Culture Club 文化俱乐部
In this book’s Introduction I discussed an interview I had with Navy SEAL captain Jamie Sands. In the interview Captain Sands stressed how training and repetition are techniques to develop muscle memory and avoid brain freeze. He also had some incredibly interesting things to say about the culture of his workplace. Specifically, he said: “An adaptive culture is part of the SEALs’ identity, and we take tremendous pride in this. Our mind-set is that we are problem solvers and we can handle anything. There is a pressure from the group to perform. No one wants to let the other members of the team down. We all do better when we are part of a team.” The SEALs are an excellent example of how training, a shared philosophy, accountability practices, and even conformity pressure create an adaptive, improvisational culture.
在本书的简介中，我讨论了我与海军海豹突击队队长杰米·桑德斯的访谈。在采访中，金沙船长强调训练和重复是发展肌肉记忆力和避免大脑冻结的技术。关于他的工作场所文化，他还说了一些非常有趣的事情。他特别指出：“适应性文化是海豹突击队身份的一部分，我们对此感到非常自豪。我们的心态是我们是解决问题的人，我们可以处理任何事情。团队有执行的压力。没有人愿意让其他团队成员失望。当我们成为团队的一员时，我们所有人都会做得更好。”海豹突击队是一个很好的例子，说明了培训，共同的哲学，问责制实践，甚至整合压力如何形成一种适应性即兴文化。
As talented and motivated individuals we often believe we can step into any group and initiate changes we think are necessary. In actuality the vast majority of people don’t ever get around to changing the company or the team they become part of. Instead they adapt to fit inside the team or inside a particular culture.3 This is understandable enough when viewed as a kind of risk reduction and survival instinct—nobody wants to be the nail in the board that is going to get hammered down. Even if we accept the fact that an overarching culture tends to dominate and assimilate individuality, we as individuals can be agents for change within the culture. We just need to be fully prepared for the challenge we’re taking on.
作为有才干和进取心的个人，我们通常相信我们可以进入任何团队并发起我们认为必要的变革。实际上，绝大多数人从来没有去改变他们所加入的公司或团队。相反，它们会适应团队内部或特定文化的适应能力。3当被视为一种降低风险和生存本能时，这是可以理解的，没有人愿意成为董事会的钉子。即使我们接受总体文化倾向于支配和吸收个性这一事实，我们作为个人也可以成为文化内变化的推动者。我们只需要为正在面临的挑战做好充分的准备。
That challenge hinges on a particular psychological aspect of a dominant culture: does the culture create “groupthink” or “group mind”? Groupthink, a term created by social psychologist Irving Janis, takes place when a group’s desire to get along and conform overtakes their desire to consider dissenting opinions and alternative viewpoints.
这一挑战取决于主导文化的特定心理方面：该文化是否创造了“集体思维”或“集体思维”？Groupthink，由社会心理学家Irving Janis创建的术语，发生在一个团体的相处和顺从的欲望超过了他们对异议和另类观点的考虑的欲望时。
As a result debate and critical evaluations are suppressed and irrational decision making takes place.4 In groupthink individuals give up their own perspectives and accept the dictates of the group unquestioningly: “This is what the group wants and there’s nothing I can do about it, so I might as well just give up and go along with it.” Or, “I thought this is what everyone else in the group wanted, so I just said I want it too.” In a group mind setting, individuals retain their unique perspectives and use them for the betterment of the bigger picture. In fact each individual perspective is valued and celebrated; at the same time, the group never loses focus on what is most important: the process, the product, the group itself.
结果，辩论和批判性的评估受到压制，做出了不合理的决策。4在小组思考中，个人毫无疑问地放弃了自己的观点并接受了小组的指示：“这是小组想要的，对此我无能为力，所以我最好还是放弃并坚持下去。”或者，“我认为这是小组中其他所有人想要的，所以我只是说我也想要。”在集体思维的环境中，个人保留自己独特的观点，并将其用于改善全局。实际上，每个观点都受到重视和赞扬；同时，小组永远不会将注意力集中在最重要的方面：过程，产品，小组本身。
In either case there is pressure for individuals to conform to the existing culture. It is just a matter of being thoughtful and creating the culture to which you want others to conform. So, before attempting to change a culture, then, one needs to be very aware of how the existing culture functions and in what direction it should be nudged. Ideally all teams should get away from groupthink and facilitate group mind. We want to create a culture in which individual perspectives are maintained within a unified agenda. Further, we want a culture where for certain periods of time and in certain situations people are not afraid to take risks, not afraid to experiment, not afraid to dissent, and not afraid to fail.
