How to build a business that lasts 100 years | Martin Reeves

譯者: 易帆 余 審譯者: Conway Ye

Imagine that you are a product designer.

想像一下，你現在是一位產品設計師。

And you've designed a product,

你已經設計好一個產品，

一種新產品，

a new type of product, called the human immune system.

叫做人類免疫系統。

You're pitching this product

你正在投售簡報你的這項產品，

to a skeptical, strictly no-nonsense manager.

對向是一個多疑、 嚴格、少廢話的經理。

Let's call him Bob.

我們就叫他「包柏」吧。

I think we all know at least one Bob, right?

各位都認識至少一位 這樣的「包柏」，對吧？

How would that go?

會如何進行呢？

Bob, I've got this incredible idea

包柏，我有一個很棒的想法，

for a completely new type of personal health product.

一個全新型態的個人健康產品。

It's called the human immune system.

它叫做人類免疫系統。

I can see from your face that you're having some problems with this.

我看到你臉上對這項產品 充滿了狐疑。

Don't worry. I know it's very complicated.

但別擔心，我知道這產品很複雜。

I don't want to take you through the gory details,

我不會贅述那些無聊的細節，

I just want to tell you about some of the amazing features of this product.

我只會告訴你一些 這項產品的主要特色。

First of all, it cleverly uses redundancy

首先，這項產品很聰明地 運用了冗餘設計，

by having millions of copies of each component --

它擁有上百萬的備用組織──

leukocytes, white blood cells --

白血球，白血球細胞──

before they're actually needed,

在還用不著之前，就大量製造出來，

to create a massive buffer against the unexpected.

以對抗意外的發生。

And it cleverly leverages diversity

而且它還有「多樣性」的特徵，

by having not just leukocytes but B cells, T cells,

不僅有白血球，還有 B 細胞、Ｔ細胞、

natural killer cells, antibodies.

自然殺手細胞、抗體。

The components don't really matter.

成分並不是那麼重要，

The point is that together,

重點是，全部加在一起，

this diversity of different approaches can cope with more or less anything

這種多樣性的方式，

幾乎可以解決演化中 出現的所有問題。

that evolution has been able to throw up.

And the design is completely modular.

而且，它的設計十分「模組化」，

You have the surface barrier of the human skin,

你有人類皮膚表面的 天然屏障功效、

you have the very rapidly reacting innate immune system

還有反應非常快的 內部免疫系統，

and then you have the highly targeted adaptive immune system.

還有針對病因適應力極強的 高效免疫系統，

The point is, that if one system fails, another can take over,

重點是，即使一種機制失效， 另一種也能及時補上

creating a virtually foolproof system.

創造出十分安全的系統。

I can see I'm losing you, Bob, but stay with me,

我知道你開始聽不懂了， 但包柏請聽我說完，

because here is the really killer feature.

因為我接下來 要介紹一個超殺的特色。

The product is completely adaptive.

這個產品有超強的適應力，

It's able to actually develop targeted antibodies

它可以針對從未見過的病原

to threats that it's never even met before.

製造出相應的抗體，

It actually also does this with incredible prudence,

它還可以十分精準地

detecting and reacting to every tiny threat,

發現並對各種 微不足道的危機做出反應，

and furthermore, remembering every previous threat,

除此之外，它還有記憶 每一個危機的功能，

in case they are ever encountered again.

萬一發生之前同樣的威脅時， 它可以立刻抵抗。

What I'm pitching you today is actually not a stand-alone product.

我今天向你投售報告的， 其實不是一種獨立運作的產品。

The product is embedded in the larger system of the human body,

這個產品與整個人體相結合，

and it works in complete harmony with that system,

完全與人體系統相容，

to create this unprecedented level of biological protection.

創造出了前所未有的生物保護水準。

So Bob, just tell me honestly, what do you think of my product?

所以包柏，老實說， 你覺得我的產品如何？

And Bob may say something like,

然後，包柏可能會這樣說，

I sincerely appreciate the effort and passion

我真摯地讚賞你在展示中

that have gone into your presentation,

所表現出的努力和熱情。

blah blah blah --

還有......（開始廢話）

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

But honestly, it's total nonsense.

