麦肯锡与咨询业的未来之路

Deal不仅仅是一个薪酬平台。

Deal's not just another payroll platform.

它可能是你的团队真正喜欢的平台。

It's one your team might actually enjoy.

人力资源、IT和薪酬终于整合在一起了。

HR, IT, and payroll together finally.

自主研发，只为安心无忧。

Built in house, built for peace of mind.

访问 deel.com/hbrpodcast。

Visit deel.com/hbrpodcast.

我是阿迪·伊格纳修斯。

I'm Adi Ignatius.

我是艾莉森·比德，欢迎收听《哈佛商业评论》创意播客。

I'm Allison Beard, and this is the HBR Ideacast.

好的，艾莉森。

Alright, Allison.

这个问题看起来可能很随机，但我向你保证，它并不是。

This question's gonna seem random, but I promise you it's not.

你大学主修什么？

What was your major in college?

我在华盛顿与李大学主修新闻学和政治学双专业。

I was a double major in journalism and politics at Washington and Lee University.

好的。

Okay.

我在哈弗福德学院主修历史，那也是一所文理学院。

I was history at Haverford, another liberal arts college.

如果你和我一样，你可能觉得你的专业能很好地为新闻工作做准备，但未必能很好地为管理咨询做准备，而管理咨询通常招聘的是学习经济学、工程学或商科的学生。

If you're like me, you probably figured that your majors equipped you well for something like journalism, but maybe not so well for something like management consulting, which has tended to recruit people who studied economics or engineering, you know, or business.

是的。

Yeah.

我一直认为，咨询和金融是那些最有抱负、最优秀、最具资本主义精神的学生都想加入的领域，这些公司确实专注于常春藤盟校和顶尖大学。

I always thought of consulting and finance as a place where sort of all the most ambitious, highest achievers, most capitalistic students wanted to go, and those firms definitely focused on the Ivy League and the big universities.

世界正在变化。

The world is changing.

我们知道这一点。

We know that.

人工智能正在重塑一切，包括管理领域。

AI is remaking everything, including the world of management.

我今天的嘉宾是麦肯锡的全球主管合伙人，他对人工智能时代下公司如何重新思考业务有许多见解。

And my guest today, McKinsey's global managing partner, has a lot to say about how it is rethinking its business in this era.

麦肯锡已经将首批人工智能代理视为其员工的重要组成部分，并正在迅速扩大这一团队。

So McKinsey already views its first AI agents as very much part of its workforce and is rapidly expanding that part of its team.

尽管人工智能在线性问题解决方面非常出色，但在突破性思维方面却表现不佳，这意味着麦肯锡正在重新思考其人才需求。

But while AI is really good at linear problem solving, it's not so good at out of the box thinking, which means McKinsey is rethinking its talent needs.

我不会剧透，但你的新闻学与政治学双学位可能正符合这家咨询巨头日益增长的需求。

I'm not gonna spoil it, but your journalism politics double major might line up well with what the consulting giant is increasingly looking for.

接下来是我对麦肯锡全球主管合伙人鲍勃·斯特恩费尔斯的采访，今年麦肯锡正庆祝其成立一百周年。

So here's my interview with Bob Sternfels, global managing partner at McKinsey, which is celebrating its one hundredth anniversary this year.

所以我想从这里开始。

So I wanna start.

麦肯锡已经，或者已经迈入了百年。

McKinsey is turning, maybe has turned 100.

《哈佛商业评论》，顺便说一句，我们已经103年了。

HBR, by the way, we're a 103.

欢迎加入百年俱乐部。

So welcome to the Century Club.

你知道吗，你会如何总结公司这一百年的遗产？

You know, how would you summarize the company's one hundred year legacy?

麦肯锡在多大程度上创造了塑造商业世界的思想，又在多大程度上只是识别并提出了来自其他地方的最佳实践？

To what extent has McKinsey created the ideas that have shaped the business world, or to what extent is it about identifying and suggesting best practices that come from elsewhere?

我想我会从我们工作方式的本质说起。

I guess I would start with the nature of how we do our work.

我们的理念是：我们与客户共同创造。

And the idea is, look, we cocreate with our clients.

当我们表现最佳时，是帮助客户实现他们自己无法达到的目标。

And when we're at our best, it is figuring out how do we help clients get to places they can't get to themselves.

某种程度上，关于功劳的问题是：你创造了全新的东西，还是只是提炼和推广了最佳实践？

The whole notion in some ways of credit of did you create something novel or did you comp you know, best practice?

也许我们更应这样理解：我们与客户共同创造，帮助他们提出自己可能想不到、或者我们自己也可能想不到的方案。

Maybe the way we frame is we're cocreating with clients to help them come up with things that they may not have come up with themselves or we might not have come up with themselves.

我们显然在专有知识产权上投入了大量资源。

And we clearly invest a boatload in proprietary IP.

我们每年在创新、新思想和新理念上的投入超过10亿美元。

We invest over $1,000,000,000 a year in innovation, new thought, new ideas.

