and try to find the most paranoid person here --

試著找出最疑神疑鬼的人。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

And then I want you to point at that person for me.

請你把那個人指出來。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

OK, don't actually do it.

不用真的指。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

But, as an organizational psychologist,

身為一名組織心理學家，

I spend a lot of time in workplaces,

我常常去很多工作場所，

and I find paranoia everywhere.

發現不少疑神疑鬼的人。

Paranoia is caused by people that I call "takers."

多疑是因為「取者」的存在。

Takers are self-serving in their interactions.

他們在互動中比較自利。

It's all about what can you do for me.

總想著你能為我做什麼。

The opposite is a giver.

相反的是「施者」。

It's somebody who approaches most interactions by asking,

他們常常會問：

"What can I do for you?"

「我能為你做什麼？」

I wanted to give you a chance to think about your own style.

我想要大家想一想自己是哪種人。

We all have moments of giving and taking.

我們都有付出和受惠的時候。

Your style is how you treat most of the people most of the time,

至於你是屬於哪種類型？

your default.

則要看你內建的思考模式； 看你平時如何看待他人而定。

I have a short test you can take

有個測試可用來判斷 你是施者還是取者，

to figure out if you're more of a giver or a taker,

你們可以現在就做一下測試。

and you can take it right now.

【自戀狂測試】

[The Narcissist Test]

【步驟 1：花時間想一想自己】

[Step 1: Take a moment to think about yourself.]

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

【步驟 2：如果你到了第二步， 你就不是一個自戀者】

[Step 2: If you made it to Step 2, you are not a narcissist.]

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

這是今天唯一沒有數據根據的測試，

This is the only thing I will say today that has no data behind it,

但我相信如果上面那個卡通，

but I am convinced the longer it takes for you to laugh at this cartoon,

引你笑起來的時間越久，

the more worried we should be that you're a taker.

那麼你就更傾向於是一個「取者」。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

Of course, not all takers are narcissists.

當然，不是所有「取者」 都是自戀狂。

Some are just givers who got burned one too many times.

有些只是上當了太多次的「施者」。

Then there's another kind of taker that we won't be addressing today,

還有一種「取者」 我們今天不作討論，

and that's called a psychopath.

稱之為「神經病」。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

I was curious, though, about how common these extremes are,

我曾好奇這種極端現象會有多普遍，

and so I surveyed over 30,000 people across industries

於是我對全世界不同文化的業者，

around the world's cultures.

進行了超過三萬人的調查。

And I found that most people are right in the middle

然後我發現大部分人都是介於 「施者」與「取者」之間。

between giving and taking.

人們把這種類型叫做「對等者」。

They choose this third style called "matching."

如果你是「對等者」， 你會在付出與獲取之間保持平衡：

If you're a matcher, you try to keep an even balance of give and take:

並以「等值交換」的角度思考；

quid pro quo -- I'll do something for you if you do something for me.

如果你能為我做甚麼， 我就會為你做些什麼。

And that seems like a safe way to live your life.

這是一種比較安全的生活方式。

But is it the most effective and productive way to live your life?

但這是否是最有效率的生活方式呢？

The answer to that question is a very definitive ...

這個問題的回答是非常確定的：

maybe.

可能吧。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

I studied dozens of organizations,

我對很多組織 和數以千計的人進行研究。

thousands of people.

我評估工程師的生產率。

I had engineers measuring their productivity.

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

我研究醫學院學生的成績，

I looked at medical students' grades --

甚至銷售員的業績。

even salespeople's revenue.

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

出人意外地發現；

And, unexpectedly,

工作表現最差者 都是來自那些「施者」。

the worst performers in each of these jobs were the givers.

那些事情做得最少的工程師，

The engineers who got the least work done

都是那些「幫助別人」， 多於「被人幫助」的人。

were the ones who did more favors than they got back.

他們用了太多的時間去幫助別人，

They were so busy doing other people's jobs,

以至於沒有時間和精力 完成自己的任務。

they literally ran out of time and energy to get their own work completed.

在醫學院，分數最低的學生，

In medical school, the lowest grades belong to the students

會特別認同某些說法，

who agree most strongly with statements like,

比如：「我喜歡幫助別人。」

"I love helping others,"

這是否代表那些你應該信任的醫生，

which suggests the doctor you ought to trust

都來自於那些比較 不想幫別人的醫學生？

is the one who came to med school with no desire to help anybody.

