首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 商潮 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

仓储业大佬:如何低调打造一家企业巨头?

Diane Brady
2025-04-16

《财富》专访安博公司创始人哈米德·莫哈达姆。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)

图片来源:Courtesy of Prologis

哈米德·莫哈达姆以14年为一个周期规划人生。1983年,他联合创立AMB Property Corporation,投资办公楼、工业园区和购物中心,并于14年后推动公司上市。2011年,他将该公司与最大竞争对手合并,组建了全球最大工业地产公司安博公司(Prologis),该公司年营收82亿美元,旗下拥有13亿平方英尺的仓库与物流设施。此次合并使安博公司跻身《财富》美国500强第463位及“全球最受赞赏公司”之列。如今,并购已过去14年,莫哈达姆将掀起人生的新篇章。他将于年底交棒给总裁丹·莱特尔,自己则继续担任执行董事长。作为《财富》杂志“对话美国500强CEO”系列访谈之一,莫哈达姆在接受采访时谈及了继任计划、领导力、物流业,以及为何混乱的贸易环境反而利好其业务——尽管用他的话说:“我并不喜欢以这种方式赚钱。”

为简明起见,以下内容经过精简和编辑。

你肯定感受到了这场关税战的影响。

这些政策和不确定性既推高通胀又抑制增长。但无论集装箱来自上海、越南还是其他地方,对我们来说并无区别。当任何扰乱供应链的突发事件发生时,即工程师们精心优化的可预测供应链体系被彻底打乱后,人们会希望在各处囤积额外库存以应对不确定性。从短期来看,这对我们的业务是需求催化剂,但我并不喜欢以这种方式赚钱。

哪些原因促使你决定在今年年底卸任首席执行官职务?

你可能会感到惊讶,因为这个决策的过程并不复杂。我曾创立并运营一家名为AMB的私营企业14年,后来公司上市。我又执掌该公司14年,直至2011年收购最大竞争对手。他们在全球金融危机中自乱阵脚,这为我们的收购创造了机会,而到2025年底又将是一个14年。

人生总是有不同的篇章。14年为一个周期有什么特殊意义?

我在伊朗长大,14岁时赴欧洲读寄宿学校。但接受教育的时间只有7年,所以这打破了规律。

第二个原因是我不希望在70岁的年龄继续担任这个职务。我即将69岁,而且坦率地讲,我决定离职的动机源于我目睹了太多CEO迟迟不愿交棒,尤其是创始人。他们确实拖垮了公司,也无法从工作中得到乐趣,精力不复当年,差旅承受力与恢复力亦不如前。我认为人们普遍会把持这种职位太久。

是时候让全新一代领导者带着全新的人际关系网络接管公司了。过去四五年间,我的职责就是清退旧管理团队,启动全体执委会成员的过渡流程。这项工作始于五年前。随着我的离任,继任者将拥有完全自主的团队。

从短期来看,[贸易混乱]对我们的业务是需求催化剂,但我并不喜欢以这种方式赚钱。

哈米德·莫哈达姆,安博公司首席执行官

你是否参考过某些权力交接方面的典范?

大约30年前,我与合伙人曾探讨过:“为何如此努力打造这家创业公司?我们究竟追求的是什么?”我们得出的答案是追求恒久卓越。当时正值安达信(Arthur Andersen)分崩离析之际,高盛(Goldman Sachs)深陷困境,麦肯锡(McKinsey)遭遇CEO风波。

高盛、麦肯锡、安达信这些服务业标杆,历经世代更迭仍保持卓越。这种情况在房地产行业从未出现过。从来没有。因为地产人总是在景气时扩张,过度杠杆导致崩盘,继而重启轮回。我们的目标就是打造一家恒久卓越的公司。我们甚至从客户、员工、投资者及社区四个维度定义了恒久卓越的内涵。我们非常理性地制定目标和衡量标准。从此之后,这成为我们所有决策的指导方针。我们唯一的原则就是如何确保所有相关方在长期内实现卓越。

最难的一件事是主动让贤。

我真心觉得这对公司是正确的决定。在疫情期间,我没有这种想法。我与丹密切合作了两年,并且逐步开始放权。首席执行官的职责是把握公司的愿景和战略。但我在这方面只投入了2%的时间。如果愿景和战略失误,其余98%皆是徒劳。但98%的成功取决于执行力,而执行力与人才有关:招聘、调动、营造有活力的环境。

为何选定丹作为继任者?

