【TED演讲34*】如何让"选择"变得更容易？演讲者：Sheena Iyengar

提示： 回复  ted 可收听查看所有《TED演讲》文章。

演说题目：如何让"选择"变得更容易？演讲者：Sheena Iyengar

你有没有过面对银行推荐的几十支理财产品茫茫然一头雾水？你有没有过对着一大排各种功效的洗发水、洗面奶、牙膏从无下手？你有没有过盯着菜单看了20分钟迟迟不能决定要点的食物？哥伦比亚大学教授Sheena Iyengar 从商家与消费者的双向角度给出了4项技巧——精简，具体化，分类，由简入繁。

中英对照翻译

Do you know how many choices you make in a typical day? Do you know how many choices you make in typical week? I recently did a survey with over 2,000 Americans, and the average number of choices that the typical American reports making is about 70 in a typical day. There was also recently a study done with CEOs in which they followed CEOs around for a whole week. 

你知道在日常生活中你平均每天做多少选择？你知道你平均每周做多少选择？我最近在超过2000美国人中做了一个调查，结果显示，一个典型的美国人平均每天做70个选择。另外最近还有一个对于CEO们的研究,科学家们在一星期中跟着CEO们。

And these scientists simply documented all the various tasks that these CEOs engaged in and how much time they spent engaging in making decisions related to these tasks. And they found that the average CEO engaged in about 139 tasks in a week. Each task was made up of many, many, many sub-choices of course. 50 percent of their decisions were made in nine minutes or less. 

然后记录下他们所参与和完成的各种不同的活动与任务和他们做的所有与这些任务有关的决定所用的时间。科学家们由此发现，每一个CEO平均每周参与完成大概139个任务。当然了，每个任务又都是由许多小的选择构成的。这其中50%的决定都是他们在九分钟甚至更短的时间内做出的。

Only about 12 percent of the decisions did they make an hour or more of their time. Think about your own choices. Do you know how many choices make it into your nine minute category versus your one hour category? How well do you think you're doing at managing those choices? 

只有其中百分之十二的决定，用了他们一小时或更长的时间。想一想你每天做的选择。你知道它们中多少是“九分钟抉择”又有多少是一小时的选择？在管理这些选择上，你做的如何？

Today I want to talk about one of the biggest modern day choosing problems that we have, which is the choice overload problem. I want to talk about the problem and some potential solutions. Now as I talk about this problem, I'm going to have some questions for you and I'm going to want to know your answers. 

今天我要讲一讲现在社会中我们所面对的最严重的选择问题：选择过多。我想要讲一讲这些问题与一些可行的解决办法。我现在先将这个问题，我要问你们一些问题然后我希望得到你们的答案。

So when I ask you a question, since I'm blind, only raise your hand if you want to burn off some calories.  Otherwise, when I ask you a question, and if your answer is yes, I'd like you to clap your hands. So for my first question for you today: Are you guys ready to hear about the choice overload problem? Thank you. 

所以当我问你们一个问题由于我看不见，不要举手除非你只是想消耗一下卡路里。（笑声)否则，当我问你们一个问题，如果你的答案是：是，我希望你们可以鼓掌。所以，我今天给你们的第一个问题是：对于选择过多这个问题你们准备好听了么？谢谢。

So when I was a graduate student at Stanford University, I used to go to this very, very upscale grocery store; at least at that time it was truly upscale. It was a store called Draeger's. Now this store, it was almost like going to an amusement park. 

当我还是斯坦福大学的一名本科学生时，我经常去一个非常高级的杂货店；至少在当时看来那家店是十分高级的。它的名字是Draeger‘s。去那家店，就像是去游乐园一样。

They had 250 different kinds of mustards and vinegars and over 500 different kinds of fruits and vegetables and more than two dozen different kinds of bottled water -- and this was during a time when we actually used to drink tap water. 

他们有250种不同的黄芥末和醋还有超过500中不同种类的蔬菜和水果，还有超过24中不同的瓶装水。而那是我们还在喝水龙头里的水的年代。

I used to love going to this store, but on one occasion I asked myself, well how come you never buy anything? Here's their olive oil aisle. They had over 75 different kinds of olive oil, including those that were in a locked case that came from thousand-year-old olive trees. 

我过去十分喜欢去这家店，但是有一次我问自己，为什么你从来都不买东西呢？这是卖橄榄油的过道。他们有75种以上不同的橄榄油，包括那些被锁在盒子里从4000年的橄榄树上取来的油。

So I one day decided to pay a visit to the manager, and I asked the manager, "Is this model of offering people all this choice really working?" And he pointed to the busloads of tourists that would show up everyday, with cameras ready usually. We decided to do a little experiment, and we picked jam for our experiment. Here's their jam aisle. 

