【华尔街日报0130】中国被视为下一个教育前沿
本帖最后由 花落无声 于 2012-2-2 16:58 编辑【中文标题】 中国被视为下一个教育前沿
【原文标题】 China Eyed as Next Educational Frontier
【登载媒体】华尔街日报
【来源地址】
http://www.wallstreetjournal.de/article/SB10001424052970204661604577184221850620242.html （原帖中没有。。又搜到的。。不知是否是原地址。。。）
【译者】花落无声
【翻译方式】人工
【声明】欢迎转载，请务必注明译者和出处 bbs.m4.cn。
【原文库链接】http://bbs.m4.cn/forum.php?mod=v ... 7&page=1#pid5541130
【译文】
http://si.wsj.net/public/resources/images/AM-AR189_miaque_G_20120129055206.jpg
'The way I explain it to my friends in the U.S. is that you cannot achieve 10% GDP growth per year by working a 35-hour week – even if you're as smart as the Chinese,' Mr. Quelch said. Above, the dean attended the Lujiazui Forum in Shanghai on May 20, 2011.
（图片）“我对自己的美国朋友的解释是：你不能通过每周工作35小时来达到每年10%的GDP增长，就算你像中国人一样聪明也不行。” 上图的Quelch先生说，他是参加了2011年5月20日上海的陆家嘴论坛的一位院长。
Résumé
简历
• Education: Exeter College, Oxford University (BA and MA), the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania (MBA), the Harvard School of Public Health (SM) and the Harvard Graduate School of Business Administration (DBA)
• 教育背景：牛津大学艾克赛特学院（文学士及文学硕士学位），宾夕法尼亚大学沃顿商学院（工商管理学硕士学位），哈佛公共卫生学院（科学硕士学位），哈佛工商管理研究生学院（工商管理学博士学位）
• Career: Harvard Business School, London Business School
• 事业：哈佛商学院，伦敦商学院
• Extracurricular: Tennis and squash
• 业余活动：网球和壁球
If there was ever a need for business schools in China, it's now.
如果在中国会有需要商学院的时候的话，那就是现在。
Breakneck economic growth has far outstripped the supply of management talent. Meanwhile, Chinese companies in both the private and state sectors are responding to government incentives to "Go Out" and compete against the best companies in the world—while juggling fierce competition, rapidly changing technology and shifting macro-economic forces at home
极快的经济增长已经远远超过了管理人才的供应。同时，中国的企业——无论是私营的还是国营的——都在响应政府“走出去”的激励，和世界上最好的企业竞争，同时还要应付国内激烈的竞争、迅速改变的科技和变化多端的宏观经济势力。
No wonder some of the world's most prominent business schools are eyeing China as the next educational frontier.
难怪一些世界上最卓越的商学院都把中国视为下一个教育前沿。
China Europe International Business School got to China early. That gives it a head start in terms of faculty and facilities. Its new pitch: "China Depth Global Breadth," marrying insight into how China works with an international perspective that attracts students from China and around the world.
中欧国际商学院早早地就到了中国，这使得它在教职工和设施方面有着优势。它的新领域“中国深度全球广度”洞察了中国如何带着吸引了中国和全世界学生的国际视野工作。
Dean John A. Quelch, a veteran of the Harvard Business School and London Business School, insists that despite economic turmoil in Europe, the CEIBS brand in China remains untarnished. "Germany is held in very high regard," he insists. Besides, he adds: "People in China take the long view."
曾求学于哈佛商学院和伦敦商学院的John A. Quelch院长坚持说，尽管欧洲经历了经济混乱，在中国的中欧国际商学院的牌子并未失去光环。“德国很受敬重，”他坚持说。另外，他补充道，“中国人目光长远。”
Mr. Quelch talked with Andrew Browne in Shanghai. The following interview has been edited.
Quelch先生在上海与Andrew Browne进行了谈话。下面的访问被编辑过。
WSJ: Like everybody else in China, CEIBS seems to be investing massively in infrastructure. Tell us something about your expansion plans.
华尔街日报（以下简称“华”）：就像中国所有其他人一样，中欧国际商学院似乎在基础设施上有着巨大的投入。跟我们谈谈你的扩展计划。
Mr. Quelch: The Shanghai campus will double in size by the end of 2013. We also have a campus that we opened in Beijing in 2010 and we currently have operations in Shenzhen that may convert into a fully fledged campus within the next two to three years.
