Generation 40s – 四十世代

Good articles for buddies


Leave a comment

全球視角下的影子銀行

Hong Kong Economic Journal
B11 | 經管智慧 | 企業管治 | By 李元莎 |
2013-05-25

次貸危機及全球金融危機之後,對於金融產業和金融監管的反思和改進成為全球課題;其中,影子銀行體系成為此次金融危機之後一個熱點。其直接原因是所謂次貸危機,其根本即在於次級按揭貸款資產證券化這一影子銀行業務模式。

根據巴塞爾組織的一項統計,2011 年的全球影子銀行業務規模達67 萬億美元,超過金融危機前的2007 年創造的62 萬億美元行業高點,達到該項統計包括25 國GDP 的110%,而該25國佔據世界GDP的八成和金融資產的九成。

從事貨幣信用仲介

影子銀行被認為是傳統銀行之外,從事貨幣信用仲介功能的各種組織和活動的統稱,這些機構為實體經濟活動提供銀行信貸之外的另類金融信用支持。從一定程度上說,影子銀行是個兜底定義,即具有類似銀行的信用仲介功能,但是不屬於現有銀行體系的金融組織。從這一功能性定義出發,影子銀行具有槓桿風險和資產負債期限錯配等所有銀行的風險特徵也就情理之中;風險等同而處身監管體系之外,影子銀行引發社會關注和行業監管也就順理成章。

具有諷刺意味的是,影子銀行的主要形式之一恰恰是傳統銀行提供的另類金融服務,即影子銀行與傳統銀行難以隔離,這也是影子銀行觸發各國監管層關注的直接原因之一。這類影子銀行業務主要有資產證券化,如近年無人不知的次級按揭抵押債券,很多由傳統銀行操作推出;直接權益類投資,如銀行直接投資私人權益資本和對沖基金,以及其他表外融資安排等。這些影子銀行業務可能肇始於傳統銀行的業務創新,但是其業務內容和風險已經迥異於一般信貸業務。

貨幣市場基金是另一種重要的影子銀行形式。這些貨幣基金作為市場上短期流動資金的主要提供者之一,向傳統銀行體系和其他多種商業機構提供非存款來源的貨幣資金。但是這些已經成為信貸市場基礎的貨幣市場基金,卻基本游離於金融監管當局的資訊統計和風險管控之外。其他形式的影子銀行主要是資產證券化機構和各種形形色色的信貸機構。這些機構由於數量龐大、組織複雜和差異巨大,相應的也就缺乏透明度和風險監控。

根據影子銀行的諸般具體組織形式和業務活動風險特徵,巴塞爾組織下屬的Financial Stability Board 在其專題報告中提出了一系列的監管政策建議,其核心是監管的適當性和有效性。監管的適當性主要體現在監管目的方面,即要通過適當的監管措施,避免來自傳統銀行體系之外的金融市場動盪;同時強調保持影子銀行體系的自我可持續發展,避免監管過度。在此監管目的下,監管重點則為影子銀行體系產生的風險和負外部性。即通過適當性監管,控制其風險,維護其自生性和獨立性。

作為監管政策建議的另一重點的監管有效性,則重在權衡兩方面的監管需求:一是基於共同風險進行國際監管的一致性,以避免監管套利;二是基於不同經濟體的金融市場結構和市場需求的特殊性制度設計。

另外,由於影子銀行體系的內在多樣性和創新性,監管措施要力圖具有前瞻性和適應性,以維護其正常發展;同時要經常回顧性評價和檢討,以不斷動態調整各種監管措施,真正實現適當性和有效性。

內地須疏而不堵

內地在整體金融發展滯後和金融監管過度之下,規避銀行貸款額度、利率上限和行業信貸控制(如對於房地產投資的信貸控制)等金融管制措施之下,影子銀行體系發展迅猛。根據《商業周刊》的報道,自2010 年以來不受監管的貸款、投資和其他金融產品等影子銀行業務,規模翻了一番達到近6 萬億美元,接近內地年度GDP 的七成。雖然根本原因都是出於金融管制的突破,歐美影子銀行商業邏輯是依靠金融創新、提高金融市場效率,而內地影子銀行則更多的是體制博弈和規避不合理的金融管制。

生成邏輯迥異之下,內地影子銀行組織形式也大異其趣:信託、典當和小額貸款等內地特色金融機構成為主流。這些金融組織機構雖然也處於嚴格金融監管之下;在內地嚴格的金融市場准入之下,基本不存在監管之外的金融機構。

不過,對於銀行功能的開發,積極適應了內地的私有經濟發展和私人投資需求,從而有效的彌補內地金融市場的國有主導缺陷,提高了整體的市場效率。因此,對於影子銀行要疏而不堵,畢竟內地金融管制不是太少而是太多了;對於影子銀行應以資訊統計和風險監管為主,而非業務控制。

作者為美國麻省大學商學院助理教授

李元莎

Advertisements


Leave a comment

Homework today is no child’s play

South China Morning Post
Comment›Insight & Opinion
Kelly Yang
2013-10-02

Kelly Yang says if our children’s mountain of homework does not improve test scores, as one study shows, then what’s the point?