他在很年轻的时候就加入我们的芝加哥建筑部门。入职约五年后,他开始负责交易和部署等职责,当时我首次动用了否决权。我们的投资委员会每年做出300个决策,被我否决的投资决策价值3,000万美元,对我们而言不算大额。我首次动用否决权,涉及的就是他的一笔交易。我做出否决的原因是我在硅谷历练形成的风险直觉。该项目带有典型的周期性危机特征,所以我不想批准。多数人可能就此罢休,但丹约一周后回来详细回答了我的问题,并指出我的担忧是多余的。我被说服了。这个年轻人拥有反驳的勇气与独立思考的能力,这非常重要。这件事让他引起了我的注意。值得一提的是,这笔交易让我们大赚了一笔。他是对的,我错了。

前任在隔壁办公,对新任首席执行官来说很有挑战性。

我是这样做的。一年半前,我让他搬到了我隔壁的办公室,中间用玻璃隔开。我们几乎是背对背,经常透过玻璃交流。如今,我大约有20%的时间常驻旧金山。物理隔离至关重要。在他正式接任当日,我将让出带大型会议室的办公室。所以,我们从物理层面已经开始了逐步过渡。

你考虑过退休吗?多数同行答案是否定的。

没有想过。我兴趣广泛,但有两件事明确不会做:首先,我不会再去公司董事会任职。我在20年前就已经不再加入上市公司董事会,因为坦白说,我认为这种工作不够刺激。董事会职位更多的是监督职能,而我想做实事。如果找到合适的首席执行官,而且他们是称职的,你就要提供全力支持。如果你不认同他们的做法,那就换人。其次,我还退出了慈善机构的董事会。我30年来首次没有加入斯坦福大学(Stanford)董事会。我依旧会参与大量慈善活动,但我只选择那些我信任并了解领导团队的慈善机构,而不是假装自己是慈善机构的董事会成员,能真正影响机构的方向。他们说希望听到你的意见,但他们真正想要的是你的财务支持和客户。

作为董事长你会做些什么?

我想将更多精力投入到指导年轻创业者。我在科技领域进行了大量投资,特别关注伊朗裔美国人社区的项目。他们是科技等诸多领域的创业新星。过去几年,我帮助了大约十几位这样的创业者。你真的可以推动小型初创公司发展,帮助他们避免灾难或者进入快速发展轨道。我喜欢那种如同驾驶手动挡汽车的直接参与感,喜欢“真正驶上路面”时的即时反馈。我还会拿出更多时间经营家族办公室。坦率地说,我更想去享受生活,去国会和酒店之外的地方旅行。

像我这样一直忙碌的人在卸任后就会感到焦虑,觉得自己可能不再重要,没有人再关心自己,或者仍然不愿意退居二线。我从其他人那里得到的建议是不要过度投入。我不会重蹈覆辙。

你计划向董事长的工作投入多少精力?