于是有一天我决定去拜访一下这家店的经理，我问他，“这个给人们所有选择的模型真的有用么？”然后他向我示意了那些每天都会来的一车一车的举着相机的游客。我们决定做一个小实验，然后选择了果酱作为试验品。这是卖果酱的走廊。

They had 348 different kinds of jam. We set up a little tasting booth right near the entrance of the store. We there put out six different flavors of jam or 24 different flavors of jam, and we looked at two things: First, in which case were people more likely to stop, sample some jam? More people stopped when there were 24, about 60 percent, than when there were six, about 40 percent. 

他们有148种不同的果酱。在店门口的地方我们摆设了一个小的品尝台。我们在那儿摆6种或24种不同味道的果酱，然后我们观察了两件事：第一，人们在哪种情况下更愿意停下脚步品尝一些果酱？相比较下，大部分，约60%的人，在有24种果酱走廊停了脚步，而当有6种果酱时只有40%的人。

The next thing we looked at is in which case were people more likely to buy a jar of jam. Now we see the opposite effect. Of the people who stopped when there were 24, only three percent of them actually bought a jar of jam. 

我们观察的另一件事是：在人们在哪种情况下更愿意买一罐果酱这时，我们观察到了相反的结果。在那些在有24种果酱时停下的人们中，只有3%的人真正买了果酱。

Of the people who stopped when there were six, well now we saw that 30 percent of them actually bought a jar of jam. Now if you do the math, people were at least six times more likely to buy a jar of jam if they encountered six than if they encountered 24. 

而此时，在那些在有6种果酱时停下的人们中，我们发现有30%的人买了果酱。现在如果你算一下的话，当人们只有六种选择时，比有24种时买果酱的倾向上升了至少六倍

Now choosing not to buy a jar of jam is probably good for us -- at least it's good for our waistlines -- but it turns out that this choice overload problem affects us even in very consequential decisions. We choose not to choose, even when it goes against our best self-interests. So now for the topic of today: financial savings. 

选择不买果酱也许对我们来说是一件好事儿至少对我们的水桶腰来说，但是结果证明过度选择甚至在非常重要的决定上影响我们。我们甚至在有悖个人利益的情况下，宁愿放弃选择。所以现在来介绍我们今天的话题：金融理财。

Now I'm going to describe to you a study I did with Gur Huberman, Emir Kamenica, Wei Jang where we looked at the retirement savings decisions of nearly a million Americans from about 650 plans all in the U.S. And what we looked at was whether the number of fund offerings available in a retirement savings plan, the 401(k) plan, does that affect people's likelihood to save more for tomorrow. 

现在我要向你们介绍我与GurHuberman,EmirKamerica,WeiJang一起做的一个关于近百万美国人在全美650多种养老金计划中选择的研究。我们研究了养老金计划，也就是401（k)雇员福利中所提供的基金选择数量，是否影响人们为未来存款的几率。

And what we found was that indeed there was a correlation. So in these plans, we had about 657 plans that ranged from offering people anywhere from two to 59 different fund offerings. And what we found was that, the more funds offered, indeed, there was less participation rate. 

我们发现，这之前却是有联系。于是在这些计划中，我们选择了657个从提供2到59种基金的不同计划。我们发现，事实上，提供的基金越多，参购率就越低。

So if you look at the extremes, those plans that offered you two funds, participation rates were around in the mid-70s -- still not as high as we want it to be. In those plans that offered nearly 60 funds, participation rates have now dropped to about the 60th percentile. 

所以如果观察一下极端的情况的话，会发现那些提供给客户两种基金的计划的参购率在70左右，仍然没有我们期待中的那么高。那些提供接近60种基金的计划，参购率降低到了60多的参购率。

Now it turns out that even if you do choose to participate when there are more choices present, even then, it has negative consequences. So for those people who did choose to participate, the more choices available, the more likely people were to completely avoid stocks or equity funds. 

由此看来，即使是你真的选择参与一个计划，当那么多计划摆在你面前时，还是会造成负面的影响。所以对于那些选择参与计划的人来说，选择越多，他们越容易选择完全避开股票或类似的基金。

The more choices available, the more likely they were to put all their money in pure money market accounts. Now neither of these extreme decisions are the kinds of decisions that any of us would recommend for people when you're considering their future financial well-being. 

