我英國及美國的同學有不少在香港工作。相比紐約及倫敦，香港不但方便，乾淨，稅率低，而且他們可以把握中國經濟發展的機遇。在海外唸書的內地朋友跟香港人一樣，對「自由行」的反社會行為極度反感，所以很多朋友都不願去內地的城市，而希望留在香港，當「港漂」， 呼吸清新的空氣，享受西化的生活方式。只要他們這類人繼續到香港工作，上海、北京根本沒有可能追上香港人才質量。香港依舊可以保住金融中心的地位。
不過，我們一方面要面對英國及美國名牌大學畢業的內地專業人士，另一方面要面對大量工作能力不濟，但平香港人一大截的內地本土大學生。試問香港人有甚麼競爭優勢？十年後，就算香港可以活下去，土生土長的香港人，會怎樣？我們又可以怎樣？
*****
數年前，當林奮強還沒有加入（及狼狽地退出）行政會議時，他創辦的智庫香港黃金50舉辦過多場地區講座。我參加了其中的一場。我記得林奮強當時分析：香港的黃金十年在等候大家。如果香港不做一點東西的話，就會錯過黃金十年。所以，大家要好好把握時機，抓緊機會，否則香港會被新加坡、上海等鄰近城市取代。我認為，很多香港的朋友錯誤地把香港的前途跟土生土長的香港人聯繫上了。即使香港有黃金十年，亦不代表香港的大眾會有黃金十年。
於是，在對答的環節，我問他，憑甚麼覺得香港人還有機會？
我已記不清林奮強怎樣回答我。但在我的印象中，他沒有否認我的悲觀，而且不能提出有力的證據，譜出香港人的美好前途。雖然如此，林奮強還是保持樂觀的。
我不能明白他樂觀的來源。信報報導，最近林奮強要宣布結束香港黃金50了。
對香港人的前程這個問題，因對自己有切身影響，過去數年一直在想。
*****
在我先後任職的投資銀行，都已經不太招聘香港人了。有一段不短的時間，我的部門裡只有兩個的土生土長的香港人，我是其中之一個。其他同事，極大部分是中國內地的同胞。有一些畢業於內地名大學，有一些在香港的大學，有些在英美名大學。經理及董事職別的有來自不同國家的洋人，內地的同胞反而很少。
以前無知地以為，投資銀行家非常厲害，又懂得會計金融財務，又懂得財技。我以為，投資銀行的工作難度極高，只有最好的學校中最優秀的學生才可以入行。對於在本地中學畢業在、一個中產家庭長大的我，投資銀行距離自己很遠。後來入行以後才發現是自己「傻逼」（國內用語，即係解傻仔）。投資銀行裡面，並不是所有同事都是一般人想像中的「做雨人投行家」rain maker。投行裡面有「高分低能」 、「低分高能」（非傳統名校畢業亦沒有「關係」，但他們肯定不是香港人）、無心工作的「高分高能」，更有不知所謂的富二代。入行難，我的體會是因為不懂竅門，並不是真的很難。
最重要的竅門是甚麼？
其實沒有甚麼，就是溝通能力，及比一般人懂多一點點common sense，就是如此。溝通能力有多重要？不論你的腦袋有多聰明，除非你有良好的溝通能力，把想法100%表達出來，否則對客戶來說就一點用也沒有。
近年在香港，投資銀行生意增長最快的客戶群肯定是內地客。因為香港過去十多年的普通話教育是完全失敗，投資銀行根本不能在本地的大學生中找到心目中的人才。在很多投行眼裡，香港人的普通話差到連面試的機會亦不會發。這就是因為一個普通話（及連帶的文化差異），香港人就被排除在外。
雖然內地的大學雖然有源源不絕的「普通話人」供應，但能正正常常能用英文溝通，有又common sense 的少得可憐，這亦是內地大學畢業生進投行的最大障礙。過去數年，投行對會說英文及普通話的人的需求才大至連英美一線名大學的內地生也不能滿足，因此投行連「低分高能」的內地同學都殺。另外有些分析員，他們就本著「拿了bonus 就走」的心態，跟本不太care 工作。跟他們工作簡直是痛苦，像照顧小孩多於工作。投行裡面差劣的普通話分析員，大家見到之後都不禁會驚嘆，「唔係搞笑啊嘛？」
就是因為見了那麼多，就更加覺得土生土長的香港人如果好好把握的話，機會本應有很多，只有大家白白讓機會溜走了。在論壇上見到很多人花時間進修念書，讀MBA，masters, 文憑、考試，又有多少人是花時間在正真有用，而且要最基本的東西上面？例如，最老掉了牙的，真真正正學會兩文三語，而非花錢買cert？例如，每天／每週看高質量的報紙網站雜誌？但又有多少香港的念商科的大學生，甚至是會計師，是每天看財經報紙、每週看財經雜誌？
其實，迷失了的香港人，最缺乏的是不是踏實苦幹的務實心態？
*****
因為要重投投資銀行的前線部門，我再不能像以往般花大量工餘時間寫作，更不能在公開場合肆無忌憚、全無顧慮地批判自己的見聞。畢竟財經圈子非常細，而且大家都很小氣。
當初寫blog 是受了蔡東豪的影響，有話想說。老土點，我想為香港人做點事。現在，主場新聞結束了。香港黃金50亦宣布結束了。當時想說的話、我最大的感觸，我都說了。The odds are not in my favor, 但現在認輸實在是太早了。
我希望，我的文字曾為大家帶來正面的影響。
香港 – 及香港人 – 你要活下去！
原載在 Education Post: 香港定要活下去 及 續集：重要的竅門
2014年11月9日星期日
2014年10月17日星期五
會計人才的語言障礙
顧問公司麥肯錫的前日本總裁大前研一曾經批評，日本現在最需要的人才偏偏就是日本教育部官僚下不能培養出來的人才。不論是遠至晚清、近至現在的香港及美國，官僚教育體制培養出來的人才往往滯後於社會的需要。常常聽到有人說，工作跟念書是兩碼子的事，書讀得好並不代表工作表現出眾。縱然兩者沒有必然關係，但經濟效率高的教育系統應該可以把學業成績高低跟工作（及其他才能）表現概然率提高。同樣，一個失敗的教育體系不但不能為社會培養需要的人才，而且會大大減少整整一代人的發展機會。這樣的事情正正在香港發生。
例如，香港政府在90年代末期雷厲風行地推行母語教育，母語教育政策下畢業的第一批大學生亦應該在2005 年入大學，2008年大學畢業。香港的大學全都是英語教學，不知道是否因此發現學生的英語水平強差人意，促使香港政府改變政策。2009年教學語言政策微調後才再次容許學校選擇教學語言。在這十年間，大學畢業生的整體英語水平如何？身邊在commercial，四大的審計、稅務部門工作的朋友，同時反映初入職的同事英文水平明顯下跌。更有朋友對我說，在國際會計師事務所的初級審計員的審計底稿英文文法不通，詞不達意，不知所云，要他親自出手改。「改用中文做審計底稿？」試問在大學生當中，有又多少人打中文比打英文快？又有多少人懂得所有審計及會計準則的中文版本？
投資銀行即使出數萬元月薪聘請初級分析員，亦難在本地的大學生中找到心目中理想的人才。我的前上司為英國人，最近他跟面試求職者時，對方竟然要求他減慢說話速度，因為求職者聽不懂其口音 - 這事從沒有發生過。從事企業融資的分析員及投行家要面對大量複雜的法律文件、財務資料及公司的內部文件，亦要跟不同的中介人士、公司部門溝通、協調，當中英文所佔的比重到現在還是極高。如果初級分析員的英文水平低落，因而犯了低級但嚴重的錯誤，即使後來被上級發現，後果亦可以很嚴重。過去數年，能夠入行的本地香港人少之又少，取而代之的是外國留學的海歸，或內地的學生。
因此，對於有抱負要在會計金融發展的同學，千萬不要只靠學校的英文課。額外花多一點時間在英文上，多讀多講多寫。已經投身社會的，則千萬不要放棄學習的機會。因為英文是香港人跟國內優才比拼時，可能是僅有的優勢。而且，國際上首屈一指的英文媒體所報導的資訊及評論分析跟中文報章的水平有明顯的差距。多看如金融時報 (Financial Times)、經濟學人 (the Economist)、紐約時報 (New York Times) 對提高自己的視野極有裨益。從事投行部門的，一般都會看紐約時報的Deal Book。母語教學做成的迷失十年，誤中的其中一個付車，就是學生的視野。這雖沒有令強者愈強，但弱者就真是弱了，兩者差距拉寬了。
不過，說到跟國內優才比拼，相對於英文，香港大學生要面對更嚴重的問題是普通話，以及對內地特色中文用語的掌握。香港的教育在這方面差不多是空白，令不只是一代人，甚至是兩代人白白錯失了大量機會。
原載在 Education Post。
例如，香港政府在90年代末期雷厲風行地推行母語教育，母語教育政策下畢業的第一批大學生亦應該在2005 年入大學，2008年大學畢業。香港的大學全都是英語教學，不知道是否因此發現學生的英語水平強差人意，促使香港政府改變政策。2009年教學語言政策微調後才再次容許學校選擇教學語言。在這十年間，大學畢業生的整體英語水平如何？身邊在commercial，四大的審計、稅務部門工作的朋友，同時反映初入職的同事英文水平明顯下跌。更有朋友對我說，在國際會計師事務所的初級審計員的審計底稿英文文法不通，詞不達意，不知所云，要他親自出手改。「改用中文做審計底稿？」試問在大學生當中，有又多少人打中文比打英文快？又有多少人懂得所有審計及會計準則的中文版本？
投資銀行即使出數萬元月薪聘請初級分析員，亦難在本地的大學生中找到心目中理想的人才。我的前上司為英國人，最近他跟面試求職者時，對方竟然要求他減慢說話速度，因為求職者聽不懂其口音 - 這事從沒有發生過。從事企業融資的分析員及投行家要面對大量複雜的法律文件、財務資料及公司的內部文件，亦要跟不同的中介人士、公司部門溝通、協調，當中英文所佔的比重到現在還是極高。如果初級分析員的英文水平低落，因而犯了低級但嚴重的錯誤，即使後來被上級發現，後果亦可以很嚴重。過去數年，能夠入行的本地香港人少之又少，取而代之的是外國留學的海歸，或內地的學生。
因此，對於有抱負要在會計金融發展的同學，千萬不要只靠學校的英文課。額外花多一點時間在英文上，多讀多講多寫。已經投身社會的，則千萬不要放棄學習的機會。因為英文是香港人跟國內優才比拼時，可能是僅有的優勢。而且，國際上首屈一指的英文媒體所報導的資訊及評論分析跟中文報章的水平有明顯的差距。多看如金融時報 (Financial Times)、經濟學人 (the Economist)、紐約時報 (New York Times) 對提高自己的視野極有裨益。從事投行部門的，一般都會看紐約時報的Deal Book。母語教學做成的迷失十年，誤中的其中一個付車，就是學生的視野。這雖沒有令強者愈強，但弱者就真是弱了，兩者差距拉寬了。
不過，說到跟國內優才比拼，相對於英文，香港大學生要面對更嚴重的問題是普通話，以及對內地特色中文用語的掌握。香港的教育在這方面差不多是空白，令不只是一代人，甚至是兩代人白白錯失了大量機會。
原載在 Education Post。
2014年9月27日星期六
想入Big4？溝通能力不可少！
服務業是的本質是為客戶提供服務的行業。基本上，所有專業都是服務業。跟客戶接觸及溝通是服務業跟製造業的其中一個跟本要求。當客戶的問題越複雜，對專業人士的要求越高，便對專業人士的溝通能力有更高要求。另外，涉及到的事情越嚴重，獲得客戶信任亦更為重要。
對絕大部分人來說，專業人士之所以是專業，是因為他們擁有的專業知識非外人所知。所以，很多人有一個錯覺，認為越成功的專業人士的專業知識越強。亦有很多人有認為，只要有專業知識便可以在其專業中一顯所長。後者在大體上是對的，但近期網民概嘆，為甚麼考畢會計專業試，但上司沒有加薪。這顯得很多人對專業 - 特別是會計業 - 都是一知半解。
當然，專業知識是專業人士的根本，是賴以為生的「工具」。所以，專業人士對自己行業的知識有深度了解是必須的。而且，現在資訊流通，要獲得資訊，學一門學問的成本非常低，亦遠較以前容易。以會計師公會的專業試為例，現在考試人數及合格率一定遠比20年前高。要獲取法律學位亦遠比以前容易 - 這從考進當律師必須考獲的法學專業證書（PCLL）的入學要求越來越高，及取錄率越來越低可以看出。
正因為專業知識越來越普遍，專業知識就越來越不值錢。不過，依舊有大量客戶願意付高昂的費用聘請會計業及法律業的優才。關鍵在哪裡呢？就是他們是否滿能足客戶真正的需要。客戶需要的並不是專業知識 ：他們並不想做會計師或律師，要不然他們自己考專業試就是了。要客戶付錢付得開心，最重要是按照他的要求把事情做好，問題解決得妥當 。簡單說就是要做到「worry-free」。客戶真正要的，是解決問題的方法。
只可惜，大量專業人士缺乏溝通能力。溝通能力不只單單只中英文的語法會話寫作，而是綜合的溝通能力，最重要的是了解做到客戶心中所想，並好好運用自己的專業知識去幫客戶解決問題。
比如說，客戶（現在我也算是）最怕就是在審計師發現了問題，再跟項目團隊的各個人講了一大堆審計跟會計上的問題，但就是不說問題清楚影響有多大，可以怎樣解決。而且，在四大、非四大也好，我遇過的絕大部分香港人會計師都不太會普通話，以為隨便混過去就可以了。但這樣客戶的溝通就大打折扣了，亦難言深度了解客戶的內心所想。
回想我在會計行的經驗，雖然我在 local firm 的時間並不長，但印象最深刻的是 local firm 跟四大比，英文及普通話的要求較低。我記得當年為暑期實習面試，分別在數家 local firm 及四大面試。Local firm 只用廣東話面試，而四大則出盡兩文三語、面試及筆試。坦白說，除了公司專有審計軟件外，在 local firm 及四大實習的工作沒有本質上的分別，四大亦不會特別對會計知識有特別高要求。不過，四大的客戶很多是上市公司、跨國公司及內地的企業。因此，四大自然對兩文三語有較高的要求。
但語言只是溝通最基礎，距離進四大（及其他高薪行業）還有一段距離。怎樣進，下期再續。
原載在 Education Post。
對絕大部分人來說，專業人士之所以是專業，是因為他們擁有的專業知識非外人所知。所以，很多人有一個錯覺，認為越成功的專業人士的專業知識越強。亦有很多人有認為，只要有專業知識便可以在其專業中一顯所長。後者在大體上是對的，但近期網民概嘆，為甚麼考畢會計專業試，但上司沒有加薪。這顯得很多人對專業 - 特別是會計業 - 都是一知半解。
當然，專業知識是專業人士的根本，是賴以為生的「工具」。所以，專業人士對自己行業的知識有深度了解是必須的。而且，現在資訊流通，要獲得資訊，學一門學問的成本非常低，亦遠較以前容易。以會計師公會的專業試為例，現在考試人數及合格率一定遠比20年前高。要獲取法律學位亦遠比以前容易 - 這從考進當律師必須考獲的法學專業證書（PCLL）的入學要求越來越高，及取錄率越來越低可以看出。
正因為專業知識越來越普遍，專業知識就越來越不值錢。不過，依舊有大量客戶願意付高昂的費用聘請會計業及法律業的優才。關鍵在哪裡呢？就是他們是否滿能足客戶真正的需要。客戶需要的並不是專業知識 ：他們並不想做會計師或律師，要不然他們自己考專業試就是了。要客戶付錢付得開心，最重要是按照他的要求把事情做好，問題解決得妥當 。簡單說就是要做到「worry-free」。客戶真正要的，是解決問題的方法。
只可惜，大量專業人士缺乏溝通能力。溝通能力不只單單只中英文的語法會話寫作，而是綜合的溝通能力，最重要的是了解做到客戶心中所想，並好好運用自己的專業知識去幫客戶解決問題。
比如說，客戶（現在我也算是）最怕就是在審計師發現了問題，再跟項目團隊的各個人講了一大堆審計跟會計上的問題，但就是不說問題清楚影響有多大，可以怎樣解決。而且，在四大、非四大也好，我遇過的絕大部分香港人會計師都不太會普通話，以為隨便混過去就可以了。但這樣客戶的溝通就大打折扣了，亦難言深度了解客戶的內心所想。
回想我在會計行的經驗，雖然我在 local firm 的時間並不長，但印象最深刻的是 local firm 跟四大比，英文及普通話的要求較低。我記得當年為暑期實習面試，分別在數家 local firm 及四大面試。Local firm 只用廣東話面試，而四大則出盡兩文三語、面試及筆試。坦白說，除了公司專有審計軟件外，在 local firm 及四大實習的工作沒有本質上的分別，四大亦不會特別對會計知識有特別高要求。不過，四大的客戶很多是上市公司、跨國公司及內地的企業。因此，四大自然對兩文三語有較高的要求。
但語言只是溝通最基礎，距離進四大（及其他高薪行業）還有一段距離。怎樣進，下期再續。
原載在 Education Post。
2014年9月16日星期二
會計小混混
早前在討論組裡看到有會計業從業員呻，努力考畢會計師公會的專業試後，老闆完全沒有表示、沒有調整薪金。很多人看到會計業的問題都會感概，是否入錯行了？
很多在職人士都想往上爬，希望更上一層樓，找到一份至少可以賺到首期，買到樓的工作。很多人會選擇讀書，考試，多拿多一張沙紙。不過，如果事業發展不順利，又二話不說的跑去念書考試的話，不論你付出了那麼多，有多麼辛苦，大部分情況下你都會失望而回。
比如說，如果你餘暇的時候花大量時間作長跑鍛煉，過程的確是很辛苦，但你不會因為你身體健康、能輕鬆完成馬拉松，而會要求老闆升職加薪。原因很簡單：除非你是運動員，否則能否完成馬拉松跟你的工作表現無關，你的鍛煉亦不會提升你的工作能力。這跟個人進修是同一道理：學到絕活要跟工作相關，否則你不能期望會升職加薪。
不過，很多人有錯覺，認為自己讀了很多書，付出了很多，老闆就要有「表示」。我認為這是極錯誤的想法。要老闆有表示，最主要原因是因為學到的東西對公司有用，能提升個人的生產力及經濟產出。例如，三大顧問公司的分析員 (business analyst) 考獲MBA後，一般可以晉升經理(associate)。這並不是因為他們有 MBA，而是因為在 MBA 課程裡面分析員可以學到有用的商業理論、建立人際網絡。
我其中一個在網上常見到的問題是，MBA 課程裡面學到的東西沒有用，認識的人對事業沒有幫助，學費白交了。這個是無知的想法。最初的 MBA 課程設計時主要考慮是商業顧問及投資銀行這兩個最多MBA畢業生會加入行業的需要。例如，最多人認為是沒有用的商業策略及商業案例就是商業顧問每天工作會接觸到的範圍。因此，選擇進修時要知道自己工作上需要什麼，自己想要做什麼，不要人選自己又選。又例如幾年前我在 CFA 的考場碰見幾位非金融行業的朋友，以為考了 CFA 就可以轉行。但他們對金融行業一無所知，我斷言他們考了 CFA 亦沒有機會進投行。遺憾的是，他們沒有一位能完成 CFA 的三級考試，所以我就不能印證自己的看法了。
會計是否入錯行了？跟我同期中途出家在投資銀行混的，除了一兩個律師及個別例子以外，其他人都是 CPA 或曾經在四大待過的。會計行業中學到的東西有沒用、怎樣用，是受制於工作環境及性質，而工作是自己的選擇。如果學能否致用，某程度是自己的責任，不能怪人。
原載在 Education Post。
很多在職人士都想往上爬，希望更上一層樓，找到一份至少可以賺到首期，買到樓的工作。很多人會選擇讀書，考試，多拿多一張沙紙。不過，如果事業發展不順利，又二話不說的跑去念書考試的話，不論你付出了那麼多，有多麼辛苦，大部分情況下你都會失望而回。
比如說，如果你餘暇的時候花大量時間作長跑鍛煉，過程的確是很辛苦，但你不會因為你身體健康、能輕鬆完成馬拉松，而會要求老闆升職加薪。原因很簡單：除非你是運動員，否則能否完成馬拉松跟你的工作表現無關，你的鍛煉亦不會提升你的工作能力。這跟個人進修是同一道理：學到絕活要跟工作相關，否則你不能期望會升職加薪。
不過，很多人有錯覺，認為自己讀了很多書，付出了很多，老闆就要有「表示」。我認為這是極錯誤的想法。要老闆有表示，最主要原因是因為學到的東西對公司有用，能提升個人的生產力及經濟產出。例如，三大顧問公司的分析員 (business analyst) 考獲MBA後，一般可以晉升經理(associate)。這並不是因為他們有 MBA，而是因為在 MBA 課程裡面分析員可以學到有用的商業理論、建立人際網絡。
