【TED】毕业两年，迟迟无法升职加薪：不是你不行，而是规则太多！
演讲者：Yves Morieux
演讲题目：How too many rules at work keep you from getting things done
Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize [winner] in economics, once wrote: "Productivity is not everything, but in the long run, it is almost everything."
诺贝尔经济学奖[得主]，保罗克·鲁格曼，曾经说过：”生产力不能代表一切，但长期来看，它差不多就是一切。“
So this is serious. There are not that many things on earth that are "almost everything." Productivity is the principal driver of the prosperity of a society. So we have a problem. In the largest European economies, productivity used to grow five percent per annum in the '50s, '60s, early '70s.
这是个严肃的问题。世界上没有什么东西能“几乎代表一切。”生产力是社会繁荣的主要推动力。那么我们面临着一个问题。在欧洲最大的经济体当中，50、60年代和70年代初期的生产力曾经保持着每年5%的增长速度。
From '73 to '83: three percent per annum. From '83 to '95: two percent per annum. Since 1995: less than one percent per annum. The same profile in Japan. The same profile in the US, despite a momentary rebound 15 years ago, and despite all the technological innovations around us: the Internet, the information, the new information and communication technologies.
在1973-1983年间，生产力年化增长率为3%。在1983-1995年间，生产力年化增长率保持在2%。自1995年以来，生产力年化增长率每年的增长一直低于1%。日本也是如此。美国亦是如此，即便15年前出现了一次短暂的经济复苏，虽然我们身边的科技日新月异：例如互联网，信息技术，新信息技术和通讯技术的发展。
When productivity grows three percent per annum, you double the standard of living every generation. Every generation is twice as well-off as its parents'. When it grows one percent per annum, it takes three generations to double the standard of living. And in this process, many people will be less well-off than their parents.
生产力年化增长率为3%时，生活水平每个年代会翻一番。每一代人享受到的福利是其父母那代的两倍。当增长率仅为1%时，需要3代的时间才能使生活水平翻一番。在这一进程中，许多人会过得还不如他们的父母。
They will have less of everything: smaller roofs, or perhaps no roof at all, less access to education, to vitamins, to antibiotics, to vaccination -- to everything. Think of all the problems that we're facing at the moment. All. Chances are that they are rooted in the productivity crisis.
他们的一切都更差些：房子更小了，或者根本没房子，受教育机会更少，获取维生素、抗生素、疫苗的机会也更少——一切机会都更少。考虑下我们当前所面临的所有问题。所有问题。我们的问题有可能是扎根于生产力危机之上的。
Why this crisis? Because the basic tenets about efficiency -- effectiveness in organizations, in management -- have become counterproductive for human efforts. Everywhere in public services -- in companies, in the way we work, the way we innovate, invest -- try to learn to work better. Take the holy trinity of efficiency: clarity, measurement, accountability. They make human efforts derail.
为什么说这个危机是根源呢？因为效率的基本原理 -- 组织、管理的效率 -- 往往会使人们的努力适得其反。在公共事业的任何地方 -- 在公司当中、我们的工作方式里、我们的创新、投资方式上 -- 都在努力提高效率。效率的三位一体是指：透明度、衡量和问责制。它们使人们的努力白费。
There are two ways to look at it, to prove it. One, the one I prefer, is rigorous, elegant, nice -- math. But the full math version takes a little while, so there is another one. It is to look at a relay race. This is what we will do today. It's a bit more animated, more visual and also faster -- it's a race. Hopefully, it's faster.
有两个方式来看待、证明这点。第一，也是我偏向的一种，是严谨，典雅，美观大方的数学。但完整的数学评估方案需要一点时间，因此又有了另一种方式。就是通过接力赛跑来看。也是我们今天要用到的。这样会更生动、更直观也更快 -- 这是短跑比赛嘛。当然，我们希望它更便捷。
World championship final -- women. Eight teams in the final. The fastest team is the US team. They have the fastest women on earth. They are the favorite team to win. Notably, if you compare them to an average team, say, the French team,
世界杯决赛 -- 女子项目。决赛共有八队。最快的是美国队。美国有全世界最快的女运动员。她们是夺冠热门。显然，如果你把她们和一般的队伍比较，比如说，法国队吧，
based on their best performances in the 100-meter race, if you add the individual times of the US runners, they arrive at the finish line 3.2 meters ahead of the French team. And this year, the US team is in great shape. Based on their best performance this year, they arrive 6.4 meters ahead of the French team, based on the data.