Quelch（以下简称“Q”）：在2013年结束前，上海的校园面积会扩充到现在的两倍。我们在2010年还在北京开了一个校园，现在我们在深圳也有运营，这在未来两到三年内可能会变成一个成熟的校园。
We also have an appetite for going west, and looking at that hundred million people in the Chengdu-Xian-Chongqing triangle, who will eventually want their own business school and will not necessarily want—or be able—to fly to Beijing or Shanghai.
我们还想向西发展，看看成都——西安——重庆三角区里的上亿人口吧，他们都想有自己的商学院，而不想——或者不能——飞到北京或者上海。
The reason why Stanford exists is because Harvard always thought that Californians would be happy to come east to Boston, and never imagined they'd want their own Harvard, a.k.a. Stanford.
斯坦福大学存在的原因就是哈佛总是觉得加州人会很愿意到东部的波士顿来，而从未想过他们会想要自己的哈佛，这就是斯坦福。
WSJ: The No. 1 complaint of foreign companies in China is lack of management talent. Isn't that a huge opportunity for you?
华：在中国的外企第一位的抱怨就是缺少管理人才。这对你来说难道不是个巨大的机会吗？
Mr. Quelch: First of all, China's pace of expansion has outrun the speed with which managers can experientially develop themselves, and so our role is to be an accelerant. We take experienced or high-potential young managers, and we accelerate the speed with which they can assume more management and leadership responsibilities.
Q：首先，中国扩张的速度已经超过了经理们可以用经验发展自己的速度，因此，我们的角色就是加速剂。我们收取有经验的或者有极大潜力的年轻经理，然后我们加速他们承担更多管理和领导责任的速度。
Second, because we cannot serve everybody—obviously—the admissions criteria that we apply and the rectitude of our admissions policies is extremely important to our overall economic impact.
第二，因为我们不能服务所有人——这很明显——我们所用的录取标准和录取政策的公正对我们总体的经济影响来说极度重要。
WSJ: What's the mix of students between college graduates and mid-career managers?
华：研究生和职业中期的经理这两种学生的混合是什么？
Mr. Quelch: We focus on more senior executives even compared with a Harvard Business School. We graduate 1,000 people a year, roughly, 800 of them are executive MBAs; average age 40. The other 200 are MBAs; average age 30.
Q：我们甚至比哈佛商学院还更多地关注高级主管。一年有1000个人从我们这里毕业，他们中大概800个都是有着工商管理硕士学位的管理人员，平均40岁。剩下的200个是工商管理硕士，平均30岁。
You have to have an extremely strong teaching faculty—very practical, very experienced—to be able to command the sustained attention and respect of 40-year-old business people.
你必须有极端强大的师资力量——他们要非常实际、非常有经验——才能从40岁的商人那里获得持续的注意力与尊重。
We are the No.1 revenue-generating business school in executive education in Asia built around our unique ability to deliver both "China Depth and Global Breadth."
我们的收益在亚洲教授管理的商学院里排名第一，因为我们有着独一无二的同时传授“中国深度和全球广度”的能力。
WSJ: How do the changes in the CEIBS syllabus over the years reflect the shifting dynamics of the Chinese economy?
华：中欧国际商学院的教学大纲这些年来的变化如何反映中国经济的动态？
Mr. Quelch: Initially the focus was on functional competency finance, accounting and marketing etc. Now the emphasis is on integrated general management and problem-solving across functional silos. Teamwork and leadership in fast-growth markets are stressed in our curriculum.
Q：最初我们的重心在金融、会计和营销等方面的专业技能。现在的重点则在跨越不同部门的综合的管理与解决问题的能力。我们的课程中强调在这个快速增长的市场中的团队协作和领导能力。
WSJ: Lack of integrated management is said to be one of the weaknesses of many Chinese companies? Why is that?
华：据说缺少综合管理能力是很多中国企业的弱点之一？为什么会这样？
Mr. Quelch: The main reason is that China is run by engineers typically have strong skills in finance and accounting and economics, but with less developed skills in the areas of leadership, change management, marketing, to some extent strategy as well.
