跨国公司因何失去尊敬
朴胜虎 温伟德
中国刚刚开放的时候，大众汽车、可口可乐、3M公司开始来到中国探索发展。上个世纪80年代，摩托罗拉、飞利浦公司和日本的NEC也受到热烈的欢迎。当时，中国消费者几乎无条件地偏爱跨国公司的产品和服务。
但是，从2000年开始，当中国人均GDP达到1000美元的时候，尤其是进入2001年以来当中国进入世贸组织以后，中国老百姓对跨国公司的印象就改变了。人们已经不觉得中国本地公司生产的产品和跨国公司生产的产品有多大不同。事实上，因为他们对跨国公司的期望高一些，经常带来很多的失望。跨国公司所享受的尊敬不见了，理智的消费者现在强调产品的细节和质量。那么，是哪些具体的错误让跨国公司失去尊敬的呢？
执行双重标准 跨国公司允许本地的标准和行为凌驾于全球的标准之上，便带来了灾难性的后果。2000年，面对东芝笔记本电脑有问题的舆论，东芝对美国的消费者赔偿了15亿美元，平均每个消费者为445美元。但对中国消费者却采取了不同的待遇，只是对他们的软件进行了维修。结果东芝遭到中国媒体的强烈谴责，从第一大笔记本电脑销售商降为第三位，市场份额从19%跌落到15%。
相似的，两大跨国公司巨头高露洁和宝洁在2005年4月都受到了中国媒体的批评，因为他们都在中国销售含有三氯生的牙膏。根据美国的一个研究，这种抗菌药物在某些特定情况下可能致癌。当这个研究被英国《旗帜晚报》报道以后，英国的零售商立即决定把含有这种药物的牙膏全部下架。而分别占据了中国牙膏市场30%和15%份额的宝洁和高露洁却声称英国的反应过激，在中国继续销售这种产品。事件发生后，新浪对于高露洁的一个品牌信任调查表明，消费者对其信任一周之内从88%下降到9%。
另外，卡夫食品和坎贝尔汤料被批评实施双重标准，因为他们在中国使用转基因大豆，在欧洲却不这样做。从法律意义上来说，两家公司没有错，因为中国没有禁止使用转基因大豆，只要标识上注明就可以了。但这个事件的核心是，在一些绿色和平组织的宣传下，全球对转基因的忧虑正蔓延到中国，人们惊恐地发现转基因正在进入中国消费者的眼睛和耳朵。
毫无疑问，那些被看做执行双重标准的跨国公司在消费者口中留下苦涩的滋味，消费者感到自己受到了歧视。
毁灭品牌的并购 最近，娃哈哈和达能之争不断升级。1996年，娃哈哈与法国达能、香港百富勤共同成立5家合资企业，其中娃哈哈持股49%，达能和百富勤共同持股51%。1997年，随着百富勤将股权转让给达能，达能以51%的股权成为合资企业的控股股东。2006年6月初，达能起诉娃哈哈。成功干掉“乐百氏”的达能尽管拥有这张法律牌，但娃哈哈搅起的“民族情绪”显然占了上风。
达能绝不是唯一的强硬者。虽然有的时候跨国公司许诺加强品牌投资，但最后都把他们消灭掉了。许多耳熟能详的品牌如活力28、熊猫洗衣粉、扬子、香雪海冰箱、天府可乐、上海汽车、白猫洗涤用品、北冰洋碳酸型饮料等，早被外企“雪藏”多年。
1994年，联合利华与一个中国公司合资租用美加净品牌5年，美加净当时是中国领先的牙膏品牌之一。3年以后，联合利华停止了这个品牌的广告。2001年一个上海公司花了5亿元从联合利华手中回购了美加净，并试图重振这个品牌。但已经晚了，损害已经造成。2000年美加净的销售量为两千万支，只是当年联合利华并购时销售量的1/3。
中国观察人士认为这种并购是有意要把中国的品牌逼上绝路，或者把它们统统杀死。来自2006年的调查显示，超过六成公众认为这样会损害到中国经济独立性，应加以限制。
在知识产权上的咄咄逼人策略 近年来，思科、飞利浦电器、矽玛特公司和微软等，都在知识产权保护上采取了一些法律诉讼的手段。2005年5月，荷兰飞利浦公司起诉东强电子和其他13个有关的公司；2006年，矽玛特公司指控中国的一个公司侵犯其知识产权，试图阻碍使用这家芯片公司的MP3的进口。更为引人注目的一次案件是思科2004年7月控告华为侵犯了其操作软件的知识产权。这个案子最终有了结果，不过双方都认为自己是胜利者。
微软是另外一个例子。由于其在中国采取了非常激烈的诉讼措施，这个软件巨头被看做非常霸道。虽然最近微软采取了更为温和的风格，但中国已有30%的国有企业使用了Linux的系统。在很多中国人看来，跨国公司在知识产权上的强势姿态，意在打压中国刚刚起步的本土产业，而这又与历史上的帝国主义行为是一致的。调查公司AC尼尔森2006年的调查发现，大部分受访者不赞同跨国公司对中国企业在知识产权问题上的指责。
管理迟钝 仅2005年，就有多家跨国公司由于管理迟钝，在中国市场集体遭遇公关危机：索尼6个型号30个批次的数码相机在抽检中被定性为“不合格”；奥诗裳离职员工自曝该公司把衣服赞助给一些节目组后再重新销售；戴尔公司的销售人员“妖魔化”竞争对手的邮件被媒体曝光；江西消费者将宝洁告上法庭等。这些都使得企业形象严重受损。
搜狐网站在2005年1月作了一个在线调查，参与者一半认为跨国公司现在变得不再正面。虽然没有提到某个公司，但有两种观点非常普遍，第一种是由于其不端行为，跨国公司的可信度和公众形象正在变差。另外一个是很多跨国公司把中国市场当做一个实验基地，比如在中国进行尝试利用新的技术，因为这里很便宜，但转移给中国或者参与到中国工业基础发展的技术却很少。
(摘自《青年文摘·上半月刊》2007年第11期）
译文:
Why multinational corporations lost their dignity?
Why multinational corporations lost their dignity?
Piao Shenhu, Tong Weide
When China first opened its door, Volks Wagen, Coco-Cola and 3M company[1] came to develop in China. Motorola，Philip and NEC[2] from Japan were welcomed with fever in the 80th, when Chines consumers unconditionally opted for the products and services of mutinational corporations.
