|
在日漸浮躁的今天 我們不盲從、不封閉、不惡意評(píng)判 用TED 開闊視野 How too many rules at work keep you from getting things done TED簡介：（2013）為什么人們?cè)诠ぷ髦袝?huì)力不從心，不在狀態(tài)？為什么有些決策看似針對(duì)性強(qiáng)，效果之差卻令人汗顏？Yves Morieux結(jié)合自己豐富工作經(jīng)驗(yàn)，從決策機(jī)構(gòu)、運(yùn)行流程等角度深入研究總結(jié)，跳出現(xiàn)象,總結(jié)出企業(yè)運(yùn)營時(shí)應(yīng)注意的規(guī)則，提高工作效率與員工工作狀態(tài)。 演講者：Yves Morieux 片長：12：02 中英文對(duì)照翻譯 I have spent the last years?trying to resolve two enigmas:?Why is productivity so disappointing?in all the companies where I work??I have worked with more than 500 companies.?Despite all the technological advances —?computers, I.T., communications, telecommunications,?the Internet.? 近幾年，我都在嘗試解開兩個(gè)謎：為什么在所有我工作過的公司生產(chǎn)力都如此令人失望？我和超過50家公司打過交道，盡管（這些公司有）所有的技術(shù)進(jìn)步——計(jì)算機(jī)、信息技術(shù)、通訊、 電信、 和互聯(lián)網(wǎng)。 Enigma number two:Why is there so little engagement at work??Why do people feel so miserable,?even actively disengaged?Disengaging their colleagues.?Acting against the interest of their company.?Despite all the affiliation events,?the celebration, the people initiatives,?the leadership development programs to train?managers on how to better motivate their teams. 第二個(gè)謎：為什么（員工）在工作中的投入這么少？為什么人們覺得如此難受，甚至主動(dòng)抽離出來呢？疏離他們的同事，和其公司的利益背道而馳，不管（公司安排）了多少歸屬活動(dòng)，慶典，以人為本的倡議，用以培訓(xùn)管理人員更好地激發(fā)他們的團(tuán)隊(duì)的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力發(fā)展項(xiàng)目。 At the beginning, I thought there was?a chicken and egg issue:?Because people are less engaged, they are less productive.?Or vice versa, because they are less productive,?we put more pressure and they are less engaged.?But as we were doing our analysis?we realized that there was a common root cause?to these two issues?that relates, in fact, to the basic pillars of management.?The way we organize is based on two pillars.?The hard — structure, processes, systems.?The soft —?feelings, sentiments, interpersonal relationships, traits, personality.? 一開始，我以為這是個(gè) “雞和蛋”的問題：因?yàn)椴煌渡碛诠ぷ鞯娜?，生產(chǎn)力會(huì)相對(duì)低下，反之亦然，因?yàn)樗麄兩a(chǎn)力較低，承受了更多壓力，以致他們較不投入工作。但是當(dāng)我們進(jìn)行了分析，我們意識(shí)到這兩個(gè)問題的根源是一致的，事實(shí)上，這涉及到管理的基本支柱。我們組織的方式基于兩大支柱： 硬性支柱——結(jié)構(gòu)、 進(jìn)程、系統(tǒng)；軟性支柱——感情、 情緒、人際關(guān)系、性狀、人格。 And whenever a company?reorganizes, restructures, reengineers,?goes through a cultural transformation program,?it chooses these two pillars.?Now, we try to refine them,?we try to combine them.?The real issue is —?and this is the answer to the two enigmas —?these pillars are obsolete.?Everything you read in business books is based?either on one or the other?or their combination.They are obsolete.?How do they work?when you try to use these approaches?in front of the new complexity of business?? 