????你能既打造出世界上最成功的公司之一,，同時(shí)又當(dāng)一名好老板嗎？有這樣成就的企業(yè)負(fù)責(zé)人不多,，但沃倫?巴菲特可能是其中一位,。

????今天的伯克希爾-哈撒韋公司（Berkshire Hathaway）價(jià)值3150億美元，由幾十家子公司組成,。在收購(gòu)這些子公司的過(guò)程中,，巴菲特從來(lái)沒(méi)有干過(guò)什么“壞事”，比如削減成本,、裁員以及經(jīng)常引發(fā)新收購(gòu)行動(dòng)的管理層重組,。上周末，伯克希爾在奧馬哈召開(kāi)了股東大會(huì),。身為首席執(zhí)行官和董事長(zhǎng),，巴菲特承認(rèn)自己的風(fēng)格是允許表現(xiàn)落后的公司不斷滑坡。這正是他如此獨(dú)特的原因之一,，但也是他最大的弱點(diǎn),。

????在上周六的大會(huì)上，一位股東要求巴菲特列舉自己的弱點(diǎn),。巴菲特回答說(shuō),，他可能是一名“懶散的”經(jīng)營(yíng)者：“我在人事調(diào)整方面行動(dòng)速度很慢，這是一個(gè)純粹的弱點(diǎn),。有時(shí)候,，大家也許會(huì)說(shuō)，對(duì)子公司缺乏監(jiān)管意味著我們會(huì)讓某些東西從眼皮底下溜走,?！?/p>

????巴菲特沒(méi)有詳細(xì)進(jìn)行解釋，但舉了個(gè)例子：“曾經(jīng)有那么個(gè)人,，我們很喜歡他,，而且我們的業(yè)務(wù)也不會(huì)因?yàn)樗艿街旅挠绊懀^(guò)了多久我們才用別人取代了他,？（跟巴菲特同坐在臺(tái)上的伯克希爾副董事長(zhǎng)查理?蒙格也想不起來(lái)）,。有時(shí)候，我們?cè)诟鼡Q管理者方面等的時(shí)間過(guò)長(zhǎng),?！?/p>

????有些到奧馬哈參加股東大會(huì)的投資者抱怨說(shuō)，巴菲特過(guò)于放任自流,，他也許應(yīng)該效仿一下維權(quán)股東,，比如對(duì)沖基金公司潘興廣場(chǎng)（ Pershing Square）基金經(jīng)理比爾?阿克曼，或者像私募基金公司3G Capital那樣專門致力于扭虧,。周六的大會(huì)上,，確實(shí)有一些投資者和分析師把問(wèn)題的焦點(diǎn)集中在伯克希爾會(huì)不會(huì)在今后的收購(gòu)中采取像3G Capital那樣“親自動(dòng)手”模式,。2013年，伯克希爾和3G Capital聯(lián)手收購(gòu)了番茄醬生產(chǎn)商亨氏（Heinz,，而且迅速調(diào)整了這家公司的管理團(tuán)隊(duì)）,。

????雖然巴菲特對(duì)3G Capital這位合作伙伴表示贊賞（“他們很聰明，也很專注,；他們工作時(shí)非常努力,，而且很堅(jiān)定?！保?，但他也指出：“他們永遠(yuǎn)不滿足”。巴菲特還為伯克希爾的溫和處理方式進(jìn)行了辯護(hù),。其中一個(gè)原因是,，巴菲特不喜歡要求子公司裁員，也不喜歡用其他方式限制子公司的行動(dòng),。他說(shuō)：“我們不是特別崇尚嚴(yán)格的紀(jì)律,?！泵筛駥?duì)這一點(diǎn)的說(shuō)法是：“如果用世界上其他地方的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來(lái)衡量,，我們過(guò)于信任別人?！?/p>

