
童年的大部分假期,我都是在父亲位于贝鲁特的办公室里度过的。当其他孩子在海滩或山间玩乐时,我却见证了父亲如何在20世纪历时最久的内战之一中经营企业。
当我们所在的城市遭受炮火袭击时,父亲并未停下工作。银行停业期间,他也没停发员工工资。即便合同在法律层面已无法强制执行,他依然恪守承诺。他照常上班,还会带上我。每天清晨,我都看着他盘点手头资源:哪些供应商仍在运营,哪些客户仍能取得联系,上周的哪些假设依然成立。他会根据最新情况做出当日决策,而非依赖已被现实打乱的既定计划。
他秉持两项准则:当体系失灵时,他绝不假装一切照旧,也不会因体系运转不灵而放弃工作。他同时直面这两种现实,并在长达十五年的战争中,每天都据此做出抉择,明确方向。我不会美化这段经历带给我的启示——世上没有任何经验教训值得付出如此沉重的代价——但我确实从中汲取了教训,我此后创建或领导的每一家企业都深受其影响。
作为一名年轻律师,我曾担任黎巴嫩投资发展局(IDAL)执行副主席,与已故黎巴嫩总理拉菲克·哈里里(Rafik Hariri)密切合作,亲眼见证了他极具韧性的领导力所迸发的强大力量,这份领导力重塑并革新了整个国家。我将这一经验带到了马希德·弗泰伊姆集团。在近二十年的时间里,我始终恪守这两条准则,推动集团实现规模化发展。担任首席执行官期间,我助力企业从迪拜的一家购物中心发展成为横跨房地产、零售、休闲娱乐领域、市值达150亿美元的巨头,业务范围覆盖从东非到中亚的广阔市场。回望这段历程时,人们总倾向于将其梳理成脉络清晰的故事,但事实上,这一路走来,我们的每一个决策,都是在信息有限的情况下做出的。
我们从没有什么宏伟蓝图,只有一以贯之、严格践行的准则。我们一次次拒绝与自身定位不符的机会。即便外界普遍认为阿拉伯地区局势动荡、体量有限、情况复杂,不值得长期投入,我们始终坚守对人才与价值创造的承诺,并致力于服务阿拉伯国家。我们深知,企业经营的核心从来不是零售面积的比拼,而是与所有利益相关方建立信任。即便没有会计师会将这份信任纳入财务核算,它仍是资产负债表上最核心的资产之一。我们明白,资本会追随人才,而非反之,成功的企业是那些拥有能在瞬息万变的环境中明智配置资本的人才的企业。我们也区分了韧性与效率,二者各有其底层逻辑:追求效率的企业会将单位产出成本降至最低,而具备韧性的企业,会将遭遇毁灭性危机的概率降至最低。卓越的领导者清楚企业的发展目标,更深谙做出这一选择的底层逻辑。
我之所以写下这些,是因为我每周接触的海湾地区商界领袖们,正面临着我早年便熟知的一类问题,尽管其表现形式截然不同。二者的相似之处不在于战争,而在于当支撑你决策的诸多假设同时发生变化时,你仍需肩负起引领企业前行的责任。
不妨思考一下当下究竟发生了哪些变化。1990年后形成的、保障贸易通道畅通与资本流动可预测的全球秩序正在瓦解。如今,几乎所有要素都可能被武器化,以服务于地缘政治目标——能源、支付渠道、半导体、供应链、数据,乃至人力资本流动本身。人工智能及其在机器人、自动化系统等实体领域的延伸,正以颠覆传统认知的方式,让经济增长与用工规模脱钩,这将重塑所有依托“增长与用工规模正相关”模式发展的经济体。资本成本已重置。长期以来的安全保障的可靠性正遭到公开质疑。这些变化并非区域性现象。所有变化都对海湾地区造成了尤为猛烈的冲击,因为该地区此前的增长模式,恰恰建立在一个核心前提之上:上述所有体系,都将延续过往的运行逻辑。
四大准则
在这样的时代背景下,四大准则尤为突出。
第一:摒弃鸵鸟心态,拒绝消极躺平。鸵鸟心态者认为,各类体系仍在照常运转,过去20年的战略手册依然适用;消极躺平者则认为,体系已然崩塌,除了等待局势明朗,别无他法。这两种心态均背离领导力的本质。真正的领导力在于盘点手头资源,厘清哪些依存关系依然稳固,哪些已岌岌可危,哪些假设已然失效,并基于这一判断做出决策。这是一项需每日践行的准则,首要之事便是坦诚承认:昨日的评估,已不再适配今晨的现实。
第二:未来十年,信任将发挥比以往任何时期都更为重要的战略作用。海湾地区正在押注人工智能、旅游业、产业多元化,致力于成为多极化全球秩序中的重要节点。这些押注将取决于海湾地区领导人能否与本土及全球利益相关者建立信任。信任的积累极其缓慢;而信任的崩塌,往往只在一瞬之间。那些深谙每一次互动要么增进信任、要么削弱信任的领导者,终将构筑起竞争对手仅凭资本投入难以逾越的长期优势。
第三:韧性,如今已成为一项独立的战略目标,而非对经济增长的拖累。海湾地区的情况尤为特殊:拥有规模庞大的主权资本,工业基础有待深化,地处全球贸易咽喉要道,国家战略以降低对外依存度为优先事项。这一切都意味着,对韧性的投资并非权宜之计,从底层逻辑来看,韧性本身就是下一轮增长周期的核心引擎。国防、物流与基础设施以及粮食安全均属于主权能力范畴。在紧迫周期内进行相关投资布局,这种能力本身就具备战略意义,而且最终可对外输出。那些将韧性视为未来十年真正增长理念的领导者,会将其视为百年一遇的机遇而全力布局。
