與其話 David Webb係股壇長毛，倒不如話佢係財金圈履歷核實署署長。繼玩具大王蔡志明、真明麗（1868）首席執行官（CEO）曾金穗嘅學歷同博士學位俾佢質疑做假 後，阿Webb噚日撰文，繼續踢爆上市公司高層嘅問題學歷，今勻主角輪到蒙牛乳業（2319）創辦人之一兼總裁楊文俊。
Webb話，根據蒙牛招股書顯示，楊總裁03年喺美國一間叫Barrington嘅大學攞到工商管理碩士學位（即係MBA），之但係， 佢話嗰間學校其實只係一間喺花旗國成立、總部設喺阿拉巴馬州嘅「公司」！更甚係呢間「大學」俾美國教育部列入非學院名單，所提供嘅學位係冇認受性。雖然後 來04年9月公司賣咗畀人後，改名做University of Atlanta，佢嘅學位已獲承認，但係楊總裁個MBA係03年攞嘅，咁即係有問題喎！
在此也特別想鼓勵那些骨子裡埋藏著創業衝動的同學，去試試吧，打一輩子工可能會讓你在兩鬢斑白的一天抑制不住的後悔。如果我們再理智地算一筆帳，會發現打工風險也很高。我們以十年為期。假如我們確定十年後，只有10%的小企業會生存並壯大下來，作為股東的你自然會擁有較一般人高得多的收益;如果你選擇了在一家大企業集團打工，十年後你有多大可能達到 top management並獲取相當的收益?能上去的人比例也非常低。
(5)How has your understanding of markets contributed towards your political views? WB: I wouldn't say knowledge of markets has. My political views were formed bythis process. Just imagine that it is 24 hours before you are born. Agenie comes and says to you in the womb, 「You look like an extraordinarilyresponsible, intelligent, potential human being. Going to emerge in 24 hoursand it is an enormous responsibility I am going to assign to you –determination of the political, economic and social system into which you are goingto emerge. You set the rules, any political system, democracy, parliamentary,anything you wish, can set the economic structure, communistic, capitalistic,set anything in motion and I guarantee you that when you emerge this world willexist for you, your children and grandchildren. What's the catch? One catch –just before you emerge you have to go through a huge bucket with 7 billionslips, one for each human. Dip your hand in and that is what you get – youcould be born intelligent or not intelligent, born healthy or disabled, bornblack or white, born in the US or in Bangladesh, etc. You have no idea whichslip you will get. Not knowing which slip you are going to get, how would youdesign the world? Do you want men to push around females? It's a 50/50 chanceyou get female. If you think about the political world, you want a system thatgets what people want. You want more and more output because you'll have morewealth to share around. The US is a great system, turns out $50,000 GDP percapita, 6 times the amount when I was born in just one lifetime. But notknowing what slip you get, you want a system that once it produces output, youdon't want anyone to be left behind. You want to incentivize the topperformers, don't want equality in results, but do want something that thosewho get the bad tickets still have a decent life. You also don't want fear inpeople's minds – fear of lack of money in old age, fear of cost of healthcare. I call this the 「Ovarian Lottery」. My sisters didn't get the same ticket.Expectations for them were that they would marry well, or if they work, wouldwork as a nurse, teacher, etc. If you are designing the world knowing 50/50male or female, you don't want this type of world for women – you could getfemale. Design your world this way; this should be your philosophy. I look atForbes 400, look at their figures and see how it's gone up in the last 30years. Americans at the bottom are also improving, and that is great, but wedon't want that degree of inequality. Only governments can correct that. Rightway to look at it is the standpoint of how you would view the world if youdidn't know who you would be. If you're not willing to gamble with your slipout of 100 random slips, you are lucky! The top 1% of 7 billion people.Everyone is wired differently. You can't say you do everything yourself. We allhave teachers, and people before us who led us to where we are. We can't letpeople fall too far behind. You all definitely got good slips.
