Why Play Is Essential for Business | Martin Reeves | TED

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Helen Chang

Have you ever trodden on a Lego brick in your bare feet?

你有沒有赤腳踩到樂高積木的經驗？

You’re tiptoeing through your lounge late at night,

深夜時，你躡手躡腳走過你的客廳，

and suddenly that stabbing pain,

突然，一陣刺痛，

the expletives

加上咒罵聲，以及必問的問題：

and the inevitable question:

“Why do we have so much of this stuff all over the place?”

「為什麼我們家到處都是這東西？」

Well, that’s really quite simple.

嗯，答案很簡單。

Your kids love playing with it,

你的孩子喜歡玩樂高，

so you buy more.

你就越買越多。

And a confession --

我得承認——我很愛 看我的孩子玩樂高。

I love to watch my kids play with Lego.

Especially good is when I see them inventing their own rules

特別喜歡看到他們發明自己的規則

and their own worlds.

和自己的世界。

So here are my daughters,

這些是我的女兒，上週六拍的，

last Saturday,

making something out of different kits

她們在自己組東西，

運用到不同組的玩具、繩子、木頭、

and pieces of string

and pieces of wood and dolls and other objects.

娃娃，及其他物品。

我問她們：「這是什麼？」

And I asked them, “What is it?”

And they said to me, “Dad, of course it’s a princess flying on a dragon

她們告訴我：「爸， 這還用說？就是公主

騎著飛龍去紐約拜訪農場的動物。」

to visit farm animals in New York.”

Of course, what else could it be?

當然啦，不然還會是什麼？

Kids at play inspire me.

玩樂的孩子能鼓舞我。

They’re not afraid to ask, “What if”

他們不怕問

「如果這樣呢」及「為什麼不」。

and “Why not?”

But what kids implicitly know that adults tend to forget

孩子本身都知道一件事， 但成人通常已經忘了：

is that play isn’t just about fun.

那就是，玩樂的重點不僅是趣味。

Now, as a biologist, I know that play is spontaneous and pleasurable --

身為生物學家，

我知道玩樂是自發性的 且會讓人愉快——

as you can see by the smiles in this photograph --

從這張照片中的笑容 就可以看得出來——

but also, it accelerates and derisks learning.

但，此外，玩樂也會 加速學習並降低相關風險。

It helps kids to try out new behaviors,

玩樂能協助孩子去嘗試新行為，

to refine those behaviors

琢磨那些行為，

並去想像現在不是什麼、

and to imagine what is not

but what could be or what will be.

但有可能是什麼，或將來會是什麼。

As a business strategist dealing with adults,

我是經營策略家， 服務對象是成人，

I still recommend play.

而我仍然建議玩樂。

In fact, play in business is not just possible,

事實上，在企業中， 玩樂不僅是可能的，

I’d argue that it’s essential

我還主張，它是必要的，

and even urgent.

甚至是急需的。

And here’s why.

原因如下。

Competitive advantage fades away faster than any time in recent memory.

和近期的其他時間點相比，

現在的競爭優勢消退速度更快了。

In the 1980s,

在 1980 年代，

if you had a performance edge over your competitors,

如果你比你的競爭對手 更有績效優勢，

you could reasonably expect to continue being a leader for around 10 years,

合理的預期是：你可以在龍頭寶座上

平均再坐十年左右。

on average.

But now the half-life of that advantage has shrunk to just one year.

但現在，那種優勢的半衰期

已經縮短為僅僅一年。

That means that short-lived success is actually still very common,

那就表示，短期的成功 仍然非常常見。

but sustained success becomes very hard

但持久的成功就變得非常困難，

and very rare.

非常稀有。

That means that, actually, reimagination is the new execution.

那就表示，「重新思考」 就是新的執行力。

In order to stay on top,

如果想要留在頂峰，

or even just to tread water and stay still,

或甚至只是停滯在原地，

you need to constantly reimagine your business.

你都需要經常重新思考你的企業。

But that’s not so simple

但如果你已經有了很成功的 商業模式，就沒有那麼簡單。

if you already have a highly successful business model.

We become prisoners of the mental models that underpin our past success.