我其中一個在網上常見到的問題是，MBA 課程裡面學到的東西沒有用，認識的人對事業沒有幫助，學費白交了。這個是無知的想法。最初的 MBA 課程設計時主要考慮是商業顧問及投資銀行這兩個最多MBA畢業生會加入行業的需要。例如，最多人認為是沒有用的商業策略及商業案例就是商業顧問每天工作會接觸到的範圍。因此，選擇進修時要知道自己工作上需要什麼，自己想要做什麼，不要人選自己又選。又例如幾年前我在 CFA 的考場碰見幾位非金融行業的朋友，以為考了 CFA 就可以轉行。但他們對金融行業一無所知，我斷言他們考了 CFA 亦沒有機會進投行。遺憾的是，他們沒有一位能完成 CFA 的三級考試，所以我就不能印證自己的看法了。
會計是否入錯行了？跟我同期中途出家在投資銀行混的，除了一兩個律師及個別例子以外，其他人都是 CPA 或曾經在四大待過的。會計行業中學到的東西有沒用、怎樣用，是受制於工作環境及性質，而工作是自己的選擇。如果學能否致用，某程度是自己的責任，不能怪人。
原載在 Education Post。
2014年9月15日星期一
登非洲第一高峰
 |
| 頂峰的日出，乞力馬扎羅山 |
位於非洲國家坦桑尼亞的乞力馬扎羅山(Kilimanjaro) 高海拔5,895米，為非洲最高的山峰，比珠穆朗瑪峰的兩個基地營 (Everest Base Camp)還要高數百米。我朋友去年成功登上山峰，凱旋回歸後跟我們分享了路途上的點滴以及鏡頭下的旑旎風光，令我嚮往不已。於是，我跟另一位『行山腳友』二人下定決心，誓要上山峰。
我們花了四個月的時間訓練及準備。我們把每週末行山的時間從4個鐘頭延長至6至7個鐘頭。有多個週末，我們摸黑走進郊野公園，享受著破曉前的寧靜。我們在晨光初露時走到山頂，上山下山，來去數回，到餓了才離去。此外，我亦繼續定期跑步，保持身體強壯。
因為沒有直航機到坦桑尼亞，我們先飛往阿姆斯特丹，再轉機往坦桑尼亞的乞力馬扎羅。小休一晚後，我們便踏上征途，乘車前往Machame Route 的閘口。開始登山的路程。
 |
| 乞力馬扎羅國家公園Machame Route 閘口，高海拔1600米 |
 |
| 剛開始時我們還在雨林當中 |
 |
| 第一晚的營地Machame Camp |
第一天的下午，我們到達了海拔2850米高的營地Machame Camp。除了容易累以外，這時我們還沒有明顯感覺到有高山反應。
第二天
清晨醒來，在營地走走。這裡已經可以清楚看到山的頂峰。
 |
| 頂峰被雲妨 |
 |
| 到了大概海拔2900米，看到的植物已經跟地面的很不一樣 |
 |
| 陰霾與導遊 |
在山上陰晴不定，濃霧一飄過來就什麼都看不見了。而且，衣服及背囊都會出倒汗水。圖中的是我們的導遊。要成為Kilimanjaro的導遊必須考獲專業資格及有相當的年資。一個好的導遊非常重要。他為我們定下的pace 非常適合我們。而且，他的小意見對我們適應高山反應極有效。如果不是他，我們可能上不到頂峰。
第二天的路程不算太長，大概走了5個鐘頭，爬升了1000米左右，到達了位於海拔3800米的 Shira Camp。這高度已經超過西藏拉薩的海拔3650米。
.JPG) |
| Shira Camp -- 我個人最喜歡的營地之一（另一個就是Barranco Camp） |
第三天
今天我們要攀過Lava Tower（海拔 4600米）前往Barranco Camp（海拔 3900米）。這天的行程的主要目的是樣我們暴露在海拔較高的地方，好讓我們的身體可以慢慢適應含氧量較低的地方。
 |
| 煙霧瀰漫的Lava Tower（塔在上圖的右面） |
我在這裡第一次（亦是最後一次）感覺到有明顯的高山反應：胸口悶，心跳加速，感覺到頭重重、頭實實。不過我反應算是輕微了--- 我的友伴從這裡開始便失去了食欲，一下嚥即感到反胃。於未來三天，他近符空著肚攀山，要『辟穀』到三日後下山才開始重拾胃口，才能正常進食。他能夠成功攀頂絕對是憑著堅毅的意志力及決心。
不過要數嚴重的高山反應，必要提路上所聽到的一個故事。
話說到達Lava Tower前的一段路，我們看到了一個石頭堆成堆金字塔。導遊解釋，在多年前，有一個美國人遇上嚴重的高山反應，命喪在這裡。到我們回家後，跟以前到爬過乞力馬扎羅山的朋友說起這事。他跟我說，他們一隊三個人就在這裡『嘔到七彩』，『食幾多，嘔幾多』，只能靠朱古力充飢，一直到落山才可以正常進食。相對他們，我倆是非常幸運了。於是我問他，你們的反應如此大，有否想過會命喪在山上？
『冇』 何解？ 『我見另外兩個人情況比我差，但佢地都未死，所以我應該都唔會咁快出事。』點解你唔早D同我講，要我地小心D? 『如果我地都冇死，你地都應該唔會死。』我無語了。
 |
| Barrance Camp，明天一大早我們就要攀上Barranco Wall。 |
第四天
第三晚的整個晚上雷雨交加，吵得根本不能入睡。而且，雨打得連防水的帳篷都滲水了。我們還要擔驚受怕，怕被雷電打中，怕被山泥淹沒，怕被明早爬Barranco Wall會被水冲下來......這驚險的一晚，展開了行程中最驚險的一天。
第四天的主要行程就是爬上Barranco Wall。顧名思義，Barranco Wall就是一塊石牆。要跨過石牆，大部分時間我們只能走在石牆上開鑿出來的『棧道』。棧道只夠一個人 --- 甚至是半個人 --- 走過，不過已經算好了。沒有路的一段，我們只能靠雙手緩慢往上攀爬。而且。因為沒有安全帶，石頭濕又滑，每一個動作大家都要小心翼翼。因為我把相機收起來了，沒有拍到出陡峭的感覺。我這網上隨便找來了一張圖讓大家看看。
 |
| Source: http://ewtravel.com/AfricaSafaris/ClimbsAndTreks/images/itins/KiliClimb19.rob.jun07.jpg |
我們在牆上亦遇到一些有高山反應、更疲力盡的登山者。因為已經攀到了一半，後面又不斷有登山者『勇進』，要從回頭路回去非常困難。但上去呢，又力有不逮。他們特別辛苦、特別糾結，不知如何是好。幸好，我跟同伴都可以安全順利完成，有驚無險。
 |
| 我們就是這樣爬上去。 |
 |
| 偉大的挑夫們 |
在這裡不可不提挑夫們。一個登山者一般會有3 - 4個挑夫負責把帳篷、食物及其他物資帶上山。當地人喜歡把東西都放在頭上頂著，而且一頂就能頂上10-20公斤。連背包，一個挑夫要背負25-35公斤的物質，跟我們一樣要走過難行的山路。相對下，我們只需自帶當天不到10公斤的個人物資，就太舒服了。其實真正偉大的登山者，就是寂寂無聞的他們。
不過，令我倆心有戚戚焉者，是因為他們的裝備衣物非常簡陋，根本不能抵擋風雨。我們的防水風摟(非 Gore-Tex)尚不能防風吹雨打，他們的破外套肯定不行。山上的夜晚寒氣入骨，很難想像他們的夜晚是如其的艱苦。下山後，我們都把外套及一些個人衣物送給他們。另外，中途發現原來外套是Gore-Tex 與否，分別巨大。行山以來從未領略個如此分別。因為只有衣物受潮了就一直會濕下去，只有生火才可以勉強烘乾。
 |
| 途中見到有趣的植物。我們在大約4000米以下的高度亦常常見到這種植物。 |
這天及接著的一天是行程最辛苦的兩天。我們希望趕在黎明前到達頂峰，所以要在凌晨出發。我依稀記得吃過飯後已經是八、九點了。因為要花時間收拾行裝，當晚只能睡不到三個小時。又因為高山反應、疲勞的身軀、睡眠不足 （前一晚根本不能入睡）。 醒來時特別難受。在高原地帶，有充足的睡眠特別重要。
所以，如果可以的話，我建議選7天的行程。一方面可以多一天適應高山反應，另一方面時間較充裕，可以在Karanga Camp營地過一個晚，第二天才出發往Barafu Camp。從Barafu Camp出發到頂峰又有大半天時間休息，睡覺。
第五天
小睡三個鐘頭後，我們醒來了。摸黑換好衣服、吃過簡單的小吃後，我們便跟挑夫說再見，踏上征途。Barafu Camp的海拔只4,600米，而頂峰有5,895米高，因此我們要在日出前攀登1,200多米。
夜深的山野，四處都是漆黑一片，伸手不見五指。看到的，只有走在我們前方登山者電筒所發出一點一點的微弱燈光，彷彿幫我們把前路點出來了。這一點一點的光路，異常壯麗。遺憾的是環境太黑，什麼也拍不出來。 這漂亮的圖片，只能印在我的腦海裡面了。
在漆黑一片裡，我們靠的就只有頭上的大燈、手中的電筒及經驗豐富的導遊引路。我聽到的，除了是越漸急促的呼吸聲、心跳聲，就只有凜冽的風聲。心中所想的就只有眼前的一小步而已，別無雜念。我的內心，有數小時停留在這狀態。
這種體驗，畢生難忘。
你可以試試集中精神有多難 --- 例如注視電腦的鍵盤、或水杯，什麼都不要想。對大部分人來說，不出一、二分鐘腦海已經會跑出不同的念頭。你越要壓抑你的心，就越難把不同的奇怪念頭壓下。當你越想靜下來，就越難靜。
當人在進行帶氧運動時，因為腦的氧氣供應減低及內分泌的調整，心特別容易靜下來，壓力越容易消散。我的教授認為，這跟冥想有異曲同工之妙。這可能是我喜歡跑步，或一個人去driving range 的緣故吧。不過，在地面的任何活動，跟在山上的寧靜、內心的澄明清澈明相比，差異之大，難以形容。
當然，我不能否定這是純粹因為腦缺氧所產生的幻像。畢竟，在這裡的含氧量只有地面的一半。
在摸黑中走了像永遠也走不完的路一樣，我們一步一步，漸漸走近山頂。不知道過了多久，晨曦初現，我們亦已到了看日出的最佳地點，5739米高的Stella Point。
 |
| Stella Point 的晨光第一線。 |
 |
| 如煙又如霧的日出，是我看過最漂亮的日出。 |
 |
| Stella Point 只有5739米高。我們還有100米才到頂峰。還要走一個鐘頭的路。 |
 |
| 終於到了非洲第一峰 --- 海拔5895米高的Uhuru Peak 。 |
 |
| 到了日出才看到上來的路是如此的壯觀。 |
我們登山後，已經筋疲力竭了。下山的路非常艱苦。因為空氣微薄，幾乎每一步我都會氣促、幾乎每一步都感到心要跳出來。我的朋友已經像半死的樣子，我把energy gel 給了他補充能量。到了半路，我的水已差不喝完了。我的導遊一方面鼓勵我，另一方面分了一半水給我，助我度過難關。
我們經歷了痛苦的三個半鐘頭，終於回到Base Camp。挑夫們已經幫我們準備了豐盛的午餐。我們在High Camp 慶祝，以茶代酒，享受美味的午餐。因為太眼瞓，我們改變計劃，在 Camp睡個覺才再出發。
到達營地，我們吃過晚餐便睡覺了。我們心情異常興奮，久久不能平復。
第六天
因為我們回到海拔較低的地方（大約3000米左右），身體復原得十分快。我們第二朝醒過來已經復原得七七八八了。我們今天的目的地是海拔1600米的Mweka Gate，在閘口乘車回去酒店。下山的路上，我們再次欣賞到乞力馬扎羅山的美、乞力馬扎羅山偉大。
 |
| 風雪後的乞力馬扎羅山 |
 |
| 回望乞力馬扎羅山 |
走過這一段困難的路，我對生命，對自己，對大自然都有了新的體驗。爬上乞力馬扎羅山是我最艱苦的旅途 --- 單單是走到滿身是汗而六天不能沖涼就已經不好受了。跑馬拉松辛苦，但不能跟爬乞力馬扎羅山比。跑馬拉松感覺不孤獨 --- 例如在香港跑馬拉松，四面八方都是人。進入灣仔/銅鑼灣後，更會有途人的鼓勵及掌聲。跑完後，可以回家沖涼。跑馬拉松近符沒有surprise。 只要有充足的訓練已經大概估計到自己的時間。但在上山前，我們根本不知道會否有高山反應，反應如何。我們沒有可能預測山上的天氣。可以變動的元素太多，太大了。如同事業及際遇，事情會有怎樣的結果，看天多於一切。『萬般皆是命，半點不由人。』
『行山可解煩』，『行山的「後悔指數」是零』，蔡東豪在《我仍有山》說得太好。
縱然行山的「後悔指數」是零，但人生總有取捨。這篇文章，本打算發布在《主場新聞》。但因為我把俗世的繁瑣事情排在寫作前，拖了一拖，《主場》已成絕響，亦為我的一件憾事。以往，我可以每週『通山跑』，可以在大街小巷自由自在地跑、有餘暇時間看書寫博客，炒股票賺點錢。如今為了糊口，我再次墮入塵網，繼續投行的迎送生涯。這會否成為憾事？這只有時間才知道。
2014年8月31日星期日
胡定旭案剝繭抽絲
前醫管局主席及安永會計師事務所遠東主席胡定旭違反審計準則一案終於塵埃落定。胡定旭、安永及另外一名合夥人被判違反專業準則,香港會計師公會對他們作出紀律處分。案中的主角胡定旭被罰停牌兩年，及罰款二十五萬港元。對於一位已經退下來的會計師，是完全沒有阻嚇力。不過，重點不在刑罰的輕重。一如以往，會計師公會的新聞稿隱惡揚善，有意無意隱去了大量細節。有趣的細節都在紀律委員會的判詞裡。
如之前寫過，胡定旭案案情非常簡單，就是胡定旭在1995起當新中港審計師期間，收兩家茶禮，並人贓並獲：他一方面負責審計，另一方面，每月收取10萬元的顧問費負責管理客戶的帳目及控制銀行戶口，違反核數師獨立性這重要的原則及會計師的專業守則。
胡定旭最近接受壹周刊訪問時解釋，這件案對他不公平，原因是不應該用現在 - 或後Enron年代 – 的標準去審批他們20年前所作的審計。壹周刊負責記者或者不是負責金融行業、或不懂英文，或是懶惰，沒有花點時間看判詞。從判詞中可以找到紀律委員會分析為何胡定旭的解釋並不合理 - 核數師獨立性是重要的原則，現在如是，20年前亦然。委員會亦對胡定旭的無知感到驚訝 (surprising)。而且，審判是用上以往的準則 Statements on Auditing Standards，如非現在的 Standards on Auditing。在胡定旭的訪問中，可以看出他不但沒有誠意作一個新的理由，而且非常厚顏。如果該記者好好把握，應該可以打蛇隨棍上，即時問胡先生為甚麼沒有悔意，沒有反思 (lack of introspection)、是否有誠信危機，是否不適合出任公職等等。壹週刊的確是很有娛樂性的讀物，不過認真就輸了，不能有要求。
另外，縱然 Enron 的審計師安達信從客戶身上賺取大額非審計的顧問費用，據我了解但並沒有直接控制 Enron 的賬戶及銀行戶口。而且，用一件臭名遠播的案來為自己說項，就有如學生考試出貓作弊，被抓後詭辯「其他同學也是這樣」一般的無理。胡定旭為四家公司（電能實業、中國農業銀行、粵海投資、中國太平保險）的獨立董事，及一家正在籌備上市的公司的出任獨立董事。各家上市公司均有發表公告，表示知悉胡定旭被罰停牌，但沒有交代為何繼續讓胡定旭出任董事，及他的任命是否合適。原來面臨紀律處分的會計師可以繼續出任香港上市公司的獨立董事，可以繼續為小股東監察上市公司，為公司管治出一份力！香港真是一個充滿機會的地方！
這件案聽來簡單。正在考會計師專業試的同學亦應該能判斷胡定旭違反了守則。不過，會計師公會在新中港清盤後4年才展開調查，而調查亦用了超過6年時間。為甚麼調查需要那麼長時間呢？原來連委員會亦有所不知，只知這應該不關胡定旭他們事 (not attributable to any of the Respondents)，但會計師公會亦沒有解釋 (unexplained)。委員會認為拖了這樣長時間是十分令人惋惜 (regrettable) 及極不尋常 (exceptional)，而且對自我監管的會計師公會，公眾及會計師本身亦有不妥，而且並非公義的處事方式。
會計師公會的新聞稿對委員會的問題沒有回應，只交代的個人的懲處。會計師公會是否欠公眾及守法的專業會計師們一個交代？
原載在 Education Post。
如之前寫過，胡定旭案案情非常簡單，就是胡定旭在1995起當新中港審計師期間，收兩家茶禮，並人贓並獲：他一方面負責審計，另一方面，每月收取10萬元的顧問費負責管理客戶的帳目及控制銀行戶口，違反核數師獨立性這重要的原則及會計師的專業守則。
胡定旭最近接受壹周刊訪問時解釋，這件案對他不公平，原因是不應該用現在 - 或後Enron年代 – 的標準去審批他們20年前所作的審計。壹周刊負責記者或者不是負責金融行業、或不懂英文，或是懶惰，沒有花點時間看判詞。從判詞中可以找到紀律委員會分析為何胡定旭的解釋並不合理 - 核數師獨立性是重要的原則，現在如是，20年前亦然。委員會亦對胡定旭的無知感到驚訝 (surprising)。而且，審判是用上以往的準則 Statements on Auditing Standards，如非現在的 Standards on Auditing。在胡定旭的訪問中，可以看出他不但沒有誠意作一個新的理由，而且非常厚顏。如果該記者好好把握，應該可以打蛇隨棍上，即時問胡先生為甚麼沒有悔意，沒有反思 (lack of introspection)、是否有誠信危機，是否不適合出任公職等等。壹週刊的確是很有娛樂性的讀物，不過認真就輸了，不能有要求。
另外，縱然 Enron 的審計師安達信從客戶身上賺取大額非審計的顧問費用，據我了解但並沒有直接控制 Enron 的賬戶及銀行戶口。而且，用一件臭名遠播的案來為自己說項，就有如學生考試出貓作弊，被抓後詭辯「其他同學也是這樣」一般的無理。胡定旭為四家公司（電能實業、中國農業銀行、粵海投資、中國太平保險）的獨立董事，及一家正在籌備上市的公司的出任獨立董事。各家上市公司均有發表公告，表示知悉胡定旭被罰停牌，但沒有交代為何繼續讓胡定旭出任董事，及他的任命是否合適。原來面臨紀律處分的會計師可以繼續出任香港上市公司的獨立董事，可以繼續為小股東監察上市公司，為公司管治出一份力！香港真是一個充滿機會的地方！
這件案聽來簡單。正在考會計師專業試的同學亦應該能判斷胡定旭違反了守則。不過，會計師公會在新中港清盤後4年才展開調查，而調查亦用了超過6年時間。為甚麼調查需要那麼長時間呢？原來連委員會亦有所不知，只知這應該不關胡定旭他們事 (not attributable to any of the Respondents)，但會計師公會亦沒有解釋 (unexplained)。委員會認為拖了這樣長時間是十分令人惋惜 (regrettable) 及極不尋常 (exceptional)，而且對自我監管的會計師公會，公眾及會計師本身亦有不妥，而且並非公義的處事方式。
會計師公會的新聞稿對委員會的問題沒有回應，只交代的個人的懲處。會計師公會是否欠公眾及守法的專業會計師們一個交代？
原載在 Education Post。
2014年8月25日星期一
What have I learned from the MBA programme? (Part 2)
In earlier times, an apprenticeship was a much more fashionable way to learn a trade or profession. While the rise of cost-effective and scalable classroom teaching may have contributed to the demise of apprenticeships, the prevalence of internships has proved that on-the-job training is irreplaceable. There is only so much that lectures and readings can achieve: we very often learn a craft through observation and imitation. For example, we learn how to play the piano not by reading a Dummies Guide on it, but by imitating the moves of our instructors. We learn through observation, exposure and practice.
