麥當勞危機 需要洗心革面

With Monday’s quarterly earnings release, McDonald’s has gone from the frying pan into the fire.

本週一剛剛發佈季度財報的麥當勞公司，可謂纔出油鍋，又進火坑。

It reported that global same store sales were down by 4.8%, versus the expected 1.2% dip. Its once high-growth Asian markets were down 12.6% versus the expected 8.4% drop.

這份季度財報顯示，該公司的全球同店銷售額下降了4.8%，超出了此前的下跌預期（1.2%）。曾經迅速增長的亞洲市場，更是下降了12.6%，超過了此前8.4%的下跌預期。

Indeed, it is an ironic time for the $72 billon burger business, where 12 hours after the 65 year-old McDonald’s MCD -1.35% fired its CEO Don Thompson, Danny Meyer, founder of 14 year-old Shake Shack SHAK -1.10% , fired up his burger chain on the New York Stock Exchange with a $1.7 billion value, doubling its IPO price of the day.

對於這家市值720億美元的漢堡包巨頭來說，現在的確是一個頗具諷刺意味的時刻。就在已經走過65個年頭的麥當勞公司解僱首席執行官唐o湯普森12個小時之後，丹尼o梅耶14年前創立的Shake Shack漢堡餐廳在紐交所成功上市，當日收盤價是IPO價格的兩倍，從而使該公司的市值達到17億美元。

Yes, McDonald’s is the big cheese in this market, with 68 million people served daily in 130 countries, 38,000 outlets, and 2 million employees. Despite that presence, diners and investors alike have flipped over the higher quality, fun entrants such as Shake Shack, Five Guys Burgers and Fries, In and Out Burger, and Smashburger. But despite the company’s stumbles, McDonald’s may now be posed to start firing back.

沒錯，麥當勞是西式快餐市場上的“大塊頭”，它在全球130個國家開設的3.8萬家分店僱傭了200萬名員工，每天爲全球6800萬人提供服務。儘管如此，還是擋不住食客和投資者紛紛投向質量更高，也更好玩的Shake Shack、Five Guys Burgers and Fries、In and Out Burger和Smashburger等市場新入者的懷抱。不過，儘管遭受了一些小小的挫折，但麥當勞或許已經做好了反擊的準備。

Despite strategic and operational missteps shared by the fast food giant’s management and board, there was no sugar coating over the need for change nor was there a vilification of the company’s beloved, albeit unsuccessful, leader. Moreover, the company’s Chicagoland-oriented board did not need outside activist investors to force needed changes.

雖然麥當勞的管理層和董事會犯下了一些戰略和運營上的錯誤，不過沒有人否認公司需要變革，也沒有人非難在麥當勞備受愛戴，雖然不怎麼成功的領導人唐o湯普森。另外，麥當勞的董事會也不需要外部的維權投資者來推動公司所需要的變革。

McDonalds’ missteps are more complex than its distasteful financial results. Recent results showed the first declining same store sales in 12 years and the fifth straight quarter of declining sales revenues and a plunge in profits. These financial records reveal problems in the company’s strategy, execution, and leadership, not an industry-wide problem. In addition to the soaring prospects of its competitors, even McDonald’s spinoffs—Boston Market (2007) and Chipotle Mexican Grill (2006)—were positioned for success when they were liberated.

麥當勞的失誤遠比其苦澀的財務結果更爲複雜。最近的數據顯示，麥當勞的同店銷售額已經出現了12年來的首次下滑，同時麥當勞的銷售收入也連續五個月下跌，利潤也大幅縮水。這些財務數據表明，麥當勞的戰略、執行、領導等方面都出了問題，並不是行業性的不景氣。不僅僅是它的競爭對手日益火爆，就連原先從麥當勞剝離出來的Boston

In short, McDonald’s has been caught in a whirlwind of confusing brand identity paradoxes; a situation in which the company’s inadequate products, confusing messaging, and overly humble messengers have aggravated its sinking public image. Consider these five quandaries:

簡言之，麥當勞是被一種品牌認知悖論絆住了手腳：質量一般的產品，令人迷惑的信息，包括過於低姿態的外賣服務，都加劇了品牌形象的下滑。它目前主要有五大困境：

1. Food quality.The fast-food chain’s tries at healthier menu options did not work. Now people associate McDonald’s with the hamburgers with “pink slime filler” (ammonium hydroxide), which the company only discontinued in 2011 amid an expose by celebrity chef Jamie Oliver. How sad that the company’s burgers were once endorsed by leading nutritionists, such as Jean Mayer, as a healthy, rare treat! In June 2014, Consumer Reports cited McDonald’s as the purveyor of the worst-rated burger in the nation. Wendy’s now fares better on account of its low prices. Meanwhile, a double Shackburger, fries, and black & white shake would ring the bell with 2,000 calories, far more calories than what you’d get from similar items at McDonald’s.

（1）食品質量。麥當勞也嘗試過健康食譜，但沒有成功。人們現在經常把麥當勞和“粉紅肉渣”（含有可用於製造化肥和清潔劑的氫氧化銨）聯繫在一起。直到2011年知名大廚傑米o奧利弗公開爆料後，麥當勞才停止使用這種材質。想想麥當勞漢堡還曾被珍o梅爾等營養學家吹捧爲健康飲食，真是可笑可悲。2014年6月，《消費者報告》將麥當勞列入美國最差的漢堡供應商之列。同樣走低價路線的Wendy’s餐廳卻做得更好。與此同時，一份Shake Shack雙層漢堡，配上薯條和黑白奶昔，能夠提供2000卡路里的熱量，遠遠超過麥當勞的同類產品。

2. Food safety.Long revered for its food safety in Asia and China in particular, as well as the Middle East, McDonald’s and Yum Brands have lost credibility as they had to close a meat processing facility in 2014 for continuing food safety problems

（2）食品安全。過去，麥當勞的食品安全性在亞洲、中國和中東等地一直受到追捧，但是在2014年關掉一家肉品加工廠並不斷爆出食品安全問題後，麥當勞和百勝餐飲集團的信譽遭受重創。

3. Pricing policy.In its attempts to woo people away from the cheap dollar menu items and value meal offers toward high quality food, traditional customers were confused if price was the focus or not. Now it is Sonic Burger, not McDonald’s, that leads in simplicity and low prices.

（3）定價政策。麥當勞試圖引誘人們放棄廉價食品，轉而選擇它正在推出的高質量的快餐，這種做法使得傳統顧客不禁疑惑，價格到底還是不是麥當勞的營銷重點。現在，引領簡約和低價風的是Sonic Burger，而不再是麥當勞。

4. Standardization vs. customization.McDonald’s was long criticized for not allowing customers to “have it your way.” So they swung to the opposite end of the pendulum, offering so many varieties that customers were confused by more than 130 items while service speeds—a key ingredient for fast food—slowed dramatically.

（4）標準化VS定製化。麥當勞因長期不允許顧客“提出符合自己口味的製作要求”而飽受詬病。所以，他們轉向另一個極端。現在提供的多達130多種產品，讓顧客眼花繚亂。與此同時，作爲快餐業立身之本的服務速度卻顯著降低。

5. Supplier sourcing.Once a master of sourcing channels to the point that it appeared like a supply chain hegemon, McDonald’s was ambushed by slowdowns at the Port of Los Angeles, without any effective contingency plan. This left the fast-food chain French fry-less in key markets, like Japan.

（5）供應鏈管理。麥當勞曾經是無與倫比的供應鏈管理大師。但當原料在洛杉磯港發生延誤時，麥當勞並沒有制定沒有任何有效的應急計劃，最終導致一些關鍵市場（比如日本）連薯條都供應不上。

McDonald’s attempted to respond to the loss of business over these image, quality, positioning, and operations problems, with band aid solutions. Expanding the number of drive-thru windows, which accounts for 70% of its business, and the current weird campaign about “showing love” do not address the deeper problems in food quality, operations, and image. In fact, McDonalds’ schmaltzy Super Bowl “Pay it with Lovin’” campaign was met with ridicule and continues to backfire all the way to its planned expiration on Valentine’s Day.

