2017年1月3日,，福特汽車公司密歇根州平巖裝配工廠生產(chǎn)線上的一輛福特野馬跑車。

如果說古羅馬的皇帝是“法令治國”,，特朗普也可以算是“推特治國”了,。在特朗普正式入主白宮之前，他僅憑一條140字的推特,，就能讓全球最大的一些企業(yè)俯首就范,。雖然他咄咄逼人的作風(fēng)的確給他在政治上加了不少分，但好政策并不一定總能帶來好的經(jīng)濟(jì)成果,。

從他的行動來看,，特朗普的確是想履行“關(guān)閉美國邊境”和“把工作帶回美國”的承諾的。他積極為廣大工人站臺,，把包括福特,、通用汽車、豐田,、波音,、洛克希德馬丁、聯(lián)合技術(shù),、開利等美國最強(qiáng)大的企業(yè)挨個批判了一遍,。

目前為止，還沒有哪家公司的CEO有膽量站出來硬扛特朗普,。通用汽車的CEO瑪麗?巴拉曾聲言,，公司將繼續(xù)把小型車的生產(chǎn)線放在墨西哥，不過她在重壓之下改弦易轍估計(jì)也只是個時間問題,。特朗普在推特上東一榔頭西一棒子的嗆聲讓很多CEO都心存恐懼,，生怕一不小心就成了他的下一個目標(biāo)。目前,，大多數(shù)企業(yè)都選擇不去招惹他,。日本軟銀的孫正義和菲亞特的塞爾吉奧?馬基奧尼還表示要在美國加大投資。

隨著各大企業(yè)紛紛向這位新領(lǐng)導(dǎo)表態(tài)效忠,，福特汽車公司也不甘落于人后,，叫停了打算斥資16億美元在墨西哥建設(shè)小型車工廠的計(jì)劃。隨后特朗普又敲打了一下日本最大的汽車制造商豐田及其CEO豐田章男,，稱他上臺后要征收“一大筆邊境稅”,，即要對豐田在墨西哥生產(chǎn)并出口到美國的汽車征收高達(dá)35%的進(jìn)口稅。

不久之后,，馬基奧尼宣布要對兩家已經(jīng)投產(chǎn)的美國工廠投資10億美元,，并且創(chuàng)造2,000個工作崗位——其實(shí)這筆投資已經(jīng)在克萊斯勒的計(jì)劃當(dāng)中。馬基奧尼還表示,，如果特朗普征收的關(guān)稅太高了,，他的公司“很有可能”將徹底放棄墨西哥的工廠,。

特朗普的眼睛不光瞄著汽車界。他還游說開利公司不要在國內(nèi)裁員,，威脅波音削減“空軍一號”的成本,，逼迫洛馬給F-35戰(zhàn)斗機(jī)砍價，并且要求各大藥企降低高昂的藥品價格,。

毫無疑問,，特朗普已經(jīng)打贏了這場政治仗，讓美國最大的企業(yè)全部臣服在他的腳下瑟瑟發(fā)抖,。但他的這種高壓做法很可能會削弱美國企業(yè)在全球市場上的競爭力,，甚至招致其他各國政府的報復(fù)。

美國經(jīng)濟(jì)最大的優(yōu)勢之一,，就是擁有許多依靠創(chuàng)新,、品質(zhì)和營銷主導(dǎo)市場的全球性企業(yè)。這也是美國企業(yè)得以在從IT,、電商,、社交媒體到金融、制藥,、醫(yī)療技術(shù),、消費(fèi)品、汽車,、農(nóng)業(yè)設(shè)備,、飛機(jī)制造業(yè)等許多行業(yè)成為領(lǐng)軍者的根本。他們依托全球供應(yīng)鏈進(jìn)行產(chǎn)品的設(shè)計(jì)和制造,，從而實(shí)現(xiàn)成本最優(yōu)化,，這樣才能在保持盈利的同時，給全球顧客帶來最大化的價值,。在很多國家，美國企業(yè)都必須將一部分產(chǎn)品進(jìn)行本地化生產(chǎn),。