每當(dāng)一家公司 整頓、重組、重新設(shè)計(jì)，或進(jìn)行文化轉(zhuǎn)型的項(xiàng)目，都要選擇這兩個(gè)支柱?，F(xiàn)在，我們?cè)囍晟扑鼈?，我們?cè)囍鴮⑺鼈兒喜?，真正的問題——正是那兩個(gè)謎題的謎底——這些支柱是過時(shí)的商務(wù)書籍中看到的一切，都是基于這個(gè)支柱或那個(gè)支柱，或它們的組合。它們已經(jīng)過時(shí)了，當(dāng)你面對(duì)新的復(fù)雜型業(yè)務(wù)，試著使用這些方法時(shí)，當(dāng)你面對(duì)新的復(fù)雜型業(yè)務(wù)，試著使用這些方法時(shí)，這些方法是如何運(yùn)行的？ The hard approach, basically is that you start from strategy,?requirements, structures, processes, systems, KPIs, scorecards,?committees, headquarters, hubs, clusters,?you name it.?I forgot all the metrics, incentives, committees, middle offices and interfaces.?What happens basically on the left,?you have more complexity, the new complexity of business.?We need quality, cost, reliability, speed.?And every time there is a new requirement,?we use the same approach.?We create dedicated structure processed systems,?basically to deal with the new complexity of business.?The hard approach creates just complicatedness?in the organization. 硬件方式基本上是這樣開始：戰(zhàn)略、要求、結(jié)構(gòu)、流程、系統(tǒng)、關(guān)鍵績效指標(biāo)、記分卡、 委員會(huì)、總部、樞紐、群體，隨你說吧，我忘了說那些測(cè)量方式、激勵(lì)措施、委員會(huì)、中間辦事處和接口，基本上都在圖的左邊（文：戰(zhàn)略，要求）。你面對(duì)更多的復(fù)雜性，新業(yè)務(wù)的復(fù)雜性，我們需要質(zhì)量、成本、可靠性、速度，然而每一次有一項(xiàng)新要求，我們都使用相同的方法，我們創(chuàng)建專用的結(jié)構(gòu)處理系統(tǒng)以解決新業(yè)務(wù)的復(fù)雜性。硬性辦法在組織內(nèi)產(chǎn)生的只有復(fù)雜性。 Let's take an example.?An automotive company, the engineering division?is a five-dimensional matrix.?If you open any cell of the matrix,?you find another 20-dimensional matrix.?You have Mr. Noise, Mr. Petrol Consumption,?Mr. Anti-Collision Properties.?For any new requirement,?you have a dedicated function?in charge of aligning engineers against?the new requirement.?What happens when the new requirement emerges?? 讓我們看一個(gè)例子：一家汽車公司，工程部。是一個(gè)五維矩陣，如果您打開的矩陣的任意一個(gè)元素，您可以找到另一個(gè)20維矩陣。你有“噪音先生”，”汽油消耗先生”， “防撞性能先生” 對(duì)任何新的要求，你有一個(gè)專用的職能，負(fù)責(zé)把工程師對(duì)應(yīng)到新的規(guī)定上。當(dāng)新規(guī)定出現(xiàn)時(shí)，會(huì)發(fā)生什么呢？ Some years ago, a new requirement?appeared on the marketplace:?the length of the warranty period.?So therefore the new requirement is repairability,?making cars easy to repair.?Otherwise when you bring the car to the garage to fix the light,?if you have to remove the engine?to access the lights,?the car will have to stay one week in the garage?instead of two hours, and the warranty budget will explode.?So, what was the solution using the hard approach?? 幾年前，一個(gè)新的要求在市場上出現(xiàn)— “保修期的長度問題” 因此新的要求就是（提高）修理的易度，使汽車容易修復(fù)。不然，當(dāng)你把車開到修車廠來修燈，如果你要拆除引擎才能修理車燈，這輛車將不得不在車庫里呆上一周，而不是兩個(gè)小時(shí)，那么保修預(yù)算就會(huì)不夠用。那么，如何使用硬件方法來解決這個(gè)問題呢？ If repairability is the new requirement,?the solution is to create a new function,?Mr. Repairability.?And Mr. Repairability creates the repairability process.?With a repairability scorecard, with a repairability metric?and eventually repairability incentive.?That came on top of 25 other KPIs.? 如果“修理易度”是新的要求，解決方案是創(chuàng)建一個(gè)新的職能叫它“修理易度先生” “修理易度先生”建立一個(gè)“修理易度“進(jìn)程，利用“修理易度”記分卡與“修理易度”矩陣，還有最終的”修理易度“激勵(lì)，位居其它25個(gè)關(guān)鍵績效指標(biāo)之上。 What percentage of these people is variable compensation??Twenty percent at most, divided by 26 KPIs,?repairability makes a difference of 0.8 percent.?What difference did it make in their actions,?their choices to simplify? Zero.?But what occurs for zero impact? Mr. Repairability, process,scorecard, evaluation, coordination with the 25 other coordinators?to have zero impact. 這些人中有多少比例領(lǐng)取可變薪酬呢？最多有20%，除以26個(gè)關(guān)鍵績效指標(biāo)，修理易度只占有0.8%的重要性，這是否影響了員工的行為？影響了他們選擇簡化流程？完全沒有。但為了這個(gè)不存在的影響，發(fā)生了多少事？ “修理易度”先生、 生產(chǎn)過程、記分卡、評(píng)價(jià)、協(xié)調(diào)，還有其他25個(gè)協(xié)調(diào)員最終沒有任何影響。 Now, in front of the new complexity of business,?the only solution is not drawing boxes?with reporting lines.?It is basically the interplay.?How the parts work together.?The connections, the interactions, the synapses.?It is not the skeleton of boxes, it is the nervous system?of adaptiveness and intelligence.? 現(xiàn)在，面對(duì)新的復(fù)雜型業(yè)務(wù)，唯一的解決辦法不是條條框框和報(bào)告路線，而是相互作用。各種路徑如何在一起工作 （包括那些）連接、互動(dòng)、突觸，它不是條框的骨架，它是應(yīng)性和智慧的中樞神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)。 You know, you could call it cooperation, basically.?Whenever people cooperate,?they use less resources. In everything.?You know, the repairability issue?is a cooperation problem.?When you design cars, please take into account?the needs of those who will repair the cars?in the after sales garages.?When we don't cooperate we need more time,?more equipment, more systems, more teams.?We need — When procurement, supply chain, manufacturing don't cooperate?we need more stock, more inventories, more working capital.? 你知道，你可以就叫它合作，每當(dāng)人們進(jìn)行合作，他們使用更少的資源，包括一切資源。你知道，修理易度的問題就是合作的問題。當(dāng)你設(shè)計(jì)汽車時(shí)，請(qǐng)你考慮一下那些在售后車庫修理汽車的工人的需求，當(dāng)我們不合作，我們需要更多的時(shí)間 更多的設(shè)備、更多系統(tǒng)、更多的團(tuán)隊(duì)。我們需要——當(dāng)采購、供應(yīng)鏈、制造互相不合作，我們就需要更多股票、更多的庫存、更多的周轉(zhuǎn)資金。 Who will pay for that??Shareholders? Customers??No, they will refuse.?So who is left? The employees,?who have to compensate through their super?individual efforts for the lack of cooperation.?Stress, burnout, they are overwhelmed, accidents.?No wonder they disengage.? 誰將為此付出代價(jià)呢？股東嗎？客戶嗎？不，他們會(huì)拒絕。那么還剩誰呢？雇員們，他們必須以加倍的個(gè)人努力來補(bǔ)償所缺乏的合作，壓力、職業(yè)倦怠，他們不堪重負(fù)，意外事故（頻發(fā)）難怪他們無法投身于工作中。 