(Applause)

誰記得這種惡名昭彰的保麗龍容器？

Well, it sure changed me, it changed my company,

（掌聲）

and it started a revelatory journey

它肯定改變了我，改變了我的公司，

about how adversaries can be your best allies.

它開啟了一段競爭對手

You know, back in the late '80s,

可能會是你最佳盟友的領悟之旅。

this Big Mac clamshell was the symbol of a garbage crisis.

在八〇年代末期，

People were really angry.

這個大麥克的掀蓋式餐盒 是垃圾危機的象徵。

For example, thousands of students,

那時人們都很生氣。

young students around the globe were sending letters, blaming McDonald's,

比如，數以千計的學生，

because we were using millions of these at that time.

世界各地的年輕學生來信指責麥當勞，

Now, no one at McDonald's knew anything about environmentally friendly packaging,

因為當時我們使用了 數百萬個這樣的盒子。

including me.

麥當勞裡沒有任何人 懂得何謂環境友善的包裝，

The last 10 years,

連我也不懂。

I was in charge of logistics and truck drivers.

過去十年，我負責 管理物流和卡車司機。

Then out of nowhere, my boss comes to me

我老闆突然來找我，說：「嘿，

and says, "Hey, we want you to save this clamshell for the company

我們希望你能為公司 拯救這個掀蓋式餐盒事件，

and lead the effort to reduce waste within McDonald's."

並負責麥當勞內部垃圾的縮減。」

I looked at him and I asked him,

我看著他，問他：

"What is polystyrene?"

「保麗龍是什麼？」

But it all sounded intriguing to me

但，在我聽來這些都很有趣，

because it brought me back to my roots.

因為它能帶我回到我的初心。

You see, I grew up in the late '60s, early '70s,

我生長的六〇年代末、七〇年代初，

in a time of huge social upheaval in the United States.

是美國社會正經歷大動盪的時期。

And I was really in tune with the protests, the sit-ins,

而我真的還蠻投入抗議、靜坐、

the anti-Vietnam sentiment,

反越戰的情緒，

and I really felt there was a need to question authority.

且我真覺得需要去質疑權威。

But as I went into university,

但當我上了大學，

I realized that I'm not going to make a living doing this.

我了解到我不能靠這些維生。

And that whole movement had subsided,

隨著整個運動熱度的消退，

and my activist spirit went dormant.

我的激進主義精神也進入了休眠期。

And I needed to make a living,

我需要謀生，所以開始接觸商界。

so I got involved in the business world.

現在，這些反對污染的學生，

So, now these students against pollution,

寄送那些抗議信給麥當勞的學生們，

who were sending those protest letters to McDonald's,

他們讓我想到二十年前的我。

they reminded me of myself 20 years ago.

他們在質疑權威。

They're questioning authority.

但現在，我是那個被質疑的對象。

But now, I'm the man.

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

我是那唯利是圖的商人。

I'm the corporate suit.

我代表著當權者。

I'm the one representing authority.

當時還有樣新興的東西， 叫做企業社會責任，

And this new thing was emerging

後來叫企業的永續發展，

called corporate social responsibility,

現在，我有機會改變現況。

later corporate sustainability,

所以，這趟旅程

and now I had a chance to make a difference.

始於麥當勞同意

So the beginning of this journey

要和環境保衛基金（EDF）合作。

started when McDonald's agreed to a partnership

它是個非政府組織，

with the Environmental Defense Fund.

創立的終旨是「告那些渾蛋」。

They were an NGO

所以，我在想，

that was founded with the principle of "sue the bastards."

他們對我和我的團隊有什麼看法？

So I'm thinking,

當我初次和 EDF 的資深科學家

what are they thinking about me and my team?

理查‧丹尼森見面時，

When I first met Richard Denison,

我非常擔心。

he's the senior scientist for EDF,

我以為他是名極端環保人士，

I was very apprehensive.

我想他應該認為我只在乎錢。

I thought he's a tree-hugger,

我們希望 EDF 團隊 能提供我們實際的解決方案。

and I'm thinking he thinks all I care about is the money.

所以我們做了件合乎邏輯的事。

So we wanted the EDF team to give us real-world solutions.

我們讓他們到我們的餐廳裡煎漢堡肉。

So we did the logical thing.

各位想像理查這位物理學博士，

We had them flip burgers in our restaurants.

試著處理四盎司的牛肉堡，

So you have to imagine Richard,

接著要擠兩次蕃茄醬、一次芥末醬、

who, by the way, is a PhD in physics,

放上三片酸黃瓜、一片洋蔥， 一個接著一個，動作要快。

and there he is, he's trying to dress a quarter-pounder,

你們猜怎樣？

and you're supposed to have two squirts of ketchup, one mustard,

一整天下來他沒做對過一次。

three pickles and an onion, go on to the next one,

他好挫折。

you've got to be so fast.