选择越多，越容易造成人们把钱存进单纯的存钱账户中。现在，这两种极端选择没有一种是当考虑到朋友未来的生活时，我们会推荐给朋友的好的选择。

Well, over the past decade, we have observed three main negative consequences to offering people more and more choices. They're more likely to delay choosing -- procrastinate even when it goes against their best self-interest. They're more likely to make worse choices -- worse financial choices, medical choices. 

在过去十年中，我们观察到了提供人们越来越多的选择所造成的负面影响他们越来越容易推迟选择的过程，即使这样做会损害到自身的利益。人们更容易做出更差的选择-更差的理财选择，医疗选择。

They're more likely to choose things that make them less satisfied, even when they do objectively better. The main reason for this is because, we might enjoy gazing at those giant walls of mayonnaises, mustards, vinegars, jams, but we can't actually do the math of comparing and contrasting and actually picking from that stunning display. 

人们更容易选择那些令自己不满意的选项，即使那些选择也许客观来讲并没有那么差。这是因为，虽然我们很享受看一排一排由美乃滋，黄芥末，醋和果酱建成的的高墙，却不愿意亲自比较然后在如此庞大的陈列中做出选择。

So what I want to propose to you today are four simple techniques -- techniques that we have tested in one way or another in different research venues -- that you can easily apply in your businesses. 

所以今天我想向你们介绍四种简单的技巧-它们都是你可以轻松地运用在生意上，并且被测试过许多次的可靠技巧。

The first: Cut. You've heard it said before, but it's never been more true than today, that less is more. People are always upset when I say, "Cut." They're always worried they're going to lose shelf space. 

一：精减。你们以前也许听过，但这个说法在从前的社会从未像现今一样的适用-“少即是多”每一次我说“精减"的时候，人们总是会很生气。他们担心这样做会导致他们丢失自我空间。

But in fact, what we're seeing more and more is that if you are willing to cut, get rid of those extraneous redundant options, well there's an increase in sales, there's a lowering of costs, there is an improvement of the choosing experience. When Proctor "Gamble went from 26 different kinds of Head " Shoulders to 15, they saw an increase in sales by 10 percent. 

但事实上，根据我们所观察到的是当一个人越是愿意放弃多余的选择，使得营业额上升，价格降低，越是会改善原则的经历。当保洁公司将26种不同的海飞丝减至15种时，销售额上升了百分之十。

When the Golden Cat Corporation got rid of their 10 worst-selling cat litter products, they saw an increase in profits by 87 percent -- a function of both increase in sales and lowering of costs. You know, the average grocery store today offers you 45,000 products. 

当金猫公司停止了他们的十种销售量最差的猫粮的销售，盈利上升了百分之八十七-是又能增加销售额还降低了成本两全其美的好方法。正如你们所知道的，现在一个普通的杂货店提供45000种商品给你选择。

The typical Walmart today offers you 100,000 products. But the ninth largest retailer, the ninth biggest retailer in the world today is Aldi, and it offers you only 1,400 products -- one kind of canned tomato sauce. 

一个典型的沃尔玛为你提供100000种商品。但是，第九大的零售商今天世界上第九大的零售商，是阿尔迪，而他们只提供给顾客1400种商品-一种罐装番茄酱。

Now in the financial savings world, I think one of the best examples that has recently come out on how to best manage the choice offerings has actually been something that David Laibson was heavily involved in designing, which was the program that they have at Harvard. 

在这个理财的世界中，我认为在关于如何最有效地管理选择中最好的例子是DavidLaibson十分投入的一个哈佛的项目。哈佛的每一个教职工都自动被登记加入一个生活周期基金中。

Every single Harvard employee is now automatically enrolled in a lifecycle fund. For those people who actually want to choose, they're given 20 funds, not 300 or more funds. You know, often, people say, "I don't know how to cut. They're all important choices." 

那些愿意自己选择的人，有20种不同的基金选择，而不是300种甚至更多。你知道，人们很喜欢说，”我不知道怎么消减这些都是非常重要的选择。”

And the first thing I do is I ask the employees, "Tell me how these choices are different from one another. And if your employees can't tell them apart, neither can your consumers." 

所以我做的第一件事是问这些教职工，“告诉我这些选择与其他那些有何不同，如果你的员工们不能分辨它们的不同，你的顾客肯定也不能。“

Now before we started our session this afternoon, I had a chat with Gary. And Gary said that he would be willing to offer people in this audience an all-expenses-paid free vacation to the most beautiful road in the world. Here's a description of the road. And I'd like you to read it. 

今天下午在这个活动开始之前，我跟Gary聊了一会儿。Gary跟我说他愿意为今天在场的所有观众提供一次到这个世界上最美的路的旅行，并且完全免费。我希望你们读一下对这条路的描写。

And now I'll give you a few seconds to read it and then I want you to clap your hands if you're ready to take Gary up on his offer. (Light clapping) Okay. Anybody who's ready to take him up on his offer. Is that all? 