Classroom teaching and business cases are the building blocks of MBA programmes, and inevitably, there are structural voids that come with this mode of education. It is true that all schools have access to the same textbooks and cases. What impressed me most about my business school and professors is how they filled those voids, making an MBA education a holistic and seamless learning experience.
A business case is a reconstruction of a chain of historical events from the perspective of a bystander. It is all too easy to critique the decision maker with perfect hindsight and perfect data in an air-conditioned classroom. However, we all have emotions and don’t necessarily make the best decisions under stress and uncertainty. Furthermore, our decisions are bound by our position, belief and office politics. These inextricably intertwined forces are so important, and yet very often lacking, in typical business cases. Perhaps some of the issues are too polarising and politically inappropriate for publication. Having guest speakers who are in the know talk about their cases makes a substantial difference in class.
Guest speakers provide the context and inconvenient truth, and thereby complete the untold story. Through our interactions with them – some are the most influential and powerful figures in the world – we catch a glimpse of their souls, their fear and their thinking. They are only prepared to reveal their inner feelings when the professors are their good friends; the class is small, professional and smart; and the conversation is off the record. The most powerful assets of senior professors are not their publications, but their rolodex. The most important asset of a great business school is their students, not their facilities.
My visits to C-suite executives and senior government officials, and daily encounters with some highly talented classmates, have exposed me to the many possibilities in life. My friends and I have seen first-hand how highly successful people portray power, exert influence, and evade questions. We challenged them in class, as if they were classmates. Even more entertaining, and somewhat mind-boggling, is seeing the Jekyll and Hyde sides of many career politicians and senior business executives behind closed doors.
We did not like all we saw, but we had a better sense of what actually happens. We drew our own conclusions and learned from them. We have also become accustomed to nasty and provocative personalities, and at ease with senior executives of multinational corporations. We have been shown the dynamics and politics of boards of directors, and may even have been assimilated by them. We have become more like them. Maybe this explains the popularity of MBAs among consulting firms, investment banks, multinational corporations and other staid establishments. Perhaps this also explains why MBAs are not known for being entrepreneurial or innovative.
Originally posted on Education Post.
Classroom teaching and business cases are the building blocks of MBA programmes, and inevitably, there are structural voids that come with this mode of education. It is true that all schools have access to the same textbooks and cases. What impressed me most about my business school and professors is how they filled those voids, making an MBA education a holistic and seamless learning experience.
A business case is a reconstruction of a chain of historical events from the perspective of a bystander. It is all too easy to critique the decision maker with perfect hindsight and perfect data in an air-conditioned classroom. However, we all have emotions and don’t necessarily make the best decisions under stress and uncertainty. Furthermore, our decisions are bound by our position, belief and office politics. These inextricably intertwined forces are so important, and yet very often lacking, in typical business cases. Perhaps some of the issues are too polarising and politically inappropriate for publication. Having guest speakers who are in the know talk about their cases makes a substantial difference in class.
Guest speakers provide the context and inconvenient truth, and thereby complete the untold story. Through our interactions with them – some are the most influential and powerful figures in the world – we catch a glimpse of their souls, their fear and their thinking. They are only prepared to reveal their inner feelings when the professors are their good friends; the class is small, professional and smart; and the conversation is off the record. The most powerful assets of senior professors are not their publications, but their rolodex. The most important asset of a great business school is their students, not their facilities.
My visits to C-suite executives and senior government officials, and daily encounters with some highly talented classmates, have exposed me to the many possibilities in life. My friends and I have seen first-hand how highly successful people portray power, exert influence, and evade questions. We challenged them in class, as if they were classmates. Even more entertaining, and somewhat mind-boggling, is seeing the Jekyll and Hyde sides of many career politicians and senior business executives behind closed doors.
We did not like all we saw, but we had a better sense of what actually happens. We drew our own conclusions and learned from them. We have also become accustomed to nasty and provocative personalities, and at ease with senior executives of multinational corporations. We have been shown the dynamics and politics of boards of directors, and may even have been assimilated by them. We have become more like them. Maybe this explains the popularity of MBAs among consulting firms, investment banks, multinational corporations and other staid establishments. Perhaps this also explains why MBAs are not known for being entrepreneurial or innovative.
Originally posted on Education Post.
2014年8月23日星期六
What have I learned from the MBA programme? (Part 1)
A friend recently asked me what I have learned during my two-year MBA programme. This is the first part of my thoughts on the subject.
There are scientific hypotheses and theories about how brain development slows down as we grow older. When I was younger, this misled me into thinking I might be incapable of further intellectual advancement after a certain age, but I could not have been more wrong. Taking an MBA has turned out to be a most inspiring and memorable experience. It has accelerated my career progression and personal development and, in doing so, has definitely been transformative.
Even so, I find it difficult to put down in words exactly what I have learned. On various occasions, friends have asked me about the biggest lessons and I have clearly failed to come up with a consistent and satisfying answer. Perhaps this is attributable to the non-technical nature of an MBA, but it has also led me to reflect deeply on my two-year educational journey in the United States.
There, the MBA is rather confusingly classified as a professional degree. But unlike other such degrees, it does not provide on-the-ground training for a profession. A law degree prepares students to work in the legal field, a degree in medicine trains future doctors. Yet there is no obviously equivalent profession for MBA graduates. Even in the realm of business education, an MBA is probably the least technical further qualification. For instance, a master’s in accounting is clearly designed for accountants, while the MBA, in covering numerous subjects, is more of a compromise between breadth and depth.
Certainly, I learned a few tricks about statistics, financial engineering, strategy and, perhaps most importantly, about using Microsoft PowerPoint. But I could probably have learned those just as easily at home at less expense. I should, of course, mention having an expanded network and the many happenings outside the classroom. The MBA was a chance to step out of my comfort zone and test my own mental – and physical – limits multiple times. Also, it was difficult to keep count of all of the interesting excursions, meetings and seminars we were asked to attend. But with the nature of the MBA being to train people to be a jack of all trades, I know I have learned a lot, but still find it hard to pin down the few key distinct skills which will make all the difference.
It is only in retrospect and through introspection that I can recognise the subtle changes in myself and what I want and expect from life. Some of the changes are obvious and amusing, such as my new tolerance for poorly brewed coffee and hamburgers and a new passion for skiing and ice hockey. They may not help career advancement, but they have helped to add colour and variety to my life.
However, other influences from the MBA have fundamentally changed my perspectives on business and views about the world around us. I will go into more detail about that in my next blog.
Posted originally on Education Post.
There are scientific hypotheses and theories about how brain development slows down as we grow older. When I was younger, this misled me into thinking I might be incapable of further intellectual advancement after a certain age, but I could not have been more wrong. Taking an MBA has turned out to be a most inspiring and memorable experience. It has accelerated my career progression and personal development and, in doing so, has definitely been transformative.
Even so, I find it difficult to put down in words exactly what I have learned. On various occasions, friends have asked me about the biggest lessons and I have clearly failed to come up with a consistent and satisfying answer. Perhaps this is attributable to the non-technical nature of an MBA, but it has also led me to reflect deeply on my two-year educational journey in the United States.
There, the MBA is rather confusingly classified as a professional degree. But unlike other such degrees, it does not provide on-the-ground training for a profession. A law degree prepares students to work in the legal field, a degree in medicine trains future doctors. Yet there is no obviously equivalent profession for MBA graduates. Even in the realm of business education, an MBA is probably the least technical further qualification. For instance, a master’s in accounting is clearly designed for accountants, while the MBA, in covering numerous subjects, is more of a compromise between breadth and depth.
Certainly, I learned a few tricks about statistics, financial engineering, strategy and, perhaps most importantly, about using Microsoft PowerPoint. But I could probably have learned those just as easily at home at less expense. I should, of course, mention having an expanded network and the many happenings outside the classroom. The MBA was a chance to step out of my comfort zone and test my own mental – and physical – limits multiple times. Also, it was difficult to keep count of all of the interesting excursions, meetings and seminars we were asked to attend. But with the nature of the MBA being to train people to be a jack of all trades, I know I have learned a lot, but still find it hard to pin down the few key distinct skills which will make all the difference.
It is only in retrospect and through introspection that I can recognise the subtle changes in myself and what I want and expect from life. Some of the changes are obvious and amusing, such as my new tolerance for poorly brewed coffee and hamburgers and a new passion for skiing and ice hockey. They may not help career advancement, but they have helped to add colour and variety to my life.
However, other influences from the MBA have fundamentally changed my perspectives on business and views about the world around us. I will go into more detail about that in my next blog.
Posted originally on Education Post.
2014年8月21日星期四
Full-time MBA study does not imply high opportunity and career costs
We often hear about young professionals in their late 20s working for blue-chip firms and earning enviable salaries. They have already achieved a lot and, to advance further, decide it makes sense to have an MBA on their resume. The next logical step - as they see it - is to gain admission to a top MBA programme in the confident expectation they ace all the subjects as they did in high school and at college. That may require some extra effort, but it will pay off as the way then opens up to an even brighter future and, in due course, a spacious office somewhere in the C-suite.
There is nothing wrong with this approach. It seems to me, though, that if someone is already so sure about their future career path and so focused too, they may be better served by taking a specialised master’s programme rather than signing up for an MBA.
Top full-time MBA programmes are not intended to offer vocational training. They combine a wide spectrum of academic courses with group work, seminars and social activities and can provide a one- or two-year “gap” to weigh up a wider range of career options. Too many people look at this hiatus from an opportunity cost perspective, considering how much income they will lose and the promotions they may miss. Indeed, when I decided to take a two-year full time MBA, concerned friends and relatives most often asked about the real cost and the “risk” of further education. I could appreciate their worries, but didn’t agree. Leading executives have to build a business by seeking improvement and planning ahead, not just by minimising risk and avoiding costs.
In retrospect, I have been able to recognise the all-round benefits of a full-time programme. Taking two years off work means you don’t have the burden and distractions of daily workplace routines. This provides vital breathing for professionals to step back, learn and reflect. A period of introspection makes it easier to identify where your true passions lie and where your limits are. A two-year break from work also provides a chance to experiment, to experience real personal growth, and to fail in a “safe” environment. Lessons from failure are often the first steps on the road to success. In fact, IDEO, the celebrated design house, has even made “fail early and often” part of their management philosophy.
I still see too many of my peers living an unexamined life, as if in a bubble. Early success in a relatively narrow sphere has given them a large ego and arrogance. Their pride robs them of a useful mechanism – the reality check - and the “disease” of overconfidence can become chronic, ultimately harming their careers and meaning they don’t spot new opportunities or looming problems.
An MBA in not the only antidote for this, but it can go a long way to opening eyes, broadening horizons and changing outlooks, which alone can make it a worthwhile investment of time and money.
Posted originally on Education Post.
There is nothing wrong with this approach. It seems to me, though, that if someone is already so sure about their future career path and so focused too, they may be better served by taking a specialised master’s programme rather than signing up for an MBA.
Top full-time MBA programmes are not intended to offer vocational training. They combine a wide spectrum of academic courses with group work, seminars and social activities and can provide a one- or two-year “gap” to weigh up a wider range of career options. Too many people look at this hiatus from an opportunity cost perspective, considering how much income they will lose and the promotions they may miss. Indeed, when I decided to take a two-year full time MBA, concerned friends and relatives most often asked about the real cost and the “risk” of further education. I could appreciate their worries, but didn’t agree. Leading executives have to build a business by seeking improvement and planning ahead, not just by minimising risk and avoiding costs.
In retrospect, I have been able to recognise the all-round benefits of a full-time programme. Taking two years off work means you don’t have the burden and distractions of daily workplace routines. This provides vital breathing for professionals to step back, learn and reflect. A period of introspection makes it easier to identify where your true passions lie and where your limits are. A two-year break from work also provides a chance to experiment, to experience real personal growth, and to fail in a “safe” environment. Lessons from failure are often the first steps on the road to success. In fact, IDEO, the celebrated design house, has even made “fail early and often” part of their management philosophy.
I still see too many of my peers living an unexamined life, as if in a bubble. Early success in a relatively narrow sphere has given them a large ego and arrogance. Their pride robs them of a useful mechanism – the reality check - and the “disease” of overconfidence can become chronic, ultimately harming their careers and meaning they don’t spot new opportunities or looming problems.
An MBA in not the only antidote for this, but it can go a long way to opening eyes, broadening horizons and changing outlooks, which alone can make it a worthwhile investment of time and money.
Posted originally on Education Post.
