things don't go as we assume?

當事情不如我們所想的一般時？

Or better, how do you explain

或者更好的是，你如何解釋

when others are able to achieve things

當其他人能夠完成似乎

that seem to defy all of the assumptions?

違反所有假設的事時？

For example:

比如：

Why is Apple so innovative?

為什麼蘋果電腦這麼地有創意？

Year after year, after year, after year,

年復年

they're more innovative than all their competition.

他們比其他的競爭對手都要有創意

And yet, they're just a computer company.

然而，他們只是一個電腦公司

They're just like everyone else.

就像其他電腦公司一樣

They have the same access to the same talent,

他們對有同樣才華的人有相同的管道接觸

the same agencies, the same consultants, the same media.

同樣的廣告商、同樣的顧問、同樣的媒體

Then why is it that they

那麼為什麼他們

seem to have something different?

似乎有點與眾不同？

Why is it that Martin Luther King

為什麼是馬汀路德金恩

led the Civil Rights Movement?

領導黑人民權運動？

He wasn't the only man

他不是唯一一個

who suffered in a pre-civil rights America,

在美國受到平等公民權不公平待遇的人

and he certainly wasn't the only great orator of the day.

而且他絕不是當時最偉大的演說家

Why him?

為什麼是他？

And why is it that the Wright brothers

而為什麼是華特兄弟

were able to figure out controlled, powered man flight

能夠想到控制力量，操控飛機

when there were certainly other teams who were

當正有其他團隊

better qualified, better funded ...

更有資格、更有資本

and they didn't achieve powered man flight,

然而他們並沒有完成飛機

and the Wright brothers beat them to it.

反而是華特兄弟打敗他們完成了這件事。

There's something else at play here.

這似乎有其他的因素在其中

About three and a half years ago

大約三年半前

I made a discovery.

我有一個發現

And this discovery profoundly changed

而這個發現深深地改變

my view on how I thought the world worked,

我對世界運作方式的看法

and it even profoundly changed the way in which

而它甚至深深改變

I operate in it.

我生活的方式

As it turns out, there's a pattern.

因為它變成—有個模式

As it turns out, all the great and inspiring leaders

而它引證了，所有偉大且具有啟發性的領袖

and organizations in the world --

以及世界上的機構

whether it's Apple or Martin Luther King or the Wright brothers --

不管是蘋果電腦，或馬汀路德金恩或華特兄弟

they all think, act and communicate

他們都以同樣的方式

the exact same way.

思考、行動與溝通

And it's the complete opposite

而這也完全與其他人

to everyone else.

相反

All I did was codify it,

我做的事就是解讀它

and it's probably the world's

而它或許是世界上

simplest idea.

最簡單的想法

I call it the golden circle.

我稱它做黃金圈

Why? How? What?

為什麼？怎麼做？做什麼？

This little idea explains

這個小小的想法解釋了

why some organizations and some leaders

為什麼有些機構和有些領袖

are able to inspire where others aren't.

能夠激勵群眾而別人做不到

Let me define the terms really quickly.

讓我很快地定義這些詞

Every single person, every single organization on the planet

在這個星球上的每個人，每個機構都

knows what they do,

知道他們在做什麼　－

100 percent.

百分之百肯定

Some know how they do it,

有些知道如何做事

whether you call it your differentiated value proposition

這裡可以叫做是你不同的價值主張

or your proprietary process or your USP.

或者你的屬性過程或你的USP (賣點)

But very, very few people or organizations

但很少很少人或機構

know why they do what they do.

知道為什麼做他們正在做的事

And by "why" I don't mean "to make a profit."

而〞為什麼〞不是指〞創造利潤“

That's a result. It's always a result.

那是結果。它永遠是結果。

By "why," I mean: What's your purpose?

〞為什麼〞指的是：你的目的是什麼？

What's your cause? What's your belief?

你的出發點是什麼？你的信念是什麼？

Why does your organization exist?

為什麼你的機構存在？

Why do you get out of bed in the morning?

為什麼你早上要起床？

And why should anyone care?

而且為什麼其他人要在乎？

Well, as a result, the way we think, the way we act,

好的，結果是我們所想、所為

the way we communicate is from the outside in.