正是歸功于這種全球化戰(zhàn)略,，美國企業(yè)才能有效地與中國、日本,、德國,、韓國等國的制造企業(yè)進(jìn)行競爭——這些國家的制造企業(yè)也正奮力地在全球市場上攻城略地。也正是實(shí)行了全球化戰(zhàn)略的緣故,，美國企業(yè)才能攢下足夠的利潤對產(chǎn)品研發(fā)和創(chuàng)新進(jìn)行二次投資,。因此，美國企業(yè)才能再次領(lǐng)先其全球競爭對手一步,，繼續(xù)擴(kuò)大其市場份額,。所以,，即便這些全球化企業(yè)的股價已經(jīng)增長至歷史最高水平，由于這種良性循環(huán)的存在,，這些美國企業(yè)依然能夠?qū)λ麄兊纳a(chǎn)設(shè)施進(jìn)行大量資本投資,，并且為股東貢獻(xiàn)大量收益。

特朗普已經(jīng)學(xué)會了如何繞過主流媒體通過推特直接與美國人民打交道,。在多次威脅要向進(jìn)口商品征收高額稅賦之后,，他成功地逼迫這些制造業(yè)巨頭做出了一系列不符合經(jīng)濟(jì)理性的決定——比如開利公司要付給印第安那工廠的工人25美元的時薪，讓他們?nèi)プ瞿鞲绻と?.5美元時薪就能做的工作,。不過工人的工資終究會被轉(zhuǎn)嫁到最終產(chǎn)品的價格上,，從而使開利公司的空調(diào)在全球范圍內(nèi)喪失價格優(yōu)勢?；蛘呷绻_利公司不堪忍受高額的人工成本,，改用機(jī)器人取代人力生產(chǎn)（特斯拉在生產(chǎn)電動汽車的過程中已經(jīng)這樣做了），那么長遠(yuǎn)看來,，最終受損的依然是普通工人的利益,。不管是這兩種情況中的哪一種，開利公司都要被迫在印第安那工廠進(jìn)行裁員,，它的工人最終也將成為輸家,。

這個邏輯同樣也適用于福特、通用汽車,、克萊斯勒和豐田等制造企業(yè),。豐田已經(jīng)在美國直接雇傭了136,000人，并且在美國投入了210億美元的資金,。特朗普眼下的“勝利”,，無非是傷敵一萬，自損八千,，因?yàn)閺拈L遠(yuǎn)來看,，這將使美國制造業(yè)失去競爭優(yōu)勢，而且就業(yè)率也將不升反降,。

另外,，特朗普還反復(fù)威脅要對從中國和墨西哥進(jìn)口的商品課以重稅。如果他是認(rèn)真的,，那么他會很快發(fā)現(xiàn),，其他國家也會打這張牌，而且很愿意這么干,。在由此掀起的貿(mào)易戰(zhàn)中,，首先處于不利地位的就是美國的公司。美國商品花了幾十年才打開的海外市場也將迅速流失,。

在特朗普的高壓威脅和CEO們的低姿態(tài)回應(yīng)背后,，還隱藏著一個更深層的問題：美國亟需對現(xiàn)有勞動力的技能進(jìn)行升級,，這樣他們才有能力在未來的就業(yè)市場上進(jìn)行競爭。雖然截至2016年12月31日,，美國的失業(yè)人口已達(dá)750萬人,，但讓人感到諷刺的是，美國還有550萬個工作崗位招不到人,，最主要的原因就是缺乏擁有適當(dāng)技能的人才,。再過些年，隨著職業(yè)需求越來越復(fù)雜,，對工人的教育培訓(xùn)水平的要求越來越高,，這個問題還將變得愈發(fā)嚴(yán)重。如何把擁有足夠資質(zhì)的美國勞動者填滿這些工作崗位的缺口,，這對美國企業(yè)的競爭力也是極為重要的,。