2014年8月19日星期二
香港V.S.國內 會計師樓文化大不同
最近跟一位在內地執業的會計師吃飯。數年前他毅然從香港的會計師樓調往內地的分所工作。在飯桌上，我再次深深感受到香港會計業所面對的困境。
朋友形容，國際會計師事務所在內地的辦公室，一般在11點時已經很冷清，在公司通訊系統上online 的人只剩下小貓三兩，跟香港大部分同事都在午夜後還會繼續拼搏成了強烈對比。而且，內地的國際會計師事務所的工資縱然比不上很多外資企業，但待遇一般比本地企業好好多。加上內地的套房始終比香港的更容易負擔，大家的自我感覺自然良好。另一邊廂，最近聽到某些本地會計樓以月薪8千請 graduate trainee，比中環負責洗碗的阿姨還要低3千。「唔灰心意冷就假。」
為甚麼內地的工作時間會比較香港好那麼多？
我朋友認為，內地的工作文化比香港要好得多。比如說，老闆不會對下屬有太多無理的要求，亦會尊重同事的私人生活，起碼，週末要同事瘋狂加班亦不會當成「老奉」。而且，整晚待在公司的高級經理及合夥人相對較少。老闆都走了，大家都沒有需要做場戲，上 facebook、whatsapp，「磨爛蓆」鬥夜放工。我在四大期間，看到大量同事花大量時間上facebook，「耕田」玩 Candy Crush、睇相、吃 long lunch、long dinner。這樣的長工時，很大程度是自找的。
朋友亦留意到，內地員工一般比較早成家立室，很多還沒有升到經理級別以及有小孩要照顧。新婚的肯定希望早一點回家過二人世界。家裡有小孩子的，肯定希望早一點回家看小孩。在內地的生育政策下，小孩是家裡的中心。大家都抱有work-life balance的訴求，公司自然不能有太多無理的要求。哪怕遇著個別變態經理及合夥人，只要大家敢一起說不，大家都會好過好多。大家都逆來順受，合理化不合理的事情，結果就是 “race to the bottom”，大家都只有忍，並邊做邊罵。
不過，內地及香港最重要的分別，我個人認為是因為內地的遍地機會，令大家有勇氣說不。即使離開了會計師樓，還有機會找到有良好晉升機會的職業。畢竟內地的會計師數量極少，對會計專業有極大的需求。如果在北京/天津/上海/廣州/深圳的發展不太順，例如得罪了某經理/合夥人，國內還有大量城市可以考慮，並不一定要座困愁城，怕被人 blacklist （當然這是相對香港而言）。
最後一點是，我個人感覺，香港的合夥人及經理相對小心，審計程序做得比較足，做得較細。但除非客戶願意多付審計費用，或者香港合夥人及經理可以找到人願意「食鐘」，否則可以找內地審計師負責的項目，都會流失到便宜一截的內地審計師。而我不知道這是不是導致香港的同事較辛苦的最終原因。
原載在 Education Post。
朋友形容，國際會計師事務所在內地的辦公室，一般在11點時已經很冷清，在公司通訊系統上online 的人只剩下小貓三兩，跟香港大部分同事都在午夜後還會繼續拼搏成了強烈對比。而且，內地的國際會計師事務所的工資縱然比不上很多外資企業，但待遇一般比本地企業好好多。加上內地的套房始終比香港的更容易負擔，大家的自我感覺自然良好。另一邊廂，最近聽到某些本地會計樓以月薪8千請 graduate trainee，比中環負責洗碗的阿姨還要低3千。「唔灰心意冷就假。」
為甚麼內地的工作時間會比較香港好那麼多？
我朋友認為，內地的工作文化比香港要好得多。比如說，老闆不會對下屬有太多無理的要求，亦會尊重同事的私人生活，起碼，週末要同事瘋狂加班亦不會當成「老奉」。而且，整晚待在公司的高級經理及合夥人相對較少。老闆都走了，大家都沒有需要做場戲，上 facebook、whatsapp，「磨爛蓆」鬥夜放工。我在四大期間，看到大量同事花大量時間上facebook，「耕田」玩 Candy Crush、睇相、吃 long lunch、long dinner。這樣的長工時，很大程度是自找的。
朋友亦留意到，內地員工一般比較早成家立室，很多還沒有升到經理級別以及有小孩要照顧。新婚的肯定希望早一點回家過二人世界。家裡有小孩子的，肯定希望早一點回家看小孩。在內地的生育政策下，小孩是家裡的中心。大家都抱有work-life balance的訴求，公司自然不能有太多無理的要求。哪怕遇著個別變態經理及合夥人，只要大家敢一起說不，大家都會好過好多。大家都逆來順受，合理化不合理的事情，結果就是 “race to the bottom”，大家都只有忍，並邊做邊罵。
不過，內地及香港最重要的分別，我個人認為是因為內地的遍地機會，令大家有勇氣說不。即使離開了會計師樓，還有機會找到有良好晉升機會的職業。畢竟內地的會計師數量極少，對會計專業有極大的需求。如果在北京/天津/上海/廣州/深圳的發展不太順，例如得罪了某經理/合夥人，國內還有大量城市可以考慮，並不一定要座困愁城，怕被人 blacklist （當然這是相對香港而言）。
最後一點是，我個人感覺，香港的合夥人及經理相對小心，審計程序做得比較足，做得較細。但除非客戶願意多付審計費用，或者香港合夥人及經理可以找到人願意「食鐘」，否則可以找內地審計師負責的項目，都會流失到便宜一截的內地審計師。而我不知道這是不是導致香港的同事較辛苦的最終原因。
原載在 Education Post。
2014年8月18日星期一
How MBA rankings can get it all wrong
In my first article, I wrote that MBA rankings fail to capture the multi-faceted nature of an MBA programme, and thus prospective students have to do their own research. One glaringly obvious omission of ranking is its inability to consider the softer, but equally important, aspects of an MBA programme, such as student life and culture. Recently, one business school ranking has tried to fix this deficiency, but their efforts back-fired, sparking controversy.
In recent months, Bloomberg Businessweek sent an e-mail survey to graduating MBA students of certain business schools, seeking input for its biannual MBA ranking. This survey differs from previous ones in that it includes a list of new questions. Some of these are truly original – they include questions on students’ sexual orientation, drinking habits, relationship status, and political affiliation. My favourite is:
Is your MBA program a good place for a single person to find casual dating partners?
Essentially, Bloomberg Businessweek is asking students how easy it is to get hooked up.
Their researchers and editors evidently think this factor must be so important that it warrants a place in the survey. I have no doubt that to some students, nightlife defines their school life. To them, the ease of finding a casual date will be highly relevant to their choice of school. However, is this so universally important that it has to be part of the business school ranking? Many people also find these questions highly private, inappropriate and offensive.
Bloomberg Businessweek defended their decision by saying that culture is an important part of an MBA education, and these questions are designed to reflect that. It is true that culture is equally important to the academics and career support of a school. However, what people have in mind, but do not say, about good culture is one that is conducive to the advancement of scholarship, knowledge and career development. A collaborative environment means students are supportive and work together in team, not in bed.
Subsequently, the deans of a group of leading business schools – Chicago Booth, Columbia, Harvard, Kellogg, Stanford GSB, Yale and Wharton – signed a collective communiqué expressing their concerns about the inappropriateness of these questions, and demanding that they delete and remove them from the surveys. The episode ended when Bloomberg Businessweek agreed to remove the problematic questions, not use them in future surveys or cite the data obtained.
Originally posted on Educational Post.
In recent months, Bloomberg Businessweek sent an e-mail survey to graduating MBA students of certain business schools, seeking input for its biannual MBA ranking. This survey differs from previous ones in that it includes a list of new questions. Some of these are truly original – they include questions on students’ sexual orientation, drinking habits, relationship status, and political affiliation. My favourite is:
Is your MBA program a good place for a single person to find casual dating partners?
Essentially, Bloomberg Businessweek is asking students how easy it is to get hooked up.
Their researchers and editors evidently think this factor must be so important that it warrants a place in the survey. I have no doubt that to some students, nightlife defines their school life. To them, the ease of finding a casual date will be highly relevant to their choice of school. However, is this so universally important that it has to be part of the business school ranking? Many people also find these questions highly private, inappropriate and offensive.
Bloomberg Businessweek defended their decision by saying that culture is an important part of an MBA education, and these questions are designed to reflect that. It is true that culture is equally important to the academics and career support of a school. However, what people have in mind, but do not say, about good culture is one that is conducive to the advancement of scholarship, knowledge and career development. A collaborative environment means students are supportive and work together in team, not in bed.
Subsequently, the deans of a group of leading business schools – Chicago Booth, Columbia, Harvard, Kellogg, Stanford GSB, Yale and Wharton – signed a collective communiqué expressing their concerns about the inappropriateness of these questions, and demanding that they delete and remove them from the surveys. The episode ended when Bloomberg Businessweek agreed to remove the problematic questions, not use them in future surveys or cite the data obtained.
Originally posted on Educational Post.
2014年8月16日星期六
Handy hints on getting that reference letter
Reference letters are a key component of an MBA application. Most MBA admission committees require two to three reference letters. They rely substantially on these to decide whether or not to grant an applicant an interview because they offer a more complete picture of who that person really is. However, they are also the least controllable part of an application. You can neither control what your referee writes, nor can you know in advance what they will write about you. It is therefore a risky component of the process.
Choosing the right referee is difficult. All admission committees and consultants will say that you should choose someone who knows you best. The trouble is that he or she may not necessarily be your best referee. You may want a referee with a fancy job title, but such a person may not know you well enough. On the other hand, the people who know you best may not have any experience of writing reference letters, and therefore make all the common mistakes: they may lack specific examples of what you did, how you did it, or rely too much on your input. Regardless of how good you are, the quality of your application will be affected by the quality of your reference letters.
Some applicants will want to offer referees assistance and help them draft their reference letters. This should be avoided at all costs. The trained eyes of admission committee members can identify similarities between your recommendation letters and your personal statement. They are exceptionally good at judging how authentic and genuine your recommendation letters are. Sometimes they will contact the referees directly via e-mail or by a phone call, and have a conversation with them. Once they find out the letter was not written primarily by the referee, your application will suffer, even without your knowing it. As such, even if you imagine you have found a referee with the perfect credentials, you need to decide whether they will commit meaningful time to write the letter instead of delegating it to their secretaries and subordinates. You should also give them plenty of time and follow up with them frequently.
Another common problem is that referees may not be good writers. They may not be able to write a reference letter that is eloquent or contains an in-depth insight into you. Even though some say that a recommendation letter is not a test of your referees’ English, the overall quality of the letter matters. In most cases, admission committees cannot afford to meet everyone’s referees; that’s why I feel that people judge how reliable your referee is by how well they write.
Given the above, it is obvious a good referee is not easy to come by. I believe that a better strategy is to develop relationships at your firm early on. Once you have identified people you can trust, and who are of a high calibre, develop a trusting relationship with them years before your application.This provides a pool of potential referees and mentors. It is also much easier to ask for assistance from someone whom you know well as a friend rather than co-workers or colleagues whom you know very little outside work.
Originally posted on Education Post.
Choosing the right referee is difficult. All admission committees and consultants will say that you should choose someone who knows you best. The trouble is that he or she may not necessarily be your best referee. You may want a referee with a fancy job title, but such a person may not know you well enough. On the other hand, the people who know you best may not have any experience of writing reference letters, and therefore make all the common mistakes: they may lack specific examples of what you did, how you did it, or rely too much on your input. Regardless of how good you are, the quality of your application will be affected by the quality of your reference letters.
Some applicants will want to offer referees assistance and help them draft their reference letters. This should be avoided at all costs. The trained eyes of admission committee members can identify similarities between your recommendation letters and your personal statement. They are exceptionally good at judging how authentic and genuine your recommendation letters are. Sometimes they will contact the referees directly via e-mail or by a phone call, and have a conversation with them. Once they find out the letter was not written primarily by the referee, your application will suffer, even without your knowing it. As such, even if you imagine you have found a referee with the perfect credentials, you need to decide whether they will commit meaningful time to write the letter instead of delegating it to their secretaries and subordinates. You should also give them plenty of time and follow up with them frequently.
Another common problem is that referees may not be good writers. They may not be able to write a reference letter that is eloquent or contains an in-depth insight into you. Even though some say that a recommendation letter is not a test of your referees’ English, the overall quality of the letter matters. In most cases, admission committees cannot afford to meet everyone’s referees; that’s why I feel that people judge how reliable your referee is by how well they write.
Given the above, it is obvious a good referee is not easy to come by. I believe that a better strategy is to develop relationships at your firm early on. Once you have identified people you can trust, and who are of a high calibre, develop a trusting relationship with them years before your application.This provides a pool of potential referees and mentors. It is also much easier to ask for assistance from someone whom you know well as a friend rather than co-workers or colleagues whom you know very little outside work.
Originally posted on Education Post.
2014年8月14日星期四
How to manage the GMAT
The GMAT (graduate management admission test) is a prerequisite for any serious MBA programme. To impress prospective students and employers, the website of every top business school shows the average GMAT score of their MBA intakes. Even though I am not an advocate of this standardised test, it is an unavoidable and important step in any MBA application.
Comparing to the SAT (scholastic aptitude test) or A-Levels in high school, the GMAT is not that difficult. It does not give candidates the same level of anxiety as university entrance exams. After all, there isn’t a fixed deadline for the GMAT - candidates can always delay their MBA application to the next year. Also, there is no limit to the number of times you can take the test. But even so, preparing for the GMAT usually takes up a substantial portion of the time spent on an MBA application. After several years in the workplace, most people find their skills in taking a public exam have waned. Therefore, it takes extra effort to sit down and work through the sometimes tedious exercises in preparation for the GMAT.
Friends often ask me how much time to spend preparing and when to start. The simple answers are, of course, as much and as soon as possible, but that is easier said than done. It is common for young professionals in Hong Kong to work long hours and have very little free time at their disposal. The professional demands placed on junior bankers, lawyers and accountants alike make it extremely difficult to spare meaningful time to prepare for the test. So, the question should be how to make best use of the limited time available.
My approach is straightforward: identify your weakness early on and design a game plan to address it. Each GMAT question is weighted differently corresponding to its difficulty. Unlike most public exams, the weighted score and the difficulty of later questions depend on how well you answer the earlier ones. If you get one answer wrong, your next question will be easier and have a lower weighted score. The GMAT scoring matrix means a wrong answer has two implications, and it requires candidates to good all-rounders. In effect, for most candidates, their highest possible score is determined by their weakest, not their strongest, area.
Diligently going through the mock GMAT questions helps in overcoming weaknesses. As that happens, candidates can decide when to change focus or adjust their study plan. A good way to improve your score is by visiting GMAT discussion forums and forming study groups to exchange ideas. The key is to find people with similar aspirations and abilities who can also serve as allies as you go through the rest of the application process.
This is sound advice, but it is also sub-optimal. No working professional can afford to spend all their free time preparing for the GMAT. Quitting your job to do that is too risky – and a gap in your resume for that reason might even hurt your subsequent application. For that reason, possibly the best time to take your GMAT is in the last year of college. Any score recorded is valid for five years, and while it may be too early to tell whether an MBA is the path to take, having the GMAT early on gives an option to apply later with a head start.
Originally posted on Education Post.
Comparing to the SAT (scholastic aptitude test) or A-Levels in high school, the GMAT is not that difficult. It does not give candidates the same level of anxiety as university entrance exams. After all, there isn’t a fixed deadline for the GMAT - candidates can always delay their MBA application to the next year. Also, there is no limit to the number of times you can take the test. But even so, preparing for the GMAT usually takes up a substantial portion of the time spent on an MBA application. After several years in the workplace, most people find their skills in taking a public exam have waned. Therefore, it takes extra effort to sit down and work through the sometimes tedious exercises in preparation for the GMAT.
Friends often ask me how much time to spend preparing and when to start. The simple answers are, of course, as much and as soon as possible, but that is easier said than done. It is common for young professionals in Hong Kong to work long hours and have very little free time at their disposal. The professional demands placed on junior bankers, lawyers and accountants alike make it extremely difficult to spare meaningful time to prepare for the test. So, the question should be how to make best use of the limited time available.
My approach is straightforward: identify your weakness early on and design a game plan to address it. Each GMAT question is weighted differently corresponding to its difficulty. Unlike most public exams, the weighted score and the difficulty of later questions depend on how well you answer the earlier ones. If you get one answer wrong, your next question will be easier and have a lower weighted score. The GMAT scoring matrix means a wrong answer has two implications, and it requires candidates to good all-rounders. In effect, for most candidates, their highest possible score is determined by their weakest, not their strongest, area.
Diligently going through the mock GMAT questions helps in overcoming weaknesses. As that happens, candidates can decide when to change focus or adjust their study plan. A good way to improve your score is by visiting GMAT discussion forums and forming study groups to exchange ideas. The key is to find people with similar aspirations and abilities who can also serve as allies as you go through the rest of the application process.
This is sound advice, but it is also sub-optimal. No working professional can afford to spend all their free time preparing for the GMAT. Quitting your job to do that is too risky – and a gap in your resume for that reason might even hurt your subsequent application. For that reason, possibly the best time to take your GMAT is in the last year of college. Any score recorded is valid for five years, and while it may be too early to tell whether an MBA is the path to take, having the GMAT early on gives an option to apply later with a head start.
Originally posted on Education Post.
