Charles Leadbeater: The era of open innovation

譯者: CHUN-JU CHEN 審譯者: Jeannie Cheng

What I'm going to do, in the spirit of collaborative creativity,

我要做的呢，就是以集體創造力這個信念

is simply repeat many of the points

來簡單地重述一些

that the three people before me have already made,

前面三位講者已經提過的論點

but do them --

但是實踐它們

this is called "creative collaboration;"

這美其名是集體創造力

it's actually called "borrowing" --

但其實是借用他們的觀點

but do it through a particular perspective,

不過從比較特別的角度闡述

and that is to ask about the role of users and consumers

並瞭解使用者和消費者

in this emerging world of

在吉米和其他人所談及的

collaborative creativity

集體創造的世界裡

that Jimmy and others have talked about.

所扮演的角色

Let me just ask you, to start with,

首先我想問問各位

this simple question:

這個簡單的問題

who invented the mountain bike?

誰發明了登山腳踏車?

Because traditional economic theory would say,

因為傳統的經濟理論會說

well, the mountain bike was probably invented by some big bike corporation

應該是某個大型的自行車企業發明的

that had a big R&D lab

他們有大規模的研發實驗室

where they were thinking up new projects,

研發人員總是有新的創意

and it came out of there. It didn't come from there.

所以登山腳踏車是他們發明的。但事實並非如此

Another answer might be, well, it came from a sort of lone genius

另外一個答案可能是，某個孤單的天才發明的

working in his garage, who,

他在自己的車庫工作

working away on different kinds of bikes, comes up

不停地測試不同車種，最後

with a bike out of thin air.

有如天上掉下來的禮物，他發明了登山腳踏車

It didn't come from there. The mountain bike

但也不是這麼一回事。登山腳踏車

came from users, came from young users,

是使用者發明的，而且是年輕人

particularly a group in Northern California,

尤其是北加州一群自行車的愛好者

who were frustrated with traditional racing bikes,

他們對傳統的競速腳踏車非常的不滿意

which were those sort of bikes that Eddy Merckx rode,

就像艾迪墨克斯(自行車手)

or your big brother, and they're very glamorous.

或你哥會騎的那種，看起來很炫

But also frustrated with the bikes that your dad rode,

他們也對像是爸爸會騎的那種有大手把的腳踏車感到不滿意

which sort of had big handlebars like that, and they were too heavy.

因為手把太重了

So, they got the frames from these big bikes,

因此他們把那些大型腳踏車的骨架拆下

put them together with the gears from the racing bikes,

用競速腳踏車的齒輪重新組合

got the brakes from motorcycles,

裝上摩托車的煞車系統

and sort of mixed and matched various ingredients.

再混合組裝不同的零件

And for the first, I don't know, three to five years of their life,

一開始的三到五年

mountain bikes were known as "clunkers."

登山腳踏車被稱為「破鐵車」

And they were just made in a community of bikers,

而且主要是由

mainly in Northern California.

北加州的一群自行車愛好者所製造

And then one of these companies that was importing parts

後來其中一家替「破鐵車」進口零件的公司

for the clunkers decided to set up in business,

決定作這門生意

start selling them to other people,

開始銷售「破鐵車」

and gradually another company emerged out of that, Marin,

後來另外一家公司，Marin，也加入銷售行列

and it probably was, I don't know,

或許經過了，我不知道

10, maybe even 15, years,

10年，甚至15年之後

before the big bike companies

這些大型自行車企業

realized there was a market.

才了解登山腳踏車的市場商機無限

Thirty years later,

30年之後

mountain bike sales

登山腳踏車

and mountain bike equipment

和登山腳踏車配備的銷售額

account for 65 percent of bike sales in America.

佔了全美腳踏車銷售額的百分之65

That's 58 billion dollars.

總共是580億美元

This is a category entirely created by consumers

這塊市場完全是由消費者開拓出來的

that would not have been created by the mainstream bike market

而不是被主流的自行車市場所發掘

because they couldn't see the need,

因為他們看不到消費者的需求

the opportunity;

看不到商機

they didn't have the incentive to innovate.

也就沒有動力去創新

The one thing I think I disagree with

在約柴教授的演講中

about Yochai's presentation

有一件事我並不認同

is when he said the Internet causes

那就是，他說網際網路提供了分散性

this distributive capacity for innovation to come alive.

