字幕列表 影片播放
-
You've all been in a bar, right?
譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: Yanyan Hong
-
(Laughter)
你們都曾經去過酒吧,對嗎?
-
But have you ever gone to a bar
(笑聲)
-
and come out with a $200 million business?
但,你們是否去過一個酒吧,
-
That's what happened to us about 10 years ago.
帶著兩億美元的生意出來?
-
We'd had a terrible day.
那就是大約十年前我們遇到的事。
-
We had this huge client that was killing us.
我們那天過得很糟。
-
We're a software consulting firm,
我們有個要命的超級大客戶。
-
and we couldn't find a very specific programming skill
我們是家軟體顧問公司,
-
to help this client deploy a cutting-edge cloud system.
我們找不到一項很特殊的程式技巧
-
We have a bunch of engineers,
來協助這客戶部署先進雲端系統。
-
but none of them could please this client.
我們有一票工程師,
-
And we were about to be fired.
但沒有一個能夠讓這位客戶滿意。
-
So we go out to the bar,
我們差不多就要被開除了。
-
and we're hanging out with our bartender friend Jeff,
所以我們去了一間酒吧,
-
and he's doing what all good bartenders do:
我們和我們的酒保朋友 傑夫在那裡打發時間,
-
he's commiserating with us, making us feel better,
他做的是所有好酒保都會做的事:
-
relating to our pain,
他同情我們,讓我們感覺好些,
-
saying, "Hey, these guys are overblowing it.
同理我們的痛苦,
-
Don't worry about it."
他說:「嘿,這些傢伙誇大其詞。
-
And finally, he deadpans us and says,
別太擔心。」
-
"Why don't you send me in there?
最後,他面無表情地對我們說:
-
I can figure it out."
「為什麼你們不派我去那裡?
-
So the next morning, we're hanging out in our team meeting,
我可以想出辦法。」
-
and we're all a little hazy ...
所以,隔天早上,我們 就在團隊會議上消磨時間,
-
(Laughter)
我們都還有一點朦朧……
-
and I half-jokingly throw it out there.
(笑聲)
-
I say, "Hey, I mean, we're about to be fired."
半開玩笑地把話丟出來。
-
So I say,
我說:「嘿,我們就要被炒魷魚了。」
-
"Why don't we send in Jeff, the bartender?"
於是我說:
-
(Laughter)
「我們不如就派酒保傑夫去吧?」
-
And there's some silence, some quizzical looks.
(笑聲)
-
Finally, my chief of staff says, "That is a great idea."
沉默了一會兒,有些人表情滑稽。
-
(Laughter)
最後,我的參謀長說: 「那是個好主意。」
-
"Jeff is wicked smart. He's brilliant.
(笑聲)
-
He'll figure it out.
「傑夫有小聰明,他很優秀。
-
Let's send him in there."
他會想出辦法。
-
Now, Jeff was not a programmer.
就派他去吧。」
-
In fact, he had dropped out of Penn as a philosophy major.
傑夫並不是程式人員。
-
But he was brilliant,
事實上他在賓州大學 主修哲學,但退學了。
-
and he could go deep on topics,
但他很優秀,
-
and we were about to be fired.
他能深入主題,
-
So we sent him in.
而且我們就要被開除了。
-
After a couple days of suspense,
所以我們就派他去。
-
Jeff was still there.
懸念幾天後,
-
They hadn't sent him home.
傑夫還在那裡。
-
I couldn't believe it.
他們沒有趕他回家。
-
What was he doing?
我無法置信。
-
Here's what I learned.
他在做什麼?
-
He had completely disarmed their fixation on the programming skill.
我所知道的如下。
-
And he had changed the conversation,
他完全解除了 他們對於程式技巧的堅持,
-
even changing what we were building.
改變了對談,
-
The conversation was now about what we were going to build and why.
甚至改變了我們正在建的東西。
-
And yes, Jeff figured out how to program the solution,
對談變成是在談 我們要建什麼,以及為什麼建。
-
and the client became one of our best references.
是的,傑夫想出解決方案,
-
Back then, we were 200 people,
這客戶成了我們最佳的參考人之一。
-
and half of our company was made up of computer science majors or engineers,
那時,我們公司有兩百人,
-
but our experience with Jeff left us wondering:
半數主修資訊科學或是工程,
-
Could we repeat this through our business?
但和傑夫合作的經驗讓我們納悶:
-
So we changed the way we recruited and trained.
我們能在事業上重覆這做法嗎?
-
And while we still sought after computer engineers and computer science majors,
我們因而改變招募和訓練的方式,
-
we sprinkled in artists, musicians, writers ...