但說實在的，好像沒什麼道理。

You seem to be saying that the key selling points of your product

你好像在說明，產品的主要賣點

are that it is inefficient and complex.

是沒什麼效率且複雜的。

Didn't they teach you 80-20?

他們沒有教你 80/20 法則嗎？

And furthermore, you're saying that this product is siloed.

此外，你還提到，這個產品很封閉，

It overreacts,

它反應過於激烈，

makes things up as it goes along

製造出很多無效的東西，

and is actually designed for somebody else's benefit.

它的效益明顯不高。

I'm sorry to break it to you, but I don't think this one is a winner.

很抱歉，要讓你失望了， 但我不認為你的產品可以勝出。

If we went with Bob's philosophy,

如果我們同意包柏的觀點，

I think we'd actually end up with a more efficient immune system.

我們實際上最終會生產出 更高效的免疫系統。

And efficiency is always important in the short term.

而且效率在短期來說往往十分重要。

Less complex, more efficient, more bang for the buck.

少些複雜、多些效率、便宜又大碗，

Who could say no to that?

誰會想拒絕？

Unfortunately, there's one very tiny problem,

很不幸的，還有一個很小的問題，

and that is that the user of this product, you or I,

就是這個產品的使用者，你或我，

would probably die within one week of the next winter,

在下一個冬季，

當我們遇上一個新型的流感病毒時， 可能在一個星期內就會死亡。

when we encountered a new strain of the influenza virus.

I first became interested in biology and business,

我第一次對生物學、事業、

and longevity and resilience,

以及持久性和抗壓性 變得這麼有興趣，

when I was asked a very unusual question

是被一個全球科技公司的執行長

by the CEO of a global tech company.

問了一個問題的時後。

And the question was:

那個問題是這樣：

What do we have to do to make sure that our company lasts 100 years?

我們要如何確保公司 持續運作超過 100 年？

A seemingly innocent question,

看上去是一個單純的問題，

but actually, it's a little trickier than you might think,

卻比你想像中的還要複雜，

considering that the average US public company now

因為目前美國上市公司的 預期平均壽命只有 30 年。

can expect a life span of only 30 years.

That is less than half of the life span

這不到它的員工可享壽命的一半。

that its employees can expect to enjoy.

Now, if you were the CEO of such a company,

現在，如果你就是 這麼一家公司的執行長，

badgered by investors and buffeted by change,

被投資人煩的要死， 又要忙於應付市場的變化，

we might forgive you for not even worrying too much

我們也許還能體諒你

about what happens 30 years out.

沒時間思考公司 未來 30 年的方向。

But here's something that should keep you awake at night:

但有件事應該會讓你晚上睡不著覺：

the probability that your company will not be around in five year's time,

你的公司在 5 年後倒閉的可能性，

on average, is now a staggering 32 percent.

平均在 32% 上下浮動，

That's a one in three chance that your company will be taken over

也就是有將近三分之一的機率，

你的公司會在 5 年後 被轉手或是倒閉。

or will fail within just five years.

Let's come back to our tech CEO's question.

讓我們回到科技總裁的問題。

Where better to turn for advice than nature,

哪裡有向比大自然 學習更好的方法呢？

that's been in the business of life and death

大自然已經在生死輪回的遊戲中

for longer than any company?

比任何公司存活得還要久。

As a lapsed biologist,

身為一位外行的生物學家，

I decided to immediately call a real biologist,

我決定馬上去請教 真正內行的生物學家，

my friend Simon Levin,

我的朋友賽門萊文，

Professor of Biology and Mathematics at Princeton University.

普林斯頓大學的生物數學教授。

Together, we looked at a variety of biological systems,

我們共同研究了許多生態系統，

ranging from natural tropical rainforests

範圍從天然熱帶雨林

through to managed forests and fisheries.

到人造森林和漁業。

And we asked ourselves the question:

我們問自己一個問題：

What makes these systems resilient and enduring?