而這種分散性正是創新所需要的

It's when the Internet combines

只有當網路結合了

with these kinds of passionate pro-am consumers --

這些有熱情的專業餘消費者

who are knowledgeable; they've got the incentive to innovate;

他們有知識，有創新的動力

they've got the tools; they want to --

他們有辦法，他們有渴求

that you get this kind of explosion

在這種情況下

of creative collaboration.

你才會看到集體創造力所激起的火花

And out of that, you get the need for the kind of things

如此一來，你就能了解

that Jimmy was talking about, which is our new kinds of organization,

剛剛吉米所談到的事情有多重要，那就是新組織型態的出現

or a better way to put it:

或者這樣說比較清楚

how do we organize ourselves without organizations?

在沒有實際組織的情況下，我們要如何形成一個團體?

That's now possible; you don't need an organization to be organized,

現在這不成問題，你不需要一個組織而結集起來

to achieve large and complex tasks,

去達成龐大而複雜的任務

like innovating new software programs.

像是發明新的軟體

So this is a huge challenge

這是大大挑戰

to the way we think creativity comes about.

我們對於「創意來源」的既定印象

The traditional view, still enshrined

一直以來

in much of the way that we think about creativity

我們都認為有創意的人

-- in organizations, in government --

是一群非比尋常的人

is that creativity is about special people:

只出現在企業裡，或政府機構

wear baseball caps the wrong way round,

把棒球帽反戴

come to conferences like this, in special places,

參加像這樣的會議，或其他特別的場合

elite universities, R&D labs in the forests, water,

例如頂尖大學、建築在森林裡或水裡的研發實驗室

maybe special rooms in companies painted funny colors,

或者在公司裡那些漆滿怪異顏色的的特別房間

you know, bean bags, maybe the odd table-football table.

你知道的，有懶骨頭，或許還有古怪的桌上足球

Special people, special places, think up special ideas,

特別的人，在特別的地方，想出特別的點子

then you have a pipeline that takes the ideas

然後接上一條管子

down to the waiting consumers, who are passive.

把這些點子傳送給被動等待的消費者

They can say "yes" or "no" to the invention.

再由他們認可或否定這項發明

That's the idea of creativity.

這就是你所認為的創意

What's the policy recommendation out of that

如果你在政府機關工作或經營大公司

if you're in government, or you're running a large company?

你會怎麼建議政策方針?

More special people, more special places.

更多特別的人，更多特別的地方

Build creative clusters in cities;

在城市裡建設創意集群

create more R&D parks, so on and so forth.

建造更多研發園區...等等

Expand the pipeline down to the consumers.

擴大將創意傳播給消費者的管道

Well this view, I think, is increasingly wrong.

我覺得這樣的觀念錯得越來越離譜了

I think it's always been wrong,

而我認為這樣的觀念一直都是錯的

because I think always creativity has been highly collaborative,

因為我認為創意是高度共同合作的結果

and it's probably been largely interactive.

互動性可能是非常強的

But it's increasingly wrong, and one of the reasons it's wrong

但是大家對於創意的觀點越來越偏差，其中一個錯誤的理由就是

is that the ideas are flowing back up the pipeline.

其實這些點子是從管子的另外一端流回來的

The ideas are coming back from the consumers,

也就是消費者的那一端

and they're often ahead of the producers.

他們常常比製造商還要先發現商機

Why is that?

為什麼呢?

Well, one issue

其中一點

is that radical innovation,

是突破性創新

when you've got ideas that

具有高度的未知性

affect a large number of technologies or people,

尤其是當你的點子

have a great deal of uncertainty attached to them.

牽涉到很多技術，影響到很多人的時候

The payoffs to innovation are greatest

未知性最高的同時

where the uncertainty is highest.

創新所帶來的收益也最多

And when you get a radical innovation,

當你執行突破性創新時

it's often very uncertain how it can be applied.

常常無法確定要如何運用它

The whole history of telephony

例如整個電話史

is a story of dealing with that uncertainty.

就是一個關於未知性的故事

The very first landline telephones,

最早發明陸線電話的發明家

the inventors thought

他們想用這種電話

that they would be used for people to listen in

讓民眾可以聽到

to live performances

倫敦西區劇院的

from West End theaters.