理想状态是相当于每周1-2个工作日,可能一个月或者两周完全休整。随着新人加入,我对人事和组织结构的洞察将快速过时。但我想在外部关系、模式识别能力、以及战略咨询方面,我仍可以贡献价值。我希望任职2至3年。顺便说一下,我不会卖掉股份。

我持有公司95%的股份。对我而言,这几乎是一种信仰。如果你是公司首席执行官,每个季度都要与投资者通话,讨论公司的前景,你得以身作则。

在权力交接过程中,你肯定有过反思的时刻。

我常有这样的时刻。我会思考自己为什么选择就读斯坦福商学院。之前我一直在美国东部上学,而让我最终决定来到加州的,就是1978年的那场暴风雪。

我是加拿大人,对你的话深感认同。

我本可以轻松选择哈佛商学院(Harvard Business School),但那场暴风雪让我来到西海岸——这纯属偶然。若非如此,我不会遇见合伙人,不会创立这家公司,不会与妻子结缘,更不会组建家庭。我的某些人生选择充满随机性。有些则经过深思熟虑,比如我们决定收购一家非常成功的私募股权房地产公司,并做一件此前无人尝试过的事情,将普通合伙人(GP)与有限合伙人(LP)合并上市。以前从未有人这样做过。有人尝试建立私募股权公司,但并没有真正成功。要知道,德太投资(TPG)、KKR等机构是在10年、15年乃至20年后才开始这样做。

在我们完成这番操作几个月后,山姆·泽尔通过权益办公物业效仿了我们的做法。开创先河并成为行业范本,实乃幸事。1999年,我们决定出售零售业务,只是因为我遇见了正在创业的Webvan创始人。

就是那个在互联网泡沫破裂时破产的在线杂货公司?路易斯·博德斯!

是的。路易斯·博德斯。他的愿景让我惊骇不已。当时我们还有零售购物中心业务,正因这次会面,我们在1999年出售了占公司三分之一的零售板块。我们选择全力押注物流业务。所以,有些决策基于敏锐洞察,有些全看运气,有些则经过周密考量。我很高兴人生中的正确决策多于错误抉择。 (财富中文网)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

哈米德·莫哈达姆以14年为一个周期规划人生。1983年,他联合创立AMB Property Corporation,投资办公楼、工业园区和购物中心,并于14年后推动公司上市。2011年,他将该公司与最大竞争对手合并,组建了全球最大工业地产公司安博公司(Prologis),该公司年营收82亿美元,旗下拥有13亿平方英尺的仓库与物流设施。此次合并使安博公司跻身《财富》美国500强第463位及“全球最受赞赏公司”之列。如今,并购已过去14年,莫哈达姆将掀起人生的新篇章。他将于年底交棒给总裁丹·莱特尔,自己则继续担任执行董事长。作为《财富》杂志“对话美国500强CEO”系列访谈之一,莫哈达姆在接受采访时谈及了继任计划、领导力、物流业,以及为何混乱的贸易环境反而利好其业务——尽管用他的话说:“我并不喜欢以这种方式赚钱。”

为简明起见,以下内容经过精简和编辑。

你肯定感受到了这场关税战的影响。

这些政策和不确定性既推高通胀又抑制增长。但无论集装箱来自上海、越南还是其他地方,对我们来说并无区别。当任何扰乱供应链的突发事件发生时,即工程师们精心优化的可预测供应链体系被彻底打乱后,人们会希望在各处囤积额外库存以应对不确定性。从短期来看,这对我们的业务是需求催化剂,但我并不喜欢以这种方式赚钱。

哪些原因促使你决定在今年年底卸任首席执行官职务?

你可能会感到惊讶,因为这个决策的过程并不复杂。我曾创立并运营一家名为AMB的私营企业14年,后来公司上市。我又执掌该公司14年,直至2011年收购最大竞争对手。他们在全球金融危机中自乱阵脚,这为我们的收购创造了机会,而到2025年底又将是一个14年。

人生总是有不同的篇章。14年为一个周期有什么特殊意义?

