全球著名CEO們最愛讀的書籍

全球著名CEO們最愛讀的書籍

CEO是經濟圈內最忙的一群人，但這並不意味著他們就沒時間看書(電子書)。他們都愛看哪些書呢？有些喜歡閱讀商業書籍，從中汲取靈感﹔也有人偏愛小說或科幻故事。 　

　　可口可樂CEO穆泰康 《貨幣的上升：世界金融史》　　前微軟CEO比爾﹒蓋茨(Bill Gates) 《麥田守望者》

　　溫弗瑞電視網絡CEO奧普拉﹒溫弗瑞(Oprah Winfrey) 《殺死一衹知更鳥(50周年紀念版)》

　　蘋果CEO蒂姆﹒庫克(Tim Cook) 《與時間競爭》

　　1.亞馬遜CEO傑夫﹒貝佐斯(Jeff Bezos)

　　美國最大虛擬書店亞馬遜及Kindle電子書創始人傑夫﹒貝佐斯接受FastCompany網站采訪時，稱其一般每月購買十本書。他最愛的兩本書是Jim Collins和Jerry Porras所著的商業書《基業長青》(Built to Last: Successful Habits of Visionary Companies)以及石黑一雄(Kazuo Ishiguro)所寫的小說《長日將盡》(The Remains of the Day)。

　　09年與新聞週刊的一次采訪中，貝佐斯曾說道：“《長日將盡》是我最喜歡的書之一。如果妳去讀一讀，妳會發現自己會情不自禁的停下來想想。我剛花了十小時的時間去體現書中他人的生活，從中我體會到生活與悔恨。”

　　2.Zappos網站CEO謝家華(Tony Hsieh )

　　鞋類服飾電子銷售網站Zappos.com的CEO謝家華在2010年的時候曾告訴《今日美國》，其最愛書籍之一便是由Dave Logan,John King和Halee Fischer-Wright合著的《組群領導：借助自然群體打造一支有活力的團隊》( Tribal Leadership: Leveraging Natural Groups to Build a Thriving Organization)。

　　他說道：“《組群領導》這本書談到了我們出於本能所正在做的這些事，而且還為所有公司將公司文化推向更高水準提供了一個很好的框架。”他還提到其他諸如Chip Conley寫的《高峰： 如何創造一流業績並自我管理公司》(Peak: How Great Companies Get Their Mojo from Maslow)以及Jonathan Haidt所寫的《幸福假設：在古代智慧中尋找現代真理》(The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom)等書籍。

　　3.可口可樂CEO穆泰康(Muhtar Kent)

　　Kent最近告訴Fox財經新聞說他最喜歡的一本書是Niall Ferguson寫的《貨幣的上升：世界金融史》(The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World)。這是本紀實文學，記錄金融系統的演變。他說道：“我喜歡有關經濟觀察類的書籍。這是最好的一本。”

　　4.AT&T 公司CEO Randall Stephenson

　　Stephenson告訴Scouting Magazine雜誌，他最愛的書是19世紀俄國小說家陀思妥耶夫斯基(Fyodor Dostoyevsky)的最後一本小說《卡拉馬佐夫兄弟》(The Brothers Karamazov)。

　　5.前微軟CEO比爾﹒蓋茨(Bill Gates)

　　蓋茨多次將J.D。塞林格的《麥田守望者》列為自己最愛的小說。在一次與非盈利組織“成就協會”的采訪中，他說道：“我直到13歲時才開始讀《麥田守望者》，從那時開始我就一直說這是我最愛的一本書。”

　　“這本書充滿睿智。它承認年輕人有些迷茫，但對於事情也會變得很睿智，而且能看到成年人所看不到的東西。所以我一直很喜歡這本書。”

　　6.溫弗瑞電視網絡CEO奧普拉﹒溫弗瑞(Oprah Winfrey)

　　溫弗瑞曾說，哈珀﹒李(Harper Lee)所寫的《殺死一衹知更鳥(50周年紀念版)》是她最愛的書。瑪麗﹒麥克唐納﹒墨菲(Mary McDonagh Murphy)甚至在她為這本書撰寫的一本紀實小說中專門提到了溫弗瑞。