現場表演

When the mobile telephone companies invented SMS,

當電信業者發明了SMS(簡訊服務)

they had no idea what it was for;

他們不知道可以拿來做什麼用

it was only when that technology got into the hands

直到這項科技到了

of teenage users

十幾歲的使用者手中

that they invented the use.

他們才發現用途

So the more radical the innovation,

所以，突破性越高的創新

the more the uncertainty,

未知性就越高

the more you need innovation in use

也更需要使用那個創新

to work out what a technology is for.

來找出新科技的用途

All of our patents, our entire approach

所有的專利權，我們對於

to patents and invention, is based on the idea

發明的構想和專利權的整個系統是建立在

that the inventor knows what the invention is for;

發明者知道為什麼要發明的前提之下

we can say what it's for.

或者說知道這個東西是做什麼用的

More and more, the inventors of things

越來越多的發明者

will not be able to say that in advance.

將無法事先預測發明物的用途

It will be worked out in use,

透過使用經驗

in collaboration with users.

以及使用者的通力合作才能找出答案

We like to think that invention is

我們喜歡把發明想成是

a sort of moment of creation:

一種創造的瞬間

there is a moment of birth when someone comes up with an idea.

某個人想到點子的那一刻發明物也同時產生

The truth is that most creativity

事實上，絕大多數的創意

is cumulative and collaborative;

是累積和共同合作的結果

like Wikipedia, it develops over a long period of time.

像是維基百科，就發展了很長一段時間

The second reason why users are more and more important

使用者越來越重要的理由之二

is that they are the source of big, disruptive innovations.

是因為他們是劃時代創新的來源

If you want to find the big new ideas,

如果你想要找到絕妙的新點子

it's often difficult to find them in mainstream markets,

通常很難在主流市場

in big organizations.

或大型組織裡找到

And just look inside large organizations

只要看看大型組織的內部

and you'll see why that is so.

你就知道為什麼了

So, you're in a big corporation.

如果你在一間大公司

You're obviously keen to go up the corporate ladder.

你一定會積極地往公司的高階層爬

Do you go into your board and say,

你會這樣對你的董事會說嗎?

"Look, I've got a fantastic idea

嘿，我想到一個超棒的點子

for an embryonic product

有個草創期的產品

in a marginal market,

沒什麼市場

with consumers we've never dealt with before,

消費者類型是我們從沒面對過的

and I'm not sure it's going to have a big payoff, but it could be really, really big in the future?"

雖然我不敢保證投資報酬率會很高，但我相信它一定是未來的趨勢

No, what you do, is you go in and you say,

不，你會做的，是對他們說

"I've got a fantastic idea for an incremental innovation

我有個超棒的漸進式創新的點子

to an existing product we sell through existing channels

透過現有的管道銷售現有的產品

to existing users, and I can guarantee

給現有的使用者，而且我可以保證

you get this much return out of it over the next three years."

在未來三年之內你可以回收多少的利潤

Big corporations have an in-built tendency

大型企業天生就易於

to reinforce past success.

鞏固過去的成就

They've got so much sunk in it

他們太沉迷於此

that it's very difficult for them to spot

以致於他們很難發現

emerging new markets. Emerging new markets, then,

新興市場。然而新興市場

are the breeding grounds for passionate users.

培育了許多富有熱忱的使用者

Best example:

舉個最好的例子

who in the music industry,

在音樂產業裡

30 years ago, would have said,

誰會在30年前就說

"Yes, let's invent a musical form

好，讓我們來創造一種音樂類型

which is all about dispossessed black men

內容是關於流離失所的黑人

in ghettos expressing their frustration

在貧民窟裡用音樂

with the world through a form of music

表達他們對世界的失望

that many people find initially quite difficult to listen to.

而這種音樂許多人一開始很難聽得下去

That sounds like a winner; we'll go with it."

聽起來似乎會大賣，我們就這麼做吧

(Laughter).

(笑聲)

So what happens? Rap music is created by the users.

所以到底是怎麼樣呢?黑人創造了饒舌音樂

They do it on their own tapes, with their own recording equipment;

他們用自己的錄音設備錄製音樂

they distribute it themselves.