我在伊朗长大,14岁时赴欧洲读寄宿学校。但接受教育的时间只有7年,所以这打破了规律。

第二个原因是我不希望在70岁的年龄继续担任这个职务。我即将69岁,而且坦率地讲,我决定离职的动机源于我目睹了太多CEO迟迟不愿交棒,尤其是创始人。他们确实拖垮了公司,也无法从工作中得到乐趣,精力不复当年,差旅承受力与恢复力亦不如前。我认为人们普遍会把持这种职位太久。

是时候让全新一代领导者带着全新的人际关系网络接管公司了。过去四五年间,我的职责就是清退旧管理团队,启动全体执委会成员的过渡流程。这项工作始于五年前。随着我的离任,继任者将拥有完全自主的团队。

从短期来看,[贸易混乱]对我们的业务是需求催化剂,但我并不喜欢以这种方式赚钱。

哈米德·莫哈达姆,安博公司首席执行官

你是否参考过某些权力交接方面的典范?

大约30年前,我与合伙人曾探讨过:“为何如此努力打造这家创业公司?我们究竟追求的是什么?”我们得出的答案是追求恒久卓越。当时正值安达信(Arthur Andersen)分崩离析之际,高盛(Goldman Sachs)深陷困境,麦肯锡(McKinsey)遭遇CEO风波。

高盛、麦肯锡、安达信这些服务业标杆,历经世代更迭仍保持卓越。这种情况在房地产行业从未出现过。从来没有。因为地产人总是在景气时扩张,过度杠杆导致崩盘,继而重启轮回。我们的目标就是打造一家恒久卓越的公司。我们甚至从客户、员工、投资者及社区四个维度定义了恒久卓越的内涵。我们非常理性地制定目标和衡量标准。从此之后,这成为我们所有决策的指导方针。我们唯一的原则就是如何确保所有相关方在长期内实现卓越。

最难的一件事是主动让贤。

我真心觉得这对公司是正确的决定。在疫情期间,我没有这种想法。我与丹密切合作了两年,并且逐步开始放权。首席执行官的职责是把握公司的愿景和战略。但我在这方面只投入了2%的时间。如果愿景和战略失误,其余98%皆是徒劳。但98%的成功取决于执行力,而执行力与人才有关:招聘、调动、营造有活力的环境。

为何选定丹作为继任者?

他在很年轻的时候就加入我们的芝加哥建筑部门。入职约五年后,他开始负责交易和部署等职责,当时我首次动用了否决权。我们的投资委员会每年做出300个决策,被我否决的投资决策价值3,000万美元,对我们而言不算大额。我首次动用否决权,涉及的就是他的一笔交易。我做出否决的原因是我在硅谷历练形成的风险直觉。该项目带有典型的周期性危机特征,所以我不想批准。多数人可能就此罢休,但丹约一周后回来详细回答了我的问题,并指出我的担忧是多余的。我被说服了。这个年轻人拥有反驳的勇气与独立思考的能力,这非常重要。这件事让他引起了我的注意。值得一提的是,这笔交易让我们大赚了一笔。他是对的,我错了。

前任在隔壁办公,对新任首席执行官来说很有挑战性。

我是这样做的。一年半前,我让他搬到了我隔壁的办公室,中间用玻璃隔开。我们几乎是背对背,经常透过玻璃交流。如今,我大约有20%的时间常驻旧金山。物理隔离至关重要。在他正式接任当日,我将让出带大型会议室的办公室。所以,我们从物理层面已经开始了逐步过渡。

你考虑过退休吗?多数同行答案是否定的。

没有想过。我兴趣广泛,但有两件事明确不会做:首先,我不会再去公司董事会任职。我在20年前就已经不再加入上市公司董事会,因为坦白说,我认为这种工作不够刺激。董事会职位更多的是监督职能,而我想做实事。如果找到合适的首席执行官,而且他们是称职的,你就要提供全力支持。如果你不认同他们的做法,那就换人。其次,我还退出了慈善机构的董事会。我30年来首次没有加入斯坦福大学(Stanford)董事会。我依旧会参与大量慈善活动,但我只选择那些我信任并了解领导团队的慈善机构,而不是假装自己是慈善机构的董事会成员,能真正影响机构的方向。他们说希望听到你的意见,但他们真正想要的是你的财务支持和客户。

作为董事长你会做些什么?

