本集简介
双语字幕
仅展示文本字幕，不包含中文音频；想边听边看，请使用 Bayt 播客 App。
这里是Nivi，您正在收听Nival播客。
This is Nivi, and you're listening to the Nival podcast.
今天我们要讨论招聘、雇佣、团队和文化的话题。
Today we're going to be talking about recruiting, hiring, team, and culture.
Vinod Khosla有句名言：你组建的团队决定了你打造的公司。
There's a famous quote from Vinod Khosla, the team you build is the company you build.
换句话说，他们告诉你这是技术竞赛，实际上却是招聘竞赛。
Or in other words, they told you it was a technology game when it's really a recruiting game.
所以我找到了Naval在2025年8月发的一条推文。
So I pulled up a tweet from Naval from August 2025.
创始人可以委派一切事务，除了招聘、融资、战略和产品愿景。
Founders can delegate everything except recruiting, fundraising, strategy, and product vision.
招聘是最重要的事，因为你需要创造力，需要积极主动的人，理想情况下早期成员都应该是天才。
Recruiting is the most important thing, because you need creativity, you need motivated people, ideally the early people are all geniuses.
他们应该具备自我管理能力、低自我意识、勤奋工作、高度胜任的建设者，技术型人才，可能还有一两个销售人员。
They're self managing, low ego, hardworking, highly competent builders, technical, maybe one or two sellers.
但你无法监督所有事，不能事无巨细地管理。
But you can't watch everything, you can't micromanage everything.
早期成员是公司的DNA。
The early people are the DNA of the company.
当你外包招聘，让他人在没有你直接参与的情况下进行面试和雇佣决策时，那是可悲的一天。
When you outsource recruiting, when you have other people hiring and interviewing and making hiring decisions without your direct involvement in Vito, that's a sad day.
从那天起，公司不再由你直接驱动，中间出现了间接操控的环节。
That's the day that the company is no longer being driven directly by you, there's now a fly by wire element in between.
这种机械式的联系通过另一个人实现，往往存在距离感，而其他人不会像创始人你这样保持同等程度的甄选标准。
There's some mechanical linkage going through another human, often at a distance, and other people are not gonna have the same level of selectivity that you as a founder.
公司开始发生质变的关键规模并非20、30或40这样的任意数字。
The important size at which a company starts changing is not some arbitrary number, like 20 or 30 or 40.
这是创始人不再直接招募和管理每个人的转折点。
It's the point at which the founder is not directly recruiting and managing everyone.
当管理层级出现时，你与公司就产生了某种程度的脱节，直接领导产品团队从零到一的能力也随之消失。
The moment that there are middle layers of management, then you are somewhat disconnected from the company, and your ability to directly drive a product team that can take the company from zero to one goes away.
所以我们真的不能将招聘外包。
So we really cannot outsource recruiting.
人们以为可以。
People think you can.
比如他们会雇佣招聘人员。
They hire recruiters, for example.
或许你可以外包部分人才搜寻工作，但我认为这也很困难。
Maybe you can outsource a little bit of sourcing, but I would even argue that's difficult.
招聘之所以如此重要——很多原因显而易见，我就跳过这些不言自明的理由。
The reason recruiting is so so so important, and a lot of it is obvious, so I'll skip the obvious reasons.
但一个不太明显的原因是：顶尖人才只愿与顶尖人才共事。
But one non obvious reason is that the best people truly only wanna work with the best people.
与水平不及自己的人合作会给他们带来认知负担。
Working with anyone who's not at their level is a cognitive load upon them.
周围能力不足的人越多，他们就越会敏锐地意识到自己属于更好的地方，或者应该独立创业。
And the more people they're surrounded by who are not as good as they are, the more keenly they're aware that they belong somewhere else, or they should be doing their own thing.
最优秀的团队会相互激励。
The best teams are mutually motivated.
他们彼此促进。
They reinforce each other.
每个人都努力给对方留下深刻印象。
Everyone's trying to impress each other.
一个很好的测试方法是：招聘新人时，你应该能对他们说——走进团队成员所在的房间，随机挑选任何人，单独交谈三十分钟来面试他们。
One good test is when you're recruiting a new person, you should be able to say to them, walk into that room where the rest of the team is sitting, take anyone you want, pick them at random, pull them aside for thirty minutes, and interview them.
如果你对他们不感到钦佩，那就不要加入。
And if you aren't impressed by them, don't join.
当你做那个测试时，你会本能地对随机面试某个在你潜意识里浮现的人选感到犹豫。
When you do that test, you will instinctively flinch at the idea of them interviewing randomly a certain person that's kind of in the back of your mind.
那个人就是你需要放手的人。
That's the person you need to let go.
因为正是这个人阻碍你打造一个高效运作、成员间相互激励的团队。
Because that's the person keeping you from having this high functioning team that all wants to impress each other.
这就是你必须坚守的标准，特别是对于你直接管理的首批人员——无论是前20人、30人、40人还是10人。
That's the bar you have to keep, especially for all the people you would directly manage, the first 20, the first 30, the first 40, the first 10, whatever that number is.
在这些早期直接管理的成员中，你在寻找什么特质？
In those early people that you're directly manage, what are you looking for?
沃伦·巴菲特有句老话：智慧、精力、正直——我还要加上低自我。
There's the old Warren Buffett line of intelligence, energy, integrity, I would add low ego.
低自我的人更容易管理。
Low ego people are just much easier to manage.
他们往往较少卷入人际冲突。
They tend to engage less in interpersonal conflict.
他们更关注工作本身，而非玩弄权术或争抢功劳。
They care more about the work than about politicking or fighting for credit.
这样团队规模才能更好地扩展。
You just scale better.
你能管理30到40个低自我的人，而可能只能管理5个高自我的人——因为你总在安抚他们的自尊。
You'll be able to manage 30 or 40 low ego people when you might only be to manage five high ego people because you're always massaging their egos.
所以我认为维诺德的说法完全正确。
So I think Vinod's phrase is absolutely correct.
你打造的团队就是你所建立的公司，特别是那些你直接管理的前n名成员。
That team you built is the company you built, especially for the first n people that you are directly managing.
他们是公司的DNA。
They are the DNA of the company.
回到那条推文，你不能外包融资，因为投资者押注的是你本人。
Back to the tweet, you can't outsource fundraising because investors are betting on you.
如果你将融资外包，那么实际运营公司的人就变成了你的外包方。
If you're outsourcing fundraising, whoever you're outsourcing to is really the person running the company.
优秀的投资者绝不会支持由代理融资人操盘的公司，这就是为什么通过银行家融资的企业总是起步就错了。
Good investors certainly are not going to back a company where there's a proxy fundraiser, which is why companies that raise money through bankers are always starting off on the wrong foot.
你本不该需要银行家来替你融资。
You shouldn't need a banker to raise money for you.
不过在后期轮次会稍有不同，因为你要接触的是常规风投市场之外的资金。
Now, in later rounds, it's a little different because you're reaching money that's outside of the normal venture market.
但尤其在早期阶段，如果你启用银行家，这往往意味着更深层的问题。
But especially in early stage, if you're engaging a banker, that's symptomatic of a deeper problem.
战略必须由你制定并传达。
Strategy, you have to set and communicate the strategy.
产品愿景则存在讨论空间。
Product vision, this is the one that's up for debate.
确实有些创始人会外包产品愿景，但我要说：你的职责是找到最优秀的团队，将他们的能量提炼成完美产品——将他们的知识与创造力具现化为产品。
There are some founders who outsource product vision, but I would argue that because your job here is to take the best team you can find and distill their energy into a perfect product, to instantiate their knowledge and creativity into a product.
你需要统一产品愿景。
You need to unify the product vision.
必须由一个人完全掌握复杂产品的全貌。
One person needs to hold any complex product entirely in their head.
这就是多创始人优势所在，因为能同时兼顾融资、招聘和完整产品愿景的人实在罕见。
And this is where it helps to have more than one founder, because it's rare that someone can fundraise and recruit and hold product vision entirely in their head.
史蒂夫·乔布斯正是这样的存在。
Steve Jobs was one of these people.
埃隆·马斯克可能是另一个例子。
Elon Musk is probably another one.
但通常你会看到一个两人团队。
But usually, you see a two person team.