自己銷售這些音樂

30 years later,

30年後

rap music is the dominant musical form of popular culture --

饒舌音樂是流行文化主要的音樂類型

would never have come from the big companies.

而這絕對不會來自於大公司

Had to start -- this is the third point --

接著我要講的第三點

with these pro-ams.

跟專業餘者有關

This is the phrase that I've used in

我與倫敦Demos智庫

some stuff which I've done

一起共事時

with a think tank in London called Demos,

曾經用過這個詞

where we've been looking at these people who are amateurs --

在Demos智庫，我們一直在關注業餘者

i.e., they do it for the love of it --

也就是那些作自己有興趣的事

but they want to do it to very high standards.

卻用高標準來要求自己的人

And across a whole range of fields --

而且這些人來自各行各業

from software, astronomy,

上至軟體，天文

natural sciences,

自然科學

vast areas of leisure and culture

下至範圍廣大的休閒、文化

like kite-surfing, so on and so forth --

像是風箏衝浪，諸如此類

you find people who want to do things because they love it,

你會發現這些人是為了自己的興趣而做事

but they want to do these things to very high standards.

而且是用高標準在做事

They work at their leisure, if you like.

你也可以說他們為自己的興趣努力付出

They take their leisure very seriously:

而且一點也不馬虎

they acquire skills; they invest time;

他們習得技能，投注時間

they use technology that's getting cheaper -- it's not just the Internet:

不只是網路而已，他們也使用越來越便宜的科技產品

cameras, design technology,

像是相機，設計科技

leisure technology, surfboards, so on and so forth.

休閒科技，衝浪板...等等

Largely through globalization,

透過全球化

a lot of this equipment has got a lot cheaper.

許多像這樣的設備已經變得便宜許多

More knowledgeable consumers, more educated,

更多有智識的消費者，教育程度更好

more able to connect with one another,

與人接觸的機會變多

more able to do things together.

也更能一起共事

Consumption, in that sense, is an expression

在這種情況下，消費一詞

of their productive potential.

意味著他們的生產潛力

Why, we found, people were interested in this,

為什麼呢?我們發現這些人之所以致力於自己的興趣

is that at work they don't feel very expressed.

是因為他們在工作上無法一展長才

They don't feel as if they're doing something that really matters to them,

他們覺得自己好像在做些不重要的事

so they pick up these kinds of activities.

所以他們選擇在閒暇之餘做自己有興趣的事

This has huge organizational implications

這對各行各業來說

for very large areas of life.

都隱含著可以形成組織的可能性

Take astronomy as an example,

舉個剛剛約柴教授提到的

which Yochai has already mentioned.

天文學的例子

Twenty years ago, 30 years ago,

20, 30年以前

only big professional astronomers

只有專業級的天文學家

with very big telescopes could see far into space.

有大型望遠鏡能觀測遙遠的星空

And there's a big telescope in Northern England called Jodrell Bank,

英格蘭北邊的喬德雷爾•班克天文台有個大型望遠鏡

and when I was a kid, it was amazing,

我小的時候覺得那個望遠鏡真是太了不起了

because the moon shots would take off, and this thing would move on rails.

人類可以登入月球，而這個望遠鏡會繞著軌道轉

而且它很巨大，令人嘆為觀止

Now, six

現在，六個

amateur astronomers, working with the Internet,

業餘天文學家，用網路

with Dobsonian digital telescopes --

用數位的杜普森望遠鏡(Dobsonian telescope)

which are pretty much open source --

這基本上是開放軟件

with some light sensors

還有一些光感測器

developed over the last 10 years, the Internet --

經過過去十年的發展，在網路上

they can do what Jodrell Bank could only do 30 years ago.

他們可以做到三十年前只有喬德雷爾˙班克天文台作得到的事

So here in astronomy, you have this vast explosion

所以在天文上，新的生產性資源

of new productive resources.

有了爆炸性的進展

The users can be producers.

使用者也可以成為生產者

What does this mean, then, for our

那麼這對我們的企業遠景

organizational landscape?

有什麼意義呢?

Well, just imagine a world,

想像一下，在這一刻

for the moment, divided into two camps.

世界被分為兩個群體

Over here, you've got the old, traditional corporate model:

其中一邊是老舊傳統的企業型態

special people, special places;

特別的人，特別的地方

patent it, push it down the pipeline

取得專利，塞給在管子另一端

to largely waiting, passive consumers.

