前谷歌经理：如何快速地做困难的决定（双语）
A former Google exec on how to make tough decisions quickly前谷歌经理：如何快速地做困难的决定
Speed, like exercise and eating healthy, can be habitual.
高速，就像运动和健康的饮食一样，可以形成惯性。
I’ve long believed that speed is the ultimate weapon in business. All else
being equal, the fastest company in any market will win. Speed is a defining
characteristic—if not the defining characteristic—of the leader in virtually
every industry you look at.
我早就相信高速是商业中的终端武器。任何市场中两个各方面相等的公司，速度快的那个会胜出。高速是任何行业领袖的一个特质——更进一步说，是唯一的特质。
In tech, speed is seen primarily as an asset in product development. Hence
the “move fast and break things” mentality, the commitment to minimum viable
products and agile development. Many people would agree that speed and agility
are how you win when it comes to product.
在科技界，高速大多被当做是产品开发中的优势。所以产生了“兵贵神速”的心态，对最小化可行产品和敏捷开发的追求。当谈到产品时很多人会同意速度和敏捷性是获胜的关键。
What they fail to grasp is that speed matters to the rest of the business
too—not just product. Google is fast. General Motors is slow. Startups are fast.
Big companies are slow. It’s pretty clear that fast equals good, but there’s
relatively little written about how to develop the institutional and employee
muscle necessary to make speed a serious competitive advantage.
他们没有抓住要领的是，高速对商业的其他领域也一样重要——不仅仅是产品。谷歌高速，通用汽车迟缓。创业公司高速，大公司迟缓。所以高速意味着好，但是很少有人写到如何让机构和员工形成敏捷的习惯，成为一种竞争优势。
I believe that speed, like exercise and eating healthy, can be
habitual.
我相信高速，和运动以及健康饮食一样，可以形成惯性。
Through a prolonged, proactive effort to develop these good habits, we can
convert ourselves as founders, executives, and employees to be faster, more
efficient company-building machines. And, when enough members of a team exhibit
this set of habits, and are rewarded with reinforcement, compensation, and
promotions, the organization itself will gain velocity.
经过长时间的积极努力，作为创始人、执行董事、员工，我们可以通过养成这些好习惯让公司壮大得更加高速、高效。然后，当一个团队里有足够多的成员有了这个惯性，并以肯定、薪酬和升迁的方式受到奖励以后，整个组织会高速运行起来。
This is how category killers are made.
这是品类杀手的成功所在。
So let’s break this down. What are the building blocks of speed? When you
think about it, all business activity really comes down to two simple things:
Making decisions and executing on decisions. Your success depends on your
ability to develop speed as a habit in both.
我们拆解出来看看。高速的关键是什么?你仔细想一下，所有商业活动都最终包含两个简单的事情：做决策和执行决策。你的成功就在于在这两项上变得迅速。
Making decisions
做决策
A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan next
week.
General George Patton said that, and I definitely subscribe to it. Do you
remember the last time you were in a meeting and someone said, “We’re going to
make this decision before we leave the room?” How great did that feel? Didn’t
you just want to hug that person?
一个现在就粗糙执行的好计划，和一个要等到下周执行的完美的计划，前者更好。
General George
Patton说过此话，我绝对同意。你记不记得上一次你在会议室里有人对你说：“我们做完这个决定以后才能离开这里。”的那种感觉?你难道不想给那个人一个大大的拥抱吗?
The process of making and remaking decisions wastes an insane amount of
time at companies. The key takeaway: WHEN a decision is made is much more
important than WHAT decision is made.
做决策、推翻、再做决策的过程太浪费公司的时间了。重要的教训是：做决策用时比决策本身更重要。
If, by way of habit, you consistently begin every decision-making process
by considering how much time and effort that decision is worth, who needs to
have input, and when you’ll have an answer, you’ll have developed the first
important muscle for speed.