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

在銷售行業也一樣，

And then in sales, too, the lowest revenue accrued

收入最低的銷售員都是 那些最慷慨的人。

in the most generous salespeople.

我接觸過一個那樣子的銷售員。

I actually reached out to one of those salespeople

他在「施者」評價中有很高的分數。

who had a very high giver score.

我問他「為何你工作表現那麼遜？」

And I asked him, "Why do you suck at your job --"

我沒用那種口氣問他，但……

I didn't ask it that way, but --

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

「在行銷過程中慷慨的 代價是什麼？」

"What's the cost of generosity in sales?"

他說：「我只是特別在乎我的客戶，

And he said, "Well, I just care so deeply about my customers

我從來不會 把糟糕的產品賣給他們。」

that I would never sell them one of our crappy products."

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

僅僅是出於好奇，

So just out of curiosity,

有多少人認為自己是「施者」，

how many of you self-identify more as givers than takers or matchers?

而不是「取者」或「對等者」？

Raise your hands.

請舉手。

OK, it would have been more before we talked about these data.

好的，在我們談到這些資料之前，

But actually, it turns out there's a twist here,

應該事先多談一點其他的。

because givers are often sacrificing themselves,

但實際上，這裡有個轉折，

but they make their organizations better.

由於「施者」往往犧牲自己，

We have a huge body of evidence --

但是他們總是讓組織變得更好。

many, many studies looking at the frequency of giving behavior

我們有大量的證據──

that exists in a team or an organization --

（38 個研究，3611 工作單位）

and the more often people are helping and sharing their knowledge

在不同團體組織中， 針對「給予頻率」做了無數的研究。

and providing mentoring,

發現當組織中有更多人 分享他們的知識、

the better organizations do on every metric we can measure:

幫助他人或給他人提供指導時，

higher profits, customer satisfaction, employee retention --

這樣的組織在我們所評估的 各項指標中都做得更好：

even lower operating expenses.

更高的利潤、客戶滿意度、 員工留職率，

So givers spend a lot of time trying to help other people

甚至更低的運作支出。

and improve the team,

所以「施者」用了 許多時間來幫助別人，

and then, unfortunately, they suffer along the way.

和幫助團隊，

I want to talk about what it takes

不幸的是，一路上受苦的 是他們自己。

to build cultures where givers actually get to succeed.

我想談的是：要怎麼做， 才能營造出一個讓「施者」

So I wondered, then, if givers are the worst performers,

也能夠真正成功獲益的文化？

who are the best performers?

於是我在想： 如果施者是表現最糟糕的人，

Let me start with the good news: it's not the takers.

那誰才是表現最好的人呢？

Takers tend to rise quickly but also fall quickly in most jobs.

讓我先從好消息說起： 答案並不是「取者」。

And they fall at the hands of matchers.

「取者」在大多數工作中， 會迅速的成功，也會迅速的失敗。

If you're a matcher, you believe in "An eye for an eye" -- a just world.

他們會敗在「對等者」手中。

And so when you meet a taker,

假如你是一個「對等者」，

you feel like it's your mission in life

你信仰「以眼還眼」的教條； 認為這是正義的世界。

to just punish the hell out of that person.

當你遇到一個「取者」的時候，

(Laughter)

你會自認搞死那些惡人， 是你生命中最神聖的任務。

And that way justice gets served.

（笑聲）

Well, most people are matchers.

那是伸張正義的方式。

And that means if you're a taker,

大部分人都是「對等者」。

it tends to catch up with you eventually;

那意味著如果你是一個「取者」，

what goes around will come around.

出來混終於要還的：

And so the logical conclusion is:

躲得了初一，躲不了十五。

it must be the matchers who are the best performers.

合理的結論是：

But they're not.

「對等者」一定會是表現最好的；

In every job, in every organization I've ever studied,

但其實並非如此。

the best results belong to the givers again.

在我所研究過的所有工作和組織中，

Take a look at some data I gathered from hundreds of salespeople,

表現最好的還是「施者」。

tracking their revenue.

看我收集到的數百名 銷售員利潤數據，

What you can see is that the givers go to both extremes.

可以看出「施者」分佈在兩個極端。

They make up the majority of people who bring in the lowest revenue,

他們是創造最低利潤的主要群體，

but also the highest revenue.

但同時也是創造 最高利潤的主要族群。

The same patterns were true for engineers' productivity

呈現出相同模式的還有 工程師的生產率，

and medical students' grades.