眾多被動等待的消費者

Over here, let's imagine we've got

另外一邊呢，想像一下我們有

Wikipedia, Linux, and beyond -- open source.

維基百科、Linux作業系統，以及其他開放性資源

This is open; this is closed.

一邊是開放的，一邊是封閉的

This is new; this is traditional.

一邊是新的，一邊是傳統的

Well, the first thing you can say, I think with certainty,

你想說的第一件事，我很肯定

is what Yochai has said already --

就跟約柴教授之前說的一樣

is there is a great big struggle

在新舊組織型態中找到平衡

between those two organizational forms.

是一件極為困難的事情

These people over there will do everything they can

傳統這一邊的人，會無所不用其極

to stop these kinds of organizations succeeding,

來阻撓新的組織模式

because they're threatened by them.

因為新的模式威脅到他們

And so the debates about

也因此有了關於

copyright, digital rights, so on and so forth --

著作權，數位版權...等的爭議

these are all about trying to stifle, in my view,

在我看來，這些都是他們扼殺

these kinds of organizations.

新組織模式的手段

What we're seeing is a complete corruption

我們現在所看到的

of the idea of patents and copyright.

是專利和著作權觀念的崩解

Meant to be a way to incentivize invention,

這個變化本來可以刺激創新

meant to be a way to orchestrate the dissemination of knowledge,

本來可以整合知識的傳播方式

they are increasingly being used by large companies

卻漸漸被大型公司利用來

to create thickets of patents

建立自己的專利叢林(防止專利被入侵的保護政策)

to prevent innovation taking place.

以防止創新的發生

Let me just give you two examples.

舉兩個例子

The first is: imagine yourself going to a venture capitalist

第一，想像你來到一個風險資本家的面前

and saying, "I've got a fantastic idea.

對他說，我有個超棒的點子

I've invented this brilliant new program

我發明了一個超棒的程式

that is much, much better than Microsoft Outlook."

比微軟的Outlook還要好上幾百倍

Which venture capitalist in their right mind is going to give you any money to set up a venture

哪個正常的風險資本家會考慮給你錢讓你去成立一家公司

competing with Microsoft, with Microsoft Outlook? No one.

跟微軟的Outlook競爭?沒有

That is why the competition with Microsoft is bound to come --

這就是為什麼要跟微軟競爭就要用

will only come --

也只能用

from an open-source kind of project.

開放資源的方式

So, there is a huge competitive argument

所以，要如何維持

about sustaining the capacity

開放性資源以及消費者導向創新的產能

for open-source and consumer-driven innovation,

是在與主流市場競爭時非常重要的議題

because it's one of the greatest

因為這是能和壟斷企業抗衡的

competitive levers against monopoly.

競爭手段之一

There'll be huge professional arguments as well.

同樣地也會有來自專家的爭論

Because the professionals, over here

因為那些來自

in these closed organizations --

封閉組織的專家

they might be academics; they might be programmers;

可能是學者、可能是程式設計師

they might be doctors; they might be journalists --

可能是醫生、可能是新聞業者

my former profession --

也就是我之前的工作

say, "No, no -- you can't trust these people over here."

他們會說不行不行，不可以相信另一邊的人

When I started in journalism --

20年前當我在金融時報

Financial Times, 20 years ago --

從事新聞業時

it was very, very exciting

看到有人在讀金融時報

to see someone reading the newspaper.

我就會非常非常興奮

And you'd kind of look over their shoulder on the Tube

在搭地鐵的時候，你會想要從他肩膀後瞄過去

to see if they were reading your article.

看他是否在讀你的文章

Usually they were reading the share prices,

但通常他們在看的是股價

and the bit of the paper with your article on

而刊有你文章的報紙

was on the floor, or something like that,

則掉在地上，或者其他類似的狀況

and you know, "For heaven's sake, what are they doing!

你的反應會是，天啊!他們在幹嘛!

They're not reading my brilliant article!"

他們沒有在讀我的大作

And we allowed users, readers,

我們讓使用者和讀者

two places where they could contribute to the paper:

能在兩個版面投稿

the letters page, where they could write a letter in,

一個是讀者來信版，讀者可以寫信過來

and we would condescend to them, cut it in half,

我們會放下身段，把它裁成兩半

and print it three days later.