2014年8月13日星期三
Big4？別太大想頭！
在英美等國，在四大工作雖比不上投資銀行的工資，但絕對是一份體面的專業，並不會給其他專業比下去。這點，在香港就很不同。從「遠古」開始，國際性會計師事務所的大學生入職起薪已低於大學畢業生平均薪金一大截 ，工作時間亦比一般大學畢業生高出一大截。有很巧合，四大會計師事務所開出的入職起薪，每一年、每一家都是一樣的。結果大量優秀的會計系畢業生並沒有投身會業，轉投了其他行業。
曾經，拿取會計或法律專業資格是進入投資銀行的踏腳石。為數不小的香港資深銀行家都是ACA /CPA或者是律師。一方面，會計是商業的語言。要學懂怎樣看一盤生意，懂得會計是必要的。而且，除了審計行業以外，只有極少數的行業可以讓你看公司的商業機密。透過審計不同客戶的帳、審計不同種類的商業模式 ，其實初級審計員可以學到很多商業知識。不過，隨著美資投行及MBA的興起，以及CPA水平的下跌，大型跨國性投行已經越來越少直接在四大招收學徒，而轉投了甚麼好像都懂，但只懂皮毛的MBA / 美國法律學院的Juris Doctor （JD, 一般譯作法律博士，但其實只是一般的graduate degree, 所以美國人不會稱呼JD為Doctor）。因此，最好當然是擁有CPA再加上MBA或 JD。
在大學時期，我幸運地遇上了一位很好的mentor。Mentor的建議是先到四大學藝：如果喜歡的話，就努力攀上合夥人的位置。如果不喜歡的話，再回去投行也可以。雖然時間多花了，但到那時候你應已學到一身好武功，有一技旁身。亦因如此我幸運地接受了較低的工資，開展了會計的生涯。
縱然我上一篇文章下筆較重手，但我在四大的時間沒有白白浪費。少了的工資，就當作交學費罷了。持平地看，在四大工作薪幅加度大，而且每年升級，因此很快便可以追上並超過大學畢業生平均薪金。對於很多會計系畢業生來說，已經是很好了。
WYJimmy 寫，會計師公會剛公佈了一項會員統計，有10％會員參與。參與的會員中有38％年薪在60萬以上。而且參與者有過半數是35歲或以下。其實對於這統計數字我並沒有感到詫異。在四大待四年時間，即大部份審計員拿到CPA資格的半年左右吧，月薪應該已經有四萬多。計算13個月糧及加班補貼等，其實跟60萬年薪差距不太遠了。四大亦不看重碩士或以上學位，只要努力工作，踏實苦幹，加上國家財政部不再封殺，在四大工作而踏進60萬年薪的階層並非相信中困難。
原載在 Education Post: Big4？別太大想頭！
曾經，拿取會計或法律專業資格是進入投資銀行的踏腳石。為數不小的香港資深銀行家都是ACA /CPA或者是律師。一方面，會計是商業的語言。要學懂怎樣看一盤生意，懂得會計是必要的。而且，除了審計行業以外，只有極少數的行業可以讓你看公司的商業機密。透過審計不同客戶的帳、審計不同種類的商業模式 ，其實初級審計員可以學到很多商業知識。不過，隨著美資投行及MBA的興起，以及CPA水平的下跌，大型跨國性投行已經越來越少直接在四大招收學徒，而轉投了甚麼好像都懂，但只懂皮毛的MBA / 美國法律學院的Juris Doctor （JD, 一般譯作法律博士，但其實只是一般的graduate degree, 所以美國人不會稱呼JD為Doctor）。因此，最好當然是擁有CPA再加上MBA或 JD。
在大學時期，我幸運地遇上了一位很好的mentor。Mentor的建議是先到四大學藝：如果喜歡的話，就努力攀上合夥人的位置。如果不喜歡的話，再回去投行也可以。雖然時間多花了，但到那時候你應已學到一身好武功，有一技旁身。亦因如此我幸運地接受了較低的工資，開展了會計的生涯。
縱然我上一篇文章下筆較重手，但我在四大的時間沒有白白浪費。少了的工資，就當作交學費罷了。持平地看，在四大工作薪幅加度大，而且每年升級，因此很快便可以追上並超過大學畢業生平均薪金。對於很多會計系畢業生來說，已經是很好了。
WYJimmy 寫，會計師公會剛公佈了一項會員統計，有10％會員參與。參與的會員中有38％年薪在60萬以上。而且參與者有過半數是35歲或以下。其實對於這統計數字我並沒有感到詫異。在四大待四年時間，即大部份審計員拿到CPA資格的半年左右吧，月薪應該已經有四萬多。計算13個月糧及加班補貼等，其實跟60萬年薪差距不太遠了。四大亦不看重碩士或以上學位，只要努力工作，踏實苦幹，加上國家財政部不再封殺，在四大工作而踏進60萬年薪的階層並非相信中困難。
原載在 Education Post: Big4？別太大想頭！
2014年8月12日星期二
The Sage of Omaha
Every year on the first Saturday in May, more than 30,000 faithful disciples of Warren Buffett visit Omaha, Nebraska. They come from around the world to attend the annual shareholders’ meeting of Berkshire Hathaway, Buffett’s investment flagship and, this year, I was one of those fans of the “sage of Omaha” who spent their weekend in a small town in mid-west America.
The main highlight of the meeting, also known as the “Woodstock of capitalism”, was the question and answer session. Here, Buffett and Charlie Munger, his business partner, respond to queries raised by journalists, analysts and investors. The session ran from around 9am to 4pm, with an hour’s break for lunch. It was tiring even for me to stay focused, but you have to remember that Buffett is 83 and Munger recently turned 90. Therefore, the length of the meeting was impressive in itself.
The duo talked about business, investment and politics with insight and wit, which made for an entertaining and inspiring six hours. Their advice about careers is generally simple, old-fashioned and straightforward.
First of all, they say, you should do something you are passionate about and where your talent lies. Both Buffett and Munger love what they do, and so have no plans to retire. They also recommend knowing your core competencies, what you are good at, and your limits. If not, your efforts may be doomed to fail. In the meeting, Munger recounted how he flirted with a career in the academia while he was at Caltech, before realising that he could never be as good as his professors. One shareholder asked how he could know if he is good at what he is doing. “There are idiots around to help you figure that out – and they are never in short supply,” Munger replied in his characteristically forthright way.
The second important thing is to “remove your ignorance” continuously. Both Buffett and Munger attributed their success to being persistent in learning what they didn’t know through the years. Regarding target companies, no matter how much they may know in advance, they can always learn more after investing. They admitted that some mistaken investments had cost them dearly and that their biggest weakness is responding too slowly to personnel changes. However, any failure also provides a golden opportunity to learn, and they are both sure that there is still a lot they don’t know.
A young shareholder asked how best to decide which industry and which company to join. “Talk to as many people as you can and ask a lot of questions,” Buffett said. He then recalled his experience as a stock researcher when he would turn up uninvited on the doorstep of senior executives of major corporations. Usually, they were ready to spend up to an hour with a young man who was obviously eager to learn. In return for their time and generosity, Buffett put a series of probing questions about their business which made them think.
“People usually like to talk if you show them you have done your homework and know a few things,” he said. Meetings with a few executives can give a good idea about an organisation and an industry. And, Buffett said, it is always worth asking executives which company, other than theirs, they think is the best in the industry and why. Munger added that it is equally important to ask which ones are the worst.
Finally, people climbing the career ladder should remember that money doesn’t buy happiness. Once you pass a certain threshold of financial wealth, money can be more destructive than many think. It corrupts and invites trouble. That is why Buffett has a notably modest lifestyle and has lived in the same house for decades.
Originally posted on Education Post: The Sage of Omaha
The main highlight of the meeting, also known as the “Woodstock of capitalism”, was the question and answer session. Here, Buffett and Charlie Munger, his business partner, respond to queries raised by journalists, analysts and investors. The session ran from around 9am to 4pm, with an hour’s break for lunch. It was tiring even for me to stay focused, but you have to remember that Buffett is 83 and Munger recently turned 90. Therefore, the length of the meeting was impressive in itself.
The duo talked about business, investment and politics with insight and wit, which made for an entertaining and inspiring six hours. Their advice about careers is generally simple, old-fashioned and straightforward.
First of all, they say, you should do something you are passionate about and where your talent lies. Both Buffett and Munger love what they do, and so have no plans to retire. They also recommend knowing your core competencies, what you are good at, and your limits. If not, your efforts may be doomed to fail. In the meeting, Munger recounted how he flirted with a career in the academia while he was at Caltech, before realising that he could never be as good as his professors. One shareholder asked how he could know if he is good at what he is doing. “There are idiots around to help you figure that out – and they are never in short supply,” Munger replied in his characteristically forthright way.
The second important thing is to “remove your ignorance” continuously. Both Buffett and Munger attributed their success to being persistent in learning what they didn’t know through the years. Regarding target companies, no matter how much they may know in advance, they can always learn more after investing. They admitted that some mistaken investments had cost them dearly and that their biggest weakness is responding too slowly to personnel changes. However, any failure also provides a golden opportunity to learn, and they are both sure that there is still a lot they don’t know.
A young shareholder asked how best to decide which industry and which company to join. “Talk to as many people as you can and ask a lot of questions,” Buffett said. He then recalled his experience as a stock researcher when he would turn up uninvited on the doorstep of senior executives of major corporations. Usually, they were ready to spend up to an hour with a young man who was obviously eager to learn. In return for their time and generosity, Buffett put a series of probing questions about their business which made them think.
“People usually like to talk if you show them you have done your homework and know a few things,” he said. Meetings with a few executives can give a good idea about an organisation and an industry. And, Buffett said, it is always worth asking executives which company, other than theirs, they think is the best in the industry and why. Munger added that it is equally important to ask which ones are the worst.
Finally, people climbing the career ladder should remember that money doesn’t buy happiness. Once you pass a certain threshold of financial wealth, money can be more destructive than many think. It corrupts and invites trouble. That is why Buffett has a notably modest lifestyle and has lived in the same house for decades.
Originally posted on Education Post: The Sage of Omaha
股神朝聖之旅 - 武林秘笈
上文提到，在巴郡的週年大會上，股神巴菲特及查理芒格跟股東及記者的對答大都似曾相識，談話內容跟他倆的著作及訪問大同小異，因此我並沒有從他倆對答環節學到新金融知識。儘管如此，去了股東大會一趟，大開眼界，令我反思了多個商業上的問題。
這是甚麼原因呢？
巴菲特多次在不同的場合說過，他的投資哲學及分析方法其實非常簡單，亦很容易學。他聲稱自己的投資方法基本上只有一個信念，那就是他師傅葛拉漢 (Ben Graham) 所創的價值投資。他亦推薦了葛拉漢所寫的《聰明的投資者》(The Intelligent Investor) 及費雪 (Philip Fisher) 的《怎樣選擇成長股》(Common Stock and Uncommon Profit)。在股東大會上，巴菲特亦有重複以上的講法。
價值投資的概念雖易學，但極難精。又有誰不知道，以低廉的價錢，換取價值不菲的股票是必贏的策略？從一開始，股票的設計就是要令人難以知道每股的價值。用另外一個角度看，近代鈔票 (banknote) 的設計就是要令人容易找出其價值，所以我們付鈔時並不需要左想右想，因為我們知道面值一百元的鈔票就是值一百元。又有誰擁有百分百的信心，準確預測股票未來三天的收市價？有又誰有百分百的信心，判斷某股票的市價及價值是否有分歧？就算是做足功課，亦不代表能做到價值投資。有為數不少的基金經理，亦中了不少天仙局。這因為價值投資有大量主觀判斷，單單看一兩本書，看看年報沒有可能學會。
情況就如武俠小說裡面的令狐冲的絕學「獨孤九劍」。獨孤求敗創立的劍法很簡單，只有九式。令狐冲只憑九式，在江湖上已經是一等一的劍術高手。惟「九劍」如同價值投資一樣，易學難精。令狐冲從風清揚學得「九劍」的口訣時，風清揚亦有加以引導。但要成大器，令狐冲亦須跟不同的高手過招，經過反覆的考量，歷練。
價值投資的書看了數本，又反覆看了數遍。欠了的，就是看「風清揚」的演示。巴郡的年報詳細列出了巴菲特的投資及他的想法，但欠了的就是「臨場」示範。在報紙上看巴菲特的訪問已經過大量修改，跟原版比已面目全非。在現場看巴菲特及查理芒格跟股東及記者的對答，所直接感受到的，是他們的思路及處事方式。不論股東的問題有多麼差，巴菲特當場迅間的回應反映了他怎樣考量問題、他怎樣處理跟股東的關係。亦可看出他是個怎樣的人、他是怎樣待人接物。
更深一層的想，投資，很大程度是押注在人上。上市公司賺了錢，公司管理層亦不一定要同股東分。股東要獲得合理回報，公司管理層必須是明白事理的人。怎樣押注在人身上？怎樣激勵及回饋管理層？怎樣管理公司的管理層？怎樣跟管理層相處？這些問題，《聰明的投資者》及《怎樣選擇成長股》未有提過。去奧馬哈市一趟，最大的得著，就是感受到巴菲特是個怎樣的人。為甚麼明知道他是個極聰明的投資者，依然有很多人要賣自己的公司給他，賣了公司給他，依然願意留下來賣命？巴菲特價值投資的終極一招，是投資在人。而他的待人處世，就是成就他事業的秘密武器。雖然去股東大會依然學不到他的一招，但亦每有會意，獲益匪淺。
原載在 Education Post: 股神朝聖之旅 - 武林秘笈 及 終極武器
這是甚麼原因呢？
巴菲特多次在不同的場合說過，他的投資哲學及分析方法其實非常簡單，亦很容易學。他聲稱自己的投資方法基本上只有一個信念，那就是他師傅葛拉漢 (Ben Graham) 所創的價值投資。他亦推薦了葛拉漢所寫的《聰明的投資者》(The Intelligent Investor) 及費雪 (Philip Fisher) 的《怎樣選擇成長股》(Common Stock and Uncommon Profit)。在股東大會上，巴菲特亦有重複以上的講法。
價值投資的概念雖易學，但極難精。又有誰不知道，以低廉的價錢，換取價值不菲的股票是必贏的策略？從一開始，股票的設計就是要令人難以知道每股的價值。用另外一個角度看，近代鈔票 (banknote) 的設計就是要令人容易找出其價值，所以我們付鈔時並不需要左想右想，因為我們知道面值一百元的鈔票就是值一百元。又有誰擁有百分百的信心，準確預測股票未來三天的收市價？有又誰有百分百的信心，判斷某股票的市價及價值是否有分歧？就算是做足功課，亦不代表能做到價值投資。有為數不少的基金經理，亦中了不少天仙局。這因為價值投資有大量主觀判斷，單單看一兩本書，看看年報沒有可能學會。
情況就如武俠小說裡面的令狐冲的絕學「獨孤九劍」。獨孤求敗創立的劍法很簡單，只有九式。令狐冲只憑九式，在江湖上已經是一等一的劍術高手。惟「九劍」如同價值投資一樣，易學難精。令狐冲從風清揚學得「九劍」的口訣時，風清揚亦有加以引導。但要成大器，令狐冲亦須跟不同的高手過招，經過反覆的考量，歷練。
價值投資的書看了數本，又反覆看了數遍。欠了的，就是看「風清揚」的演示。巴郡的年報詳細列出了巴菲特的投資及他的想法，但欠了的就是「臨場」示範。在報紙上看巴菲特的訪問已經過大量修改，跟原版比已面目全非。在現場看巴菲特及查理芒格跟股東及記者的對答，所直接感受到的，是他們的思路及處事方式。不論股東的問題有多麼差，巴菲特當場迅間的回應反映了他怎樣考量問題、他怎樣處理跟股東的關係。亦可看出他是個怎樣的人、他是怎樣待人接物。
更深一層的想，投資，很大程度是押注在人上。上市公司賺了錢，公司管理層亦不一定要同股東分。股東要獲得合理回報，公司管理層必須是明白事理的人。怎樣押注在人身上？怎樣激勵及回饋管理層？怎樣管理公司的管理層？怎樣跟管理層相處？這些問題，《聰明的投資者》及《怎樣選擇成長股》未有提過。去奧馬哈市一趟，最大的得著，就是感受到巴菲特是個怎樣的人。為甚麼明知道他是個極聰明的投資者，依然有很多人要賣自己的公司給他，賣了公司給他，依然願意留下來賣命？巴菲特價值投資的終極一招，是投資在人。而他的待人處世，就是成就他事業的秘密武器。雖然去股東大會依然學不到他的一招，但亦每有會意，獲益匪淺。
原載在 Education Post: 股神朝聖之旅 - 武林秘笈 及 終極武器
股神朝聖之旅
我大概是在中四、五開始每天看南華早報及信報，亦大概是同一時間從報紙上讀到股神巴菲特的事蹟。之後一直有聽聞巴菲特在巴郡的股東周年大會與他的拍檔查理芒格 (Charlie Munger) 的對答環節非常精彩，亦一直想去拜訪他老人家，但就是沒有推動力老遠跑去美國中部的內布拉斯加州奧馬哈市。我要到2012年巴菲特患上前列腺癌後，才意識到巴菲特老了，時日可能無多。雖然他投資表現依然良好，但畢竟是八十多歲的老人家了，就算他可以活很久，難保他可保持精靈活潑多年。 於是，今年下定決心，要到奧馬哈一睹股神的風采。
今年的股東大會的主要活動從五月二號星期五開始，到星期天結束，高潮是星期六進行的股東大會。於該週末，奧馬哈市內所有的酒店房都爆滿，而酒店房價及內陸機票亦比會議前後一周漲了一到兩倍。據當地人說，該週奧馬哈的人口會增加百分之 5-10。巴菲特的 fans 從世界各地飛到奧馬哈，擠在一個只有40萬人口的小鎮，為的只是聽巴菲特及芒格數小時的分享。沒有親自到過奧馬哈，很難想像這是個怎樣的光景。
我在週五到達奧馬哈，抵步後就去了主場館 Century Link Center 拿入場證，之後就去了股東歡迎會。基本上是喝酒聽音樂的酒會，沒有甚麼特別。
股東大會星期六進行，主場館在七點鐘開門，活動在八點半開始。我的一位朋友每年也去奧馬哈朝聖，他說要坐在較前的位置的話，要在早上五點半開始排隊。五點半？Are you kidding me? 我去開股東大會啊，不是去音樂會！香港上市公司的股東大會一般只有小貓三兩隻，更肯定沒有人排隊。五點半排隊去開股東大會？原來我五點半到達的時候已經有一條龍。Are you kidding me?
