有时，及时将公司出手是件好事

    哈佛商学院（Harvard Business School）副教授诺阿姆•瓦瑟曼认为，公司创始人可分为两类。“国王”型的创始人，希望建立自己的帝国并改变世界；“富有型”的创始人则希望在获得财务收益的同时，发挥公司的成长潜力。

    在史蒂夫•乔布斯的领导下，苹果公司（Apple）成长为行业巨人，同时乔布斯仍然掌管着公司的生杀大权。许多企业家每看到这类成功故事，就想当然地认为，公司创始人既当国王又腰缠万贯，也并非不可能。然而事实上，“99%的公司创始人在某个时刻都将面临‘二选一’的抉择。”瓦瑟曼表示。“但愿他们能够选择与自己目标和雄心更为一致的方向。”

    瓦瑟曼指出，理解并明确你最认可哪一类创始人，以更好地把握企业家成长历程中有可能面临的关键抉择，这一点至关重要。国王型创始人不仅很难与他人分享对公司的控制权，而且当现实与其愿景不一致时，他们也会表现得固执己见。富有型创始人奋斗的动机是获得作为企业家的现实回报，不管这回报是金钱还是自由，而且在公司成长及变化的过程中，他们更可能分享对公司的控制权。

    事实上，与乔布斯相比，苹果公司联合创始人史蒂夫•沃兹尼亚克是更典型的国王型创始人，他的梦想就是要为普通大众提供强大的计算能力。苹果上市之前，他将自己的股份以低于市场的价格，卖给了他认为应当在财务上受到奖赏的核心早期员工，瓦瑟曼介绍说。

    “每个企业家都认为自己与众不同，独一无二。”他表示。“但是，这些形形色色的人从来都会面临相同的问题，有可能犯相同的错误。”

    赛格威公司（Segway）创始人迪恩•卡门和耐克公司（Nike）创始人菲尔•奈特也属于典型的国王型创始人。这两位一门心思地要保持对公司的掌控权，以至于公司坐失成长或者资本扩充的良机。卡门坚信，赛格威将彻底颠覆交通运输业，因而不顾一切地坚持让员工保守秘密，在正式上市前不能在市场上试销赛格威汽车。上世纪80年代，奈特曾公开嘲笑彼时刚刚兴起的有氧运动趋势，并且坚持认为，耐克应该继续专门为精英运动员设计产品。如此刚愎自用的代价是，眼睁睁地看着锐步（Reebok）由于销售女款运动鞋而取代耐克成为行业王者。

    与此相反，教育社交网络Grockit的创始人法布德•尼维却甘愿辞去首席执行官的职务，并招募能带领公司再上一个台阶的人担当此职。“能够聘任到具备相当才干的人的唯一办法，就是我辞去首席执行官的工作。”尼维表示。“如果你尚未做好准备，明白有一天你的公司会取得巨大成功，而你会感觉力不从心，无法继续胜任领导职务，那你不免有些短视或者窄视了。”

    无论国王型模式还是富有型模式都并非最佳，瓦瑟曼指出。企业家应该始终如一地坚持自己的奋斗目标。比如说，如果让国王型企业家放弃对公司的控制权，再眼看着公司在别人的领导下，身价飞涨至几十亿美元，成为妇孺皆知的成功传奇，然而到头来，其最初的愿景并未实现，那他们也不大可能对最终结果感到心满意足。

    1992年，凯利•坎贝尔在美国北卡罗莱纳州的罗利创建了软件开发公司Interface Technologies Inc。他的梦想是要用设计得美轮美奂的技术去改变世界。然而自那时起，他开始认识到，在这个创新代表一切的行业，分享控制权是确保公司生存和发展的根本。

    “我经过了多年才完成这一转变，也就是你不必控制每件事，相反，你可以把控制权交给内部员工或者客户。”坎贝尔表示。“其实这与技术没多大关系，或者说跟我们用技术做事的能力关系也不大，关键是你如何应用技术解决具体问题，帮助客户实现需求。经历过这种转变之后，我不再是掌控欲十足的人了。”

    在互联网繁荣时期，坎贝尔的同时代人纷纷创建企业，然后再将它们以几百万美元的高价出手。而他却更愿意建立一家企业，并让这家企业，无论是在繁荣期还是即将来临的衰败期，都不停止茁壮成长。“上世纪90年代末，人们嘲笑我经营的是家生活方式企业。”他表示：“然而两三年后，事情就没那么可笑了。”

    大卫•威韦罗曾在瓦瑟曼的课上学过创始人模式理论，但他不确定自己到底属于国王型还是富有型。2009年，他创建了RentJuice公司，为的是要实现自己的愿景：帮助房地产经纪人与地产管理专业人士实现高效互连。