爲了挽救因品牌形象、產品質量和定位及運營問題導致的業績損失，麥當勞也嘗試過一些權宜之計，比如增加汽車穿梭窗口的數量（這些窗口貢獻了其營業額的70%），並推出目前這款以“示愛”爲主題的怪異廣告，但所有這些都無法解決食品質量、運營和形象方面的深層問題。它在“超級碗”上打的“用愛付款”（Pay it with Lovin）廣告也遭到了無情的嘲笑，其副作用估計要延續到情人節，當這輪廣告按照計劃結束的時候。

Yet an even deeper problem had to do with the company’s succession drama. Indeed, McDonald’s has had five CEOs in a dozen years. The universally respected and experienced operator Don Thompson was not the board’s intended successor. In fact, he was their third choice candidate.

另一個更深層的問題是公司領導層的繼任人選。在過去十幾年，麥當勞已經更換了五位CEO。廣受尊敬、經驗豐富的唐o湯普森當年並不是董事會鐘意的人選，事實上他在候選名單裏只排在第三順位。

CEO Jim Skinner’s presumed successor, Mike Roberts, quit in 2006, reportedly complaining that Skinner was not clear enough about his intended succession schedule. Another initial favorite was Ralph Alvarez, who had to “retire” due to a sudden concern over his knees, at age 55, with a single day’s notice in 2009. The news shocked the company, as he left the company in the aftermath of a second wave of rumors over personal conduct problems. Published allegations of serial sexual misconduct with subordinates forced Alvarez’s exit when he was previously fired by CEO Jack Greenberg.

前CEO吉姆o斯金納看中的繼任者麥克o羅伯茨於2006年辭職，據報道，他曾報怨過斯金納對他的繼任安排不夠確定。另一個曾一度提上議事日程的人選是拉爾夫o阿爾瓦雷茲，但在2009年的一天，這位55歲的高管突然宣佈將於次日“退休”，理由是他突然發現自己的膝蓋有問題，這件事在公司上下引起了不小的震動，因爲當時關於他個人操守問題的議論再度傳開。針對他跟女下屬保持不正當性關係的公開指控，迫使阿爾瓦雷茲不得不在CEO傑克o格林伯克將其解僱之前離開公司。

Skinner himself was not expected to take the reins as CEO. He came into the job after two McDonald’s CEOs died young. James R. Cantalupo died of a heart attack, and his successor, Charles H. Bell, left with cancer. (Bell died in January 2005.)

斯金納自己也沒想到能坐上CEO的寶座。前兩位CEO都是英年早逝，詹姆斯oRo坎塔盧波死於心臟病發作，他的繼任者查爾斯oHo貝爾因罹患癌症離職。（貝爾於2005年1月去世。）

Cantalupo’s predecessor, Jack M. Greenberg, stepped down at age 60 after his successful introduction of a “made for you” campaign, with mildly customized products. The initiative was introduced at a time when McDonald’s suffered earnings declines for seven consecutive quarters, a similar situation to what Don Thompson encountered.

坎塔盧波的前任傑克oMo格林伯格在60歲時退休，退休前他剛剛成功推出了一款以“爲你製作”（made for you）爲主題的廣告，同時推出了一些輕度定製的產品。當時恰好也是麥當勞連續遭遇7個季度收益下跌之時，與唐o湯普森的處境有些相似。

Shareholders were initially unimpressed with Cantalupo and Bell’s appointments, as it suggested that the company was suffering from inbreeding. During Bell’s short time as CEO, McDonalds’ was being criticized for the health of its food. This was exacerbated by the release of the documentary film Super Size Me. Bell led efforts to add healthier choices to the McDonald’s menu, allowing parents to substitute juice and apple slices for fries and soft drinks. The “Supersize” option was also eliminated. During his brief tenure, Bell’s initiatives resulted in a successful turnaround, with the firm’s stock price rising 24% during his brief reign. Bell also introduced the McCafe and the strikingly tasty Newman’s Own coffee.