和醫學院學生的成績。

Givers are overrepresented at the bottom and at the top

「施者」在成功指標分布曲線中，

of every success metric that I can track.

不成比例的呈現在 我所有成功指標的頂端和底端。

Which raises the question:

這產生了一個問題：

How do we create a world where more of these givers get to excel?

我們如何能夠創造一種環境？ 讓更多的「施者」變得成功？

I want to talk about how to do that, not just in businesses,

我想聊一下這個話题， 不僅僅針對企業，

but also in nonprofits, schools --

還包括非盈利機構、學校、

even governments.

甚至政府。

Are you ready?

你們準備好了嗎？

(Cheers)

（歡呼）

I was going to do it anyway, but I appreciate the enthusiasm.

無論如何我都是要說的， 不過我很感謝你們的熱情。

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

The first thing that's really critical

首先至關重要的是，

is to recognize that givers are your most valuable people,

你必須了解到「施者」 是最有價值的人，

but if they're not careful, they burn out.

但是如果他們不小心， 就會把自己累死。

So you have to protect the givers in your midst.

所以你要保護好這些「施者」。

And I learned a great lesson about this from Fortune's best networker.

我從財星雜誌 最佳社交網路達人那裡，

It's the guy, not the cat.

學到了很棒的一課。

(Laughter)

是那個人，不是那只貓。

His name is Adam Rifkin.

（笑聲）

He's a very successful serial entrepreneur

他叫亞當．里夫金，

who spends a huge amount of his time helping other people.

他是一個非常成功的連續創業者。

And his secret weapon is the five-minute favor.

他花了超級多的時間來幫助其他人。

Adam said, "You don't have to be Mother Teresa or Gandhi

他的秘密武器是： 「幫忙 5 分鐘。」

to be a giver.

亞當說：「你不需要像 德蕾莎修女或甘地

You just have to find small ways to add large value

才能成為一個施者。

to other people's lives."

你只需要利用很小的方法，

That could be as simple as making an introduction

就可以給別人的生命 帶來巨大的價值。」

between two people who could benefit from knowing each other.

就像介紹人互相認識那樣簡單，

It could be sharing your knowledge or giving a little bit of feedback.

引介兩個彼此有利的人 互相認識就可了！

Or It might be even something as basic as saying,

可以彼此分享知識或提供一些回饋。

"You know,

也可以做一些很基本的事，

I'm going to try and figure out

你可以開口這樣說：

if I can recognize somebody whose work has gone unnoticed."

「你知道嗎？我可以去發掘 那些工作成果被忽視的人。」

And those five-minute favors are really critical

那些「幫助 5 分鐘」的 工作真的很重要，

to helping givers set boundaries and protect themselves.

可以幫助「施者」 設下界線來保護自己。

The second thing that matters

其次重要的是，

if you want to build a culture where givers succeed,

如果你想創造一個 施者可以成功的文化，

is you actually need a culture where help-seeking is the norm;

你真正需要創造的是： 一個以尋求幫助別人為文化的環境。

where people ask a lot.

人們可以提出一堆問題的環境。

This may hit a little too close to home for some of you.

（字幕：鼓勵尋求幫助）

[So in all your relationships, you always have to be the giver?]

這一幕可能會讓 在座的某些人產生共鳴，

(Laughter)

（字幕：在你經歷過的人際關係中， 你總是扮演 「施者」的腳色嗎？)

What you see with successful givers

（笑聲）

is they recognize that it's OK to be a receiver, too.

你看到的成功「施者」， 都知道作為一個收受者也是正常的。

If you run an organization, we can actually make this easier.

如果你是一位企業經營者， 我們可以讓這事情做得更容易些。

We can make it easier for people to ask for help.

我們可以讓人們更願意去尋求幫助。

A couple colleagues and I studied hospitals.

我和一些同事學對醫院進行了研究。

We found that on certain floors, nurses did a lot of help-seeking,

我們發現在一些特定的樓層， 護士會做很多尋求幫助的事，

and on other floors, they did very little of it.

在其它樓層，他們很少那樣做。

The factor that stood out on the floors where help-seeking was common,

那些把尋求幫助視為常態的樓層，

where it was the norm,

是因為那裡有一個只做 一件事的護士，

was there was just one nurse whose sole job it was

那就是專門負責幫助 單位內的其他護士。

to help other nurses on the unit.