是什麼使這些系統 具有抗壓能力和持續性？

And what we found was that the same six principles

我們發現恰恰是支撐人體 免疫系統的六條規律，

that we saw underpinning the miracle of the human immune system

actually cropped up again and again,

從冗餘設計到鑲嵌性， 一次又一次的出現。

from redundancy through to embeddedness.

In fact, we saw these principles not only in biologically enduring systems,

實際上，我們發現到，這些準則 不僅出現在生物永續系統中，

we also found them being very characteristic

它們在壽命長久的社會系統中

of long-lived social systems,

也表現得十分突出，

like the Roman Empire and the Catholic Church,

例如羅馬帝國及天主教，

believe it or not.

信不信由你。

We also went on to look at business,

我們還深入研究企業，

and found that these very same properties also characterized businesses

也發現它們在堅韌且長久的企業中

that were resilient and long-lived,

也表現的非常明顯。

and we noted their absence from ones which were short-lived.

我們也注意到，

沒有這些東西的企業也比較短命。

Let's first take a look at what happens when the corporate immune system

我們先來看看，

當企業的免疫機制失效時會發生什麼。

collapses.

This beautiful building is part of the Shitennoji Temple Complex

這一棟漂亮的建築物

是日本大阪天王寺院的其中一部分。

in Osaka, Japan.

In fact, it's one of the oldest temples in Japan.

實際上，它是日本最古老的寺廟。

It was built by a Korean artisan,

由一位韓國工匠所建築的，

because at the time, Japan was not yet building temples.

因為當時，日本尚未開始蓋寺廟。

And this Korean artisan went on to found a temple-building company.

這位韓國工匠前往日本 設立了寺廟建築公司。

Amazingly, his company, Kongō Gumi,

令人驚訝的是， 他的公司株式會社金剛組，

was still around 1,428 years later.

1428 年後，依然存在。

In fact, it became the oldest continuously operating company

實際上，它是世界上

持續經營最久的老公司。

in the world.

So how is Kongō Gumi doing today?

那金剛組目前的公司狀況如何呢？

Not too well, I'm afraid.

恐怕不太好。

It borrowed very heavily

它在日本泡沫經濟時， 貸款了很多錢投資在房地產上。

during the bubble period of the Japanese economy,

to invest in real estate.

And when the bubble burst, it couldn't refinance its loans.

就在泡沫破滅後， 公司已經無法再融資，

The company failed,

所以公司倒了，

and it was taken over by a major construction company.

最後被一家主流建築公司接手管理。

Tragically, after 40 generations of very careful stewardship

可悲的是，經過了金剛家族

by the Kongō family,

40 世代的努力經營，

Kongō Gumi succumbed to a spectacular lapse

這家公司最後還是臣服於沒有採取

in the ability to apply a principle of prudence.

精準化經營而宣告停止營業。

Speaking of company failures:

談到公司倒閉：

we're all familiar with the failure of Kodak,

大家對柯達應該都耳熟能詳，

the company that declared bankruptcy

這家公司在

in January 2012.

2012 年一月宣布破產。

Much more interesting, however, is the question:

然而，還有一個更有趣的問題：

Why did Fujifilm --

為什麼富士軟片──

same product, same pressures from digital technology, same time --

同樣的產品、數位科技的壓力、 同一時期──

why was Fujifilm able to survive and flourish?

為什麼富士軟片得以 生存下來並發光發熱？

Fujifilm used its capabilities in chemistry, material science and optics

因為富士軟片懂得把它的 化工能力、材料科學及光學技術

to diversify into a number of areas,

運用在不同領域，

ranging from cosmetics to pharmaceuticals,

從化妝品、藥品、

to medical systems to biomaterials.

醫療系統到生物材料。

Some of these diversification attempts failed.

有些多樣性的嘗試失敗了。

But in aggregate,

但總體而言，

it was able to adapt its portfolio sufficiently

它還是能採取有效的資產配置，

to survive and flourish.

來維持企業的生存與發展。

As the CEO, Mr. Komori, put it,

就像其總裁古森重隆先生說的，

the strategy succeeded because it had "more pockets and drawers"

他們策略成功的原因是

比對手有更多的「口袋跟抽屜。」

than the rivals.

