矮牡丹如何快速进入工作状态 中英文演讲稿

2021年1月22日发(作者：都监)
I want to talk a little bit today aboutlabor and work.

今天我想谈谈劳动和工作。


When we think about how people work, thenaive intuition we have is that people are like rats in
a
maze
--
that
allpeople
care
about
is
money,
and
the
moment
we
give
them
money,
we
can
directthem
to
work
one
way,
we
can
direct
them
to
work
another
way.
This
is
why
wegive
bonuses to bankers and pay in all kinds of ways. And we really have thisincredibly simplistic view
of why people work, and what the labor market lookslike.

当谈到人们是如何工作的时候，我们首先联想到的是

迷宫中的老鼠

--
他们在乎的只有金
钱，

只要我们付钱给他们，

我们就能随心所欲地指挥他们，让他们这样工作，或者那样工
作。

正因为此，我们给银行家奖金，

用各种方式进行金钱激励。

我们用一种非常简单的
方法

来看待人们工作的动因

以及劳动市场的状况。


At the same time, if you think about it,there's all kinds of strange behaviors in the world around
us.
Think
aboutsomething
like
mountaineering
and
mountain
climbing.
If
you
read
books
ofpeople
who
climb
mountains,
difficult
mountains,
do
you
think
that
those
booksare
full
of
moments
of
joy
and
happiness?
No,
they
are
full
of
misery.
In
fact,it's
all
about
frostbite
and
having difficulty walking, and difficulty breathing-- cold, challenging circumstances. And if people
were just trying to be happy,the moment they would get to the top, they would say,
terriblemistake. I'll never do it again.

同时，
如果你稍微想想就会发现这个世界上有各种各样奇怪的行为。

以登山运动为例，

如
果你读读那些登山人写的书，

那些有挑战性的山，

你认为那些书是充满着

欢乐和幸福的
瞬间吗
?
不，全是描写痛苦的。实际上，书中所讲的都是

关于冻伤之苦，前行之艰难，

和
呼吸困难

--
寒冷，极具挑战性的生存环境。

如果人们追求的是快乐，当他们到达山顶的
那一刻，

他们可能会说，
“这真是个可怕的错误。

我再也不会做这种事情了。
”




after theyrecover, they go up again. And if you think about mountain climbing as anexample, it
suggests all kinds of things. It suggests that we care aboutreaching the end, a peak. It suggests
that we care about the fight, about thechallenge. It suggests that there's all kinds of other things
that motivate usto work or behave in all kinds of ways.

“我还是坐在沙滩上喝

Mojito(
鸡尾酒
)
吧。
”但相反，在人们下了山，

恢复了之后，他们又
一次向山顶进发了。

如果将登山当做一个例子的话，

它可以说明很多事情。

它说明，我
们在意实现目标，到达峰顶。它说明，我们在意竞争，在意挑战。

它还意味着，

有很多不
同的事情，

以不同的方式来激励我们去工作。


And for me personally, I started thinkingabout this after a student came to visit me. This was one
of my students from afew years earlier, and he came one day back to campus. And he told me
thefollowing
story:
He
said
that
for
more
than
two
weeks,
he
was
working
on
aPowerPoint
presentation.
He
was
working
in
a
big
bank,
and
this
was
inpreparation
for
a
merger
and
acquisition. And he was working very hard on thispresentation -- graphs, tables, information. He
stayed late at night every the day before it was due, he sent his PowerPoint presentation
to his boss,and his boss wrote him back and said,
And the guy was deeply depressed. Now at the moment when hewas working, he was actually
quite
happy.
Every
night
he
was
enjoying
his
work,he
was
staying
late,
he
was
perfecting
this
PowerPoint
presentation.
Butknowing
that
nobody
would
ever
watch
it
made
him
quite
depressed.