在这两种情况下，个人都必须遵守现有文化。这只是考虑周到并创建您希望他人遵循的文化的问题。因此，在尝试改变一种文化之前，需要非常了解现有文化的运作方式以及应朝着哪个方向发展。理想情况下，所有团队都应该摆脱集体思维，促进集体思维。我们希望创建一种文化，在这种文化中，个人观点应保持在统一的议程内。此外，我们需要一种在某些时间段和某些情况下人们不害怕冒险，不害怕尝试，不害怕持异议和不害怕失败的文化。
If a fear of failure becomes deeply ingrained in a corporate culture, eventually the fear itself fades back to be replaced by something even worse: learned helplessness. When a workplace is permeated by learned helplessness, work is nothing but a grind. When a boss continually shoots down any and all ideas, that boss is training employees to accept that nothing will ever change whether their ideas are fantastic or terrible. After a while employees have no fear of coming up with a bad idea because they just stop coming up with ideas altogether. Whatever improvements or innovations might come from the employee talent pool are essentially buried in cement. Newer employees accept this as part of the culture and never consider going up against it.
如果对失败的恐惧在企业文化中根深蒂固，最终恐惧本身会逐渐消失，并由更糟的东西取代：学习到的无助。当工作场所充斥着习得性的无助时，工作无非是一种磨难。当老板不断否定任何主意时，这位老板正在培训员工，使他们接受，无论他们的想法是奇妙的还是可怕的，都不会改变。一段时间后，员工不再担心提出一个坏主意，因为他们只是完全停止提出主意。员工人才库可能带来的任何改进或创新基本上都被埋没了。新员工将其视为文化的一部分，从不考虑与文化背道而驰。
Learned helplessness was perhaps best illustrated by extensive laboratory research conducted by psychologist Martin Seligman. For our purposes let’s look at an example of a Seligman-like experiment on primates. Several monkeys are in a pen that features a flight of stairs,at the top of which is a bunch of bananas. Stepping on the steps at the top of the flight triggers a powerful jet of water, which strikes the monkey going for the bananas and knocks him back to the bottom of the steps. After several attempts to get the bananas, and several powerful blows of cold water, the monkeys all experience the hopelessness of ever attaining a banana snack and give up climbing the stairs. They learn not to try.
心理学家马丁·塞利格曼（Martin Seligman）进行的广泛实验室研究也许最好地说明了学习的无助感。出于我们的目的，让我们看一个类似Seligman的灵长类动物实验的例子。钢笔上有几只猴子，上面有阶梯状的楼梯，上面有一束香蕉。踩在飞行顶部的台阶上会触发一股强劲的水流，这会击中猴子去抢香蕉，并将其击退到台阶底部。经过几次尝试获得香蕉和几次强劲的冷水吹拂之后，猴子们都经历了获得香蕉点心并放弃爬楼梯的绝望。他们学会了不要尝试。
When new monkeys are introduced into the pen, they naturally want to go for the bananas. Now however, instead of being repelled by the jet stream, the new monkeys are aggressively held back by the other monkeys until they too give up trying. The new monkeys are trained by the original monkeys not to try. Finally, one by one the original monkeys are removed from the pen, and with each original monkey’s departure a new monkey is introduced. However, the behavior does not change: when each of the newest monkeys tries to head up the stairs, it is oppressively held back by the veterans; this holds even after “generations” of monkeys have been rotated in and out.The takeaway from this experiment: you end up with monkey after monkey who have no idea why they should not go up the steps. Most of them have never been hit by the water. They just know—they are taught—that they are not allowed to try.
当新的猴子被引入围栏时，他们自然希望去买香蕉。但是，现在，新的猴子不再被喷气流所击退，而是被其他猴子积极地阻止，直到它们也放弃尝试。新猴子受原始猴子训练，不要尝试。最后，从笔上逐个移走原始猴子，并在每只原始猴子离开后引入新的猴子。但是，这种行为并没有改变：当每只最新的猴子试图爬上楼梯时，它们都被退伍军人压制下来。即使在“几代”猴子旋转进出后，这种情况仍然成立。本实验的要点是：您最终遇到了一个又一个猴子，他们都不知道为什么不应该走上台阶。他们中的大多数从未被水击中。他们只是知道-他们被教导-他们不允许尝试。
Created as a model for environmental and circumstantial depression, Seligman’s research presents a cautionary tale in creating culture.You can create a culture in which it is not okay to try—to succeed, to take risks, to obtain whatever “bananas” your team might desire. You can teach people it is not okay to try. You can also create a culture in which, at least for specific periods, it is okay to try, to just simply try. It is up to us as leaders to understand that creating a culture is a choice,and once a culture is in place the individual group members will help uphold the laws of the land.