以及我們所溝通的方式都是由外而內的

It's obvious. We go from the clearest thing to the fuzziest thing.

很明顯。我們從最清楚到最模糊不明

But the inspired leaders

但激勵人的領導者

and the inspired organizations --

以及激勵人們的機構

regardless of their size, regardless of their industry --

不管它們的規模，不管它們的產業

all think, act and communicate

都以由內而外的方式

from the inside out.

去思考、行動與溝通

Let me give you an example.

讓我給你們舉個例子

I use Apple because they're easy to understand and everybody gets it.

我使用蘋果電腦是因為它很容易明白，而所有人都明白它

If Apple were like everyone else,

如果蘋果電腦就像其他的電腦

a marketing message from them might sound like this:

給的行銷訊息很可能聽起來像

"We make great computers.

我們製造最棒的電腦

They're beautifully designed, simple to use

他們都有美好的設計、容易上手

and user friendly.

也迎合使用者的要求

Want to buy one?" "Meh."

想買一台嗎？...呃，不要。

And that's how most of us communicate.

這就是多數人溝通的方式

That's how most marketing is done, that's how most sales is done

這就是多數行銷的方式。 這是多數業務銷售的方式

and that's how most of us communicate interpersonally.

而這也是我們多數人與人相處時的溝通方式

We say what we do, we say how we're different or how we're better

我們說我們做了什麼，我們說我們如何不同或我們如何比較好

and we expect some sort of a behavior,

然後我們期待某種行為

a purchase, a vote, something like that.

可能是購買行為、投票行為或這類的事

Here's our new law firm:

這裡是我們新的法律公司

We have the best lawyers with the biggest clients,

我們有最好的律師和最大的客戶

we always perform for our clients who do business with us.

我們總是為和我們做生意的客戶著想

Here's our new car:

這是我們的新車

It gets great gas mileage, it has leather seats, buy our car.

它有很好的油耗表現。它有皮革製的座椅。買我們的車吧。

But it's uninspiring.

但這都不激勵人心

Here's how Apple actually communicates.

這裡有蘋果電腦實際上溝通的方式：

"Everything we do,

我們所做的每件事

we believe in challenging the status quo.

我們相信都在挑戰現狀

We believe in thinking differently.

我們相信用不同的角度思考

The way we challenge the status quo

我們挑戰現狀的方式

is by making our products beautifully designed,

是使我們的產品有美好的設計

simple to use and user friendly.

容易使用而且迎合使用者。

We just happen to make great computers.

我們只是恰巧做了很棒的電腦。

Want to buy one?"

想要買一台嗎？

Totally different right? You're ready to buy a computer from me.

完全不一樣，對吧？你準備要從我這裡買一台電腦了。

All I did was reverse the order of the information.

我只要改變資訊的順序

What it proves to us is that people don't buy what you do;

這個例子告訴我們人們不會買你做了什麼

people buy why you do it.

人們要買你為什麼做它

People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it.

人們不會買你做什麼；他們要買你的為什麼。

This explains why

這解釋了為什麼

every single person in this room

在場的每個人

is perfectly comfortable buying a computer from Apple.

都對買蘋果電腦感到很好

But we're also perfectly comfortable

但我們也同樣感覺很好

buying an MP3 player from Apple, or a phone from Apple,

當購買蘋果電腦 的MP3播放器，或蘋果電腦的手機

or a DVR from Apple.

或蘋果電腦的DVR

But, as I said before, Apple's just a computer company.

但如同我前述所說，蘋果電腦只是一家電腦公司

There's nothing that distinguishes them

結構上沒有什麼使它們與

structurally from any of their competitors.

其他的競爭者不同

Their competitors are all equally qualified to make all of these products.

他們的競爭者都有同樣能力做這些產品

In fact, they tried.

事實上，他們試過

A few years ago, Gateway came out with flat screen TVs.

幾年前，Gateway推出他們的平面電視

They're eminently qualified to make flat screen TVs.

他們很明顯夠資格製造平面電視

They've been making flat screen monitors for years.

他們已經做平面監視器好幾年了

Nobody bought one.