He meant, of course,

當然，他的意思是，

that they were able to create more options than the rivals.

他們比對手有更多的選擇空間。

Fujifilm survived because it applied the principles of prudence,

富士軟片能生存的原因是， 它採用了精準、

diversity

多樣化、

and adaptation.

適應能力的準則。

A catastrophic factory fire, like the one we see here,

一場災難性的工廠大火， 如我們現在所看到的，

completely wiped out, in one evening,

就在一個晚上完全燒毀，

the only plant which supplied Toyota with valves for car-braking systems.

這是唯一一家提供 豐田汽車煞車系統閥門的工廠。

The ultimate test of resilience.

這是一場對抗壓能力的終極考驗。

Car production ground to a screeching halt.

汽車產線完全被迫中止。

How was it, then, that Toyota was able to recover car production?

但豐田汽車花了 多久的時間回復產能？

Can you imagine how long it took?

你們可以想像花了多久時間嗎？

Just five days.

僅五天。

From having no braking valves to complete recovery in five days.

從沒有剎車閥門到產能完全恢復 只花了五天的時間。

How was this possible?

這怎麼辦到的？

Toyota managed its network of suppliers in such a collaborative manner

豐田快速整合了它的供應商網路，

以同舟共濟的態度，與供應商一起

that it could work very quickly and smoothly with suppliers

快速流暢地重新規劃生產，

to repurpose production,

fill the missing braking valve capacity

填補掉煞車閥門被迫停產的漏洞，

and have car production come online again.

讓汽車的生產再度上線。

Toyota applied the principles of modularity of its supply network,

豐田汽車採用了 「供給網絡模組化」原理、

embeddedness in an integrated system

相互結合系統中的「鑲嵌」原理，

and the functional redundancy to be able to repurpose, smoothly,

以及有效的冗餘設計 來達到順利重整現有產能的目標。

existing capacity.

Now fortunately, few companies succumb to catastrophic fires.

很幸運的，如今僅有少數公司 無法度過火災的難關。

But we do read in the newspaper every day about companies

但每天新聞還是看到不少公司

succumbing to the disruption of technology.

因顛覆性科技的破壞而瓦解。

How is it, then, that the consumer optics giant Essilor

然而消費性光學巨人「依視路公司」，

is able to avoid technology disruption, and even profit from it?

是如何避掉顛覆性科技的破壞 甚至還能獲利呢？

And yes, technology disruption is not only a big deal

沒錯，顛覆性科技

不僅僅在軟體產業和 電子產業上意義重大。

in software and electronics.

Essilor carefully scans the competitive environment

依視路仔細地在競爭環境中

審視潛在的顛覆性科技，

for potentially disruptive technologies.

It acquires those technologies very early,

並在這些技術變貴 或被競爭對手掌握之前，

before they've become expensive or competitors have mobilized around them,

盡快地取得它們，

and it then develops those technologies itself,

之後再發展該項技術，

even at the risk of failure

即使有失敗的風險

or the risk of self-disruption.

或是研究中斷的風險。

Essilor stays ahead of its game,

依視路過去四十年來 一直是同業中的佼佼者，

and has delivered spectacular performance

for over 40 years,

by using the principles of prudence and adaptation.

因為運用了精明和適應力準則 所以業績表現一直都不錯。

OK, if these principles are so powerful, you might be thinking,

好，如果這些準則這麼有效， 你可能會問，

why are they not commonplace in business?

為什麼它們在企業裡 並不是那麼地常見？

Why do we not use these words every day?

為什麼我們不每天使用這些準則？

Well, change has to first start in the mind.

沒錯，改變需要從你的頭腦開始。

If we think back to our pitch to Bob,

如果我們回想一下 對包柏做的投售報告，

in order to apply the principles

為了運用支撐人體免疫機制的

that underpin the miracle of the human immune system,

幾條法則，

we first need to think differently

我們首先需要換個角度思考

about business.