一个更擅长销售的人，虽然如果他们有些建造背景会更好，这样他们知道自己谈论的内容。
One person who's better at selling, although it helps if they have some builder background, so they know what they're talking about.
以及一个更擅长建造的人。
And one person who's better at building.
但如果他们有一点销售天赋会更好，因为他们可能需要招募其他建造者。
But it helps if they have a little bit of a seller bone because they're probably gonna be recruiting the other builders.
我认为这四个角色中任何一个都无法外包。
I don't think you can outsource any of those four.
确实存在产品愿景被外包的情况。
There are cases where product vision has been outsourced.
有些幕后天才在推动产品愿景，但这些情况很罕见。
There's some brilliant person underneath who's driving the product vision, but those are rare.
通常，核心创始团队会处理所有这四个方面。
Usually, all four are handled by the core founding team.
公司里永远不会有人比创始人更擅长招聘，我这话有两层意思。
There will never be a better recruiter in the company than the founder, and I mean that in two ways.
其一，在任何成功的初创企业中，创始人总是出色的招聘者。
One, in any successful startup, the founder is always a great recruiter.
但另一方面，创始人作为招聘者、作为个人或作为贡献者的素质，决定了你能引进组织的任何人的素质上限。
But there's also the flip side of that, which is the quality of the founder as a recruiter, as a human being, or as a contributor is a cap on the quality of anybody you're going to bring into the organization.
你永远无法雇佣到比你更优秀的人。
You're never going to be able to hire anybody who's better than you are.
没错。
Right.
人们说要雇佣比你优秀的人。
People say hire people who are better than you.
我认为这并不实际。
I don't think that really works.
比你优秀的人不会长期为你工作。
People who are better than you don't wanna work for you for long.
当然，当你建立起庞大的企业体系，形成网络效应和卓越产品后，情况可能会不同——那时你或许能雇佣比你优秀的人，因为你带来的远不止个人能力。
Now, it may be different down the road when you built a huge enterprise and there's a network effect and an amazing product, then maybe you can hire people who are better than you because you're bringing a lot more than just you.
但在创业初期，你能带给公司的只有你自己。
But early on, all you're bringing to the startup is you.
要想让别人愿意为你工作，你至少要与他们水平相当。
And for people to want to work for you, you have to be at least on their level.
这就是为什么我认为早期投资者如此看重创始团队。
This is why I think early stage investors judge the founding team so heavily.
他们甚至不关心初期进展（至少优秀的投资者不会），也不关心合作关系或领域专长。
They don't even care about early progress, at least the good ones don't, or about partnerships or domain expertise.
他们只想看你到底有多优秀。
They just wanna see how good you are.
而证明你能力最清晰的方式，就是招募到优秀人才。
And the clearest way you can show how good you are is by recruiting great people.
另一个不能外包招聘的原因在于：招聘需要极大的创造力。
Another reason you can't outsource recruiting is that recruiting takes a tremendous amount of creativity.
否则你只会重复世界上其他公司都在做的标准化流程，最终得到的也是和其他公司无差别的可替换人才。
Otherwise, you're gonna be doing the same cookie cutter stuff that every other company in the world is doing, and you're going to end up with the same interchangeable talent every other company has.
所以不要因为不懂招聘就认为这是劣势。
So don't take the fact that you don't know anything about recruiting as a negative.
完全正确。
Absolutely.
在我最近的公司里，我认为我招募到了迄今为止共事过的最优秀团队，而且我们打破了许多规则。
In my own most recent company, I think I've recruited the best team I've ever worked with by far, and have broken so many rules.
每一次招聘，我们都必须打破一些核心的招聘规则。
Every single hire, we had to break some core rule of recruiting.
我不会详细说明所有方法，因为其中一些在当前环境下仍然有效的技巧。
I won't go into all of them because some of those are still tricks that are valid in the environment.
有些做法可能游走在边界线上，但我们打破了每一条规则。
Some of those are probably pushing boundaries, but we break every rule.
我们打破了所有关于通勤的反对意见。
We break all the objections around commuting.
我们会消除诸如'哦，我要生孩子了'这样的反对理由。
We'll break the objections around, oh, I'm having a kid.
我们会解决'我无法行使这些期权'的顾虑。
We'll break the objections around, oh, I can't afford to exercise these options.
我们会破除'但我还在大学里'这样的反对声音。
We'll break the objections around, oh, but I'm at a university.
我们甚至能打消那些怀有'我想和最优秀的科学家共事'或'我想在另一种环境中工作'等目标的人的顾虑。
We'll even break the objections around people who may have goals like, oh, I wanna be surrounded by the best scientists, or I wanna work in a different kind of environment.
在2025年的环境下，每个人都在拼命招募AI人才和工程师。
In the 2025 environment, everyone is trying so hard to recruit AI people and engineers.
对顶级工程师的需求比以往任何时候都高，因为他们能通过这些新工具发挥巨大作用。
The demand for top level engineers is higher than ever because they're so leveraged through the new tools.
从给顶尖人才开出的薪资待遇就能明显看出这一点。
And you can just see that in the salary offers that are going out to the top people.
你只需要极具创造力。
You just have to be incredibly creative.
你只需要打破规则。
You just have to break rules.
这就是为什么你不能将招聘外包的另一个原因——外包给他人时，对方并不清楚哪些规则可以打破，哪些不能。
This is another reason why you can't outsource recruiting because when you outsource it, you're outsourcing to someone else who doesn't know what rules they can break and what they can't.
他们的人力资源部门，或者他们害怕会违反某些你不希望被打破的规则。
Their HR, or they're afraid that they'll break some rule that you're not gonna be happy with them breaking.
但作为创始人，你可以打破股权结构表相关的规则。
But as a founder, you can break rules around the cap table.
你可能给每位员工分配固定数量的股票，但有时会遇到必须为其破例的人才。
You might be giving a certain amount of stock to each employee, but one might come along for whom you have to break the rules.
或者你必须说服他们为何不能为其破例。
Or you have to convince them why you can't break the rules for them.
或者你需要以不同方式设计他们的股权激励、薪资结构、入职日期、工作时间、办公地点、职位头衔、合作对象、汇报线、办公环境、招聘权限、决策话语权、负责产品模块、所属部门，以及如何跨部门兼任角色。
Or you have to structure their stock compensation a different way, or their salary in a certain way, or their start date, or their hours, or their location, or their title, or who they're working with, or who they're reporting to, or what their office is like, or who they get to hire, or what say they get to have, and what part of the product, or in what part of the company, or how they get to straddle roles across different parts of the company.
要吸引顶尖人才就必须打破常规，因为他们不是机器中的齿轮。
You're gonna have to break rules to get the best people because the best people are not cogs in a machine.
他们无法被简单地归类安置。
They don't fit into a neat and comfortable place.
他们具备多学科能力，需要随时切换身份：电气工程师、软件工程师、市场专员、产品经理等等。
They're multidisciplinary, and they have to temporarily don an identity of, oh, I'm an electrical engineer, I'm a software engineer, I'm a marketer, I'm a product manager, whatever.
但优秀人才无所不能。
But the great people are capable of anything.
他们选择专攻某个领域，但其见解在所有领域都极具价值。
They chose to specialize in a particular thing, but their input is valuable everywhere.
并且他们能赢得同行群体的尊重。
And they're respected by a group of peers.
我的联合创始人喜欢用拉丁语'primus interpares'（同辈之首）来形容——在各自专长领域，每个人都因其独特技能被同伴公认为平等群体中的首席。
My co founder has a phrase he likes to use from Latin, primus interpares, first among equals, where they're all peers, but each person given their expertise and their particular know how is acknowledged by the others as being the first among equals in a given domain.
比如某人可能更擅长命名与品牌塑造。
So one person might be better at naming and branding.
一个人可能在工业设计方面更出色。
One person might be better at industrial design.
另一个人可能在电气工程或软件工程方面更优秀，或者在另一个领域有独到见解。
The other person might be better at electrical engineering or software engineering or have taste in a different domain.
但优秀的团队应由多面手组成，他们既能胜任多种工作，又在特定领域具备极致的品味和判断力，而团队成员也足够聪明，能识别这些专长并赋予他们在该领域的决策权。
But a great team will have multidisciplinary people who are each capable of doing many jobs, but are specialized and have extreme taste and judgment in particular areas, and their peers are smart enough to recognize where they have that taste and will confer upon them the ability to make decisions in that area.