比如我们的麦肯锡全球研究院，它是我们相对独立的研究机构，而现在我们又成立了麦肯锡健康研究院。

Our McKinsey Global Institute, for example, which is a bit of our independent research tank, but we've now created McKinsey Health Institute.

我认为，如果回顾他们的历史，其中很多都是开创性的思考。

I think if you do look at their history, a lot of that is novel thinking.

你看看最近我们对全球资产负债表的研究，试图回答：从资产和负债的角度看，世界现状如何？

You know, the most recent looking at a a global balance sheet and kind of saying, how's the world when you look at assets and liabilities?

这并不是最佳实践。

That's not a best practice.

这是全新的想法。

That's new thought.

但同样，我们保持全球运营模式的部分原因在于，在更微观的层面，我们服务的客户并不想了解他们本国的前沿创新。

But equally, part of the reason we stay global as an operating model is then at the more micro levels, the clients that we serve don't want to understand what the leading edge innovation is in their particular country.

他们希望了解全球范围内的创新，甚至跨行业的创新，而这正是我们模式的一部分。

They wanna understand innovation around the world and perhaps even cross sector, and that is part of our model.

所以，如果非要我猜测的话，我认为大概是一半一半：哪些地方真正实现了创新性的共同创造，哪些地方是将全球创新带给那些因自身现实条件而无法接触这些创新的客户？

So I'd probably say it's if I had to guess, it's probably half half on this around where are there truly novel co creation, and where is this idea of figuring out how do you bring innovation around the world to clients who may not have access to that innovation based on their the reality that they're in?

因此，创新的一个领域显然是人工智能。

So one area of innovation, obviously, is AI.

我肯定你们经常在为公司提供如何适应人工智能驱动世界的建议。

And I'm sure you're advising companies all the time on how to adapt to an AI driven world.

我想谈谈这一点，但我更感兴趣的是麦肯锡内部关于这个问题的讨论。

I wanna talk about that, but I I'm interested in the internal discussions that are happening at McKinsey about this.

你知道吗？

You know?

AI在多大程度上改变了你们行业的经济模式、人员规模、定价和生产力？

To what extent is AI shifting the economics of your industry, headcount, pricing, productivity?

利润率在提高吗？

Are margins improving?

它们承受压力了吗？

Are they under stress?

我的意思是，你们公司内部关于AI的讨论是什么样的？

I mean, what are the internal conversations about AI for your business?

AI？

AI?

我们根本没谈过这个。

We haven't talked about that at all.

没有。

No.

我只是说你应该。

I'm just You should.

这真的很酷。

It's it's really cool.

我的意思是，现在几乎不可能在任何情境下进行对话而不涉及某种形式的AI。

I mean, it's hard to have a conversation in any context right now that doesn't link back to to some form of AI.

你知道，关于AI如何影响麦肯锡这个问题，其实有两面性。

You know, I think this question around AI and how it impacts McKinsey, there's kinda two two sides of that coin.

一方面是面向客户的，另一方面是AI对麦肯锡自身的影响是什么。

There's a client facing side, and then there's a what are the implications on McKinsey?

现在有一个独特的契机，可以帮助我们的所有客户利用这项技术重新塑造自我。

There's a unique moment to help all of our clients reimagine themselves leveraging this technology.

而要实现这一点，我们必须重新调整自身，以便能够提供这样的服务。

And to be able to do that, we have to rewire ourselves to be able to deliver that.

阿迪，我先从我实际从全球各行业、各地区客户那里听到的内容说起吧。

I may, Adi, just start with a bit of what I'm actually hearing from clients around the world across all industries and across all geographies.

在真实情境中，我确实听到了两件事。

And I really hear in the truth room maybe two things.

一方面，人们对这一波技术变革的潜力抱有极大的信心，这涵盖了从客户服务或后台流程等领域的巨大生产力提升，到增长机遇的方方面面。

On the one hand, an enormous belief in the potential for this wave of technological change, and and that's everything from enormous productivity gains in areas like customer care or, you know, back office processes, but also to growth stakes.

你知道吗？

You know?

如果你想想大幅缩短药物研发时间，这实际上对寿命和生命意味着什么，这就是收入端的增长。

If you think about radically shortening the time of drug discovery and what that actually means for longevity and and life, and that's top line growth.

所以人们对此感到兴奋，并且深信不疑。

So folks are excited, and they're believers.

但与此同时，从我与首席执行官们的对话中，他们经常会说，嘿，鲍勃。

But at the same time, from the conversations that I have with with CEOs, you know, they'll often say, hey, Bob.

那我现在该听 CFO 还是 CIO 的？

So do I listen to my CFO or my CIO right now?

我的 CFO 不断提醒我，我们在技术上投入了大量资金，但至今尚未看到企业层面的价值回报。

You know, my CFO is in my ear that we're spending a lot of money on technology, but we're not yet seeing enterprise level value from this.

那么，我们真的需要站在前沿吗？为什么不能做个快速跟进者呢？

And so do we really need to be at the cutting edge, or why can't we be a fast follower?