This isn’t to say all decisions should be made quickly. Some decisions are
more complicated or critical than others. It might behoove you to wait for more
information. Some decisions can’t be easily reversed, or would be too damaging
if you choose poorly. Most importantly, some decisions don’t need to be made
immediately to maintain downstream velocity.
如果你形成了习惯，总是在做决策之前考虑这个决策值得花多少时间和精力，谁需要参与，当你有了答案的时候，你就走出了朝向“速度”的第一步。我并不是说所有的决定都必须快速完成。有一些决定是非常复杂和关键的。你可能应当等有了更多的信息再说。一些决定不能轻易重改，如果选择错了，后果可能很严重。更重要的是，不必去为了速度而立刻做一些决定。
Deciding on when a decision will be made from the start is a profound,
powerful change that will speed everything up.
从开头就决定一个决策需要决定多久，这是一个深刻、强大的改变，会让一切高速起来。
In my many years at Google, I saw Eric Schmidt use this approach to
decision-making on a regular basis—probably without even thinking about it.
Because founders Larry and Sergey were (and are) very strong-minded leaders
involved in every major decision, Eric knew he couldn’t make huge unilateral
choices. This could have stalled a lot of things, but Eric made sure that
decisions were made on a specific timeframe—a realistic one—but a firm one. He
made this a habit for himself and it made a world of difference for Google.
我在谷歌司职多年中，我看到Eric
Schmidt经常用到这一方法——他可能都没意识到。因为创始人Larry和Sergey头脑清醒，参与每个关键决策，Eric知道他的重大决定不可能是单边的。这个条件本会让很多事情停滞不前，但是Eric确保每个决策都在一定的时间范围内——很实际的时间范围——但是很严格。他形成了这样的惯性，并让谷歌因此大为不同。
Today at Upstart, we’re a much smaller company, and we’re making decisions
that matter several times a day. We’re deeply driven by the belief that fast
decisions are far better than slow ones, and radically better than no decisions.
From day to day, hour to hour, we think about how important each decision is and
how much time it’s worth taking.There are decisions that deserve days of debate
and analysis, but the vast majority aren’t worth more than 10 minutes.
如今我们的Upstart是一个小一点的公司，我们每天好几次用这种方式做决策。我们深深地相信，快速的决定远比迟缓的好，更甚于没有决定。每一天，每一个小时，我们都去考虑每个决定的分量值多少，值多长时间。有些决策需要几天的辩论和分析，但大部分都不值得超过10分钟。
It’s important to internalize how irreversible, fatal, or non-fatal a
decision may be. Very few can’t be undone.
内心要知道一个决定是无法逆转的，还是致命的，还是不致命的。只有很少的决定无法撤回。
Note that speed doesn’t require one leader to make all the calls top-down.
The art of good decision making requires that you gather input and perspective
from your team, and then push toward a final decision in a way that makes it
clear that all voices were heard. As I’ve grown in my career, I’ve moved away
from telling people I had the right answer upfront to shaping and steering the
discussion toward a conclusion. I wouldn’t call it consensus building. But input
from others will help you get to the right decision faster, and with buy-in from
the team.
还要注意，速度不是说要一个领导者在做所有决定的时候都是独裁式的。你做出好决策的秘方是需要你从团队那里收集不同的见解，你考虑了所有的声音以后，做出一个最终决策。在我职业成长的道路上，我渐渐不再告诉大家我的见解是正确的，然后将团队的讨论引向这个方向。这个不叫达成一致。但是其他人的见解会让你更加快速地做出正确的决策，并且你的团队也会买账。
This isn’t a vote for rash decisions. I can be a little too “pedal to the
metal” at times, and sometimes my co-founder Anna will say, “This is a big
decision. Even though we think we know what to do, let’s give it 24 hours.”
She’s saved us multiple times with that wisdom.
我不是说要你做一些草率的决定。我有时候会有点“全速前进”，有时我的合伙创始人安娜会说：“这个决定很重大。即使我们知道应该怎么做，我们还是留24小时再好好想想。”她的这种智慧解救了我们好几次。
There’s an art to knowing when to end debate and make a decision.