How do the hard and the soft try to foster cooperation??The hard: In banks, when there is a problem?between the back office and the front office,?they don't cooperate. What is the solution??They create a middle office.What happens one year later??Instead of one problem between the back and the front,?now I have two problems.?Between the back and the middle?and between the middle and the front.?Plus I have to pay for the middle office.?The hard approach is unable to foster cooperation.?It can only add new boxes, new bones in the skeleton. 如何促進(jìn)硬件和軟件方式的合作？硬性辦法：在銀行里，當(dāng)后臺(tái)辦公室和前臺(tái)之間出現(xiàn)問題，他們不合作。解決方案是什么呢？他們創(chuàng)建了一個(gè)中間辦公室，一年后會(huì)發(fā)生什么呢？以前只有一個(gè)問題，在前臺(tái)和后頭辦公室?，F(xiàn)在我有兩個(gè)問題：后臺(tái)與中間（的問題），還有中間和前臺(tái)之間（的問題） 再加上要付中間辦公室的費(fèi)用。硬性辦法不能促進(jìn)合作，它只會(huì)加上新框框，在骨架中加入新的骨頭。 The soft approach:?To make people cooperate, we need to make them like each other.?Improve interpersonal feelings,?the more people like each other, the more they will cooperate.?It is totally wrong.?It is even counterproductive.?Look, at home I have two TVs. Why??Precisely not to have to cooperate with my wife.?(Laughter)?Not to have to impose tradeoffs to my wife.? 軟性辦法：若要使人合作，我們需要讓他們喜歡對(duì)方，改善人與人之間的感情。人們?cè)较矚g對(duì)方，他們就會(huì)越合作。這是完全錯(cuò)誤的，它甚至?xí)m得其反。瞧，我有兩臺(tái)電視在家里為什么呢？正是為了不需要和我的妻子合作 （笑聲）不需要讓我的妻子（在我和電視之間）選擇。 And why I try not to impose tradeoffs to my wife?is precisely because I love my wife.?If I didn't love my wife, one TV would be enough:?You will watch my favorite football game,?if you are not happy, how is the book or the door??(Laughter)?The more we like each other,?the more we avoid the real cooperation?that would strain our relationships by imposing tough tradeoffs.?And we go for a second TV or we escalate?the decision above for arbitration.Definitely, these approaches are obsolete. 我不想逼我的妻子選擇，正是因?yàn)槲覑畚业钠拮?，如果我不愛我的妻子，一臺(tái)電視就足夠：你就看我最喜歡的足球賽，如果你不高興，不如看本書或者走人吧？（笑聲）我們?cè)较矚g對(duì)方，我們就越避免真正的合作，艱難的權(quán)衡會(huì)使我們的關(guān)系緊張，所以我們?nèi)ベI第二臺(tái)電視，或者我們讓更權(quán)威的機(jī)構(gòu)定奪。當(dāng)然，這些方法已經(jīng)過時(shí)。 To deal with complexity, to enhance the nervous system,?we have created what we call the smart simplicity approach?based on simple rules.? 為了應(yīng)對(duì)復(fù)雜性，為了改善一種新型系統(tǒng)，我們創(chuàng)建了我們稱之為“智能簡化”的方法，它基于一些簡單的規(guī)則： Simple rule number one:?Understand what others do.?What is their real work??We need to go beyond the boxes,?the job descriptions, beyond the surface?of the container, to understand the real content.?Me, designer, if I put a wire here,?I know that it will mean that we will have to?remove the engine to access the lights.? 第一條簡單的原則：了解其他人做的是什么。人們真正的工作是什么？我們需要超越條條框框、工作說明，超越表層，以理解真實(shí)的內(nèi)容。我，設(shè)計(jì)者，如果我把一根導(dǎo)線放在這里，我知道這將意味著我們將不得不拆除引擎才能修理到燈。 