Why it's time to forget the pecking order at work

Margaret Heffernan?

An evolutionary biologist at Purdue University named William Muir studied chickens. He was interested in productivity — I think it's something that concerns all of us — but it's easy to measure in chickens because you just count the eggs. He wanted to know what could make his chickens more productive, so he devised a beautiful experiment.?

普度大學(xué)一位名叫威廉.繆爾的生物進化學(xué)家研究了雞群。他對生產(chǎn)率很感興趣，我覺得他的研究關(guān)系到我們每個人，但計算雞的生產(chǎn)率很簡單，只需要數(shù)數(shù)雞蛋就行了。他想要知道如何提高雞的生蛋率，所以他設(shè)計了一個巧妙的實驗。

Chickens live in groups, so first of all, he selected just an average flock, and he let it alone for six generations. But then he created a second group of the individually most productive chickens — you could call them superchickens — and he put them together in a superflock, and each generation, he selected only the most productive for breeding.

雞都是群居的，所以他先選擇了一群普通的雞，然后他讓這一群雞獨自生存繁衍直到第六代。然后他又用生產(chǎn)力最強的創(chuàng)建了第二個雞群你可以叫它們“超級雞”，他將超級雞放在一起成了“超級雞群”，然后在每一代里，他都選擇最高產(chǎn)的雞來繁衍。

After six generations had passed, what did he find? Well, the first group, the average group, was doing just fine. They were all plump and fully feathered and egg production had increased dramatically. What about the second group? Well, all but three were dead. They'd pecked the rest to death. (Laughter) The individually productive chickens had only achieved their success by suppressing the productivity of the rest.

在經(jīng)過六代以后，他發(fā)現(xiàn)了什么呢？第一群普通的雞，表現(xiàn)都還不錯，它們都身形結(jié)實、羽翼豐滿，并且雞蛋的產(chǎn)量急劇增加。而第二群呢？除了三只以外全死了，那三只雞把其他的雞都啄死了。這些個個高產(chǎn)的雞只是通過擠兌同伴才獲得了成功。

Now, as I've gone around the world talking about this and telling this story in all sorts of organizations and companies, people have seen the relevance almost instantly, and they come up and they say things to me like, "That superflock, that's my company." (Laughter) Or, "That's my country." Or, "That's my life."

現(xiàn)在，我走遍世界，在各類組織和公司里講述這個故事，人們幾乎立刻就看出了其中的關(guān)聯(lián)，然后都跑來對我說這樣的話：“我們公司就是那個超級雞群?！庇械恼f：“那就是我的國家?！边€有的說，“那就是我的人生。”

All my life I've been told that the way we have to get ahead is to compete: get into the right school, get into the right job, get to the top, and I've really never found it very inspiring. I've started and run businesses because invention is a joy, and because working alongside brilliant, creative people is its own reward. And I've never really felt very motivated by pecking orders or by superchickens or by superstars.?

我的一生中都被告知要獲得成功只有不斷的競爭：進好的學(xué)校、找好的工作、要做人上人。但我從沒覺得這些話有多激勵人。我開始為我自己的事業(yè)奮斗，因為創(chuàng)造是快樂的，也因為與許多優(yōu)秀的、有創(chuàng)造力的人并肩奮斗本身就是一種回報。我自己從來不會通過擠兌他人或從“超級雞”或超級大明星那獲得激勵。

But for the past 50 years, we've run most organizations and some societies along the superchicken model. We've thought that success is achieved by picking the superstars, the brightest men, or occasionally women, in the room, and giving them all the resources and all the power. And the result has been just the same as in William Muir's experiment: aggression, dysfunction and waste. If the only way the most productive can be successful is by suppressing the productivity of the rest, then we badly need to find a better way to work and a richer way to live.?