你不仅要打破招聘规则，还要打破公司运营方式和组织架构的常规。
You have to break the rules not just on recruiting, but also on operating the company and how it's structured.
每家优秀的公司都有其独特之处。
Every good company is idiosyncratic.
它的文化是独一无二的。
Its culture is unique to it.
你不能简单地移植它。
You can't just transplant it.
举个例子，在我的最新公司，我们没有使用Slack这类群聊平台。
To give you an example, at my latest company, we don't use Slack, which is one of these group chat platforms.
尤其在小公司里，Slack很容易变成闲聊场所。
And especially in a small company, Slack just becomes a hangout spot.
它有点像电子邮件。
It's kinda like email.
通过邮件，太容易给大群人派发任务了。
In email, it's too easy to generate tasks for large groups of other people.
我花五秒钟就能发一封包含20项待办事项的邮件给别人。
I can fire off an email with 20 to dos for other people, and it takes me five seconds to generate that email.
而收件人却要花一整天来回复处理。
And then it takes up the day of the other people trying to respond to it.
这造成了单方面浪费他人时间的能力。
It creates this asymmetric ability to waste other people's time.
随着时间的推移，电子邮件已退化成为一种信号极少而噪音极多的媒介，也就是垃圾邮件。
Over time, email has degenerated into a medium where there's very low signal and a lot of noise, aka spam.
甚至是来自朋友、家人和同事的好意垃圾邮件。
Even well meaning spam from friends, family, and coworkers.
因此我们也转向短信交流，因为我们明白其准入门槛更高。
So we also switch to text messaging where we understand the barrier to entry is higher.
比如，如果你要给我发短信，最好是有重要的事。
Like, you if you're gonna text me, it better be important.
如果你频繁给我发无关紧要的信息，我很可能会把你静音。
And if you're texting me a lot and it's not that important, I'm probably gonna mute you.
或者在群聊中如果有人发太多消息，你会直接退出群聊——这就是为什么所有大型群聊最终都会逐渐沉寂，因为靠谱的人都选择静音或退出。
Or if you're in a group text and someone starts messaging too much, you exit the group text, which is why all these large group text die out over time because the good people mute them and leave.
Slack等群聊平台也有类似现象，它们会逐渐演变成人们随意提问、发表预测、搞政治斗争、争吵不休、讨论与工作无关内容的混合体。
Slack and group messaging platforms have a similar dynamic, where over time, they degenerate into a combination of people asking random questions in the thin air, people prognosticating, people politicking, people bickering, people talking about stuff that is not germane to the work.
这些平台主要变成了构建团队文化的娱乐场所，虽然无可厚非，但信号噪音比极高。
And they become largely entertainment platforms for group culture building, which is fine, with a high noise to signal ratio.
反观不使用Slack时，遇到问题你必须认真思考并尝试自行解决。
Whereas if you don't have Slack, if you have a question, you have to really think about and try to solve it yourself.
如果解决不了，还得找出公司里谁可能知道答案。
And if you can't, you have to figure out who in the company might have an answer to that question.
然后你得找到那个人——这非常打扰对方——还得考虑如何得体地请教。
And you have to track that person down, which is highly interruptive, and you have to figure out how to approach them properly.
你可能会说这种沟通成本太高了。
You could argue that communication overhead is too high.
这恰恰限制了公司的扩张能力——而这正是关键所在。
This limits your ability to scale as a company, which is exactly the point.
当少数精英共同协作从零到一打造产品时，最不需要的就是规模化。
When you have a small number of brilliant people working together to try to take a product from zero to one, the last thing you want is scale.
规模是你的敌人。
Scale is your enemy.
只需要一小群人就能创造出伟大的东西。
It just takes a small group of people to create something great.
每个优秀的创始人都明白这一点。
Every good founder knows this.
史蒂夫·乔布斯在苹果推行保密制度的原因之一，就是防止团队过度交叉影响、互相插手业务并争夺功劳。
One of the reasons Steve Jobs implemented secrecy at Apple was to prevent teams from cross pollinating too much and being in each other's business and trying to take credit for each other's work.
这也是为什么他把Macintosh团队搬到与Apple II团队不同的办公楼。
It's also why he moved the Macintosh team into a separate building from the Apple two team.
埃隆·马斯克鼓励人们离开会议，只进行站立会议。
Elon Musk encourages people to walk out of meetings and do standing meetings only.
杰夫·贝索斯将团队限制在两张披萨能喂饱的规模。
Jeff Bezos limits teams to two pizza teams.
这些都是创始人试图反规模化的举措，将公司拆分为更小的单元，让人们真正投入工作而非把时间浪费在会议和政治上。
These are all attempts by founders to unscale the company, to break it down into smaller components so people can actually get work done instead of spending all their time in meetings and politicking.
Slack打破了这些边界。
Slack breaks those boundaries.
它允许50人同时在一个群组里互相消耗时间。
It allows 50 people to be in a group at once and waste each other's time.
如果你迫使人们审慎对待互动方式，从会议日程转向创造者日程，人们就能获得不受干扰的自由创作时间。
If you force people to be thoughtful about their interactions, you move from a meeting schedule to a maker schedule, then people can have uninterrupted free time to be creative.
而创造力才至关重要——因为我们确实生活在无限杠杆的时代，AI和机器人技术每天都在印证这一点。
And creativity is all that matters because we do live in the age of infinite leverage, and AI and robotics are making that more clear every day.
你需要让员工感到无聊而非忙碌。
You need to let your people be bored rather than busy.
总是用琐事让他们保持忙碌是低效的。
Always keeping them busy with make work is not effective.
你需要给创作者和建设者时间，也就是大量不受干扰的自由时间来进行深度创造性工作。当他们从这种状态中探出头来感到无聊时，可以去跑步、陪伴家人，甚至刷TikTok。
You need to give the makers time, builders time, which means large amounts of uninterrupted free time to do deep creative work, And then when they stick their heads out of that and they're bored, they can go for a run or they can spend time with their family or they can even go surf TikTok.
没人会评判他们。
No one's judging.
但他们能更好地管理自己的时间。
But they get to manage their time better.
而Slack却把会议这种弊病变成了全天候无孔不入的存在。
Where Slack takes the disease of meetings and makes it pervasive twenty four seven.
所以现在除了查看电子邮件收件箱，你还得查看Slack收件箱。
So now on top of checking your email inbox, you have to check your Slack inbox.
它就像TikTok一样具有阴险的成瘾循环——虽然大部分是垃圾信息，但偶尔会有精华内容。
And it has that TikTok like insidious addiction loop where there's a lot of slop in there, but once in a while there's a nugget.
于是你不得不持续翻找这堆垃圾来寻找那点精华。
So you're constantly now running through this pile of slop to find that nugget.
人们可以通过发送一条消息就非对称地浪费他人时间——这条消息可能让其他50个人不得不筛选判断它是否属于垃圾信息。
People can asymmetrically waste each other's time by sending one message that then 50 other people have to sift through and figure out if it's slop or not.
因此在小团队中，一对一沟通效率更高。通过限制Slack的使用（尤其在早期），你可以迫使团队保持精简规模。
So especially in a small team, one on one communications are much better, and by limiting the use of Slack, especially early on, you can force the team to stay small.
当团队规模小时，滥竽充数者无处藏身。
And when a team is small, people who aren't pulling their weight can't hide.
作为领导者你能更高效地优化团队。
You can curate it much better as a leader.
你可以直接管理或协作，真正打造出改变世界的产品。
You can manage them directly or work with them directly, and you can actually deliver world changing products.
这让我想起纳西姆·塔勒布的观点：永远不要雇佣助理，因为这给了你扩大规模的机会，最终助理会产生反效果，让你变得更忙而非更轻松。
It reminds me of Nassim Taleb's idea of never hiring an assistant because it gives you the opportunity to expand your scale and the assistant ends up having a paradoxical effect of making you busier instead of less busy.
2025年7月你曾发推说，初创公司的工作就是发掘未被发现的人才并将其提炼成产品？
In July 2025, you tweeted that the job of a startup is to find undiscovered talent and distill it into a product?
显然，产品愿景已经存在。
Obviously, the product vision is there.
显然，你必须找到人才。
Obviously, you have to find talent.
关键在于未被发现的。
The key is undiscovered.
