The celebrity effect
名人效应
The magical effect of putting a famous face on a company's board
明星人物参加公司董事会产生的魔法效应
Mar 30th 2010 | From The Economist online
IN MARCH 1998 the Coca-Cola Bottling Company announced the appointment of a most unlikely new director to its board: Evander Holyfield, a former heavyweight boxing champion (pictured above), best-known for having part of his ear bitten off in a bout by a fellow boxer, Mike Tyson. He was not the only top athlete at the time with a seat in the boardroom: Michael Jordan, a celebrated basketball player, was a director of Oakley, a sunglasses manufacturer. Other sports stars to try their hand at directing corporate America in the past 25 years include Billie Jean King, a tennis player appointed to the board of Altria (then called Philip Morris) in 1999 and Nancy Lopez, a golfer, who became a director of J.M. Smucker, a jam-maker, in 2006.
1998年3月，可口可乐装瓶公司宣布任命一位跌破众人眼镜的董事人选加入董事会∶这位就是前重量级拳王Evander Holyfield（如上图），他因耳朵的一小块曾遭另一位拳王Mike Tyson咬下来而声名大噪。当时他不是唯一一位在董事会享有席次的顶尖运动员：美国职篮球星Michael Jordan曾担任太阳眼镜制造商Oakley公司的董事。过去廿五年，其他运动明星亦尝试担任美国企业的董事，包括网球选手Billie Jean King，1999年加入Altria董事会（当年原名Philip Morris），女子高尔夫球选手Nancy Lopez，2006年成为果酱制造商J.M. Smucker的董事之一。
Boards have also recruited from the ranks of Hollywood. Disney appointed Poitier to its board in 1994, for example. Deepak Chopra, an author and lifestyle guru, was recruited to the board of Men's Wearhouse, a suit retailer, in 2004. Stretching the definition of celebrity a bit, General "Stormin'" Norman Schwarzkopf was appointed a director by the Home Shopping Network in 1996. And you can take your pick from scores of politicians-turned-directors, including Al Gore, a former vice-president and a member of Apple's board since 2003.
好莱坞电影明星亦纷纷受邀参加董事会。例如，迪斯尼集团1994年邀请老牌演员Sidney Poitier加入董事会。畅销书作家和生活导师Deepak Chopra，在2004年受邀加入西服零售商Men's Wearhouse的董事会。将名人的定义稍微延伸一点，波斯湾战争「沙漠风暴」多国部队统帅Norman Schwarzkopf将军，1996年受邀加入Home Shopping Network（家庭购物网）的董事会。并且，你还可以举出更多政治人物转型为公司董事的例子，包括前副总统Al Gore，2003年起加入Apple计算机公司董事会。
Gerald Ford was a particularly enthusiastic collector of boardroom seats after he left the White House. While on the board of American Express he stunned his fellow directors by asking Harvey Golub, the chief executive at the time, to explain the difference between "equity" and "revenue", according to Vicky Ward's new book on Lehman Brothers, "The Devil's Casino". This was perhaps not so surprising for a man Lyndon Johnson once said had "played too much football with his helmet off". But it prompts a broader thought about why companies recruit celebrity directors.
美国前总统Gerald Ford（福特）在离开白宫之后，一直是各大企业董事会的热门人选。根据Vicky Ward关于雷曼兄弟公司的新书The Devil's Casino（暂译《魔鬼的赌场》）透露，Gerald Ford在任职American Express（美国运通银行）董事会期间，曾经当面请益当时执行长Harvey Golub解释一下「平衡」和「获利」之间的差异，而令在场其他董事傻眼。或许这还不算离谱，前总统Lyndon Johnson（约翰逊）甚至曾说「他曾经不戴头盔踢过很多场美式足球比赛」。但是，公司企业为什么要网罗名人加入董事会，引发外界更广泛的思考。
Michael Eisner, the boss of Disney when Mr Poitier joined the board, may have been right to say that the actor's "talent is more than screen deep," and that his "election to our board brings us not only his exhaustive knowledge of the entertainment industry but the judgment and wisdom of an exceptional man." Even so, it would seem a reasonable assumption that the lack of business nous displayed by the late President Ford is more typical of the celebrity in the boardroom. So what is the point of having them?