现在我给你们几秒钟自己读一下，如果你愿意接受Gary的提议的话，就请鼓掌。好，有人愿意接受他的提议么？没有其他人了么？

All right, let me show you some more about this. (Laughter) You guys knew there was a trick, didn't you. (Honk) Now who's ready to go on this trip. (Applause) (Laughter) I think I might have actually heard more hands. 

好吧，我多给你们看一些有关此事的。你们早就知道这是个诡计了，是吧？现在，有谁愿意去这次旅行？我以为我会听到更多掌声呢。

All right. Now in fact, you had objectively more information the first time around than the second time around, but I would venture to guess that you felt that it was more real the second time around. Because the pictures made it feel more real to you. 

好吧，事实上，客观地来讲，你们第一次的时候比第二次得到的信息要多，但是我冒昧地猜你们觉得第二次更真实一些。因为那些照片让你们感觉更真实。

Which brings me to the second technique for handling the choice overload problem, which is concretization. That in order for people to understand the differences between the choices, they have to be able to understand the consequences associated with each choice, and that the consequences need to be felt in a vivid sort of way, in a very concrete way. 

而这个例子就是我们今天要讲的第二个处理选择过多的技巧，具体化。为了令人们更好地理解众多选择之间的区别，他们必须理解，每一个选择所将带来的后果，而这些后果必须是可以十分清晰、具体地感受到的。

Why do people spend an average of 15 to 30 percent more when they use an ATM card or a credit card as opposed to cash? Because it doesn't feel like real money. And it turns out that making it feel more concrete can actually be a very positive tool to use in getting people to save more. 

为什么人们平均每天花比用现今多15%到30%的时间在自动提款机或信用卡上呢？因为那样感觉不像是真正的钱。所以原来使感觉更具体化可以成为令人们节约的好方法。

So a study that I did with Shlomo Benartzi and Alessandro Previtero, we did a study with people at ING -- employees that are all working at ING -- and now these people were all in a session where they're doing enrollment for their 401(k) plan. 

所以在一个我与ShlomoBenartzi和AlessandroPrecitero做的研究中，我们和所有ING（荷兰国际集团）的员工一起做了一个研究，所有人都参加了一个一起注册401(k)雇员福利的会议。

And during that session, we kept the session exactly the way it used to be, but we added one little thing. The one little thing we added was we asked people to just think about all the positive things that would happen in your life if you saved more. 

在这个过程中我们在保持每个会议完全相同的情况下，加了一个小东西。我们加的是，让他们每个人都想象如果多存一些生命中可能会发生的那些美好的事情。

By doing that simple thing, there was an increase in enrollment by 20 percent and there was an increase in the amount of people willing to save or the amount that they were willing to put down into their savings account by four percent. 

仅仅是这样做后，参与率上升了百分之二十，人们愿意存钱的数额或者说是愿意放进自己储蓄账户的金额增长了百分之四。

The third technique: Categorization. We can handle more categories than we can handle choices. So for example, here's a study we did in a magazine aisle. It turns out that in Wegmans grocery stores up and down the northeast corridor, the magazine aisles range anywhere from 331 different kinds of magazines all the way up to 664. 

第三个技巧：分类。相比处理选择来说，我们可以轻松处理更多类别。比如说，我们做了一个有关买杂志类过道的研究，发现在Wegmans百货商店中，在东北走廊的地方，买杂志的那一栏有331到甚至664种杂志。但是你们知道么？

But you know what? If I show you 600 magazines and I divide them up into 10 categories, versus I show you 400 magazines and divide them up into 20 categories, you believe that I have given you more choice and a better choosing experience if I gave you the 400 than if I gave you the 600. Because the categories tell me how to tell them apart. 

如果我先给你们看600本杂志，然后把它们分成10类，然后再给你们看400本杂志，但是分成20类，你们会相信，当我给你们看400本杂志时比给你们600本时的选择更多，选择体验更好。因为类别可以帮我分辨它们的区别。

Here are two different jewelry displays. One is called "Jazz" and the other one is called "Swing." If you think the display on the left is Swing and the display on the right is Jazz, clap your hands. Okay, there's some. 

这里有两个不同的珠宝展示，一个叫“爵士”，另一个叫“摇摆”如果你觉得左边的是“摇摆”右边的是“爵士”就请鼓掌。好吧，有一些。

If you think the one on the left is Jazz and the one on the right is Swing, clap your hands. Okay, a bit more. Now it turns out you're right. The one on the left is Jazz and the one on the right is Swing, but you know what? 