这是我们尚未讨论的部分，我认为很多人忽略了这一点。
That's the part that we haven't talked about and that I think a lot of people miss.
如果你能轻易从远处识别人才，其他人也能做到。
If you can identify the talent from afar easily, so can everybody else.
你必须在别人之前找到他们。
You have to find them before other people do.
你该怎么做？
How do you do this?
埃隆可能是这方面的现代大师。
Elon is probably the modern master of this.
尽管乔布斯、阿尔特曼和其他一些人在这一点上也做得非常出色。
Although Jobs, Altman, and a few other people have also done extremely well in this regard.
埃隆使用的策略很有趣。
The playbook that Elon uses is interesting.
首先，选择一个极其大胆的使命。
First, you pick a mission that's extremely audacious.
一天只有这么多小时。
There's only so many hours in a day.
反正你都要工作，不如做些大事。
You're gonna work anyway, you might as well work on something big.
最优秀的人内心深处都明白这一点。
The best people know that deep down.
他们想做一些大事。
They wanna work on something big.
例如，我认为最优秀的人不想开发电子游戏或那些浪费生命的低劣娱乐产品。
For example, I think the best people don't wanna build video games or slop entertainment that's wasting people's lives.
他们不想建立一个加密货币赌场。
They don't wanna build a crypto casino.
最优秀的人想做有意义的工作，因为他们内心深处意识到自己的潜力。
The best people want to do meaningful work because deep down, they're aware of their potential.
所以当他们看到有机会以工程师、艺术家的身份表达自我时——希望两者兼具，因为我认为伟大的工程师往往也是伟大的艺术家——他们会被重大使命所吸引。
And so when they see an opportunity to express themselves as engineers, as artists, hopefully, as both, because I think the great engineers are often great artists as well, they're going to be drawn to a big mission.
埃隆做的第一件事就是选择一个宏大使命，并以尽可能宏大的方式呈现它。
The first thing Elon does across the board is he picks a big mission, and he frames it in the largest way possible.
我们不是要进入太空。
We're not going into space.
我们不是要去月球。
We're not going to the moon.
我们要去火星。
We're going to Mars.
那是个重大使命。
That's a big mission.
同样，萨姆·奥特曼始终坚持：我们不只是为了视频流开发Sora。
Similarly, Sam Altman stays true to we're not just building Sora to video feeds.
我们不只是开发聊天机器人。
We're not just building chatbots.
我们正在构建通用人工智能（AGI）。
We're building AGI.
他对此从未动摇。
He's not wavering from that.
他想要打造通用人工智能。
He wants to build AGI.
埃隆并不满足于只做电动汽车。
Elon doesn't wanna stop at just electric cars.
他甚至不满足于自动驾驶汽车。
He doesn't even wanna stop at self driving cars.
他想要机器人。
He wants robots.
他想要一支一亿规模的机器人大军。
He wants an army of a 100,000,000 robots.
特斯拉正在全力以赴。
Tesla is going all the way.
这些愿景很激励人心。
So these are inspiring.
这些能吸引最优秀的人才。
These attract the best people.
第二，你要趁早。
Second, you're early.
你要率先布局这些使命，在所有人之前行动。
You lay out these missions, and you do it before everybody else does.
所以埃隆在航天热之前就创立了SpaceX。
So Elon did SpaceX long before space was cool.
当时人们认为这不可能实现。
People thought it was impossible.
因此他成功在所有人之前，吸引了来自NASA、波音、洛克希德和大学的最顶尖工程师。
And so he managed to attract the best engineers out of NASA and Boeing and Lockheed and universities before everybody else did.
如果你身处更拥挤的领域，就需要发挥创意，发掘该领域未被发现的人才。
Now, if you're in a more crowded space, you need to get creative and find the undiscovered talent in that space.
等到有人在Twitter上成名时，招募他们已经太迟了。
By the time someone's famous on Twitter, it's too late to recruit them.
众所周知。
Everybody knows.
甚至当某人功成名就，论文奖项尽收囊中时，也很难招募他们。
Even by the time someone is pedigreed, they've won all the awards in the papers, very hard to recruit.
你得另辟蹊径接近他们。
You're gonna have to hack your way to them.
因此要成为顶尖的招聘者，首先必须是优秀的寻才专家。
So to be a great recruiter, you have to first be a great sourcer.
优秀的寻才者是未发现人才的猎手，这意味着你需要有独到眼光，对他人保持兴趣，并愿意投入时间。
And a great sourcer is a good hunter of undiscovered talent, which means you have to have taste, and you have to have interest in other people, and you have to put in the time.
比如，我的联合创始人就热衷于寻找爱捣鼓的人。
For example, my cofounder loves to find tinkerers.
他喜欢发掘非主流项目，不是那些显而易见的主流成果。
He loves to find weird projects, not mainstream projects, not the obvious stuff.
他不会关注谁在训练更好的AI模型。
He's not looking at who's training a better AI model.
那太容易发现了。
That's too obvious.
相反，他可能会关注边缘领域，比如谁在用古怪的机器学习算法做微气象预测。
Instead, he might be looking at something adjacent, like who's really into using weird ML algorithms for micro weather forecasting.
然后他会花一两天研读对方的GitHub或论文，真正理解其内容。
Then he'll spend a day or two going through their GitHub or going through their paper and really understanding it.
接着他会深入思考。
And then he'll go off and he'll think deeply about it.
最后带着改进方案或修改建议回来。
And then he'll come back with a tweak or a modification.
他会给那个人发邮件说，嘿，我看到你的代码了。
And he'll email that person and say, hey, I saw your code.
我看到你做了什么。
I saw what you've done.
我觉得这真的很有趣。
I thought it's really interesting.
我写了一些代码，可能你会想整合或接入。
I wrote a little bit of code that I think you may wanna incorporate or plug in.
或者我有个问题，通常是个好问题。
Or I have a question, and usually it's a good question.
这是个经过深思熟虑的问题。
It's a considered question.
对方会积极回应，因为他们本是在业余时间捣鼓些东西，突然有人注意到了他们的成果并提出了有价值的问题。
And the person responds well because here they are off tinkering on the side and somebody has spotted their tinkering and has a good question about it.
最棒的是他这么做并不是为了招聘人才。
And the best part is he's not doing this to recruit people.
他这么做纯粹是因为这就是他的兴趣所在。
He's doing this because that's just what he does for fun.
他是真心感兴趣。
He's genuinely interested.
所以他发现这些在边缘领域独自钻研的怪才，然后我就能去招募他们。
So he finds these weird loners tinkering at the edge, and then I get to go in and recruit them.
大多数时候会失败，但偶尔会成功，而且总能发现非常有趣的人。
Most of the time it fails and sometimes it succeeds, but you find really interesting people.
这就是他的品味如何帮助他锁定特定人群的例子。
That's an example of how his taste allows him to source a particular category of people.
所以你必须要在未被发掘的地方寻找人才。
So you do have to look for talent in undiscovered places.
我们公司最近招了一名助理，就是我偶然在餐厅遇到的一个人，他极其热情好客，但从未在科技公司工作过一天。
We recently hired an assistant at the company, and it was just someone I ran into at a restaurant who was incredibly hospitable and had never worked a day in their life at a tech company.
但你就能看出这个人做什么都很出色。
But you could just tell this person was good at everything they did.
他们经手的每件事都品质上乘、风格独特，他们很用心。
Everything they touch was quality and stylish, they cared.
我们招募了他。
We recruited them.
我们尝试了一次。
We took a chance.
所以关键在于发掘未被发现的人才，而不是那些显而易见的人才。
So it's about finding undiscovered talent, not the obvious talent.
这也是外包招聘的另一个问题，你把招聘交给猎头，交给人力资源部门。
And this is another problem with outsourcing recruiting, which is you hand to a recruiter, you hand to HR.
他们不会给你带来特立独行的人。
They can't bring you weird people.
风险太高了。
It's too high risk.
他们自己也没有这种眼光。
They don't have the taste themselves.
创造者能识别其他创造者的才华。
Makers have taste in other makers.
建设者能识别其他建设者的才华。
Builders have taste in other builders.
工程师能识别其他工程师的才华。
Engineers have taste in other engineers.
优秀的销售能识别其他销售人才的才华。
Good salespeople have taste in other salespeople.
文案写手对其他文案写手的作品有鉴赏力。
Copywriters have taste in other copywriters.