按照她们在100米短跑当中的最佳成绩，把美国选手个人的成绩相加起来，最后她们会在达终点线时比法国队领先3.2米。今年，美国队状态很好。根据她们今年的最好成绩，她们在到达终点时应该要领先法国队6.4米，这是根据数据推算的。
We are going to look at the race. At some point you will see, towards the end, that Torri Edwards, the fourth US runner, is ahead. Not surprising -- this year she got the gold medal in the 100-meter race. And by the way, Chryste Gaines, the second runner in the US team, is the fastest woman on earth. So, there are 3.5 billion women on earth. Where are the two fastest? On the US team. And the two other runners on the US team are not bad, either.
那我们来看一下比赛。从某个角度来看，快到终点时，Torri Edwards，美国队第四棒，暂时领先。毫不意外地 -- 今年她在100米赛跑中获得了金牌。顺便说下，Chryste Gaines，美国队第二棒，是地球上跑得最快的女性。那么，全世界有35亿女性。最快的两个在哪里？答案在美国队。美国队的另外两名选手也不赖。
So clearly, the US team has won the war for talent. But behind, the average team is trying to catch up. Let's watch the race.
显然，美国队赢得了人才争夺战。不过在其背后，普通的队伍也在奋力追赶。我们来看下比赛。
(Video: French sportscasters narrate race)
（视频：法国体育节目比赛解说）
(Video: Race narration ends)
（视频：比赛讲解结束）
Yves Morieux: So what happened? The fastest team did not win; the slower one did. By the way, I hope you appreciate the deep historical research I did to make the French look good.
所以视频里发生了什么？最快的队伍没有赢；慢的那一队反而赢了。顺便说下，我希望你们能认可，我做了非常深入的历史研究来使法国看起来很好。
But let's not exaggerate -- it's not archeology, either.
但我们不要这么较真 -- 这也不是考古学。
But why? Because of cooperation. When you hear this sentence: "Thanks to cooperation, the whole is worth more than the sum of the parts." This is not poetry; this is not philosophy. This is math. Those who carry the baton are slower, but their baton is faster.
但是为什么呢？因为合作。当你听到这句话：“多亏了合作，整体大于部分之和。”这不是诗歌；这不是哲学。这是数学。握着接力棒的人跑得慢了点，但她们交接棒更快。
Miracle of cooperation: it multiplies energy, intelligence in human efforts. It is the essence of human efforts: how we work together, how each effort contributes to the efforts of others. With cooperation, we can do more with less.
合作的奇迹：它能让人们努力的能量和智慧加倍。这是人们努力的精髓：我们如何合作，个人的成果如何为团队做贡献。通过合作，我们可以事半功倍。
Now, what happens to cooperation when the holy grail -- the holy trinity, even -- of clarity, measurement, accountability -- appears?
那么，当目标 -- 包含了 -- 清晰度、衡量、问责的圣神三位一体 -- 出现时，会对合作产生什么影响？
Clarity. Management reports are full of complaints about the lack of clarity. Compliance audits, consultants' diagnostics. We need more clarity, we need to clarify the roles, the processes. It is as though the runners on the team were saying, "Let's be clear -- where does my role really start and end? Am I supposed to run for 95 meters, 96, 97...?" It's important, let's be clear. If you say 97, after 97 meters, people will drop the baton, whether there is someone to take it or not.
清晰度。管理报告充满了对缺乏清晰度的抱怨。合规性审核、咨询诊断。我们需要更高的清晰度，我们要明确角色分担和过程。就好比说队伍里的选手说，“我们明确下吧 -- 我从哪里跑到哪里？我要跑95米，还是96、97米...？”这很重要，我们要分清楚。如果你说97米的话，那么跑完97米，人们就会把交接棒丢掉，可不管到时候有没有人接。
Accountability. We are constantly trying to put accountability in someone's hands. Who is accountable for this process? We need somebody accountable for this process. So in the relay race, since passing the baton is so important, then we need somebody clearly accountable for passing the baton. So between each runner, now we will have a new dedicated athlete, clearly dedicated to taking the baton from one runner, and passing it to the next runner.
