??? 雅虎公司（Yahoo）或許一直深受標識上巨大嘆號的詛咒。這家公司就是消停不了，經常因為種種負面新聞吸引著媒體的眼球。誠然，作為一家大型科技公司，雅虎確實存在各種問題，但對于一家擁有豐富資產、卻在創新方面表現拙劣的公司來說，雅虎的轉變之路其實一直都在人們的預料之中。公司真正的問題并非戰略層面，而是不靠譜的領導層引發的一出出鬧劇。

????這部連續劇最近上演了新的戲碼。上周日，雅虎公司宣布，涉嫌簡歷造假的前任CEO斯科特?湯普森同意辭職。據悉，湯普森在簡歷中聲稱自己擁有計算機科學學位，而實際上他在說謊。公司找到更合適的人選之前，雅虎負責全球媒體業務的羅斯?B?列文森將擔任公司臨時CEO。

????此外，雅虎也不得不向對沖基金第三點（Third Point）的維權股東丹尼爾?勒布妥協。丹尼爾?勒布持有雅虎5.8%的股份。二月份，勒布要求雅虎任命其本人以及第三點對沖基金的幾位同事為雅虎董事。雅虎拒絕了該要求，結果招致第三點公司一連串的憤怒回應。雙方的爭執在上周達到高潮，當時，第三點公司宣布，普森簡歷被發現造假，隨后要求湯普森下臺。

????這丑陋的一切都發生在眾目睽睽之下。不過，對于久經考驗的雅虎而言，這不過是小插曲而已。一段時間以來，這家公司一直充滿了戲劇性。早在2009年，雅虎任命卡羅爾?巴茨為公司CEO。她在雅虎擔任CEO期間雖未增加公司收入，但她確實降低了成本，提高了利潤率，這兩項都稱得上是管理層采取的有力的措施。然而，這些成就在她張揚的個性面前就顯得黯然失色了：巴茨經常像水手一樣破口大罵，非常難以共事。

????她并不是在雅虎才形成了這樣的性格。實際上，巴茨的魅力很大程度上是源自她這種率性的行為舉止。如果確實如此的話，當初雅虎的做法必然會引火燒身。當時公司董事長羅伊?博斯托克通過電話炒了巴茨的魷魚，之后，巴茨立即通過iPad向員工發了一封滿含憤恨的電子郵件，并在媒體面前對自己被炒魷魚的事情破口大罵。

????之后，雅虎一直在尋找合適的人選，并最終選定了時任貝寶公司（Paypal）CEO的斯科特?湯普森。今年一月，湯普森接到了雅虎的正式任命。在公布今年第一季度的收入報告之后，湯普森表示自己將在雅虎展開大刀闊斧的改革。他計劃裁掉數千個工作崗位，并將公司的重心轉移到電子商務領域：在4月10日的公告中，湯普森對員工稱，我們將為通過雅虎網站購物的用戶帶來變得更加簡易的網購體驗，并使廣告商更接近目標客戶。

????當時，雅虎已經陷入與維權股東勒布及其對沖基金第三點的紛爭。第三點于2011年底購買了雅虎的股份。勒布曾在多家面臨困境的公司投資，一向慣于在加入公司董事會之后爭奪代理權，以便挖掘公司的價值。因此，雅虎對于勒布應該早有耳聞。

????Perhaps Yahoo! has been cursed by the exclamation point in its name. The company just can't stop yelling, attracting headlines for all the wrong reasons. And sure, the tech giant has had its troubles, but for a company as rich in assets and poor in market-shattering innovation as it is, Yahoo has been following a pretty predictable turnaround pattern. It's the leadership soap opera, not their strategy, that's the problem.

????In the latest in a series of awkward events, Yahoo (YHOO) announced Sunday that former CEO Scott Thompson would resign, amid revelations that his resume included a bachelor's degree in computer science he never actually earned. The company's head of global media, Ross B. Levinsohn, will serve as interim CEO until Yahoo launches yet another talent search.

????Yahoo also capitulated to Daniel Loeb, the activist shareholder at Third Point, which owns a 5.8% stake in the company. Loeb first demanded in February that Yahoo appoint him and some of his other Third Point colleagues to Yahoo's board. Yahoo denied his request, which triggered a chain of angry responses from Third Point. The big crescendo happened last week, when Third Point announced that it had discovered falsities on Thompson's resume, and subsequently called for his head.

????It was all very ugly and public. But this episode is one in a long line of fiascos for Yahoo. The company has been a drama magnet for quite some time. Just look back to 2009, when Yahoo hired Carol Bartz as CEO. During her time at the company, Bartz may not have boosted revenue, but she did cut costs and improve profit margins -- both solid management moves. That was all overshadowed by her loud personality: Bartz apparently cussed like a sailor and was tough to work with.

????These weren't character traits she developed at Yahoo. In fact, Bartz's demeanor may have originally been part of her appeal. If that's the case, the strategy backfired on Yahoo when then-chairman Roy Bostock fired Bartz via phone call, and she immediately beamed an angry email to employees from her iPad, and then dropped some F-bombs to the press about her dismissal.

????Yahoo went on a talent search that eventually led them to then-Paypal CEO Scott Thompson. They gave him the top spot this past January. Thompson was going to make big dramatic changes, he said after the company's first-quarter earnings announcement. He was going to slash thousands of jobs and shift the company's focus towards e-commerce: in a statement on April 10, Thompson suggested to employees that Yahoo was going to make it easier for users to spend via Yahoo's site, bringing advertisers closer to targeted customers.

????By that time, Yahoo had already landed yet another aggressive personality, Loeb and his hedge fund Third Point, which had bought a stake in Yahoo in late 2011. Loeb has a history of joining boards and starting proxy fights to get value out of struggling companies. Yahoo should have known who it was dealing with.?