等了很久…主場館終於開門了。為了霸占有利位置，一大班中年、禿頭，有肚腩男人一起開步跑，往講台前排衝！有人說香港人甚麼都要搶先，其實外國的月亮不一定特別圓。為了親近股神一點，大家也不太管規矩，爭先恐後了。
搶到位置安頓好之後，各股東就排隊拿簡單早餐，有咖啡、茶及獨立包裝的麵包，吃著等待股東大會正式開始。
股東大會的頭30分鐘是播放關於巴菲特及巴郡的短片，大部分是輕鬆搞笑的小品，亦有一些頗有意思的短片。之後從9點半到3點半都是巴菲特及查理芒格的回答記者、分析員及在場股東問題的環節，當中有一個小時的午飯時間。大部分問題財經報紙都有報導過，不冗。有不少的問題都很尖銳，但亦有不過爾爾的問題，多數是由股東提出。我印象是三分之一的問題在巴菲特致股東的信及芒格的 Poor Charlie’s Almanack 已有多次提過，問題質量令人失望。儘管問題水平參差不齊，巴菲特及芒格的對答不但有內容，有sound bite ，很多更有幽默感。而且，在整整五個小時，沒有冷場。
我看巴菲特及芒格的寫作多年，關於他們投資的哲學及具體操作已沒有甚麼大的問題。這是多年沒有成行的原因之一。但這是錯誤的判斷。聽他們講話的具體內容學到，比看書及看報紙立體很多，可以說是打開眼界。我離開奧馬哈一周後亦在咀嚼巴菲特及芒格的對答，令我想了很多關於投資及做生意的問題。
學到甚麼，下文再續。
原載在 Education Post: 股神朝聖之旅 及 股神朝聖之旅 - 絕無冷場
今年的股東大會的主要活動從五月二號星期五開始，到星期天結束，高潮是星期六進行的股東大會。於該週末，奧馬哈市內所有的酒店房都爆滿，而酒店房價及內陸機票亦比會議前後一周漲了一到兩倍。據當地人說，該週奧馬哈的人口會增加百分之 5-10。巴菲特的 fans 從世界各地飛到奧馬哈，擠在一個只有40萬人口的小鎮，為的只是聽巴菲特及芒格數小時的分享。沒有親自到過奧馬哈，很難想像這是個怎樣的光景。
我在週五到達奧馬哈，抵步後就去了主場館 Century Link Center 拿入場證，之後就去了股東歡迎會。基本上是喝酒聽音樂的酒會，沒有甚麼特別。
 |
| Century Link Center. 未到6點已出現有人龍。 |
股東大會星期六進行，主場館在七點鐘開門，活動在八點半開始。我的一位朋友每年也去奧馬哈朝聖，他說要坐在較前的位置的話，要在早上五點半開始排隊。五點半？Are you kidding me? 我去開股東大會啊，不是去音樂會！香港上市公司的股東大會一般只有小貓三兩隻，更肯定沒有人排隊。五點半排隊去開股東大會？原來我五點半到達的時候已經有一條龍。Are you kidding me?
等了很久…主場館終於開門了。為了霸占有利位置，一大班中年、禿頭，有肚腩男人一起開步跑，往講台前排衝！有人說香港人甚麼都要搶先，其實外國的月亮不一定特別圓。為了親近股神一點，大家也不太管規矩，爭先恐後了。
搶到位置安頓好之後，各股東就排隊拿簡單早餐，有咖啡、茶及獨立包裝的麵包，吃著等待股東大會正式開始。
股東大會的頭30分鐘是播放關於巴菲特及巴郡的短片，大部分是輕鬆搞笑的小品，亦有一些頗有意思的短片。之後從9點半到3點半都是巴菲特及查理芒格的回答記者、分析員及在場股東問題的環節，當中有一個小時的午飯時間。大部分問題財經報紙都有報導過，不冗。有不少的問題都很尖銳，但亦有不過爾爾的問題，多數是由股東提出。我印象是三分之一的問題在巴菲特致股東的信及芒格的 Poor Charlie’s Almanack 已有多次提過，問題質量令人失望。儘管問題水平參差不齊，巴菲特及芒格的對答不但有內容，有sound bite ，很多更有幽默感。而且，在整整五個小時，沒有冷場。
我看巴菲特及芒格的寫作多年，關於他們投資的哲學及具體操作已沒有甚麼大的問題。這是多年沒有成行的原因之一。但這是錯誤的判斷。聽他們講話的具體內容學到，比看書及看報紙立體很多，可以說是打開眼界。我離開奧馬哈一周後亦在咀嚼巴菲特及芒格的對答，令我想了很多關於投資及做生意的問題。
學到甚麼，下文再續。
原載在 Education Post: 股神朝聖之旅 及 股神朝聖之旅 - 絕無冷場
極不人道的會計生涯
在香港，經常見到不正常、不合理的事情。初入行會計師的極不人道的工作時間及極低的實際時薪，為一例。
這樣的待遇及制度，不同年代的會計師，不斷的罵。不滿的人不斷辭職，但制度依舊保存下來。為甚麼可以這樣？正所謂「有人辭官歸故里，有人漏夜趕科場」，希望踏上數萬月薪的大學生太多，願意放棄生命中種種美好事物的人，太多。甚至，有人會為了自己的事業，為了錢，可以把一些不合理，不負責任的事情合理化。最近觸動我神經的，是看到一篇「偽正面」的恐怖文章。
一位會計師作家蔚薇在蘋果日報寫她的一位當上媽媽的會計師朋友，雖然「家中的幼兒生病，心裏急得如熱鍋上的螞蟻，但為了能在死線前完成工作，也不能趕回家陪伴」。這位「媽媽會計師」對自己專業的投入及熱誠是無容置疑的。蔚薇認為媽媽會計師這樣「一點也不慘情，相反，為了理想而堅持的那團火、那份熱誠…型爆。」
為了自己的夢想，很多人都可以去到好盡。每一個人都有選擇自己命運的權利。不過，除了夢想及權利，每一個人亦有責任。成年人可以選擇生育與否，但小孩是無辜的，小孩沒有選擇自己媽媽的權利。即使是成年的孩子亦有情緒問題，需要父母的關心及支持，更遑論是幼兒？病倒了的幼兒，最需要的是親人的愛護照顧。因為無理的工作安排，因為那虛無縹緲的所謂「死線」，媽媽會計師竟然連當母親的最本的責任也不能兼顧。
你問，當媽媽有當媽媽的責任，但會計師也有會計師對客戶的責任啊。難道跑回家，不理「死線」在即的工作責任，不理客戶的利益才是好員工？當然不是。我在想，為甚麼公司不安排同事幫忙，頂一下？為甚麼合夥人自己不可以主動幫同事，頂一晚？實情是，公司沒有這樣的文化，而且大部分合夥人根本不會知道初中級同事的問題。大部分合夥人根本不care。大型跨國會計師事務所會關心公司有沒有拿下 Caring Company ，但只要同事繼續賣命，公司同事的turnover 在可控、可以接受的水平，公司根本不會太關心員工的去留。如果公司缺人、閣下的表現好，或者是經理，你一人的辭職可能會引起公司管理層的關注，但沒有人會從根本出發，改變制度，改善同事的生活。
「你唔做？大把人想做！」
我理解每個人都有自己的難處，份工（及人工）對不同人有不同的意義。既然行內大量會計師願意這樣付出，願意默默承受，默默忍耐，就得接受這個遊戲。但接受不代表要合理化，甚至美化。面對一點也不人性化的上司，「工作到凌晨五點，然後回家洗個澡小睡一會，十時回到公司，被上司投訴沒有準時上班」的遭遇，要默默忍耐，再用一個虛無縹緲的「夢想」來美化，是否有點兒那個？對於會計行業這樣的工作環境，蔚薇不單沒有反思，更正面回應，認為這樣「型爆」。
蔚薇，對不起，我不覺得連當父母最本的責任也不能兼顧的，是型爆。對不起，我認為，會計業出現困境，就是因為像你這樣的人，太多。
原載在 Education Post
這樣的待遇及制度，不同年代的會計師，不斷的罵。不滿的人不斷辭職，但制度依舊保存下來。為甚麼可以這樣？正所謂「有人辭官歸故里，有人漏夜趕科場」，希望踏上數萬月薪的大學生太多，願意放棄生命中種種美好事物的人，太多。甚至，有人會為了自己的事業，為了錢，可以把一些不合理，不負責任的事情合理化。最近觸動我神經的，是看到一篇「偽正面」的恐怖文章。
一位會計師作家蔚薇在蘋果日報寫她的一位當上媽媽的會計師朋友，雖然「家中的幼兒生病，心裏急得如熱鍋上的螞蟻，但為了能在死線前完成工作，也不能趕回家陪伴」。這位「媽媽會計師」對自己專業的投入及熱誠是無容置疑的。蔚薇認為媽媽會計師這樣「一點也不慘情，相反，為了理想而堅持的那團火、那份熱誠…型爆。」
為了自己的夢想，很多人都可以去到好盡。每一個人都有選擇自己命運的權利。不過，除了夢想及權利，每一個人亦有責任。成年人可以選擇生育與否，但小孩是無辜的，小孩沒有選擇自己媽媽的權利。即使是成年的孩子亦有情緒問題，需要父母的關心及支持，更遑論是幼兒？病倒了的幼兒，最需要的是親人的愛護照顧。因為無理的工作安排，因為那虛無縹緲的所謂「死線」，媽媽會計師竟然連當母親的最本的責任也不能兼顧。
你問，當媽媽有當媽媽的責任，但會計師也有會計師對客戶的責任啊。難道跑回家，不理「死線」在即的工作責任，不理客戶的利益才是好員工？當然不是。我在想，為甚麼公司不安排同事幫忙，頂一下？為甚麼合夥人自己不可以主動幫同事，頂一晚？實情是，公司沒有這樣的文化，而且大部分合夥人根本不會知道初中級同事的問題。大部分合夥人根本不care。大型跨國會計師事務所會關心公司有沒有拿下 Caring Company ，但只要同事繼續賣命，公司同事的turnover 在可控、可以接受的水平，公司根本不會太關心員工的去留。如果公司缺人、閣下的表現好，或者是經理，你一人的辭職可能會引起公司管理層的關注，但沒有人會從根本出發，改變制度，改善同事的生活。
「你唔做？大把人想做！」
我理解每個人都有自己的難處，份工（及人工）對不同人有不同的意義。既然行內大量會計師願意這樣付出，願意默默承受，默默忍耐，就得接受這個遊戲。但接受不代表要合理化，甚至美化。面對一點也不人性化的上司，「工作到凌晨五點，然後回家洗個澡小睡一會，十時回到公司，被上司投訴沒有準時上班」的遭遇，要默默忍耐，再用一個虛無縹緲的「夢想」來美化，是否有點兒那個？對於會計行業這樣的工作環境，蔚薇不單沒有反思，更正面回應，認為這樣「型爆」。
蔚薇，對不起，我不覺得連當父母最本的責任也不能兼顧的，是型爆。對不起，我認為，會計業出現困境，就是因為像你這樣的人，太多。
原載在 Education Post
2014年7月15日星期二
會計領袖？往resignee裡找
 |
| Source: The Gentleman's Journal, at http://www.thegentlemansjournal.com/profile-sir-jimmy-goldsmith/ |
”If you pay peanuts, you get monkeys.” – Sir James Goldsmith
馬振峰在《信報》專欄《年青有計》及年青會計師協會的博客問，會計界的領袖在何方。
我想說，要在會計界找有領導才華的人很容易，只要從剛離開會計師事務所及會計行業的專業會計師 CPA 裡面一定可以找到。
我認為在會計師樓拜師學藝及拿取專業資格對日後在商界發展極有裨益。但在會計及商業知識以外，我學到最多的就是會計師樓管理上的反面教材。
審計師樓的主要業務為審計及不同類型的顧問服務，但四大會計師樓的制度像工廠多於一般的專業服務機構：階級分明，有強烈的 chain of command，除非犯了嚴重錯誤，會計師每年自動升一級，直至經理。表面上，公司獎罰分明，表現好的員工會在紮職的時候獲得較大幅度的加薪，其他員工只能獲得平均加幅。惟所謂較大幅度的加薪往往並不能彌補負責鑊job同事的辛酸、不能夠鼓勵員工繼續拼命工作。一開始被標籤成為「領袖」或者是「傑出員工」的，很多沒有好下場。例如，除非閣下遞信辭職被公司挽留，做開鑊 job、IPO、special、內地 job 的，一般會繼續負責鑊 job、IPO、special、內地 job，閣下會一直得到公司的重用及「重賞」。雖然這樣磨練出來的審計員百分之二百可以晉升至經理，不過大部分獲「重點培訓」的審計員拿到 CPA 後就會趕緊走頭。公司可能沒有意識到，流失的有很多是公司最頂尖的員工。
而且，對於高級經理及合夥人，初級審計員只是面目模糊的工廠員工。他們一般不太關心初級審計員，更遑論了解他們的表現。你可能默默耕耘了兩三年，表現出色，但亦不代表高級經理及合夥人會賞識你，給你稱意的表現評級。這點跟投資銀行有很大分別。曾經有下屬問我 ，為甚麼他勞心勞力，全年 wok，但加薪幅度跟旺淡季分明的同事一樣。我只是「小朋友」，不是他的經理，沒有能力幫他。我當時跟他說，很多今天的 high flyer 都是這樣的。而且，我的所謂 high pay，只是多雞碎咁多。翌年，他找到一份政府工，沒有 qualified 就走了。
很難相信各大會計師事務所在21世紀依然擁抱不合時宜的管理哲學。這管理制度容易建立，運營成本低，但從根本上就不鼓勵領袖型員工。而且，公司是否重視人才，公司是否真的是獎罰分明，大家看在眼裡，心照不宣。有才華的優秀員工面對著大量冇料，冇領導才華、爛英文、亂做 working paper 放飛機的上司，拿比自己高一大截的人工，加上階級分明的制度，可以怎樣呢？大部分人會選擇離開。
最後，人各有志，在會計師樓學滿師，立志成為經理，甚至是合夥人的，當然可以留下來。不過，會計師樓的工資一向低。四大會計師樓的大學畢業生的入職起薪點一直遠低於三大院校的平均畢業生工資。而且，大學 fresh graduate 在國際律師樓當見習律師或投資銀行當個分析員，年薪已經可以抵得上四大的經理。馬振峰指，想入會計行的已不再是精英。這樣的工作環境、這樣的工資，又有誰想做？
原載在 Education Post。
2014年7月9日星期三
Big 4 V.S. 會計師樓：前途如何抉擇？
上文提到，要避免蹉跎歲月，越早知道會計師樓的運作及遊戲規則，越早裝備自己就越好。不過，在探討怎樣可以在大四「跑出」前，先要回答很多同學的問題：怎樣才可以考進心儀的會計師樓？究竟四大的工作性質跟本地會計師樓有甚麼分別？究竟自己適合在那一種工作呢？
會計師樓最主要的業務是審計（即核數）及稅務服務。大的會計師樓內的分工一般會較細。例如，四大一般會分開審計及稅務部門，審計部門內亦會再分行業組。規模少的 local firm 很多時因人手不多，沒有規模效益去設立各獨立部門。而且，客戶相對較細，負責的大規模審計及奇難雜症的機會相對較少，對「專門」知識的要求相對較少。
以銀行的審計為例，審計師必須要有充足的行業知識才能「多、快、好、省」地審核公司的財務狀況、判斷風險及審計的工作量。怎樣為充足的行業知識呢？宏觀如銀行業的行業趨勢、監管條例、資本要求、及簡單如怎樣填 banking return 等都是。亦因為銀行規模大，基本上四大以外的會計師樓都沒有能力接下這類巨無霸公司的生意。
另一方面，因為四大的收費高，一般接不到「街坊生意」。要學會審計茶餐廳、麵包鋪、 start-up 這類公司，在非四大肯定較好。一般的中型本地會計師樓則在四大及小 local firm 中間。
一聽到大銀行及街坊生意的分別，很多人一定以為在較大的會計師樓學藝一定比 local firm 好。如我前文所言，四大的確有更好的資源，遇到好師傅及複雜項目的機會亦更多。無可否認，四大學師滿師 qualified 的會計師，跳槽的機會較多，工資亦較高。但其實在四大學到的技能跟 local firm 有很大分別。好不好、怎樣學以致用，很看個人際遇、能耐及運氣。因此，四大並不是絕對地好，local firm 亦不是絕對地差。
認識一些在四大工作幾年的年輕會計師，希望有天開設自己的會計師樓。我認為他們要成功，不是沒有機會，但很難。為甚麼呢？因為四大的會計師自己創業，創立的肯定是 local firm。弔詭的是他們在四大的學會的審計技能及判斷客戶風險的商業觸覺，部分在 local firm 難以運用自如。在四大極少 / 沒有機會用到的中小企會計準則，現在要重新學習。可能你曾經負責屈臣氏的審計，熟透和黃及歐洲零售業的運作，但你怎樣評核街口士多的風險及老闆的風格？怎樣知道茶餐廳的員工有沒有「穿櫃桶底」？在四大學到的風險評估，能有效評核細如「菌企」的風險嗎？
要培養對本地客戶敏銳的觸覺，非一朝一夕可達到。除非有數年跟這樣的客戶打交道的經驗及懂一點人情細故，否則在競爭激烈的會計市場獲得客戶的信任、贏得生意，談何容易。四大的會計師，很多就是缺乏的這樣的訓練。好不好？有沒有需要？這就因人而異了。
我的一位朋友，在四大拿到專業資格後便加入了一家local firm。因工作表現好 – 或因local firm 競爭較細吧 – 很快獲得老闆賞識，一直扶搖直上，發展並不比留在四大的同事差，但工作時間就肯定比四大的同事更好，升合夥人的機會更大。所謂條條大路通羅馬，只要找到適合自己的舞台，努力苦幹，會計師在local firm 或是四大都可以發光發亮。
原載在 Education Post: Big 4 V.S. 會計師樓：前途如何抉擇？ 及 條條大路通羅馬
會計師樓最主要的業務是審計（即核數）及稅務服務。大的會計師樓內的分工一般會較細。例如，四大一般會分開審計及稅務部門，審計部門內亦會再分行業組。規模少的 local firm 很多時因人手不多，沒有規模效益去設立各獨立部門。而且，客戶相對較細，負責的大規模審計及奇難雜症的機會相對較少，對「專門」知識的要求相對較少。
以銀行的審計為例，審計師必須要有充足的行業知識才能「多、快、好、省」地審核公司的財務狀況、判斷風險及審計的工作量。怎樣為充足的行業知識呢？宏觀如銀行業的行業趨勢、監管條例、資本要求、及簡單如怎樣填 banking return 等都是。亦因為銀行規模大，基本上四大以外的會計師樓都沒有能力接下這類巨無霸公司的生意。
另一方面，因為四大的收費高，一般接不到「街坊生意」。要學會審計茶餐廳、麵包鋪、 start-up 這類公司，在非四大肯定較好。一般的中型本地會計師樓則在四大及小 local firm 中間。
一聽到大銀行及街坊生意的分別，很多人一定以為在較大的會計師樓學藝一定比 local firm 好。如我前文所言，四大的確有更好的資源，遇到好師傅及複雜項目的機會亦更多。無可否認，四大學師滿師 qualified 的會計師，跳槽的機會較多，工資亦較高。但其實在四大學到的技能跟 local firm 有很大分別。好不好、怎樣學以致用，很看個人際遇、能耐及運氣。因此，四大並不是絕對地好，local firm 亦不是絕對地差。
認識一些在四大工作幾年的年輕會計師，希望有天開設自己的會計師樓。我認為他們要成功，不是沒有機會，但很難。為甚麼呢？因為四大的會計師自己創業，創立的肯定是 local firm。弔詭的是他們在四大的學會的審計技能及判斷客戶風險的商業觸覺，部分在 local firm 難以運用自如。在四大極少 / 沒有機會用到的中小企會計準則，現在要重新學習。可能你曾經負責屈臣氏的審計，熟透和黃及歐洲零售業的運作，但你怎樣評核街口士多的風險及老闆的風格？怎樣知道茶餐廳的員工有沒有「穿櫃桶底」？在四大學到的風險評估，能有效評核細如「菌企」的風險嗎？
要培養對本地客戶敏銳的觸覺，非一朝一夕可達到。除非有數年跟這樣的客戶打交道的經驗及懂一點人情細故，否則在競爭激烈的會計市場獲得客戶的信任、贏得生意，談何容易。四大的會計師，很多就是缺乏的這樣的訓練。好不好？有沒有需要？這就因人而異了。
我的一位朋友，在四大拿到專業資格後便加入了一家local firm。因工作表現好 – 或因local firm 競爭較細吧 – 很快獲得老闆賞識，一直扶搖直上，發展並不比留在四大的同事差，但工作時間就肯定比四大的同事更好，升合夥人的機會更大。所謂條條大路通羅馬，只要找到適合自己的舞台，努力苦幹，會計師在local firm 或是四大都可以發光發亮。
原載在 Education Post: Big 4 V.S. 會計師樓：前途如何抉擇？ 及 條條大路通羅馬
2014年7月8日星期二
Big 4的事業
從事會計行業的，一般會說在四大會計師樓學藝是最好的。
四大會計師樓階梯明顯，而且每年亦會自動晉升，大幅度加薪。只要安分守己地工作，不要犯大錯，基本上職位在高級審計員 (Senior/Assistant Manager) 以下都會自動收到升職加薪的「大信封」。我記得香港一家大學的會計系甚至用四大的晉升階梯、「8年成為高級審計經理」及月入數萬元作為招徠。因此難怪，在我的那個年代，大部分主修會計的大學同學都希望畢業後能在四大找到一份差事。很多大學同學認為進入四大即能踏上康莊大道，成為專業人士，平步青雲。
一般而言，四大的確比本地會計師樓，即所謂的 local firm，有更好的機會及資源。這亦是我畢業後第一份工作選擇四大的主因。不過，在我加入四大只有數月的時間內，我及同期的同事的事業發展及際遇已經出現了極大的分歧。在一年之內，已經有數位同期的同事因不同原因而離職。有的是因為工作壓力大、工作時間太長，身心俱疲，心灰意冷。有些另謀高就；有少部分是因為工作有問題而被勸退。這跟我身邊很多同學及同事心目中的平穩上揚的事業發展有極大的落差。
四大裡面臥虎藏龍，資源豐富。遇到好的師傅，當然學到會計知識及管理項目的智慧。我已離開了審計行業多年，但 business sense 及會計的基礎都建基於當年數位師傅的傾囊相贈，獲益良多。不過，大家在四大的際遇亦因人而異。我前文說過，有審計員被派到豬場數豬，過程極度痛苦。有同事被分配到「鑊job」（即極度難頂的項目，成因以後再寫），過著披星戴月的生涯。亦因為自動晉升，四大有大量並不稱職的高級審計員。有些部份同事跟著這些技術水平低，人品差劣的高級審計員，飽受折磨。
但一兩次肉體的痛苦，甚至是一兩個鑊job，最長亦只有數個月的時間，總會有完的一天。而且，四大的初級審計員不論有多忙，公司亦會盡量安排多於足夠的假期給同事準備專業考試，可以小休。就算同事真的要花掉所有假期複習，審計行業總有淡季。所以，最決定性、對事業有最大影響的，並不是短期的工作安排，而是被「定型」。
例如，頭一兩年接內地工作的同事，會因為北上的經驗豐富，會繼續被派到內地工作。負責金融業審計的，亦會繼續負責金融業的審計。如果當初被分配到的工作跟自己的能力及抱負一致，當然沒有問題。但這樣幸運的事情不一定發生在你身上，亦肯定沒有發生在我身上。而且，被「定型」後要轉型，不是不可能，但對沒有討價能力的初級審計員來說，很困難。