第四:在极易动摇战略定力的环境中,坚守战略准则。机遇层出不穷,追逐机遇的资本规模亦达到前所未有的高度。来自董事会、媒体、同行的压力,再加上不愿掉队的本能,会在每一个周期中进一步加剧。但未来十年,最终能够脱颖而出的领导者,必然是那些始终坚定信念,清楚自己要打造什么、为何而打造的人——他们会对几乎所有其他机会说不,绝不将盲目行动与进步混为一谈。这是四项准则中最难坚守的一项,因为坚守它的代价,体现在每一个季度的财报里,而它带来的回报,只能在漫长时间里逐步兑现。
颠覆与前行并非对立关系
颠覆与前行并非对立关系——恰恰是在变局之中,前行方向成了唯一重要的事。愿景,是你在顺境中对外宣告的蓝图;而方向,是你在多重假设在同一周内崩塌、数据尚无逻辑可循、团队期待你点破真相时,所做出的选择。这是我用一生悟出的准则。
这对领导力提出了极高的要求,坦率而言,目前市场上的人才供给,远远无法满足这样的需求。能够统筹地缘政治、资本配置、技术应用、人力资本战略、国家韧性规划,并将所有这些要素纳入同一决策框架的领导者,其数量远不足以满足未来的市场需求。但这并不意味着此类需求会减少。领导力是应势而生的,是现实造就了领导者,而非反之。这个世界,终将给予那些最快培养出这类领导者的机构最丰厚的回报。这些领导者要做的,绝非实现企业转型,更要围绕五年前尚不存在的现实,重塑企业的底层逻辑。这就是海湾地区未来十年的使命,其艰巨程度,远超过往十年。(财富中文网)
阿兰·贝贾尼(Alain Bejjani)在2015年至2023年间担任马希德·弗泰伊姆集团(Majid Al Futtaim)首席执行官,将其发展成为一家业务遍及17个国家、市值达150亿美元的企业。他于2020年被《海湾商业》杂志评为“年度首席执行官”,并于2022年跻身《福布斯》中东百强首席执行官榜单。他的著作《未来:在全新现实中引领前行》(Next: Leading Through the New Realities)现已出版。
Fortune.com上发表的评论文章中表达的观点,仅代表作者本人的观点,不代表《财富》杂志的观点和立场。
译者:中慧言-王芳
童年的大部分假期,我都是在父亲位于贝鲁特的办公室里度过的。当其他孩子在海滩或山间玩乐时,我却见证了父亲如何在20世纪历时最久的内战之一中经营企业。
当我们所在的城市遭受炮火袭击时,父亲并未停下工作。银行停业期间,他也没停发员工工资。即便合同在法律层面已无法强制执行,他依然恪守承诺。他照常上班,还会带上我。每天清晨,我都看着他盘点手头资源:哪些供应商仍在运营,哪些客户仍能取得联系,上周的哪些假设依然成立。他会根据最新情况做出当日决策,而非依赖已被现实打乱的既定计划。
他秉持两项准则:当体系失灵时,他绝不假装一切照旧,也不会因体系运转不灵而放弃工作。他同时直面这两种现实,并在长达十五年的战争中,每天都据此做出抉择,明确方向。我不会美化这段经历带给我的启示——世上没有任何经验教训值得付出如此沉重的代价——但我确实从中汲取了教训,我此后创建或领导的每一家企业都深受其影响。
作为一名年轻律师,我曾担任黎巴嫩投资发展局(IDAL)执行副主席,与已故黎巴嫩总理拉菲克·哈里里(Rafik Hariri)密切合作,亲眼见证了他极具韧性的领导力所迸发的强大力量,这份领导力重塑并革新了整个国家。我将这一经验带到了马希德·弗泰伊姆集团。在近二十年的时间里,我始终恪守这两条准则,推动集团实现规模化发展。担任首席执行官期间,我助力企业从迪拜的一家购物中心发展成为横跨房地产、零售、休闲娱乐领域、市值达150亿美元的巨头,业务范围覆盖从东非到中亚的广阔市场。回望这段历程时,人们总倾向于将其梳理成脉络清晰的故事,但事实上,这一路走来,我们的每一个决策,都是在信息有限的情况下做出的。
我们从没有什么宏伟蓝图,只有一以贯之、严格践行的准则。我们一次次拒绝与自身定位不符的机会。即便外界普遍认为阿拉伯地区局势动荡、体量有限、情况复杂,不值得长期投入,我们始终坚守对人才与价值创造的承诺,并致力于服务阿拉伯国家。我们深知,企业经营的核心从来不是零售面积的比拼,而是与所有利益相关方建立信任。即便没有会计师会将这份信任纳入财务核算,它仍是资产负债表上最核心的资产之一。我们明白,资本会追随人才,而非反之,成功的企业是那些拥有能在瞬息万变的环境中明智配置资本的人才的企业。我们也区分了韧性与效率,二者各有其底层逻辑:追求效率的企业会将单位产出成本降至最低,而具备韧性的企业,会将遭遇毁灭性危机的概率降至最低。卓越的领导者清楚企业的发展目标,更深谙做出这一选择的底层逻辑。