问责制。我们总是试图把责任规定给某个人。谁对这个过程负责？我们需要一个人对这个过程负责。所以在接力赛中，既然交接棒如此之重要，那么我们需要非常明确负责交接棒的人是谁。在两个选手中间，我们现在要规定一个新的专门的运动员，这个运动员要非常明确地专注于接过上一个选手的交接棒，然后再交接给下一个选手。
And we will have at least two like that. Well, will we, in that case, win the race? That I don't know, but for sure, we would have a clear interface, a clear line of accountability. We will know who to blame. But we'll never win the race. If you think about it, we pay more attention to knowing who to blame in case we fail, than to creating the conditions to succeed.
而且我们至少需要两个这样的选手。那么，我们，这样一来，会赢得比赛吗？这个我就不知道了，但是可以肯定的是，我们有一个明确的分工，对责任有了非常明确的划分界线。我们会知道由谁来承担过错。但我们不会赢得比赛。如果你仔细想想，会发现我们在失败时把更多精力集中在确定谁来负责的问题上，而不是去创造有利于成功的条件。
All the human intelligence put in organization design -- urban structures, processing systems -- what is the real goal? To have somebody guilty in case they fail. We are creating organizations able to fail, but in a compliant way, with somebody clearly accountable when we fail. And we are quite effective at that -- failing.
把所有的人类智慧都投入到组织设计当中 -- 城市结构、处理系统 -- 真正的目的是什么？目的是在失败的时候把责任归咎于某人。我们创造了会失败的组织，但是以一种合规的方式来创造的，在这种组织中，有明确的人来为失败负责。在失败这点上，人们做的相当有效率。
Measurement. What gets measured gets done. Look, to pass the baton, you have to do it at the right time, in the right hand, at the right speed. But to do that, you have to put energy in your arm. This energy that is in your arm will not be in your legs. It will come at the expense of your measurable speed.
衡量。东西衡量好了，事情也就完成了。你看，要传递交接棒，你要在对的时间、用对的手、以正确的速度来传递。但要这么做的话，你要把能量分配到你的手臂里。你手臂中的能量不在你的腿里。你必须牺牲掉可被衡量的速度。
You have to shout early enough to the next runner when you will pass the baton, to signal that you are arriving, so that the next runner can prepare, can anticipate. And you have to shout loud. But the blood, the energy that will be in your throat will not be in your legs. Because you know, there are eight people shouting at the same time. So you have to recognize the voice of your colleague. You cannot say, "Is it you?" Too late!
你将要交接的时候要及早喊出声，发出信号说明你快到了，以便让下一位选手最好准备、有所预备。而且你要喊得够大声。但是这时血液、能量会集中在你的喉咙里，而不是你的腿里。因为你知道，这时候有8个人同时在喊。所以你要辨别得出你队友的声音。你可不能说，“是你吗？” 这就晚了！
Now, let's look at the race in slow motion, and concentrate on the third runner. Look at where she allocates her efforts, her energy, her attention. Not all in her legs -- that would be great for her own speed -- but in also in her throat, arm, eye, brain. That makes a difference in whose legs? In the legs of the next runner.
那么，我们现在看下比赛的慢动作，大家注意第三棒选手。你看她把力量、能量和注意力都分配在哪里。并没有都在腿部 -- 虽然这样对她的速度很有利 -- 可也分配在了喉咙、手臂、眼睛、大脑里。那么这对哪个选手的腿产生了影响呢？答案是下一个选手的腿。
But when the next runner runs super-fast, is it because she made a super effort, or because of the way the third runner passed the baton? There is no metric on earth that will give us the answer. And if we reward people on the basis of their measurable performance, they will put their energy, their attention, their blood in what can get measured -- in their legs. And the baton will fall and slow down.
但当下一名选手跑得特别快的时候，这是因为她自己特别使劲跑了呢，还是因为前面一名选手的交接棒传得好呢？这个地球上没有标准来给我们一个答案。如果我们根据可以测量的表现来对人们进行奖励的话，人们就会把自己的能量、注意力和血液集中在能够被测量的部位 -- 就是腿部。而这样一来交接棒会滑落然后传递速度会减慢。
To cooperate is not a super effort, it is how you allocate your effort. It is to take a risk, because you sacrifice the ultimate protection granted by objectively measurable individual performance. It is to make a super difference in the performance of others, with whom we are compared. It takes being stupid to cooperate, then. And people are not stupid; they don't cooperate.
