字幕列表 影片播放
-
How many companies have you interacted with today?
今天你和多少間公司互動過?
-
Well, you got up in the morning,
你早上起床,
-
took a shower,
先去淋浴,
-
washed your hair,
洗洗頭髮,
-
used a hair dryer,
用了吹風機,
-
ate breakfast --
吃了早餐──
-
ate cereals, fruit, yogurt, whatever --
吃的是穀片、水果、優格、等等──
-
had coffee --
喝了咖啡
-
tea.
或茶。
-
You took public transport to come here,
你搭乘大眾交通工具到這裡,
-
or maybe used your private car.
或是開你自己的車過來。
-
You interacted with the company that you work for or that you own.
你和你上班的公司或是 你自己開的公司互動。
-
You interacted with your clients,
你和你的客戶互動,
-
your customers,
和你的顧客互動,
-
and so on and so forth.
諸如此類。
-
I'm pretty sure there are at least seven companies
我非常確定
-
you've interacted with today.
你今天至少和七間公司互動過。
-
Let me tell you a stunning statistic.
讓我告訴各位一個驚人的統計數據。
-
One out of seven large, public corporations
每七間大型的上市公司中
-
commit fraud every year.
每年會有一間犯下詐欺罪。
-
This is a US academic study that looks at US companies --
這是美國的學術研究, 調查的對象是美國的公司──
-
I have no reason to believe that it's different in Europe.
但我認為歐洲公司的情況類似。
-
This is a study that looks at both detected and undetected fraud
被發現、未被發現的詐欺 兩者都被調查研究,
-
using statistical methods.
使用的方法是統計。
-
This is not petty fraud.
不是小欺小騙。
-
These frauds cost the shareholders of these companies,
這些詐欺會造成公司股東的損失,
-
and therefore society,
因此也造成社會的損失,
-
on the order of 380 billion dollars per year.
每年損失約三千八百億美元。
-
We can all think of some examples, right?
我們都能想出一些例子,對嗎?
-
The car industry's secrets aren't quite so secret anymore.
汽車產業的秘密不再那麼秘密了。
-
Fraud has become a feature,
在金融服務業,
-
not a bug,
詐欺已經變成了一種特性,
-
of the financial services industry.
而不是錯誤。
-
That's not me who's claiming that,
並不是我自己在這麼說,
-
that's the president of the American Finance Association
是美國財務學會的會長
-
who stated that in his presidential address.
在他的會長演說當中說的。
-
That's a huge problem if you think about, especially,
如果你仔細想想, 這是個很大的問題,
-
an economy like Switzerland,
特別是在像瑞士這樣的經濟體中,
-
which relies so much on the trust put into its financial industry.
瑞士非常仰賴人們對其 金融業投入的信任。
-
On the other hand,
另一方面,
-
there are six out of seven companies who actually remain honest
七間中的六間事實上維持著誠信,
-
despite all temptations to start engaging in fraud.
它們抗拒了各種引誘 它們進行詐欺的誘惑。
-
There are whistle-blowers like Michael Woodford,
有像邁克爾伍德福特這樣的告密者,
-
who blew the whistle on Olympus.
他告了奧林巴斯的密。
-
These whistle-blowers risk their careers,
這些告密者賭上他們的職涯
-
their friendships,
和友情,
-
to bring out the truth about their companies.
揭露他們公司的真相。
-
There are journalists like Anna Politkovskaya
有像安娜波利特科夫 斯卡婭這樣的記者,
-
who risk even their lives to report human rights violations.
冒著生命危險去報導 違反人權的事件。
-
She got killed --
後來她被殺了──
-
every year,
每年,
-
around 100 journalists get killed
有大約一百名記者
-
because of their conviction to bring out the truth.
因為堅定地想要揭露真相而被殺害。
-
So in my talk today,
在今天這場演說,
-
I want to share with you some insights I've obtained and learned
我想和各位分享的是我過去十年間
-
in the last 10 years of conducting research in this.
在研究這個主題時 所學到的一些洞見。
-
I'm a researcher, a scientist working with economists,
我是個研究者、科學家,
-
financial economists,
合作的對象有經濟學家、
-
ethicists, neuroscientists,
金融經濟學家、
-
lawyers and others
倫理學家、神經科學家、 律師,以及其他的人。
-
trying to understand what makes humans tick,
我嘗試要了解是什麼在驅使人類,
-
and how can we address this issue of fraud in corporations
以及我們如何處理 企業內的詐欺議題,
-
and therefore contribute to the improvement of the world.
