麦肯锡在南非的错误是明知故犯
即使不是天才也看得出，在雅各布•祖马(Jacob Zuma)担任总统的糟糕时期，企业很难在南非保持声誉。一家像毕马威(KPMG)或麦肯锡(McKinsey)这样的跨国咨询公司，不应该看不清这一事实。
Neither firm was as crass as Bell Pottinger, the PR firm that went into administration after running a racially divisive campaign for the holding company of the Gupta family, Mr Zuma’s business patrons. But both have been tarnished by Mr Zuma’s misgovernance of his country and its tragic descent into cronyism and corruption.
虽然这两家公司都不像公关公司贝尔-波廷格(Bell Pottinger)那样愚蠢——后者在为祖马总统的商业赞助人古普塔(Gupta)家族的控股公司开展了一场宣扬种族分裂的公关活动后，被破产管理人接管——但祖马对南非的不当治理、以及南非悲剧地沦落到任人唯亲和腐败盛行的境地让这两家公司都名誉受损。
KPMG audited many of the Guptas’ companies and eight of its executives last week resigned as it admitted its errors of judgment. McKinsey took a juicy contract with Eskom, a state utility, that involved working with a consultancy linked to the family. The firm still maintains that it behaved correctly and is walking the tightrope of self-justification. I am intrigued to see how long it will take to fall off.
毕马威审计了多家古普塔家族旗下企业，该公司已承认自己判断失误，不久前其8名高管辞职。麦肯锡接下了南非国家电力公司(Eskom)一笔报酬丰厚的合同，该合同涉及到与一家和古普塔家族有联系的咨询公司合作。麦肯锡仍然坚称自己行为端正并小心翼翼地自我辩解着。我很想看看它还能硬撑多久。
Here is a simple guide to South African due diligence: avoid the Guptas, the Zuma family and state-owned enterprises over which they exert any influence. Other professional services firms paid greater attention to the daily bulletins of “state capture” by the president’s allies; they were also better at resisting financial temptation.
以下是针对在南非开展尽职调查的一份简明指导：避免古普塔家族、祖马家族以及这两个家族能够施加任何影响的南非国有企业。其他的专业事务所更重视总统的盟友们发布的《掠夺之国》(state of capture)每日简报，也更能抵御金钱的诱惑。
A client gains two things when it hires a KPMG or a McKinsey: sound advice that helps it to raise revenues while maintaining strong controls, and the imprimatur that comes with their names. Particularly in economies where corruption is common, government officials take bribes, and regulation is suspect, they can charge for lending the benefits of integrity.
当雇用毕马威或麦肯锡时，客户会有两样收获：帮助自己在提高收入的同时保持有力控制的合理建议，以及由这两家公司的品牌带来的认可。尤其在那些腐败盛行、政府官员受贿、同时监管受到质疑的经济体中，它们可以对出借诚信的好处收费。
South Africa is tricky, for the end of apartheid in the early 1990s offered a chance for advisers and consultants not only to make money but to become part of the legitimate rebuilding of a nation that needed business expertise. As the country has degenerated during Mr Zuma’s tacky leadership, their responsibility to examine carefully what they are asked to endorse has increased.
南非的情况很复杂，20世纪90年代初种族隔离制度的终结，为顾问和咨询公司提供了一个机会，不仅能挣钱，还能参与一个急需商业专业知识的国家的合法重建。随着南非在祖马昏庸的领导下日渐堕落，他们必须更加仔细地审视自己被要求背书的是什么。
KPMG has conceded that it failed in that duty, although it took far too long to recognise this failure. It was auditor and adviser to Gupta companies for 15 years, until the taint became too great last year. It audited the accounts of one Gupta entity that diverted $3.3m of public money to a family wedding and wrote a report that helped Mr Zuma’s circle wrongly to discredit Pravin Gordhan, former finance minister.
毕马威已承认了自己在这一点上的失职，虽然它花了太长时间才承认这一错误。毕马威为古普塔家族的企业担任了15年的审计所和咨询顾问，直到去年污点过大而败露。毕马威审计的古普塔家族的一家实体，曾挪用330万美元公款举办一场家族婚礼，它还出具了一份报告，帮助祖马的圈子不当诋毁前财长普拉温•戈尔丹(Pravin Gordhan)。
By its own account, the firm ignored warning signs about “the integrity and ethics of the Guptas” and should have ditched them earlier. It fell into the trap of sticking with an old client after its flaws became clear, but it can hardly complain that it was not informed. Mr Zuma has undermined many of South Africa’s institutions but it still has a vibrantly outspoken media.