Q：主要原因是中国是由一般来说在金融、会计和经济方面有着很强技能的工程师支撑的，但他们缺乏在领导能力、变革管理、营销、某种程度上来说还有策略等方面的技能。
So the soft skills, as we refer to them in the States, are the ones which are underdeveloped in China. The hard skills are well-developed. And so our curriculum places considerable emphasis on overlaying soft skills on the foundation of hard skills that many students bring to the classroom.
所以我们在美国说的“软技能”在中国是不发达的。而硬技能发展得很好。所以我们的课程强调在很多学生带到课堂中的硬技能的基础上建立软技能。
WSJ: Isn't part of the problem that state-owned enterprises have many of the same kinds of rigid hierarchies that you have in the Communist Party?
华：国营企业有很多共产党里有的僵硬阶层，这不是问题的一部分吗？
Mr. Quelch: That may be the case. But there's one thing that I've discovered in China: no-one—and I'm talking about the state sector—gets promoted for breaking the rules, but no-one gets to the top if they just follow the rules. So there is an art in China to taking new initiatives but doing so in a manner that is not destabilizing.
Q：这个情况可能属实。但我在中国发现了一件事：没人——我是说国家部门里——会因为违反规定而被提拔，但是也没人能仅通过遵守规定而到达顶端。所以在中国，提出新方案但以一种不会影响稳定的方法来实行，这是一种艺术。
WSJ: But can that system generate true innovation?
华：但是这个体制能产生真正的创新吗？
Mr. Quelch: I think you can, if you throw a considerable amount of money behind it. But certainly a major challenge in the state-owned sector is to achieve innovation.
Q：我觉得可以，如果你在后面扔了足够的钱的话。但可以肯定的是在国营部门里最大的挑战是实现创新。
In every country the public sector is different from the private sector, whether it's the U.K. or the U.S., there's an approach, a culture and a style that is different, norms that are different. But in China I think that the gap is wider, certainly than it is in the States, and it's almost a case of natural selection where people come to a fork in the road in China and either go to the state sector or to the private sector. And the mental mind-set associated with each is more substantially different than it is in the U.K. or the U.S.
在每个国家里，公共部门都和私有部门不同，不管是在英国还是在美国都是这样，文化和风格都是不同的，规则也不同。但是我觉得在中国这个差异更大，肯定比在美国的更大，在中国当人们走到这个三岔路口的时候，去国家部门还是私有部门几乎是一种自然选择。而有关两者的心态的差异比在英国或美国的更大。
The innovation in China is much more likely to be generated out of the private sector, even though the state sector is hugely well-endowed with resources that could fund innovation.
中国的创新更可能在私有部门里发生，尽管国家部门有着充足的资源来支持创新。
WSJ: What advice would you give to Chinese companies headed overseas?
华：你会对走向海外的中国企业建议什么？
Mr. Quelch: Chinese companies should not go abroad as Chinese companies. They should go abroad as companies with an important differentiated value offering that consumers will be happy to pay for—and the country of origin is irrelevant.
Q：中国企业不应该作为中国企业走向海外。他们应该作为能够提供消费者愿意为之掏钱的重要差异性价值的企业走向海外——原产国毫不相关。
WSJ: When will we see the emergence of global Chinese brands?
华：我们什么时候能看到全球中国品牌的出现？
Mr. Quelch: I think that Chinese companies will add value initially in the B-to-B (business-to-business) sector, not the B-to-C (business-to-consumer) sector. Many people in China are eagerly awaiting the day when the first truly global Chinese brand enters the top-10 ranking of the world's most valuable brands. I think that's probably at least a decade away.
Q：我觉得中国企业最初会在“企业对企业”部分增加价值，而非“企业对消费者”部分。很多中国人都热切盼望着第一个真正的全球中国品牌进入世界最有价值品牌前十的那一天。我觉得那至少要在十年以后。
But Chinese companies like Huawei, ZTE—these companies have extremely good technology and know how to invest in technology acquisitions and, increasingly, they are acquiring or hiring non-Chinese to help them become global players. Those are the companies that are likely to be at the forefront of Chinese value-added overseas. Yes, there will be a Lenovo, there'll be a Haier, there'll be a Geely—we'll all, as consumers, be interested in following the fortunes of these B-to-C companies, but I think the B-to-B space is where Chinese companies are really going to excel.
