聯合利華何以比肩谷歌蘋果，成爲全球最受歡迎僱主？

When LinkedIn unveiled its data-fueled list of “the most sought-after employers in the world” a few months ago, the companies at the very top of the heap came as no surprise: Google, followed by Apple.

幾個月前，LinkedIn基於大量統計資料，發佈了“全球最受歡迎僱主”榜單。排名最靠前的公司毫不令人意外：谷歌，隨後是蘋果。

But coming in at No. 3—ahead of Microsoft and Facebook—was a very different breed of business: consumer-products giant Unilever, whose Dutch roots stretch back more than 140 years.

但在微軟和Facebook之上，高居第三位的卻是一個完全不同類型的公司：日用消費品巨頭聯合利華，這家創建於荷蘭的公司的歷史可以追溯到140多年前。

How did that happen? CEO Paul Polman is convinced that Unilever, which draws about 2 million job applicants annually, has turned into a magnet for recruiting and retaining workers because it is considered a place of purpose.

聯合利華憑什麼？該公司首席執行官保羅o波爾曼認爲，每年吸引約200萬求職者的聯合利華，彷彿就像一塊吸引和留住員工的磁鐵，因爲這裏被認爲是一家目標明確的公司。

With an original vision to “make cleanliness commonplace,” Unilever has a long of history of thinking broadly about its mission. “It’s in the DNA of the company,” Polman says. But since taking the helm in 2009, he has more closely tied Unilever’s core strategy to having a positive impact on the environment and public health—and that, Polman says, is generating “enormous opportunities.”

聯合利華起初的願景是“使潔淨成爲尋常之事”，他們有着深入思考公司使命的悠久歷史。波爾曼表示：“這是我們公司的特色。”但自從2009年接掌這家公司後，他就改變了聯合利華的核心戰略，致力於推動公司對環境和公共衛生產生更加積極的影響。波爾曼表示，這種戰略創造了“巨大的機遇”。

Not long ago, Polman notes, the keeper of Dove, Lifebuoy, Pond’s, Lipton, Ben & Jerry’s, Hellmann’s, Knorr, and hundreds of other brands was “not on the radar screen in the U.S.” Last year, the company saw a 65% rise in job applications from American college students compared to 2013.

波爾曼指出，不久前，這家坐擁多芬、衛寶、旁氏、立頓、Ben & Jerry’s、Hellmann’s、家樂以及其他數百個品牌的公司仍“不在美國大衆的視線之內。”然而到了2014年，聯合利華收到的美國大學生求職申請數量比前一年提高了65%。

Meanwhile, Unilever’s employee engagement scores have climbed 12% since Polman started as CEO, according to the company. “If you peel the onion on that, it really is the pride people have,” Polman says. Putting purpose at the center of everything the corporation does is “incredibly motivating for our employees.”

與此同時，聯合利華的數據顯示，自從波爾曼擔任首席執行官起，公司員工的敬業度評分提高了12%。波爾曼說：“就其實質而言，這說明員工們真的擁有強烈的自豪感。”公司將目標置於一切事物的最中心，這“極大地激勵了我們的員工。”

This is especially the case for members of the Millennial generation, who, in the words of a study by consulting firm PwC, are eager “to contribute something to the world and … want to be proud of their employer.” Says Polman: If members of Gen Y don’t believe in what you’re doing, “they don’t want to work with you.”

對於80後和90後員工而言，情況尤其如此。用普華永道諮詢公司一份研究報告中的話來說，這些年輕人迫切地“想要爲世界做點什麼……想要以他們的公司爲傲。”波爾曼表示：如果80後和90後不認可你的做法，“他們就不想與你共事。”

None of this is shocking. “Humans, by their nature, seek purpose—to make a contribution and to be part of a cause greater and more enduring than themselves,” writes Daniel Pink in Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. Abraham Maslow, Douglas McGregor, Frederick Herzberg, Peter Drucker, and other great management thinkers said similar things more than half a century ago.

這一切都並不令人震驚。丹尼爾o平克在《驅動力：有關激勵的驚人真相》一書中指出：“追求目標——投身於比他們自身更偉大、更持久的事業，併成爲其中的一部分——是人類的天性。” 在半個多世紀之前，亞伯拉罕o馬斯洛、道格拉斯o麥格雷戈、弗雷德裏克o赫茨伯格和彼得o德魯克等偉大的管理學先哲也都有過類似的說法。

So, why don’t more companies behave the way Unilever does?

那麼，爲什麼沒有更多公司仿效聯合利華的做法呢？

For one, many executives underestimate how difficult it is to build this kind of culture. That doesn’t mean every company needs to make grand pronouncements like Unilever has done. (Case in point: Polman has described his company as “the world’s biggest NGO.”) Having purpose simply requires being clear about how you’re delivering value to your customers while taking responsibility for whomever and whatever you touch.

原因之一在於，許多高管低估了建立這種文化的難度。這並不意味着所有公司都要像聯合利華那樣發佈宏偉的宣言。（一個恰當的例子是，波爾曼曾把聯合利華描述爲“全球最大的非營利性組織”。）擁有目標，只是要求公司清楚該如何把自己的價值觀傳達給顧客，併爲一切接觸的人和事物負責。

The problem is, many companies are fuzzy about their mission. And all too often, “corporate social responsibility” amounts to nothing more than trotting out a few empty slogans, cutting some checks for charity, holding a day of service for employees, or setting up a CSR department that has no actual input into major decisions.