而我印象深刻，

And you know what? He couldn't get it right all day long.

因為他在試著了解我們的事業。

And he was frustrated.

EDF 的團隊認為

And I was so impressed,

可重覆使用的東西，會是 我們事業體要努力追尋的目標。

because he was trying to understand our business.

我和我的團隊心想， 可重覆使用的東西？

Now, the EDF team,

太佔空間，會搞得一團亂， 會拖慢我們的速度。

they thought reusables were the holy grail for our business.

但我們沒有排斥這個想法。

Me and my team thought, reusables?

他們選了一間在華盛頓特區外的 餐廳，我們到它後面的廚房。

Too much space, they'd make a mess,

洗碗機的運作異常，

they would slow us down.

洗出來的盤子還是髒的。

But we didn't reject the idea.

廚房區域很骯髒汙穢。

We went to the restaurant they chose outside DC, we went to the back room.

和他們在麥當勞所看到 清潔又整齊的廚房相比，

The dishwasher wasn't working properly,

他們能夠看出明顯的差別。

it's spitting out dirty dishes.

我們也坐在一間 麥當勞餐廳裡一整天，

The kitchen area is dirty and grimy.

觀察內用的客人。

And compared to their experience at McDonald's

他們的行為。

that's clean and organized,

結果發現許多客人會帶著食物離開，

they could see the stark difference.

會帶著飲料離開。

We also sat in a restaurant at McDonald's, all day long,

EDF 自己下了結論，

and watched the customers eating in.

認為可重覆使用的東西並不適合我們。

Their behavior.

但，他們還是有很多可行的點子。

Ends up that many customers left with the food,

若沒有 EDF 團隊，我們自己 不可能想到那些點子。

they left with the beverage.

我最喜歡的點子是把白色的外帶袋子

And EDF came to their own conclusion

換成褐色紙袋。

that reusables wouldn't work for us.

我們一直在用白色袋子。

But they did have a lot of ideas that did work.

它是原始材料，

And we never would have thought of them by ourselves,

它是用氯漂的化學方式來漂白的，

without the EDF team.

他們說，要使用未漂白的袋子，

My favorite was switching from the white carry-out bag

沒有化學物質的。

to the brown bag.

它是用回收物品做的，

We had been using the white bag.

大部分都是回收的運輸瓦楞紙盒。

It's virgin material,

結果發現褐色袋子更耐用， 它的纖維更強韌，

it's made from chlorine bleaching chemicals,

我們的成本也沒增加。

and they said, use an unbleached bag,

這是雙贏的局面。

no chemicals.

他們還有另一個點子，

It's made from recycled content,

我們可以把餐巾紙縮小一英吋。

mostly recycled shipping corrugated boxes.

並用辦公室所回收的紙來製造。

Ends up that the bag is stronger, the fiber is stronger,

我心想，一英吋沒什麼大不了的。

it didn't cost us more money.

我們做了，結果每年減少了 三百萬磅的廢棄物。

It was win-win.

因此拯救了一萬六千棵樹木。

Another idea they had

（掌聲）

was that we could reduce our napkin by one inch.

很酷的是，我們 換掉了亮白色的餐紙，

And make it from recycled office paper.

因為用回收材質會變成灰色且有斑點。

I'm thinking, one inch, no big deal.

我們把餐巾紙的外觀做成

We did it, it reduced waste by three million pounds a year.

符合客人的喜好。

Sixteen thousand trees saved.

所以，我漸漸開始真的很享受

(Applause)

和 EDF 團隊合作的時光。

What was really cool is we changed that bright white napkin,

我們多次共進晚餐且討論 到深夜，我們一起去球賽。

because the recycled content became gray and speckled.

我們變成了朋友。

And we made that look, you know,

那時，我學到了人生的一課。

in tune, in vogue with customers.

這些非政府組織的改革鬥士，

So, I came to really enjoy

他們和我沒什麼不同。

the time working with the EDF team.

他們在乎，他們有熱忱，

We had many dinners, late-night discussions,

我們沒有不同。

we went to a ball game together.

我們合作了六個月，

We became friends.

最後規劃出四十二點的 廢棄物減量行動計畫。

And that's when I learned a life lesson.

做減量、重覆使用、回收。

That these NGO crusaders,

我們在九〇年代的那十年 做測量，十年多的時間，

they're really no different than me.

我們減少了三億磅的廢棄物。

They care, they have passion,

如果各位很納悶掀蓋式 保麗龍盒後來怎麼了，

we're just not different.