所以这很难外包出去。
So it's very hard to outsource that.
顺便说一句，我最讨厌雇佣那些没有自我营销能力的市场公关人员。
As a related aside, one of my pet peeves is hiring marketing and PR people who have no evidence of being able to market themselves.
比如你想雇人管理社交媒体，那他们自己的社交媒体账号必须做得非常出色。
For example, if you wanna hire someone to do your social media, they better have a great social media account for themselves.
他们应该在社交媒体领域玩得风生水起。
They should be playing their own social media game at the top of the game.
事实上，我认为最优秀的社交媒体人才根本雇不到。
And in fact, I would argue the best social media people are not even hireable.
你必须在他们初露锋芒时就发现他们，那时他们的账号还很小很新但潜力无限，或者以合作方式签约——因为他们明白真正的机会是打造个人专属频道，他们只会短暂为你服务而不会完全交出自己的频道。
You have to discover them when they're very raw, when their accounts are small and young and up and coming, or if they contract with them, because they know that their real opportunity is to build a channel around themselves uniquely, and they'll briefly write you their channel rather than hand it over to you completely.
AngelList在人才招募上做了个创新：把一楼改造成咖啡馆。
One thing AngelList has done to be creative in sourcing is to turn our 1st Floor into a cafe.
叫做创始人咖啡馆，这里持续吸引着单打独斗的创业者和小型初创团队。
It's called Founders Cafe, and we have a constant stream of founders, one man companies, two person companies that are just trying to get started.
虽然很多这样的公司最终会失败，但如果他们倒闭了我们就有机会招募这些人。
And a lot of these companies are not gonna go anywhere, and we will have the opportunity to recruit them if their companies fail.
没有招聘专员能想出这种点子。
This is not an idea that any recruiter is going to come up with.
我还要更进一步建议。
And I would go one level further.
我觉得开这种咖啡馆不该是为了招人，而是因为你喜欢和创业者相处，单纯享受经营咖啡馆的乐趣。
I think you should open a cafe like that, not because you wanna recruit people, but just because you like hanging around founders and you like having a cafe.
这样会更真实自然，不会像在工作，效果反而更好，还能带来额外收获。
That's gonna be a lot more genuine and authentic and won't feel like work, and you'll do a better job, and then there'll be ancillary benefits to it.
同意。
Agreed.
我们开设它是因为我们的业务就是服务创始人。
We opened it because we are in the business of serving founders.
2025年8月，你曾在推特上说每个伟大的工程师同时也是艺术家。
In August 2025, you tweeted that every great engineer is also an artist.
我对此有切身体会，不过我们还是先聊聊什么是艺术。
I know this experientially, but let's also talk about what art is.
我对艺术的定义比传统定义宽泛得多。
My definition of art is much broader than a conventional definition.
我认为艺术是那些因其本身而被精心完成的事物，通常能创造美感或引发强烈情感。
I characterize art as something that is done for its own sake and done well, and often creates a sense of beauty or some strong emotion.
而且很多工程师都是内向的人。
And a lot of engineers are introverts.
顺便说一句，我讨厌'incel'这个词。
As an aside, I hate the term incel.
这只是贬低内向者的一种方式。
It's just a way of putting introverts down.
可以说这是新时代的'书呆子'代名词。
It's the new nerd, if you will.
如果有人称某人是incel，我反而更想面试他们。
If someone says that somebody is an incel, I'm more likely to wanna interview them.
所以我们还是远离这些侮辱性词汇吧。
So let's move away from the slurs.
但内向者往往更倾向于通过其他事物表达自己，而非直接外向表达。
But introverts tend to want to express themselves through other things rather than going out and expressing themselves directly.
那他们会怎么做呢？
So what are they going to do?
他们会通过自己的手艺来表达自我。
They're going to express themselves through their craft.
他们会创作艺术。
They're going to create art.
在我现在的公司里，至少有一半工程师在业余时间从事着世界级的严肃艺术创作。
In my current company, at least half the engineers have serious artwork they've done on the side, World class artwork.
从优雅的数学证明到精美的计算机艺术，再到用黏土雕塑、设计服装、设计门把手和水瓶。
Everything from elegant mathematical proofs to beautiful computer art to literally sculpting things with clay, designing clothing, designing doorknobs, water bottles.
有人制作了令人惊叹的音乐视频，质量非常高。
There's one who's done incredible music videos, really good stuff.
我发现很多优秀工程师比所谓的艺术家更热衷于尝试AI艺术产品。
And I see a lot of the better engineers tinker with the AI art products much more so than even so called artists do.
我认为很多艺术家对AI艺术产品感到恐惧，认为这会取代他们。
I think a lot of artists are scared by AI art products saying this is gonna replace me.
而那些不以艺术家自居、不感到威胁的人，只把它当作工具，尝试用它来探索创作可能。
Whereas someone who doesn't have that identity of an artist and doesn't feel threatened by it, it's just a tool, and they try it out to see what it can create.
任何为做而做，且尽力做到极致的事情都是艺术。
Anything done for its own sake and done as well as one possibly can is art.
伟大的工程师也是艺术家。
And great engineers are also artists.
他们无所不能。
They're capable of anything.
只是他们选择成为工程师并专注于建造事物，因为工程学是将你的想法和艺术转化为实际可用事物的能力，这些事物能重复运作，让人们从中获益。
It's just they've chosen to be engineers and focused on building things, because engineering is the ability to turn your ideas and your art into things that actually work, that do something useful, that embodies some knowledge in a way that it can be repeated, and people can get utility out of it.
但这并不意味着它不能是美丽的。
But that doesn't mean that it can't be beautiful.
再次引用我联合创始人的观点：如果你问他什么是最好的艺术形式——绘画、音乐、文学等，对他来说就是工业设计。
Again, I'm channeling my cofounder, but if you ask him what is the best form of art, painting, music, literature, etcetera, For him, it's industrial design.
以AirPods为例，它们的气动造型设计既要符合中国工厂的特定成本生产要求，又要完美契合技术规范——磁吸式充电仓的卡位设计令人愉悦，内置‘查找我的AirPods’功能的充电盒开创行业先河，所有冗余按键都被巧妙隐藏，备用电池的携带方案别出心裁，可更换耳塞的设计让佩戴更贴合人耳。
For example, if you look at the AirPods, the way they're sculpted aerodynamically and still have to be manufacturable on a machine at a certain price point by someone in China, according to a spec, the way they satisfyingly click into the little resting places in their case with magnets, the way they pioneered that whole charging case with the find my AirPods product built in, the way they hid all the extra buttons, the way they made it carry spare batteries, the way they fit inside your ear with the replaceable tips.
这是艺术与工程的奇迹。
That is a marvel of art and engineering.
要让产品既符合人体工学又保留耳朵的自然美感，同时实现特定成本的大规模量产，并确保所有细节协调运作，这需要惊人的艺术造诣。
It took incredible artistry to figure out how to design it so it fits, sculpted into the human ear, which is a beautiful natural form, while still being mass producible at a certain price point, and making all of the little elements work together.
当你合上AirPods充电仓时，那声清脆的‘咔嗒’令人无比满足。
When you close the lid on the AirPods, it makes a very satisfying snap.
机身边缘的曲线，那三条精妙的弧度。
The way the curves around it, those are g three curves.
这些曲线都是手工雕琢后扫描成型的。
Those are hand sculpted and then scanned in.
计算机无法生成这样的曲线。
Computers can't generate those.
握在手中的触感，宛如天外坠落的抛光鹅卵石般温润。
The way it feels in your hand, it feels like a smooth polished pebble that fell from the sky.
这是美的化身。
It's a thing of beauty.
这是艺术杰作。
It's a work of art.
我认为人们本能地感知到这点，所以相比各类安卓产品更青睐苹果——因为它们本身就是雕塑般的艺术品。
And I think people intrinsically know that, which is why they flock to Apple products over various Android products because they are sculpted like works of art.
你能感受到其中倾注的心血。
The care goes in there and you can feel it.
苹果的成功在于它汇聚了一群真正执着的人，那些工程师艺术家。
Apple triumphed as a company of people who genuinely deeply cared, of engineer artists.
这就是为何时至今日，即便其他创始人近期创造了更高市值，他们依然仰望苹果。
That's why to this day, even all the other founders, even ones who might have built more market cap recently than Apple has, they still all look up to Apple.