让别人去摸索方向，然后我们快速跟进，因为作为跟进者比作为领导者高效得多。

Let other folks figure out where this is, and then we'll adopt quickly because it's a lot more efficient to be a follower than a than a leader.

CIO们说：你疯了吗？

CIOs saying, are you crazy?

这是关键时刻之一。

This is one of those moments.

如果我们不领先，就会被颠覆。

And if we're not in the lead, we're gonna get disrupted.

你知道，我们花了很多时间思考，至少我们认为这里的答案是什么。

You know, we spend a lot of time looking at at least what we think the answer is here.

我知道我们花了大量时间讨论技术，但我们发现，秘诀的一半，甚至更多，是组织变革，而不是技术实施。

And I know we spend a lot of time talking about technology, but what we're finding is half, if not more, of the secret sauce is organizational change as opposed to technology implementation.

这是针对大型企业的。

This is for large large enterprise.

你知道吗，这涉及到实施之后你的组织结构会变成什么样。

And, you know, it's things like, well, what does your org look like after you're implementing this?

比如，你能否建立一个更加扁平的组织，去掉大量中间层级，让组织运行得更快？

Could you have, for example, a much flatter organization that cuts out a lot of middle layers and makes your organization faster?

当你思考那些非常复杂的流程时，想想按揭贷款的流程。

When you think about really complicated workflows, think about a a mortgage process.

你有这么多步骤。

You got all these steps.

你知道吗？

You know?

包括贷款申请、信用评分、催收、售后服务等等。

Origination, credit scoring, collection, after service, etcetera.

这些在银行里都是不同的部门。

Those are all departments in a bank.

但如果你能通过人工智能真正实现流程自动化，为什么还要保留四五个部门来完成一个流程呢？

But why do you have four or five departments in a process if you can really enable this through AI?

你不能打破这些壁垒吗？

Can't you break those walls down?

因此，我们花了很多时间思考的不仅是战略是什么以及如何实施，还有如何改变组织。

And so we're spending a lot of time thinking through not only what's the strategy and how do you implement, but how do you change the organization?

如何重新调整组织结构以实现价值？

How do you rewire the organization to realize the value?

如果你能做好这一点，突然间，CFO和CIO就能达成一致了。

And and if you can get that right, all of a sudden, the CFO and the CIO are actually on the same page.

但我们发现，这比人们想象的更难，也花更长时间。

But we're finding that's harder and is taking longer than people thought.

因此，我认为我们将进入一个企业真正自我变革的时期。

And so I do think we're gonna be in this period where really enterprise fundamentally changing themselves.

是的。

Yes.

巨大的潜力。

Enormous potential.

要达到那个目标还需要一点时间。

It's gonna take a little while to get there.

所以你会说，好吧。

So then you kinda say, okay.

这对麦肯锡意味着什么？

What does that mean for McKinsey?

嗯。

Mhmm.

我们正在将这一点应用到自身身上。

We're applying this to ourselves.

我经常被问到，麦肯锡有多大？

I often get asked, how big is McKinsey?

你们雇了多少人？

How many people do you employ?

我现在几乎每个月都会更新这个数据，但我最新的回答是：六万人。

I now update this almost every month, but my latest answer to you would be 60,000.

但其中有4万名人类和2万名代理。

But it's 40,000 humans and 20,000 agents.

一年半前，代理数量只有3000个。

Little over a year and a half ago, that was 3,000 agents.

我原本以为我们需要到2030年才能达到每人一个代理的比例。

And I originally thought it was gonna take us to twenty thirty to get to one agent per human.

我认为我们将在十八个月内实现这一目标，每位员工都将至少由一个或多个代理赋能。

I think we're gonna be there in eighteen months, and we'll have every employee enabled by at least one or more agents.

这是关于我们自身正在构建的资产和技术的其中一部分。

That's kind of one piece of what are the assets and technologies that we're building in ourselves.

另一大块是它如何改变我们的模式？

The other big piece is how does it change our model?

我们逐渐形成一种共识：正在迅速从所谓的纯咨询工作转型，而这种工作曾是公司早期的主要业务，以及按服务收费的模式等。

We're coming around to the conviction that we're migrating pretty quickly away from, let's call it, pure advisory work, which was a lot of the origins of of our firm and kind of a fee for service model, etcetera.

那么它将转向什么？

And what's it moving to?

它正转向一种以成果为导向的模式，我们说：看。

It's moving to much more of an outcomes based model where we say, look.

让我们共同确定一个业务案例，我们将为该业务案例的成果提供担保。

Let's identify a joint business case together, and we will underwrite the outcomes of that business case.

这使我们的利益与客户更加一致，我认为这将是未来的趋势。

And it aligns our interests with our clients a lot more, and I think will be the way of the future.

现在，我的意思是，人工智能会变得更好。

Now, I mean, AI is gonna get better.

对吧？

Right?

我们仍处于生成式人工智能的早期阶段。

We're still in the early early phases of generative AI.