知道什么时候结束争论做出决定是种艺术。
There’s an art to knowing when to end debate and make a decision. Many
leaders are reluctant to make the final call when there are good arguments and a
lot of emotions on both sides. We intuitively want the team to come to the right
decision on their own. But I’ve found that people are enormously relieved when
they hear that you’re grabbing the baton and accepting responsibility for a
decision. Using the “CEO prerogative”—to make the final call—isn’t something you
ought to need every day. As long as you do it sparingly, you can actually make
your employees more comfortable, and engender more trust by pulling the trigger,
logically explaining your choice and sticking with it.
In fact, gauging comfort on your team is a really helpful measure of
whether you’re going fast enough or not.
知道什么时候结束争论做出决定是种艺术。很多领导不愿意在双方在辩论中提出好的观点或者是很情绪化的当头做出最后决定。我们本能地希望团队会自己得出找正确的结论。但是我发现如果你把指挥棒夺过来并承担这个决定的责任时，你的团队会感觉如释重负。使用“CEO特权”做出最后的决定，不是你每天都需要做的事情。只要你用在刀刃上，你其实在承担责任、条理清晰地解释你的选择并坚持它的过程中会让你的员工们感到更加舒坦、更加信任你。
事实上，测量一下你团队的舒适度也是一个测量你是否足够快的有效标准。
You know you’re going fast enough if there’s a low-level discomfort, people
feeling stretched. But if you’re going too fast, you’ll see it on their faces,
and that’s important to spot too.
如果你的团队舒适度很低，你就知道你运转得足够快了，大家觉得难以承受。但是如果你运转地太快了，你会在他们的脸上看到一些信号，观察力也很重要。
While I was at Google, Larry Page was extremely good at forcing decisions
so fast that people were worried the team was about to drive the car off a
cliff. He’d push it as far as he could go without people crossing that line of
discomfort. It was just his fundamental nature to ask, “Why not? Why can’t we do
it faster than this?” and then wait to see if people started screaming. He
really rallied everyone around this theory that fast decisions, unless they’re
fatal, are always better.
我在谷歌的时候，Larry
Page非常擅长逼大家快速地做决定，快到大家都担心是不是要悬崖勒马了。他会把程度正好控制在人们不会觉得不舒服。他的本能是问代价：“为什么不这么做?我们为什么不能做得更快一些?”然后静观人们会不会抓狂。他真的让所有人都团结在他的这个理论周围：快速做的决定总是好的，除非这些决定是一决生死的。
Executing decisions
执行决策
A lot of people spend a whole lot of time refining their productivity
systems and to-do lists. But within the context of a team and a business,
executing a plan as quickly as possible is an entirely different concept. Here’s
how I’ve learned to execute with momentum.
很多人花很长的时间修改自己的效率系统和待办事项表。但是在一个团队和商业的环境下，以最快的速度执行计划是完全不同的概念。我想讲讲我时如何学习到动力十足地执行计划的。
Challenge the when
勤问完成时间
I’m always shocked by how many plans and action items come out of meetings
without being assigned due dates. Even when dates are assigned, they’re often
based on half-baked intuition about how long the task should take. Completion
dates and times follow a tribal notion of the sun setting and rising, and too
often “tomorrow” is the default answer.
It’s not that everything needs to be done NOW, but for items on your
critical path, it’s always useful to challenge the due date. All it takes is
asking the simplest question: “Why can’t this be done sooner?” Asking it
methodically, reliably and habitually can have a profound impact on the speed of
your organization.
我总是被会议中谈到的许多计划和行动没有上交日期所震惊。即使有的有日期，也经常是没有仔细考虑过这项任务到底需要多长时间的。完成日期通常和日出日落有关，惯性的回答一般都是“明天”。并不是说什么事都要现在做完，但是在关键路径上的事务，提前完成日期通常都是好的。只需问一个最简单的问题就好：“这个为什么不能早点做完?”提问要有理、有序并且要惯于这样提问，这会对你的组织的运转速度有深远的影响。
Today is better than tomorrow, right now is better than six hours from
now.