特朗普和國會與其強(qiáng)迫企業(yè)做出不符合經(jīng)濟(jì)理性的決定，還不如與各大企業(yè)展開合作,，對廣大勞動者進(jìn)行教育培訓(xùn),。美國甚至可以制定一個長遠(yuǎn)的戰(zhàn)略，重點(diǎn)在于教育勞動者為未來的新興工作做好準(zhǔn)備,，而不是挽救那些已經(jīng)日薄西山的工作,。

如果特朗普真把他的這些推特變成了行業(yè)政策，這將標(biāo)志美國進(jìn)入了一個“權(quán)貴資本主義時代”,，就像法國和俄羅斯那樣,。然而美國企業(yè)的成功是建立在自由市場、充分競爭,、自由貿(mào)易,、英才主義和多元化等原則上的。50多年來,，美國政府一直致力于確保美國企業(yè)能在世界各地與當(dāng)?shù)仄髽I(yè)平等地進(jìn)行競爭,。

然而現(xiàn)在，美國政府卻開始圍繞就業(yè),、工廠選址和很多其他問題跟本土企業(yè)掐架,。如果這種風(fēng)氣成了“新常態(tài)”，美國的全球性企業(yè)將不愿意再建立新的工作機(jī)會以及投資建廠,，因?yàn)樗麄儞?dān)心自己將陷入無法盈利的境地。目前美國的失業(yè)率僅為4.7%,，還算不錯,，而法國的失業(yè)率高達(dá)9.5%，整整比美國高出一倍,，這主要便是拜這種短視的經(jīng)濟(jì)政策所賜,。

希望特朗普的推特只是雷聲大雨點(diǎn)小,。如果特朗普和他的團(tuán)隊(duì)還算明智，他們最好利用他日益增長的聲望,，打造一些改革性的政策,，讓美國企業(yè)在全球市場上更有競爭力，為美國的下一波真正的增長奠定土壤,。 （財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

本文作者比爾?喬治是哈佛商學(xué)院高級研究員,，美敦利公司前董事長兼CEO，著有《真北》(Discover Your True North)一書,。

譯者：樸成奎

A Ford Motor Co. Mustang vehicle stands on the production line at the company's assembly plant in Flat Rock, Michigan, U.S., on Tuesday, Jan. 3, 2017.

If the Roman emperors ruled by edict, President-elect Donald Trump appears poised to rule by tweet. Even before taking office, Trump has discovered he can move the world’s largest global corporations with simple, 140-character tweets. And though his aggressive approach is winning politically, good politics doesn’t necessarily mean good economics.

Voters see Trump fulfilling his campaign promises to close America’s borders and bring jobs back home. He is using the bully pulpit to stand up for workers by taking on the most powerful American companies, including Ford, General Motors, Toyota, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and United Technologies/Carrier.

Thus far, no CEOs have had the courage to stand up to Trump. General Motors CEO Mary Barra has said the company’s small-car production will remain in Mexico, but it could only be a matter of time before she’s forced to change course. Trump’s sudden tweets likely worry many CEOs who fear they may be his next target. Right now, most have just tried to stay out of his way. Some, like SoftBank’s Masayoshi Son and Fiat’s Sergio Marchionne, have put forth peace offerings to invest more in the U.S.

Most striking was Ford’s recent decision to reverse plans to build a $1.6 billion plant in Mexico to produce small cars. Then Trump rattled Japan’s leading automobile producer, Toyota, and its CEO, Akio Toyoda, by threatening to slap a “big border tax”—which he has referred to as 35%—on any automobiles the company assembled in Mexico and imported into the U.S.

Shortly thereafter, Marchionne committed to invest $1 billion in two existing U.S. plants and create 2,000 new jobs—investments that were already part of Chrysler’s plans. He said it is “quite possible” his company will abandon Mexican production altogether if Trump’s tariffs are too high.

Trump didn’t stop with the automakers. He jawboned Carrier into keeping jobs in the United States, threatened Boeing for the cost of Air Force One and Lockheed on its F-35 aircraft, and pharmaceutical companies on their high drug prices.