你知道，如果技术继续使像麦肯锡长期以来提供的那种分析和洞察力商品化，当客户自己可能就能完成大部分工作时，他们到底会为哪些服务付费呢？

You know, if technology can continue to commoditize, you know, even the kinds of analysis and insight that, you know, a McKinsey has long provided, what will clients actually be paying for when they could probably do a lot of that themselves?

我们一百多年来与客户共同应对的问题并非一成不变。

The kind of problems that we have tackled with our clients over a hundred years has not been static.

它已经发生了根本性的变化。

It has changed radically.

因为我在这里已经待了三十多年，现在他们认为我是恐龙。

I'm now considered a dinosaur in our firm because I'm a little over thirty years with us.

但当我三十二年前刚加入时作为一名助理所做的工作，我们现在根本不会考虑去做。

But the stuff that I did when I joined as an associate thirty two years ago, we wouldn't consider even doing right now.

为什么？

Why?

因为客户自己就能做这些事。

Because clients do that stuff themselves.

我们现在正在与客户一起解决更复杂、相互关联的问题。

And we are solving much more complicated interconnected questions with our clients.

我认为这意味着，几年前我们为客户提供的一系列服务，现在客户自己就能完成。

And I think what this is gonna then mean is this is just gonna be that next evolution of there'll be a whole bunch of things that a couple years ago we did for our clients that our clients will do for themselves.

而接下来的挑战将是转向更复杂的问题。

And the imperative will then be to move to the even more complicated questions.

说到这一点，客户会为我们支付什么费用呢？

And to your point, what are clients gonna pay us for?

他们会付钱让我们找到方法将他们的市值翻倍。

They're gonna play us to find ways to double their market cap.

只要还没有CEO说我不想把市值翻倍，就总会存在更复杂的一系列问题和机会。

And until we get to CEOs who say, I don't wanna double my market cap, I think there'll always be a more complicated set of questions and opportunities out there.

那么，管理咨询师的技能要求正在如何演变呢？

What is the evolving skills profile then of a management consultant?

你到现在知道了吗？

Do you even know yet?

我的意思是，你在新员工身上寻找什么样的特质？

I mean, what what are you looking for in new hires?

这肯定正在迅速变化。

And that must be evolving pretty quickly.

我可以从我们现在确信的方面和正在探索的方面来阐述这个问题。

I might frame it in what are some things we're confident about now, and then what are some things we're exploring?

当我接手这个职位时，那是四年前的事了，我问过我们的人才招聘团队：我们在吸引人才方面做得怎么样？

When I came into this role, and it was a little over four years ago, I asked our talent attraction team, how we doing on attracting talent?

我得到的回答是：‘做得非常好，鲍勃。’

And and I got a we're doing great, Bob.

我们做得非常好。

We're doing great.

我说：‘那为什么呢？’

I said, well, why?

你知道，我们每年收到超过一百万份申请，招聘人数在八千到一万之间。

So what you know, we we get over a million applications a year, and we we hire anywhere between eight and ten thousand people.

而且这百万份申请也不是正态分布。

And and even the million aren't a normal distribution.

对吧？

Right?

这些申请者中有很多是世界上最具智慧的人才。

It's they're some of the brightest minds in the world that are applying.

那么，问题到底出在哪里？

So effectively, what's the problem?

你为什么要问我？

Why are you asking me?

让我回去做好我的本职工作。

Let me let me go back and do my job.

我继续问这个问题：我们到底在寻找多少份简历？

And I kinda kept asking the question, but well, how many profiles are we really looking for?

我们系统性地筛掉了哪些人？

What are we systematically screening out?

结果发现，从全球范围来看，真正能通往麦肯锡的路径只有区区500条。

And and it turned out that really when you boiled it down worldwide, there's only only 500 pathways that would lead you to McKinsey.

但这与我们自身的组织研究结果不符，研究显示，技能的半衰期正在缩短，人们过于关注学历门槛，认为只要拥有正确的资历就够了。

And that wasn't tying with what our own organizational research was saying, that the half life on skills was getting shorter, that people were too focused on paper ceiling, because you have the right credentials.

因此，我们实际上对自己的数据进行了分析，调取了过去二十年的数据，试图找出最有可能成为麦肯锡合伙人的技能和特质。

And so we we actually applied analytics on ourselves and took the last twenty years of data and said, what are the skills and characteristics that are most likely to make partner in McKinsey?

因为这虽然不完美，但可以说是成功的标志。

Because that's it's not perfect, but it's kind of a marker of of success.

你知道，每六个新员工中可能只有一个能成为合伙人。

You know, only one in six hires may partner.

结果发现我们的系统中存在一些偏见。

And it turned out we had some bias in our system.

我们有大约50种不同的问题，但我只给你讲最重要的三个。

We had, like, 50 different implications, but I'll give you the biggest three.

其中一个是我们过于关注你是否成绩完美，而不是你是否遭遇过挫折并重新振作。

One was that we were too focused on did you have perfect marks versus did you have a setback and recover?