合作不是一股超级力量，而是对力量的分配。这意味着冒险，因为你要牺牲可被客观测量的个人表现所能给予你的终极保障。这对别人的表现有着重要影响，而这些人正是和我们相比较的人。所以要合作就要当傻子。但是人们可不是傻子；所以他们不合作。
You know, clarity, accountability, measurement were OK when the world was simpler. But business has become much more complex. With my teams, we have measured the evolution of complexity in business. It is much more demanding today to attract and retain customers, to build advantage on a global scale, to create value. And the more business gets complex, the more, in the name of clarity, accountability, measurement we multiply structures, processes, systems.
你知道吗，在比较简单的世界里，清晰度、问责制、衡量都是可行的。但商业已经变得更加复杂了。我的团队，我们评估了商业复杂度的演变。如今要吸引并留住客户，打造世界级的优势并创造价值，是一件要求严苛的事。而商业越是复杂，我们就越是会以清晰度、问责和衡量的名义来让结构、过程和体制更加复杂繁多。
You know, this drive for clarity and accountability triggers a counterproductive multiplication of interfaces, middle offices, coordinators that do not only mobilize people and resources, but that also add obstacles. And the more complicated the organization, the more difficult it is to understand what is really happening. So we need summaries, proxies, reports, key performance indicators, metrics. So people put their energy in what can get measured, at the expense of cooperation.
要知道，这种对清晰度和问责的推崇会引发 一种反生产力的复杂化，导致出现更多的分界线、中间部门、协调者，他们不仅能动员人力和物资，但也会增添障碍。组织越是复杂，就越难理解究竟发生了什么。所以我们需要做总结、代理、报告、关键绩效指标、衡量标准。所以人们都把精力放在了可以被测量的东西上，然后牺牲合作。
And as performance deteriorates, we add even more structure, process, systems. People spend their time in meetings, writing reports they have to do, undo and redo. Based on our analysis, teams in these organizations spend between 40 and 80 percent of their time wasting their time, but working harder and harder, longer and longer, on less and less value-adding activities. This is what is killing productivity, what makes people suffer at work.
当表现退步了，我们会增加更多的结构、过程、体系。人们会把时间都用来开会、写报告，写了又改、改了又写。根据我们的分析数据显示，这些机构的团队会把40%到80%的时间用来浪费时间，他们越做越辛苦，越做越耗时，而增值活动却越来越少。这才是消耗生产力的罪魁祸首，这才是让人们工作痛苦的原因。
Our organizations are wasting human intelligence. They have turned against human efforts. When people don't cooperate, don't blame their mindsets, their mentalities, their personality -- look at the work situations. Is it really in their personal interest to cooperate or not, if, when they cooperate, they are individually worse off? Why would they cooperate? When we blame personalities instead of the clarity, the accountability, the measurement, we add injustice to ineffectiveness.
我们的组织在浪费人类智慧。它们和人类的努力背道而驰。当人们不合作的时候，不要怪他们的思想、他们的心理、他们的性格 -- 请看一下他们的工作环境吧。合作与否真的事关他们的个人利益吗，如果，他们合作了，他们的个人表现会不会被削弱？既然如此他们为什么还会合作呢？当我们责怪的是一个人的性格，而不是责怪清晰度、问责制和衡量方法时，我们在无效之上又加上了不公正。
We need to create organizations in which it becomes individually useful for people to cooperate. Remove the interfaces, the middle offices -- all these complicated coordination structures. Don't look for clarity; go for fuzziness. Fuzziness overlaps. Remove most of the quantitative metrics to assess performance.
我们要创造的组织，应该让人们觉得合作有益于个人。把界线划分、中间部门取消掉 -- 所有这些复杂的协调结构。不要强求清晰度；选择模糊。模糊没有明确分界线。取消大部分的评估表现的量化指标。
Speed the "what." Look at cooperation, the "how." How did you pass the baton? Did you throw it, or did you pass it effectively? Am I putting my energy in what can get measured -- my legs, my speed -- or in passing the baton?
速度指的是“什么”。可我们要看的是合作，即“如何。”你如何传递交接棒？你直接抛弃它吗，还是有效地传递过去？我是不是把我的能量都集中在了可量化的方面 -- 我的腿，我的速度 -- 还是放在了如何传递交接棒上？
You, as leaders, as managers, are you making it individually useful for people to cooperate? The future of our organizations, our companies, our societies hinges on your answer to these questions.
你们，作为领导和管理者，是否让人们觉得合作有益于个人了？我们组织、公司、社团的未来取决于你们对这些问题的答案。
Thank you.
谢谢。
来源：TED演讲