雖然還是會找電腦工程師 和主修資訊科學的人,
-
and Jeff's story started to multiply itself throughout our company.
也分散找些藝術家、音樂家、作家……
-
Our chief technology officer is an English major,
傑夫的故事在我們公司裡開始擴增。
-
and he was a bike messenger in Manhattan.
我們的技術長主修的是英文,
-
And today, we're a thousand people,
他原是曼哈頓的自行車送貨員。
-
yet still less than a hundred have degrees in computer science or engineering.
我們現今有一千人,
-
And yes, we're still a computer consulting firm.
但其中有資訊科學或工程 相關學位的人不到一百人。
-
We're the number one player in our market.
是的,我們還是電腦顧問公司。
-
We work with the fastest-growing software package
我們是這個領域的第一名。
-
to ever reach 10 billion dollars in annual sales.
我們的套裝軟體快速成長,
-
So it's working.
是市場上最早達到 年業績一百億美元的。
-
Meanwhile, the push for STEM-based education in this country --
這行得通。
-
science, technology, engineering, mathematics --
在此同時,我國正在推行 以 STEM 為基礎的教育──
-
is fierce.
STEM 代表科學、 科技、工程、數學──
-
It's in all of our faces.
推行得如火如荼,
-
And this is a colossal mistake.
全面性地推動。
-
Since 2009, STEM majors in the United States
這是個巨大的錯誤。
-
have increased by 43 percent,
從 2009 年起,
-
while the humanities have stayed flat.
美國主修 STEM 的人增加了 43%,
-
Our past president
而人文學科則持平。
-
dedicated over a billion dollars towards STEM education
我們過去的總統
-
at the expense of other subjects,
投入了十億美元到 STEM 教育上,
-
and our current president
犧牲了其他的學科,
-
recently redirected 200 million dollars of Department of Education funding
而我們目前的總統
-
into computer science.
最近將兩億美元的教育部資金
-
And CEOs are continually complaining about an engineering-starved workforce.
轉為導入資訊科學。
-
These campaigns,
而執行長們不斷地抱怨 勞動力中很缺乏工程師。
-
coupled with the undeniable success of the tech economy --
這些倡議
-
I mean, let's face it,
和無可否認的資訊經濟 成功結合在一起──
-
seven out of the 10 most valuable companies in the world by market cap
我們要面對這個事實,
-
are technology firms --
世界上市值最有高的公司,
-
these things create an assumption
十個中有七個是科技公司──
-
that the path of our future workforce will be dominated by STEM.
因而形成了一個假設,
-
I get it.
假設我們未來的勞動力之路 將會由 STEM 所支配。
-
On paper, it makes sense.
我懂。
-
It's tempting.
理論上這是合理的,
-
But it's totally overblown.
它很誘人。
-
It's like, the entire soccer team chases the ball into the corner,
但它完全是誇大其詞,
-
because that's where the ball is.
這就像是整支足球隊 都追著球跑到角落,
-
We shouldn't overvalue STEM.
只因為球在角落。
-
We shouldn't value the sciences any more than we value the humanities.
我們不應該過度重視 STEM。
-
And there are a couple of reasons.
我們不應該把科學學科 看得比人文學科還重要。
-
Number one, today's technologies are incredibly intuitive.
原因有幾個:
-
The reason we've been able to recruit from all disciplines
第一,現今的科技是極端直覺的。
-
and swivel into specialized skills
我們之所以能從各學科領域招募人才
-
is because modern systems can be manipulated without writing code.
再轉為專業技能,
-
They're like LEGO: easy to put together, easy to learn, even easy to program,
是因為現代的系統 不需要寫程式碼也可以操作。
-
given the vast amounts of information that are available for learning.
它們就像樂高:容易組裝、 容易學,甚至容易寫程式,
-
Yes, our workforce needs specialized skill,
前提是能取得大量的資訊 供學習之用。
-
but that skill requires a far less rigorous and formalized education
是的,我們的勞動力 需要特殊化的技能,
-
than it did in the past.
但和過去相比,那技能不再需要
-
Number two, the skills that are imperative and differentiated
那麼嚴格和制式化的教育。
-
in a world with intuitive technology
第二,這個直覺式的科技世界
-
are the skills that help us to work together as humans,
必須有差異性的技能,
-
where the hard work is envisioning the end product
那些能協助人類團結合作的技能,
-
and its usefulness,
困難的是要預想出最終產品
-
which requires real-world experience and judgment and historical context.
以及其用處,
-
What Jeff's story taught us
這就需要有真實世界的經驗、 判斷,以及歷史的情境。
-
is that the customer was focused on the wrong thing.