而那些经历过挫折后重新站起来的申请者，更具韧性，更有可能成为麦肯锡的合伙人，而我们却没有对此进行筛选。

And the applicant who had a setback and recovered was more resilient and more likely to be a higher probability of making partner in McKinsey, And we weren't screening for that.

因此，我们修改了流程，在申请过程中寻找韧性的表现。

So we've changed the process to look for resilience in the application process.

你知道吗？

You know?

这听起来可能令人震惊，但我们之前并没有足够重视你是否真正有过与他人合作的重要经验。

And it may sound shocking, but we weren't indexing enough on had you had real experience in a significant way working with others.

你知道，我们的核心是帮助客户实现变革。

You know, fundamentally, we're about helping our clients change.

如果你参加过团队运动，或者在上大学期间做过零售工作，你就一定有过与他人互动的经历。

And if you've done a team sport or if you've worked in retail, you know, working your way through college, you've had to engage with others.

这培养了一种人际交往能力，而我们现在更加重视这种能力。

And it's built a skill, human to human skill, that we're now indexing a lot more on.

最后一个问题是：你是否有学习新事物的潜力，而不是你是否已经掌握了所选择的专业领域？

And and then the last one was, did you have the aptitude to learn new stuff versus had you mastered the subject that you chose to study?

我最小的儿子实际上就用这一点来反驳我，当时他第三次换专业，我对他有点生气。

My youngest guy used this one against me actually when he was changing his major for the third time, and I was a little frustrated with him.

他跟我说：‘爸爸，你不是发表过一篇论文说，只要你有学习新事物的潜力吗？’

And he's like, but, dad, you published a paper that said, you know, if you have the aptitude to learn new stuff.

是啊。

Like, yeah.

但你必须在你所选的科目上表现优异。

But you have to do well in the subject that you go to.

这孩子很聪明。

This kid's smart.

是的。

Yeah.

嗯。

Well

把他的简历发给我。

Send send send his resume to me.

这是他唯一一次引用我的话，娜迪亚。

It's the only time he quoted me, Nadia.

我心想，真的吗？

I'm like, really?

但这确实促使我们改变了评估方式，我们刻意创造了一个环境，在这个环境中，世界上没有任何人能在此环境中进行模式识别。

But it did get us to then change our assessment techniques where we purposely create an environment where no human in the world will have any pattern recognition in this environment.

我们弄清楚你在没有任何模式识别的环境中表现如何。

And we figure out how well do you do in an environment where you have no pattern recognition.

你只能自己去摸索解决问题。

You just have to go figure things out.

所以这些是我们现在知道正在转向的一些技能。

So those are some of the skills now we know we're moving to.

我们现在开始进行更多探索性的尝试，比如说，好吧。

We've launched more of an exploratory look now going forward where you say, okay.

但如果每个人都借助这些AI工具变得超人，除了韧性、团队合作和学习新事物的能力之外，你还想增加什么？

But if everyone gets superhuman with these AI tools, what do you wanna add on top of this resilience, teamwork, ability to learn new stuff?

刚才我告诉你的那部分，我觉得很有把握。

That part I just told you, I feel pretty solid about.

这部分我要告诉你，我们还处于探索阶段。

This part I'm gonna tell you is places we're more in exploration mode.

其中一个问题是：这些模型哪里做得不好？

One of them is, well, what do the models not do well?

它们没有抱负。

They don't aspire.

它们不擅长设定合适的目标水平。

They're not good at setting the right aspiration level.

当你思考优秀领导者所做的事情时，他们会帮助组织设定正确的方向——我们应该追求什么？

When you think about what great leaders do, they help an organization set the right ask what should we aspire to?

那么，我们该如何开始寻找和培养领导力技能呢？

And so how do we start to look for and develop the skills of leadership?

在后AI时代，领导力将依然持久，因为领导者的一个重要贡献是帮助设定目标并激励人们超越自我。

Leadership is gonna be durable in a post AI world because one of the great things leaders do is they help set an aspiration and get people to stretch.

第二点是判断力。

The second is judgment.

你一次又一次看到，这些模型中并不存在真相。

And you've seen time and time again these these models there's not truth in the model.

模型中也没有判断力。

There's not judgment in the model.

人类需要设定这些参数。

Humans need to impose those parameters.

那么，你如何培养判断力，以及如何发展这种能力？

So how do you build judgment, and how do you build that capability?

然后，我们目前花了很多时间研究的可能是最后一个方面：这些模型是推理模型。

And then maybe the the last one we're we're spending a lot of time on is the models are inference models.

它们擅长线性的问题解决方式，而这正是我们过去一百年来一直在教授的。

They're great at a linear approach to problem solving, which is kind of what we've been teaching for the last hundred years.

它们不擅长的是跳跃式思维和真正新颖的思考。

What they're not great is discontinuous leaps, truly novel thinking.

因此，我们开始寻找那些更富有创造力的背景，去思考那些不是关于下一个逻辑步骤，而是关于非连续性突破的问题。

And so we're starting to figure out where are backgrounds that are gonna be more creative to come up with things that aren't about the next logical step but are about a discontinuity.