我之所以写下这些,是因为我每周接触的海湾地区商界领袖们,正面临着我早年便熟知的一类问题,尽管其表现形式截然不同。二者的相似之处不在于战争,而在于当支撑你决策的诸多假设同时发生变化时,你仍需肩负起引领企业前行的责任。
不妨思考一下当下究竟发生了哪些变化。1990年后形成的、保障贸易通道畅通与资本流动可预测的全球秩序正在瓦解。如今,几乎所有要素都可能被武器化,以服务于地缘政治目标——能源、支付渠道、半导体、供应链、数据,乃至人力资本流动本身。人工智能及其在机器人、自动化系统等实体领域的延伸,正以颠覆传统认知的方式,让经济增长与用工规模脱钩,这将重塑所有依托“增长与用工规模正相关”模式发展的经济体。资本成本已重置。长期以来的安全保障的可靠性正遭到公开质疑。这些变化并非区域性现象。所有变化都对海湾地区造成了尤为猛烈的冲击,因为该地区此前的增长模式,恰恰建立在一个核心前提之上:上述所有体系,都将延续过往的运行逻辑。
四大准则
在这样的时代背景下,四大准则尤为突出。
第一:摒弃鸵鸟心态,拒绝消极躺平。鸵鸟心态者认为,各类体系仍在照常运转,过去20年的战略手册依然适用;消极躺平者则认为,体系已然崩塌,除了等待局势明朗,别无他法。这两种心态均背离领导力的本质。真正的领导力在于盘点手头资源,厘清哪些依存关系依然稳固,哪些已岌岌可危,哪些假设已然失效,并基于这一判断做出决策。这是一项需每日践行的准则,首要之事便是坦诚承认:昨日的评估,已不再适配今晨的现实。
第二:未来十年,信任将发挥比以往任何时期都更为重要的战略作用。海湾地区正在押注人工智能、旅游业、产业多元化,致力于成为多极化全球秩序中的重要节点。这些押注将取决于海湾地区领导人能否与本土及全球利益相关者建立信任。信任的积累极其缓慢;而信任的崩塌,往往只在一瞬之间。那些深谙每一次互动要么增进信任、要么削弱信任的领导者,终将构筑起竞争对手仅凭资本投入难以逾越的长期优势。
第三:韧性,如今已成为一项独立的战略目标,而非对经济增长的拖累。海湾地区的情况尤为特殊:拥有规模庞大的主权资本,工业基础有待深化,地处全球贸易咽喉要道,国家战略以降低对外依存度为优先事项。这一切都意味着,对韧性的投资并非权宜之计,从底层逻辑来看,韧性本身就是下一轮增长周期的核心引擎。国防、物流与基础设施以及粮食安全均属于主权能力范畴。在紧迫周期内进行相关投资布局,这种能力本身就具备战略意义,而且最终可对外输出。那些将韧性视为未来十年真正增长理念的领导者,会将其视为百年一遇的机遇而全力布局。
第四:在极易动摇战略定力的环境中,坚守战略准则。机遇层出不穷,追逐机遇的资本规模亦达到前所未有的高度。来自董事会、媒体、同行的压力,再加上不愿掉队的本能,会在每一个周期中进一步加剧。但未来十年,最终能够脱颖而出的领导者,必然是那些始终坚定信念,清楚自己要打造什么、为何而打造的人——他们会对几乎所有其他机会说不,绝不将盲目行动与进步混为一谈。这是四项准则中最难坚守的一项,因为坚守它的代价,体现在每一个季度的财报里,而它带来的回报,只能在漫长时间里逐步兑现。
颠覆与前行并非对立关系
颠覆与前行并非对立关系——恰恰是在变局之中,前行方向成了唯一重要的事。愿景,是你在顺境中对外宣告的蓝图;而方向,是你在多重假设在同一周内崩塌、数据尚无逻辑可循、团队期待你点破真相时,所做出的选择。这是我用一生悟出的准则。
这对领导力提出了极高的要求,坦率而言,目前市场上的人才供给,远远无法满足这样的需求。能够统筹地缘政治、资本配置、技术应用、人力资本战略、国家韧性规划,并将所有这些要素纳入同一决策框架的领导者,其数量远不足以满足未来的市场需求。但这并不意味着此类需求会减少。领导力是应势而生的,是现实造就了领导者,而非反之。这个世界,终将给予那些最快培养出这类领导者的机构最丰厚的回报。这些领导者要做的,绝非实现企业转型,更要围绕五年前尚不存在的现实,重塑企业的底层逻辑。这就是海湾地区未来十年的使命,其艰巨程度,远超过往十年。(财富中文网)
阿兰·贝贾尼(Alain Bejjani)在2015年至2023年间担任马希德·弗泰伊姆集团(Majid Al Futtaim)首席执行官,将其发展成为一家业务遍及17个国家、市值达150亿美元的企业。他于2020年被《海湾商业》杂志评为“年度首席执行官”,并于2022年跻身《福布斯》中东百强首席执行官榜单。他的著作《未来:在全新现实中引领前行》(Next: Leading Through the New Realities)现已出版。
Fortune.com上发表的评论文章中表达的观点,仅代表作者本人的观点,不代表《财富》杂志的观点和立场。
译者:中慧言-王芳