促成過往成功的心智模型

反而會將我們困住。

In fact, I found in dealing with businesses

事實上，我在協助企業的 過程中發現，

that you can’t really stretch your strategy

你得先能延伸你的想法， 才有可能延伸你的策略。

unless you stretch your mind.

Now play is of course a great way of stretching your mind.

當然，若要延伸想法， 玩樂就是一種好方法。

Now --

那——

I mean, there’d be no mistake,

別弄錯我的意思，我的 建議並不是字面上的意思，

I’m not suggesting literally

that executives huddle around a conference table

不是要主管圍在會議桌旁邊，

with a big pile of Lego bricks --

面前有一大堆樂高積木——

不過我也試過這一招，且也有用。

although I’ve done that, and that works too.

But instead, I’ve created a series of imagination games

不過，換個方式，

我創造了一系列的想像遊戲，

to help executives to stretch their thinking.

來協助主管延伸他們的思考。

Would you like to play with me?

各位想跟我玩一下嗎？

(Audience nods)

（觀眾點頭） 很好，很高興你們這樣說。

Good, I'm glad you said that.

OK, so let’s supposing that you’re stuck in the rut

好，

咱們假設你被困在常規裡面，

of seeing the world through the lens of your past and current success.

你都是用過去和當前的成功 當作透鏡，來看這個世界。

I would recommend the “Anti-Company Game,”

我會推薦「反公司遊戲」， 它的玩法如下：

and here’s how it works.

You get a piece of paper,

拿一張紙，在紙上列出

you create a list of everything which is essential to your strategy --

所有對你的策略而言 很重要的事項——

everything which underpinned your past success,

讓你在過去能夠成功的所有事項，

everything which is core and sacred --

核心的、非常重要的所有事項——

and then you flip it.

接著，把紙翻過來。

You create the exact mirror-image list of assumptions,

在背面列出所有相對的鏡像假設，

and then you make the best business case for this antiself.

接著，提出好的商業理由 來支持這個相反的狀況。

You’ll be surprised at the ideas that it triggers.

這麼做能夠觸發的想法， 會讓你感到很驚訝。

Supposing, for example, that you’re the CEO of a hotel chain

舉例來說，你是連鎖飯店的執行長，

and playing the game and flipping the assumptions.

你在玩這個遊戲，把假設都反過來。

Let’s assume that, inconveniently,

咱們假設，很不巧，

you don’t actually own any hotels

你實際上完全沒有擁有任何飯店，

or any rooms

或任何房間，

or even operate any hotels or any rooms anywhere.

你甚至沒有實際上在任何地方 營運任何飯店或房間。

Ridiculous --

很荒謬——

quite possibly --

相當可能——

but actually, how would you know the difference between ridiculous

但，實際上，你又怎麼 知道到底是荒謬還是

and the merely unfamiliar, untried and uncomfortable?

僅僅是不熟悉、沒試過、不自在？

And who’s to say

誰又能斷言看似不切實際的事物

that something that seems impractical can’t actually become and evolve

不會真的變成、演進成 更強大的點子？

into a more powerful idea?

Actually, had the executives of hotels played the “Anti-Company Game”

事實上，如果飯店的經理

曾在 2007 年之前 玩過「反公司遊戲」，

before 2007,

they might have been able to foresee the appearance of Airbnb,

他們可能可以預見 將來會出現 Airbnb，

the hotel-less hospitality company,

非飯店式旅宿公司，

and they might have been able to stave off disruption

那麼他們就有可能避免受到衝擊，

by preemptively disrupting themselves.

因為他們能搶先自己先衝擊自己。

Let’s play another game:

咱們再來玩另一個遊戲：

“The Maverick Game.”

「特立獨行遊戲」。

On the edge of your industries --

在你的產業的邊緣—— 在每個產業的邊緣——

on the edge of every industry --

are a population of maverick companies

都有一些特立獨行的公司，

that are taking a bet against the incumbents’ business model

把賭注押在不跟進產業中 老牌公司採用的商業模式

and their view of the future.

以及其對未來的觀點。

Actually, they have no choice

事實上，它們別無選擇， 因為它們也不可能成為

because to be a miniature version of the incumbent would not be viable.

老牌公司的縮小版。

Now, it’s easy not to notice them --

很容易不去注意它們—— 它們多半是小公司。

many of them are small companies.