是的，我們摒棄它了。

So, we had a six-month partnership

幸運的是，我沒丟了工作。

that ended up producing a 42-point waste reduction action plan.

而這段合作關係相當成功，

To reduce, reuse, recycle.

讓我們繼續秉持著這個 和批評者合作的想法。

We measured it during the decade of the '90s,

和他們合作一起找出對社會和對企業

and over 10 years we reduced 300 million pounds of waste.

皆可行的解決方案。

Now, if you're wondering about that polystyrene clamshell,

但，這種合作的點子

yeah, we ditched it.

遇到最反骨的那群人也行得通嗎？

And luckily, I still had a job.

而且，合作的議題還是 我們無法直接控制的議題。

And this partnership was so successful

比如動物權利。

that we went on to recycle the idea to work with critics.

關於動物權利，顯然他們 不希望動物的肉被當成食材。

Collaborate with them on solutions that could work

麥當勞可能是餐飲服務產業中 最大的肉品購買者。

for society and for business.

所以，這點先天上就存在著矛盾。

But could this idea of collaborating

但我認為，最好的做法

work with the most contrarian folks?

是去造訪那時最敢發聲、

And on issues that are, you know, not within our direct control.

警戒心最高的批評者，並向他們學習。

Like animal rights.

包括國際動物權的 領導者亨利‧史皮拉，

Now, animal rights,

還有彼得‧辛格，

obviously they don't want animals used for meat.

他是《動物解放》的作者，

McDonald's, probably the biggest purchaser of meat

該書被認為是動物權利的現代論著。

in the food service industry.

我讀了彼得的書來預作準備，

So there's a natural conflict there.

我試著了解他的心態，

But I thought it would be best

我必須要承認，那很難， 我沒打算變成素食者，

to go visit and learn from the most vociferous and vigilant critics

我的公司也沒要走那個方向。

we had at that time,

但我真心認為我們可以學到很多。

which were Henry Spira, head of Animal Rights International,

所以我在紐約市 安排了一場早餐會面。

and Peter Singer,

我還記得，我坐下來做好準備，

who wrote the book "Animal Liberation,"

我決定我不要點我最愛的食物，

which is considered the modern treatise about animal rights.

因為我最愛的是培根、香腸、蛋。

You know, I read Peter's book to prepare,

（笑聲）

I tried to get into his mindset,

我還是吃酥皮點心就好。

and I have to admit, it was tough,

但我得承認，我預期 會有一場敵對的討論。

I'm not becoming a vegan,

但完全不是如此。

my company wasn't going that way.

亨利和彼得很親切，

But I really thought we could learn a lot.

他們有愛心、很聰明， 提出很好的問題。

And so I set up a breakfast meeting in New York City.

我告訴他們，麥當勞 很難致力於動物福利，

And I remember sitting down, getting ready,

因為我們的直接供應商 只是負責做肉餅的。

and I decided I'm not going to order my favorite,

就供應鏈的角度來看，我們對於 實質改善動物福利的影響鞭長莫及。

which is you know, bacon and sausage and eggs.

他們非常有同理心。

(Laughter)

雖然我們各自的組織在使命上

And I'm just going to stick to the pastries.

是非常直接對立的，

But I have to admit,

我仍然覺得我學了很多。

I was waiting for the adversarial discussion to happen.

最棒的是，他們給了我 一個很棒的建議。

And it never did.

那就是，他們說：

Henry and Peter were just gracious,

「你們應該和泰普‧葛蘭汀博士合作。」

they were caring, they were smart, they asked good questions.

那時我沒聽過這個名字。

I told them about how working on animal welfare

但讓我告訴各位，不論那時或現在，

is very tough for McDonald's

她都是最知名的動物行為專家。

because our direct suppliers, they only make meat patties.

她知道動物的一舉一動， 及牠們在建物設施中的反應。

The animals are three or four steps removed from our influence.

我最後去見了她，

And they were very empathetic.

她是最棒的那種評論家，

And while we were so directly opposed

因為她就只是愛動物， 只想要保護牠們，

in terms of the missions of our organizations,

但她也了解肉品業的現實狀況。

I felt that I had learned a lot.

我永遠不會忘記， 我一生中都沒去過屠宰場，

And best of all, they gave me a terrific recommendation.

所以我和她去了第一次。

And that is, they said,

我不知道會看到什麼。

"You should work with Dr. Temple Grandin."

我們發現，

Now, I didn't know her at the time.

處理動物的人手中都會有電擊棒，

But I tell you,

基本上是用來電擊制服 那場內的每一隻動物。

she's the most renowned expert, then and now, on animal behavior.

我們兩人都很震驚， 她甚至跳上跳下，

And she knows how animals move and how they should react in facilities.