我们这一代的每位创业者，包括后来几代人，最崇拜的都是史蒂夫·乔布斯和他的团队，因为他们不仅是工程师，更是真正的艺术家。
Every entrepreneur from my generation, and I think many subsequent generations, looks up to Steve Jobs and his team more than any other because they were truly artists, not just engineers.
在我看来，任何职位的理想人选都应该具备技术素养、艺术气质，能持续创造新知识，并能通过代码、产品或AI实现工作重复环节的自动化。
To me, the ideal person for any role is technical, an artist, constantly generating new knowledge, and finally, automating the repetitive parts of their job through code, product, or AI.
虽然存在例外，但任何职位的理想候选人要么具备这些能力，要么正积极追求获得这些能力。
Exceptions apply, but the ideal candidate for any role should either have these capabilities or be aspiring to gain these capabilities.
技术型、艺术范、持续创造新知（可称之为创造力）、并能自动化处理工作中繁琐部分。
Technical, an artist, constantly generating new knowledge, call that creativity, and automating the tedious parts of their job.
我认为这是对的。
I think that's right.
值得注意的是，当你谈到自动化时，刻意避开了通过流程或人力实现自动化。
And it's telling that when you talked about automation, you left out automating through process or people.
那是最糟糕的自动化形式，因为这会让非技术或缺乏创造力的人参与流程，这些人不会长期满意这种工作——他们只是机器中的齿轮，最终会被某项技术取代。
That's the worst form of automation because then that adds nontechnical or non creative people into the process, and those people aren't gonna be happy in those jobs for long because they're cogs in a machine and will eventually be replaced by some piece of technology.
这还会改变环境氛围，因为人类是社交动物。
It also changes the environment, because humans are social animals.
如果开始混搭不同类型的人，他们总会想要迁就他人，于是对话层次就会发生偏移。
If you start mixing them together, they're always gonna wanna accommodate the other people, and so the level of conversation will shift.
比如房间里既有政客又有工程师，你们很快就不会继续讨论工程技术了。
For example, if you have a bunch of politicians in a room and a bunch of engineers, you're not gonna be talking engineering for long.
最终总会滑向大众话题。
Eventually, you will drift into common topics.
在足够大的群体里，永恒的共同话题永远是旅行和美食，因为这些话题最安全。
And in a large enough group, the common topics are always travel and food because they're non threatening topics.
展开剩余字幕（还有 324 条）
人们总会退化到这种状态。
People always degenerate to that.
如果想建立真正以使命为导向的强文化团队，就不能混入太多不同类型的人。
If you really wanna have a strong culture of people who are mission oriented, you can't mix too many different kinds of people.
这就是邪教与文化的起源。
That's where the cult and culture comes from.
青少年群体确实看起来像邪教。
Early teens do look like cults.
他们偏执狂热。
They are monomaniacal.
他们古怪，但都以相似的方式古怪着。
They are weird, but they're all kind of weird in a similar way.
如果混入太多不同类型的人，只会得到平庸的平均值，这无法打造伟大的公司或产品。
And if you start mixing too many different kinds of people, you're just gonna get a bland average, which is not how you're gonna build a great company or product.
这是均值回归的问题。
It's a regression to the mean problem.
其实有个不愿具名的知名创始人在Quora旧帖里说过，初创公司最不需要的就是所谓的'多样性'。
There's actually a old Quora thread by a famous founder that I won't name, where he says the last thing you want in an early stage company is quote unquote diversity.
你需要单一文化——所有人都信仰相同事物，否则时间全耗在无休止的争论上，而初创阶段根本耗不起这时间。
You want a monoculture of people who all believe the same things because if you don't have that, you're going to just spend your time arguing about everything, and you don't have that time at an early stage startup.
必须确保全员思想高度统一，这样才有余力争论那些真正能推动业务发展的少数议题。
So you need everybody to already be on the same exact page, and then there's a few things that you might argue about that really move the needle on the performance of the business.
创始人和其他人一样渴望受欢迎。
Founders wanna be popular like everybody else.
所以对外他们会营造共识驱动的形象，有时甚至蠢到自己也信了这套说辞。
So externally, they'll try to project this image that they're consensus driven, and sometimes they're even stupid enough to fall for it.
但我近距离或远距离观察过的所有杰出创始人，都极度固执己见，管理方式近乎独裁。
But every great founder I've seen up close or even from afar is highly opinionated, and they're almost dictatorial in how they run things.
初创团队往往固执己见，他们打造的产品也充满主张。
Also, early stage teams are opinionated, and the products they built are opinionated.
所谓'充满主张'，就是对其该做与不该做的事有着强烈愿景。
Opinionated means they have a strong vision for what it should and should not do.
如果你对产品该做什么、不该做什么没有清晰的愿景，最终就会陷入功能堆砌的混乱局面。
If you don't have a strong vision of what it should and should not do, then you end up with a giant mess of competing features.
杰克·多西有句名言：限制细节数量，让每个细节都臻于完美。
Jack Dorsey has a great phrase, limit the number of details and make every detail perfect.
这一点在消费级产品中尤为重要。
And that's especially important in consumer products.
你必须要有非常明确的产品主张。
You have to be extremely opinionated.
消费领域所有最成功的产品都胜在简洁。
All the best products in consumer land get there through simplicity.
可以说ChatGPT等AI聊天机器人最近的成功，正是因为它们比谷歌还要简单。
You could argue the recent success of ChatGPT and similar AI chatbots is because they're even simpler than Google.
谷歌曾经看起来是你能打造的最简单的产品。
Google looked like the simplest product you could possibly build.
它就是个搜索框。
It was just a box.
但即便那个搜索框也存在功能限制。
But even that box had limitations on what you could do.
人们被训练得不会用对话方式使用它。
You were trained not to talk to it conversationally.
你只能输入关键词，而且必须谨慎选择这些关键词。
You would enter keywords, and you had to be careful with those keywords.
你不能直接提问并得到合理的答案。
You couldn't just ask a question outright and get a sensible answer.
它不会进行准确的同义词匹配，然后给你返回一堆复杂的结果。
It wouldn't do proper synonym matching, and then it would spit you back a whole bunch of results that was complicated.
你得自己筛选哪些是广告、哪些是真实内容、排序是否正确，然后点击链接阅读。
You'd have to sift through and figure out which ones were ads, which ones were real, were they sorted correctly, and then you'd have to click through and read it.
ChatGPT和聊天机器人让这变得更加简单。
ChatGPT and the chatbot simplify that even further.
你只需像和人对话一样与它交流。
You just talk to it like a human.
用语音或文字输入，它就会直接给你答案。
Use your voice or you type, and it gives you back a straight answer.
答案未必总是正确，但通常够用。
It might not always be right, but it's good enough.
它会以文字、语音、图片或你喜欢的任何形式直接回复。
And it gives you back a straight answer in text or voice or images or whatever you prefer.
这简化了我们过去认为最简单的互联网产品——谷歌搜索，使其更加简洁。
So it simplifies what we looked at as a simplest product in the Internet, which was formerly Google, and makes it even simpler.
产品的简洁程度永远没有上限。
And you just cannot make a product that's simple enough.
要做到极简，必须持有极其明确的设计理念。
To be simple, you have to be extremely opinionated.
必须剔除所有不符合产品核心功能的设计元素。
You have to remove everything that doesn't match your opinion of what the product should be doing.
必须精心去除每一个多余的点击、每一个附加按钮、每一项设置选项。
You have to meticulously remove every single click, every single extra button, every single setting.
实际上，设置菜单里的选项说明你已放弃了对用户的责任。
In fact, things in the settings menu are an indication that you've abdicated your responsibility to the user.
给用户选择权等同于推卸设计责任。
Choices for the user are an abdication of your responsibility.
出于法律或重要原因可以保留少量选项，但应该竭力避免让用户做任何选择。
Maybe for legal or important reasons, you can have a few of these, but you should struggle and resist against every single choice the user has to make.
在TikTok和ChatGPT的时代，这个道理比以往任何时候都更明显。
In the age of TikTok and chat GPT, that's more obvious than ever.
人们不想做选择。
People don't want to make choices.
他们不想承受认知负担。
They don't want the cognitive load.
他们希望你找出正确的默认选项，告诉他们该做什么、看什么，并直接呈现给他们。
They want you to figure out what the right defaults are and what they should be doing and looking at, and they want you to present it to them.