However, the impressiom has been changed a lot since 2000 when Chines GDP on average reached $1000, esp. following the membership in WTO in 2001. The public fail to notice much differences beween local products and their western counterparties'. In fact, the more they expect, the more disappointed they get. The dignity which favored the mutinational companies gone away for reasonable consumers' focus on products' details and qualities. Well then, what are the mistakes to deprive of their diginity?
Double-standard Execution The practice to allow local standard and action beyond global criteria brings catastrophic consequences. In the issue of Toshiba notebook[3], Toshiba company compensated 1.5 billion US. dollars for American consumers, $445 on average, but showed different face to their Chinese consumers, merely some maintaining on software. As the result, Toshiba encountered with feverish rebuke, as their selling droped to 3rd and marketing share 15% from previous 19%.
Similarily, Colgate and Procter & Gamble[4], the two mutinational corporation giants, were critisized by Chinese media due to their selling of toothpaste containing Irgacare MP. According to the research in America, this antivirus could cause cancer under certain circumstances. On revealing by The Evening Standard [5],English retailers decided to pull the toothpaste containing Irgacare MP off the shelf on spot, which was put as overreacting by Colgate and Procter & Gamble, occupying 30& and 50% in Chinese toothpaste market, as sale continued in China. Afterwards, a questionnaire ,conducted by Sina, on brand trust of Colgate shows, consumer's trust points declined to 9% from 88% within a week.
otherwise, Kraftfoods and Campbell Soup[6] were also criticized as double-standard for their using GM soyabean in China, not the same practice in Europe. Legally speaking, these two companies have no fault, beacause there's no taboo in GM soyabean in China, and it's ok once giving a clear indication on the mark. The core of the fact is that under the advertisement of green and peace organization global worry on GM food is spreading in China, which enters into eyes and ears of Chinese clients to everyone's horrors.
Undoubtedly, thouse double-standard multinational companies have left bitterness in consumers's mouth, making them feel discriminated vastly.