Second, you need to reenforce integrators.Integrators are not middle offices, they are managers,?existing managers that you reinforce?so that they have power and interest?to make others cooperate.?How can you reinforce your managers as integrators?By removing layers.?When there are too many layers?people are too far from the action,?therefore they need KPIs, metrics,?they need poor proxies for reality.? 第二，需要加固聯(lián)系樞紐。聯(lián)系樞紐不是中間的辦事處，他們是管理人員，對(duì)現(xiàn)有管理人員進(jìn)行加強(qiáng)，讓他們有權(quán)力、有動(dòng)力，讓其他人進(jìn)行合作。你如何能把您的經(jīng)理訓(xùn)練為聯(lián)系樞紐？通過消除階層。當(dāng)有太多階層時(shí)，人離實(shí)際行動(dòng)太遠(yuǎn)，所以他們需要業(yè)績指標(biāo)、矩陣，他們需要空洞的指標(biāo)來代替現(xiàn)實(shí)。 They don't understand reality?and they add the complicatedness of metrics, KPIs.?By removing rules — the bigger we are,?the more we need integrators,therefore the less rules we must have,?to give discretionary power to managers.?And we do the opposite —?the bigger we are, the more rules we create.?And we end up with the Encyclopedia Britannica of rules. 他們不了解現(xiàn)實(shí)，同時(shí)他們?cè)黾恿司仃囍笜?biāo)的復(fù)雜性。通過去除規(guī)則——組織越是大，我們?cè)叫枰?lián)系樞紐，因此我們必須有更少的規(guī)則，把權(quán)力分給管理人員。但我們卻做了相反的事——組織越是大，我們卻創(chuàng)造了更多的規(guī)則，最終我們有了大英百科全書一樣的規(guī)則。 You need to increase the quanitity of power?so that you can empower everybody?to use their judgment, their intelligence.?You must give more cards to people?so that they have the critical mass of cards?to take the risk to cooperate,?to move out of insulation.?Otherwise, they will withdraw. They will disengage.?These rules, they come from game theory?and organizational sociology.? 我們需要增加權(quán)力的數(shù)量，從而可以讓每個(gè)人有權(quán)利使用他們的判斷、他們的智力。我們必須給大家手里放入更多的”牌“ 給他們足夠的”牌“ 讓他們?cè)敢庑璩袚?dān)合作的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)、走出阻隔。否則，他們將會(huì)退出。他們將會(huì)抽離這些規(guī)則，他們來自博弈論和組織社會(huì)學(xué)。 You can increase the shadow of the future.?Create feedback loops that expose people?to the consequences of their actions.?This is what the automotive company did?when they saw that Mr. Repairability had no impact.?They said to the design engineers:?Now, in three years, when the new car is launched on the market,?you will move to the after sales network, and become in charge?of the warranty budget,?and if the warranty budget explodes,?it will explode in your face. (Laughter)?Much more powerful than 0.8 percent variable compensation.? 您可以增加未來的陰影建立反饋循環(huán)，暴露人們行動(dòng)的后果。這是汽車公司所做的，當(dāng)他們看到”簡易度先生“并沒有產(chǎn)生影響，他們對(duì)設(shè)計(jì)工程師說：三年后，在新車上市時(shí)，你將移到售后網(wǎng)絡(luò)，并負(fù)責(zé)保修期內(nèi)的修理預(yù)算。如果保修預(yù)算透支，你就沒好日子過（笑聲）這可比0.8%可變薪酬厲害得多。 You need also to increase reciprocity,?by removing the buffers that make us self-sufficient.?When you remove these buffers,?you hold me by the nose, I hold you by the ear.?We will cooperate.?Remove the second TV.?There are many second TVs at work?that don't create value,?they just provide dysfunctional self-sufficiency.? 