I recently asked a roomful of eight-year-olds what time they go to bed. I was shocked when some said 10pm or even later. Why? Homework.

Studies show that the amount of homework given to students in the West has risen considerably over the past three decades. A University of Michigan study found students spent an average of 2 hours 38 minutes per week on homework in 1981; by 2007, the figure had risen to 6 hours 48 minutes for those in grades nine to 12, according to the National Centre for Education Statistics.

In Hong Kong, that doesn’t seem like a lot. Most students I’ve known average much more. That could be because they are learning both English and Chinese. These, plus maths, history and science, add up to hours of revision, dictation and projects.

Any parent who has ever watched a child spend a beautiful Sunday afternoon cooped up inside, struggling to finish homework when they could be out riding their bike, can tell you just how much homework affects family life. Sure, there are some self-motivated children with excellent time-management skills who can do all their homework by themselves quickly and efficiently. But there are countless others, like my kids, who need constant reminding, persuading, and sometimes shrieking at, before it finally all gets done.

These days, homework is no longer a child’s sole responsibility. The instructions on assignments now seem written for the parent. It’s no wonder so many mothers sit with their child for hours after school poring over assignments until both are exhausted and near tears.

As it turns out, homework may not even be beneficial. A study in the Economics of Education Review suggests that homework in science, English and history actually has “little to no impact” on test scores. There is, however, a positive correlation for maths homework. If homework, for the most part, doesn’t help improve test scores, why bother?

When I asked the eight-year-olds if they liked doing homework, unsurprisingly, everyone shook their head. However, they were also quick to say that, “You get used to it. And if you do it right and you do it quickly, it’s not so bad.” At eight, they had already developed their own coping mechanisms for a life involving mountains of paperwork.

Maybe that’s the real point of homework. Maybe its just a way to get our children prepared for office life, where, for every fascinating project, there are countless other tedious tasks that have to be done.

One college admissions officer at a top US university told me recently: “One thing we can always be sure of when we accept kids from Hong Kong or China is that they’re going to work hard. You have to hand it to these kids – they really know how to roll up their sleeves and get to work.”

You also have to hand it to their mums, dads, grandparents, tutors, helpers and countless other support people in the background whose lives have been completely transformed – not always for the better – by this never-ending heap of homework.

Kelly Yang is the founder of The Kelly Yang Project, an after-school programme for children in Hong Kong. She is a graduate of the University of California, Berkeley, and Harvard Law School.


Leave a comment

Hong Kong universities ‘face bigger challenge from mainland campuses’

South China Morning Post
News›Hong Kong
EDUCATION
2013-10-02

Shirley Zhao

HKUST vice chancellor warns city could lose its place as first choice for the best students and should seek greater support from businesses

Hong Kong universities have been warned to prepare for stiffer challenges from elite mainland institutions that have more money and bigger pools of talent.

While attention has focused recently on how the city’s position as China’s primary financial centre may be under threat from Shanghai, a leading academic said it was also in danger of losing its standing as top choice for the nation’s brightest students.

The vice chancellor of the University of Science and Technology, Tony Chan Fan-cheong, said the likes of Peking University and Tsinghua University were working hard to raise their standards.

“They have global ambition and great students. That’s the long-term competition we’re up against. We have to keep running to stay in place.”

His warning comes ahead of the release tomorrow of a new global ranking of universities by Times Higher Education.

Chan said Hong Kong’s universities cannot compete with the mainland on money or talent. “These I think they have in abundance. But how to use them efficiently and in a proper way so that you don’t corrupt your core values? That is another question.”

Chan, giving his first interview since renewing a contract that will run until 2019, said Hong Kong must play to its unique strengths: free flow of information and a robust rule of law.

“Here you can get any information. You can access Facebook, Google, Twitter or weibo. Everything is available,” he said.

Hong Kong’s universities constantly rank among the best in Asia and have become the preferred choice of the mainland’s best students.

At the same time, they have been criticised for not working closely enough with the business and commercial sectors. A survey in August by Times Higher Education ranked the city’s universities behind those in Korea, Singapore, China and even Turkey in terms of collaborating with business in research efforts.

Chan said local universities should strive for more support from business communities.

“I often envy our counterparts in Korea, because they have scholarships and labs sponsored by companies like Samsung and LG, and when their students graduate, they can get into these companies.”

Chan noted that many mainland-based companies, such as Lenovo or Huawei, were setting up labs in Hong Kong.

He said the city must seize these opportunities.

“The government has a role to play in this,” said Chan. “It needs to offer [more] initiatives and incentives. We have all the right ingredients. We just need a leader with a vision.”