　　溫弗瑞在《巴爾的摩太陽報》的報導中曾說道：“我記得以前讀這本書，然後去學校上課就一個勁不停的討論書中的故事。我大概是在八、九年級讀的，然後一直在給其他同學推薦這本書。所以說，現在我主持個讀書會也是很合情理的，因為我可能從這本書開始就學會給別人推薦了。”

　　7.巴克萊銀行(Barclays)CEO Bob Diamond

　　Diamond 告訴Fox財經新聞說，他最愛的一本書是Anthony Seldon和Guy Lodge所寫的《Brown at 10》。這是本紀實小說，寫的是戈登﹒布朗作為英國首相時候的故事。Diamond稱這段時間是戰後最動蕩的年代。

　　8.摩根大通CEO詹姆斯﹒迪蒙(Jamie Dimon)

　　去年迪蒙給他的實習生們發了一份清單，上面是他最喜歡的25本書。大部分是經濟類和歷史類的著作。這些書包括Thomas Friedman寫的《世界是平的》(The World is Flat)、Gary Wills的《葛底斯堡的林肯：重塑美國的話語》以及Bill Bryson所寫的《萬物簡史》(A Short History of Nearly Everything)。

　　9.Facebook CEO 馬克﹒紮克伯格(Mark Zuckerberg)

　　據2010年紐約客(New Yorker)的一篇人物介紹，紮克伯格在其個人臉譜頁面上曾寫著奧森﹒斯科特﹒卡德(Orson Scott Card)成長科幻小說《安德的遊戲》(Ender\'s Game)，而紮克伯格在隨後的文章中說這並不是他最愛的一本書，而是更喜歡經典希臘小說維吉爾的《埃涅阿斯記》 。

　　10.摩根士丹利CEO傑姆斯﹒戈爾曼(James Gorman)

　　戈爾曼告訴彭博市場雜誌，他平時閒暇時間最愛做的事情之一就是讀約翰﹒勒卡雷(John le Carr　)的間諜小說。勒卡雷的作品有《鍋匠，裁縫，士兵，間諜》(Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy)以及《柏林諜影》(The Spy Who Came in From the Cold)。

　　11.埃克森美孚(ExxonMobil)CEO雷克斯﹒蒂爾納森(Rex Tillerson)

　　蒂爾納森對Scouting Magazine雜誌稱，其最愛的書是艾茵﹒蘭德(Ayn Rand )所著的《聳肩的阿特拉斯》(Atlas Shrugged)。據美國國會圖書館和每月讀書會共同開展的一項調查顯示，這本書是對美國的影響力僅次於《聖經》。

　　12.日產(Nissan)CEO卡洛斯﹒戈恩(Carlos.Ghosn)

　　戈恩對Fox財經新聞稱，他最愛的一本書是本哈德﹒施林克(Bernhard_Schlink)的《朗讀者》(The Reader)。講述的是二戰後，德國的一位少年和大他兩倍的一位中年女子的忘年戀。戈恩說道：“是我兒子給我看的，我很喜歡。”

　　13.通用磨坊CEO肯﹒鮑威爾(Ken Powell)

　　據Fox財經新聞，鮑威爾說他喜歡喬納森﹒弗蘭岑(Jonathan Franzen)寫的所有書。弗蘭岑的作品有《自由》(Freedom: A Novel)和《糾正》(The Corrections)等。“他是個了不起的作家。”鮑威爾說道。

　　14.美國投資公司Cantor Fitzgerald CEO霍華德？ 魯特尼克(Howard Lutnick)

　　據與Fox財經新聞的一次采訪，魯特尼克最喜愛的書是普利策獎得主記者J.R. Moehringer所寫的《溫柔酒吧：回憶錄》(The Tender Bar: A Memoir)。“這是一個發生在妳絕對想不到的地方的故事，非常令人振奮。”

　　15.IMAX CEO 理查﹒葛爾方(Richard Gelfond)