老牌演员Sidney Poitier加入董事会，当时的迪斯尼老板Michael Eisner可能会一直向外界表示，这位演员的「能力远超过银幕魅力」，而且他「入选参加本公司董事会，不仅因为他拥有丰沛的娱乐圈知识，更具有超乎常人的判断力和智慧。」即使如此，似乎可以合理的假设，前总统福特展现的缺乏商业常识，对于董事会内的名人来说应该是司空见惯。那么，为什么要邀请他们加入呢？
Because they increase the value of the firms whose boards they join, apparently. According to "Reaching for the Stars: The Appointment of Celebrities to Corporate Boards", a new study by four American-based economists, simply announcing that a celebrity is joining a board gives the company's share price a boost. Disney's share price jumped by 4.2% on the day Mr Poitier was appointed. But, for the more than 700 celebrity director appointments (out of over 70,000 board appointments in all) that the study examines during 1985-2006, the firms' shares continued to outperform significantly over the subsequent one, two and three years.
因为，很明显地，他们提高了参加董事会母公司企业的价值。根据四位美国经济学者的最新研究《伸手摘星∶邀请名人加入公司董事会》，仅仅宣布某一名人即将加入某一董事会，就会拉抬该公司的股价。迪斯尼的股价在Sidney Poitier确定受邀加入董事会的当天上涨了4.2%。但是，该份研究检视在1985至2006年间，（总计七万多个名人董事受邀加入）其中仅七百位多名人董事，公司股价在随后的一、二和三年内仍然持续表现超乎预期。
Why is this? In some cases―a former president, say―powerful connections and the ability to open the right doors were surely a factor. And, as Mr Eisner claimed of Mr Poitier, some celebrities may bring relevant experience (the study muddies the waters somewhat by including several famous business people, such as Rupert Murdoch and Martha Stewart, within its definition of celebrity). On average, the study found a bigger impact on share prices when celebrity directors had "related" experience than when they had none. Yet "unrelated" celebrity directors had a bigger impact on share prices than unrelated non-celebrities.
这是为什么？在若干情况下―一位前总统表示―强有力的人脉网络和打开正确门路的能力肯定是因素之一。并且，正如Michael Eisner指称Sidney Poitier，一些名人可能带来相关的经验（这项研究因为符合名人的定义而纳入了几位出名的商界人物，例如Rupert Murdoch和Martha Stewart，使得研究结果有点混乱）。平均而言，这项研究发现，当名人董事具有「相关的」经验较他们没有任何经验，会带给股价更大的冲击。可是，「不相关的」名人董事较不相关的非名人亦会带给股价更大的冲击。
To explain this, the economists point to the "visibility effect"―that appointing a celebrity helps draw the attention of investors to a company which, all else being equal, increases demand for its shares and thus its share price. Certainly, a celebrity director seems to increase the proportion of a firm's shares bought by institutional investors (whom the economists think are especially prone to the visibility effect both directly and as a result of the greater attention paid by stockmarket analysts).
解释此一现象，经济学者指出「能见度效应」―邀请名人有助于吸引投资者对于该公司的目光，当所有其他条件都一样时，提高了该公司的股票需求，亦拉抬了股价。当然，名人董事似乎提高了法人投资者购买该公司股票的比例（那些经济学者尤其倾向于直接的能见度效应，以及股市分析师投入更多注意的结果）。
So, should companies respond to this study by picking a few directors at random from the pages of People magazine, or beating a path to Brangelina Towers? It might work, at least for a while. On the other hand, surely sooner or later investors will realise that if the appointment of a director who has nothing to offer but a famous name boosts a firm's share price, it delivers a damning verdict on the value of the rest of the board. Rather than a reason to cheer, perhaps the celebrity effect on companies' shares should be seen instead as an indicator that boards are failing to do their job properly and that they contribute little in return for their generous pay. Or indeed that professional investors, who ought to know better, are as starstruck as the readers of gossip magazines.