但是50多年過去了，我們用超級雞的模式經(jīng)營了大多數(shù)組織和很多社會。我們曾覺得成功靠的是挑選頂尖人才，把那些最聰明的男人或者女人放在一起，然后給他們所有的資源和權(quán)利。結(jié)果也和威廉的實驗如出一轍：那些拔尖者野心勃勃，組織功能失調(diào)，還出現(xiàn)了各種資源的浪費。如果實現(xiàn)高生產(chǎn)率的唯一途徑是通過抑制對手生產(chǎn)率的話，那我們就更加迫切的需要另外一條路和更多樣的方法去生存。

So what is it that makes some groups obviously more successful and more productive than others?Well, that's the question a team at MIT took to research. They brought in hundreds of volunteers, they put them into groups, and they gave them very hard problems to solve.?

那么，到底是什么造就了一些團隊比其它的更加成功、更加高效呢？這也是麻省理工學(xué)院的一個研究團隊提出的問題。他們邀請了幾百名志愿者，將他們分成幾組，讓他們解決非常困難的問題。結(jié)果與你期望的一樣，其中一些團隊比另外一些優(yōu)秀很多。

And what happened was exactly what you'd expect, that some groups were very much more successful than others, but what was really interesting was that the high-achieving groups were not those where they had one or two people with spectacularly high I.Q. Nor were the most successful groups the ones that had the highest aggregate I.Q. Instead, they had three characteristics, the really successful teams. First of all, they showed high degrees of social sensitivity to each other. This is measured by something called the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test. It's broadly considered a test for empathy, and the groups that scored highly on thisdid better.?

但真正有趣的是，表現(xiàn)優(yōu)異的團隊并不是擁有一兩個超高智商的團隊，也不是那些整體智商水平最高的團隊。反之，那些成功的團隊都有三個特點.第一，他們都有著較高的社交靈敏度。這是由一種“由眼及心”的測試檢驗出來的。它被廣泛的理解為同理心測試，在這個測試里獲得高分的團隊解決問題的表現(xiàn)更優(yōu)異。

Secondly, the successful groups gave roughly equal time to each other, so that no one voice dominated, but neither were there any passengers. And thirdly, the more successful groups had more women in them. (Applause) Now, was this because women typically score more highly on the Reading the Mind in the Eyes Test, so you're getting a doubling down on the empathy quotient? Or was it because they brought a more diverse perspective? We don't really know, but the striking thing about this experiment is that it showed what we know, which is some groups do better than others, but what's key to that is their social connectedness to each other.

第二，成功的團隊給了每個人同樣的時間，這樣就沒有任何人會成為主導(dǎo)，也沒有任何人有機會搭便車。第三，成功的團隊里都有更多的女性員工。是不是因為女性通常在“由眼及心”測試里得分更高，所以他們所在的團隊具有雙倍的同理心？或者是因為她們用更多的視角看問題？這個問題我們還無從知曉，然而重要的是這個實驗證實了我們的理論：那些團隊表現(xiàn)優(yōu)異的關(guān)鍵在于每個人和隊友的關(guān)系。

So how does this play out in the real world? Well, it means that what happens between people really counts, because in groups that are highly attuned and sensitive to each other, ideas can flow and grow.People don't get stuck. They don't waste energy down dead ends.

那么這個原理是怎樣在現(xiàn)實中體現(xiàn)的？這意味著人與人之間的互動非常重要，因為在成員之間高度契合和反應(yīng)靈敏的團隊里創(chuàng)意才會涌動并且發(fā)展壯大。人們不會被某個想法困擾住，不會浪費精力鉆牛角尖。

An example: Arup is one of the world's most successful engineering firms, and it was commissioned to build the equestrian center for the Beijing Olympics. Now, this building had to receive two and a half thousand really highly strung thoroughbred horses that were coming off long-haul flights, highly jet-lagged, not feeling their finest.?

舉個例子：Arup是世界上最成功的工程公司之一，它是北京奧運會馬術(shù)中心的建造商。現(xiàn)在，這個建筑必須容納2500匹剛由長途飛機運送過來的高質(zhì)量的純種馬，這些馬兒有很嚴重的時差，身體狀況也并不算好。

And the problem the engineer confronted was, what quantity of waste to cater for? Now, you don't get taught this in engineering school — (Laughter) — and it's not really the kind of thing you want to get wrong, so he could have spent months talking to vets, doing the research,tweaking the spreadsheet.?