　　據Fox財經新聞，葛爾方最愛的書是《生命》(滾石音樂家Keith Richards的自傳)。“那傢伙有著別人所沒有的極為不拘一格的有趣生活。”

　　16.彭博公司前CEO 邁克爾﹒布隆伯格(Michael Bloomberg)

　　據紐約時報最近一篇關於布隆伯格拜訪布朗克斯區一所中學英語課的文章，布隆伯格和根士丹利CEO傑姆斯﹒戈爾曼一樣，也是約翰﹒勒卡雷(John le Carr　)間諜小說的粉絲。對勒卡雷的《榮譽學生》(The Honourable Schoolboy)，布隆伯格說：“它有600頁，大部分是在描寫，幾乎沒有什麼事情發生。但它卻引人入勝。”

　　17.伯克希爾哈撒韋(Berkshire-Hathaway)CEO沃倫﹒巴菲特(Warren Buffett)

　　在伯克希爾哈撒韋2003年年報中，巴菲特向投資者們推薦了一些自己鐘愛的書目。像瑪吉。馬哈爾(Maggie Mahar) 的《大牛市》(Bull！)、本瑟尼？麥克裏恩和彼得﹒艾爾金德寫的《房間裏最聰明的人： 安然公司是怎樣破產的》(The Smartest Guys in the Room: The Amazing Rise and Scandalous Fall of Enron)以及羅伯特﹒魯賓和雅各﹒韋斯伯格所著的《在不確定的世界：從華爾街到華盛頓的艱難選擇》(In an Uncertain World: Tough Choices from Wall Street to Washington)。

　　18.特朗普地產CEO唐納德﹒特朗普(Donald Trump)

　　據ShortList Magazine 雜誌，特朗普將諾曼﹒文森特﹒皮爾的《正面思考的力量》列為自己最喜歡的書。這本書在特朗普欠了幾十億美元外債，處於人生最低谷的時候激勵了他。

　　他曾對《今日心理學》說：“我父親是諾曼﹒文森特﹒皮爾的朋友，我也讀了皮爾最出名的著作《正面思考的力量》。我是個謹慎的樂觀主義者，但也十分相信保持正面積極有著強大力量。我認為這很有用。我不想有任何的負面想法，即使情況可能不妙。這是個很好的經驗教訓，因為這讓我成功勝利過。這是個不錯的選擇。”

　　19.Oracle公司(甲骨文)CEO 拉裏﹒埃裏森(Larry Ellision)

　　埃裏森對《成就》說，他喜歡很多書。但他最近剛讀完溫森特。克羅寧撰寫的《拿破侖傳》，而且非常喜歡。“讀拿破侖有趣有好幾個原因：能看到一個出生平庸的人一生能有何作為以及歷史是如何完全扭曲事實的。”

　　20.蘋果CEO蒂姆﹒庫克(Tim Cook)

　　蒂姆﹒庫克是喬治？斯托克所著的《與時間競爭》的忠實粉絲。這本書說的是如何使用供應鏈來取得戰略優勢。事實上，他還會給同事們分發這本書。

　　21.維珍航空(Virgin)CEO 理查﹒布蘭森(Richard Branson)

　　布蘭森在他寫的書Screw It, Let\'s Do It 裏寫道，他最愛的書是安東尼﹒比弗寫的《斯大林格勒》和旅英華裔作家張戎的《野天鵝》。

　　納爾遜﹒曼德拉的《漫漫自由路》(Long Walk to Freedom)也曾給他很大的靈感和啟發。小時候，他最喜歡的書是《燕子和鸚鵡》(Swallows and Amazons)。他說那是一本不錯的兒童冒險故事書。

Deja 2011 Vu Part 2: Goldman Sees Another US Downgrade In 2013

Two of the three major credit ratings agencies have recently affirmed their outlook on the US sovereign credit rating, and all three continue to hold a negative outlook on the rating. In Goldman's view there is little likelihood that additional ratings actions will be taken this year, but the possibility of a ratings change is another risk posed by the "fiscal cliff," debt limit, and related debate over medium-term fiscal reforms that looks likely in 2013.


