没有乔布斯的苹果还是今天的苹果吗？

日前，苹果公司(Apple)被追捧为世界上最有价值的品牌。真是凑巧，就在同一天，一家主流的商业出版物将这家消费电子公司描述为“无情的企业文化”，这种情况下失败即被认为是一种诅咒。而几天前，媒体才报导当iPad 2运抵中国开始销售时，消费者在Apple专卖店疯狂扭打抢购。

苹果极端注重设计精美、性能卓越的产品，加上越来越多的消费者迷恋高科技商品，使这家曾经的电脑公司在十年内成为全球最有价值的品牌。根据Millward Brown Optimor公布的最新BrandZ全球最具价值百强品牌排名，苹果的品牌价值已超过1,530亿美元，遥遥领先第2名Google公司的1,115亿美元和第三名IBM公司的1,010亿美元。

Google已连续四年蝉连全球最有价值品牌。不过，苹果凭借着iPhone,iPad和iTunes应用程序商店的巨大成功，爬到了第一名的位置，当然还包括苹果在微软(Microsoft)垄断全球PC操作系统市场后进行奇妙改造，翻身成为全球成长最快的技术公司的神奇故事。

苹果的崛起很大部份要归功于CEO乔布斯极具前瞻性的领导，但即使他因为业绩长红而受到诸多称赞，部份管理大师仍对他的管理风格有所批评。据报道，这个狂热的微观管理者(micro-manager)几乎插手所有的公司运作，从关键的产品设计到最细微的问题，如员工的交通都包括在内。据报导，乔布斯曾因2008年MobileMe推出时的通讯软件故障问题，毫不留情地斥责了MobilMe团队。以下是某媒体描述的乔布斯的领导风格：

对苹果的崇拜者而言，这家公司就像是一个高科技版本的旺卡(Wonka)工厂，是一个神秘而迷人的地方，专门生产他们所无法大量获得的美妙物品。这些描述都是真实的，然而，苹果却又是一个残酷无情的地方，它严格执行责任制，决策迅速，且沟通是从最顶层开始即明确阐明。

乔布斯在公司管理上并不会以任何方式表达歉意。苹果的巨大成功，证实了他的所做所为的正确性。但有没有可能，在今天获得胜利的同时，也种下了明天失败的种子？乔布斯离开时会发生什么事？没有其他人拥有像乔布斯一样的人格魅力和坚强的意志力，他的管理风格能否持续？员工最终将群起叛乱，反抗不容异议高谈阔论的老板？而对苹果乔布斯的负面报导也可能逐渐浮现，最终是否会削弱该公司的品牌与消费者的权益？

我对这些问题都没有答案。但我知道，其他高科技业者正从消费者、供应商和其他并未吸引同类型负面消息的企业机构那里获得越来越高的品牌价值。该名单的前100大全球最具价值品牌充满了科技公司，其中许多名列前25。事实上，前三大最具价值品牌都是高科技公司；而位居前10名的最具价值品牌中，有七家是电子/高科技业者。

通常最值得关注的企业都在前25强，包括IBM、微软、AT&T、通用电气(GE)、沃达丰(Vodafone)和Verizon。我很惊喜地看到UPS名列第17。这家物流公司甚至领先惠普(HP)、德国电信(Deutsche Telekom)和甲骨文(Oracle)。

点击参考原文：How Apple Became the World's Most Valuable Brand

《电子工程专辑》网站版权所有，谢绝转载

{pagination}

How Apple Became the World's Most Valuable Brand

Bolaji Ojo

What a coincidence. On the same day that a major business publication described Apple Inc. (Nasdaq: AAPL) as a company with a "ruthless corporate culture" where failure is considered an anathema, the consumer electronics company was being feted as the world's most valuable brand. A few days earlier, the media reported a frenzied scuffle in China at an Apple store when the iPad 2 went on sale in the country.

There is a connection somewhere here. Apple's ferocious focus on beautifully designed, high performance products, mixed with growing consumer fascination with high-tech's best gadgets, turned a once-ran PC company into the world's most valued brand within a decade. Apple, according to the latest BrandZ Top 100 Most Valuable Global Brands from Millward Brown Optimor, has brand equity value of more than $153 billion, far ahead of No. 2 Google Inc.'s $111.5 billion and No. 3 IBM Corp.'s $101 billion. (Download the full report here.)

Until now, Google (Nasdaq: GOOG) had been the world's most valuable brand four years in a row. However, Apple climbed to the No. 1 spot on the runaway success of its iPhone, iPad, and the iTunes store, coupled with the story of its fantastic transformation from road-kill, in the wake of Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq: MSFT)'s monopoly in the PC operating system market, to the world's fastest-growing technology company.

Apple's rise has been attributed mainly to CEO Steve Jobs's visionary leadership, but even as he receives encomiums for the company's performance, there are indications his managerial style could draw criticisms from management gurus. Apple, according to a Fortune Magazine report, is being led by a fanatical micro-manager who has his hands on virtually all of the company's operations, from critical product design to the most minor issues such as employee transportation. Jobs reportedly chewed out the company's MobileMe team for the initial failure of the messaging program when it launched in 2008. Here's how Fortune describes Jobs's leadership:

To Apple's legion of admirers, the company is like a tech version of Wonka's factory, an enigmatic but enchanted place that produces wonderful items they can't get enough of. That characterization is true, but Apple also is a brutal and unforgiving place, where accountability is strictly enforced, decisions are swift, and communication is articulated clearly from the top.

Jobs is unlikely to offer any apologies for the way he manages the company. The proof he is doing something right is clearly evident in Apple's enormous success. But could today's victories also hold the seeds of tomorrow's defeat? What happens when Jobs leaves the stage and nobody else has the same level of charisma and forceful will to continue with his managerial style? Would employees rebel, eventually, against being harangued by a boss who brooks no dissent, and could the slowly rising tide of negative reports about Apple and Jobs eventually erode the company's brand equity with consumers?

I don't have answers to these questions. I am nevertheless aware that other high-tech players are getting high brand valuation from consumers, suppliers, and other corporate bodies without attracting the same type of negative press. The list of the 100 Most Valuable Global Brands is chock full of technology companies, many of them in the top 25. In fact, the first three most valued brands are high-tech companies; among the leading 10 most valued brands, seven are electronics/high-tech firms.

The usual suspects are all there in the Top 25, including IBM, Microsoft, AT&T, GE, Vodafone, and Verizon. I was pleasantly surprised to see UPS at No. 17. The logistics company is even ahead of Hewlett-Packard, Deutsche Telekom, and Oracle. Those guys and gals in brown must be making great impressions while making their deliveries.