我想将更多精力投入到指导年轻创业者。我在科技领域进行了大量投资,特别关注伊朗裔美国人社区的项目。他们是科技等诸多领域的创业新星。过去几年,我帮助了大约十几位这样的创业者。你真的可以推动小型初创公司发展,帮助他们避免灾难或者进入快速发展轨道。我喜欢那种如同驾驶手动挡汽车的直接参与感,喜欢“真正驶上路面”时的即时反馈。我还会拿出更多时间经营家族办公室。坦率地说,我更想去享受生活,去国会和酒店之外的地方旅行。

像我这样一直忙碌的人在卸任后就会感到焦虑,觉得自己可能不再重要,没有人再关心自己,或者仍然不愿意退居二线。我从其他人那里得到的建议是不要过度投入。我不会重蹈覆辙。

你计划向董事长的工作投入多少精力?

理想状态是相当于每周1-2个工作日,可能一个月或者两周完全休整。随着新人加入,我对人事和组织结构的洞察将快速过时。但我想在外部关系、模式识别能力、以及战略咨询方面,我仍可以贡献价值。我希望任职2至3年。顺便说一下,我不会卖掉股份。

我持有公司95%的股份。对我而言,这几乎是一种信仰。如果你是公司首席执行官,每个季度都要与投资者通话,讨论公司的前景,你得以身作则。

在权力交接过程中,你肯定有过反思的时刻。

我常有这样的时刻。我会思考自己为什么选择就读斯坦福商学院。之前我一直在美国东部上学,而让我最终决定来到加州的,就是1978年的那场暴风雪。

我是加拿大人,对你的话深感认同。

我本可以轻松选择哈佛商学院(Harvard Business School),但那场暴风雪让我来到西海岸——这纯属偶然。若非如此,我不会遇见合伙人,不会创立这家公司,不会与妻子结缘,更不会组建家庭。我的某些人生选择充满随机性。有些则经过深思熟虑,比如我们决定收购一家非常成功的私募股权房地产公司,并做一件此前无人尝试过的事情,将普通合伙人(GP)与有限合伙人(LP)合并上市。以前从未有人这样做过。有人尝试建立私募股权公司,但并没有真正成功。要知道,德太投资(TPG)、KKR等机构是在10年、15年乃至20年后才开始这样做。

在我们完成这番操作几个月后,山姆·泽尔通过权益办公物业效仿了我们的做法。开创先河并成为行业范本,实乃幸事。1999年,我们决定出售零售业务,只是因为我遇见了正在创业的Webvan创始人。

就是那个在互联网泡沫破裂时破产的在线杂货公司?路易斯·博德斯!

是的。路易斯·博德斯。他的愿景让我惊骇不已。当时我们还有零售购物中心业务,正因这次会面,我们在1999年出售了占公司三分之一的零售板块。我们选择全力押注物流业务。所以,有些决策基于敏锐洞察,有些全看运气,有些则经过周密考量。我很高兴人生中的正确决策多于错误抉择。 (财富中文网)

译者:刘进龙

审校:汪皓

Hamid Moghadam thinks of life in 14-year cycles. In 1983, he cofounded AMB Property Corporation to invest in offices, industrial parks, and shopping centers and took it public 14 years later. In 2011, he merged the company with his biggest competitor to form Prologis, the world’s largest industrial property owner with $8.2 billion in revenue and 1.3 billion square feet of warehouses and logistics facilities in its portfolio. Now, 14 years after the merger that put Prologis on the path to be No. 463 on the  Fortune 500 and one of the World’s Most Admired Companies, Moghadam is making another pivot, at the end of the year he will hand the reins to President Dan Letter while staying on as executive chairman. In an interview with Fortune as part of a series of conversations with Fortune 500 CEOs, Moghadam reflects on succession, leadership, logistics, and why a chaotic trade environment boosts his business—even though, as he puts it, “I don’t like to make our money that way.”

The following has been condensed and edited for clarity.

You must be feeling the impact of this tariff war.