(6) You are one of the few male CEO's whochampions women in the workplace. Can you talk about your reasoning and how wecan contribute our intelligence to the workplace? (from a woman speaker) WB: We wrote the Declaration of Independence in 1776 – 「All men arecreated equal」 etc. In 1789 we wrote a Constitution – on second thoughts…blacks are only 3/5 of a person. They slipped up. They wrote in such a way thatthey didn't have to use gender pronouns. They gave themselves away inpresidency, they said 「He」. Pretty soon all men are created equal became allmales are created equal. Move forward to the Gettysburg address, Lincolnrepeated the line about All men are created equal. Slipped over the fact thatwomen couldn't vote, couldn't even inherit money in some states. Finally, in1920, 131 years into this new venture of governance, 「Oh yea, women should havea fair stake in vote.」 After this, many justices were appointed before O'Connorwas. Everyone had expectations of me as a child, but my sisters who were justas smart, were delegated to something different. Here is this country, thinkabout how far we came from using half our talent. Now we are beginning tounleash the potential of the other half. If we only allow people to be CEO's,accountants or lawyers if they are above 5』10〞, and people under 5』10〞 mustbecome nurses, etc. that would be crazy, we could not unleash potential. Samething was the case for women. No one realized it, my dad didn't, and myteachers didn't. Women are obviously just as smart and work just as hard. No one is better at running our annual meetings than Carrie. I think itsnuts for a CEO to pass up the most talented person based on their gender. Butwe are going in the right direction. We're moving towards the ideals we set,but these ideals set by Jefferson weren't practiced until much later.
巴菲特： 2008年，我們對高盛和GE進行了投資，這我做夢也沒想到（想像一下， GE打電話給你，說他們需要你的資金資助）。 BRK購買了附有5年（ 2013年9月到期）認股權證的優先股。認股權證可以購買價值50億高盛、300億通用電氣的普通股。如果我們行權，我們將不得不投入額外80億。但這兩家公司不想發出這些新股。今年早些時候，我們達成共識，他們不發行所有該等股份，我們也不需要耗資80億。讓我們算一算，可能大家都想我們算算。我們不需要支出現金，他們也並不需要發行該等股份。 BRK獲得了高盛價值接近20億的股票，而沒有支出一分錢的現金（原句BRK ended up with Goldman Sachs shares valued close to $2 billionwithout any outlay of BRK'scash. 沒有背景知識，不知如何翻譯好，就翻譯成了這樣）。 而GE我們只花了2億美金。 BRK現在只剩下一個美國銀行發行的權證了。我們有權在2021年8月前以每股7.14購買7億股（共計5億美金）美股銀行股票。我們會持有權證，除非股息變高，或者權證到期。高盛和GE的交易非常有趣，當然誰又能猜到5年前會發生的事情呢。因為雷曼，貨幣市場幾近坍塌。而貨幣市場基金持有大量雷曼權證。一夜之間，雷曼倒閉，30多萬原以為貨幣市場十分安全的投資者損失慘重。這造成主要的貨幣市場基金破產、貶值。