????巴菲特是如此信任伯克希爾子公司的負(fù)責(zé)人,，以至于他都沒(méi)有詳細(xì)記錄過(guò)后者在什么時(shí)候?yàn)椴讼栘暙I(xiàn)了多少收益，他甚至都不去核實(shí)一下這些公司是否存在,。比如說(shuō),，他從沒(méi)考察過(guò)設(shè)在印第安納州的房車制造商Forest River。巴菲特開(kāi)玩笑說(shuō)：“但愿有這么一家公司,，我能想象到他們正在商量,，‘這個(gè)月我們應(yīng)該給巴菲特報(bào)什么樣的數(shù)字呢？’”說(shuō)完之后他自己也笑了,。（巴菲特還說(shuō)：“如果他們?cè)敢饴?tīng)的話,，我要說(shuō)，我不想鼓勵(lì)子公司負(fù)責(zé)人改變自己的行為方式,?！保?/p>

????巴菲特承認(rèn)，讓子公司完全自主有時(shí)候也會(huì)帶來(lái)一些問(wèn)題,。批評(píng)者認(rèn)為,，如果巴菲特加強(qiáng)監(jiān)管，伯克希爾的回報(bào)率會(huì)更高,。但巴菲特并不贊同這一點(diǎn),。他說(shuō)：“正是因?yàn)榻o了他們這樣的空間,，我們才能和如此這么多人一起獲得成功，批評(píng)者根本沒(méi)辦法衡量這種積極影響,?！卑头铺剡€指出，伯克希爾沒(méi)有內(nèi)部法律顧問(wèn)或人力資源部門,。

????至于比爾?阿克曼代表的維權(quán)主義,，對(duì)巴菲特來(lái)說(shuō)，在伯克希爾和這位對(duì)沖基金經(jīng)理之間做任何類比看來(lái)都近乎于冒犯,。最近,，阿克曼做空了營(yíng)養(yǎng)品公司康寶萊（Herbalife），還敵意收購(gòu)了制造瘦臉除皺注射劑保妥適（Botox）的愛(ài)力根公司（Allergan）,，成了媒體關(guān)注的焦點(diǎn),。首先，巴菲特不在股市做空,，也不參與金融衍生產(chǎn)品交易,。同時(shí)，巴菲特對(duì)阿克曼最近的成功能否延續(xù)下去持懷疑態(tài)度,。巴菲特說(shuō),，阿克曼等人通常著眼于短期股價(jià)波動(dòng)，而不是通過(guò)永久性調(diào)整來(lái)改善一家公司,。蒙格則是從總體上反對(duì)所有投資者維權(quán)行動(dòng),。蒙格說(shuō)：“我覺(jué)得這種行為對(duì)美國(guó)沒(méi)有好處?！?/p>

????巴菲特的接班人會(huì)有巴菲特所不具備的強(qiáng)硬做派嗎,？別想太多了。

????上周末,，巴菲特和其他投資者重申,，伯克希爾最寶貴的資產(chǎn)之一就是別人愿意把自己的公司轉(zhuǎn)讓給伯克希爾——而且實(shí)際的轉(zhuǎn)讓價(jià)格往往低于私募股權(quán)公司的報(bào)價(jià)，原因是他們相信巴菲特會(huì)照看好自己的公司,。正如對(duì)沖基金公司Kase Capital Management基金經(jīng)理惠特尼?蒂爾森上周五所說(shuō)：“伯克希爾就像一座博物館,，或者說(shuō)大都會(huì)博物館。人們都愿意把自己最有價(jià)值的藝術(shù)品賣給它,，原因在于,，人們知道這些藝術(shù)品待在那兒會(huì)很安全?！?/p>

????巴菲特也說(shuō)：“我們信守承諾,。這就意味著，雖然有時(shí)候一些公司的表現(xiàn)沒(méi)有達(dá)到預(yù)期,，但我們會(huì)一直持有它們的股份,?！?財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))

????譯者：Charlie

????Can you build one of the world's most successful companies and also be a great boss? Warren Buffett may be one of the few executives to accomplish this feat.

