瞄準企業治理監管機構 給人脈資源估值

When Boardex started mapping the professional relationships between prominent business people, the London-based company was targeting corporate governance watchdogs as clients.

當Boardex開始爲商界精英間的相互關係建立圖譜時，這家總部駐倫敦的企業把目標客戶羣瞄準了企業治理監管機構。

James Daly, chief executive, thought its database would be used to track connections between executives and board members to guard against cronyism in the wake of Enron’s 2001 collapse.

該公司首席執行官詹姆斯•戴利(James Daly)認爲，該公司的數據庫可以用來跟蹤高管和董事會成員間的人際關係，旨在防止在2001年安然破產後公司治理中的任人唯親現象。

The product eventually took off – but not in the way Boardex intended. Corporate governance watchdogs were interested, “but they didn’t have the budget to spend on it”.

最終，該產品向市場推出了，不過其反響卻出乎Bordex意料。公司治理監管機構對這種產品挺感興趣，“不過他們沒有用於該產品的預算”。

Instead, the database was picked up by bankers and lawyers as a way of identifying which employees were best placed to win new business.

相反，使用該數據庫的是些銀行家和律師，他們用這個數據庫來發掘那些最能拉來新業務的員工。

Mr Daly says clients are paying up to $1m a year to use the data. “Two years ago it started to become a trend. Companies started looking at the relationships their employees had and recognised it as a form of capital.”

戴利表示，客戶如今每年使用這些數據的費用高達1百萬美元。“兩年前，這麼做開始成爲一種潮流。企業開始審視員工擁有的關係網，並把這視爲一種資本。”

Technology such as Boardex’s is indeed making it easier to put a value on the adage “it is not what you know, it is who you know”, both for high-level employees and rank-and-file workers.

“重要的不在於你知道什麼，而在於你認識誰。”Boardex等公司的技術確實令這句諺語的價值體現得更加淋漓盡致——對高層員工和一般員工來說這句話都同樣成立。

In recent years, for instance, companies such as Klout, Kred and Peer­Index have emerged, promising to measure the level of influence that an individual has onLine.

比如，最近幾年Klout、Kred和PeerIndex這類公司應運而生，它們承諾能量化評價個人在網上的影響力水平。

Factors such as how many followers someone has on Twitter and how influential those followers are can be condensed into a single number by Klout. Accenture, the consultant, is among those using it as part of its recruitment process in the US.

某人在Twitter上擁有多少粉絲，粉絲的影響力如何，這些因素都可以被Klout濃縮爲一個數字。在美國，對這一數字的考察被諮詢公司埃森哲(Accenture)等公司納入了其招聘流程。

Profiles on the LinkedIn networking service are another guide to an individual’s connectedness, publicly listing how many contacts someone has (although it stops counting at 500).

領英(LinkedIn)網絡服務中提供的背景資料則是另一個關於個人人脈關係的指南，因爲其中公開列出了用戶本人的聯絡人數目（儘管這一數字到了500之後就不再增加）。

But to what extent should employers track such indicators when they hire, promote and manage staff?

不過，僱主在僱傭、提升和管理員工時，到底應該在多大程度上參考這類指標呢？

Michael Wright, head of talent acquisition for the Asia Pacific region for Group M, an advertising company, says that, while he would never hire someone solely on the basis of their Klout score or LinkedIn profile, it can be a useful filter for weeding out candidates.

羣邑集團(Group M)是一家廣告公司，該公司亞太區人才招聘主管邁克爾•賴特(Michael Wright)表示，儘管他不會把Klout分數或領英的背景資料當做聘用某人的唯一標準，不過這些材料可以用來過濾部分候選人。

“If someone has just four connections on LinkedIn and they haven’t bothered to upload a photo, it is a warning sign. They would be off our longlist of candidates for a role,” he says.

他說：“如果某個人在領英上只有四個朋友，他甚至懶得上傳一張照片，這是一個值得警惕的信號。這樣的人會從我們的初步候選人名單上剔除。”

“If someone is looking to relocate from Europe to Asia and a quick scan through their contacts shows they have no connections in Asia, that would count against them as this is a relationship business,” he adds.

他補充說：“如果某人打算從歐洲搬到亞洲，快速瀏覽一下他的聯絡人信息，發現他在亞洲沒有認識的人，那將對他很不利，因爲我們做的是基於人脈關係的業務。”

Paul Guely, managing partner at Arma Partners, a corporate finance advisory firm, says technical tools can only be a small part of the process.

Arma Partners管理合夥人保羅•蓋利(Paul Guely)表示，技術工具在整個招聘過程中可能只佔一小部分。Arma Partners是一家企業融資顧問公司。

He says: “I am a member of a number of social networks and I do get value from them in terms of seeing who knows who. But when I want to understand what “know” means – whether someone trusts this person, how much business they really do together – I have not yet found a substitute for the off-the-record phone call to someone who knows them.”

他說：“我是幾個社交網絡的會員，從瞭解誰認識誰這方面來說，我確實從這些社交網絡獲得了有價值的信息。不過，如果我想弄清楚‘認識’到底是什麼意思——比如說某人是否信任這個人，他們實際上會合作開展的業務有多少——我發現什麼也不如私下給認識他的人打電話更管用。”

Russell Reynolds, an executive search firm, is one of the more than 250 companies that use Boardex’s software. Tim Cook, co-leader of its information officers practice, finds the software useful for looking at a candidate’s job history but says it can never be a complete substitute for a recruiter’s own market insight.