对我个人而言，我开始思考这个问题是因一个学生的拜访而起。

几年前，他是我的一个学
生。

有一天他回到了校园。

他给我讲了个故事：

他说，
他用了两个多星期的时间

来做一
个演示文稿。

那时他在一家很大的银行工作。
这个演示文稿是用于公司合并和收购的。

他
非常努力地在做这份演示文稿

--
图表，表格，相关信息。

每天都熬夜到很晚。在截止日
期的前一天，

他把这份演示文稿传给了他的老板，

老板在回信中说道，

“

演示文稿做得
很不错，但这项合并计划取消了。
”

这消息让这家伙非常沮丧。

本来在他做这个任务的时
候，

他是很开心的。

每天晚上都享受着这份工作，

享受着熬着夜，不 断完善他的演示文
稿。但在知道没人会看到他的成果之后，他沮丧极了。


So, I started thinking about how do weexperiment with this idea of the fruits of our labor. And to
start
with,
wecreated
a
little
experiment
in
which
we
gave
people
Legos,
and
we
asked
them
tobuild with Legos. And for some people, we gave them Legos and we said,
to build this Bionicle for three dollars? We'll payyou three dollars for it.
they built with theseLegos. And when they finished, we took it, we put it under the table, and
wesaid,
another one, and when they finished, we asked them,
$$2.40, $$2.10, and so on,until at some point people said,
was what we called the meaningful condition. People built one Bionicleafter another. After they
finished every one of them, we put them under thetable. And we told them that at the end of the
experiment, we will take allthese Bionicles, we will disassemble them, we will put them back in
the boxes,and we will use it for the next participant.

于是我开始思索如何通过实验来验证劳动成果所能发挥的作用。

首先，我们设计了一个小
实验

我们先给测试者一些乐高积木，
让他们来搭建。

在给其中一些人提供积木的时候，

我
们对他们说，

“嘿，

想不想拼装这样一个生化战士来赚

3
美元
?
我们为此会付给你

3
美
元的。
”

他们答应了，然后就开始动手拼装乐高积木。

等他们完成了，我们就拿走它，放
在桌子下面，然后们说，
“再做一个怎么样
?
这次我们会付你

2.7
美元。
”

如果他们同意的
话，我们就再给他们一个。

等他们拼完之后，我们又问，

“还想再做一个吗
?
”

分别付给
他们
2.4
美元，
2.1
美元，依此类推。

直到人们说

“不用了，已经不值得我去做了。
”

这
就是我们所称作的意义条件。

人们一个接一个地制作生化战士。

每当他们完成一个，

我
们就把它拿到桌子底下。

然后在实验的最后我们告诉他们，他们做的这些生化战士将会被
拿走拆掉，

被放回盒子里，给下一个测试者用。


There was
another
condition.
This
othercondition
was
inspired by
David,
my
student.
And
this
other condition we calledthe Sisyphic condition. And if you remember the story about Sisyphus,
Sisyphuswas punished by the gods to push the same rock up a hill, and when he almostgot to the
end, the rock would roll over, and he would have to start again. Andyou can think about this as
the essence of doing futile work. You can imaginethat if he pushed the rock on different hills, at
least he would have somesense of progress. Also, if you look at prison movies, sometimes the
way thatthe guards torture the prisoners is to get them to dig a hole, and when theprisoner is
finished, they ask him to fill the hole back up and then dig 's something about this
cyclical
version
of
doing
something
over
and
overand
over
that
seems
to
be
particularly
demotivating.

还有另外一种情境。这情境是受我的学生

David
而启发。

这种情况被我们称为西西弗斯情
境。

还记得关于西西弗斯的那个传说吗
?
西西弗斯被神惩罚将一块岩石推到山上去，

每当
他就要到达山顶的时候，

那石头就会滚回去，

然后他必须重头再来。

这个故事告诉人们
无用工作的本质。

你可以想象，
如果他是在不同的山上推着石头，
至少他会有点儿成就感。

或者，如果你看过监狱题材的电影的话，

有时看守是这样折磨犯人的

先让他们去挖洞

当
他们挖好洞之后，

又叫他们把那个洞填上，
然后再重新挖。
这种循环模式

反复再反复地做
同一件事情

似乎特别的让人感到消极。


So
in
the
second
condition
of
thisexperiment,
that's
exactly
what
we
did.
We
asked
people,

asked them,
new one, and as they were building it, wetook apart the one that they just finished. And when
they finished that, wesaid,
if they said yes, we gave them the one that they built and webroke. So this was an endless cycle
of them building, and us destroying infront of their eyes.