沃伦·巴菲特说过，你应该雇佣有精力、智慧和正直的人。
Warren Buffett says that you should hire people who have energy, intelligence, and integrity.
乔尔·斯波斯基则换了个说法：你需要既聪明又能把事情搞定的人。
Joel Spalsky put it another way that you want people who are smart and gets things done.
对我来说，在智力方面最重要的标准只有一个：候选人是否能创造新知识？
What's become important to me on the intelligence side is that there's really only one significant test for a candidate, which is are they generating new knowledge?
这其实就是问：他们是否有创造力？
Which is just a fancy way of saying, are they creative?
否则，你只是在雇佣一个本该被自动化取代的机器人。
Because otherwise, you're just hiring a robot whose job should be automated.
我认为这是对的，虽然人们可能会不高兴，说你这是在把人比作机器人，但没人愿意日复一日做重复的事。
I think that's correct, and people may get unhappy saying, well, you're calling these people robots, but I don't think anybody wants to do the same thing over and over.
每个人都想做新颖、独特且有创造力的事。
Everybody wants to do new, unique, and creative things.
人人都可以成为艺术家——不是指拿起画笔作画那种，而是指创造新知识并享受这个过程。
Everyone can be an artist, not in the sense of grabbing a paintbrush and painting, but in the sense of creating new knowledge and enjoying that process.
只是领域可能不同。
It may just be in different domains.
甚至研究如何利用Twitter或YouTube传播观点，也是一种创造新知识的形式。
Even figuring out how to hack Twitter or YouTube to get your word out is a form of creating new knowledge.
比如几年前，传播观点的方式可能是写博客。
For example, a couple of years ago, the way to get the word out was probably writing blog posts.
现在可能是x加Substack，或是在TikTok上走红，或是制作一个出色的创业发布视频。
Now it might be x plus Substack or going viral in TikTok or doing a great startup launch video.
目标总在变化，人们总是试图运用创造力来破解这个系统。
The target is always moving, and people are always trying to apply creativity to hack that system.
即便是融资，与其逐个拜访风投，如今我认为如果你的产品能通过出色的发布视频和产品演示来展示，并尝试使其在网络上走红，展现个性并脱颖而出，效果会更好。
Even fundraising, rather than going and meeting VCs one by one, today, I would argue you're better served if your product shows well to build a killer launch video and a great demo of the product and try to get it to go viral online to have a personality and stand out from the noise.
因此创造力可以应用于任何领域。
So creativity can be applied anywhere.
我在人们身上寻找的另一个特质是自我驱动力。
The other thing I look for in people is being self motivated.
这样你就不必告诉他们该做什么，不必催促他们：'嘿，你这周完成了什么？'
So you don't have to tell them what to do, you don't have to push them, hey, what did you get done this week?
这是埃隆的经典提问，我认为很棒，但它本质上仍是一个管理问题，是经理该问的。
That's a famous Elon question, and I think it's a great one, but it is fundamentally still a management question, it's a manager's question.
这不是领导者该问的问题。
It's not a leader's question.
领导力在于激励他人，指明前进方向，但团队成员应具备较强的自我驱动力。
With leadership, you motivate people, you give them the place to march to, but they're relatively self motivated.
一旦他们知道整体方向，就会主动思考最佳实现路径并为团队目标贡献力量。
Once they know what direction you're all headed in, they're going to figure out how best to get there and contribute to the team getting there.
如果需要被指挥何时行动，需要被鞭策前行，那他们就不适合早期创业团队。
And if they have to be told when to march and they have to be pushed along and flogged, then they don't belong in early stage startup.
所以我认为自我驱动力非常重要。
So I think being self motivated is really important.
正如我之前提到的，保持谦逊也同样关键。
And as I've mentioned earlier, low ego is also very important.
这两种特质兼具的人相当罕见，但自我膨胀者足以摧毁团队的正常运作。
And these are pretty rare combinations, but high ego people can destroy the functioning of a team.
许多这些原则在公司超过一定规模后就很难采用了。
A lot of these principles are very difficult to adopt once the company is past a certain size.
例如，你可以设定标准说，我只与自我驱动力强的人共事。
For example, you could have the criteria saying, I'm only gonna work with self motivated people.
我只与那些不需要太多指导的人合作，这样我就能与尽可能多的人共事，而不必时刻盯着他们。
I'm only gonna work with people who don't need a lot of directions, so I can work with as many of them as possible, and I don't have to look over their shoulder all the time.
但如果公司已经有四五十人，很可能你已经雇佣了一批这样的人。
But if you already have 40 or 50 people in the company, odds are you've already hired a bunch of these people.
现在你打算怎么办？
Now what are you gonna do?
大规模裁员吗？
A mass layoff?
依据什么？
Based on what?
基于对工作动力的模糊感觉？
Some fuzzy feeling about motivation?
你有多少把握？
How much conviction do you have?
可能还不够。
Probably not enough.
所以不仅是你组建的团队决定了你创建的公司。
So it's not only that the team you build is the company you build.
实际上，创始人的个性就是公司本身，因为你的原则、底线和价值观决定了你将雇佣谁。
Literally, the founder's personality is the company because your principles and your non negotiables and your values dictate who you're gonna hire.
最优秀的创始人在人才和产品方面有着极其挑剔的眼光。
The best founders have extreme taste in people and in products.
他们非常善于评判。
They are extremely judgy.
比如在我现在的公司，我对投资者有着极其挑剔的标准。
For example, in my current company, I have extreme taste about investors.
我不会接受任何风投的钱。
I won't take money from any VC.
我对大多数风投都不尊重。
I don't respect most VCs.
他们不过是把钱推来推去的资金管理人。
They're just money managers pushing money around.
其中很多人喜欢把别人的功劳据为己有。
A lot of them like taking credit for other people's work.
过去我曾与风投有过不愉快的接触。
I've had bad encounters with VCs in the past.
没有哪个风投能坐在我的董事会里给我建议——那些建议我可能早就听过了。
There's no VC who's gonna sit on my board and give me advice, which I probably haven't already heard.
那我为什么要招募风投呢？
So what am I gonna recruit a VC for?
我对风投会保持极其挑剔的态度。
I'm gonna have very extreme taste about a VC.
我的合伙人对建设者有着极其苛刻的标准。
My cofounder has extreme taste about builders.
我对市场营销人员、销售人员和文案撰写者有着极高的要求。
I have extreme taste about marketers and sellers and copywriting.
我永远不会雇佣一个营销能力不能明显超过我的人——这样的人很罕见。
I'm never gonna hire a marketing person who can't outright me, and that's a rare person.
保持高度挑剔是有帮助的。
It helps to be very judgy.
你确实需要有自己的主见。
You do wanna be very opinionated.
任何告诉你应该倾听他人意见、达成共识并收集反馈的人，其实是在暗示你软弱无能，或者你的方法有问题。
Anyone who tells you to listen to others and build consensus and gather feedback is implying that you're weak, you're not good enough at what you do, or that you have the wrong approach.
优秀的创始人都极其固执己见。
Good founders are incredibly opinionated.
问题在于糟糕的创始人也同样固执。
The problem is the bad founders are very opinionated too.
这样的例子
There's a lot
人们尝试评估一个人是否具备创造新知识能力的方式有很多。
of ways people try to assess whether someone has the ability to create new knowledge.
彼得·蒂尔有个著名问题：'有什么重要真理是几乎没人认同你的？'
Peter Thiel has his famous question, what important truth do very few people agree with you on?
他试图确认这个人是否拥有自己的独立见解。
He's trying to find out if that person has opinions of their own.
他们是否有自己的原创想法？
Do they have their own ideas?
我有时会问人们是否对自己的爱好产生过独特理论。
I will sometimes ask people whether they have any unique theories that they've come up with about their hobbies.
即使是关于壁球，我也听过有人提出独特的壁球理论。
Even if it's about squash, I've heard people give me unique theories about squash.
如果你具备创造新知识的能力，在学习壁球的第一小时内就会开始形成关于如何打法和教学的新想法。
If you are able to generate new knowledge, you will start coming up with ideas about how squash should be played and taught within the first hour of learning squash.
这些想法不一定全对，但你会提出新颖的理论。
They might not all be right, but you will come up with novel theories.