今天比明天好，现在比六个小时后好。
This is definitely a tactic that starts with individual employees
first—ideally those in senior positions who can influence others’ behavior. As a
leader, you want them to make “things I like to do” become “things we like to
do.” This is how ideas get ingrained. I’ve seen too many people never question
when something will be delivered and assume it will happen immediately. This
rarely happens. I’ve also seen ideas float into the ether because they were
never anchored in time.
这是一个从员工个体先开始后的技巧——最好是那些高职位的员工，他们可以影响其他人的行为。作为领袖，你想从“我想做的事情”变成“大家想做的事情。”
思想就是这样扎根的。我见过太多的人从来不质疑事情什么时候能做完，他们总是假设会马上做完。事实上从来不是这样。我也见过一些主意最后一场空，因为从来没人确定过时间范围。
You don’t have to be militant about it, just consistently respond that
today is better than tomorrow, that right now is better than six hours from
now.
你不需要像军官一样实施这一点，只需经常回应“今天比明天好，现在比六个小时后好。”
There’s a funny story about my old pal Sabih Khan, who worked in operations
at Apple when I was a product manager there. In 2008, he was meeting with Tim
Cook about a production snafu in China. Tim said, “This is bad. Someone ought to
get over there.” Thirty minutes went by and the conversation moved to other
topics. Suddenly Tim looked back at Sabih and asked, ‘Why are you still here?’
Sabih left the meeting immediately, drove directly to San Francisco Airport, got
on the next flight to China without even a change of clothes. But you can bet
that problem was resolved fast.
我有一个关于老朋友Sabih Khan的故事，他曾经为苹果的运营部工作过，我曾是哪里的产品经理。2008年，他和Tim
Cook见面谈论中国区出现的生产混乱的局面。Tim说：“这不行。需要有人马上赶到那边去。”三十分钟过去了，他们把话题转移到了别的地方。突然Tim向后看了一眼Sabih，说：“你怎么还在这儿?”Sabih立刻离开了会场，连衣服都没换就开车直往旧金山飞机场，坐下一班航班飞往中国。但是你可以想象问题肯定解决地很迅速。
The candle is always burning. You need leadership to feel and infuse every
discussion with that kind of urgency.
蜡烛总是在燃烧。你需要领导力才能让每个对话都充满了那种紧急感。
Recognize and remove dependencies
认识到依赖关系，并移除它
Mission critical items should be absolutely gang tackled by your team.
关键任务一定要让所有成员一起上手解决。
Just as important as assigning a deadline, you need to tease out any
dependencies around an action item. This might be obvious, but mission critical
items should be absolutely gang tackled by your team in order to accelerate all
downstream activities. Things that can wait till later need to wait. Ultimately,
you can’t have team members slow-rolling on non-vital tasks when they could be
hacking away at the due date for something that is make or break.
如同设立一个完成期限一样重要，你需要将一项行动所牵扯的依赖关系移除掉。我要说得可能大家都知道，关键任务一定要让所有成员一起上手解决，以确保所有下游活动能够加速完成。能稍等再做的事情应该等一下再做。最基本的是，你不能让团队成员在不重要的任务上磨洋工，他们应该为一个生死攸关的任务撸起袖子大干。
A big part of this is making sure people aren’t waiting on one another to
take next steps. The untrained mind has a weird way of defaulting to serial
activities—i.e. I’ll do this after you do that after X, Y, Z happens. You want
people working in parallel instead.
A lot of people assume dependencies where they don’t even exist.
这样做主要原因是要确保不会有人需要等上一个工作做完才能做之后的工作。没有经过训练的大脑会奇怪地自动安排几个连续性的任务——比如，满足了X, Y,
Z条件后你才能做这个，你做完那个我才能做这个。你想让员工平行工作。很多人在即使一些依赖关系不存在的时候也错误地认为存在。
How can you turn serial dependencies into parallel action? As a CEO, I
insert myself at different points in a process to radically accelerate things.