而我们的第二种实验情境正是用这个方法。

我们问道：
“给你

3
美元，

你愿意拼装这个生
化战士吗
?
”

如果他们同意，就开始拼装。

我们接着问，
“现在给你

2.7
美元，你愿意再
做一个吗
?
”

如果他们愿意，我们就再给他们一个，

就在他们拼装第二个的时候，我们把
他们之前做好的那个拆开。

在他们拼完后，

我们问，
“这次再少给你

30
美分，

你还愿意
再做一个吗
?
”

如果他们愿意，

我们就把之前拼完又拆开的那个给他们。

这就成了一个无
限循环他们忙着拼装，

而我们当着他们的面把它们拆了。


Now what happens when you compare these twoconditions? The first thing that happened was
that people built many moreBionicles -- eleven in the meaningful condition, versus seven in the
Sisyphuscondition.
And
by
the
way, we
should point
out
that
this
was
not
big

were not curing cancer or building bridges.
People were buildingBionicles for a few cents. And
not only that, everybody knew that the Bionicleswould be destroyed quite soon. So, there was
not a real opportunity for bigmeaning. But even the small meaning made a difference.

当把这两种情况对比会发生什么呢
?
首先我们发现，

相比西西弗斯情境，在意义情境下

受
试者拼装了更多的生化战士

-- 11
比

7
。

同时，我们必须指出，

这个意义条件并非特别重
大。

他们不是在治疗癌症也不是建造大桥，

只是拼装生化战士赚几美分而已。不仅如此，
每个人都知道，
它们将很快被拆掉。

因此这并没有什么重大的意义。

但即使再小的意义也
有所影响。


Now we had another version of thisexperiment. In this other version of the experiment, we didn't
put people inthis situation, we just described to them the situation, much as I amdescribing to
you
now,
and
we
asked
them
to
predict
what
the
result
would

happened?
People
predicted
the
right
direction
but
not
the
rightmagnitude.
People
who
were
just
given
the
description of the experiment saidthat in the meaningful condition, people would probably build
one moreBionicle. So, people understand that meaning is important, they just don'tunderstand
the magnitude of the importance, the extent to which it's important.

然后我们又做了另外一个版本的实验。
在新的实验中，

我们不把人们至于这个情境之中，

而
只是向他们描述实验情境，

就像我现在向你们所描述的这样，

然后我们让他们预测实验的
可能结果。

这次发生了什么呢
?
受试者都预测对了结果，

但是没有猜对这个结果的程度。

那些被告知实验细节的测试者

认为在有意义情景中，

人们可能会多拼装一个生化战士。
由
此可见，人们是知道意义的重要性的。

只是不清楚有多重要，

它的重要程度到底多深。


There was one other piece of data we lookedat. If you think about it, there are some people who
love Legos, and somepeople who don't. And you would speculate that the people who love Legos
wouldbuild more Legos, even for less money, because after all, they get moreinternal joy from it.
And
the
people
who
love
Legos
less
would
build
less
Legosbecause
the
enjoyment
that
they
derive from it is lower. And that's actuallywhat we found in the meaningful condition. There was
a very nice correlationbetween the love of Legos and the amount of Legos people built.

我们还将考虑了另一项因素。
考虑到在这其中，

有些人喜欢乐高而有些则不喜欢。

你可以
推测那些喜欢乐高的人

会愿意拼乐高，
即使回报少一点，

毕竟他们会从中得到更多的快乐。

而那些没那么喜欢乐高的人拼装的数量较少

因为他们从中得到的快乐较少。

这正是我们在
意义情境中得到的结论。

对乐高的喜爱程度和拼装的乐高的数量之间

有一种十分奇妙的关
联。


What happened in the Sisyphic condition? Inthat condition, the correlation was zero -- there was
no relationship betweenthe love of Legos, and how much people built, which suggests to me that
withthis manipulation of breaking things in front of people's eyes, we basicallycrushed any joy
that they could get out of this activity. We basicallyeliminated it.