It's easy to deliberately overlook them with some justification.

很容易找個正當理由 來刻意忽略它們。

Many startups disappear fairly quickly after being founded.

許多新創公司在成立之後 沒多久就消失了。

And it’s very, very tempting,

且當你在業界有豐富的 經驗時，會非常非常想要

given all of your experience in the business,

去評斷它們。

to judge them.

Do they know what they’re doing?

它們知道自己在做什麼嗎？

Does their business model make sense?

它們的商業模式合理嗎？ 它們會賺錢嗎？

Will they ever make any money?

But instead of judging them from the comfort

但，別用你這個位置的舒適 和自信來評斷它們，

and the confidence of your position,

try assuming that it’s they that have the right bet on the future.

試著假設，它們對於未來 所押的賭注才是正確的。

Think about the consequences of that for your business model.

想想看，這對你的商業模式 會造成什麼後果？

Try making the best case for their idea.

試著找理由說明 它們的想法才是最好的。

Supposing, for example,

比如，假設

that you are the CEO of a company

你是公司的執行長，

that makes equipment that makes semiconductors.

公司生產的是製造半導體用的設備。

Naturally, you’d probably spend most of your time and attention

很自然的，你可能會把 大部分的時間和注意力

on your main customer industry,

放在你的主要銷售對象產業，

the electronics industry.

電子業。

And if it so happened,

如果說剛好

that a couple of maverick bioscience companies

有幾間特立獨行的生物科學公司

were tinkering with your patents and your technologies,

在稍稍修改你的專利和你的技術，

you might overlook that as a distraction,

你可能會忽視這件事， 只覺得那是讓人分心的小事。

an irrelevance.

But actually, Brooks Automation,

但，事實上，這個領域的 領導者「布魯克斯自動化」，

a leader in the field,

decided to take a close-up look at such a group of mavericks

決定要更仔細來研究 這些特立獨行的公司，

to see whether it could learn anything.

看看能不能向它們學到什麼。

And what it realized

而布魯克斯透過 這些特立獨行公司的眼睛

by looking at the world through the eyes of these mavericks

去看世界之後發現

was that, actually, the same techniques

事實上，這些技術和科技

and technologies which can be used to handle delicate semiconductors

除了可以用來處理 精緻的半導體之外，

can also be applied to other fragile and easily contaminated materials,

也可以應用到其他脆弱

且容易被汙染的材料上，

like biological samples.

如生物樣本。

And puzzling on the significance of this,

在苦思這個發現的重要性時，

they reimagined how to handle and store and transport

他們重新思考了要如何處理、

儲存、運送、

and label and identify biological samples.

標示，以及辨識生物樣本。

In fact, they became a successful pioneer

事實上，他們在 自動化人體生物資料庫

in the new industry of automated biobanking.

這個新產業中成了成功的先鋒。

So successful, in fact, that just a couple of days ago,

事實上，他們太成功了， 因此就在幾天前他們宣佈

they announced that this was now their core business moving forwards.

這項業務將成為他們 未來發展的核心業務。

It’s only by focusing on these anomalous mavericks

是因為把焦點放在這些 特立獨行的反常公司上，

that they could see their own path to renewed success and growth.

他們才有辦法看清他們自己 該如何再次成功及成長。

Now, not everything in business goes according to plan.

企業裡的事情不會 通通都照計畫發展。

In fact, sometimes the plans go horribly awry.

事實上，有時，計畫還會出大差錯。

But you know what?

但，你知道嗎？那也有 可能成為靈感來源。

That can be a source of inspiration, too.

To find out how,

想知道怎麼有可能，

let’s play the “Pre-Mortem Game.”

咱們來玩玩「事前驗屍遊戲」。

So your role in this game is to write ...

在這個遊戲中，你的角色是要……

the obituary for your company,

幫你的公司寫訃聞，

which is going to fail with 100 percent certainty

百分之百

可以肯定，你的公司 會在五年之內倒閉。

in five years’ time.

What is the cause of death?

死因是什麼？

What will have been the point of failure?

故障點在哪裡？

Why will it have failed?

它為什麼會倒閉？

How will it have failed?