于是，我们开始回归通识教育学位，并且说：嘿。

And so we're going back to liberal arts degrees and kinda saying, hey.

让我们重新关注一些过去可能被忽视的领域，看看能否激发更多的创造力。

You know, let's come back to some of the things that might have been deprioritized in the past to see if we can get a little bit more creativity.

是的。

Yeah.

你知道吗，我们曾有一篇文章，来自高盛的首席技术官，他原本希望自己的孩子成为程序员，但后来改变了想法。

You know, we had a piece from the chief technology officer of Goldman Sachs who had wanted his child to be a coder and then thought, nope.

我觉得她应该主修哲学。

I think she should be a philosophy major.

这正是这个世界所需要的。

That that's kind of what this what this world calls for.

也许吧。

Maybe.

对吧？

Right?

是的。

Yeah.

我们回望了一下。

We sort of looked back.

我们展望了未来。

We've looked forward.

你提到过一些正在庆祝的事项。

You've talked about the some of the celebratory stuff that's going on.

但我必须问一下，近年来你也经历了不少不受欢迎的舆论，我指的是奥施康定、南非的贿赂指控，以及在美国和其他地方的利益冲突指控。

I need to ask though, you've also had your share of unwelcome publicity in recent years, and I'm talking about OxyContin, bribery charges in South Africa, conflict of interest accusations in The US and elsewhere.

你如何解释这一切？

How do you account for all of that?

你如何看待发生的事情以及原因？

How do you look at what happened and and why?

很高兴你问到这个问题。

Well, I'm glad you asked.

我想，从大约四五年前开始，这对我们来说是一场真正的内心反省，涉及两个问题，阿迪。

And, you know, this has been I think it's been a real soul searching for us starting about four or five years ago of really two questions, Adi.

一方面，我们在哪些方面应该更谦逊，并从错误中学习？

On the one hand, where should we be more humble and learn from our mistakes?

同时，在哪些方面我们应当更加勇敢，直接说：

And at the same time, where should we be more courageous and just say, look.

我们不同意你的看法。

We disagree with you.

即使会面临批评，我们也要坚持反对，因为这正是我们所坚信的。

And even though we'll face criticism, we're gonna push back because that's what we believe in.

让我来逐一分析这些方面。

And and let me kinda parse each of those.

你知道吗？

You know?

你提到的某些问题显然属于需要谦逊反思的范畴。

Some of the ones that you mentioned fall clearly in the humble camp.

我认为我们从中获得的一些重要教训，如果我举两个特别的例子，那就是阿片类药物和我们在南非的合作。

And I think some of the great learnings that we had, if I just take two in particular, opioids, the work with opioids and our partnerships in South Africa.

我们学到的是，必须对客户选择进行更严格的审查。

You know, what we learned is that we have to have a higher diligence around client selection.

我们已经建立了一个非常完善的评估框架，从国家、议题、机构、个人到运营环境各个方面进行全面审视，以判断这是否是我们真正希望纳入公司的客户。

And we've put in place a framework that is a really robust assessment now that looks across every aspect from the country, the topic, the institution, the individuals, and the operating environment to say, is this a client that we actually wanna bring in to the firm?

因此，我用来与我们的合伙人沟通的一种说法是——你知道，在合伙制企业中推动变革很难——你们都成长于这样一种观念：合伙人的一项特权就是代表公司做出承诺。

And so one of the languages that I've used with our partners, and, you know, it's hard to drive change in a partnership, is you all grew up with the idea that one of the privileges of a partner is to commit the firm.

我并不是说这种情况已经不再存在，但你们不能再独自做决定了。

And I'm not saying that's not the case anymore, but you don't do it alone.

你们需要与风险专业人士一起做出决定。

You do it with risk professionals.

我们为此投资了大约十亿美元。

And and we invested about a billion dollars.

我聘请了苹果公司的内部审计主管和沃尔玛的合规主管，来帮助我们现代化这些流程。

I brought in the head of internal audit from Apple, the head of compliance from Walmart to basically kinda modernize us around these processes.

因此，我也说：看。

And so I also said, look.

我们表示歉意。

We apologize.

我们搞错了。

We got those wrong.

但我们并不只想简单地纠正这个问题。

And but we don't wanna set out just to remediate the problem.

我们希望树立行业专业性的标杆。

We wanna set out to try and set the standard for professionalism for our industry.

所以我认为，这是一个重要的教训：如何从错误中学习，保持谦逊，但不仅仅满足于修复，而是真正让自己变得更好。

So I think that is an important lesson of how do you learn from your mistakes, stay humble, but not seek to just repair them, but seek to actually make yourself better.

是的。

Yeah.

我们在这一点上学到了很多。

And we've had a lot of learnings around that.

麦肯锡从中学到了很多，我们正努力让自己变得更好。

McKinsey has learned a ton from this, and we're setting out to make ourselves better.

我努力向监管机构和客户敞开心扉，说的是：看。

And and one of the things that I've tried to open myself up to both to regulators and to clients is, look.

这些是我们实施的新协议。

These are the new protocols we put in place.