三天之後印出來

Or the op-ed page, where if they knew the editor --

另一個是讀者投書版

had been to school with him, slept with his wife --

如果編輯曾經跟他一起上學，跟他老婆亂搞

they could write an article for the op-ed page.

讀者可以寫篇文章到讀者投書版

Those were the two places.

這就是我說的那兩個版面

Shock, horror: now, the readers want to be writers and publishers.

現在令人驚恐的是，這些讀者想成為作家和出版商

That's not their role; they're supposed to read what we write.

那不是他們所該扮演的角色，他們應該讀我們寫的東西才對啊

But they don't want to be journalists. The journalists think

但是他們並不想當記者，那些記者覺得

that the bloggers want to be journalists;

部落客想搶他們的飯碗

they don't want to be journalists; they just want to have a voice.

但是這些部落客並不想當記者，他們只想要有個發聲的管道

They want to, as Jimmy said, they want to have a dialogue, a conversation.

就像吉米說的一樣，他們要的是對話溝通

They want to be part of that flow of information.

他們想成為資訊流的一部份

What's happening there is that the whole domain

現在，創意的整個範疇

of creativity is expanding.

還在持續擴大中

So, there's going to be a tremendous struggle.

所以未來還有更大的挑戰

But, also, there's going to be tremendous movement

但同時，不管是開放性組織還是封閉性組織

from the open to the closed.

都將面臨劇烈的變遷

What you'll see, I think, is two things that are critical,

我想，你會看到的是兩件非常重要的事

and these, I think, are two challenges

而這兩件事，我覺得是

for the open movement.

邁向開放的兩個挑戰

The first is:

第一

can we really survive on volunteers?

我們真的可以仰賴義工嗎?

If this is so critical,

如果開放性資源真的這麼重要

do we not need it funded, organized, supported

我們難道不需要用更有架構的方式

in much more structured ways?

去投注資金並且加以組織嗎?

I think the idea of creating the Red Cross

我認為創立資訊和知識的紅十字會

for information and knowledge is a fantastic idea,

是個非常棒的主意

but can we really organize that, just on volunteers?

但是我們真的可以靠義工就達到目的嗎?

What kind of changes do we need in public policy

在公共政策和資金提供方面

and funding to make that possible?

需要做哪些改變呢?

What's the role of the BBC,

例如英國廣播公司BBC

for instance, in that world?

應該在哪裡扮演什麼角色呢?

What should be the role of public policy?

而公共政策又應該扮演什麼角色

And finally, what I think you will see

最後，你將會看到

is the intelligent, closed organizations

那些明智、封閉的企業

moving increasingly in the open direction.

會一步步走向開放

So it's not going to be a contest between two camps,

所以這並不是兩個陣營的競賽

but, in between them, you'll find all sorts of interesting places

相反地，你會發現有些人

that people will occupy.

佔據兩個陣營中間的灰色地帶

New organizational models coming about,

新的組織模式將會出現

mixing closed and open in tricky ways.

並巧妙地融合封閉和開放的優點

It won't be so clear-cut; it won't be Microsoft versus Linux --

界線將不再分明，競爭不會只存在於微軟與Linux之間

there'll be all sorts of things in between.

而是在兩者的中間地帶

And those organizational models, it turns out,

而這些新的組織模式

are incredibly powerful,

將會變得極為強大

and the people who can understand them

能夠看出箇中玄機的人

will be very, very successful.

將來就能出人頭地

Let me just give you one final example

我舉最後一個例子

of what that means.

說明我剛剛的論點

I was in Shanghai,

我之前在上海的時候

in an office block

有去一棟辦公大樓，而那塊辦公大樓的用地

built on what was a rice paddy five years ago --

在五年前還是一片稻田

one of the 2,500 skyscrapers

那棟辦公大樓，是上海在過去十年內

they've built in Shanghai in the last 10 years.

所建的2500棟摩天大樓之一

And I was having dinner with this guy called Timothy Chan.

當時我和一位叫做陳天橋的先生共進晚餐

Timothy Chan set up an Internet business

陳天橋在2000年的時候

in 2000.

創立了網路公司

Didn't go into the Internet, kept his money,

但他並未就此投身網路業，他把錢留著

decided to go into computer games.