塞利格曼的研究被创建为环境和周围环境沮丧的典范，它提出了一个创造文化的警示故事。您可以创建一种文化，在这种文化中，尝试，成功，冒险，获取团队可能获得的“香蕉”是不可行的欲望。您可以教人们尝试尝试是不可行的。您还可以创建一种文化，至少在特定时期内可以尝试，只需尝试即可。作为领导者，我们有责任了解创建文化是一种选择，一旦文化到位，个人个人将有助于维护土地法律。
When the routines and attitudes of culture seem deeply ingrained,the challenge of changing a culture is greater. Yet change is possible. I can demonstrate how a bit of improvisational thinking might steer culture with an example drawn from my experiences working with some of the top business schools in the United States. At one in particular the faculty had a subsidized meal plan that gave them a great discount on a beautiful buffet laid out each day in the business school’s very comfortable executive education hotel on campus. The school then built a brand-new university center, a spectacular sun-filled space, a covered atrium with a great, welcoming, wide-open feel to it. The university’s intention was that this would be a great common place for students and professors to commingle—all the facilities were tailored with that as a goal.
当文化的惯例和态度根深蒂固时，改变文化的挑战就更大了。然而改变是可能的。我可以从我在美国一些顶级商学院工作的经验中得出的例子，来证明一点即兴的思维如何引导文化。该校特别制定了一项补贴餐计划，使他们在商学院校园内非常舒适的高级管理人员酒店每天布置的精美自助餐中享有很大的折扣。然后，学校建立了一个崭新的大学中心，一个壮观的充满阳光的空间，一个带顶棚的中庭，给人以极大，热情，开放的感觉。该大学的意图是，这将是学生和教授混合的绝佳场所-所有设施都是以此为目标而量身定制的。
As beautiful as the new place was, though, the professors wouldn’t eat there; they were still hidden away at the execed hotel enjoying the buffet. The university’s solution was to shift the subsidized faculty discount from the hotel to the atrium. No professor was going to be forced to eat with students if they really didn’t want to, but there was no longer a financial incentive to stay away from the students.
尽管和新地方一样美丽，但是教授们在那儿不会吃饭。他们仍然躲在高级旅馆享用自助餐。大学的解决方案是将补贴的教师折扣从酒店转移到中庭。没有一个教授真的不会被迫和学生一起吃饭，但是不再有经济上的诱因让他们远离学生。
The university wanted a particular change to take place in its culture and it created a framework in which that change could take place, which in turn influenced the behaviors (routines) of the professors. The university wanted interaction and it made a simple change that drove people to interact. I’m sure there was some pushback from the most ardent buffet-lovers, but from the university’s perspective the upside of greater student–faculty interaction outweighed the benefits of unlimited mac and cheese for a few of the hungrier profs.
大学希望文化发生特定的变化，并创建了一个可以进行这种变化的框架，进而影响了教授的行为（惯例）。该大学希望进行交互，并且做出了一个简单的改变，促使人们进行交互。我敢肯定，最热衷于自助餐的人会有所退缩，但是从大学的角度来看，学生与教职员工之间更好的互动交流对一些饥饿的教授而言，带来了无穷无尽的Mac和奶酪带来的好处。
Of course for most individuals in a workplace it’s not possible to initiate grand policy actions that will bring about the change you desire. Once you’re comfortable enough with “Yes, and” to begin to apply it in the workplace, it’s worth thinking about where and when its application could best benefit you and how to use it in a simple step-by-step action plan. Again, this is about “Yes, and-ing” yourself and framing your thought. Instead of focusing on elements of the workplace that are truly out of your control, tweak your thoughts to focus on the workplace changes that you can make. Remind yourself that you are not helpless. Change can be daunting, though, so if this elephant seems too big and it is difficult to take a bite, look at the distinction between the possible and the unchangeable in terms of “controllable pluses and minuses.”