按其自己的说法，毕马威忽略了有关“古普塔家族的诚信与道德”的警示信号，本应早一点儿跟该家族脱离关系的。毕马威犯了一个错误，即当老客户的缺点变得明显时还继续为其站台，但毕马威不能抱怨称自己不知情。祖马已破坏了南非的许多机构，但南非仍拥有充满活力、直言不讳的媒体。
McKinsey’s mistake was shorter lived and less blatant, but it was wrong nonetheless. As one partner of a Johannesburg firm sees it: “KPMG became part of the machinery, while McKinsey looked the other way for money.” It was indeed a lot of money. Eskom paid McKinsey $73m for nine months work ending in July 2016, and at one point the consultancy anticipated receiving a payment of up to $370m over four years.
麦肯锡的错误持续时间更短，也不那么明目张胆，但毕竟是错误。正如约翰内斯堡一家事务所的合伙人所说：“毕马威(KPMG)成为了机器的一部分，而麦肯锡则为了赚钱睁一只眼闭一只眼。”钱确实不少。南非国家电力公司为截至2016年7月的9个月的工作向麦肯锡支付了7300万美元，而这家咨询机构曾一度预计，将在4年内收到至多3.7亿美元费用。
McKinsey produced a restructuring plan for the inefficient utility, which was inflicting power cuts across South Africa. It was also due to work on implementing the plan and be paid a share of the financial gains. The firm insists that such contracts are common and the terms matched similar deals, but rivals are astonished. One internal McKinsey document noted the risk of being criticised for “exorbitant fees”.
麦肯锡为效率不高的南非国家电力公司制定了一项重组方案，南非国家电力公司当时正在南非各地实行停电。麦肯锡按计划还应该努力让该方案得到执行，并从财务收益中获得抽成。麦肯锡坚称，这类合同很常见，条款也跟类似交易的条款相似，但竞争对手公司都震惊了。麦肯锡的一份内部报告指出了因“费用过高”而遭批评的风险。
It was never tested because of another obstacle. McKinsey legally had to work with a black economic empowerment partner and Eskom wanted it to be Trillian, a consulting firm formerly majority owned by Salim Essa, an associate of the Guptas. After six months, Trillian failed McKinsey’s due diligence and Eskom later ended the contract.
由于另一项障碍，麦肯锡始终未受到考验。根据《黑人经济振兴法案》(Black Economic Empowerment，BEE)，麦肯锡必须与一家符合该法案要求的伙伴合作，南非国家电力公司希望这个伙伴是Trillian——此前由古普塔家族的手下萨利姆•埃萨(Salim Essa)持有大部分股权的一家咨询公司。6个月后，Trillian未能通过麦肯锡的尽职调查，南非国家电力公司后来终止了这份合同。
The firm has a brisk defence to accusations from South African politicians and Corruption Watch that it facilitated state capture by helping Trillian to gain money from Eskom. It says that its own inquiry into its behaviour has not uncovered wrongdoing, nor anything that would require it to report itself to the US authorities under anti-corruption laws. This seems to be setting the reputational bar rather low.
南非政客和腐败观察(Corruption Watch)指责麦肯锡帮助Trillian从南非国家电力公司捞钱，从而充当了“掠夺之国”的帮凶;面对这样的指责，麦肯锡理直气壮地为自己辩护道：它对自身行为的调查没有发现不当之处，也未发现任何依照反腐败法律应向美国当局自首的问题。这似乎把信誉标准设得相当低。
Being willing to charge an entrenched institution in a fractured country so much money looks awfully like rent seeking, especially when payments of up to $700m were to be split with what it should have known was a dubious consulting partner. McKinsey is full of superior intellects but sometimes you only need to open your eyes.
在一个四分五裂的国家里，愿意向一个地位稳固的公司收取如此高额的费用，看起来很像是寻租，尤其是当高达7亿美元的费用将与一家本应被其视为可疑的咨询伙伴分享的时候。麦肯锡人才济济，但有时，你只需睁开眼睛正视。
None of this occurred in a vacuum. The group Business Unity South Africa this month bemoaned the “scourge of corruption that is stifling the country” and called for an end to a “culture of immunity”. Each time that a consultant or accountant fails to take a decisive stand, the scourge worsens.
这一切都不是发生在真空里。9月，南非商业总工会(Business Unity South Africa)哀叹“腐败之祸勒住了这个国家的喉咙”，并呼吁终结一种“豁免文化”。每当一名顾问或会计师未能采取坚决立场，这场灾祸就会又加重一些。
KPMG has recognised it but McKinsey is still learning. It could start by confessing that it was wrong and promising not to repeat its failure.
毕马威已经认识到这一点，但麦肯锡还没有。麦肯锡朝这个方向可以迈出的第一步就是承认自己错了，并承诺未来不会再犯同样的错误。
john.gapper@ft.com 译者/何黎