因此，公司看过这份研究后，应该从《人物》杂志的内页随便挑选一些董事，还是去叩门通往Brad Pitt和Angelina Jolie的路径？可能会有用，至少暂时。另一方面，确定投资者迟早会了解，邀请一位完全互不相干但却是知名人物来拉抬公司股价，而对于董事会其他成员的价值却传递了一个咒骂的定论。或许名人对于公司股价的效应应被视为董事会有亏职守的一项指标，而不是高兴的理由，况且相较于优渥的收入，他们的贡献微乎其微。或许，甚至本来应该了解更多的专业投资者，亦变得像八卦杂志的读者一样喜爱追星。
名人效应
The magical effect of putting a famous face on a company's board
明星人物参加公司董事会产生的魔法效应
Mar 30th 2010 | From The Economist online
IN MARCH 1998 the Coca-Cola Bottling Company announced the appointment of a most unlikely new director to its board: Evander Holyfield, a former heavyweight boxing champion (pictured above), best-known for having part of his ear bitten off in a bout by a fellow boxer, Mike Tyson. He was not the only top athlete at the time with a seat in the boardroom: Michael Jordan, a celebrated basketball player, was a director of Oakley, a sunglasses manufacturer. Other sports stars to try their hand at directing corporate America in the past 25 years include Billie Jean King, a tennis player appointed to the board of Altria (then called Philip Morris) in 1999 and Nancy Lopez, a golfer, who became a director of J.M. Smucker, a jam-maker, in 2006.
1998年3月，可口可乐装瓶公司宣布任命一位跌破众人眼镜的董事人选加入董事会∶这位就是前重量级拳王Evander Holyfield（如上图），他因耳朵的一小块曾遭另一位拳王Mike Tyson咬下来而声名大噪。当时他不是唯一一位在董事会享有席次的顶尖运动员：美国职篮球星Michael Jordan曾担任太阳眼镜制造商Oakley公司的董事。过去廿五年，其他运动明星亦尝试担任美国企业的董事，包括网球选手Billie Jean King，1999年加入Altria董事会（当年原名Philip Morris），女子高尔夫球选手Nancy Lopez，2006年成为果酱制造商J.M. Smucker的董事之一。
Boards have also recruited from the ranks of Hollywood. Disney appointed Poitier to its board in 1994, for example. Deepak Chopra, an author and lifestyle guru, was recruited to the board of Men's Wearhouse, a suit retailer, in 2004. Stretching the definition of celebrity a bit, General "Stormin'" Norman Schwarzkopf was appointed a director by the Home Shopping Network in 1996. And you can take your pick from scores of politicians-turned-directors, including Al Gore, a former vice-president and a member of Apple's board since 2003.
好莱坞电影明星亦纷纷受邀参加董事会。例如，迪斯尼集团1994年邀请老牌演员Sidney Poitier加入董事会。畅销书作家和生活导师Deepak Chopra，在2004年受邀加入西服零售商Men's Wearhouse的董事会。将名人的定义稍微延伸一点，波斯湾战争「沙漠风暴」多国部队统帅Norman Schwarzkopf将军，1996年受邀加入Home Shopping Network（家庭购物网）的董事会。并且，你还可以举出更多政治人物转型为公司董事的例子，包括前副总统Al Gore，2003年起加入Apple计算机公司董事会。
Gerald Ford was a particularly enthusiastic collector of boardroom seats after he left the White House. While on the board of American Express he stunned his fellow directors by asking Harvey Golub, the chief executive at the time, to explain the difference between "equity" and "revenue", according to Vicky Ward's new book on Lehman Brothers, "The Devil's Casino". This was perhaps not so surprising for a man Lyndon Johnson once said had "played too much football with his helmet off". But it prompts a broader thought about why companies recruit celebrity directors.
美国前总统Gerald Ford（福特）在离开白宫之后，一直是各大企业董事会的热门人选。根据Vicky Ward关于雷曼兄弟公司的新书The Devil's Casino（暂译《魔鬼的赌场》）透露，Gerald Ford在任职American Express（美国运通银行）董事会期间，曾经当面请益当时执行长Harvey Golub解释一下「平衡」和「获利」之间的差异，而令在场其他董事傻眼。或许这还不算离谱，前总统Lyndon Johnson（约翰逊）甚至曾说「他曾经不戴头盔踢过很多场美式足球比赛」。但是，公司企业为什么要网罗名人加入董事会，引发外界更广泛的思考。
Michael Eisner, the boss of Disney when Mr Poitier joined the board, may have been right to say that the actor's "talent is more than screen deep," and that his "election to our board brings us not only his exhaustive knowledge of the entertainment industry but the judgment and wisdom of an exceptional man." Even so, it would seem a reasonable assumption that the lack of business nous displayed by the late President Ford is more typical of the celebrity in the boardroom. So what is the point of having them?