羅盛諮詢(Russell Reynolds)是一家高管獵頭公司，該公司是使用Boardex軟件的250多家公司之一。蒂姆•庫克(Tim Cook)是該公司信息官員部門的聯合主管，他認爲該軟件對於審查求職者的就業史很有用，不過他還表示，該軟件永遠不能完全代替招聘者自身對市場的洞察力。

“Knowing who is connected to who is interesting, but knowing who has excelled in their role and how they have done it is the insight on which we act,” he says.

他說：“瞭解誰認識誰很有趣，不過了解誰在自己的崗位上表現出色以及他是如何辦到的，纔是我們想要的參考依據。”

The Boardex database maps relationships between more than 600,000 business people. If a bank wants to pitch to a company for work – to Intel, say – the software can indicate which of its employees are closest to Intel senior management.

Boardex的數據庫記載了逾60萬名商界人士間的相互關係。如果一家銀行因工作關係有求於一家企業——比如說英特爾(Intel)——該軟件能顯示出哪位員工最接近英特爾資深管理層。

The relationships are ranked by strength, “so that having met someone once at a cocktail party does not have the same value as having served on a board with them for 10 years,” Mr Daly says.

戴利表示，所有關係都根據關係的強弱進行了排名，“這樣，那種曾在雞尾酒會上見過某人的‘關係’，與同某人在一個董事會共事10年的‘關係’會得到不同的評價”。

The most valuable information is not so much the direct connections, which might be known through other means, but the second-degree ones, which are more difficult to discover.

最有價值的信息並不總是那種直接往來——通過其他手段也能瞭解到直接往來方面的信息，而是間接往來。相比之下，這種間接往來更難發現。

The system can also show a company areas where it lacks connections, as well as the impact a particular employee’s departure might have.

該系統還能顯示出一家企業在哪個領域中缺乏人脈關係，以及某位特定員工離職可能造成的影響。

Mr Daly goes so far as to claim that its algorithms could put an overall financial value on a company’s relationships that would merit being placed on its balance sheet alongside other intangible assets. He believes such a number would be at least as valid as an estimate of goodwill – a notoriously finger-in-the-air asset created in takeovers.

到目前爲止，戴利始終聲稱該系統的算法能對公司擁有的人脈關係進行總體財務估值，這一估值或許可以和其他無形資產一同列入公司的資產負債表中。他相信這種估值至少和那種對商譽的估值一樣有效——商譽是在併購交易中創造的、衆所周知不太可靠的一種資產。

But even as companies are offered new ways to value their employees’ relationships, there is concern in some cases over who owns those networks. Put bluntly: are your business contacts your own or the company’s?

不過，在企業獲得了評價員工人際關係新途徑的同時，有時候人們會擔心這類人脈關係的歸屬權問題。簡單說：你的商業聯絡人歸私人所有還是歸企業所有？

Mr Daly talks of a “healthy tension” between individuals and their employers on this point. This is by no means entirely new. The loss of valuable connections has always been a threat to any relationship-based business, such as investment banking.

在這個問題上，戴利提到個人和僱主間存在的一種“健康的張力”。這種說法絕不是戴利的發明創造。對於任何基於人際關係的業務（比如投資銀行業務）來說，有價值人脈關係的流失一直是一大威脅。

The tension is also creeping into the world of social media, however; courts have yet to work out a clear position on who owns what online when an employee leaves (see box).

不過，這種張力也逐漸滲透到了社交媒體中。到目前爲止，對於員工離職時網上人脈關係的歸屬權，法院還無法得出明確結論。

Donna Ballman, an employment lawyer and author of the book Stand Up For Yourself Without Getting Fired, says that as “relationship capital” becomes more important, employment contracts will need to start including more clauses on ownership of online networks.

《如何維權而不失業》(Stand Up For Yourself Without Getting Fired)一書的作者、就業律師唐娜•鮑爾曼(Donna Ballman)表示，隨着“關係資本”變得越來越重要，勞動合同中需要開始加入更多關於在線人脈網絡歸屬權的條款。

“This issue continues to be a hot topic in employment law. The courts frequently look to what the parties agreed in any contracts. I see provisions dealing with social media in employment agreements, confidentiality agreements, intellectual property agreements and non-solicitation agreements,” she says.

她表示：“這個問題仍舊是勞動法的熱門話題。法院往往會留心雙方在合同中達成的條款。我曾在勞動合同、保密協議、知識產權協議和競業禁止協議中見到過與社交媒體有關的條款。”

Even so, it remains unclear whether such contracts related to social media can be enforced. If any of the contacts are deemed to be in the public domain, for example, ownership clauses would not apply.

即便如此，目前仍不清楚這種與社交媒體有關的合同能否得到執行。比如，任何被視爲屬於公共領域的聯絡人，均不適用有關歸屬權的條款。

So how worried should you be if your own Klout score is less than stellar and you do not have a contact who knows Larry Ellison and can therefore make you stand out on the Board­ex database?

那麼，如果你的Klout得分不夠高，你的聯絡人裏也沒人認識拉里•埃裏森(Larry Ellison)，於是你無法從Boardex數據庫中脫穎而出，你該不該爲此擔憂呢？

“It is just one tool in a very big toolbox,” says Mr Wright, of Group M. “The final decision on hiring needs human assessment. But it will be used more and more. I have a friend who says you are the product of the people you keep company with and I think there is some truth in that.”

羣邑集團的賴特表示：“這只是超多評估工具中的一個而已。是否聘用投資者的最終決定需要經過人力評估。不過這套工具的使用頻率會越來越高。我有位朋友曾說，看一個人跟哪些人來往，就知道他是什麼樣的人。我認爲這話有些道理。”