亞馬遜平淡無(wú)奇的成功秘訣

Walking around downtown Seattle, it’s impossible to avoid the whiff of Amazon that permeates the city. For a newcomer, it’s hard to tell where Seattle ends and Amazon begins, as the skyscrapers of the corporate campus blend so seamlessly into the city centre.

漫步在西雅圖市中心，你會(huì)不可避免地感受到彌漫在這個(gè)城市的亞馬遜(Amazon)氣息。剛到西雅圖的人，很難分清西雅圖的邊界在哪兒，亞馬遜又是從哪兒開(kāi)始的，因?yàn)樵摴緢@區(qū)的摩天大樓很自然地與城市中心融為一體。

Hundreds of US cities fell over themselves last year to compete for Amazon’s second headquarters. (A list of frontrunners was recently narrowed to 20 candidates.) But on a recent trip to Seattle, standing on a rainy sidewalk next to a dull Amazon skyscraper after an interview, I wondered if there was anything very different about this hugely successful company — or if it just happened to be in the right place at the right time, cashing in on the rise of online retail, much as Google did for online search. Some companies are lucky, others work hard, very few run on genius. Which was it?

去年，數(shù)百個(gè)美國(guó)城市竭盡全力參與了亞馬遜第二個(gè)總部的競(jìng)投。(最近，領(lǐng)跑的入圍城市名單縮小至20個(gè)。)最近一次去西雅圖，在一個(gè)雨天結(jié)束采訪后，我站在亞馬遜毫無(wú)特色的摩天大樓旁的人行道上，心里在想，這個(gè)取得巨大成功的公司到底有什么與眾不同——還是說(shuō)他們的成功僅僅是因?yàn)檎紦?jù)了天時(shí)和地利，正好趕上了在線零售業(yè)崛起的大好時(shí)機(jī)，就像谷歌(Google)借了在線搜索的東風(fēng)一樣?一些公司的成功靠的是機(jī)遇，另外一些公司靠的是努力，但也有為數(shù)極少的公司靠的是天才。亞馬遜是哪一類?

To answer this question, I looked up Amazon’s corporate value statement when I got back to San Francisco. Along with Jeff Bezos’s annual letter to shareholders, the values are a mainstay of Amazonian culture. But a lot of these 14 “leadership principles” are just as dreary as you’d expect. One advises leaders to “be right, a lot” — as if anyone ever sets out to be wrong. Another says that talent is important, so hire the best — hardly rocket science.

為了回答這個(gè)問(wèn)題，回到舊金山后，我查閱了亞馬遜的企業(yè)價(jià)值宣言。企業(yè)價(jià)值與杰夫•貝佐斯(Jeff Bezos)給股東的年度致函構(gòu)成了亞馬遜企業(yè)文化的支柱。不過(guò)，亞馬遜的14條“領(lǐng)導(dǎo)原則”中，很多都與你想象的一樣平淡。有一條是建議公司領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層“做正確的事，多多益善” ——好像有人故意要做錯(cuò)似的。另一條說(shuō)，人才很重要，所以要聘用最優(yōu)秀的人才——這也不是什么尖端科學(xué)。

More banalities follow, including “deliver results” and “think big”. If you’re not sure how to do that, try “looking around corners for ways to serve customers”, which sounds more useful for running a restaurant than a business. Furthermore, all this advice is aimed only at leaders, missing the point that not everyone can be a leader all the time.

剩下的就更加稀松平常了，包括“用結(jié)果說(shuō)話”和“從大處著眼”。如果你不確定如何做，可以嘗試“拓寬思路來(lái)尋找服務(wù)客戶的方法”。這些原則似乎更適合經(jīng)營(yíng)一家餐館，而不是經(jīng)營(yíng)一家企業(yè)。再說(shuō)，所有這些建議都只針對(duì)公司領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層，但它忽略了一點(diǎn)，不是所有人永遠(yuǎn)是領(lǐng)導(dǎo)。

However, I did find three messages that seemed vaguely useful. The first is, get over yourself. Amazon doesn’t say that in so many words, but it uses a vivid analogy: “Leaders do not believe their or their team’s body odour smells of perfume.” That’s something the tech wunderkinds in Silicon Valley could afford to hear more often.

