"黑即是白"新潮流,"似是而非"管理學新論

There is a brand new fashion in management circles. It doesn't yet have a name so I'm calling it “White is the new black”, because it involves taking something we all think is bad and telling us that it's good (or vice versa).

在管理圈裏，目前涌現出一股嶄新的潮流。這股潮流還沒有一個名稱，所以，我打算稱其爲“黑即是白”潮流，因爲它的特點是，把大家都認爲不好的東西說成是好的（或反過來）。

Everyone loves this latest fashion. It's refreshing. It's counter-intuitive. It's liberating. And it's so cool. On LinkedIn and the Harvard Business Review website, readers can't get their fingers on the “like” button fast enough.

每個人都喜歡這股最新的潮流。它讓人耳目一新，出乎意料，解放了思路。並且它很酷。在LinkedIn和《哈佛商業評論》(Harvard Business Review)網站上，讀者們迫不及待地對這股潮流點“贊”。

In the past week alone I've come across four examples of it. The first and most popular case of white-is-the-new-black says that failure is not bad: it is good. Pushers of this theory, who first appeared a few years ago, have consistently said that mistakes are vital because you learn from them. This is fair enough. What isn't fair enough is to say that since it's hard to succeed without failing first, you must therefore aim to fail.

僅上週一週，我就遇到了四個體現這股潮流的例子。第一個、同時也最受大家歡迎的“黑即是白”的例子是，認爲失敗不是壞事，而是好事。這個理論首次出現於幾年前，鼓吹它的人一直堅稱，犯錯非常重要，因爲可以讓人學到東西。這倒不無道理。這個理論接着說，因爲不經歷失敗很難成功，所以我們必須致力於讓自己失敗——這就有些令人匪夷所思了。

A recent Harvard Business Review blog argues that failure is so fantastic that organisations ought to hold a regular “fail-fest” at which employees wear a pink feather boa and celebrate their cock-ups. This is not only silly and patronising, it is dangerous. It is true that a fear of failure can be paralysing, but in my experience it can also be galvanising. I'm currently working on a radio series and the dreadful and very real prospect of screwing it up is focusing my mind no end. If I thought the BBC would organise a party for me and give me a pink feather boa if I messed up, I would barely be moved to try at all.

《哈佛商業評論》博客上最近的一篇文章建議，因爲失敗是如此美妙的一件事情，各類組織都應定期舉行“失敗歡慶會”，讓員工戴上粉色羽毛圍巾，慶祝過去的種種失敗。這個建議不僅愚蠢、傲慢，還非常危險。誠然，對失敗的恐懼可能讓人畏手畏腳，但從我自身的經驗來看，這種恐懼也可能促人奮起。我最近在準備一個系列廣播節目，搞砸的可能性真實存在，令我十分擔心，反而讓我全神貫注。如果我這樣想：反正如果我搞砸，英國廣播公司(BBC)會爲我舉辦慶祝活動，給我戴上粉色羽毛圍巾，那麼我可能根本提不起努力的勁頭。

Failure is a bad thing and should not be celebrated. It shouldn't be punished either, unless it is caused by laziness and sloppiness. In that case I can think of a better use of the pink boas – force offending employees to eat them.

失敗是壞事，不值得慶祝。失敗也不應受到懲罰，除非是懶惰和馬虎引起的。如果員工因爲懶惰和馬虎導致失敗，那麼我認爲，可以用粉色羽毛圍巾做一件更有用的事情：讓這些懶惰鬼或馬虎鬼吃掉它。

This leads naturally to the second white-is-the-new-black theory, which says laziness can be a good thing in a boss. This idea is peddled in Richard Koch's latest book, The 80/20 Manager, published last week. In it he writes: “Lazy managers achieve exceptional results. Only by being economical with your energy and attention can you make it count when it matters.” He goes on to say that sloth is such a gift that those managers not fortunate enough to have been born with it must work to acquire it.