有同事因為當初級審計員時沒有機會參與大規模的項目，自己亦沒有主動爭取，當高級審計員時就顯得力有不逮，難擔大旗。記得有其中一位同事異常努力去補救，但最後亦未能升上經理，鬱鬱不得志，意興闌珊地離開了。亦有一位同事一直想從事金融行業，但公司一直不允許她轉換行業組。她要離開四大後再轉了兩次工才能進入心儀的公司。雖然最後她達成願望，但歲月已蹉跎了。
要避免蹉跎歲月及白白浪費的機會，定要懂得四大的運作及遊戲規則。怎樣可以快人一步呢？下期再寫。
原載在 Education Post: Big 4的事業 及 Big 4的事業 - 蹉跎歲月
四大會計師樓階梯明顯，而且每年亦會自動晉升，大幅度加薪。只要安分守己地工作，不要犯大錯，基本上職位在高級審計員 (Senior/Assistant Manager) 以下都會自動收到升職加薪的「大信封」。我記得香港一家大學的會計系甚至用四大的晉升階梯、「8年成為高級審計經理」及月入數萬元作為招徠。因此難怪，在我的那個年代，大部分主修會計的大學同學都希望畢業後能在四大找到一份差事。很多大學同學認為進入四大即能踏上康莊大道，成為專業人士，平步青雲。
一般而言，四大的確比本地會計師樓，即所謂的 local firm，有更好的機會及資源。這亦是我畢業後第一份工作選擇四大的主因。不過，在我加入四大只有數月的時間內，我及同期的同事的事業發展及際遇已經出現了極大的分歧。在一年之內，已經有數位同期的同事因不同原因而離職。有的是因為工作壓力大、工作時間太長，身心俱疲，心灰意冷。有些另謀高就；有少部分是因為工作有問題而被勸退。這跟我身邊很多同學及同事心目中的平穩上揚的事業發展有極大的落差。
四大裡面臥虎藏龍，資源豐富。遇到好的師傅，當然學到會計知識及管理項目的智慧。我已離開了審計行業多年，但 business sense 及會計的基礎都建基於當年數位師傅的傾囊相贈，獲益良多。不過，大家在四大的際遇亦因人而異。我前文說過，有審計員被派到豬場數豬，過程極度痛苦。有同事被分配到「鑊job」（即極度難頂的項目，成因以後再寫），過著披星戴月的生涯。亦因為自動晉升，四大有大量並不稱職的高級審計員。有些部份同事跟著這些技術水平低，人品差劣的高級審計員，飽受折磨。
但一兩次肉體的痛苦，甚至是一兩個鑊job，最長亦只有數個月的時間，總會有完的一天。而且，四大的初級審計員不論有多忙，公司亦會盡量安排多於足夠的假期給同事準備專業考試，可以小休。就算同事真的要花掉所有假期複習，審計行業總有淡季。所以，最決定性、對事業有最大影響的，並不是短期的工作安排，而是被「定型」。
例如，頭一兩年接內地工作的同事，會因為北上的經驗豐富，會繼續被派到內地工作。負責金融業審計的，亦會繼續負責金融業的審計。如果當初被分配到的工作跟自己的能力及抱負一致，當然沒有問題。但這樣幸運的事情不一定發生在你身上，亦肯定沒有發生在我身上。而且，被「定型」後要轉型，不是不可能，但對沒有討價能力的初級審計員來說，很困難。
有同事因為當初級審計員時沒有機會參與大規模的項目，自己亦沒有主動爭取，當高級審計員時就顯得力有不逮，難擔大旗。記得有其中一位同事異常努力去補救，但最後亦未能升上經理，鬱鬱不得志，意興闌珊地離開了。亦有一位同事一直想從事金融行業，但公司一直不允許她轉換行業組。她要離開四大後再轉了兩次工才能進入心儀的公司。雖然最後她達成願望，但歲月已蹉跎了。
要避免蹉跎歲月及白白浪費的機會，定要懂得四大的運作及遊戲規則。怎樣可以快人一步呢？下期再寫。
原載在 Education Post: Big 4的事業 及 Big 4的事業 - 蹉跎歲月
2014年5月9日星期五
Summer internship Dos and Don’ts
The MBA summer internship started out as an American phenomenon, and there are still very few such openings available outside the United States or offered by non-US companies. The reason is that almost all graduate business schools in other parts of the world have one-year, full-time MBA programmes. Therefore, most of their graduates complete the course and have a short summer break before re-entering the workforce. In contrast, most top US business schools offer two-year MBA programmes, giving companies the chance to assess the talent pool by recruiting high-calibre summer interns and trying them out with a view to later full-time roles.
Even so, the MBA internship is a slightly weird creation. Most people now see it not just as a matter of giving and gaining useful experience, but as a crucial part of the recruitment process. Employers realise that observing how someone performs on the job is the best way of judging his or her long-term suitability and potential. Essentially, that is why the MBA internship came about. However, it does also provide a great opportunity for students contemplating a career switch to see exactly what the job, company and sector are all about.
Given that, the reason I find it weird is because, whatever the short-term responsibilities, an internship is not a “real” job. Typically, MBA students are thrown into a working environment which might seem real, but differs in important ways. As “trainee managers”, or “summer associates”, the interns are assigned to a team and usually have subordinates to lead. They are given tasks and projects to demonstrate their business skills and managerial talents.
However, this inevitably creates an interesting dynamic. The summer associates may rank higher in the corporate hierarchy than fellow team members, but they may also have little or no relevant experience. They have to learn from other staff about many aspects of the work and the firm’s culture. To operate effectively, they may well be completely dependent on the assistance and co-operation of their subordinates. Without that, MBA interns are walking on thin ice and will have trouble contributing in any significant way.
If they hope to return to the same company after graduation, they must fit in quickly, win over advocates, and take every chance to prove themselves. They must also stay on top of the daily routine, while figuring out what they want to do and multi-tasking in order to make an impression on as many people as possible.
When asked, I advise MBA students about to start internships to expect some tough tasks, not complain about them, and always show willing. By being nice to everyone, you earn the respect of your team. In general, it is amazing how many people don’t get these basics right, therefore spoiling their chances of getting an offer to return to a full-time role the following year.
Even so, the MBA internship is a slightly weird creation. Most people now see it not just as a matter of giving and gaining useful experience, but as a crucial part of the recruitment process. Employers realise that observing how someone performs on the job is the best way of judging his or her long-term suitability and potential. Essentially, that is why the MBA internship came about. However, it does also provide a great opportunity for students contemplating a career switch to see exactly what the job, company and sector are all about.
Given that, the reason I find it weird is because, whatever the short-term responsibilities, an internship is not a “real” job. Typically, MBA students are thrown into a working environment which might seem real, but differs in important ways. As “trainee managers”, or “summer associates”, the interns are assigned to a team and usually have subordinates to lead. They are given tasks and projects to demonstrate their business skills and managerial talents.
However, this inevitably creates an interesting dynamic. The summer associates may rank higher in the corporate hierarchy than fellow team members, but they may also have little or no relevant experience. They have to learn from other staff about many aspects of the work and the firm’s culture. To operate effectively, they may well be completely dependent on the assistance and co-operation of their subordinates. Without that, MBA interns are walking on thin ice and will have trouble contributing in any significant way.
If they hope to return to the same company after graduation, they must fit in quickly, win over advocates, and take every chance to prove themselves. They must also stay on top of the daily routine, while figuring out what they want to do and multi-tasking in order to make an impression on as many people as possible.
When asked, I advise MBA students about to start internships to expect some tough tasks, not complain about them, and always show willing. By being nice to everyone, you earn the respect of your team. In general, it is amazing how many people don’t get these basics right, therefore spoiling their chances of getting an offer to return to a full-time role the following year.
2014年4月27日星期日
中環的光環
早前有前輩討論大學畢業生在會計界的出路，這令我想起如煙往事。
我的一個好友，為人playful，廣交天下朋友，早年在英國名牌大學畢業。可能是因為放浪英倫太久，鄉愁日深，以致他對一切香港的事情都趨之若騖，對香港帶來的東西都珍而重之。遺憾的是，這包括了擇偶條件。他最愛的竟然是比港女更港女的極品。這一點不知道應否算是英國教育的失敗。
記得有一次跟中學同學唱K，他說會帶幾個朋友過來。結果帶來了幾個只有外表，其他甚麼都沒有的女女。看著她們「易容」後的臉，我感到迷茫。迷茫並不是出於歧視她們唸書不成又沒有內涵。迷茫是因為我第一次跟如此質素的女子接觸，不懂招架。我不看電視劇，又少看報紙娛樂版，所以真的不知道跟她們聊甚麼才好。
四目相投，death air，尷尬，歌又未輪到的我選的，只好亂找些東西聊。我對她做甚麼，有甚麼興趣，其實甚麼興趣也沒有。不過，還算是個樣貌娟好的女子，也隨便答幾句吧。啊啊啊你做邊行？
「我在銀行打工的。」對於剛認識的人，我個人認為最好不要透露自己做投資銀行。
「係邊度嘅銀行返工啊即係？」該女子還不心息。
「中環。」
該女子頓了一頓，要數秒才能回神，之後再加個崇拜加羨慕的表情。阿小姐我可能是負責掃地的，妳是否應該了解清楚我的工資，才給我反應？當然，這小女孩只個「極品」，不能當作常規。不過，在外國留學加個專業資格，亦比不上區區一句「我係中環IFC番工」。在那一刻，我才深深感受到中環的威力。原來香港還有人對中環存在如此幻想。
對於我來說，中環只是拼搏的地點，人多車多，餐廳又貴又難吃又要等位，下班後最好不要回來。當會計師樓相繼離開中環時，我記得其中一個大家反對的理由時影響招聘。我不相信畢業生會單單因為公司地址而放棄四大的聘書。後來因為週末經常上班，才慢慢發現，週末時很多人會千里迢迢到中環消遣。原來，對於某些應徵者，對於某些公司，地址對選擇公司真的有影響。原來，很多在中環上班的人，都以為自己頭上有光環。
這樣的事情，倫敦及紐約都沒有發生。
國際會計師事務所及律師事務所在倫敦及紐約辦公室很多都不在市中心的黃金地段。羅兵咸永道、安永的倫敦辦公室在泰晤士河南岸，傳統上一不是商業區，二並不是一線的市中心地帶。花旗 - 及後來搬進來的高盛 - 紐約總部位於TriBeCa，在80年代時肯定不是紐約的中環，而是破舊的工業區。摩根士丹利及巴克萊的總部位於時代廣場，地點像銅鑼灣多於金鐘。但這些公司的辦公室寬趟舒適，有優質飯堂、咖啡館、gym，當地員工肯定比香港的同事開心。我認識的紐約專業人士，沒有一個會以自己在華爾街上班為榮。大家拼的是公司的實力及福利。
為甚麼香港沒有發生這樣的事情？為甚麼中環對那麼多人會有吸引力？我真的不懂。
原載在 Education Post: 中環的光環
我的一個好友，為人playful，廣交天下朋友，早年在英國名牌大學畢業。可能是因為放浪英倫太久，鄉愁日深，以致他對一切香港的事情都趨之若騖，對香港帶來的東西都珍而重之。遺憾的是，這包括了擇偶條件。他最愛的竟然是比港女更港女的極品。這一點不知道應否算是英國教育的失敗。
記得有一次跟中學同學唱K，他說會帶幾個朋友過來。結果帶來了幾個只有外表，其他甚麼都沒有的女女。看著她們「易容」後的臉，我感到迷茫。迷茫並不是出於歧視她們唸書不成又沒有內涵。迷茫是因為我第一次跟如此質素的女子接觸，不懂招架。我不看電視劇，又少看報紙娛樂版，所以真的不知道跟她們聊甚麼才好。
四目相投，death air，尷尬，歌又未輪到的我選的，只好亂找些東西聊。我對她做甚麼，有甚麼興趣，其實甚麼興趣也沒有。不過，還算是個樣貌娟好的女子，也隨便答幾句吧。啊啊啊你做邊行？
「我在銀行打工的。」對於剛認識的人，我個人認為最好不要透露自己做投資銀行。
「係邊度嘅銀行返工啊即係？」該女子還不心息。
「中環。」
該女子頓了一頓，要數秒才能回神，之後再加個崇拜加羨慕的表情。阿小姐我可能是負責掃地的，妳是否應該了解清楚我的工資，才給我反應？當然，這小女孩只個「極品」，不能當作常規。不過，在外國留學加個專業資格，亦比不上區區一句「我係中環IFC番工」。在那一刻，我才深深感受到中環的威力。原來香港還有人對中環存在如此幻想。
對於我來說，中環只是拼搏的地點，人多車多，餐廳又貴又難吃又要等位，下班後最好不要回來。當會計師樓相繼離開中環時，我記得其中一個大家反對的理由時影響招聘。我不相信畢業生會單單因為公司地址而放棄四大的聘書。後來因為週末經常上班，才慢慢發現，週末時很多人會千里迢迢到中環消遣。原來，對於某些應徵者，對於某些公司，地址對選擇公司真的有影響。原來，很多在中環上班的人，都以為自己頭上有光環。
這樣的事情，倫敦及紐約都沒有發生。
國際會計師事務所及律師事務所在倫敦及紐約辦公室很多都不在市中心的黃金地段。羅兵咸永道、安永的倫敦辦公室在泰晤士河南岸，傳統上一不是商業區，二並不是一線的市中心地帶。花旗 - 及後來搬進來的高盛 - 紐約總部位於TriBeCa，在80年代時肯定不是紐約的中環，而是破舊的工業區。摩根士丹利及巴克萊的總部位於時代廣場，地點像銅鑼灣多於金鐘。但這些公司的辦公室寬趟舒適，有優質飯堂、咖啡館、gym，當地員工肯定比香港的同事開心。我認識的紐約專業人士，沒有一個會以自己在華爾街上班為榮。大家拼的是公司的實力及福利。
為甚麼香港沒有發生這樣的事情？為甚麼中環對那麼多人會有吸引力？我真的不懂。
原載在 Education Post: 中環的光環
2014年4月24日星期四
Secrets to a successful career switch
Most MBA holders, myself included, took career and financial risks in deciding to take a two-year, full-time programme because they were unsatisfied with the path they were on. Some yearned for a better career in a different industry. Others were driven more by the prospect of pay rises and promotions in their current sector.