貨幣市場頓時鴉雀無聲。在雷曼倒閉後的起初三天，3.5萬億美元的貨幣市場基金和1750億基金資產資金流出。所有貨幣市場基金都持有商業票據。像GE這樣的公司也很多的商業票據。此後，美國工業運轉名義上進入停止狀態。布什說，「如果貨幣政策不放鬆，這些混蛋都會倒閉」 。 我相信這是有史以來最偉大的經濟陳述。這就是為什麼他支持保爾森和伯南克。企業都對商業票據市場十分依賴。 2008年9月，我們來到了地獄。如果保爾森和伯南克沒有干預，兩日內所有的一切都將完蛋。 BRK一直保持著200億或更多的現金。這聽起來很瘋狂，需要這麼多現金幹嘛？但在未來100年裡，若有一天當世界再次停止運轉時，我們已經做好準備。總會有一些事件會發生，也許就是是明天。這個個時候，你就需要現金。這個時候的現金就像是氧氣！當你不需要它時，你不會注意到它。當你迫切需要它時，它將是你唯一需要的東西。我們的流動性管理或許以你想像不到的方式進行著。我們不像銀行那樣操作。當局沒有以美國國債的形式保擔保幣市場基金。他們的權力來自國會。2008年9月，保爾森設立外匯平準基金，為貨幣市場基金擔保。這一措施終止了貨幣市場基金的運行。一切都結束了。在有生之年，這樣的事情可能多次發生。當類似的事情再次發生時，注意兩點：1不要讓它毀了你；2如果你有錢或膽量，你將有機會以意想不到價格買到寶貝。恐懼迅速蔓延，它是會傳染的。這與智商無關。信心只能逐漸恢復（一次只能回來一點），不是立馬。有時候，恐懼能使投資世界癱瘓。這時候你不要欠錢，如果你有錢，你應該在這個時候買入。「別人恐懼時我貪婪，別人貪婪時我恐懼」 。
WB ：我僅僅從我爸那學的談判方法。不同人有不同的談判風格。我不希望參與到那種只能在某點上達成一致的那種談判（it 「has to end」 at some point）。不希望與他們在一個點上爭吵（Don't want them to have me by the throat while I have them by the throat）。這種情況下要麼我們放棄，要麼扼殺對方。我的風格與大多數人不同，我只是說我做什麼。如果在你的整個生活你都這樣做，然後一直堅持。我也能一走了之。我說我會付$ X，通常這是最好的交易。我不想虛報低價，然後你反擊，然後多少多少錢。你花時間和金錢這樣做吧。我只是說我會付多少，而且一旦有了聲譽，這招很好用。你不願意因為你買不起而進行談判，然後一走了之。與你愛的人討價還價是一個可怕的錯誤，簡直是破壞性的錯誤。在這個世界上最強大的力量是無條件的愛。
Dawna Levenson: 我們現在坐在這個咖啡廳（Sloan商學院咖啡廳），看到了自很多不同項目的人。事實上你可以在Sloan獲得本科學位。我們也有一年的金融碩士項目，一年的管理科學項目，兩年的MBA——這是我們Sloan最大、也許也是最知名的項目。我們還有一個非全日制的EMBA（高級管理人員行政管理）項目。此外，還有Sloan Fellow項目和博士（Phd）項目。很多不同的項目會帶來巨大好處，那就是這會吸引到有著各種各樣經歷的人，所以教室內的討論和社交互動是相當豐富和多元的。
嚴婷： 過去你們曾要求申請者提交一封Cover Letter，後來為什麽不要求了？
Dawna Levenson: 我認為最大的改變時我們的第二篇短文。去年申請了的同學，應該會記得去年我們第二篇短文的題目是“告訴我們你曾走出自己舒適區的一次經歷。”但今年我們的第二篇短文是要求申請者自己給自己寫一封推薦信，就像把自己當做自己現在的推薦人。我們在推薦信中提出的問題與我們給推薦人提的問題是一樣的。這很有趣，我們團隊對這一改變很興奮。
沒有哪一個部分是一定比另一部分更重要的，我們會參考申請的每一個部分，我們會從中讀取特定的數據。我們事實上從兩個維度上評估我們收到的申請。一個是我們所謂的“已證明的成功”（Demonstrated Success），另一個是“個人屬性”（Personal Attribution）。已證明的成功包括你工作上的成就、你的GMAT或GRE成績和你的GPA。很多這樣的信息都是個人披露的，一些來自於你的簡歷，一些是來自你的推薦信。另一方面，我們在尋找我們稱作“個人屬性”的東西，這些特質正是我們之前提到的：領導力、關系建立能力等等。
我們鼓勵在等待名單中的人在開放窗口期中（Open Window Period）告知我們的發生的任何新的情況。這並不意味著他們需要每天給我們寫電子郵件，但當比如他們得到了晉升或是換了工作等重大事情的發生的時候，請給我們發郵件，讓我們知曉，我們將會把信息加入你的檔案。
Dawna Levenson: 不，我的建議對每一個人來說都是一樣的，做你自己，在你的申請上花一些時間，面試是MIT Sloan對你的第一印象。盡量通過各種可能的方式來接觸我們，通過我們在你的國家舉辦的活動了解我們，或者你有機會直接來到學校參觀。
（實習編輯 戴博 對本文亦有貢獻）
Interview with Dawna Levenson, director of the MBA & MFin admissions office at MIT Sloan School of Management
（By Ting Yan, Deputy Editor-in-Chief of Wallstreetcn）
Ting Yan: We have just passed the round 1 application deadline (on Sep 23). You must have received tons of applications. Could you share some data on last year’s application and acceptance?
