The American government has made heavy investments in the US automobile industry. How should it use its influence? It is a difficult question to answer because it appears that the automobile industry is in the middle of a fundamental transformation. There is a lot of information available on how companies have dealt with major changes in their business environments, but little is known about the transformation of entire industry.
美国政府在美国汽车业投入了巨资。它应该如何利用这种影响 力呢？这是一个难以回答的问题,因为汽车业正处于最重要的转型 过程之中。对于企业如何应对企业环境的重大变化可以获得许多信 息,但有关整个行业转型的信息却少得可怜。
History shows that most companies do not deal well with transformation. This is what happened in the computer industry in the 1980s and 90s. Previously, each company produced its own mainframe computers using proprietary hardware and software. The company’s sales force then sold these complex and expensive products. The PC changed this. In a period of just a few years, the entire industry began to rely on common hardware elements (microprocessors) and packaged software; selling was handed off to third parties. In business we call this moving from a “vertical” structure (where a company handles its own development, manufacturing and distribution) to a “horizontal” structure (where some companies specialize in building components while others integrate them and handle distribution tasks). The result was that the computer industry became more dynamic as old participants (such as Burroughs and Digital Equipment) who did not manage to change faded away and new types of companies (such as Compaq and Dell) emerged.
历史表明，大多数企业对转型的处理都不够好。上世纪八九十 年代的电脑业就是如此。在那之前，各个企业利用自有的软硬件生 产自己的大型机。企业的销售团队随后销售这些结构复杂、价格不 菲的产品。个人电脑的出现改变了这一切。短短几年间，整个行业 开始依靠常用硬件元素(微处理器)和软件包;销售则被外包给第三 方。在企业中,我们称之为从“垂直”结构转向“水平”结构。垂直结构 指的是企业负责自己的开发、制造和分销,水平结构则指的是一些 企业专门从事元件生产,而其他企业则负责组装和分销任务。结果 是,没有处理好改革的Burroughs和Digital Equipment等老合作伙 伴逐渐消失，出现了康柏和戴尔等新型企业。从此，电脑业变得更具 活力。
Typically, a single company cannot call the shots that transform an industry. But when a government gets as involved as ours has in the US automobile industry, it can end up making transformational decisions. Imagine if in the middle of the computer transformation, the Reagan Administration worried about the upheaval and tried to rescue this vital industry by making huge investments in leading mainframe companies. The purpose of such investments would have been to protect the viability of these companies. The effect, however, would have been to put the brakes on transformation and all but ensure that the US would lose its leadership role.
通常来讲，一个企业无法左右一个行业的转型。不过，当一个政 府像美国政府参与汽车业转型一样参与一个行业的转型时，政府最终能作出转型决策。想象一下，如果在电脑业转型的过程中，里根政府担心行业的动荡，并试图通 过向主要大型机企业投人巨资而拯救这个重要行业的话，情况会怎样？这样的投资本来是为了保 持这些企业的生存活力，而结果却会使转型戛然而止,只会注定使美国失去其领导地位。
The government’s investment in General Motors might be directly helpful if the auto industry only had the recession to contend with. But that is not the case. The industry faces the confluence of a world-wide recession, rising fuel prices, environmental demands, globalization of manufacturing, and, most importantly, technological change involving the very nature of the automobile.
如果汽车业只需要应付衰退，那么政府投资通用汽车或许会带来直接帮助。但事实情况并非 如此。汽车业面临着一系列的问题:全球性的经济衰退.油价上涨、环保需求、制造业全球化，最重 要的是涉及到汽车业本质的技术变革。
Electric cars have become viable and will likely only become more capable in the future. Components critical to their performance—batteries and electronic control systems are on a rapidly rising technology curve. These technologies are new and therefore capable of improving quickly with incremental investments. By contrast, technologies that have been around a long time, such as the internal combustion engine and the fuel and drive systems built around it, have enjoyed the benefits of decades of development and have limited potential for further improvement.
电动汽车巳经变得可行，未来很可能只会变得更强大。对电动汽车性能至关重要的组件—— 电池和电子控制系统的技术都在迅速发展。这些都是新技术,因此可以在投资持续增加的情况下迅速 改进。与此相反，一些存在并发展了几十年的技术进一步改进的潜力有限，比如内燃机引擎以及相 应的燃料和驱动系统。
The US government is investing in the automobile industry with the intention of preventing jobs from being lost. This may improve GM’s ability to operate within today’s structure. But there is no comparably large investment being made to develop the capabilities that could serve the company in a new era of electric cars.
美国政府正在投资汽车业,希望借此防止就业岗位的流失。这可能会改善通用汽车在现有结 构下的运营能力。不过，在开发该公司应对新的电动汽车时代的运营能力上,政府并没有投人同等 规模的资金。
In the short term, the US strategy will likely save jobs. The long term is much more problematic. We do not yet know when and if the automobile industry will shift into a horizontal structure. The stakes, however, are very high. The strategic bets being placed by each country may determine which one will end up as the world’s leader in automotive technology and manufacturing.
美国在短期内很可能会实施挽救就业岗位的策略。长远来看，则有更多的问题。我们还不知道 汽车业是否以及何时会转向水平结构。然而我们的赌注非常大。各国进行的战略决策可能会决定 谁将最终成为世界汽车技术和制造的领头羊。