由此自然引出了第二個“黑即是白”理論。這個理論宣稱，老闆的懶惰可能是件好事。理查德??科克(Richard Koch)在他上週出版的新書《80/20經理人》(The 80/20 Manager)中就宣揚了這個理論。他在書中寫道：“懶惰的經理人能夠實現卓越的業績。只有節約精力和注意力，才能把好鋼用在刀刃上。”他接着寫道，懶惰是一種如此難得的天賦，那些不幸生而沒有這項天賦的經理人，必須努力去獲得它。

Mr Koch is right to point out that most of our work is wasted effort; but the trouble is that we have to crunch through the wasted bits in order to get to the worthwhile ones. In real life there are few lazy bosses, since if you are an idle slug you tend not to get promoted. The few that I have met were incompetent, much disliked and generally sacked before long.

科克說，我們的工作大多是無用功，這話沒錯。但問題在於，沒有這些點滴的“無用功”，就沒有後面的“有用功”。在實際生活中，很少有懶惰的老闆，因爲懶蟲往往無法獲得晉升。我認識的爲數不多的懶蟲老闆，都是不稱職和討人嫌的，通常過不了多久就會被炒。

The third idea is another new trend being pushed in an article by consultant Jordan Cohen on the HBR website. He argues that telling workers what to do – another essential principle underpinning organisational life – is a bad idea and we shouldn't do it. He proceeds to “prove” this with a cute anecdote and then with neuroscience: when people are told what to do, he says, “the brain's emotional response center can actually cause a decrease in cognitive functioning”.

第三個“黑即是白”觀點，見於諮詢顧問喬丹??科恩(Jordan Cohen)在《哈佛商業評論》網站上發表的一篇文章。該文章鼓吹的是另一股新潮流。科恩認爲，給員工下指令（支撐組織運作的另一個重要原則）是不好的，我們不應該這樣做。接着，他先用一則有趣的軼事來“證明”這一點，然後又搬出了神經科學。他說，當人們遵循指令行事的時候，“大腦情緒反射中樞事實上會促使人的認知機能下降”。

I'm always suspicious of non-neuroscientist writers who use the science as a way of bullying me into submission. All they are saying is: here is something I don't understand and neither do you, but I'm ordering you to accept it because a neuroscientist told me.

我對非神經科學家使用神經科學爲論據始終表示懷疑，在我看來，這不過是一種虛張聲勢。他們其實只不過是在說：這裏有一個我不懂、你也不懂的理論，但我命令你接受這個理論，因爲有一位神經科學家是這樣告訴我的。

Thanks, but I'd rather stick with what I have observed to be the case after decades of paying attention: that most employees need instruction, although what they don't need is micromanaging. I also can't help thinking that if Mr Cohen found himself in hospital having an operation on one of the “response centers” in his brain, he might not like it if the hospital staff were told: cut into this man's brain in whatever way feels right for you.

多謝了，但我還是寧願堅守我經過多年觀察得出的結論：大多數員工需要指令，不過他們確實不需要事無鉅細的指導。我還忍不住設想，假如科恩發現自己躺在醫院裏，他大腦的某個“反射中樞”正在接受手術，而醫院員工已得到指示，自己覺得怎麼合適就怎麼切開他的大腦，那麼，科恩大概不會樂意。

The final example is described in an article being plugged on LinkedIn, called: “How to Retain Talent? Teach Them to Leave, Says KBS+.” It tells how KBS+, a New York advertising agency, is teaching staff how to start their own businesses and – guess what? – some are taking the opportunity and quitting to do just that. But never mind: KBS+ insists this is a great way of keeping staff motivated. It sounds a pretty far-fetched way of keeping people to me. Making their jobs more interesting and saying the odd “thank you” might be a better – and cheaper – way of doing it.

最後一個例子是LinkedIn上瘋傳的一篇文章。這篇文章名爲：“KBS+說：留住人才的方法就是教他們自立門戶”。這篇文章講述紐約廣告代理公司KBS+如何教員工創業。猜猜怎麼着？有些員工利用這個機會真的辭職創業去了。但沒關係：KBS+堅持認爲，這是保持員工積極性的絕佳辦法。在我看來，這種留住員工的方法實在莫名其妙。讓員工的工作變得更有趣，和小小的一句“多謝”，可能是留住員工更好、也更便宜的方法。

So white isn't the new black, after all. Black is black, white is white, and any company that has a mathematical symbol as part of its name is sending a clear sign to the world that it dispensed with logic a long time ago.

所以，說到底，黑仍然沒有變成白。黑就是黑，白就是白，而任何在名稱中加入數學符號的企業，都在向世人發出一個明確的信號：自己早已摒棄了邏輯。