Yeah, we did. So our current class is 406 students that made up of 50 Leaders for Global Operations (LGO) students, 356 2-year MBA students, a little under 40% female (39.4%), 60% US and 40% international. It is from 60 different countries around the world, so it is an incredibly diverse class. The years of working experience range goes from 0 to about 12 or so, and the average working experience is a little bit under 5. We have people coming from all different industries. So we get people from consulting, we get people from financial services and banking, but we also get people from the arts, we get people who are entrepreneurs starting their own companies. It really varies significantly.
Ting Yan: Every school has its stereotypes, and we know that these are not always accurate. Some say “MIT is for engineers who want to start-up businesses”. What do you think of this mindset? What do you want applicants to think of when they hear the name MIT Sloan?
MIT Sloan is definitely a part of MIT, in terms of the students, the people who are successful here, they really come from all different back grounds. Yes people who have science and engineering are more aware of MIT and therefore they tend to apply to our program. But we are not specifically seeking out just people with science engineering backgrounds, not at all.
Ting Yan: You are in charge of different programs in Sloan, are there any unique aspects of Sloan compared to other schools?
We are sitting in this cafeteria with people from many different programs. You actually can get an undergraduate degree here at Sloan. We also have our one year Master of Finance program, one year Master of Science in Management Studies, two-year MBA that are largest and probably best-known program at Sloan. We have an executive MBA which is a part-time MBA program. We also have a Sloan fellows program and we also have a PhD program. So this is a variety of programs. What’s great about that is it attracts people with very different experience levels, so the classroom conversation and the networking in the community is really very rich and diverse.
Ting Yan: Regarding the application, could you briefly summerize the process first?
Dawna Levenson: Our application process is extremely straight forward. I will focus on MBA, but we tried very hard to standardize the process of different programs, so it is not that different for other programs. For the MBA, there are two required essays. We also ask for resume and we provide a resume template for you. We ask for two letters of professional recommendation. We ask for transcripts from all universities where you received a degree. And if you by chance did any kind of exchange, we want those grades too. And GMAT or GRE, and no TOEFL requirement at all, we then review all of our applications.
Ting Yan: Even for non-English speaking students?
No, because the next step in the process, after you submit your application, is to be invited for an interview. The interviews are face to face, they are by invitation only, that are required next step. And we really feel strongly we rely on the interview to help us assess one’s English proficiency.
Ting Yan: I remember you used to ask for a cover letter, why was the change?
Dawna Levenson: No more, we are constantly looking to change things. Some of them are simply because we want to experiment different things. You know, we found that it was a little bit redundancy in what people put in their cover letter and then put in their essay. So we decide to strip that out.
Ting Yan: What are the major changes in MBA application process this year?
Dawna Levenson: So I would say the biggest change is our second essay. To those of you who applied a year ago, you would remember that our second essay was “tell us about a time when you went beyond your comfort zone.” Our second essay this year is actually to ask our candidates to write a letter of recommendation on behalf of themselves, as if they were their current supervisor and we provide them the exactly same set of questions that we send to our recommenders. It is fun. We are excited.