For example, if we’re coming up on an announcement and time is of the essence, I
might jump in and just write the blog post myself. It’s not that my team
couldn’t do it. I just know it would be faster since I’m the one who’s picky
about the content anyway. As a leader, it’s your job to recognize the
dependencies and non-dependencies, and take action depending on how critical the
thing is and when it’s due.
你怎么将连续性的依赖关系转化成平行的任务?作为CEO，我把自己安插在一个过程的不同点来给工作大大提速。比如说，如果我们需要做一个通过，时间宝贵的情况下，我会横插进去，自己写要发表的博客。不是说我的团队做不了。我只是知道既然我是那个挑毛拣刺的人，我自己做会更快些。作为领导者，你的职责是认识到这些依赖关系和非依赖关系，根据事务的关键程度和最后期限采取行动。
Ten times a day I’ll find myself sitting in a meeting saying, “We don’t
need to wait for that thing, we can do this now.” That thought is so common.
It’s just that people need to say it out loud more often.
每天我发现我说在会议里说上十次“我们不用等其他事情完成，我们现在就可以做这件事情。”这种思路很平常。只是需要人们更经常地大声说出来。
Eliminate cognitive overhead
减少认知的复杂程度
Remember when you used to download lots of songs on iTunes? It was so
painfully slow if you wanted to buy a whole album at once. You’d have to wait
for one to finish downloading so they could all speed up. Projects are like
this. Sometimes a project is so complicated that it feels like you’re
downloading six albums at once so everything else grinds to a halt too.
还记得你以前在iTunes里下载很多歌曲的画面?如果你要下载整张专辑，速度简直慢得要命。你必须等到一首歌下完，其他的下载速度才会提上来。项目也是这样。有时项目的复杂程度让你觉得你在一气儿下载六个专辑所以其他事情都被挤压到没速度。
I can’t even count the number of meetings I had at Google related to
enterprise app identities versus normal consumer Google IDs. We launched a
project to fix this, but it was so complicated that the first 30 minutes of
every meeting were dedicated to restating what had happened in the last meeting.
The cognitive overhead was mind boggling.
This is how I learned that if you can knock out big chunks of a project
early, you can reduce the overhead of the remaining parts by 90%. You should
always be on the lookout for these opportunities.
我都数不清我在谷歌开了多少公司应用身份对一般谷歌身份的会了。我们专门开启了一个项目来修复这个问题，但是问题复杂到每次会议的前30分钟我们都用来重述上一次会议的内容。这种认知的过度复杂让人没办法理清思路。不过我学会了如何早早地把项目中的大块头解决掉，这样接下来部分的复杂程度就减少了90%。你应该经常寻找这样的机会。
Often, it will be one tiny element of a project that’s adding all of the
complexity. For example, our business at Upstart has to comply with a lot of
regulations. There’s not a lot we can do until we know we’ll have legal
approval, so we used to spend a lot of time dancing around whether something was
going to be legal or not. Then we thought, why don’t we just get a brain dump
from our lawyers saying, “Do this, this and this and not this, and you’ll be
fine.” Having that type of simple understanding of the problem drastically
reduced the cognitive overhead of every decision we made.
通常是项目中一个小小的因素引起所有的复杂关系。比如，我们在Upstart的生意必须符合许多规范。除非我们知道我们拿到了法律许可，否则我们做不了什么，所以我们过去花很多时间去搞清楚某件事是否会符合法律程序。然后我们想，我们干嘛不根据律师讲的话把我们的大脑清干净，“这样、这样、这样做，不要那样做，你就能通过。”有了这种简单的思维方式，我们在做决策的时候大大减少了认知上的复杂程度。
If you can assess, pull out, and stomp on the complicating pieces of the
puzzle, everyone’s life gets easier. The one I see the most—and this includes at
Google too—is that people hem and haw over what the founder or CEO will think
every step of the way. Just get their input first. Don’t get your work reversed
later on. What a founder might think is classic cognitive overhead.