For the “career switcher”, an MBA seems to offer the best chance of starting somewhere else with a clean slate – but not at the bottom of the ladder. After all, many schools brag about their success in placing career switchers with leading corporations, consulting firms and investment banks. Every year, there are probably thousands of such stories of top business schools helping students achieve this goal - and I have heard quite a few of them in person.
A few of my classmates are now management consultants with the best known firms. Before the MBA, they were high school teachers, specialising in mathematics, science and English. They had no prior background in business, but are now advising senior executives and board-level directors of some of the world’s most successful multinationals. Their career switch has been dramatic and successful, showing just what a good business degree can help you achieve. The MBA has transformed their careers, but my own encounters with them showed that it takes something extra to actually do it.
Following the curriculum and duly completing your assignments will, at best, only get you an average grade at a leading business school. In the first two terms, the distinctions and accolades usually go to those with prior business experience. So, if your main goal is to switch career, a relevant summer internship is generally a pre-requisite. Since preparations and applications for these usually begin during the first term, there is little time to play catch-up. And the truth is that students with business experience and top grades have a much better chance of getting the best internships and – later – the best jobs.
For my friends to win through, it took diligence. Before accepting their MBA offers, they did extensive research on each school’s student profiles and were well aware of the competition among classmates for each type of job. Some rejected offers from higher-ranked schools on the grounds that their chances of getting into a dream job from there would be so small. Long before classes started, they read the leading financial journals to familiarise themselves with the latest business trends and concepts. They also networked with alumni in their preferred industry and learned how best to prepare for job interviews. These individuals also took the time to study consulting cases and see how they worked. Then, when it came to recruitment season, they knew all about the analytical frameworks and were able to ace their interviews with a show of real confidence.
Their success can be put down to the Boy Scout motto: be prepared. You would be surprised to learn how many people at highly rated universities miss out on opportunities because of complacency and over-confidence. By being proactive and preparing well, you will end up ahead of them and ahead of the curve.
Originally posted on Education Post.
For the “career switcher”, an MBA seems to offer the best chance of starting somewhere else with a clean slate – but not at the bottom of the ladder. After all, many schools brag about their success in placing career switchers with leading corporations, consulting firms and investment banks. Every year, there are probably thousands of such stories of top business schools helping students achieve this goal - and I have heard quite a few of them in person.
A few of my classmates are now management consultants with the best known firms. Before the MBA, they were high school teachers, specialising in mathematics, science and English. They had no prior background in business, but are now advising senior executives and board-level directors of some of the world’s most successful multinationals. Their career switch has been dramatic and successful, showing just what a good business degree can help you achieve. The MBA has transformed their careers, but my own encounters with them showed that it takes something extra to actually do it.
Following the curriculum and duly completing your assignments will, at best, only get you an average grade at a leading business school. In the first two terms, the distinctions and accolades usually go to those with prior business experience. So, if your main goal is to switch career, a relevant summer internship is generally a pre-requisite. Since preparations and applications for these usually begin during the first term, there is little time to play catch-up. And the truth is that students with business experience and top grades have a much better chance of getting the best internships and – later – the best jobs.
For my friends to win through, it took diligence. Before accepting their MBA offers, they did extensive research on each school’s student profiles and were well aware of the competition among classmates for each type of job. Some rejected offers from higher-ranked schools on the grounds that their chances of getting into a dream job from there would be so small. Long before classes started, they read the leading financial journals to familiarise themselves with the latest business trends and concepts. They also networked with alumni in their preferred industry and learned how best to prepare for job interviews. These individuals also took the time to study consulting cases and see how they worked. Then, when it came to recruitment season, they knew all about the analytical frameworks and were able to ace their interviews with a show of real confidence.
Their success can be put down to the Boy Scout motto: be prepared. You would be surprised to learn how many people at highly rated universities miss out on opportunities because of complacency and over-confidence. By being proactive and preparing well, you will end up ahead of them and ahead of the curve.
Originally posted on Education Post.
2014年4月23日星期三
初級審計員歲月
我認為，當初級審計員的經驗非常寶貴。
在各大會計師樓，剛畢業進審計行業的初級審計員一般被戲稱為「小朋友」。相對大學的其他同學，在會計師樓工作的「小朋友」的工資低、工時長、壓力大，亦沒有什麼job envy及榮譽可言。如果跟舊同學吃飯，聊起近況，當你聽到你的朋友滿懷不憤，投訴自己懷才不遇，bonus 只有三十多萬，其他同事有四十多萬的時候，你怎樣跟他說自己的一年賺不到20萬的際遇？
最辛苦的，可能是到內地出差。如在一線大城市如北京上海廣州當然沒有問題。不過這些機會不是屬於我，及你，的。有很多時要到內地三四五六線小鎮，過著民工般的生活。數年前，曾經在網上瘋傳的一封電郵，講敘一個某四大的駐上海初級審計員到豬場數豬的痛苦經驗。在公司眼中，初級審計員是工廠女工，重複又重複地查賬，對單，找發票，低增值，亦是可替代品。
不過，當初級審計員的歲月最寶貴就是因為可以做這些「低端」的工作。「小朋友」每天的工作都是在「商業的最前線」，親手接觸變成會計帳數字前的交易資料。對客戶的公司來說，這些重要資料都是高度機密。「小朋友」每天都要處理大量這樣的機密資料，工作量大，可能盲目了：審核過客戶的帳目後，你亦同時掌握了客戶成功的因數及商業模式。如果你發現街口的茶餐廳原來一直賺取暴利，但又少交了稅。你清楚了解他們的生意，亦都看過他們的供應商合同、勞工合約，剛好你同朋友有幾十萬想創業…
大家都說，當審計可以學會計。我認為，會計哪裡都可以學。大行ibanker分析員都懂一般的會計。但你問問他們，如要請秘書、茶水阿姨要出多少錢，怎樣才是好的買賣合約條款，airway bill 的terms 怎樣看，在怎樣開香港及BVI公司，甚至一程地鐵巴士的價錢，十個有九「中環才俊」個答不上。上心地做一年審計的「小朋友」肯定知道答案。
所以，在我看來，當「小朋友」學到最寶貴的，是商界的運作。學的不只是會計，而是近距離看公司實際運作，學做生意。
原載在 Education Post: 初級審計員歲月
在各大會計師樓，剛畢業進審計行業的初級審計員一般被戲稱為「小朋友」。相對大學的其他同學，在會計師樓工作的「小朋友」的工資低、工時長、壓力大，亦沒有什麼job envy及榮譽可言。如果跟舊同學吃飯，聊起近況，當你聽到你的朋友滿懷不憤，投訴自己懷才不遇，bonus 只有三十多萬，其他同事有四十多萬的時候，你怎樣跟他說自己的一年賺不到20萬的際遇？
最辛苦的，可能是到內地出差。如在一線大城市如北京上海廣州當然沒有問題。不過這些機會不是屬於我，及你，的。有很多時要到內地三四五六線小鎮，過著民工般的生活。數年前，曾經在網上瘋傳的一封電郵，講敘一個某四大的駐上海初級審計員到豬場數豬的痛苦經驗。在公司眼中，初級審計員是工廠女工，重複又重複地查賬，對單，找發票，低增值，亦是可替代品。
不過，當初級審計員的歲月最寶貴就是因為可以做這些「低端」的工作。「小朋友」每天的工作都是在「商業的最前線」，親手接觸變成會計帳數字前的交易資料。對客戶的公司來說，這些重要資料都是高度機密。「小朋友」每天都要處理大量這樣的機密資料，工作量大，可能盲目了：審核過客戶的帳目後，你亦同時掌握了客戶成功的因數及商業模式。如果你發現街口的茶餐廳原來一直賺取暴利，但又少交了稅。你清楚了解他們的生意，亦都看過他們的供應商合同、勞工合約，剛好你同朋友有幾十萬想創業…
大家都說，當審計可以學會計。我認為，會計哪裡都可以學。大行ibanker分析員都懂一般的會計。但你問問他們，如要請秘書、茶水阿姨要出多少錢，怎樣才是好的買賣合約條款，airway bill 的terms 怎樣看，在怎樣開香港及BVI公司，甚至一程地鐵巴士的價錢，十個有九「中環才俊」個答不上。上心地做一年審計的「小朋友」肯定知道答案。
所以，在我看來，當「小朋友」學到最寶貴的，是商界的運作。學的不只是會計，而是近距離看公司實際運作，學做生意。
原載在 Education Post: 初級審計員歲月
2014年4月22日星期二
The reinvention of business school
The ultimate yardstick for measuring your success in business is, of course, your business. Since their establishment, business schools have successfully trained generations of MBAs who have gone on to become successful C-suite executives, partners of management consulting firms, managing directors of investment banks and fund managers. However, very few have businesses of their own. MBAs are mostly good managers, but not all are entrepreneurs or business magnates. They are successful climbers of corporate ladders, but not rock stars who can bring disruptive forces that change businesses for the better. Business schools do not have a good record in training entrepreneurs or picking winners.
In this regard, business schools and business education are an embarrassing disappointment.
It is tempting to resort to the wisdom of the age - “A students teach; B students work for C students.” There is some truth in this, but in the age of knowledge, this may no longer be as relevant. Before Mark Zuckerberg dropped out of Harvard College he was on track to graduate magna cum laude. The founders of Google and Yahoo dropped out of their schools to found their companies, but they were in the PhD programme at Stanford University, working on a groundbreaking discovery that yielded unlimited commercial potential. They are highly educated and business-savvy, but there is no trace of business school education on their résumés.
Nonetheless, to say that business knowledge is less important than technological breakthroughs could not be further from the truth. It is generally believed that the first decline of Apple in the late 1980s and 1990s was attributable to the ousting of Steve Jobs engineered by John Sculley, a seasoned executive Jobs had recruited from PepsiCo. But contrary to popular belief, Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple and designer of the legendary Apple II computer, actually attributed the success of later generations of Apple computers to the skills of senior managers such as Sculley. Business education, therefore, should be as important to executives, if not more important, than technical expertise.
The questions are: where do these entrepreneurs receive their business education, and who are their professors? There is a limit as to what anyone can achieve by their own reading. The vacuum can be easily filled by venture capitalists who invest in entrepreneurs, providing them with capital, advice and coaching. Mike Markkula provided Steve Jobs and his team with much-needed guidance when Apple was in its infancy. Peter Thiel and Sean Parker were early advisers to Mark Zuckerberg. The gold standard of MBA education, a two-year full-time programme, may be too time-consuming and inflexible to meet the needs of up and coming business stars.
In order to remain relevant, business schools are reinventing themselves. Some offer more flexible means of delivery, such as online or part-time programmes. European schools are well-known for their one-year programmes. But top business schools are reluctant to revamp their two-year MBA programmes. Despite this, they do incorporate elements of entrepreneurship in their education, push students into joining start-ups, and expand their short-term executive training offerings.
If you are pretty sure you are not going to start your own business, why should the re-positioning of business schools be relevant to you? Firstly, the ability of business professors to respond to emerging business trends reflects their business acumen. Secondly, as I argued in my previous article, your network may be the most important asset you can acquire at business school. Even if you are not Mark Zuckerberg you may meet the next Zuckerberg at business school, and you could be the next Eduardo Saverin.
Originally posted on Education Post.
In this regard, business schools and business education are an embarrassing disappointment.
It is tempting to resort to the wisdom of the age - “A students teach; B students work for C students.” There is some truth in this, but in the age of knowledge, this may no longer be as relevant. Before Mark Zuckerberg dropped out of Harvard College he was on track to graduate magna cum laude. The founders of Google and Yahoo dropped out of their schools to found their companies, but they were in the PhD programme at Stanford University, working on a groundbreaking discovery that yielded unlimited commercial potential. They are highly educated and business-savvy, but there is no trace of business school education on their résumés.
Nonetheless, to say that business knowledge is less important than technological breakthroughs could not be further from the truth. It is generally believed that the first decline of Apple in the late 1980s and 1990s was attributable to the ousting of Steve Jobs engineered by John Sculley, a seasoned executive Jobs had recruited from PepsiCo. But contrary to popular belief, Steve Wozniak, co-founder of Apple and designer of the legendary Apple II computer, actually attributed the success of later generations of Apple computers to the skills of senior managers such as Sculley. Business education, therefore, should be as important to executives, if not more important, than technical expertise.
The questions are: where do these entrepreneurs receive their business education, and who are their professors? There is a limit as to what anyone can achieve by their own reading. The vacuum can be easily filled by venture capitalists who invest in entrepreneurs, providing them with capital, advice and coaching. Mike Markkula provided Steve Jobs and his team with much-needed guidance when Apple was in its infancy. Peter Thiel and Sean Parker were early advisers to Mark Zuckerberg. The gold standard of MBA education, a two-year full-time programme, may be too time-consuming and inflexible to meet the needs of up and coming business stars.
In order to remain relevant, business schools are reinventing themselves. Some offer more flexible means of delivery, such as online or part-time programmes. European schools are well-known for their one-year programmes. But top business schools are reluctant to revamp their two-year MBA programmes. Despite this, they do incorporate elements of entrepreneurship in their education, push students into joining start-ups, and expand their short-term executive training offerings.
If you are pretty sure you are not going to start your own business, why should the re-positioning of business schools be relevant to you? Firstly, the ability of business professors to respond to emerging business trends reflects their business acumen. Secondly, as I argued in my previous article, your network may be the most important asset you can acquire at business school. Even if you are not Mark Zuckerberg you may meet the next Zuckerberg at business school, and you could be the next Eduardo Saverin.
Originally posted on Education Post.
2014年4月21日星期一
Understand what an admissions team wants to see
Every year, thousands of deserving candidates apply to top MBA programmes –and are rejected. This year, for instance, Harvard Business School only admitted 12 per cent of applicants, the majority of whom are highly accomplished by any standards. This number is typical of all leading schools, so if you aim to attend a first-rate programme, you have to find a way to stand out from other applicants.
The obvious answer is to be among the best and the brightest in every area the admissions committee looks at. Having a magna cum laude AB from Harvard College and a few years’ experience at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs immediately catches the eye. So does a BS from Caltech and founding a successful start-up. However, the very reason most professionals want an MBA is because they don’t yet have such accomplishments on their CV.
Realistically, nothing can be done about an undergraduate GPA (grade point average) or a first job out of college. However, you do have a greater degree of control over the remaining parts or your business school application – the reference letter, essays, and GMAT score. In fact, I know of a few candidates who have impressed admissions committee with an outstanding GMAT score.
Usually, they spent a substantial amount of time preparing for the GMAT and other forms of standardised test. I have even read of some applicants quitting their jobs just to prepare for the test and add an extra 10 or 20 points to their total score. In my view, though, this type of dedication is misplaced.
My rationale is that trying to improve a GMAT score which may already be in the top 4 per cent overall, there is a diminishing marginal return on time invested. Most top schools accept candidates with scores in the range of 680 to 760 – out of a maximum 800. So, if you have achieved a fairly good GMAT score, it is more important to spend time crafting your application essays and coaching your referee to emphasise the right things.
The GMAT is important, but it is one-dimensional. It shows how smart you are, but in business school, as in the real world, being smart can only get you so far. Good essays give more colour, revealing other talents and aspects of your personality.
The primary goal of these essays is to let the admissions committee know who you are and where you want to go to. You should be answering the implicit questions why this business school and why you. When I wrote application essays, I kept thinking about how best to demonstrate the “why me”, while ensuring the essay was interesting to read and would hold the attention for a few minutes. The easiest mistake is to jump right in and take the set question at face value. Instead, you should think long and hard about what the admissions committee is really asking. Knowing what they want will help you tick more boxes on their scorecard.
Originally posted on Education Post.
The obvious answer is to be among the best and the brightest in every area the admissions committee looks at. Having a magna cum laude AB from Harvard College and a few years’ experience at McKinsey or Goldman Sachs immediately catches the eye. So does a BS from Caltech and founding a successful start-up. However, the very reason most professionals want an MBA is because they don’t yet have such accomplishments on their CV.
Realistically, nothing can be done about an undergraduate GPA (grade point average) or a first job out of college. However, you do have a greater degree of control over the remaining parts or your business school application – the reference letter, essays, and GMAT score. In fact, I know of a few candidates who have impressed admissions committee with an outstanding GMAT score.
Usually, they spent a substantial amount of time preparing for the GMAT and other forms of standardised test. I have even read of some applicants quitting their jobs just to prepare for the test and add an extra 10 or 20 points to their total score. In my view, though, this type of dedication is misplaced.
My rationale is that trying to improve a GMAT score which may already be in the top 4 per cent overall, there is a diminishing marginal return on time invested. Most top schools accept candidates with scores in the range of 680 to 760 – out of a maximum 800. So, if you have achieved a fairly good GMAT score, it is more important to spend time crafting your application essays and coaching your referee to emphasise the right things.
The GMAT is important, but it is one-dimensional. It shows how smart you are, but in business school, as in the real world, being smart can only get you so far. Good essays give more colour, revealing other talents and aspects of your personality.
The primary goal of these essays is to let the admissions committee know who you are and where you want to go to. You should be answering the implicit questions why this business school and why you. When I wrote application essays, I kept thinking about how best to demonstrate the “why me”, while ensuring the essay was interesting to read and would hold the attention for a few minutes. The easiest mistake is to jump right in and take the set question at face value. Instead, you should think long and hard about what the admissions committee is really asking. Knowing what they want will help you tick more boxes on their scorecard.
Originally posted on Education Post.
訂閱：
文章 (Atom)