Ting Yan: What’s the rationale behind this change?
Dawna Levenson: So there are several factors, one was simply we wanted to change it up to mirror what industry does. So in industry, people are asked to do self-assessment now more than in the past. Also the data, the way we structure our questions, and the data we are asking, the recommenders form is very much the data we are looking for in terms of people’s different competencies. So we thought why not ask somebody to write their own recommendation. I think it is very thought-provoking for the individuals.
Ting Yan: It also helps you to assess the competencies. I know you use a score system during selection. Do you still use it?
Dawna Levenson: So we do, our entire admission process is based on a behaviourial model where we are looking for certain competencies. Many years ago we worked with consultants to identify those four or five qualities that were prevalent in many successful both students as well as alumni. And we structure our essay questions as well as our recommender’s questions as well as our interviews to be able to garner data that support these competencies, for example leadership. So we are looking for evidence of leadership skills, and we look for evidence of relationship building just to give you a couple of examples.
Ting Yan: What are the other qualities?
Dawna Levenson: Besides leadership and relationship building, we want to see independence of thought, i.e. the ability of thinking outside of a box. And the persuit of goals, i.e. the ability to set and define goals, and actually go after them even if obstacles get in your way. And finally there is innovation. You know, we are MIT Sloan, and we’re always looking for people who are pursuing innovative ideas and thoughts, that’s something else that we evaluating.
Ting Yan: Interestingly, you don’t really ask for applicants’ career goals or future plans, why?
Dawna Levenson: We have found that a very large percentage of our two-year MBA students, once they come here, meet other people, see other opportunities get a feel for other industries, they change their minds. So it is not your career interests that make you successful here, but these other qualities we’ve talked about. They are the real key indicators for us, of success.
Ting Yan: Then how do you evaluate the candidates' potentials?
Dawna Levenson: There is a school of mind that says past performance is the best indicator of future success. That’s where we are lying on. We are looking for, in your past, evidence of relationship building. To me it is a great example, because it is so important to us. Mentoring, teambuilding, teaching, coaching, and these qualities don’t go away if it is something you were inheritably good at doing in the past three years, most likely you will continue to do it moving forward.
Ting Yan: In the application packages you actually receive a lot of things, the data, recommenders, extracurricular activities, essays. How do all the little pieces fit together for you？
Dawna Levenson: No part is more important than the other, we really look at all of the components of the application, we are pulling out certain data. We are actually evaluating all of our applicants on two dimensions. One is what we called demonstrated success, and the other is personal attributes. Demonstrated success includes your work success, your GMAT or GRE and your GPA. A lot of that information are self-reported, some of them come from your resume, some of them also come from your recommendation. On the other hand, we are looking at what we call personal attributes, these are the qualities that I talked about before, leadership, relationship building, etc. that come into play.
Ting Yan: What are the common mistakes that applicants should avoid?
Dawna Levenson: A common mistake or challenge that people are faced with are something we called “we vs. I” factor. We very much want to know what you as an individual did, on the other hand, we also want to know that you work well in teams. So striking the right balance in your essay using the word “we” versus the word “I”, is a very important thing to do. We encourage people to simply following the directions. We provide word limits, so you want to stay within the limits. We ask for two recommendations, we are sure that everybody is capable of getting five recommendations if you really want to. So you know, not following the guidelines is not something we recommend. We understand that everybody wants to stand out, but there are ways to stand out that are good, and there are ways that are not so good.
Ting Yan: Every decision you make may change one’s life. Is there a time when you have to make a very difficult choice?
Dawna Levenson: We definitely realize that the work that we do as you mentioned is life changing, I actually really like that, I remind people in my office, and I remind people who read our applications about this all the time, because it really is life changing. It is a great privilege of my job to be able to call people and tell them if they get admitted to MIT Sloan, and at times it is challenging to have some different conversations with somebody to let them know that perhaps this is not the best place for them, we don’t have a spot for them. It is all part of the job, and they are certainly parts that I enjoy more than others, but I recognize that there are both sides to it.
