经济学人下载:IBM vs 卡耐基基金会

The answer matters, and not just in order to award the historical bragging rights. Comparing the records of those giants of 20th-century American capitalism—or “philanthrocapitalism”—can shed light on a question that is keenly debated today: whether philanthropy or business is more effective at “Making the World Work Better”, to borrow the title of the book celebrating IBM’s centenary.

这个问题的答案很重要，不只是为了奖励它们吹嘘自己的历史。比一比20世纪美国资本主义——或“慈善资本主义” ——那些巨头公司的记录，有助于理解一个今天被热烈讨论的问题：慈善事业或企业哪一个在——借用那本庆祝IBM百年生日的书名——“使世界运行得更好”的方面更有效？

The comparison can also help answer an old question about the proper role of business in society. Many people would agree with Milton Friedman’s view that the “only social responsibility of business” is to “increase its profits”. But Michael Porter, a management guru, recently caused a stir by arguing that firms should seek instead to create “shared value” that simultaneously benefits both the firm and society. Andrew Carnegie would have shared Friedman’s view of business, saving the philanthropy until after the money has been made. IBM, at least after Thomas Watson senior took charge in 1914, has arguably been a case study in how to create shared value, both through its formalised giving, which is among the most generous in corporate America, but more fundamentally through its everyday business.

这样的比较还能回答一个古老的问题，有关企业在社会中扮演的适当角色。米尔顿??弗里德曼（Milton Friedman）认为“企业唯一的社会责任”是“提高它的利润”，很多人都同意这个看法。但是最近管理大师迈克??波特（Michael Porter）却提出公司应该寻求而不是创造同时对自己和社会都有利的“共享价值”，这一论点引起了一番争议。卡耐基会同意弗里德曼对商业的看法，在挣到钱以后再做慈善。而IBM、至少在老托马斯??沃森（Thomas Watson senior）于1914年掌舵后的IBM是一个可以论证如何创造共享价值的案例，既通过一定形式的捐献个角度看它属于最慷慨的国公司之一——更根本地是通过平时的生意。

And the comparison can shed light on the role of the wealthy in society. Bill Gates, the Andrew Carnegie of today, is busily giving away the fortune he earned in business—a fact that has irked some prominent critics. A few years ago, Robert Barro, an economist, argued in the Wall Street Journal that by switching from making money to giving it away, Mr Gates had failed to appreciate both the good he had done at Microsoft and the waste that he was about to preside over as a philanthropist. “By any reasonable calculation, Microsoft has been a boon for society and the value of its software greatly exceeds the likely value of Mr Gates’s philanthropic efforts,” concluded Mr Barro.

而且这样的对比还能让人们清楚地认识财富在社会中起到的作用。今天的卡耐基比尔??盖茨正忙于将他从生意中赚到的财富捐赠出去——这一事实激怒了一些著名评论者。几年前，经济学家罗伯特??拜伦（Robert Barron）在《华尔街日报》上提出盖茨从挣钱到捐钱的转变证明他没能欣赏到自己对微软的贡献，也没注意到他即将以慈善家的姿态来管理的是废物。“任何合理的计算都会得出微乳对社会是个福利，它软件的价值远远超过盖茨的慈善行为有可能带来的价值。”拜伦这样总结道。

Yet Mr Gates and his partner in philanthropy, Warren Buffett, are not only confident they can improve the world by giving away their money through a charitable foundation much like the Carnegie Corporation (only bigger). They are also trying to persuade other billionaires in America and abroad to pledge publicly to give away at least half of their wealth during their lifetimes.

但是盖茨和他在慈善事业上的伙伴沃伦??巴菲特（Warren Buffett）不仅相信自己能通过一个很像卡耐基基金会的慈善机构捐钱、以此来改善这个世界，而且还试图说服美国国内外其他的亿万富翁公开承诺在他们的一生中把自己至少一半的财产捐出去。