These policies and this uncertainty are both inflationary and growth reducing. But whether the container is coming from Shanghai or Vietnam or somewhere else, there’s no difference. When any kind of disruption happens that raises havoc with the supply chain—meaning the predictable supply chain that’s been optimized by engineers goes out the window—people want to have all kinds of extra inventory everywhere to deal with the uncertainty. In the short term, it’s a demand booster for our business, but I don’t like to make our money that way.

What prompted you to step down as CEO at the end of this year?

You’re going to be surprised by the lack of sophistication in this decision-making. I started and ran an entrepreneurial private company called AMB for 14 years before taking it public. I ran that for 14 years until 2011, when we bought our biggest competitor. They kind of blew themselves up during global financial crisis and that opened the door for us to buy it, so that will be another 14 years by the end of 2025.

Every life has chapters. Is there something distinctive about 14 years?

Well, I grew up in Iran and was 14 when I went to boarding school in Europe. But the education part only took seven years, so that that sort of breaks the rule.

The second reason is I did not want to have a seven in front of my age doing this job. I’m going to be 69 and, honestly, the reason for it is that I’ve seen too many CEOs, and particularly founders, hang around too long. They’ve really destroyed their company, and they’ve stopped having fun. You don’t have the same energy. You don’t have the same ability to travel or recover from travel the way you did. I think people generally stay too long in these kinds of jobs.

It’s time for a whole new generation of leaders with a whole new generation of relationships with their peers to take over the business. My job in the last four or five years has been to clear the deck of the old management team and start the process of transitioning all the executive committee members. That started five years ago. With me gone, he will have completely his own team.

“In the short term, [trade woes are] a demand booster for our business, but I don’t like to make our money that way.”

Hamid Moghadam, CEO, Prologis

Did you have some role model for how to do this?

My partners and I, about 30 years ago, sat down and said, “Why are we working so hard building this entrepreneurial company? What do we care about at the end of the day?” The notion of enduring excellence popped up. This was around the time that Arthur Andersen had blown up. Goldman Sachs had gone through a lot of problems. McKinsey had its CEO issue.

But Goldman, Mackenzie, Arthur Anderson, they’re all service firms, these icons of organizations that have gone through generational change and remained excellent. There was no example of that in real estate. None. Zero. Because real estate people build up when times are good, they over lever, they crash, and then they start all over, and so it goes. Our goal was to build a company of enduring excellence. We even defined it by what it means to customers, to our employees, to our investors, and to the communities in which we operate. We were very clinical about the objective and how to measure it? And that’s pretty much defined everything we’ve done since then. The only north star is what’s going to ensure excellence in the long term for all those constituencies.

One of the hardest things to do is replace yourself.

I just felt in my bones that it was the right thing for the company. I didn’t want to do it while we were in COVID. Dan and I spent two years working very closely together, and I’ve given up more and more of this stuff. You know, the CEO job is about vision and strategy and all that. But I spend 2% of my time on that. If you don’t get that stuff right, the other 98% doesn’t matter. But 98% of success is about execution, and execution has to do with people: recruiting, where you move somebody, creating a dynamic environment.

What made you think Dan should be the next CEO?

He joined us as a very, very junior young guy in our construction department in Chicago. Maybe five years into his career, when he was in charge of making deals and deployment and all that kind of stuff, I vetoed a decision. Our investment committee makes 300 decisions a year, and this was a $30 million investment, which is not a big number for us. I exercised my veto for the first time, and it was his deal. I did it because of some patterns that have been ingrained in my brain over how Silicon Valley works. This particular investment reeked of all the things that have gone wrong before in these cycles and all that, and I just didn’t want to do it. Most people would have left it there, but Dan came back after about a week of looking at all the questions that I asked and made the case as to why I was worried about the wrong thing. And I changed my mind. The fact that this young guy had the courage to do that, that he was an independent thinker, that’s really important. So that got him on my radar. By the way, we made a ton of money on that deal. So, he was right, and I was wrong.