決定往電腦遊戲業發展

He runs a company called Shanda,

他經營一家叫做盛大網路(Shanda)的公司

which is the largest computer games company in China.

是中國最大的電腦遊戲公司

Nine thousand servers all over China,

在全中國有9000個伺服器

has 250 million subscribers.

兩億五千萬個玩家

At any one time, there are four million people playing one of his games.

不管在任何時候，平均都有四百萬人玩這家公司的遊戲

How many people does he employ

他雇用了多少人

to service that population?

來服務這些玩家?

500 people.

五百個

Well, how can he service

用五百人來服務兩億五千人

250 million people from 500 employees?

他怎麼做到的?

Because basically, he doesn't service them.

因為基本上，他根本不用服務玩家

He gives them a platform;

而是給玩家一個平台

he gives them some rules; he gives them the tools

制訂一些規則，給他們一些工具

and then he kind of orchestrates the conversation;

並且從中扮演

he orchestrates the action.

和玩家溝通協調的角色

But actually, a lot of the content

但是事實上，有許多遊戲內容

is created by the users themselves.

是玩家自己創造的

And it creates a kind of stickiness

這種作法讓玩家對

between the community and the company

遊戲社群和盛大網路產生黏性

which is really, really powerful.

而這種黏性是非常非常強而有力的

The best measure of that: so you go into one of his games,

證明這點的最好辦法就是去玩他某一款遊戲

you create a character

在遊戲過程中

that you develop in the course of the game.

創造一個角色

If, for some reason, your credit card bounces,

如果因為某些原因，你的信用卡被拒絕使用

or there's some other problem,

或其他問題

you lose your character.

失去了遊戲角色

You've got two options.

你有兩個選擇

One option: you can create a new character,

一，創造一個新的角色

right from scratch, but with none of the history of your player.

從頭開始玩，但是之前的遊戲記錄都會消失

That costs about 100 dollars.

這大概要花100元美金

Or you can get on a plane, fly to Shanghai,

或者你可以搭飛機搭到上海

queue up outside Shanda's offices --

到盛大網路的辦公室外排隊

cost probably 600, 700 dollars --

大約要花600或700元美金

and reclaim your character, get your history back.

要回你的遊戲角色和遊戲記錄

Every morning, there are 600 people queuing

每天早上，有600人

outside their offices

在辦公室外面排隊

to reclaim these characters. (Laughter)

等著拿回他們的遊戲角色

So this is about companies built on communities,

這是一個以社群為基石的公司實例

that provide communities with tools,

提供社群工具

resources, platforms in which they can share.

資源，還有可以讓玩家彼此分享的平台

He's not open source,

盛大網路並不是開放性資源

but it's very, very powerful.

但卻非常具有影響力

So here is one of the challenges, I think,

我想，對於像我一樣

for people like me, who

與政府合作多項工作的人來說

do a lot of work with government.

這是其中一個挑戰

If you're a games company,

如果你經營遊戲公司

and you've got a million players in your game,

擁有一百萬個玩家

you only need one percent of them

你只需要其中百分之一的人

to be co-developers, contributing ideas,

當你的共同開發者，貢獻想法

and you've got a development workforce

那你就有一萬個

of 10,000 people.

開發人員

Imagine you could take all the children

想像所有在英國受教育的兒童

in education in Britain, and one percent of them

其中百分之一的人口

were co-developers of education.

是教育界的共同開發者

What would that do to the resources available

對於教育系統可利用的資源

to the education system?

會有什麼影響

Or if you got one percent of the patients in the NHS

或者從英國國家醫療保健服務(NHS)找來其中百分之一的病人

to, in some sense, be co-producers of health.

成為醫療保健的共同生產者

The reason why --

即使想盡辦法阻止

despite all the efforts to cut it down,

開放模式產生

to constrain it, to hold it back --

開放模式還是會挾著巨大的影響力

why these open models will still start emerging

而展露頭角

with tremendous force,

原因在於

is that they multiply our productive resources.

這種模式讓生產性資源變得多樣化

And one of the reasons they do that

其中一個原因

is that they turn users into producers,

就是它把使用者變成生產者

consumers into designers.

把消費者變成設計者

Thank you very much.

謝謝各位