There is no doubt that Trump is winning the political game and shaking up America’s largest companies. But there is real danger that his pressure may corrode the competitiveness of U.S.-based global companies and cause retaliation by foreign governments.

One of America’s greatest strengths is having global companies that dominate their markets around the world through innovation, quality, and marketing. That’s why American companies lead a wide range of industries, from information technology, e-commerce, and social media to finance, pharmaceuticals, medical technology, consumer products, automobiles, farm equipment, and aircraft. They do so profitably with global supply chains that enable them to design and produce products to achieve optimal costs and deliver the greatest value to their customers around the globe. In many countries, they are required to produce a portion of their products locally.

The global strategies of our corporations have enabled them to compete effectively with Chinese, Japanese, German, and Korean manufacturers—all vigorous competitors striving to win share in global markets. At the same time, they have been profitable enough to reinvest substantial portions of their profits in research, innovation, and product development. When they do so, they stay ahead of their global competitors and increase their market shares. This positive cycle allows them to justify large capital investments in their facilities and provide substantial returns for their shareholders, as share prices for these global companies are at all-time highs.

Trump has learned how to reach the American people directly through his tweets, thus bypassing mainstream media. With his threats of large tariffs on imported goods, he has succeeded in forcing these giants to make uneconomic decisions—such as Carrier paying $25 per hour to its workers in Indiana to do work that can be done by Mexican employees for $2.50 per hour. However, in the long run, this will be a losing strategy for American workers if it forces Carrier to sell its air conditioners on the world market at non-competitive prices, or replace its production workers with robots, as Tesla has done in producing its electric cars. In either case, Carrier will be forced to reduce its Indiana workforce, with its workers ultimately becoming the losers.

The same logic applies to Ford, General Motors, Chrysler, and Toyota. Toyota has created 136,000 American jobs through direct employment, and has invested $21 billion in the U.S. What appear now to be significant “wins” for Trump may turn into pyrrhic victories, as America loses its competitive edge and hiring declines instead of increasing.

Trump has also repeatedly threatened to levy large tariffs on imports from Mexico and China. If he is serious about doing so, he will quickly learn that other countries can also play this game, and are quite willing to do so. This could trigger a trade war that will disadvantage American companies and their employees. Decades of progress in opening up foreign markets to American-made goods could quickly vanish.

Behind all of the threats and CEO responses lies a much deeper issue: the vital need for America to upgrade its workforce so that American employees can compete for jobs of the future. While there are 7.5 million unemployed Americans as of December 31, 2016, the irony is that there are 5.5 million jobs unfilled, many due to a lack of skilled workers. This situation will get worse in the years ahead as jobs become more complex and require more education and training. Filling these jobs with qualified Americans is essential for the competitiveness of U.S. companies.

Rather than jawboning companies to make uneconomic decisions, Trump and Congress should instead work with major employers to train and educate workers. Americans might even find a real strategy that emphasizes preparing for the jobs of the future vs. trying to save the jobs of the past.

If Trump’s tweets turn into an industrial policy, this may signal that the U.S. is headed into an era of “crony capitalism,” similar to the systems of France and Russia. In contrast, American business has been built on free market principles of market-based competition, free trade, meritocracy, and diversity. For five decades, the U.S. government has worked to ensure U.S. companies are free to sell their goods around the world on a level playing field with local competitors.

Now it appears the focus may shift to negotiation with the U.S. government over jobs, factory sites, and a host of other issues. If this becomes the prevailing norm, global companies will be reluctant to create new jobs and invest in new factories for fear of being locked into unprofitable decisions. This is a primary reason why France’s current unemployment rate of 9.5% is more than double the U.S.’s relatively modest 4.7% rate.

Let’s hope the bark of Trump’s Twitter account is worse than its bite. If Trump and his new team are wise, they will use his rising popularity to create transformative policy that fosters real growth for the next generation by making America truly competitive in world markets.

Bill George is senior fellow at Harvard Business School, former chair and CEO of Medtronic, and author of Discover Your True North.