On June 16, New York State Supreme Court Justice Jeffrey Oing issued a 63-page decision in which he found that retailer J.C. Penney JCP 2.78% had committed tortious interference in its attempt to develop a Martha Stewart store inside JC Penney stores. The deal, announced in 2011 as Ron Johnson took Penney’s helm, violated the terms of a preexisting deal that Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia MSO -0.89% had with Macy’s M 1.29% , the judge ruled. Damages will be determined by a special master or referee.6月16日，纽约州最高法院华裔法官翁家驹得出长达63页的起诉书，确认零售商J.C. Penney公司企图在J.C. Penney商场中开玛莎·斯图沃特（Martha Stewart）店面科侵权行为阻碍不道德。这笔交易于2011年罗恩·约翰逊接掌J.C. Penney时宣告。翁家驹法官裁决，它违背了玛莎·斯图沃特公司早前与梅西百货（Macy’s）签定的协议之条款。
损害赔偿将由一名尤其专家或鉴定人要求。The decision surprised no one. Oing had previously issued a preliminary injunction barring Penney from building the stores and selling most of the products. The ill-fated deal was just one of the many choices that contributed to Johnson’s ultimate failure.翁家驹法官作出这个裁决是意料之中的事。他曾公布可行性禁令，禁令J.C. Penney公司修建玛莎o斯图沃特店面以及销售这个品牌的大部分产品。
这笔意外流产的交易只不过是约翰逊最后告终的诸多原因之一。The decision also sheds light on how closely Johnson’s own approach to management hewed to the “reality distortion field” made famous by his prior boss and mentor, Steve Jobs—and, more important—how infrequently such an approach can succeed outside of Apple.上述判决使我们认识到，在相当大程度上，约翰逊的管理方式师承自其导师和前老板史蒂夫o乔布斯知名的“现实变形力场”，而更加最重要的是，这种管理方式出有了苹果（Apple）公司往往权宜之计。
When Johnson took the helm at J.C. Penney, he brought with him a strong belief that his Apple experience—he built the company’s stores, now the most profitable retail group in the country—would be a huge plus. So did Penney’s board of directors; indeed, it was the main reason he was selected. Johnson held a coming out party eerily reminiscent of Jobs’ MacWorld events; he added a clean, white aesthetic to the company’s branding and logo; he hired several Apple veterans; and he talked constantly about his closeness to Jobs and the Apple way of doing things.约翰逊接掌J.C. Penney 时曾深信，他在苹果的经验——他一手打造出的苹果商店现在早已是全美最赚的零售集团——将是一个极大优势。J.C. Penney的董事会也这样指出；事实上，这是他们自由选择约翰逊的主要原因。
约翰逊接掌J.C. Penney后举办的首次舞会不已令人回想乔布斯的MacWorld大会；他给J.C. Penney公司的品牌和标识加添了整洁、紫色的美感；他雇用了几位来自苹果的老将；而且他大大谈及自己与乔布斯关系有多紧密，重复驳回苹果公司的行事方法。Jobs was rightfully lionized as a creative genius, but he was also a fiercely competitive leader who simply could not bear to lose. That ferocity—plus a force of will that could convince just about anyone of anything—was referred to by people around him as his “reality distortion” field. And it is this trait that we see Johnson emulating in his attempt to convince the world that Penney was not, in fact, infringing upon Macy’s earlier agreement with Martha Stewart’s company.乔布斯被尊为创新天才无可厚非，但他同时也是位好胜心爆棚的强势领导者。
乔布斯的强悍——再加完全能劝说所有人拒绝接受任何事的意志力——被他身边的人称作乔布斯的“现实变形”力场。约翰逊正是效仿乔布斯的这个特质，企图让人们坚信，J.C. Penney公司事实上并没对梅西百货早前与玛莎o斯图沃特签订的协议构成侵权行为。
The emails presented as evidence in the case show a leader who had already convinced himself that he had won—regardless of the fact that even his own counsel worried about the deal’s legality. As Johnson wrote in an email to Daniel Walker, an Apple retail veteran he had hired at Penney: “I’m feeling awesome about grand strategy. I need to pull off Martha. I need to propose a deal so she can go to Terry [Lundgren] at Macy’s and break their agreement. That is the only issue in way of success at this point.” Johnson suggested, with some glee, that Lundgren would probably “have a headache,” when he heard about the JCP deal, one that would soon develop into a “full on migraine.”作为证据递交给法院的电子邮件表明，约翰逊早已劝说了自己，坚信自己早已输掉了，尽管连他自己的律师都担忧这笔交易不合法。约翰逊在给J.C. Penney雇员、前苹果零售业务杨家员工丹尼尔o沃克的邮件中写到：“我对大战略感觉好极了。我得搞定玛莎。我得拿走好的交易，让她去跟梅西百货的（首席执行官）特里o伦德格伦中止合约。
”约翰逊有些幸灾乐祸地似乎，伦德格伦听见J.C. Penney与玛莎的交易后估算要“头痛”了，而且迅速不会变为“重度偏头痛”。The judge was clearly astonished by Johnson’s reaction after Martha Stewart announced to Lundgren that she had signed on with Penney. “Incredibly,” the judge wrote, “ignoring the seriousness of what had just transpired, Mr. Johnson wrote to [board member] William Ackman: ‘Media good as well. We put Terry in a corner. Normally when that happens and you get someone on the defensive they make bad decisions. This is good.’ And to board member Steven Roth, he wrote ‘…the more this is seen as brilliant for JCP and Martha the more he won’t want to interfere…’”玛莎o斯图沃特告诉伦德格伦自己与J.C. Penney签下之后，约翰逊做出的反应令其翁家驹法官吃惊深感。法官写到：“真是令人难以置信，（约翰逊）几乎漠视事情的严重性。
他在给（董事会成员）威廉o阿克曼的邮件中写到：‘媒体反响较好。我们把特里逼上了绝路。一般来说经常出现这种情况的时候，人们就不会正处于防卫状态，往往不会作出错误的要求。
这是好事。’而在给董事会成员史蒂芬o罗斯的邮件中，约翰逊写到：“......外界就越指出JCP和玛莎腊得可爱，他就就越会干预……”In fact, the opposite became true as a result of the company’s cavalier attitude, Oing observed. “Unbeknownst to Mr. Lundgren and Macy’s, Mr. Johnson’s attitude towards them with respect to JCP’s budding relationship with MSLO was take it or leave it. Mr. Johnson aptly described the scene as making JCP’s ‘offensive so strong’ that Macy’s would ‘simply pick up their toys and go home.’ JCP and Mr. Johnson could not have been more wrong.”翁家驹法官回应，事实上，由于J.C. Penney的刻薄态度，事态在向着几乎忽略的方向发展。“伦德格伦先生和梅西百货所不告诉的是，在JCP与玛莎公司可行性奠定合作关系这件事情上，约翰逊先生对他们的态度是“没有得商量”。约翰逊先生似乎一位，面临JCP‘如此激烈的反攻’，梅西不会‘偷偷地离去玩具回家’。
然而，JCP和约翰逊先生堪称大错特错。”It is axiomatic that leaders must believe that they have made the right decisions. But as this case shows, believing that they are right does not make it so—no matter what Steve Jobs would have said.大自然，领导者必需坚信自己所做到的要求是准确的。但上面这个案例指出，假如显然拢了，光靠坚信自己是对的没用——无论史蒂夫·乔布斯不会怎么说。
本文来源：必赢|bwin-www.515tu.com