因而對改善世界貢獻一份心力。
-
I want to start by sharing with you two very distinct visions
一開始,我想分享兩個 非常不同的看法,
-
of how people behave.
對於人的行為的看法。
-
First, meet Adam Smith,
首先,來見見亞當史密斯,
-
founding father of modern economics.
現代經濟學之父。
-
His basic idea was that if everybody behaves in their own self-interests,
他的基本想法是: 如果每個人都依自身利益而行,
-
that's good for everybody in the end.
最終,那對每個人而言都是好的。
-
Self-interest isn't a narrowly defined concept
自身利益不是一個 定義很狹隘的觀念,
-
just for your immediate utility.
不是只為了立即的功利。
-
It has a long-run implication.
它有著長期的意涵。
-
Let's think about that.
我們來想想這一點。
-
Think about this dog here.
想想圖上的這隻狗。
-
That might be us.
牠可能就是我們。
-
There's this temptation --
圖上有著誘惑──
-
I apologize to all vegetarians, but --
我要向所有的素食者道歉,但──
-
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
-
Dogs do like the bratwurst.
狗確實喜歡臘腸。
-
(Laughter)
(笑聲)
-
Now, the straight-up, self-interested move here
這裡最直接、最以 自身利益為主的做法,
-
is to go for that.
就是去取得臘腸。
-
So my friend Adam here might jump up,
所以我的朋友亞當,可能會跳上去,
-
get the sausage and thereby ruin all this beautiful tableware.
取得臘腸,因而把 所有的美麗餐具都給毀了。
-
But that's not what Adam Smith meant.
但那並不是亞當史密斯的意思。
-
He didn't mean disregard all consequences --
他並不是說要不顧一切的後果──
-
to the contrary.
其實相反。
-
He would have thought,
他會想,
-
well, there may be negative consequences,
也許會有負面的後果,
-
for example,
比如,
-
the owner might be angry with the dog
主人可能會對狗發怒,
-
and the dog, anticipating that, might not behave in this way.
而狗能預期到這一點, 就不會做出這個行為。
-
That might be us,
那可能就是我們,
-
weighing the benefits and costs of our actions.
權衡我們每個行動的利益和成本。
-
How does that play out?
那會產生什麼結果?
-
Well, many of you, I'm sure,
我相信,在座許多人,
-
have in your companies,
在你們的公司裡,
-
especially if it's a large company,
特別是大公司裡,
-
a code of conduct.
會有「行為準則」。
-
And then if you behave according to that code of conduct,
如果你根據行為準則來做事,
-
that improves your chances of getting a bonus payment.
就能讓你比較有機會得到獎金。
-
And on the other hand, if you disregard it,
另一方面,如果你漠視它,
-
then there are higher chances of not getting your bonus
就比較有可能得不到獎金,
-
or its being diminished.
或是獎金會縮水。
-
In other words,
換言之,
-
this is a very economic motivation
這是個非常經濟的動機,
-
of trying to get people to be more honest,
試圖讓人們更誠實,
-
or more aligned with the corporation's principles.
或是更符合公司的原則。
-
Similarly, reputation is a very powerful economic force, right?
同樣地,名聲也是種非常 強大的經濟力量,對吧?
-
We try to build a reputation,
我們試圖建立名聲,
-
maybe for being honest,
也許是誠實的名聲,
-
because then people trust us more in the future.
因為這樣做,人們將來會更信任我們。
-
Right?
對嗎?
-
Adam Smith talked about the baker
亞當史密斯談到一個麵包師傅,
-
who's not producing good bread out of his benevolence
他為那些消費者製作好的麵包,
-
for those people who consume the bread,
並不是出於善心,
-
but because he wants to sell more future bread.
而是因為他想要在未來 能賣出更多麵包。
-
In my research, we find, for example,
在我的研究中,我們發現,比如,
-
at the University of Zurich,
在蘇黎世大學,
-
that Swiss banks who get caught up in media,
瑞士銀行被捲入媒體當中,
-
and in the context, for example,
例如在逃稅或稅務詐欺的情況下,
-
of tax evasion, of tax fraud,
有很糟的媒體報導。
-
have bad media coverage.
他們就會在未來失去淨新增資金,
-
They lose net new money in the future
因此賺的利潤就會減少。
-
and therefore make lower profits.
那是非常強大的名聲力量。
-
That's a very powerful reputational force.
利益和成本。
-
Benefits and costs.
世界上有另一種觀點。
-
Here's another viewpoint of the world.