Alec Phillips, Goldman Sachs; US Daily: Q&A on the US Sovereign Debt Rating
On June 11, Fitch Ratings affirmed the US sovereign credit rating at AAA and continued its negative outlook. This comes roughly one month after Standard and Poor’s (S&P) affirmed its AA+ rating, also with a negative outlook. However, all three rating agencies look likely to reassess the rating over the next year or so. In light of the recent announcements and upcoming fiscal events that could influence the rating, Goldman Sachs Economics team provides some updated thoughts on the intersection of fiscal policy and the US sovereign rating, in Q&A form.

Q: Is the US federal government likely to be downgraded this year?
A: Probably not. As noted above two of the rating agencies just affirmed their rating, and it is unlikely they would do so if a change were likely in the near future. Moody's has not affirmed its rating as recently, but its most recent commentary published in May did not imply a change in the rating was likely in the near term. Moreover, it is very unlikely that there will be any significant fiscal policy developments until the end of the year, when Congress may address the "fiscal cliff." With few policy developments to react to ahead of year-end but plenty to react to after that, a near-term rating change seems unlikely.

Q: When will the risk of a downgrade reemerge?
A: In 2013. All three of the major ratings agencies have indicated they will reassess their rating over the next year or so. Moody's most recently indicated that any outlook change would most likely not occur until "sometime in 2013," while Fitch stated in their recent rating affirmation that they would resolve the negative outlook on the US rating in the later half of 2013. S&P has not given a specific guidance on timing, saying only that their negative outlook reflects "risks that could build to the point of leading us to lower our AA+ long-term rating by 2014."

Q: What would the catalyst be for a downgrade, if one were to occur?
A: There are several possibilities, but the most likely is failure to reach any type of medium-term fiscal agreement. In addition to the guidance given by the rating agencies that they are likely to reassess the US rating next year, all three of the major rating agencies indicate that the primary means the US has of maintaining its current rating is to agree on a deficit reduction plan that would stabilize the debt to GDP ratio by the middle of the decade. Just as importantly, the agencies also appear to be in agreement that failure to agree on such a plan over the next year would put pressure on the rating, potentially leading to a downgrade next year. There are three obvious events we anticipate that could prompt ratings action (either positive or negative):

1. The fiscal cliff. Decisions at year end choices could lead to ratings pressure in 2013; how Congress deals with the "sequester" appears to be the most important consideration (see below).
2. The debt limit. We currently expect the Treasury to reach the statutory limit late in 2012, and we expect the limit to constrain Treasury financing ability unless Congress acts by February 2013. The political debate surrounding the debt limit increase in 2011 was the proximate cause of S&P's downgrade, along with disappointment at the amount of deficit reduction agreed to in the Budget Control Act (BCA). The upcoming debate could be at least as difficult to resolve, though this depends in part on the election.
3. Failure to enact a medium-term fiscal agreement. Policymakers in both political parties anticipate a broad fiscal debate in 2013, partly as a means of addressing the two items just noted. More importantly (from a ratings perspective) the rating agencies appear to expect an agreement next year that will produce a substantial improvement in the debt/GDP ratio over the medium term compared to projections that assume current policy will be extended. While the fiscal cliff and debt limit have a greater potential for near-term market and economic dislocation and have thus received more focus among market participants lately, we expect that the potential agreement (or lack thereof) on broader fiscal issues in 2013 will be the most important event for the US sovereign rating.

Q: How do the ratings agencies view the “fiscal cliff”?
A: It varies, but in general they assume most of the expiring policies will be extended. Fitch assumes a decline in the federal budget deficit of 1.5% of GDP in 2013 over 2012, which appears to reflect mainly cyclical improvement. Fitch explicitly assumes extension of the payroll tax cut, emergency unemployment benefits, and the 2001/2003 tax cuts. S&P assumes that the 2001/2003 tax cuts remain in place indefinitely but that the spending caps under the BCA are maintained and the additional spending cuts scheduled to take place at year end under the "sequester" are allowed to take effect. Moody's appears to have a less specific view apart from the view that Congress is likely to address these issues in late 2012 or early 2013. However, as of May 15, Moody's projects a decline in the primary general government balance of 4% of GDP, roughly the size of the "fiscal cliff."