沒有人買

Dell came out with MP3 players and PDAs,

戴爾電腦推出mp3播放器與PDA.

and they make great quality products,

他們的產品都有很好的品質

and they can make perfectly well-designed products --

而且他們也能完美地製造精美設計的產品

and nobody bought one.

然而沒有人買。

In fact, talking about it now, we can't even imagine

事實上，現在我們說這些事，我們甚至無法想像

buying an MP3 player from Dell.

從戴爾電腦買一台mp3播放器

Why would you buy an MP3 player from a computer company?

為什麼你會從一家電腦公司買一台mp3播放器？

But we do it every day.

但我們每天都這麼做

People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it.

人們不買你做什麼；他們買你的為什麼

The goal is not to do business

目標不是

with everybody who needs what you have.

與每個需要你有什麼的人在做生意

The goal is to do business with people

目標是要與

who believe what you believe.

那些相信你所相信的人做生意

Here's the best part:

這就是最美好的部份

None of what I'm telling you is my opinion.

我告訴你們的都不是我個人的意見

It's all grounded in the tenets of biology.

這在生物學裡證實

Not psychology, biology.

不是心理學，是生物學

If you look at a cross-section of the human brain, looking from the top down,

如果你去看人腦裡的切面，從上往下看

what you see is the human brain is actually broken

你看到的人腦實際上是

into three major components

分成三個主要部份的

that correlate perfectly with the golden circle.

這和黃金圈完美地相關

Our newest brain, our Homo sapien brain,

我們最新的腦，或說我們人類的腦

our neocortex,

我們的大腦皮層

corresponds with the "what" level.

對應的是〞什麼〞的層次

The neocortex is responsible for all of our

大腦皮層負責我們所有的

rational and analytical thought

理性、分析的想法

and language.

以及語言

The middle two sections make up our limbic brains,

中間兩個部份組成我們腦的邊緣

and our limbic brains are responsible for all of our feelings,

而我們邊緣的腦是負責所有的感情

like trust and loyalty.

如信任與忠誠

It's also responsible for all human behavior,

它也同時負責所有人類的行為

all decision-making,

所有的決策

and it has no capacity for language.

而它沒有語言的空間

In other words, when we communicate from the outside in,

換句話說，當我們從外而內地溝通時

yes, people can understand vast amounts of complicated information

是的，人們可以了解很多複雜的資訊量

like features and benefits and facts and figures.

像是特色、好處、事實與數字

It just doesn't drive behavior.

但這不能刺激行為

When we can communicate from the inside out,

當我們能由內而外溝通時

we're talking directly to the part of the brain

我們就正對著我們的腦說話

that controls behavior,

那控制行為的腦

and then we allow people to rationalize it

然後我們允許人們去分析它

with the tangible things we say and do.

以我們可以說與做的可見事物

This is where gut decisions come from.

這就是我們用膽識做決定的來源

You know, sometimes you can give somebody

你們知道，有時候你們可以給人們

all the facts and figures,

所有的事實與數字

and they say, "I know what all the facts and details say,

然後他們說，〞我知道事實與細節是什麼，

but it just doesn't feel right."

但就是感覺不對勁〞

Why would we use that verb, it doesn't "feel" right?

為什麼我們會用這個動詞，〝感覺〞不對勁？

Because the part of the brain that controls decision-making

因為管控決策的腦

doesn't control language.

並不管控語言

And the best we can muster up is, "I don't know. It just doesn't feel right."

而我們最多能整理出的是〝我不知道，就是覺得不對〞

Or sometimes you say you're leading with your heart,

或者有時你說你隨心所欲

or you're leading with your soul.

或者你跟隨你靈魂的聲音

Well, I hate to break it to you, those aren't other body parts

嗯，我很不想對你說，那些都不是身體的其他部份

controlling your behavior.

在控制你的行為

It's all happening here in your limbic brain,

所有的發生都在你邊緣的腦裡

the part of the brain that controls decision-making and not language.

是控制決策而不是語言的腦

But if you don't know why you do what you do,

但如果你不知道為什麼做你正在做的事

and people respond to why you do what you do,

而人們對為什麼你正在做的事有反應

then how will you ever get people

然後甚至是你如何贏得人們

to vote for you, or buy something from you,

的選票或買你的東西

or, more importantly, be loyal

或更重要的，忠實

and want to be a part of what it is that you do.