Leave a comment

高效能的時間管理

Hong Kong Economic Journal
B10 | 專家之言 | 管理人管理事 | By 李漢祥 |
2013-05-18

面對沉重挑戰的領導者,好像把所有事情都照顧周到,日理萬機,時間的管理似乎是十分基本的事,或是領導者從容而為的事情。杜魯克也提及時間管理是高效能管理者其中最重要的高效能習慣之一,有系統地管理自己能夠掌握有限時間,同時發揮最有效能的領導。

筆者在各大跨國公司擔任人力資源統籌所有培訓及績效管理時,時間管理往往被所有部門主管認為是最基礎的培訓項目,應該適合那些剛畢業的見習生或初級經理。同時大多數有關管理工作的討論,提出的都是規劃你的工作,聽來很有道理,唯一的問題是這一招通常行不通,很多計劃只是紙上談兵,很少轉化為實際成果。

杜魯克認為高效能時間管理需要重要的基礎,他指出,高效能管理者不會從任務着手,而從時間着手,三個重要基礎就是記錄時間、管理時間及整合時間,高效能管理者應明白,時間是一項限制性因素,也是稀有資源,時間很容易會消失不見,無法儲存,總之是極度匱乏,同時,每件事情要做到有某種質素,都需要花時間,因此,時間是不可或缺的獨特資源。

事實上,不少管理者都不懂得管理時間,他們可能每次都在某種死線前完成任務,但假如適當重視時間的重要性及高效能管理,績效及成果可能達到更高效果。

筆者經歷大小不同的會議或計劃,往往因領袖不善於管理及運用時間這個重要資源,帶來了不少負面影響,包括打擊下屬的士氣,不尊重時間的管理文化,又或是績效的影響。很多時,不少管理者都不察覺自己的生活充斥着很多浪費時間的活動,到頭來感到自己毫無貢獻,大部分人的時間浪費在必須完成的事情上,卻沒有什麼實質的重要貢獻,這樣,管理者只達到很低的成效,因此每一位知識工作者,尤其是管理者必須完整地支配時間,才能展現效能。

架構性系統管理時間

每一項重要的策略性計劃開始時,機構都不以為然地把某重要計劃給予有能力的某部門或功能主管,但往往忽略了這主管已是每天工作超過16 小時,同時周末也須工作。

麥健時1 月刊出的關於時間管理的一項研究中,提出管理人必須停止把時間管理看作是個人問題,而應看成是結構性及機構性的重要挑戰,因為其根源已不再只是個人控制的問題,而是機構的結構及文化問題。面對人才短缺及人才工作量超重的情況下,機構必須重視並給予適當的工具、指引及協助,使成為一家有系統的時間管理及良好文化的機構。

在麥健時報告上,全球訪問了1500 多名行政人員,了解他們如何採用時間,9%認為十分滿意,少於一半滿意,三分一極度不滿,同時,一半以上認為機構完全沒有足夠的領導及指引他們,如何把時間放在哪些重要的策略性的方向及工作上。

研究結果更討論到很多機構極少把時間當作是一項重要的可以衡量的資源,時間往往不及其他的資源,例如Capital 成本的投資及回報等;領袖及管理層的時間,也很少被處理為「有限的資源」,無論遇到種種機會,領袖的能力包括時間,都極少考慮為重要的因素,因此不少領袖往往感到自己花了很多時間,但不是在高效能及成果上,以致感到十分沮喪。

管理人的四大沮喪

報告更提及在時間管理上,管理人遇到的四個最大的沮喪因素。

一、「計劃及新思維的過重」(Initiative Overload),筆者正正經歷着這不斷增加的計劃,看到每個領袖及管理人,除了日常工作外,由於種種策略、改變、新思維、計劃……等,管理人又被邀加入某工作小組,或計劃隊伍,或總部的策略、或某區域的改變,又或另一項計劃及研究,這些管理人就不斷參與種種會議,根本沒有時間和自己的團隊傾談或交流,減低了員工的投入感,這種「改變的疲慮」(Change Fatigue),令管理人喪失了基本的氣力及士氣。

二、當機構沒有有系統的時間管理體制及文化時,管理人每天被電郵、會議及大大小小的事項拖拖拉拉,投放不少時間,逐漸變成一個極被動、失去方向的管理人,同時,重要事情反被拖垮了。

三、放棄了重要事情,管理人在沒有時間的優先次序的管理人,必定放棄了重要的項目,人際的溝通,這就是杜魯克談到的: 「時間是極稀有的資源,如果不妥善管理,什麼也不能管理好。」四、尊重時間,機構作為良好有效的重要架構,須要懂得指引各上下員工時間管理,但同時須尊重時間的平衡,每個工作的內容,須要平衡職能的需要,平衡對外,對內及對自己,對員工的時間,才能發揮高效能高水準。

一個機構一位高效能的領袖,須要察覺及積極好好把時間管理,作為機構一項重要資源及項目,才能平衡各方面的長處,達致成果。

李漢祥alee@wwhcc.com