而工程師面臨的問題是要應(yīng)付多少馬糞？這個在工程學(xué)院可沒有學(xué)過，但是誰也不想把這個問題搞砸。其實他本可以花上幾個月時間和獸醫(yī)交流，做各種研究，調(diào)整電子數(shù)據(jù)表。

Instead, he asked for help and he found someone who had designed the Jockey Club in New York. The problem was solved in less than a day. Arup believes that the culture of helpfulness is central to their success.

但實際上他四處尋求幫助,找到了一個曾經(jīng)設(shè)計過紐約賽馬場的人，問題用了不到一天就解決了。Arup相信他們成功的精髓是互幫互助的文化。

Now, helpfulness sounds really anemic, but it's absolutely core to successful teams, and it routinely outperforms individual intelligence. Helpfulness means I don't have to know everything, I just have to work among people who are good at getting and giving help.?

互幫互助聽起來很沒士氣，但它在成功的團隊里至關(guān)重要，其作用往往勝過個體的智慧?；突ブ馕吨拔覜]有必要了解所有事”,我只需要在一群愿意尋求并給予幫助的人之間工作。

At SAP, they reckon that you can answer any question in 17 minutes. But there isn't a single high-tech company I've worked with that imagines for a moment that this is a technology issue, because what drives helpfulness is people getting to know each other. Now that sounds so obvious, and we think it'll just happen normally, but it doesn't.?

在SAP（德國軟件公司），他們記得一個人可以在17分鐘之內(nèi)回答任何問題。但是，從沒有一個和我合作過的高科技公司曾經(jīng)覺得這是個技術(shù)問題，因為驅(qū)使大家互助的正是彼此間的互相了解。既然互助聽起來那么淺顯，讓我們覺得它會自然發(fā)生，但并非如此。

When I was running my first software company, I realized that we were getting stuck. There was a lot of friction, but not much else, and I gradually realized the brilliant, creative people that I'd hired didn't know each other. They were so focused on their own individual work, they didn't even know who they were sitting next to, and it was only when I insisted that we stop working and invest time in getting to know each other that we achieved real momentum.

當我在經(jīng)營第一家軟件公司時，我意識到我們陷入了困境。除了許多摩擦就沒有別的了，后來我漸漸意識到，我雇的那些聰明又有創(chuàng)造力的人并不了解彼此。他們將全部的精力都投入了彼此的工作，他們甚至都不知道是誰坐在他們旁邊，只有當我堅持讓大家停掉工作花些時間去認識他人的時候，我們才取得了一些突破性的進展。

Now, that was 20 years ago, and now I visit companies that have banned coffee cups at desksbecause they want people to hang out around the coffee machines and talk to each other. The Swedes even have a special term for this. They call it fika, which means more than a coffee break. It means collective restoration.?

那是20年以前的事兒了，如今我訪問的公司都不允許員工在桌上放咖啡杯，因為公司希望人們能夠走到咖啡機前與人交流。在瑞士，甚至有個與之相關(guān)的專有名詞，他們管這叫做fika，意思是超越茶歇的活動，也表示集體的休整。

At Idexx, a company up in Maine, they've created vegetable gardens on campus so that people from different parts of the business can work together and get to know the whole business that way. Have they all gone mad? Quite the opposite — they've figured out that when the going gets tough, and it always will get tough if you're doing breakthrough work that really matters,what people need is social support, and they need to know who to ask for help.?

在緬因州的Idexx公司，他們在園區(qū)里修了一個菜園，讓所有部門的人能夠湊到一起干活兒，并且了解整個公司的運營狀況。是這些人都瘋了嗎？恰恰相反，他們知道了當事情進展不順時，事情總會這樣難以避免。如果你做的是非常有突破性和重要的工作，人們需要的是社交上的支持，也需要知道他們可以向誰求助。

Companies don't have ideas; only people do. And what motivates people are the bonds and loyalty and trust they develop between each other. What matters is the mortar, not just the bricks.

公司造不出創(chuàng)意，只有人可以。真正激勵人的是彼此間建立的聯(lián)系、忠誠和信任。重要的是砂漿，而不只是磚頭。

Now, when you put all of this together, what you get is something called social capital. Social capital is the reliance and interdependency that builds trust. The term comes from sociologists who were studying communities that proved particularly resilient in times of stress. Social capital is what gives companies momentum, and social capital is what makes companies robust. What does this mean in practical terms??