傑夫的故事讓我們學到,
-
It's the classic case:
客戶把焦點放錯了地方。
-
the technologist struggling to communicate with the business and the end user,
這是個經典的案例:
-
and the business failing to articulate their needs.
技術人員努力和那些
-
I see it every day.
未能表達需求的企業、 終端使用者溝通。
-
We are scratching the surface
我每天都會看到這種事,
-
in our ability as humans to communicate and invent together,
我們正觸及
-
and while the sciences teach us how to build things,
人類溝通和共同發明能力的表面。
-
it's the humanities that teach us what to build and why to build them.
雖然科學教我們如何建造東西,
-
And they're equally as important,
但人文卻教導我們 要建什麼和為什麼要建。
-
and they're just as hard.
它們同等重要,
-
It irks me ...
也一樣困難。
-
when I hear people treat the humanities as a lesser path,
有件事會讓我惱怒……
-
as the easier path.
就是聽到有人把人文學科 視為是比較差的路、
-
Come on!
比較簡單的路。
-
The humanities give us the context of our world.
拜託!
-
They teach us how to think critically.
人文學科讓我們能夠了解 世界的來龍去脈,
-
They are purposely unstructured,
教導我們如何做批評性思考。
-
while the sciences are purposely structured.
它們本來就沒有結構,
-
They teach us to persuade, they give us our language,
而科學本來就有結構。
-
which we use to convert our emotions to thought and action.
它們教我們說服,給我們語言,
-
And they need to be on equal footing with the sciences.
我們用語言把情緒 轉換成思想和行動。
-
And yes, you can hire a bunch of artists
它們必需要和科學學科 有一樣的立基點。
-
and build a tech company
你的確可以僱用一群藝術家
-
and have an incredible outcome.
來創立一間科技公司,
-
Now, I'm not here today to tell you that STEM's bad.
得到了不起的結果。
-
I'm not here today to tell you that girls shouldn't code.
今天我來這裡並不是要 告訴各位 STEM 不好。
-
(Laughter)
我今天在這裡不是要告訴各位 女生不應該寫程式。
-
Please.
(笑聲)
-
And that next bridge I drive over
拜託。
-
or that next elevator we all jump into --
我開車經過的下一座橋,
-
let's make sure there's an engineer behind it.
或是我們進入的下一台電梯──
-
(Laughter)
我們要確保它背後有個工程師。
-
But to fall into this paranoia
(笑聲)
-
that our future jobs will be dominated by STEM,
但若是陷入這種偏執,
-
that's just folly.
認為我們未來的工作 將由 STEM 主導,
-
If you have friends or kids or relatives or grandchildren
那就是太愚蠢了。
-
or nieces or nephews ...
如果你有朋友、孩子、 親戚、孫子孫女,
-
encourage them to be whatever they want to be.
或姪子姪女……
-
(Applause)
鼓勵他們做他們想要做的。
-
The jobs will be there.
(掌聲)
-
Those tech CEOs
工作會等在那裡的。
-
that are clamoring for STEM grads,
那些大聲吵著
-
you know what they're hiring for?
要 STEM 畢業生的執行長們,
-
Google, Apple, Facebook.
他們僱人是要做什麼工作?
-
Sixty-five percent of their open job opportunities
Google、蘋果、臉書,
-
are non-technical:
它們的事求人中
-
marketers, designers, project managers, program managers,
有 65% 是非技術的工作:
-
product managers, lawyers, HR specialists,
行銷人員、設計師、 專案經理、項目經理、
-
trainers, coaches, sellers, buyers, on and on.
產品經理、律師、人力資源專員、
-
These are the jobs they're hiring for.
訓練師、教練、銷售員、買家等等,
-
And if there's one thing that our future workforce needs --
是他們要僱人來做的工作。
-
and I think we can all agree on this --
如果我們未來的勞動力 真需要什麼的話──
-
it's diversity.
我想大家都能認同這點──
-
But that diversity shouldn't end with gender or race.
那就是多樣性。
-
We need a diversity of backgrounds
但,多樣性不該只限於 性別或種族方面而已。
-
and skills,
我們也需要有多樣的背景和技能,
-
with introverts and extroverts
有內向者也有外向者,
-
and leaders and followers.
有領導者也有追隨者。
-
That is our future workforce.
那是我們未來的勞動力。
-
And the fact that the technology is getting easier and more accessible
科技越來越簡單、 越來越容易取得的事實,
-
frees that workforce up
讓勞動力能夠有餘裕,
-
to study whatever they damn well please.
依他們的意願去學他們想學的。
-
Thank you.
謝謝。
-
(Applause)
(掌聲)