問題在於，許多公司沒有搞清他們的使命。太多情況下，“企業社會責任”的意義只是喊幾句空洞口號，在賬上撥點錢用於慈善，給員工組織一天的公益活動，或是建立一個無法對重大決策施加實質性影響的企業社會責任部門。

Unilever UN 1.35% , by contrast, rigorously measures and reports its progress against three ambitious goals it aims to reach by 2020: helping more than a billion people across the globe improve their health and well-being; halving the environmental footprint of its products; and sourcing 100% of its agricultural raw materials sustainably while enhancing the livelihoods of those working across its supply chain.

而聯合利華正好相反，該公司嚴格地測算和報告他們準備在2020年達成的三個雄心勃勃的目標的進展情況：幫助全球10億以上的人口提高健康和幸福水平；將公司產品對環境的負面影響減半；農業原材料要具有100%的可持續性，同時提高供應鏈工人的生活水平。

What’s more, the company has committed to doing all this while doubling the size of its business, to about $100 billion. (Unilever derives nearly 60% of its sales from emerging markets.)

此外，該公司還決心在做到這一切的同時，將業務規模翻番，達到1,000億美元。（聯合利華的近六成銷售額來自新興市場。）

On the ground, these objectives manifest themselves in many ways, like the recent launch of the Toilet Board Coalition, a cross-sector group that is trying to find scalable, market-based solutions to what it calls “the sanitation crisis.” Could this Unilever-led effort make a difference in the lives of the 2.5 billion people around the world who lack access to a safe, clean toilet? Quite possibly. Could it also help Unilever sell more bottles of Domestos, its bathroom germ killer? Definitely.

在實際執行中，這些目標從許多角度證明了自己的價值。比如最近成立的廁所董事會聯盟。這是一個跨部門的組織，旨在尋找可擴展且基於市場的方法來解決所謂的“衛生危機”。全球目前還有多達25億人缺乏安全且潔淨的廁所，這場由聯合利華發起的行動究竟能否他們的生活？很有可能。這項行動能否幫助聯合利華賣出更多殺滅衛生間細菌的產品“家淨”呢？絕對如此。

Using the same logic, Unilever is trying to position Knorr bouillon as a weapon to combat food insecurity; Lifebuoy, a vehicle to promote good hygiene.

秉持同樣的邏輯，聯合利華試圖將家樂的肉汁清湯作爲與食品安全問題鬥爭的武器，利用抗菌品牌衛寶來宣傳良好的個人衛生習慣。

Making this tangible for those on the front lines isn’t easy. So, in late 2013, Unilever launched an online “Social Impact Hub” for its 174,000 employees to learn more about its myriad initiatives in this area. Unilever has also augmented its training programs so that workers at all levels can understand the company’s commitment to sustainability and how their own jobs fit in.

要讓第一線的工人感受到這一切並不容易。所以在2013年底，聯合利華爲17.4萬名員工建立了在線“社會影響中心”，讓他們認識到公司在該領域的許多舉措。聯合利華還增加了培訓項目，讓所有級別的員工都能理解公司在可持續發展領域的投入，以及他們自身的工作如何促進這項目標的實現。

Being purpose-driven also demands that companies have a clear long-term vision. And that’s tough when investors are pushing executives to set their sights not much further out than the current quarter’s earnings or the day’s stock price. “We’ve created a rat race toward short-termism,” Polman says.

要用目的驅動員工，公司還得有明確的長期願景。在當今時代，投資者總是敦促公司高管專注於當前季度的收益狀況或當日股價而不要看得太遠，所以許多公司很難做到這一點。波爾曼表示：“我們一直在與短期主義激烈地鬥爭。”

Standing up to this myopic mindset takes guts. Under Polman, Unilever has stopped reporting its quarterly profits, and it resists giving earnings guidance to financial analysts. His own compensation is tied to how well the company is tracking against its long-range sustainability metrics.

抗拒這種短視的思維模式需要勇氣。在波爾曼的領導下，聯合利華不再發布季度盈利報告，並拒絕向金融分析師提供業績預期。而波爾曼自己的薪酬也與公司執行長期可持續計劃的效果相掛鉤。

No organization is perfect, and Unilever’s outspokenness on social issues has made it a juicy target for critics; any perceived stumble is quickly called out.

沒有哪家公司是完美的。聯合利華討論社會問題的直白方式，也讓該公司成爲批評家樂於抨擊的目標，任何被認爲犯錯的地方都會被迅速指出。

But Polman is relentless about the need for business to “serve society, rather than take from it”—and his message appears to be getting through. With it comes the “satisfaction of working for a company that generally tries to lead and do the right thing,” as one Unilever employee commented on Glassdoor.

但波爾曼依然在毫不鬆懈地遵循“服務社會，而不是向社會索取”的理念，這種訊息似乎已經得到理解。一名聯合利華的員工在職業社區Classdoor上如此評論：“在這樣一家總是試圖引領潮流並且做正確事情的公司中工作，我感到很滿意。”

That may sound a bit touchy feely. But in an era in which cultivating talent is increasingly essential, building a deep and authentic sense of purpose could be a company’s ultimate competitive advantage.

這聽起來也許有點肉麻。但在一個培養人才日益重要的時代，能建立深切而真實的目標感，也許是一家公司最具競爭力的優勢。（財富中文網）