當你將兩者放在一起，就是所謂的社會資本。它是一種信賴和依存，能夠建立信任。這個名詞來自于一位社會學(xué)家，他對社區(qū)的研究證明了社會在緊張時期具備更高的適應(yīng)性。社會資本可以讓公司穩(wěn)固，也可以使公司更有活力。而它有什么實際意義嗎？

It means that time is everything, because social capital compounds with time. So teams that work together longer get better, because it takes time to develop the trust you need for real candor and openness. And time is what builds value.?

它代表時間就是一切，社會資本會隨著時間增加。所以團隊磨合的越久就工作的越好，因為要讓人真正坦誠和坦率，就需要時間來建立信任。時間會造就價值。

When Alex Pentland suggested to one companythat they synchronize coffee breaks so that people would have time to talk to each other, profits went up 15 million dollars, and employee satisfaction went up 10 percent. Not a bad return on social capital,which compounds even as you spend it.?

當AlexPentland在建議一家公司整合茶歇時間，讓所有人都有時間去和別人交流時，公司的利潤增加了1500萬美元，并且雇員滿意度上升了10%。這份社會資本的回報還不賴吧，而且甚至它在消耗的過程中還會不斷增加。

Now, this isn't about chumminess, and it's no charter for slackers, because people who work this way tend to be kind of scratchy, impatient, absolutely determined to think for themselves because that's what their contribution is.?

這里不涉及裙帶關(guān)系，也沒有懶人的位置，因為這樣去做的人總是會有些毛毛躁躁、急功近利，心里只有自己，因為他們覺得這才能體現(xiàn)出自己的價值。

Conflict is frequent because candor is safe. And that's how good ideas turn into great ideas, because no idea is born fully formed. It emerges a little bit as a child is born, kind of messy and confused, but full of possibilities. And it's only through the generous contribution, faith and challenge that they achieve their potential. And that's what social capital supports.

有時沖突會頻繁，但這樣的坦率總是好的，因為這是一個尚可的點子變成杰作的過程，沒有哪個點子生來就完美。它就像新生兒的誕生一樣，有點混亂、困惑，但是未來充滿可能。在接受外界慷慨的幫助，有了信念戰(zhàn)勝挑戰(zhàn)之后才能發(fā)揮出它們最大的潛能，這就是社會資本所支持的。

Now, we aren't really used to talking about this, about talent, about creativity, in this way. We're used to talking about stars. So I started to wonder, well, if we start working this way, does that mean no more stars? So I went and I sat in on the auditions at the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art in London. And what I saw there really surprised me, because the teachers weren't looking for individual pyrotechnics.They were looking for what happened between the students, because that's where the drama is.?

但我們很少談?wù)撨@個話題，很少用這種方式談?wù)撝腔酆蛣?chuàng)造力。我們習(xí)慣談?wù)撁餍菃T工,所以我開始想，如果我們開始以這種方式培養(yǎng)人才，是不是就不會再有明星員工了呢？所以當我在欣賞倫敦皇家藝術(shù)學(xué)院戲劇的試演時，眼前的一切真的讓我很驚訝。因為教授們并不看重個人的表演能力，他們看重的是學(xué)生之間那種互動，因為戲劇就是這樣產(chǎn)生的。

And when I talked to producers of hit albums, they said, "Oh sure, we have lots of superstars in music. It's just, they don't last very long. It's the outstanding collaborators who enjoy the long careers, because bringing out the best in others is how they found the best in themselves."?

而當我與一些暢銷專輯的制作人交談時，他們說，“當然了，我們有很多音樂巨星。只不過他們的名氣并沒有持續(xù)很久。合作性非常強的人，在事業(yè)上往往可以做得更久，因為當他們激勵別人做到最好的同時，也往往將最好的自己呈現(xiàn)出來?！?/p>

And when I went to visit companies that are renowned for their ingenuity and creativity, I couldn't even see any superstars,because everybody there really mattered. And when I reflected on my own career, and the extraordinary people I've had the privilege to work with, I realized how much more we could give each other if we just stopped trying to be superchickens.?