Merger on Brand Destruct Recently, conflicts between Wahaha and Danone[7] upgraded increasingly. In 1996, Wahaha established five jonit venture with French Danone and Hongkong BNP，in which Wahaha held 49% share, Danone and BNP jointly 51%. In early June of 2006, Danone sued Wahaha. Although Danone has the legal jetton after destroying"Robust"[8] successfully, the" ethical mood" stired by Wahaha apparently gets the run upon.
Danone is definitely not the exlusive tough one. Despite of their promises to feinforce brand investment sometimes, mutinational companies destroy them all in the end. Many widely known brands such as Energy28, Panda Landry Powder, Yangzi, Xiang Xue Mei Refrigeratory, Tianfu Cola, Shanghai Auto, The White Cat Abstersion Product, the Artic Ocean Carbonic Aicid Drink etc. , have been "frozen" for many years by foreign companies.
In 1994, Unilever jointly hiredvwith another Chinese company the brand of Maxam for 5 years , which was the leading toothpaste brand then. 3 years later, Unilever stopped advertisements on this brand. In 2001, a company from Shanghai purchased Maxam back from Unilever at the cost of 0.5 billion RMB, trying to build up its reputatioin again. But it was too late for the existent damages. The sales amount of Maxam in 2000 was 20 million, amounting to only 1/3 sale in times of merger by Unilever.
Chinese observers consider the merger to push Chinese brands to corner, or kill them all. A survey in 2006 showed that, over 60% of the public held the practice to harm the independence of Chinese economy should be banned.
The Aggressive strategies on Intellecture Property In recent years, Cisco, Philip Electricity, Sigmatel and Microsoft etc. have take actions in lawsuit on intellecture property rights protection. In May, 2005, Netherlandish Philip brought lawsuit against Dongqiang Electron and other 13 related companies; in 2006, Sigmatel accused a Chinese company of violation of its intellecture property rights, trying to barricade the importation of MP3 from any companies who used their COMS chip. As another eyes-striking case in July of 2007, Cisco accused Huawei of violatioin of intelleture property rights on operation software.Finally, the case drew its conclution, but then two parties considered themself the winner.
Microsoft stands as another example. People see the software giant extreme arbitrary due to the very radical legal actions it takes in China. Although it adopts tender style recently, 30% state-run enterprises has employed the Linux system. From the view of many Chinese, the tough stance that mutinational companies take on intelleture property is designed to strike down the underway local industry in China, which accords to the historical imperialistic acts. According to the research by an investigatioin company called AC Nelson, the major interviewee are not in favor of mutinational companies' throwing stone at Chinese companies on intelleture propery rights.
The Lagging Management In the year of 2005 alone, several mutinational companies encoutered with PR crisis owing to its lagging management :3o packs of 6 types of Sony digital cameral were categorized as "disqualified" in sampling inspection:dimitted workers of OASIS revealed that the company put on sales againt the cloths which had been sponsered to some shows; Dale's saleforce's email aimed at smearing their competitors were exposed by media; consumers from Jiangxi Province broght lawsuit against Procter & Gamble etc., which impare their image a lot.
An online survey conducted by Sohu.com in May 2005 showed half of the anticipant thought multinational becoming virtueless. Withous mentioning any company, two ideas prevails: one is that the credit and public image is getting terrible due to its improper behavior. Another is that many mutinational companies treat Chinese market as a experimental base so as to take advantages of its cheapness to try new technology, while skills transferred or contributed to Chinese industrial development remains much less.
(Excerpted from Youth Tabloid·Semimonthly No.11 2007 )
[1] 3M company:Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Company
[2] NEC:Nippon Electric Company, Limited.
[3]the issue of Toshiba notebook: Due to berry danger problem, Toshiba has to take back all its notebook.
[4]Procter & Gamble: Established in 1837 as one of the biggest daily consumables companies in the world.
[5]The Evening Standard : A famous English newspaper in Britain, covering entertaintment and serious event report as well.
[6]Campbell Soup: An American company specialized in cooking condiments.
[7]Danone: A French food company which strives to buy out Chinese company Wahaha.
[8]Robust: A type of dairy brand initiated by Wahaha, finally stricken down by Danone.