I spent most of the school holidays of my childhood at my father’s office in Beirut. While other children were at the beach or the mountains, I was watching a man run his businesses through one of the longest civil wars of the 20th century.
My father did not stop working when our city was being shelled. He did not stop paying his people when the banks were closed. He did not stop honoring his commitments when the contracts were technically unenforceable. He went to work and took me with him. I saw him every morning take stock of what was still standing: which suppliers were operating, which customers were reachable, which assumptions from the previous week still held. He would make each day’s decisions on the basis of that fresh assessment rather than on plans that had already been overtaken.
He had two imperatives: he did not pretend the system was working when it was not — yet hedid did not abandon the work because the system was not working. He held both these realities at once, and he chose direction within them every day of that fifteen-year war. I do not romanticize what this taught me — there is no lesson worth its cost — but I learned all the same, and it has shaped every business I have built or led since.
As a young lawyer, I worked closely with the late Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri as Executive Vice Chairman of the Investment and Development Authority of Lebanon– — IDAL — and saw the power of his resilient leadership, which transformed and reinvented the country. I carried this to Majid Al Futtaim, where I spent the better part of two decades working at scale with those two imperatives. As CEO I helped build a single Dubai shopping mall into a $15 billion enterprise across real estate, retail and leisure and entertainment, operating in markets stretching from East Africa to Central Asia. The instinct when one writes about that journey is to project a clean narrative onto what was, on the ground, a long sequence of decisions made under partial information.