????In acquiring the dozens of companies that today make up his $315 billion Berkshire Hathaway (BRKA), Buffett has never dirtied his hands much with the sort of cost-cutting, layoffs, and management shakeups that often follow acquisitions at other firms. While Buffett's style of allowing even underperforming businesses to languish is part of what makes him so unique, it is also his greatest shortcoming, the Berkshire CEO and chairman admitted during the company's annual shareholder meeting this past weekend in Omaha.

????Asked by a shareholder to highlight his weaknesses, Buffett said that as a manager, he can be "sloppy." "A pure weak point is, I'm slow to make personnel changes," he said on Saturday. "There will be times when what you might call our lack of supervision of our subsidiaries means we'll miss something."

????Without getting into specifics, he recalled one example. "We had a guy, we loved the guy, and it wasn't killing us in our business, and how long before we went to somebody else?" (Neither he nor Berkshire's vice chairman Charlie Munger, who sat beside Buffett on stage, could remember.) "We've waited too long on one manager sometimes," Buffett said.

????Buffett's comments came amid grumbling from some investors gathered in Omaha that the Oracle is too hands-off and perhaps should take a page from activist shareholders like Pershing Square Capital's BillAckman or turnaround specialists like private equity firm 3G Capital. Indeed, several questions from shareholders and analysts at Saturday's meeting focused on whether Berkshire, which teamed up with 3G in 2013 to purchase ketchup maker Heinz (where management was then swiftly replaced), would adopt 3G's "hands-on" approach for future acquisitions.

????While Buffett praised 3G as a partner ("They're smart, they're focused; they're very hard-working and determined.") he also noted that "they're never satisfied," and defended Berkshire's gentler way of doing things. For one, Buffett doesn't like telling his subsidiaries that they need to get rid of employees or restrict their actions in other ways. "We're not big disciplinarians," Buffett said. As Munger put it, "By the standards of the rest of the world, we over-trust."

????So much does Buffett trust the CEOs of Berkshire companies that he doesn't keep close track of how much money they send him and when, or bother to double-check that a company even exists. He's never visited Forest River, the Indiana-based recreational vehicle manufacturer that Berkshire owns, for example. "I hope it's there," Buffett joked. "I could see them saying, 'What figure should we send Warren this month?'" he said, laughing. ("I don't want to encourage managers of subsidiaries to do a different way of behaving, if they're listening," he added.)

????When you leave companies alone to run themselves, sometimes things go wrong, Buffett acknowledged. But he took issue with critics who complain that Berkshire's returns would be higher if Buffett ran a tighter ship. "What they won't be able to measure is how much on the positive side we have achieved with so many other people because we gave them that leeway," he said, noting that Berkshire doesn't have in-house general counsel or human resources.

????As for Ackman's brand of activism, Buffett seemed almost offended by any likeness between Berkshire and the hedge fund manager. First, unlike Ackman, who has lately made headlines for his short position in Herbalife (HLF) and hostile bid for Botox manufacturer Allergan (AGN), Buffett doesn't short stocks or trade in derivatives. He's also skeptical that activists' recent success is sustainable, saying they're usually looking to cause a short-term swing in a stock price, not permanent changes to improve a business. Munger, for his part, swore off investor activism in general, saying, "I don't think it's good for America."

????Will Buffett's successor be the hard-line boss that Buffett isn't? Don't count on it.

????One of Berkshire's most valuable assets, Buffett and other investors reiterated over the weekend, is other businesses' willingness to sell to Berkshire -- often at lower prices than what private equity firms would pay -- because they trust Buffett to mind the store. As hedge fund manager Whitney Tilson of Kase Capital Management put it on Friday, "Berkshire is like a museum, like the Met, where people will sell their most valuable art just because they know it's going to be safe there."

????Added Buffett, "We keep promises, and that means we sometimes end up holding on to some businesses that haven't lived up to expectations."