要知道她，她說： 「不能這樣，這樣是不對的，

So I end up meeting her,

我們可以用旗子、塑膠袋，

and she's the very best type of critic,

我們可因應動物的自然行為 來重新設計適合的畜欄。」

in a sense that she just loves the animals,

我安排泰普和我們的供應商見面，

wants to protect them,

以設立標準和指導方針。

but she also understands the reality of the meat business.

及衡量她的動物福利點子 是否有效的方法。

And I'll always remember,

這是我們接下來二到五年的工作。

I had never been to a slaughterhouse in my life,

後來全都整合起來，也都執行了。

and so I go with her for my first trip.

順道一提，麥當勞的兩間供應商

I didn't know what to expect.

因為沒有達到我們的標準 而丟了我們的生意。

And we find that the animal handlers have electric prods in their hands,

最棒的是，所有這些標準 最後被擴大到整個產業。

and are basically zapping almost every animal in the facility.

那些動物不會再遭到電擊。

We're both appalled, she's jumping up and down,

那麼，我們在別處被責怪的議題呢？

you'd have to know her,

比如砍伐森林。

she's saying, "This can't be, this isn't right,

關於那個議題，我一直認為，

we could use flags, we could use plastic bags,

那是政策制訂者和政府要做的事。

we could redesign the corrals for natural behavior."

從來沒有想過這個議題會到我手上。

Well I set up Temple with our suppliers

但我記得，在 2006 年四月初，

to set up standards and guidelines.

我打開我的黑莓機，

And ways to measure her ideas of implementing animal welfare.

讀到一些資訊，內容是 關於綠色和平的倡導者

We did this for the next two to five years.

成群出現在英國，

And it all got integrated, it all got enforced.

每個人穿扮成一隻雞的模樣，

By the way, two of McDonald's suppliers lost business

到麥當勞去吃早餐，

because they didn't meet our standards.

然後把自己鏈在椅子和桌子上。

And best of all,

他們贏得了廣大的注意，

all these standards ended up scaling to the entire industry.

包括我的關注。

And no more zapping of those animals.

我想了解他們剛發布的那份報告，

Now, what about issues that we're blamed for elsewhere?

標題叫做「吃光亞馬遜」。

Like deforestation.

順道一提，雞飼料的主要成份是黃豆，

You know, on that issue, I always thought,

那就是麥當勞被捲入的原因。

policy makers and government, that's their role.

我打電話給世界自然 基金會中所信賴的朋友，

Never thought it would end up in my lap.

我打給保護國際，

But I remember in early April 2006,

我很快就得知，

I opened up my Blackberry,

綠色和平的報告是正確的。

and I'm reading about Greenpeace campaigners

所以，我獲得了內部的支持後，

showing up in the UK by the dozens,

我永遠不會忘記， 隔天，在那活動之後，

dressed as chickens,

我打電話給他們， 說：「我們認同你們。」

having breakfast at McDonald's

我說：「一起合作如何？」

and chaining themselves to the chairs and tables.

三天後，

So they got a lot of attention,

奇蹟發生了，四個麥當勞的人 和四個綠色和平的人

including mine.

在倫敦希斯洛機場會面。

And I was wondering if the report that they had just released,

我必須要說，頭一個小時很緊張。

it was called "Eating Up the Amazon."

因為對彼此沒有太多的信賴感。

And by the way, soy is a key ingredient for chicken feed,

但，似乎一切漸漸成形，

and that's the connection to McDonald's.

因為我們每個人都想要拯救亞馬遜。

So I called my trusted friends at the World Wildlife Fund,

在我們的討論中，

I called Conservation International,

會無法辨別出，我認為無法，

and I soon learned that the Greenpeace report was accurate.

誰是綠色和平的人、誰是麥當勞的人。

So I gathered internal support,

我們所做的其中一件最棒的事

and I'll always remember, next day, after that campaign,

就是我們和他們一起走訪亞馬遜九天，

I called them up,

搭乘綠色和平的飛機， 坐綠色和平的船。

and I said, "We agree with you."

我永遠不會忘記，

And I said, "How about working together?"

想像一下，從亞馬遜的首都瑪瑙斯

So three days later,

向西行數百英里。

miraculously, four people from McDonald's,

那裡的美是原始之美，

four people from Greenpeace,

沒有人造的建物，沒有道路、

we're meeting in the London Heathrow airport.

沒有電線、沒有房子。

And I have to say, the first hour was shaky,

如果你從瑪瑙斯向東行，

it wasn't a whole lot of trust in the room.

你會看見雨林被明顯損毀。

But it seemed like everything came together,

所以，這次不太可能的合作