如果你觉得左边的是“爵士”，右边的是“摇摆”请鼓掌。稍微多一点儿了。你们是对的。左边的的确是“爵士”，而右边的正是“摇摆”，但是你知道么？

This is a highly useless categorization scheme. (Laughter) The categories need to say something to the chooser, not the choice-maker. And you often see that problem when it comes down to those long lists of all these funds. Who are they actually supposed to be informing? 

这是一个十分无用的分类阴谋。类别必须可以告诉选择者一些事情，而不是创造选择的人。你们也许可以在那些冗长的基金名单中看到这个问题。到底谁才是应该得到信息的人呢？

My fourth technique: Condition for complexity. It turns out we can actually handle a lot more information than we think we can, we've just got to take it a little easier. We have to gradually increase the complexity. I'm going to show you one example of what I'm talking about. 

我的第四个技巧是：从简入繁事实上，我们所能承受的信息量比我们想象的要高，我们需要做的就是用轻松地面度对待。我们必须逐渐加大复杂程度。现在我给你们举一个有关的例子。

Let's take a very, very complicated decision: buying a car. Here's a German car manufacturer that gives you the opportunity to completely custom make your car. You've got to make 60 different decisions, completely make up your car. Now these decisions vary in the number of choices that they offer per decision. 

我们来一起做一个非常非常复杂的决定：买车。现在有一个德国制造商，愿意让你定制一辆完全个性化的车。你必须要做60个不同的决定才能做好这辆车。这些决定包括每一个决定所提供的选择。

Car colors, exterior car colors -- I've got 56 choices. Engines, gearshift -- four choices. So now what I'm going to do is I'm going to vary the order in which these decisions appear. So half of the customers are going to go from high choice, 56 car colors, to low choice, four gearshifts. The other half of the customers are going to go from low choice, four gearshifts, to 56 car colors, high choice. 

光车的颜色，内置的颜色就有56种选择。有四种发动机，变速排档选择。现在我要做的是改变这些要做的决定出线的顺序。所以，一般的观众要从选择多的决定开始-56种颜色开始到选择少的决定-四种变速排档。另外一半的观众要从选择少的决定，四种变档开始到56种车颜色，选择多的决定.

What am I going to look at? How engaged you are. If you keep hitting the default button per decision, that means you're getting overwhelmed, that means I'm losing you. What you find is the people who go from high choice to low choice, they're hitting that default button over and over and over again. 

我想要观察什么呢？你们有多积极。如果你不停地按默认选项的话就说明你已经被选择淹没了，也就是说我正在失去你的参与。你会发现，从选择多的开始到选择少的人会不停地选择默认选项。

We're losing them. They go from low choice to high choice, they're hanging in there. It's the same information. It's the same number of choices. The only thing that I have done is I have varied the order in which that information is presented. 

我们就会逐渐失去他们了那些从选择少开始到选择多的人，还在坚持着。可是他们所得到的信息是完全一样的。所要做的选择也是一样的。我所做的唯一一件事就是改变了信息所出现的顺序。

If I start you off easy, I learn how to choose. Even though choosing gearshift doesn't tell me anything about my preferences for interior decor, it still prepares me for how to choose. It also gets me excited about this big product that I'm putting together, so I'm more willing to be motivated to be engaged. 

如果我给你一个轻松的开始，教你如何选择。即使选择变速排档不能说明我对车内颜色的偏好却仍能教会我如何去选择。另一件令我兴奋的事实是我所要组成的是如此一个庞然大物，所以我变得更有动力去参与。

So let me recap. I have talked about four techniques for mitigating the problem of choice overload -- cut -- get rid of the extraneous alternatives; concretize -- make it real; categorize -- we can handle more categories, less choices; condition for complexity. 

让我重新整理一下重点，我讲了四种可以减缓过多选择的技巧-精简-放弃没有用的选择；具体化-让选择变得更真实一些；分类-我们能承受的类别比选择多；从简入繁。

All of these techniques that I'm describing to you today are designed to help you manage your choices -- better for you, you can use them on yourself, better for the people that you are serving. 

今天我所讲的所有技巧，都是为了帮助你更好地管理选择而设计的-使用这些技巧对你更好，也对你所服务的那些人更好。

Because I believe that the key to getting the most from choice is to be choosy about choosing. And the more we're able to be choosy about choosing the better we will be able to practice the art of choosing. Thank you very much. 

所以我相信从选择中获益最多的关键是对选择挑剔一些。我们对选择越是挑剔就越能掌握选择的艺术。非常感谢！