它會怎麼倒閉？

The challenge here is that it’s easy to be seduced into the baseline fallacy.

這裡的挑戰在於，很容易 就會落入基線謬誤的陷阱。

The baseline fallacy is the idea

基線謬誤就是認為 把賭注押在目前的商業模式

that it’s the current business model which is the low-risk bet.

才是最低風險的選擇。

And of course that tends to be true

當然，通常的狀況也是如此，

until it isn’t true,

直到狀況變成不是如此，

at which point it’s probably too late to do anything about it.

那時，可能再採取行動也太遲了。

Now, your employees are an early-warning indicator.

你的員工就是預警指標。

They will have intuitions if the model begins to slip,

如果商業模式開始出問題， 他們會察覺到，

but it’s very hard for them to speak up.

但他們很難大聲說出來。

And it’s even taboo for them to speak up

甚至，當商業模式承受壓力時，

when the business model is under pressure.

大聲說出來根本是禁忌。

But when executives create playgrounds --

但，當經理創造出遊樂場——

spaces for the safe exploration of alternatives

讓大家能安全地探討替代方案 以及其他可能情境的空間——

and alternative scenarios --

then you get to tap into your employees’ considerable experience

接著，你就能透過你旗下 員工的大量經驗來了解

about the vulnerabilities

你的公司

and the weak spots

有什麼弱點、缺點，和盲點。

and the blind spots of your company.

Does anyone remember visiting recently one of these gorgeous marble palaces?

有沒有人近期才造訪過 這類華麗的大理石宮殿？

No?

沒有，我們可能都有一陣子 沒去我們當地的銀行分行了。

It’s probably been a while since we visited the local banking branch.

Had bricks-and-mortar banks played the “Pre-Mortem Game,”

如果實體銀行當初 有玩過「事前驗屍遊戲」，

perhaps they would have heard their employees expressing some concerns

也許它們就會聽到它們的員工

表示很擔心流向各地分行的

about the gradually dwindling flow of customers to local branches.

客戶漸漸變少了。

And perhaps they would have been slightly less taken by surprise

也許，它們就比較不至於完全沒料到

when companies like NewBank,

像 NewBank 這樣的公司，

a digital native,

一間本土數位公司，

seized, very rapidly indeed, on that opportunity

會非常快速地抓住那個機會，

to convince, to date, more than 40 million Latin Americans

至今已說服了超過 四千萬名拉丁裔美國人，

that in-person transactions in real buildings

親自到實體大樓中去進行交易

were a quaint but obsolete relic of the past.

是很古雅但已經淘汰的過去遺俗。

It’s only when you bring your vulnerabilities into full view

唯有用這種方式 完整地檢視你的弱點，

in this way

that you may be motivated to reimagine your business

你才有可能有動機想要 去重新思考你的事業，

and to do so in a robust manner.

且是用穩健的方式去重新思考。

It’s why the Roman Catholic Church invented the role,

這就是為什麼十六世紀時

the position of the Devil’s advocate in the 16th century

羅馬天主教教堂會發明 列聖審查官這個職務，

to test the future consequences of its decisions to appoint new saints.

在教堂決定授命新聖者時，他們 負責分析會造成什麼未來後果。

They did that by imagining

他們的做法就是去設想

what would Satan say

撒旦會說什麼，

or propose

或提出什麼支持或反對意見，

or counterpropose,

in addition to the normal procedure of thinking about the big man upstairs.

而不只是依循正常的程序， 完全只想著上帝。

Now, any human being, any employee, any team

任何人、任何員工、

任何團隊都能運用人的想像力， 因此，任何公司也都能。

and therefore any company can harness human imagination.

It’s a defining trait of our species.

這是定義人類這個物種的特徵之一。

Failures to imagine in business are really failures of leadership.

在企業中沒有做好想像， 其實就是沒有做好領導。

Business is a serious matter, but it should not exclude play.

經營企業是嚴肅的事， 但它不應該排除玩樂。

When leaders embrace play and imagination games,

當領導人能夠擁抱 玩樂和想像遊戲時，

they can unlock the imagination of their employees,

他們就能解放旗下員工的想像力，

uncover disruptive new strategies

發現顛覆性的新策略，

and renew their lease on the future.

讓未來能再延續。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）