老牌演员Sidney Poitier加入董事会，当时的迪斯尼老板Michael Eisner可能会一直向外界表示，这位演员的「能力远超过银幕魅力」，而且他「入选参加本公司董事会，不仅因为他拥有丰沛的娱乐圈知识，更具有超乎常人的判断力和智慧。」即使如此，似乎可以合理的假设，前总统福特展现的缺乏商业常识，对于董事会内的名人来说应该是司空见惯。那么，为什么要邀请他们加入呢？
Because they increase the value of the firms whose boards they join, apparently. According to "Reaching for the Stars: The Appointment of Celebrities to Corporate Boards", a new study by four American-based economists, simply announcing that a celebrity is joining a board gives the company's share price a boost. Disney's share price jumped by 4.2% on the day Mr Poitier was appointed. But, for the more than 700 celebrity director appointments (out of over 70,000 board appointments in all) that the study examines during 1985-2006, the firms' shares continued to outperform significantly over the subsequent one, two and three years.
因为，很明显地，他们提高了参加董事会母公司企业的价值。根据四位美国经济学者的最新研究《伸手摘星∶邀请名人加入公司董事会》，仅仅宣布某一名人即将加入某一董事会，就会拉抬该公司的股价。迪斯尼的股价在Sidney Poitier确定受邀加入董事会的当天上涨了4.2%。但是，该份研究检视在1985至2006年间，（总计七万多个名人董事受邀加入）其中仅七百位多名人董事，公司股价在随后的一、二和三年内仍然持续表现超乎预期。
Why is this? In some cases―a former president, say―powerful connections and the ability to open the right doors were surely a factor. And, as Mr Eisner claimed of Mr Poitier, some celebrities may bring relevant experience (the study muddies the waters somewhat by including several famous business people, such as Rupert Murdoch and Martha Stewart, within its definition of celebrity). On average, the study found a bigger impact on share prices when celebrity directors had "related" experience than when they had none. Yet "unrelated" celebrity directors had a bigger impact on share prices than unrelated non-celebrities.
这是为什么？在若干情况下―一位前总统表示―强有力的人脉网络和打开正确门路的能力肯定是因素之一。并且，正如Michael Eisner指称Sidney Poitier，一些名人可能带来相关的经验（这项研究因为符合名人的定义而纳入了几位出名的商界人物，例如Rupert Murdoch和Martha Stewart，使得研究结果有点混乱）。平均而言，这项研究发现，当名人董事具有「相关的」经验较他们没有任何经验，会带给股价更大的冲击。可是，「不相关的」名人董事较不相关的非名人亦会带给股价更大的冲击。
To explain this, the economists point to the "visibility effect"―that appointing a celebrity helps draw the attention of investors to a company which, all else being equal, increases demand for its shares and thus its share price. Certainly, a celebrity director seems to increase the proportion of a firm's shares bought by institutional investors (whom the economists think are especially prone to the visibility effect both directly and as a result of the greater attention paid by stockmarket analysts).
解释此一现象，经济学者指出「能见度效应」―邀请名人有助于吸引投资者对于该公司的目光，当所有其他条件都一样时，提高了该公司的股票需求，亦拉抬了股价。当然，名人董事似乎提高了法人投资者购买该公司股票的比例（那些经济学者尤其倾向于直接的能见度效应，以及股市分析师投入更多注意的结果）。
So, should companies respond to this study by picking a few directors at random from the pages of People magazine, or beating a path to Brangelina Towers? It might work, at least for a while. On the other hand, surely sooner or later investors will realise that if the appointment of a director who has nothing to offer but a famous name boosts a firm's share price, it delivers a damning verdict on the value of the rest of the board. Rather than a reason to cheer, perhaps the celebrity effect on companies' shares should be seen instead as an indicator that boards are failing to do their job properly and that they contribute little in return for their generous pay. Or indeed that professional investors, who ought to know better, are as starstruck as the readers of gossip magazines.
因此，公司看过这份研究后，应该从《人物》杂志的内页随便挑选一些董事，还是去叩门通往Brad Pitt和Angelina Jolie的路径？可能会有用，至少暂时。另一方面，确定投资者迟早会了解，邀请一位完全互不相干但却是知名人物来拉抬公司股价，而对于董事会其他成员的价值却传递了一个咒骂的定论。或许名人对于公司股价的效应应被视为董事会有亏职守的一项指标，而不是高兴的理由，况且相较于优渥的收入，他们的贡献微乎其微。或许，甚至本来应该了解更多的专业投资者，亦变得像八卦杂志的读者一样喜爱追星。
博文
没有评论:
发表评论