但是像华为、中兴这类的中国企业有着极度优秀的科技，并知道如何投资科技兼并，而且它们渐渐地获取或者雇佣外国人来帮助自己成为业务遍及全球的大公司。这些是可能位于中国海外附加值的前沿的公司。是的，会有联想，会有海尔，会有吉利——作为消费者，我们都会对跟随这些“企业对消费者”型企业的命运感兴趣，但我认为“企业对企业”空间才是中国企业真的会表现优秀的地方。
You look at Sany at the moment: it's a very promising long-term competitor to Caterpillar.
你现在看看三一重工：它很有希望成为卡特彼勒公司的长期竞争对手。
WSJ: You say that Chinese companies are increasingly hiring foreigners and becoming diverse. Can you give examples?
华：你说中国企业越来越多地雇用外国人并越来越多样化。你能举几个例子吗？
Mr. Quelch: If you go to the U.K. website of Huawei, you will find that it's all about Basingstoke. It's not about Huawei as the global brand; it's about Huawei as a company that is in Basingstoke.
Q：如果你访问华为的英国网站，你会发现它都是有关贝辛斯托克的。这和华为是一个全球品牌无关，这只是关于华为作为一家位于贝辛斯托克的企业。
This is where the Chinese are going to move faster than the Japanese because a major brake on Japanese global expansion ended up being the shortage of talented Japanese who were interested in, or linguistically able to, operate in international markets.
这是中国人将会比日本人行动快的地方，因为日本的全球扩张受到的主要阻碍就是缺少对在国际市场运营感兴趣，或者语言上能够在国际市场运营的有才能的日本人。
But the Chinese are much more outgoing, and perhaps because they're coming 30 years later there are many more millions of Chinese who are English-language capable.
但中国人外向得多，也许是因为他们晚来30年，所以有几百万会说英文的中国人。
My guess is that whereas when a Japanese company made an acquisition the foreign executives immediately hit the equivalent of a glass ceiling, in the case of foreigners in a Chinese company, it's going to be easier for them to move up the ranks.
我猜测，每次一家日本企业做出收购后，外国高官们马上就会撞到玻璃天花板（注：玻璃天花板指一种不可见的障碍，这种障碍会使得妇女或有障碍者无法升上管理高层的阶段），而在中国企业里的外国人更容易取得高级职位。
What will really make a difference in that regard is reciprocity. If and when, for example, Sam Su of Yum Brands becomes the first Chinese CEO of a Fortune 500 company born in China then they will accept a free flow of non-Chinese executive talent throughout their organizations.
在这方面，真正会带来变化的是互惠主义。比如说，如果山姆苏百胜餐饮成为了第一个出生在中国的世界500强企业CEO，那么他们会接受外国管理人员的才能在自己组织中的自由流动。
WSJ: What was the biggest surprise for you working in China?
华：你在中国工作的最大惊讶是什么？
Mr. Quelch: The biggest surprise is that there are no weekends in China. I've always been a very hard-working person, but I have been amazed at the degree to which on Saturdays and Sundays I find myself involved in professional activities.
Q：最大的惊讶是在中国没有周末。我一直是个工作很努力的人，但是我还是为自己在周六和周日还是在做与工作有关的事而感到惊讶。
The way I explain it to my friends in the U.S. is that you cannot achieve 10% GDP growth per year by working a 35-hour week – even if you're as smart as the Chinese.
我对自己的美国朋友的解释是：你不能通过每周工作35小时来达到每年10%的GDP增长，就算你像中国人一样聪明也不行。
I remember Jack Welch famously held meetings on Saturdays with his people. But I think for many Chinese this is an historic moment of opportunity – a once-in-a-lifetime, maybe a once-in-a-millennium moment in time that no one wants to waste. So many Chinese display a relentless resolution to work hard today for themselves, their families and a better China.
我记得杰克•韦尔奇很著名地每周六和他的人开会。但我认为，对很多中国人来说，这是一个历史性的机遇——一个一生只有一次，也许千年一遇的机遇，没人想浪费它。因此，很多中国人显示出无尽决心，来为自己，为家人，为一个更好的中国而努力工作。
希望中国能在抨击和马屁的合力攻击中保持清醒，不要飘飘欲仙也不要举手投降，脚踏实地地努力才是为人本份。。。， 商学院？
还是多下点功夫在应用技术跟基础学科吧。中国用不着那么多CEO跟金融家。
页:
[1]