当然，对于工作场所中的大多数人来说，不可能采取能带来您想要的改变的宏伟政策行动。一旦您对“是”感到足够自在，并开始在工作场所中使用它，就值得考虑在何时何地使用它最能使您受益，以及如何在简单的分步操作计划中使用它。再次，这是关于“是的，并且-使自己”和构想。与其将精力集中在真正无法控制的工作场所元素上，不如将注意力集中在可以进行的工作场所更改上。提醒自己，你并非无助。但是，变化可能令人生畏，因此，如果这头大象看起来太大而又难以咬一口，请从“可控的优势和劣势”的角度审视可能与不变之间的区别。
Need help? Try this exercise:Take a piece of paper and write down a list of things you don’t like about your workplace (diverge). On a second piece of paper make a list of all the things that you would want to be part of your dream workplace; think limitlessly as if the whole world is yours (diverge, again). Push yourself to think hard about the things you don’t like and do want in your environment. Once these lists are created, sort each one by the following categories:(1) what is 100 percent, completely out of my control; and (2)what I have at least some control over.
需要帮忙？试试这个练习：拿一张纸写下你不喜欢的事情清单（分歧）。在第二张纸上，列出您想成为理想工作场所的所有事物的清单；无限思考，仿佛整个世界都属于你（再次分开）。推动自己认真思考自己在环境中不喜欢和想要的事情。创建这些列表后，请按以下类别对每个列表进行排序：（1）100％是什么，完全超出了我的控制范围；（2）我至少有什么控制权。
Now look at the things you really could not do anything about compared to the things you could do something to change. Most will find that they actually have more control over more things than they initially give themselves credit for.
现在，将您真正无法做的事情与可以做出改变的事情进行比较。大多数人会发现，他们实际上对更多事情的控制权超过了他们最初给予自己的荣誉。
I’ve been having people put together these lists since 2001, and I have lost count of the number of times that something as simple as “chocolate” shows up on dream job lists. If you’re pining to make chocolate a part of your workday, could you have a bowl of your favorite candy on your desk—or at least have some tucked away in your desk drawer? Unless you work in a food allergist’s office, I can’t imagine any company enforcing a strict no-chocolate policy. So if the sight of M&Ms is going to brighten your day a little bit, make them a part of your day.
自2001年以来，我一直将人们放在这些名单上，而我忘记了像“巧克力”这样简单的事情出现在理想工作清单上的次数。如果您想在工作日中把巧克力作为工作的一部分，可以在桌上放一碗您最喜欢的糖果，或者至少可以将一些藏在办公桌的抽屉里吗？除非您在食物过敏专科办公室工作，否则我无法想象有一家公司会执行严格的无巧克力政策。因此，如果M＆M的目光将使您的一天变得更加美好，请使其成为您一天中的一部分。
The point is, we often have more control than we believe we do.Sure there will be things on each list that are not controllable, and if in examining each list you decide there are only 5 out of 15 things that you can affect even slightly, then you have just boosted your ability to influence the culture around you by 33 percent—not a bad return for less than 30 minutes of divergent and convergent thinking. And in deciding that something is truly out of your control, you can minimize the weight that element of the culture may have on you. You don’t have to waste time worrying about things you really can’t change. Focus on the things you can change even slightly .
关键是，我们通常比我们想象的拥有更多的控制权。确保每个列表上都有不可控制的事物，如果检查每个列表，您决定只有15个事物中有5个可以稍微影响一下，那么您刚刚将影响周围文化的能力提高了33％-在不到30分钟的分歧和趋同思想中，这是不小的回报。并且，在确定某件事确实无法控制时，您可以最大程度地减少文化因素对您的影响。您不必浪费时间担心真正无法更改的事情。专注于可以稍微改变的事情。
The point here is not just to get the AC turned down or to eat more Hershey’s Kisses. The point is to understand that a corporate culture is a dynamic force, always capable of change, and you have the ability to effect change yourself. When you focus on what you can control and you start to frame your interactions with your workplace culture in terms of “What can I do to make this a better place?” (or “What can I do to make myself better in this place?”), you are approaching the workplace with an active perspective rather than a helpless one.That’s another big bite of the elephant.
这里的意义不仅在于调低交流电或吃更多的好时之吻。关键是要了解，企业文化是一种动态的力量，总是有变化的能力，并且您有能力自我改变。当您专注于可以控制的事情时，您就开始用“如何使这个地方变得更好？”来构筑与工作场所文化的互动。（或“我该怎么做才能使自己在这个地方变得更好？”），您正在以一种积极的眼光而不是无助的眼光走近工作场所。这是大象的另一大口号。