當那個角色存在的時候，

When that role was available,

護士們會想：「哦， 找人幫忙並不是可恥的事，

nurses said, "It's not embarrassing, it's not vulnerable to ask for help --

也不會令人自覺軟弱， 反之更受到激勵。」

it's actually encouraged."

尋求幫助的重要性， 不僅是只有提供「施者」保護而已，

Help-seeking isn't important just for protecting the success

對「施者」 的福利亦然。

and the well-being of givers.

對於促使更多的人， 學習成為「施者」也是很關鍵。

It's also critical to getting more people to act like givers,

因為由數據中可以看出，

because the data say

組織中的給予行為， 有 75% 至 90%

that somewhere between 75 and 90 percent of all giving in organizations

是由尋求協助開始。

starts with a request.

但是很多人不會開口。

But a lot of people don't ask.

他們不想被認為能力不足，

They don't want to look incompetent,

他們不知道該向誰尋求幫助， 他們不想給別人造成負擔。

they don't know where to turn, they don't want to burden others.

然而如果沒有人尋求幫助，

Yet if nobody ever asks for help,

在組織中會有很多失落的「施者」，

you have a lot of frustrated givers in your organization

他們很想主動幫助別人，

who would love to step up and contribute,

只要有人告訴他誰需要幫助， 和如何去幫助別人。

if they only knew who could benefit and how.

但我想最重要的事情，

But I think the most important thing,

如果你想營造一個 「施者」成功的文化，

if you want to build a culture of successful givers,

必須思慮周全的選擇適當的團隊。

is to be thoughtful about who you let onto your team.

我猜你想創造一個非常慷慨的文化，

I figured, you want a culture of productive generosity,

你應該聘請一批「施者」才對。

you should hire a bunch of givers.

但我驚訝的發現 那樣做其實是不對的。

But I was surprised to discover, actually, that that was not right --

「取者」對文化的負面影響，

that the negative impact of a taker on a culture

通常會是「施者」 正面影響的 2~3 倍。

is usually double to triple the positive impact of a giver.

試著這樣想：

Think about it this way:

一個壞蘋果會毀了一桶蘋果，

one bad apple can spoil a barrel,

但是一顆好雞蛋， 不會把一打壞雞蛋變好。

but one good egg just does not make a dozen.

我不知道這是什麼意思……

I don't know what that means --

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

但是我希望你們明白。

But I hope you do.

絕對不可以讓「取者」進入團隊， 哪怕是只有一位。

No -- let even one taker into a team,

因為那樣的話， 「施者」會停止幫助別人。

and you will see that the givers will stop helping.

他們會說：「我被蛇和鯊魚包圍著，

They'll say, "I'm surrounded by a bunch of snakes and sharks.

我為什麼需要付出？」

Why should I contribute?"

然而你讓一個「施者」進入團隊，

Whereas if you let one giver into a team,

你團隊裡的慷慨行為 不會因此而爆增，

you don't get an explosion of generosity.

更多情況下，人們會說：

More often, people are like,

「太好了！

"Great! That person can do all our work."

這個人可以包下我們 所有的工作了。」

So, effective hiring and screening and team building

所以，有效的聘僱、 篩選和團隊建構，

is not about bringing in the givers;

不是引入更多的「施者」；

it's about weeding out the takers.

而是要將重點放在把 「取者」剔除掉！

If you can do that well,

如果你能把這件事做得很好，

you'll be left with givers and matchers.

你會只留下「施者」和「對等者」。

The givers will be generous

「施者」會變得更開放自在，

because they don't have to worry about the consequences.

因為他們不用擔心後果。

And the beauty of the matchers is that they follow the norm.

「對等者」的好處是 他們會跟著規範走。

So how do you catch a taker before it's too late?

那麼如何在太晚之前 找出那個「取者」？

We're actually pretty bad at figuring out who's a taker,

我們其實不善於辨識誰是「取者」，

especially on first impressions.

特別是憑藉第一印象。

There's a personality trait that throws us off.

但有一個特徵可以暴露他的本性，

It's called agreeableness,

它被稱為「友善度。」

one the major dimensions of personality across cultures.

在各種文化中都有這種人的特徵。

Agreeable people are warm and friendly, they're nice, they're polite.

友善度高的人通常較熱情友善，

You find a lot of them in Canada --

他們很善良且都很有禮貌。

(Laughter)

你會在加拿大找到很多這樣的人。

Where there was actually a national contest

（笑聲）

to come up with a new Canadian slogan and fill in the blank,