而且想成為你正在做的事的一份子

Again, the goal is not just to sell to people who need what you have;

再一次，目標不是僅僅將需要你所有賣給需要的人而已

the goal is to sell to people who believe what you believe.

目標是要賣東西給那些相信你所相信的事的人

The goal is not just to hire people

目標不是只在雇

who need a job;

那些需要工作的人

it's to hire people who believe what you believe.

而是要雇用那些相信你所相信的事的人

I always say that, you know,

我會一直這麼說，你知道。

if you hire people just because they can do a job, they'll work for your money,

如果你雇用人僅是因為他們能做事，他們將會為了你的錢而做事

but if you hire people who believe what you believe,

但如果你雇用那些相信你所相信的人們

they'll work for you with blood and sweat and tears.

他們將與你工作：用血汗與淚水。

And nowhere else is there a better example of this

而沒有比這個萊特兄弟

than with the Wright brothers.

更好的例子了

Most people don't know about Samuel Pierpont Langley.

多數人不認識Samuel Pierpont Langley.

And back in the early 20th century,

在20世紀初

the pursuit of powered man flight was like the dot com of the day.

追尋人類飛翔就像今天的網路公司一樣

Everybody was trying it.

每個人都在嘗試

And Samuel Pierpont Langley had, what we assume,

而Samuel Pierpont Langley曾經擁有，我們假設的

to be the recipe for success.

成功的關鍵

I mean, even now, you ask people,

我的意思是，即使現在，你去問人們

"Why did your product or why did your company fail?"

〝為什麼你的產品為或什麼你的公司失敗？〞

and people always give you the same permutation

而人們總會給你

of the same three things:

相類似的三個原因

under-capitalized, the wrong people, bad market conditions.

資金不足，不適合的人，市場情況不良

It's always the same three things, so let's explore that.

總是這相同的三個原因，所以我們來研究一下

Samuel Pierpont Langley

Samuel Pierpont Langley

was given 50,000 dollars by the War Department

從國防部得到5萬美金

to figure out this flying machine.

去研發這個飛行機器

Money was no problem.

資金不是問題

He held a seat at Harvard

他有哈佛大學的學位

and worked at the Smithsonian and was extremely well-connected;

在Smithsonian工作而且有很好的人脈

he knew all the big minds of the day.

他認識當時所有著名的知識份子

He hired the best minds

他雇用最好的人才

money could find

資金有管道

and the market conditions were fantastic.

而市場情況呈現一片榮景

The New York Times followed him around everywhere,

紐約時報跟著他到處跑

and everyone was rooting for Langley.

而且每個人都為Langley加油

Then how come we've never heard of Samuel Pierpont Langley?

那麼你怎麼會從沒聽過Samuel Pierpont Langley？

A few hundred miles away in Dayton Ohio,

幾百英哩遠在俄亥俄州的Dayton

Orville and Wilbur Wright,

萊特兄弟

they had none of what we consider

他們沒有我們認為的

to be the recipe for success.

成功關鍵

They had no money;

他們沒有資金

they paid for their dream with the proceeds from their bicycle shop;

他們用他們腳踏車店裡的現金來支付他們的夢想

not a single person on the Wright brothers' team

沒有任何一個在萊特兄弟的團隊裡

had a college education,

的人有大學學歷

not even Orville or Wilbur;

兄弟倆都沒有

and The New York Times followed them around nowhere.

而他們也沒有紐約時報的報導

The difference was,

不同的是

Orville and Wilbur were driven by a cause,

萊特兄弟是有個目的去驅動他們的

by a purpose, by a belief.

因為目的、因為相信

They believed that if they

他們相信如果他們

could figure out this flying machine,

能想出這架飛行機器

it'll change the course of the world.

這將改變世界的軌道

Samuel Pierpont Langley was different.

Samuel Pierpont Langley 不同

He wanted to be rich, and he wanted to be famous.

他想變得富有，而且他想成名

He was in pursuit of the result.

他在追求結果

He was in pursuit of the riches.