabrina Chang)對此表示認同,并補充道:相反,企業往往會刻意忽視業務骨干的不當行為。

          但員工對領導者行為的投訴,有時會迫使企業采取行動。“即便(假設)某位董事會成員可能會選擇視而不見,”她說,“但員工卻沒有這樣做的動機。”

          若配偶曾是你的下屬,或許你本就不該擔任首席執行官

          洛桑大學商業倫理學教授、《黑暗模式:企業丑聞的隱藏動因》(The Dark Pattern: The Hidden Dynamics of Corporate Scandals)一書合著者吉多·帕拉佐(Guido Palazzo)認為,雀巢董事會在最初提名傅樂宏擔任首席執行官一職時,忽略了一個重要細節:有報道稱,傅樂宏的妻子是他在雀巢工作期間結識的,二人公開戀情后,其妻子便離開了雀巢。

          雀巢董事會很可能知曉這一背景,卻仍聘用他出任首席執行官,此舉傳遞出自相矛盾的信號。“倘若此類行為在雀巢是不可接受的,那當初就不應任命他為首席執行官,”帕拉佐表示,“可現實卻是,這種行為被容忍了,他還一路高升。”(財富中文網)

          譯者:中慧言-王芳

          這場人事變動來得干脆利落,就像掰斷一塊奇巧(Kit Kat)巧克力一樣。

          上周,市值2440億美元的食品巨頭雀巢(旗下擁有多個全球最受歡迎的糖果與咖啡品牌)宣布,上任僅一年的首席執行官傅樂宏因違反公司行為準則遭解職。

          雀巢表示,調查已證實傅樂宏(Laurent Freixe)與直屬下屬存在不當關系的報道。目前,這家在行業內表現欠佳、股價持續下滑的公司已任命菲利普·納夫拉蒂爾(Philipp Navratil)為新任首席執行官,他是從內部提拔的高管,此前負責雀巢旗下奈斯派索(Nespresso)業務。新聞稿的潛臺詞很明確:此事無需過度解讀。

          然而,盡管沒有“親吻鏡頭”(體育賽事里攝像機在觀眾間游走并挑選需接吻情侶的娛樂環節)的曝光,也沒有名人鬧劇的加持,這起事件仍持續吸引著公眾關注,引發了一系列討論:雙方自愿的辦公室戀情在倫理層面暗藏著哪些微妙爭議?企業處理此類事件的規范正在發生怎樣的變化?以及對首席執行官個人行為的評判標準究竟是什么?

          雀巢首席執行官被解雇事件帶來以下關鍵啟示:

          不當戀情可能招致嚴重后果

          與二三十年前相比,當下董事會對首席執行官不當行為(如辦公室戀情)的容忍度更低,且通常會迅速撤換那些引發爭議的領導者。相較于領導者因業績問題而被撤職,此類丑聞引發的離職所遭受的懲處往往要嚴厲得多——業績不佳遭撤職者通常還能獲得“黃金降落傘”(高額離職補償)。正如我的同事伊娃·羅伊特堡(Eva Roytburg)報道的那樣,傅樂宏離開雀巢時,未獲得任何離職補償。

          這種“嚴格執行紀律”的轉變,在一定程度上源于對公司形象的擔憂。“審查既來自內部,也來自外部,”施洛策(Schloetzer)表示,并補充道,這已經超出了股東的范疇。“還包括董事會、高管層同僚以及中層管理者。所有人對‘正確行為’的認知都在提升,而對‘越軌行為’的容忍度正不斷降低。”

          關鍵在于披露的細節

          雀巢的新聞稿指出,這位前首席執行官遭解雇,不僅是因為存在婚外情,還源于其未披露這段關系。(據報道,傅樂宏曾兩次接受調查,且在首次問詢中否認了這段婚外情。)

          那么,若他當初如實披露,是否就能避免被解雇呢?

          對首席執行官這一職位而言,答案很可能是否定的。多數企業對首席執行官與員工戀情采取零容忍政策——無論職級高低,權力失衡的狀況都過于顯著,難免會引發對首席執行官決策能力和職業操守的質疑。“我的意思是,人力資源部門和董事會必須采取極為嚴格的緩解措施,才能消除人們對偏袒、報復或騷擾的擔憂。”喬治城大學麥克多諾商學院副教授杰森·施洛策(Jason Schloetzer)表示。

          話雖如此,職場過去是、如今依然是人們相識的常見場所(盡管如今已不再像上世紀后半葉那樣,每五段戀情中就有一段在職場萌生)。對于非首席執行官級別的高管而言,公開戀情有時能解決問題——此外,企業還能通過調整組織架構,避免處于戀愛關系中的兩名員工存在“上下級”關系。

          董事會素來對高績效者的不當行為視而不見

          盡管明星首席執行官因婚外情而下臺,但施洛策指出,也存在另一種情況:當首席執行官表現未達預期時,董事會可能以“企業政策”為幌子,設法讓其離職。這位教授向《財富》雜志透露,在進入學術界之前,他就意識到“企業為達成預設結論而采取針對性行動,這種情況屢見不鮮”。

          “比如,我可能會突然決定審計費用報銷單,聲稱此舉是為了確保所有人都能遵守公司報銷規定,”他舉例道,“隨后便會發現某人確實違反了規定——這樣一來,我便有理由解雇他了。”

          波士頓大學凱斯特羅姆商學院商業法與倫理學臨床教授卡布麗娜·張(Kabrina Chang)對此表示認同,并補充道:相反,企業往往會刻意忽視業務骨干的不當行為。

          但員工對領導者行為的投訴,有時會迫使企業采取行動。“即便(假設)某位董事會成員可能會選擇視而不見,”她說,“但員工卻沒有這樣做的動機。”