There was no master plan. There were principles, applied with discipline. We said no repeatedly to opportunities that did not fit. We stayed committed not only to talent and merit but also to the Arab world at moments when the prevailing wisdom said the region was too volatile, too small, or too complicated to justify the patience. We understood that we were not in the business of retail square meters but in the business of trust with all our stakeholders and that trust is a balance sheet item, even if no accountant will quantify it. We knew that capital follows talent, not the other way around and that successful companies are those with the people capable of deploying capital intelligently in changing conditions. And we distinguished resilience from efficiency, each with its own logic: efficient companies minimize cost per output — resilient companies minimize the probability of catastrophic failure. Better leaders know which one they are optimizing for, and why.
I write this now because the Gulf business leaders I speak with weekly are facing a version of the questions I learned to recognize early, though in a profoundly different register. The parallel is not war. The parallel is the obligation to lead inside conditions where several of the assumptions you built on are in motion at the same time.
Consider what is actually shifting. The post-1990 global order that kept trade routes open and capital flows predictable is fragmenting. Almost anything can now be weaponized to serve geopolitical objectives — energy, payment rails, semiconductors, supply chains, data, and human capital flows themselves. Artificial intelligence — and its physical extension into robotics and autonomous systems — is decoupling growth from headcount in ways that will reshape every economy whose models assumed the opposite. The cost of capital has reset. The reliability of long-standing security guarantees is being openly questioned. None of these shifts is regional. All of them are landing in the Gulf with particular force, because the region’s growth model was built, successfully, on the assumption that each of these systems would continue to behave as it had.
Four Imperatives
Against that backdrop, four imperatives stand out.
First: refuse both denial and paralysis. Denial says the systems are working as they used to and the strategic playbook of the last 20 years still applies. Paralysis says the systems are broken and there is nothing to do but wait for clarity. Neither is leadership. The work is to take stock of what is still standing, which dependencies are intact, which are exposed, which assumptions have expired, and to make decisions on the basis of that judgment. It is a daily discipline — it starts with the honesty to admit when yesterday’s assessment no longer serves this morning’s reality.
Second: trust will do more strategic work in this decade than it has done in living memory. The Gulf is making bets on AI, tourism, industrial diversification, and on becoming a node in a multipolar order. These bets will depend on the trust that leaders in the Gulf have built with their local and global stakeholders. Trust accumulates slowly and evaporates quickly. The leaders who understand that every interaction either augments or diminishes trust will compound an advantage their competitors cannot match by spending more.
Third: resilience is now a distinct strategic objective rather than a tax on growth. The Gulf’s position is particular: sovereign capital at scale, an industrial base that needs deepening, geographic exposure to chokepoints that cannot be wished away, and a strategic logic that makes reducing external dependency a sovereign priority. All of this means that resilience investment is not a crutch — it is, structurally, the next growth cycle. Defense, logistics and infrastructure, and food security are sovereign capabilities. The capacity to execute these investments on compressed timelines is itself a strategic and ultimately exportable one. Leaders who recognize resilience as the actual growth thesis of the decade will fund it like a generational opportunity.
Fourth: maintain strategic discipline under conditions prone to erode it. Opportunities will multiply and the capital available to chase them will be unprecedented. Pressure from boards, media, peer institutions, and the simple human instinct not to be left behind will intensify with every cycle. Yet the leaders who win this decade will be those who maintain conviction about what they are building and why — saying no to almost everything else, and who refuse to confuse motion with progress. This is the hardest discipline of the four, because the cost of holding it is quarterly and the reward is paid only in the long run.
Disruption Is Not the Opposite of Direction
Disruption is not the opposite of direction — it is the condition under which direction becomes the only thing that matters. Vision is what you announce in good times. Direction is what you choose when several of your assumptions have failed in the same week, when the numbers do not yet make sense, when your team looks to you to name what is actually going on. That is the discipline I learned over a lifetime.
The leadership requirement that this implies is significant and I will be honest the supply does not yet match the demand. Leaders who can integrate across geopolitics, capital allocation, technology adoption, human capital strategy, and sovereign-resilience planning and who can hold all of these in a single decision frame are not today available in the numbers that will be needed. That does not make them less needed. Leadership is circumstantial — the realities produce the leaders, not the other way around. The world will reward the institutions that develop leaders fastest. Those leaders will not simply transform their organizations — they will reinvent them around realities that did not exist five years ago. That is the work of the Gulf’s next decade. It is harder than the work of the last one.
Alain Bejjani served as CEO of Majid Al Futtaim from 2015 to 2023, growing it into a $15 billion enterprise across 17 countries. He was named Gulf Business CEO of the Year in 2020 and ranked among Forbes Middle East's Top 100 CEOs in 2022. His book, Next: Leading Through the New Realities, is out now.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.