那么在西西弗斯情境下发生了什么呢
?
这种情境下的关联度为零。

人们对乐高的喜爱程度与
拼装数量没有关联，

这也就说明我们通过

当着人们的面拆掉他们的劳动成果

会毁掉了人
们从劳动中得到的乐趣。

我们几乎彻底抹杀了乐趣。


Soon after I finished running thisexperiment, I went to talk to a big software company in Seattle. I
can't tellyou who they were, but they were a big company in Seattle. This was a groupwithin the
software
company
that
was
put
in
a
different
building,
and
theyasked
them
to
innovate,
and
create the next big product for this company. Andthe week before I showed up, the CEO of this
big software company went to thatgroup, 200 engineers, and canceled the project. And I stood
there
in
front
of200
of
the
most
depressed
people
I've
ever
talked
to.
And
I
described
to
themsome of these Lego experiments, and they said they felt like they had just beenthrough that
experiment.
And
I asked
them,
I
said,

many
of
you
nowshow
up
to
work
later
than
you
used to?
you
used
to?
raised
their
hand.
I
asked
them,

many
of
you
now
addnot-so-kosher
things
to
your
expense
reports?
And
they
didn't
raise
theirhands,
but
they
took me out to dinner and showed me what they could do withexpense reports. And then I asked
them, I said,
with all kinds ofideas.

在完成了这项实验的之后不久，我去了西雅图的一家软件公司。

我不能告诉你们具体是哪
家公司，

但那是西雅图的一家大公司。

在这家软件公司里有一群人

是被安置在另一座大
楼里工作的

他们负责为公司创造和革新下一代产品。
而就在我到那儿一周之前，

这家公司
的

CEO
来到这个

有

200
个工程师的小组，
取消了这项研发计划。

当时在我面前的这

200
个人

是我所交谈过的人中最郁闷的一群。

我向他们描述了这些乐高实验，
他们说他们感觉
就像

刚刚经历过这些实验一样。

于是我问道，

“现在你们中哪些人比以前更晚上班了
?
”

所有人都举手了。我说，
“现在你们中哪些人比以前下班更早了
?
”

所有人都举手了。我又
问道：
“

现在你们哪些人对开支报表动手脚了
?
”

他们并没有举手承认，
但他们邀请我去聚
餐，然后向我演示了

他们能对开支报表做些什么。

于是我问道，

“

当初你们的

CEO
要
怎么做才能让你们不这么沮丧呢
?
”

他们给出了各种各样的想法。


They said the CEO could have asked them topresent to the whole company about their journey
over the last two years andwhat they decided to do. He could have asked them to think about
which
aspectof
their
technology
could
fit
with
other
parts
of
the
organization.
He
couldhave
asked
them
to
build
some
next- generation
prototypes,
and
see
how
theywould
work.
But
the
thing
is
that
any
one
of
those
would
require
some
effortand
motivation.
And
I
think
the
CEO
basically
did
not
understand
the
importanceof
meaning.
If
the
CEO,
just
like
our
participants,
thought the essence ofmeaning is unimportant, then he [wouldn't] care. And he would say,
themoment I directed you in this way, and now that I'm directing you in this way,everything will
be
okay.
But
if
you
understood
how
important
meaning
is,then
you would
figure
out
that
it's
actually important to spend some time,energy and effort in getting people to care more about
what they're doing.

比如

CEO
可以让他们向整个公司展示

他们这两年来走过的路，

以及他们原本计划做的事
情。

他本可以请他们思考这之中有哪些技术可以应用于公司的其他领域。

他本可以要他们
做一些原型，

一些下一代产品的原型，

然后看它们是如何运行的。

事实上每一个补救方
案

都包含着努力和激励。

而我认为这位

CEO
没有意识到意义的重要性。

如果这位

CEO
，
像我们的受试者一样，认为意义的本质并不重要，

那他当然不会在意。

他只会告诉他们，
“当时我要你这样做，

而现在我要你这样做，

一切都没有问题。
”

但如果你知道意义是多
么地重要，

你就会了解到

去把时间、
精力、
努力花在

让人们更在意他们所做的事情上

实
际上有多么重要。


The next experiment was slightly took a sheet of paper with random letters, and we
asked
people
to
find
pairsof
letters
that
were
identical
next
to
each
other.
That
was
the
task.
Peopledid the first sheet, then we asked if they wanted to do another for a littleless money, the
next sheet for a little bit less, and so on and so forth. Andwe had three conditions. In the first
condition,
people
wrote
their
name
on
thesheet,
found
all
the
pairs
of
letters,
gave
it
to
the