          若配偶曾是你的下屬,或許你本就不該擔任首席執行官

          洛桑大學商業倫理學教授、《黑暗模式:企業丑聞的隱藏動因》(The Dark Pattern: The Hidden Dynamics of Corporate Scandals)一書合著者吉多·帕拉佐(Guido Palazzo)認為,雀巢董事會在最初提名傅樂宏擔任首席執行官一職時,忽略了一個重要細節:有報道稱,傅樂宏的妻子是他在雀巢工作期間結識的,二人公開戀情后,其妻子便離開了雀巢。

          雀巢董事會很可能知曉這一背景,卻仍聘用他出任首席執行官,此舉傳遞出自相矛盾的信號。“倘若此類行為在雀巢是不可接受的,那當初就不應任命他為首席執行官,”帕拉佐表示,“可現實卻是,這種行為被容忍了,他還一路高升。”(財富中文網)

          譯者:中慧言-王芳

          It seemed like such a clean break, like snapping off a piece of a Kit Kat bar.

          Last week, Nestlé, the $244 billion food conglomerate behind some of the world’s most beloved candy and coffee brands, announced that its CEO, Laurent Freixe, had been dismissed for violating the company code of conduct after just one year on the job.

          An investigation had confirmed reports that he was having an inappropriate relationship with a direct report, the company said. Nestlé, a category laggard whose share price has been slipping, had already installed a new CEO, Philipp Navratil, an internal hire who previously led the company’s Nespresso business. The subtext of the press release was clear: Nothing to see here.

          Despite the lack of kiss cams and celebrity hijinks, however, the story has continued to hold people’s attention, prompting conversations about the ethical nuances of consensual office romances, changing norms for how companies handle them, and the standards for personal behavior that CEOs are held to.

          Here are some takeaways from Nestlé’s CEO ouster:

          The consequences for an improper romance can be severe

          Boards have less tolerance now for CEO misconduct, like office romances, compared to 20 or 30 years ago, and are generally moving quickly to replace problematic leaders. The exits following a scandal like this can be far more punitive than when leaders are removed for performance issues, often with “golden parachutes.” As my colleague Eva Roytburg reported, Freixe left Nestlé without any pay package.

          The shift toward tough enforcement is partly due to concerns about perceptions of the company. “The scrutiny is both internal and external,” says Schloetzer, adding that it goes beyond shareholders. “It’s boards, it’s peers in the C suite, it’s people one level below the C suite. Everybody has a heightened sense of what’s the right thing to do, and the leash for not doing the right thing has become shorter and shorter.”

          The devil is in the details of disclosure

          Nestlé’s news release said the ex-CEO was being dismissed not just for having a relationship, but for having an undisclosed relationship. (Freixe was reportedly investigated twice and denied the affair during the first inquiry.)

          So would he have been safe if he had come clean?

          Probably not, as a chief executive. Most companies have a zero-tolerance policy for CEOs dating employees because no matter where they are on the org chart, the power imbalance is too great for there not to be questions about the CEO’s decision-making and ethics. “I mean, human resources and the board would have to go through some pretty serious mitigation to assuage concerns of favoritism or retaliation or harassment,” says Jason Schloetzer, associate professor at Georgetown University’s McDonough School of Business.

          That said, work has always been and is still a common place for people to meet (even if it’s no longer the starting point for one in five relationships, as it was in the latter part of last century). For executives who aren’t CEOs, disclosure of a relationship can sometimes address the problem, along with a reorganization so that one lovestruck employee doesn’t report to the other.

          Boards have been known to look past misconduct by high performers

          Although star CEOs have been taken down by affairs, it’s also true that when a CEO is not living up to expectations, the board might find a way to send that CEO packing using corporate policy for cover, says Schloetzer. Before he became an academic, the professor tells Fortune, he became aware that “it is not unusual for companies to do things to get the conclusion that they’re looking for.”

          “For instance, I can suddenly decide to audit expense reports just to make sure that everybody’s expense reports are following company practices,” he says. “And lo and behold, this person was not following company practices. Now I have a reason to get rid of them.”

          Kabrina Chang, clinical professor of business law and ethics at Boston University’s Questrom School of Business, agrees, adding that on the flip side, businesses have a way of willfully ignoring poor behavior when it comes to rainmakers.

          But complaints from employees about a leader’s behavior can sometimes force action. “While a hypothetical board member might turn a hypothetical blind eye,” she says, employees don’t have the same incentive to do so.

          If your spouse used to report to you, you probably shouldn’t be a CEO

          The Nestlé board overlooked an important detail about Freixe when he was first nominated for the corner office, argues Guido Palazzo, a professor of business ethics at the University of Lausanne and co-author of The Dark Pattern: The Hidden Dynamics of Corporate Scandals: According to reports, the CEO married a woman he met at Nestlé; the pair disclosed the relationship, then she left the company.

          Nestlé’s board would likely have been aware of that background, and hiring him anyway sent a mixed message. “He should never have become CEO if this behavior was not acceptable at Nestlé,” says Palazzo. “Instead, it was tolerated, and he continued to be promoted.”

          財富中文網所刊載內容之知識產權為財富媒體知識產權有限公司及/或相關權利人專屬所有或持有。未經許可,禁止進行轉載、摘編、復制及建立鏡像等任何使用。
          0條Plus
          精彩評論
          評論

          撰寫或查看更多評論

          請打開財富Plus APP

          前往打開