The upshot is that congressional action to head off the fiscal cliff seems to be expected by all three major agencies, though for the most part there is also an expectation that the "sequester" spending cuts will remain in place. Since the rating agencies have tended to view "medium-term" fiscal consolidation to be much more important than near-term fiscal restraint, it seems likely that they would be supportive of reducing the sequester-related spending cuts for 2013 in return for deficit reduction of a similar or greater amount spread over several years. In fact, last year's "super committee" was tasked to do just that--reduce the deficit by $1.2 trillion gradually over ten years, rather impose the full amount of deficit reduction in the first year. The rating agencies viewed the super committee's failure as a minor negative, so it should follow that they should see replacing the sequester with savings spread over several years as preferable to allowing the cuts to take effect as planned. That said, one risk is that the congressional budget process usually counts as deficit-neutral any policy that does not change the cumulative deficit (in nominal terms) over the next ten years. The rating agencies typically focus on a shorter time frame of three to five years, and may take a more skeptical view of proposals to delay savings from the sequester or other deficit reduction measures until late in the ten-year period.

Q: Does the economy also pose a risk to the rating?
A: Not under our forecast, though the rating agencies assume slightly faster growth than we do this year and next. Fitch and Moody's share very similar economic outlooks, calling for growth of 2.2% and 2.3% respectively in 2012 and 2.3% and 2.6% in 2013. S&P is slightly below those levels, at 2.1% for 2012 and 2.4% for 2013. Our own forecast assumes growth of 2.0% this year and 1.9% next year. Every one percentage point of growth disappointment tends to result in around 0.4 percentage point of GDP deterioration in the budget balance, so differences of this magnitude are unlikely to affect the outlook for the US sovereign rating if they persist for only one year. Not surprisingly, one of the economic risks mentioned by all three rating agencies is the "fiscal cliff".

Q: What fiscal measures are most important to the rating agencies?
A: Each agency emphasizes different factors, but the debt to GDP ratio and the interest expense to revenue ratio tend to be most important. The rating agencies typically consider political and institutional factors along with economic, monetary and of course fiscal factors in determining the rating. Among the fiscal factors, which for advanced economies appear to be the most important to the rating, the primary factors often considered are the ratio of government debt net of financial assets to GDP and the ratio of interest expense to revenues. While the debt/GDP ratio is fairly intuitive and is something that is forecasted regularly by federal budget agencies like the Congressional Budget Office and the White House Office of Management and Budget, the relationship of federal interest payments to revenues is not something frequently considered in fiscal policymaking in at the federal level in the US.

Q: How does the US look on those measures?
A: On the cusp between AAA and AA territory. The chart below shows how the US compares to other ‘advanced’ economies for which data are readily available from the IMF or OECD, using 2011 data. For simplicity, we group sovereigns with ratings within one notch of AA, A, BBB and BB together (i.e., AA+ rated sovereigns are grouped with AA and AA-). Since ratings from the three major rating agencies differ for some sovereigns, we also differentiate those governments with uniform ratings and those with mixed ratings (i.e., the US with its two AAA ratings and one AA+ rating would be classified as AAA, mixed). The upshot is that the US is at the edge of "AAA space" using these two common measures, and is in fact close to comparable sovereigns with mixed AAA and AA+ ratings.

Sovereign ratings by debt/GDP and interest/revenue ratios

Q: If a downgrade occurred, what would the consequence be?
A: The market reaction would presumably be negative, but there would be few practical consequences of a single notch downgrade. A downgrade, particularly if it came as a surprise to the market, could obviously be destabilizing at least temporarily. That said, in prior research we found little reason to expect forced selling of Treasury securities due to regulatory constraints or investment mandates.