來見見伊曼努爾康德,
-
Meet Immanuel Kant,
十八世紀的明星德國哲學家。
-
18th-century German philosopher superstar.
他發展出了這個概念:
-
He developed this notion
和結果無關,
-
that independent of the consequences,
有些行為就是對的,
-
some actions are just right
有些就是錯的。
-
and some are just wrong.
比如,說謊就是錯的。
-
It's just wrong to lie, for example.
所以,來見見我的朋友伊曼努爾。
-
So, meet my friend Immanuel here.
牠知道香腸非常可口,
-
He knows that the sausage is very tasty,
但牠打算調頭走開, 因為牠是條好狗。
-
but he's going to turn away because he's a good dog.
牠知道跳上去是錯的,
-
He knows it's wrong to jump up
有可能會打破所有這些漂亮的餐具。
-
and risk ruining all this beautiful tableware.
如果你相信人們會被 這樣的動機驅使,
-
If you believe that people are motivated like that,
那麼所有關於獎勵的一切,
-
then all the stuff about incentives,
那麼所有關於行為準則、 獎金制度等等的一切,
-
all the stuff about code of conduct and bonus systems and so on,
就不是很有道理了。
-
doesn't make a whole lot of sense.
人們被不同的價值觀驅使,也許吧。
-
People are motivated by different values perhaps.
所以人們的動機到底是什麼?
-
So, what are people actually motivated by?
這裡的兩位先生有著完美的髮型,
-
These two gentlemen here have perfect hairdos,
但他們給我們非常不同的世界觀。
-
but they give us very different views of the world.
對此,我們該怎麼辦?
-
What do we do with this?
嗯,我是經濟學家,
-
Well, I'm an economist
而我們會進行所謂的實驗, 來處理這個議題。
-
and we conduct so-called experiments to address this issue.
我們會剝除在現實中讓我們困惑的事實,
-
We strip away facts which are confusing in reality.
現實非常的豐富, 有太多事情在發生,
-
Reality is so rich, there is so much going on,
幾乎不可能知道 什麼真正驅動人類的行為。
-
it's almost impossible to know what drives people's behavior really.
所以,讓我們一起來做個小實驗。
-
So let's do a little experiment together.
想像下面的情境。
-
Imagine the following situation.
你單獨在一間房間中,
-
You're in a room alone,
不像這裡這麼多人。
-
not like here.
有一個五法郎硬幣, 就像我手上的這個,
-
There's a five-franc coin like the one I'm holding up right now
硬幣就在你面前。
-
in front of you.
你得到的指示是:
-
Here are your instructions:
擲硬幣四次,
-
toss the coin four times,
接著,在你面前的電腦終端機上,
-
and then on a computer terminal in front of you,
輸入硬幣出現反面的次數。
-
enter the number of times tails came up.
情境就是這樣。
-
This is the situation.
難處在這裏:
-
Here's the rub.
每次你宣佈你擲出了反面,
-
For every time that you announce that you had a tails throw,
你就會得到五法郎。
-
you get paid five francs.
所以如果你說我擲出兩次反面,
-
So if you say I had two tails throws,
你就會得十法郎。
-
you get paid 10 francs.
如果你說你沒擲出反面, 你就會得到零法郎。
-
If you say you had zero, you get paid zero francs.
如果你說:「我擲出四次反面」,
-
If you say, "I had four tails throws,"
你就會得到二十法郎。
-
then you get paid 20 francs.
這是匿名的,
-
It's anonymous,
沒有人在看你做,
-
nobody's watching what you're doing,
付錢給你時也是匿名的。
-
and you get paid that money anonymously.
我要問各位兩個問題。
-
I've got two questions for you.
(笑聲)
-
(Laughter)
你們知道接下來是什麼吧?
-
You know what's coming now, right?
第一,在這個情境,你會怎麼做?
-
First, how would you behave in that situation?
第二,看看你的左邊, 看看你的右邊──
-
The second, look to your left and look to your right --
(笑聲)
-
(Laughter)
想想坐在你旁邊的人
-
and think about how the person sitting next to you
在這情境可能會怎麼做。
-
might behave in that situation.
我們真做了這個實驗。
-
We did this experiment for real.
我們是在最近蘇黎世這裡舉行的
-
We did it at the Manifesta art exhibition
Manifesta 藝術展覽上做的,
-
that took place here in Zurich recently,
不是在大學實驗室裡對學生做的,
-
not with students in the lab at the university
對象是真正的一般大眾,
-
but with the real population,
就像在座各位。
-
like you guys.