你有什么建议，能让我们把这些协议做得更好吗？

Do you have any ideas on how we can make them better?

因为即使我们已经采取了这些措施，我也不确定我们在这一领域是否真的能彻底完成。

Because even what we've put in place, I'm not sure we're ever gonna be done on this front.

所以我想就此做个收尾。

So I just wanna close the loop on that.

我始终坚信，我们必须踏上一段旅程，努力树立专业性的标杆。

Like, I'm obsessed with we gotta be a journey to try and aspire to set the standard for professionalism.

我们所做工作的核心生命力，正是世界各地众多优秀人才愿意加入的原因——他们能为客户带来的影响力。

The lifeblood of what we do, and it's why so many great talent from around the world come is the kind of impact that they can have with clients.

从外部来看，你知道，麦肯锡似乎一心追求在全球各个市场快速扩张。

I mean, from the outside, you know, it looked like McKinsey was committed to growing as quickly as possible in markets all over the world.

这是有意为之，集中监督相对较少。

By design, relatively little centralized oversight.

而且，从外部来看，这听起来像是麻烦的根源。

And again, from the outside, that sounds like a recipe for trouble.

这种分析公平吗？

Is that is that a fair analysis?

不。

No.

不太对。

Not really.

Avi，从外部这么说很容易。

It's easy to kinda say that, Avi, from the outside.

但事实上，这里正在发生三到四种力量。

But, you know, the the truth of the matter is you have three or four forces that are going on here.

一方面，媒体和政府对所有机构的监督日益加强。

You know, on the one hand, there's a an increasing scrutiny on the side of media governments for all institutions.

因此，我们在这个过程中学到的一点是，有些事情我们会受到批评，但我们会坚持反驳。

And so one of the things that we learned through this process is there are some things that we're gonna be criticized for that that we're just gonna push back on.

我们在难以减排领域的转型工作上受到了严厉批评。

We got heavily criticized for our work in hard to abate sectors on their transition issues.

有人说我们加速了气候恶化等等。

And it was, you know, McKinsey's accelerating climate degradation, etcetera.

我们进行了反驳，说：不。

And we pushed back and said, no.

听好了。

Look.

如果你真想致力于气候转型，就必须与最难减排的行业合作。

If you're gonna be committed to climate transition, you have to work with the hardest to abate sectors.

认为不与这些行业合作就能解决这个问题，简直是天真的。

It's just naive to say that you're gonna solve this problem without that.

这其中有一部分源于更透明、更多的批评，而我正努力让自己变得更有韧性。

So there's a portion of this that was rooted in just more transparency, more criticism, and I'm trying to build a bit of thicker skin.

还有一部分是我们组织模式的演变，意思是：听好了。

There's a portion which was an evolution in our organization model that said, look.

随着我们规模不断扩大，世界日益复杂，各种要求不断增加，我们需要更严格的合规标准。

As we do get bigger and as the world gets more complicated and more requirements are thrown in, we do need tighter compliance standards.

我认为，尽管我们并非上市公司，但应采用与上市公司相同的合规和问责标准，这是过去六年中我们经历的最重要变革之一。

This is where the idea that we should have the same compliance and accountability standards as a publicly traded company, even though we're not publicly traded, was, I think, one of the greatest changes that we've been through in the last six years.

增长从来不是我们的目标函数。

And growth has never been our objective function.

我们是一家私营公司。

We're privately traded.

我们没有季度财报。

We don't have quarterly earnings.

你不会看到麦肯锡谈论‘我们的收入增长了多少’之类的话。

You don't see McKinsey talking about, oh, we had revenue growth of this or that.

因为内部的理念是，我们是一个专业机构，而非一家企业，这意味着我们要将客户利益置于自身利益之上。

Because the ethos internally is that we're a profession, not a business, meaning that we wanna put our clients' interests ahead of ourselves.

我们的目标应该是：我们是否在做具有独特价值的工作，而不是任何类型的工作？

And the objective should be, are we doing distinctive work versus, you know, any kind of work?

但如果没有适当的控制措施，你就无法保证这一点。

But without the right controls, you can't guarantee that.

因此，我认为我们学到的一点是，即使我们的理念是如此，且目标从来不是不惜一切代价增长，但如果你不建立合规机制，你就无法真正落实这些标准。

And so one of the things I think we learned is even though we had that as our ethos and the objective function was never grow at all costs, if you don't put in place compliance, you're not gonna actually be able to enforce those standards.

对于一家合伙制企业来说，放弃部分自主权是痛苦的，但我认为我们现在已经相当——我的意思是，你看。

It's painful for a partnership to give up some of that autonomy, but I think it's one that we now have pretty I mean, look.

在合伙制企业中，永远不可能实现100%的统一。

You never get a 100% uniformity in a in a partnership.

但我认为大家普遍认同，这些措施让我们变得更好，为了维护企业的完整性，放弃一定的自主权是值得的。

But I think there's pretty good agreement that these things have made us better, and it's worth giving up that autonomy to actually preserve the integrity of the enterprise.