您還需要增加互惠原則，去除使我們能自給自足的緩沖區(qū)。當(dāng)你把這些緩沖區(qū)拿掉，你我唇亡齒寒。我們將進(jìn)行合作。拿掉第二個(gè)電視... 在工作有很多的第二個(gè)電視，他們不創(chuàng)造價(jià)值，它們只是提供功能失調(diào)的自給自足。 You need to reward those who cooperate?and blame those who don't cooperate.?The CEO of The Lego Group,?Jorgen Vig Knudstorp, has a great way to use it.?He says, blame is not for failure,?it is for failing to help or ask for help.?It changes everything.?Suddenly it becomes in my interest to be transparent?on my real weaknesses, my real forecast,?because I know I will not be blamed if I fail,?but if I fail to help or ask for help.?When you do this, it has a lot of implications?on organizational design.?You stop drawing boxes, dotted lines, full lines;?you look at their interplay.?It has a lot of implications on financial policies?that we use.?On human resource management practices.? 我們需要獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)那些合作的人并指責(zé)那些不合作的人。樂高集團(tuán)的首席執(zhí)行官喬根·魏·諾斯托（Jorgen Vig Knudstorp）就有不錯(cuò)的應(yīng)用方法。他說，被指責(zé)的不應(yīng)是失敗，應(yīng)該是不尋求幫助，這改變了一切：突然間，將我的弱點(diǎn)和預(yù)測(cè)透明化，變得對(duì)我有益，因?yàn)槿绻×?，我知道我不?huì)受到責(zé)備。但如果我不尋求幫助，我會(huì)被責(zé)備當(dāng)你這樣做時(shí)，對(duì)組織設(shè)計(jì)有很大的意義。你停止畫框框、 虛線、直線，你看著他們相互作用，它對(duì)我們的財(cái)政政策有很大的意義，它對(duì)我們的財(cái)政政策有很大的意義，它影響到人力資源管理的實(shí)踐。 When you do that, you can manage complexity,?the new complexity of business,?without getting complicated.?You create more value with lower cost.?You simultaneously improve performance and satisfaction at work?because you have removed the common root cause?that hinders both.?Complicatedness: This is your battle, business leaders.?The real battle is not against competitors.?This is rubbish, very abstract.?When do we meet competitors to fight them??The real battle is against ourselves,?against our bureaucracy, our complicatedness.?Only you can fight, can do it. 當(dāng)你這樣做時(shí)，你可以管理復(fù)雜性，新的復(fù)雜型業(yè)務(wù)，而不需要弄得復(fù)雜。你能夠以較低成本創(chuàng)造更多價(jià)值，同時(shí)提高了工作表現(xiàn)和工作滿意度，因?yàn)槟阋褎h除了阻礙兩種復(fù)雜性的根源。這是你們這些商界領(lǐng)袖的戰(zhàn)爭，真正的戰(zhàn)斗不是對(duì)抗競爭對(duì)手，這是廢話，非常的抽象。我們什么時(shí)候和競爭對(duì)手見面，和他們打？真正的戰(zhàn)斗是對(duì)抗我們自己，針對(duì)我們的官僚作風(fēng)、我們的復(fù)雜性，只有你才能打倒它們，只有你才能做到。 Thank you.?(Applause) 謝謝大家！ （掌聲） 轉(zhuǎn)載請(qǐng)帶上“轉(zhuǎn)自TED與紀(jì)錄片“ 版權(quán)歸TED所有，僅供學(xué)習(xí)交流如有侵權(quán)也請(qǐng)后臺(tái)聯(lián)系 今日互動(dòng) 留言一起說說話吧 【 最 熱 TED 】 TED | 嬰兒的天才語言能力 哈佛75年研究 如何更好地生活 TED | 請(qǐng)一定要睡個(gè)好覺 TED | 重新認(rèn)識(shí)出軌行為 TED | 如何掌控你的自由時(shí)間 紀(jì)錄片 | 航拍中國 后臺(tái)回復(fù)“目錄”???查看全部往期文章 【 入 群 】 TED | 觀后感交流群 | TED打卡群 請(qǐng)加萬水：hey-hey- 或后臺(tái)回復(fù)“加群” ▼點(diǎn)擊原文 到TED官網(wǎng)看本期 本文來自鳳凰號(hào)，僅代表鳳凰號(hào)自媒體觀點(diǎn)。 0 投訴 |
|
|