    “我对自己的公司充满了感情，无法割舍。从这个角度说，我永远也不会把它卖掉。”威韦罗表示。尽管如此，他仍然四处寻找风险资本支持，以有足够的资源去实现自己的愿景。而且，他也热情欢迎投资者贡献各自的经验和信息。

    如果硬要选择的话，他说他更愿意将自己归入国王型。“大概由于我独自推销这款产品时间过久的缘故，我没有将自己视为需要分裂的单细胞组织。”威韦罗表示：“我需要调整自己的定位，当个雇佣者、指导者以及补偿者。这于我而言可是个巨大的转变。如果我能早点认识并完成这一转变的话，也许我们公司还能成长得更快。”

    译者：大海

    Company founders fall into two categories, according to Noam Wasserman, an associate professor at Harvard Business School. The "king" wants to build an empire and change the world, while a "rich" founder is motivated by financial gains and unleashing a company's growth potential.

    Many entrepreneurs look at company founders like Apple's (AAPL) Steve Jobs -- who managed to grow his company into a behemoth while also maintaining control -- and assume it's possible to be both a king and rich. In reality, "99% of those founders are going to be facing, at some point, a choice between one and the other," Wasserman says. "Hopefully they're picking the fork in the road that is much more consistent with what their goals and aspirations are."

    It's important to understand what type you identify with most to navigate the key decisions that will arise during any entrepreneurial venture, Wasserman says. King founders find it difficult to share control and can be very stubborn when facts on the ground challenge their vision. Rich founders are motivated by the practical rewards of entrepreneurship, whether it's money or freedom, and are more likely to share control as their venture grows and changes.

    In fact, Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak is a better example than Jobs of a king, motivated by a dream of bringing computing power to the masses. When Apple was about to go public, he sold his own shares below-market to the key early employees he thought should be rewarded financially, Wasserman says.

    "Every entrepreneur thinks they're unique and idiosyncratic," he says. "Those very diverse people are consistently facing the same issues and same potential missteps."

    Segway founder Dean Kamen and Nike (NKE) founder Phil Knight are other examples of kings, so intent on maintaining control of the company that they missed out on growth opportunities or access to capital. Kamen's conviction that the Segway would revolutionize the transportation industry made him fanatical about secrecy, limiting his staff's ability to test market the device before its release. Knight scoffed at the 1980s aerobics trend and kept Nike focused on designing for elite athletes, only to see Reebok overtake his company by selling sneakers to women.

    By contrast, Farbood Nivi, founder of educational social network Grockit, agreed to step aside as CEO and recruit an executive who could take the company to the next level. "The only way to get someone of high enough caliber was to give away the CEO job," Nivi says. "If you're not set up to think that your company is going to be so successful that it's going to outperform you, you've got your sights set the wrong way."

    Neither the king nor rich model is best, Wasserman says. Entrepreneurs should act consistently with their motivations. King entrepreneurs, for instance, would likely be less satisfied with the outcome if they gave up control and saw the company become a multi-billion dollar success story without them -- and without fulfilling their vision.

    In 1992 when Kelly Campbell started Interface Technologies Inc., a software development company in Raleigh, North Carolina, his dream was to change the world with beautifully designed technology. Since then, he's come to see that sharing control is essential for a company in such a creative industry.

    "That's been a shift for me over the years, that you don't have to have control over everything, that you can involve people internally and customers," Campbell says. "It's not so much about the technology or our ability to do things with technology that really matters. It's about how you can apply it to solving a specific problem and getting things done for people. That's sort of a shift into a less controlling position."

    During the Internet boom, Campbell's contemporaries launched businesses and sold them for multi-million dollar paychecks; he was content to build an enterprise that would thrive during the boom and busts to come. "In the late 90's I got laughed at for being a lifestyle business," he says. "A couple of years later, it wasn't so funny."

    David Vivero isn't sure whether he falls into the king or rich model, which he studied in Wasserman's class. He launched RentJuice in 2009 to fulfill his vision of efficiently connecting real estate brokers and property management professionals.

    "There's an emotional attachment and connection to my business. I would never sell it at this point," Vivero says. Still, he sought venture capital financing to have enough resources to execute his vision, and he welcomes the experience and input of his investors.

    When pushed, he says that he likely falls into the king model. "I probably sold the product on my own too long instead of thinking of myself as this single cell organization that needs to split," Vivero says. "I needed to change my position to being a hirer and mentor and compensator. That was a big transition for me. We probably would've had a faster growing enterprise if I had done that sooner."