人们常说，顾问们提出各种框架，却不必承担后果。

People would say consultants prescribe frameworks but don't have to live with the consequences.

你们如何确保麦肯锡的建议不仅仅是PPT战略，而是能产生真正持久的长期影响？

How do you ensure that McKinsey's advice is more than a PowerPoint strategy, you know, that it creates real lasting long term impact?

我希望有一天我们能完全摆脱PPT，这话我说得很有爱，对微软而言。

I hope we get out of PowerPoint entirely at someday, and I say that with love to Microsoft.

但这并不是提供独特的见解。

But it's it isn't about providing a unique insight.

这回到了我们真正渴望成为客户影响伙伴这一理念。

It goes back to this notion of what we really aspire to be is to be impact partners with our clients.

我们正在经历一场变革，坦率地说，是从一个咨询模式转向一个担保成果的模式。

We're on a change journey of moving, quite frankly, from a model that was advisory to one that underwrites outcomes.

今天，阿迪，我们总收入的大约三分之一是担保成果。

And today, Adi, about a third of our revenues total are underwriting outcomes.

所以，这不是说。

So it's not, hey.

你给了我一份PPT。

You handed me a PowerPoint.

很好。

Great.

而是我们共同承诺了这一成果，并在整个旅程中紧密合作，直到实现这一影响。

It's we collectively signed up for this outcome together, and we're tied on this journey all the way through until that impact is delivered.

我希望，到我卸任全球管理合伙人时，这一模式能覆盖大部分收入。

My hope is that that crosses a majority of the revenues by the time I'm done being the global

管理合伙人。

managing partner.

我们已经存在了一百年。

We've been around a hundred years.

你们也已经存在了一百年。

You've been around a hundred years.

我们都在提出重要的想法。

We're all presenting important ideas.

还有其他人也是如此。

There are others as well.

但这一切很难。

And yet, this is hard.

对吧？

Right?

经营企业很难。

Running a business is hard.

没有人真正能永远破解这个难题。

Nobody really has has cracked the code forever.

你认为领导者最常在哪些方面犯错？

Where do you think leaders most consistently get things wrong?

我认为，至少在我看来，有几个因素的结合正变得越来越重要。

I think there is some mix of a couple things that are, at least in my mind, increasingly important.

一个是渴望和渴求获取新信息。

You know, one is this hunger and thirst to acquire new information.

一旦你变得过于自信，甚至过度自信，我认为负面的变化就会到来。

And whenever you get too confident, too overconfident, I think change for the negative is gonna come.

那么，你如何保持一种近乎无情的追求，不断质疑新事物，也许还来自组织的各个层级？

And and so how do you have this almost ruthless quest for, let me continue to question new things and and maybe also from all levels in the organization.

最好的想法常常隐藏在较低的层级中。

Often, best ideas are embedded somewhere lowered out.

第二点，阿迪，你提到我们两家公司时其实已经涉及了：你自己做多少，又在多大程度上考虑合作？

The second and, Adi, you kinda linked it when you talked about both of our organizations is how much do you do this yourself versus do you think about partnerships?

我认为，越来越多的情况是，当人们在整个价值链上协作时，会获得不成比例的收益。

And I think increasingly, we're seeing when people collaborate across the value chain, etcetera, you find disproportionate gain.

但我们的组织并不擅长协作。

And yet our organizations aren't geared to collaborate well.

对吧？

Right?

我们就是不擅长。

We're just not.

因此，要渴望新事物，专注于协作。

And so thirst for new, focus on on collaboration.

最后，我想说，这或许是时代的一种体现，也可能不是，速度很重要。

And then finally, I would say, and maybe this is kind of a sign of the times, maybe not, speed matters.

我们研究得最多的一点就是，更快的组织即使犯更多错误，也比慢的组织表现更好，但我们却并不具备这样的本能。

You know, one of the things that we've studied to death is faster organizations outperform slower organizations even if they make more mistakes, and yet we're not wired to do that.

大型企业中普遍存在规避风险的倾向。

There's such risk aversion in large enterprise.

如果我们能在这方面更进一步，我认为会取得非凡的成果。

If we could lean in a bit more to that, I think great things happen.

关于管理问题，如今与公司应对地缘政治或技术剧变时相比，根本性的不同是什么？

So on the issue of management, what seems to be fundamentally different today, you know, versus how companies have to adapt to jolts in geopolitics or or with technology?

你知道吗？

You know?

你看到当今正在形成哪些新的管理范式？

What are you seeing in terms of kind of new management paradigms that are taking shape today?

我主要从我所参与的讨论角度来看待这个问题，即首席执行官们关注什么？

I kinda look at it from the lens of the discussions that I have, which is what are CEOs focused on?

目前有哪些重大议题正在占据高层管理团队的思维，以及他们彼此之间和与董事会的讨论？

What are some big topics right now that are occupying the minds of senior management teams and their discussions both amongst themselves and and with boards?

正如你所想象的，这取决于你身处世界的哪个位置。

And as you can imagine, that varies based on where you sit in the world.