如果你能找到拼图中过去复杂难懂的那些，扔出去，在上面狠狠踩上几脚，那么每个人的工作会轻松很多。我最经常看到的——包括在谷歌——是人们在每一步上都反复揣摩创始人或者CEO会怎么想。先问问他们不就得了。不要让你的工作功亏一篑。“创始人会怎么想”，这是典型的自找麻烦。
Use competition the right way
正确使用竞争的力量
Talking about your competition is a good way to add urgency. But you have
to be careful. As a leader, your role is to determine whether your team is going
fast because they’re panicked, or if they don’t seem to be paranoid enough.
Based on the answer, competition is a helpful tool.
谈论你的竞争对手是个增加紧急感的好方法。但是你必须要谨慎。作为领导者，你需要决定你的团队动作迅速是因为他们恐慌了，还是他们不够恐慌。根据答案的不同，竞争可能是个好帮手。
At Upstart, we constantly say that while we’re working hard on this one
thing, our competitors are probably working just as hard on something we don’t
even know about. So we have to be vigilant. A lot of people say you should
ignore competition, but by acknowledging it, you’re incentivizing yourself to
set the pace in your market.
在Upstart，我们经常说我们在拼命做一件事的时候，我们的竞争对手可能在同样拼命地做一件我们都不知道是什么的东西。所以我们必须保持晶体。很多人说你不应该关心竞争对手怎样，但是如果我们能认识到竞争，你在鞭策自己引领你的市场领域。
You can either set the pace of the market or be the one to react.
你如果不是在市场中领跑的人，就是被领跑的人。
You can either set the pace of the market or be the one to react. Whoever
is fastest out of the gate is the one everyone else has to react to.
你如果不是在市场中领跑的人，就是被领跑的人。谁跑的最快，其他人就必须跟在后面被牵着鼻子走。
When we were launching Google Apps, we were coming out against Microsoft
Office, which had this dominant, monopolistic ownership of the business. We
thought about what we could do differently and better, and the simplicity of our
pricing was part of it. We offered one price of $50 per employee per
year—compared to the wacky 20-page price list Microsoft would drop on you. We
didn’t agonize over whether it should be $45, $50, or $55—I think we decided
that in a half hour. We just wanted to be able to tell people, “We may not be
free, but we’ll be the simplest decision you ever made.” That was us re-setting
the bar for the market and pushing it hard so everyone else would have to react
to it.
我们发行谷歌应用的时候，我们开始和微软办公软件竞争，他们占据了这个领域的垄断地位。我们思考如何能做得与众不同或者更好，其中产品价格的直截了当就是其中的一个策略。我们的价格是每个员工每年$50——而微软给出的是长达20页纸的价格目录。我们不去纠结到底应该是$45，$50，还是$55——我记得我们只花了半个小时就做出来这个决定。我们只想告诉用户：“我们不是免费的，但是我们会是你们做出的最简单的决定。”这就是我们在领跑市场，并且领跑的很多，这样其他人必须做出反应。
Rally support for decisions
为决策寻求支持
Almost nothing in tech can be done in a vacuum. Basically, once you’ve made
a decision, you’ll need to convince others that you’re right and get them to
prioritize what you need from them over the other things on their plate.
科技界没有什么东西可以在真空中做出来。所以，一旦你做出一个决定，你就必须说服其他人你是对的，并且让他们将你需要他们做的事情排到他们自己需要做的事情之前。
Influencing a decision starts with recognizing that you’re really just
dealing with other people. Even if it’s a vendor or another company you need to
rally, it boils down to one person first. Given this view, you need to make a
point of understanding this person, what their job is, how their success is
measured, what they care about, what all of their other priorities are, etc.
Then ask: “How can you help them get what they want while helping you get what
you want?”
