在过去的几年里，我写了时间和再次是时候了机构投资者之间的合作与合作会越来越普遍。亚博赞助欧冠为什么？因为我相信长期投资者，如养老金，主权，家庭和捐赠，可以努力共同努力，努力支持他们的回报并实现其目标。In large part, the economic geographer in me was convinced that the sharing of local knowledge and asymmetric information that would come from partnering with peers (not to mention access to other funds’ skill-sets, deal pipeline, and network of elites) would have real commercial value. And I still believe that. But, I have to say, I’m much more cynical than I was a few years ago.
虽然我仍然热衷于共同投资安排，但我认为有一些主要的障碍，即“潜在的合作伙伴”将要克服，如果他们要在一个以上的基础上共同努力。这是三个跳到思想：
赔偿：激励措施的设计对个人的行为产生了巨大影响。因此，如果一个机构投亚博赞助欧冠资者以这样的方式设计其激励措施（即，其薪酬制度），这种方式驱使员工将同龄人视为竞争对手而不是作为合作伙伴，那么合作将变得更具挑战性。而且，在世界上的最高资金，这正是发生了什么;赔偿越来越多地是基金或个人如何增加基于市场基准的价值的函数。换句话说，赔偿基于基金相对于同龄人的表现。如果他们的赔偿明确绑定，我们怎样才能将人们合作，并将其基金每年击败其同行组的金额？
正式化：Try all you want to come up with Memoranda of Understanding or even (bless your soul) formal organizational structures to facilitate collaborative investing (with allocated assets and joint-investment committees), all you’ll end up doing is helping a few lawyers put their kids through college. Recall that most institutional investors are often bureaucratic to begin with, which means it can be extremely difficult to get internal approvals to launch a vehicle where one fund relies on the investment advice of another fund. But even aside from the legal challenges, these formal arrangements are an attempt to replace trust and interpersonal relationships with contracts and commitments. And that’s not easy. As such, most of the collaborative ventures I’ve seen eventually revert back to more informal arrangements (whereby each member retains absolute authority over their assets and resources) and instead focus on building trust and inter-personal relationships.
本体论：为了在两个或更多投资者之间发生有意义的协作，这些组织必须具有非常相似的世界观点（本体论）。由此，我的意思是说，志同道合的投资者比以不同方式看到世界的资金更加易于合作。It’s not all that important that they act in exactly the same way (methodology) – in fact it’s probably better if they have different skills and knowledge to round out each others’ endowments – but it is important that they agree in the way assets should be deployed in a given domain. The problem here is that it can be very challenging to identify the reasoning and motives (ontology) underpinning a fund’s actions and behavior (methodology), which makes attempts to find partners quite challenging. Again, in order to really assess whether a fund is “like-minded” requires inter-personal relationships built around mutual respect and trust; this is not something that an artificial contractual edifice can replace.
这就是限制协作（超越一次性交易）。有什么影响？我有两个竞争的想法：
1）潜在的合作者可以保持简单/非正式的，并专注于与其他投资者建立信任和友谊的方式。在这种情况下，会议和事件的“约会游戏”将不可避免地揭示“志同道合的”投资者，共同投资机会将有机泡起来。
2）潜在的合作者可以与一个或多个相识的投资者聚在一起推出新车。换句话说，他们可以采取额外的步骤来创建De-Novo资产经理（带有专用团队），这些经理将处理倾向于破坏协作的所有问题。我在中东地区看到了这些类型的车辆（例如，科威特中国投资公司）。
无论如何，我仍然是合作的粉丝 - 这是扩大资源欠资金范围的有用方法 - 但上面的障碍在我看来，持久挑战。