首先,快速提醒大家一下統計數字,
-
First, a quick reminder of stats.
如果你擲硬幣四次, 且它是個公平的硬幣,
-
If I throw the coin four times and it's a fair coin,
四次都是反面的機率
-
then the probability that it comes up four times tails
是 6.25%。
-
is 6.25 percent.
希望你們用直覺就能看出,
-
And I hope you can intuitively see
四次都是反面的機率
-
that the probability that all four of them are tails is much lower
遠低於兩次是反面的機率,對吧?
-
than if two of them are tails, right?
這裡是明確的數據。
-
Here are the specific numbers.
而結果如下。
-
Here's what happened.
人們真的做了這個實驗。
-
People did this experiment for real.
大約 30%~35% 的人說:
-
Around 30 to 35 percent of people said,
「嗯,我擲出四次反面。」
-
"Well, I had four tails throws."
那是極度不可能的。
-
That's extremely unlikely.
(笑聲)
-
(Laughter)
但,真正驚人的是,
-
But the really amazing thing here,
也許對經濟學家而言,驚人的是:
-
perhaps to an economist,
大約 65% 的人 沒說他們擲出四次反面,
-
is there are around 65 percent of people who did not say I had four tails throws,
即使在那個情境中,
-
even though in that situation,
沒有人在看你,
-
nobody's watching you,
唯一會發生的後果是:
-
the only consequence that's in place
假如你說四次而不是少於四次, 得的錢就會比較多;
-
is you get more money if you say four than less.
如果你宣稱零次,就放棄了二十法郎。
-
You leave 20 francs on the table by announcing zero.
我不知道其他人是否都誠實,
-
I don't know whether the other people all were honest
或是他們會把數字向上或向下調整,
-
or whether they also said a little bit higher or lower than what they did
因為這是匿名的。
-
because it's anonymous.
我們只是觀察數據分佈。
-
We only observed the distribution.
但我可以告訴各位── 這是另一次擲硬幣結果。
-
But what I can tell you -- and here's another coin toss.
來了,是反面。
-
There you go, it's tails.
(笑聲)
-
(Laughter)
別來確認,好嗎?
-
Don't check, OK?
(笑聲)
-
(Laughter)
我能告訴你們的是,
-
What I can tell you
並非每個人的行為 都如亞當史密斯所預測。
-
is that not everybody behaved like Adam Smith would have predicted.
所以這告訴我們什麼?
-
So what does that leave us with?
嗯,似乎人們會被某種 內在的價值觀所驅使,
-
Well, it seems people are motivated by certain intrinsic values
在研究中,我們調查了這點。
-
and in our research, we look at this.
我們探討了人會有所謂的 「被保護的價值觀」的這個想法。
-
We look at the idea that people have so-called protected values.
被保護的價值觀並非任何價值觀。
-
A protected value isn't just any value.
被保護的價值觀是 你願意付出一個代價
-
A protected value is a value where you're willing to pay a price
來維持的價值。
-
to uphold that value.
你願意付出一個代價來 對抗要你屈服的誘惑。
-
You're willing to pay a price to withstand the temptation to give in.
而結果就是,如果你賺到錢的方式
-
And the consequence is you feel better
和你的價值觀是一致的, 你的感覺會比較好。
-
if you earn money in a way that's consistent with your values.
讓我再次用我們都愛的 狗狗比喻來說明。
-
Let me show you this again in the metaphor of our beloved dog here.
如果我們不違反價值觀 而成功地取得香腸,
-
If we succeed in getting the sausage without violating our values,
那麼香腸嚐起來的味道比較好。
-
then the sausage tastes better.
那就是我們的研究發現。
-
That's what our research shows.
另一方面,
-
If, on the other hand,
若我們這樣做──
-
we do so --
如果我們取得香腸,
-
if we get the sausage
用的是違反價值觀的方式,
-
and in doing so we actually violate values,
我們也會比較不珍視這香腸。
-
we value the sausage less.
就量化而言,相當強而有力。
-
Quantitatively, that's quite powerful.
我們能夠測量這些被保護的價值觀,
-
We can measure these protected values,
比如,
-
for example,
可以用問卷調查來測量。
-
by a survey measure.
簡單的九題問卷調查
-
Simple, nine-item survey that's quite predictive in these experiments.
是非常容易預測結果的實驗。
-
If you think about the average of the population
如果考量人數平均值,
-
and then there's a distribution around it --
平均值的周邊會呈現一種分佈──
-
people are different, we all are different.
人各不相同,我們都不一樣。