One challenge for any new CEO is having your former boss work down the hall.

So, here’s what I did. I moved him into the office literally next to mine a year and a half ago, with glass in between. We’re basically joined at the hip and always communicating across the glass. Now, I’m relocating my residency and am in San Francisco, maybe 20% of the time. That physical separation was important, and I’m going to make sure he moves into my larger conference room and makes that his office the day he takes over. So, we’ve gone through a gradual transition, physically, too.

Could you imagine ever retiring? Most people I talk to in your position say, “No.”

No. I’ve got way too many interests. I tell you what I’m not going to do: I am not going to go on corporate boards. I stopped doing public company boards about 20 years because, frankly, I don’t find that stimulating. It’s more of an oversight function and I just want to get things done. If you have the right CEO and they’re doing the job, you’ve got to support them. If you don’t like what they’re doing, you should change them. I’ve also gotten off of all my charitable boards. I’m on no Stanford board for the first time in 30 years. I’m still doing a lot of philanthropy, but I’m doing it in organizations where I trust and know the leadership and not trying to pretend like I’m from the board that can really influence the direction. They say they want your input, but they really want your financial support and your Rolodex.

So what will you do?

What I’m going to do more of is mentor young entrepreneurs. I’ve made a lot of investments in technology, particularly with the deal flow coming from the Iranian American community. They’re very entrepreneurial in tech and all that. And I helped them over the years, about a dozen of them. You can really move the needle on small, young companies, and help them avoid disaster or get on a really fast wave. And I just like the immediate manual transmission of that action, what happens when the rubber hits the road. And I’m going to spend more time on my own family office. Frankly, I want to enjoy life a little bit more, travel to places other than Congress or hotels.

The advice I’ve gotten from people is don’t overcommit because busy people like me, when they step off, they get sort of nervous that maybe I’m not important, or nobody cares about me or they want to still be in the game. I’m not going to do that.

How much time do you want to spend as a chairman?

I think I want to get down to a day, the equivalent of a day or two a week, which may be nothing for a month and a couple of weeks. You know, the people and organizational insights are going to have a very short shelf life, because I’m not going to know the new people coming. On some of the external relationships, the pattern recognition skills, some of the sounding board things, I think I can add more. I ideally want to do it for two to three years. And by the way, I’m not going to sell my stock.

I have held on to 95% of that. I think it’s a religious thing for me. If you’re a CEO of the company, and you’re getting on the call every quarter, talking to investors about your company and all that, you got to be eating your own cooking.

There must be moments of reflection as you make this transition.

There are lots of those. I think of why I chose to come to Stanford Business School, having gone to school back east, and it was because of the blizzard of 78.

I’m Canadian. You’re speaking my language there.

I could have just as easily gone to Harvard Business School. That got me on the West Coast, which was totally serendipitous. I wouldn’t have met my partners if I had not been on here. I wouldn’t have started this business. I wouldn’t have married my wife. I wouldn’t have started my family. Some decisions I handle randomly. Some are more deliberate, like we decided to take a very successful private equity real estate business and do something that nobody had done in the world, which is to combine the GP and the LPs and take that business public. Nobody had done before. A couple of people had done private equity firms have not kind of done it. You know, 1015, 20 years later, TPG, KKR, those guys,

Sam Zell did it a couple of months after we did ours with equity office property. So, it’s great to have done something that nobody did before that really worked and became the playbook for other people. We decided to sell retail in 1999 because I met a man who was starting a company called Webvan.

The online grocery company that went bankrupt when the dot.com bubble burst. Louis Borders!

Yes. Louis Borders. His vision just scared the bejesus out of me. At that time, we also owned the retail shopping center business and, literally because of that, in ’99, we sold our entire retail division, which was a third the company. We doubled down on logistics. So were some cool insights, some dumb luck, and some decisions that were well thought through. I’m really proud of getting more things right than wrong.

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开
Baidu
map