将你的决定推而广之，首先要认识到你其实只是在和其他人打交道。即使你要说服的一个卖主或者是另外一个公司，最终负责的还是一个人。用这种方法，你需要理解这个人、他们的工作范畴、对他们而言什么是成功、他们关心什么、他们还有什么其他重要的事情要做等等。然后问自己：“我怎样在他们帮助我达成我要的东西的同时帮助他们做成他们想要的。”
I’ve seen this done by appealing to people’s pride. Maybe you tell them
that you used to work with a competitor who was quite speedy so that they have
incentive to go even faster. I’ve also seen this done by appealing to human
decency and being honest. You might say something like, “Hey we’re really
betting heavily on this, and we really need you guys to deliver.”
让对方感觉到自己的重要性是一种方法。也许你可以告诉他们以前你和一个他们的竞争对手合作，动作非常迅速，他们会有动力做得更迅速。我还见过以得体和诚实赢得他们的合作。你可以说：“嗨我们在这儿上面真的是下了大赌注，我们很需要你们能做出来。”
Whichever route you choose, you want to back up your argument with logic.
You should gently seek to understand what’s happening. I tend to ask a lot of
questions like: “Can you help me understand why something would take so long? Is
there any way we can help or make it go faster?” Really try to get to the heart
of the actions they’re taking and the time they’ve carved out to do it. And if
this works, be sure to commend them to their boss.
不管你选择哪种方法，你想让你的论点有清楚的调理。你应该温和地试图理解事情的进展。我经常会文很多这样的问题：“你能帮我理解为什么这个东西要花这么长时间吗?我们可以做点什么或者让它加快速度吗?”努力试图理解他们的行为和付出的时间背后的核心意义。如果他们做到了你想做的，一定要向他们的老板称赞他们。
How can you make other people look good?
如何让其他人脸面有光?
I highly recommend this over a brute force method of escalating things to
the person’s manager or throwing competition in their face. That doesn’t serve
them, and they’ll be much less likely to serve you as a result.
我很不推荐用联系某人的经历或者将竞争对手甩到这人脸上的粗鲁方式来达到加快速度的目的。这种方法不会管用，最后的结果很可能是他们不愿意配合你。
How can you make other people look good? How can you make meeting your
needs a win for them inside their company?
如果让其他人脸面有光?如何将满足你的需求变成他们内部的一种成功?
All of this comes back to making things go as fast and smoothly as
possible. When you feel things start to slow down, you have to keep asking
questions. Questions are your best weapon against inertia.
所有这些又回归到如何让事情以最快的速度和最圆滑的方式进行。如果你感觉到速度开始变慢，你就应该不停地问问题。提问是你对抗懒惰的最佳武器。
To keep things moving along at Upstart, I ask a lot of hard questions very
quickly, and most of them are time related. I know that we execute well and are
generally working on the right things at the right time, but I will always
challenge why something takes a certain amount of time. Are we working as
smartly as we can?
为了让Upstart的事务运转起来，我会迅速地跑出几个核心问题，大部分是有时间敏感性的。我知道我们的执行很好，一般都是在正确的时间表上做着正确的事情，但是我总是会质疑为什么一个东西要花特定长的时间去做。我们真的在以最聪明的方式工作吗?
Too many people believe that speed is the enemy of quality. To an extent
they’re right—you can’t force innovation and sometimes genius needs time and
freedom to bloom. But in my experience, that’s the rare case. There’s not always
a stark tradeoff between something done fast and done well. Don’t let you or
your organization use that as a false shield or excuse to lose momentum. The
moment you do, you lose your competitive advantage.
很多人以为高速和质量是敌对的。在一定程度上是这样——你不可能强迫发明创造，天才们有时也需要一些时间和空间才能绽放异彩。但是根据我的经验，这是少数。在快速完成某事和高质量地完成某事之间没有必然的牺牲其中之一的关系。不要让你自己或者是你的企业运用这个错误的方程，或者借故丧失动力。如果你这样做，你会立刻失去竞争优势。
(英文原文请见 A former Google exec on how to make tough decisions quickly)
版权声明：本文系新东方网独家稿件，版权为新东方网所有。转载须注明来源及作者，否则必将追究法律责任。
页:
[1]