Ting Yan: Some people get rejected but they may have a second chance and reapply.
Yeah, absolutely, we encourage people to reapply, we do. Re-applicants do very well in our program. It is an incredibly competitive pool, and there may not be a space for an individual. But somebody may have improved their candidacy in their profile over the past year. Reapplying certainly shows persistence, it shows your interest it shows your pursuit of goal, your ability to find goals and pursue them even if they don’t work out for the first time. So we do admit people who are reapplicants, and they do very well in our program.
Ting Yan: What are your common reasons to waitlist an applicant? What can they do to get off the wait list and get admitted?
Dawna Levenson: so people on the waitlist are encouraged to keep us informed of any changes that may happened during the open window period. It does not mean that they have to email us every day, but to the extent that if they get promotion, change of job, something significant happened. Please send us an email and let us know, we will add it to your file.
Ting Yan: What is your general impression of Chinese applicants and students?
Dawna Levenson: We receive a healthy number of applicants from China every year, it is a large number, definitely significant. We just had our round one deadline, again we received a healthy number of applications from China. I think that the class we are trying to create here is in incredibly diverse global class. I think students in China are doing very well here, so that’s great, we would love to see even more people from China to apply.
Ting Yan: How do you conduct interviews for Chinese students?
Dawna Levenson: When it comes to the interview, we travel globally. So we come to China, we come to Beijing, Shanghai, depending on the number of interviews, we go to both of these cities. From me personally, the very first responsibility as the interviewer I have is trying to make the applicant feel relaxed, because again it is all about getting to one another. I have been interviewed many many applicants in China, with multiple programs here, they do very well.
Ting Yan: Do you have any specific advice for Chinese applicants?
Dawna Levenson: No, I think it is the same for everybody, be yourself, spend some time on your application. It is actually your first impression to MIT Sloan school. Reach out to us however you can, get to know people whether through the event we are holding in your country or if you have an opportunity to come here.
Ting Yan: A more industry-level questions is, how has the MBA education changed before and after this financial crisis?
Dawna Levenson: We definitely have seen less interest of people in pursuing a career in finance. We have seen that. We have people coming from finance coming here, but many of them are career changers.
Ting Yan: Talking of career change, you spent 18 years working for Accenture but decided to shift your career to a completely new and different path. Why did you make that decision? What are you advice to many career changers?
Dawna Levenson: Yes, it is interesting because I understand why somebody from outside would think it is a huge career change. For me personally, based on the strengths that I think I have, the type of work that I find interesting, it wasn’t such a big change. I knew that, at some point I would leave Accenture to do something else, and actually I had known for a very long time that I would want to work in an academic environment. I have always longed being in a university campus. So I was very focused at that time, when I decide to leave Accenture and work at MIT. I felt I brought a lot of very transferable skills with me. So I feel my work at Accenture I learned a lot about program and project management, about business development, personal development, and relationship management. These are all different skills that I continue to rely upon every day to do my job here. So not that different. The other thing I would like to say is that I found out about myself that I love to be in an environment with a very strong culture. And clearly both Accenture and MIT Sloan have very strong cultures that I also want to be in part of.
Ting Yan: Do you have any advice for those career changers at MIT Sloan and beyond?
Dawna Levenson: It is easier said than done. It’s easier to say now because I am on the other side. Follow your instincts. Figure out the intersection of what you are good at doing, what you are interested in doing and where there is a need. And at that point, really be focused and go for it, and you know you will find your next career. That’s exactly what I have ended up in. To be honest, five years ago it would be hard for me to imagine that I would be where I am today. And very fortunate that I am where I am. I encourage others to do similar things with their lives.
（Please quote both Wallstreetcn and Ting Yan if you intend to post the above content on other websites.)