但是，我確實(shí)發(fā)現(xiàn)了三條似乎有用的信息。首先，就是別自以為是。亞馬遜并沒(méi)有累述，而是用了一個(gè)生動(dòng)的比喻：“領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者不認(rèn)為自己或者自己團(tuán)隊(duì)的體味是香的。”可以讓硅谷的科技神童們更常聽(tīng)到這些話。

The second useful message is that frugality is good. “Constraints breed resourcefulness,” the document says. I can attest to the truth of this: during my very first meeting with Amazon in one of its San Francisco offices, I was ushered into a spartan meeting room and not even offered a glass of water. Having cycled there, I was somewhat thirsty, but this only prompted me to wrap up the meeting more quickly, saving everyone time. Quite a contrast to most San Francisco tech companies, where meetings usually begin with a perusal of the gourmet beverages on offer in the kitchen, and a lack of cold-brewed coffee or kombucha is seen as an embarrassing omission.

第二個(gè)有用的信息是節(jié)儉是美德。文件說(shuō)：“不大手大腳才能累積資源。”我可以證明這一點(diǎn)是真的：當(dāng)我在亞馬遜舊金山的一個(gè)辦公室與他們第一次會(huì)面時(shí)，被帶到了一個(gè)簡(jiǎn)樸的會(huì)議室，連一杯水也沒(méi)給。我是騎自行車去的，到了后有些口渴，但這只能促使我更快地結(jié)束會(huì)議，節(jié)省每個(gè)人的時(shí)間。這與舊金山的大多數(shù)科技公司形成了鮮明的對(duì)照，與這些公司開(kāi)會(huì)前，通常都會(huì)先讓你瀏覽一份廚房提供的名目繁多的高級(jí)飲料清單，如果沒(méi)有冷釀咖啡或紅茶菌飲料，都會(huì)感到不好意思。

The third interesting principle is, have some backbone. “Do not compromise for the sake of social cohesion,” the document reads. Employees should “respectfully challenge decisions when they disagree, even when doing so is uncomfortable or exhausting”. If you are a contrarian — a type that is ostracised in the can-do Bay Area — this could be the place for you.

第三個(gè)有意思的原則是，要有一點(diǎn)兒骨氣。這份文件寫(xiě)道，“不要為了社會(huì)和諧而妥協(xié)。”員工應(yīng)該“在對(duì)一項(xiàng)決定有不同意見(jiàn)時(shí)，懷有尊敬地提出挑戰(zhàn)，即使這樣做會(huì)讓你感到很不舒服或身心疲憊”。如果你是一位逆向思考者——即在“世上無(wú)難事”的灣區(qū)被排斥的類型——亞馬遜可能是最適合你的地方。

Ironically, the principles that seem the most practical don’t make Amazon sound like a very fun place to work, what with all that confrontation and frugality. Reports of the long hours and tough culture at its offices were published in a New York Times article in 2015, prompting concern and chagrin at the highest levels of the company. Some perks were improved or added, such as more dog-friendly offices and snack bars, and a fancy greenhouse in which workers can hold meetings.

具有諷刺意味的是，由于鼓勵(lì)反抗和崇尚節(jié)儉，這些看似最實(shí)用的原則并沒(méi)有使亞馬遜成為一個(gè)氣氛非常輕松的工作場(chǎng)所。2015年，《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》(New York Times)刊登了一篇關(guān)于亞馬遜工作時(shí)間長(zhǎng)、企業(yè)文化嚴(yán)苛的報(bào)道，引起了公司最高層的關(guān)注和不安。公司改善或增加了一些福利，如增加了寵物狗友好辦公室和零食吧、以及一個(gè)可供員工開(kāi)會(huì)的別致的溫室。

I know a few people who do enjoy working at Amazon — high-achieving, hard-driving types who appreciate the company’s peculiar ways. But the culture is certainly not for everyone.

我認(rèn)識(shí)一些喜歡在亞馬遜工作的人——他們是追求卓越、雄心勃勃的類型，他們認(rèn)同公司與眾不同的做法。當(dāng)然，公司的文化并不是適合每個(gè)人。

Amazon seems to have anticipated this, with a principle that is perhaps the most insightful of all. “As we do new things, we accept that we may be misunderstood for long periods of time.” It’s still not quite genius, but something that we could all do with a bit more of — self-awareness.

亞馬遜似乎已經(jīng)預(yù)料到了這一點(diǎn)，公司最有見(jiàn)地的一項(xiàng)原則也許是：“當(dāng)我們開(kāi)拓新領(lǐng)域時(shí)，我們接受可能在長(zhǎng)時(shí)間內(nèi)被誤解。” 這仍然還算不上天才的做法，而是有一點(diǎn)自我意識(shí)的我們都能做到的事。

Leslie Hook is an FT correspondent in San Francisco

何麗(Leslie Hook)是英國(guó)《金融時(shí)報(bào)》駐舊金山的記者