當我訪問那些以獨特性和創(chuàng)造性聞名的公司，我甚至并沒有看到什么明星員工，因為每個人都很重要。當我反思自己的事業(yè)，以及我有幸合作的出色的同事時，我意識到如果我們放棄做“超級雞”的話，我們其實可以給予對方更多。一旦你們真正理解人與人之間的互動，很多問題就會迎刃而解。

Once you appreciate truly how social work is, a lot of things have to change. Management by talent contest has routinely pittedemployees against each other. Now, rivalry has to be replaced by social capital. For decades, we've tried to motivate people with money, even though we've got a vast amount of research that shows that money erodes social connectedness. Now, we need to let people motivate each other.?

人才競賽類型的管理哲學(xué)總是鼓勵員工們互相競爭。如今社會資本已經(jīng)代替了競爭。幾十年來，我們試過用金錢去激勵人們，盡管已有大量的研究表明，金錢將破壞人與人之間的社會連接?，F(xiàn)在，我們應(yīng)該讓人們互相激勵。

And for years, we've thought that leaders were heroic soloists who were expected, all by themselves, to solve complex problems. Now, we need to redefine leadership as an activity in which conditions are createdin which everyone can do their most courageous thinking together.

多年來，我們認為領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者應(yīng)該像救世主那樣獨自解決復(fù)雜的難題。如今，我們應(yīng)該重新定義領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)力就是有能力去創(chuàng)造一種環(huán)境，讓其中的每個人都能集思廣益。我們知道這行得通。

We know that this works. When the Montreal Protocol called for the phasing out of CFCs, the chlorofluorocarbons implicated in the hole in the ozone layer, the risks were immense. CFCs were everywhere, and nobody knew if a substitute could be found. But one team that rose to the challenge adopted three key principles.?

蒙特利爾協(xié)定書提倡逐步禁用氟氯烴，因為氟氯烴會導(dǎo)致臭氧空洞，這樣的風(fēng)險是極大的，氟氯烴無處不在，而且沒有人清楚能否找到替代品。但是有個團隊迎接了挑戰(zhàn)并采用了三個關(guān)鍵原則。

The first was the head of engineering, Frank Maslen, said, there will be no stars in this team. We need everybody. Everybody has a valid perspective. Second, we work to one standard only: the best imaginable. And third, he told his boss, Geoff Tudhope, that he had to butt out,because he knew how disruptive power can be.?

工程學(xué)院的院長FrankMaslen這樣說：第一，團隊里不應(yīng)該有明星隊員,我們需要每個人,每個人都有獨到的見解。第二，我們做事只遵循一個標準：沒有最好，只有更好。第三，他告訴他的老板GeoffTudhope,不應(yīng)該進行干涉，因為Frank明白干涉別人的破壞力不容忽視。

Now, this didn't mean Tudhope did nothing. He gave the team air cover, and he listened to ensure that they honored their principles. And it worked: Ahead of all the other companies tackling this hard problem, this group cracked it first. And to date, the Montreal Protocol is the most successful international environmental agreement ever implemented.

當然，這并不意味著Tudhope只能毫無作為。他要保證團隊的正常運作，也會傾聽團隊的意見并確保他們遵守原則。這招奏效了：Tudhope的公司在處理這個棘手問題時的表現(xiàn)，遠遠超越了其他公司，他們首先獲得了成功。到目前為止，蒙特利爾協(xié)定書是執(zhí)行最成功的國際環(huán)境公約。

There was a lot at stake then, and there's a lot at stake now, and we won't solve our problems if we expect it to be solved by a few supermen or superwomen. Now we need everybody, because it is only when we accept that everybody has value that we will liberate the energy and imagination and momentum we need to create the best beyond measure.Thank you.

之前有好多亟待處理的事情，現(xiàn)在也一樣。如果我們僅僅寄希望于一兩個超人，那么肯定不能解決問題。現(xiàn)在我們需要每一個人，因為只有我們承認每個人有價值，才能充分釋放我們需要的能量、想象力和動力，創(chuàng)造出一片新天地。謝謝。