對坎塔盧波和貝爾的任命起初並沒有給股東留下好印象，因爲這些人事安排顯示，該公司出現了“近親繁殖”的問題。在貝爾短暫的CEO任期內，麥當勞因爲食品的健康性受到攻擊。特別是記錄片《超碼的我》上映更加劇了這種攻勢。在貝爾的領導下，麥當勞向食譜中加入了一些健康選擇，使父母們可以用果汁和蘋果片換掉孩子的薯條和軟飲料。爲了不刺激消費者，“超大號”這個概念也被從產品中剔除了。在短暫的任期內，貝爾的舉措成功地扭轉了局面，該公司的股價在其任期內上漲了24%。貝爾也推出了麥咖啡和味道相當不錯的Newman’s Own咖啡。

When Bell’s health declined, Jim Skinner stepped up. Skinner’s greatest accomplishment, the “Plan to Win” strategy, managed to reverse McDonalds’ falling profits. Skinner’s strategy focused on improving operations at existing locations instead pursuing the expansion models of the company’s past. The company hoped to achieve “faster, friendlier service; tastier food; a more appealing ambiance; better value; and sharper marketing.” Skinner and his team were able to increase McDonalds’ total sales, increasing from $50.1 billion in 2004 to $70.1 billion in 2008.

後來由於貝爾的健康狀況每況愈下，吉姆o斯金納接任了CEO一職。斯金納最大的成就——“制勝計劃”戰略，成功地扭轉了麥當勞的利潤下跌之勢。他的戰略將重點放在改善現有門店的運營上，而不是向過去一樣追求盲目擴張。麥當勞希望實現“更快、更友好的服務；更美味的食物；更有吸引力的氛圍；更好的價值；更犀利的營銷”目標。在斯金納及其團隊的帶領下，麥當勞的總銷量成功上漲，從2004年的501億美元增長至2008年的701億美元。

In fact, there were terrific stars positioned just below the surface through much of this period, such as CFO Matt Paull and Jeff Kindler, former general counsel and CEO of such McDonald’s units as Boston Market. (Kindler left McDonald’s to serve as general counsel and then CEO of Pfizer.) One of these stars in the McDonald’s pipeline is Steve Easterbrook, now the company’s newly anointed CEO. Easterbrook left the company to run other European food chains, giving him valuable outside perspective. In this sense, Easterbrook’s trajectory marks a similar path to former Coca-Cola CEO Neville Isdell.

事實上，就在這段時期裏，麥當勞管理層還隱藏着其他一些商業明星，比如CFO馬特o波爾，以及前法務總顧問、麥當勞子公司Boston Market的CEO傑夫o金德勒等。（金德勒後來從麥當勞離職，成爲輝瑞製藥公司的法律總顧問，後又擔任了該公司的CEO）。另一位是剛剛被任命爲CEO的史蒂夫o伊斯特布魯克。他曾一度離開公司去運營其他的歐洲快餐連鎖公司，這段經歷爲他提供了寶貴的外部視角。從這層意義上說，伊斯特布魯克的軌跡與可口可樂前CEO內維爾o艾斯戴爾很相似。

Easterbrook seems to be a superb choice—as a brand steward and past top operating executive in Europe, he led triumphant turnarounds and engineered the very successful introduction of organic, healthy foods in the core menu. He also introduced modern, attractive store designs and championed promising digital strategies.

伊斯特布魯克看起來的確是一個出色的選擇。他曾經擔任過麥當勞的品牌管家，在歐洲也是一個非常出色的運營高管，成功地領導過企業扭虧爲盈，並且向核心菜單上加入了非常成功的有機健康食品。他還引入了具有吸引力的現代化店面設計，而且支持各種具有前景的數字戰略。

So, while the company has made some honest mistakes, there is no governance failure at McDonald’s, beyond, perhaps the somewhat overly Chicago-oriented board. They have recognized the need to admit mistakes and change leadership without vilifying hardworking officials who swung at the pitch but missed. In addition, McDonald’s did not need media campaigns or proxy battle drama to make change. The McDonald’s board has invested in deep bench strength, giving the company prepared, credible leaders to take charge with little internal chaos and external confusion.

因此，儘管麥當勞犯下一些無心之過，但卻沒有什麼管理上的重大過失。而且他們已經認識到需要承認錯誤，對領導層進行改革，那些付出了艱苦努力的高管不應該被非難。另外，麥當勞也不必依賴媒體宣傳或代理權爭奪戰等戲碼來促進改革。在董事會的投資下，麥當勞已經具備了很深厚的“板凳實力”，使新一屆有準備、有實力的領導人能夠在儘量不造成內外混亂的情況下接管公司。（財富中文網）