企業的經營。

Now typically, when we think about business,

基本上，當我們談論到企業經營，

we use what I call "mechanical thinking."

我們都常會陷入一種我稱之為 「機械式思考」的迷思。

We set goals,

我們設定目標後，

we analyze problems,

會分析問題，

we construct and we adhere to plans,

擬定計畫並緊盯著計畫，

and more than anything else,

最重要的是

we stress efficiency and short-term performance.

我們著重在效率和短期表現。

Now, don't get me wrong --

千萬別誤會──

this is a splendidly practical and effective way

這是一個相當實用而且有效的方法，

of addressing relatively simple challenges

可以在相對穩定的環境中， 解決相對簡單的挑戰。

in relatively stable environments.

It's the way that Bob -- and probably many of us, myself included --

這是包柏，及包括我在內的許多人，

process most business problems we're faced with every day.

處理我們每天面臨的大多數 商業問題的辦法。

In fact, it was a pretty good mental model for business --

實際上，這曾是一個很好的 商業思考模式，

overall --

總的來說，

until about the mid-1980s,

這個模式直到 1980 年代 中期還都很好用，

when the conjunction of globalization

然後全球化的世代來臨，

and a revolution in technology and telecommunications

革命性科技與遠端通訊

made business far more dynamic and unpredictable.

造成企業的經營變化越來越快， 越來越不可預測。

But what about those more dynamic and unpredictable situations

當我們現在面臨更具變化和 不可預測性的情況時，

that we now increasingly face?

該怎麼應對呢？

I think in addition to the mechanical thinking,

我認為除了機械式思考外，

we now need to master the art of biological thinking,

現在我們得掌握生物思考的藝術，

as embodied by our six principles.

就像我們的六條準則所傳達的一樣。

In other words, we need to think more modestly and subtly

換句話說，我們需要更 審慎、敏感地思考，

about when and how

我們要何時、如何

we can shape, rather than control,

行塑這些不可測且複雜的情況， 而不是控制它。

unpredictable and complex situations.

It's a little like the difference between throwing a ball

這有點像扔一顆球

and releasing a bird.

和放飛一隻鳥的區別，

The ball would head in a straight line,

球會直線往前飛行，

probably towards the intended target,

還可能擊中你想打到的目標，

and the bird certainly would not.

但鳥顯然不能。

So what do you think?

所以，你們怎麼想呢？

Sounds a little impractical, a little theoretical, perhaps?

是不是聽起來有點不實際， 又有點純理論化了，是嗎？

Not at all.

一點也不。

Every small entrepreneurial company

每一個小型創業公司的想法與行動，

naturally thinks and acts biologically.

天生就會有生物性的特質。

Why?

為什麼？

Because it lacks the resources to shape its environment

因為它們缺少 塑造周圍環境條件的資源。

through brute force.

It lacks the scale to buffer change,

它沒有足夠可以迎接改變的規模，

and it's constantly thinking about the tough odds

且不斷地在思考

如何讓初創公司度過 這些艱困、零散的挑戰。

for a start-up to survive.

Now, the irony is, of course,

現在，諷刺的是，當然

that every large company started off as a small, entrepreneurial company.

每一個大型公司都是由 小型企業開始。

But along the way somewhere,

但是在發展的某一階段

many have lost this ability to think and act biologically.

許多公司丟失了生物化思考 和行動的能力。

They need to rejuvenate their ability to think biologically

他們需要重拾生物化思考的能力，

in order to survive and thrive in today's environment.

以便在今日的環境中生存並繁榮。

So let's not just think about short-term performance.

讓我們不要再只考慮短期表現吧！

Every company I know spends plenty of time

我所知道的每一個公司 都花大量的時間

thinking about the central question of strategy:

思考他們的戰略核心：

How good is our competitive game?

我們的競爭力還有多少榮景？

In addition, let's also consider

除此之外，為什麼不考慮

the second, more biological and equally important question:

第二個、更為生物化 而且同等重要的問題：

How long will that game last?

這場遊戲還能持續多久？

Thank you very much.

謝謝！

(Applause)

（掌聲）