纳瓦尔最近在推特上提到的问题，我总结为：'你关心哪些不受大众欢迎的事物？'
Naval also has one question he mentioned on Twitter recently, which I would sum up as, what do you care about that isn't popular?
这是另一种评估某人是否具备自主创新能力的方式。
That's another way of trying to assess whether that person has the ability to generate their own ideas.
蒂尔关于秘密的著名问题实际上是从投资者角度出发的，他在寻找企业做出的独特赌注，因为他不想面对竞争。
Thiel's famous question about a secret is really from an investor's perspective where he's hunting for the unique bet that the business is making, because he doesn't want competition.
正如他所说，竞争是输家的游戏。
As he says, competition is for losers.
正如我们在基础微观经济学中学到的，竞争会将利润降至零。
As we learn in basic microeconomics, competition reduces profits to zero.
他想要做出独特的押注，或者像早期天使投资人迈克·梅普尔斯喜欢说的那样——非共识且正确。
And he wants to make a unique bet, or as Mike Maples, early angel investor likes to say, nonconsensus and right.
但这适用于投资领域。
But that's for investing.
我认为在日常工作中，你应该与那些擅长持续从工作中提炼见解的人共事。
I think in everyday work, you wanna work with people who are very good at distilling the insight from their work on a constant basis.
马尔科姆·格拉德威尔推广了一万小时定律。
Malcolm Gladwell popularized ten thousand hours.
一万小时在方向上是对的，但并不完全准确。
Ten thousand hours is directionally correct, but it's not exactly correct.
它暗示如果你在某事上花费一万小时，就能达到精通。
It implies that if you spend ten thousand hours doing something, you get mastery.
我们暂且不讨论一万是否是正确数字。
Let's put aside whether 10,000 is the right number or not.
关键不在于投入的时间，而在于迭代次数。
It's not just hours put in, it's iterations.
你有多少个推动学习曲线的学习循环？
How many learning loops do you have that drive the learning curve?
什么是迭代？
What is an iteration?
迭代就是你做某事，然后观察结果，以某种方式测试结果——理想情况下是对照自由市场或物理规律来验证。
Iteration is when you do something, and then you look at the result, you test the results somehow, ideally against a free market nature of physics.
然后你要分析实验的哪些部分有效或无效，基于此做出新的创造性猜测来改进这件事，并再次尝试。
Then you ask what part of this experiment worked or not, and then based on that, you make a new creative guess on how to improve that thing, and you do it again.
你能完成这种循环迭代的次数越多，学习速度就越快。
The number of times you can do that rotation, that iteration, the faster you're gonna learn.
这才是你应该追求的成长曲线。
That's the curve you want to be on.
优秀的人会从每次迭代中提炼真知灼见。
Great people will distill insights from every iteration.
所以这不像找到一个秘诀那么简单。
So it's not as simple as finding one secret.
没错，每个公司都在做秘密押注。
Yes, every company makes a secret bet.
他们对世界运行方式有独特见解，这种理论尚未成为大众共识或普遍认知。
They have a theory as to how the world is going to work out that other people don't necessarily have en masse, or it's not conventional wisdom yet.
但在这个过程中，他们会发现成千上万的洞见，每个洞见都建立在前一个基础上。
But along the way, they're going to discover thousands of insights, and each one will build upon the last.
而这一切都取决于他们能进行多少次迭代。
And that's all going to be driven by the number of iterations they can do.
初创公司扩张时遇到的典型问题是：你雇佣的人又雇佣了其他人，而后者习惯了大公司里定义明确的工作岗位。
One of the problems you run into when scaling a startup is you hire someone who hires someone, and that person is used to a well defined job at a larger company.
他们习惯了为自己的工作邀功。
They're used to getting credit for their work.
他们与最终结果脱节严重，只需要取悦直属上司就行——这就是典型的委托代理问题。
They're divorced enough from the end outcome that all they have to do is kind of impress their manager, the principal agent problem.
所以他们现在只希望自己的劳动成果不被废弃。
So now what they want is for their work to not be thrown away.
当公司规模超过二三十、四五十人时，你常会听到这样的反对意见：我们不想尝试这个，因为很可能行不通。
A common objection you get when your company scales beyond twenty, thirty, forty, fifty people is, we don't wanna try this because it's probably not gonna work.
这实际上可能是创始人随着公司规模扩大最需要应对的首要问题——他们会提出比组织执行能力更多的想法，而内部会存在阻力，因为十之八九的想法都不够成熟。
It's actually probably the number one thing a founder will struggle with as a company scales, that they'll come up with more ideas in their organization can execute upon, and there'll be internal resistance to doing things because nine out of 10 ideas are half baked.
但实际上，你正处于探索过程中，处于学习过程中，处于发现过程中，你正在努力寻找可行方案，确实需要尝试大量方法。
But really, you're in a search process, you're in a learning process, you're in a discovery process, you're trying to find a thing that works, and you do have to try a lot of things.
优秀的创始人应当具备快速迭代多种方案并舍弃无效方案的能力，因为学习必然伴随着失败。
And a good founder will have the ability to iterate on many things and throw away the things that didn't work because learning necessarily involves failure.
记住，所有新信息最初都是以错误信息的形式出现的。
Remember, all new information starts as misinformation.
它最初并不明显正确，因此会被指责为错误信息。
It starts as not being obviously true, And so it's accused of being misinformation.
最终，随着时间的推移，它会被证明是对是错。
Eventually, over time, it's proven right or wrong.
如果是对的，你就能在此基础上构建有效信息。
If it's right, there's information you can then build upon.
优秀的创始人会与这个问题正面交锋。
A good founder will struggle with exactly this.
我的建议是：咬牙挺过去。
My advice would be power through it.
弄清楚你们组织的执行能力上限在哪里。
Figure out what is your organizational capacity to get things done.
要让团队成员坦然接受他们大部分工作成果终将被舍弃的事实。
Get people comfortable with the idea that most of their work is gonna be thrown away.
这全是实验过程。
It's all experimentation.
被舍弃是很正常的事。
It's fine for it to be thrown away.
并且要习惯反复的小失败——只要你能在此过程中提炼出真知灼见。
And get comfortable with repeated small failure as long as you distill the insights along the way.
巴拉吉·斯里尼瓦桑对此有另一种表述，称之为在创意迷宫中漫游。
Balaji Srinivasan has another way of putting this, which is wandering through the idea maze.
你不断左转右转、回溯路线，摸索哪些方法可行，哪些不可行。
You're taking left turns and right turns and backtracking and figuring out what works and what doesn't.
虽然大体方向可能与最初一致，但若自认为始终走在正确路径上，那不过是自我陶醉。
It might be in the rough direction where you started out, although it's an ego trip to think that you're always gonna be moving in the right direction.
这里最大的障碍是骄傲自满。
The biggest impediment here is pride.
人们固守最初的构想，未能真正驾驭创意迷宫。
People stay locked into their original vision, and they don't properly navigate the idea maze.
这需要无数次重复尝试、折返和迂回，直到找到穿越迷宫的路径。
It's about taking lots and lots of repeated steps and backtracks and side turns until you find your way through the maze.
因此即便从外部看，某家公司的成就似乎微不足道，竞争对手很容易追赶。
This is why even though from the outside, it looks like what a company has done is trivial, and it's gonna be easy for competitors to catch up to them.
常见的情况是：初创企业突围后，人们会说大公司马上就会碾压它们——实则不然。
And it's a common thing to see a startup break out, and then you say, well, that big company is just gonna crush No.
只要初创企业持续在创意迷宫中探索，它们实际已深入迷宫更深处。
As long as that startup keeps wandering through the idea maze, they're actually much deeper down through the maze than the big company is.
即便大公司模仿，等它们追到初创企业的位置时，后者早已遥遥领先。
Even if the big company copies them, by the time it gets to where the startup is, the startup has moved way ahead.
它已身处迷宫的另一区域。
It's in a different part of the maze.
大公司难以克制探索侧道的冲动，而这些路径初创企业多年前就已探明是死胡同。
The big company can't resist the urge to explore side hallways that the startup has already explored years ago and knows our dead ends.
快速迭代、从中学习并持续产生新洞见和秘密的能力，才是成功的关键。
It's this ability to iterate very quickly and to learn from it and constantly generate new insights and secrets that is a secret to success.
这并非简单的'创始人相信而他人不信的单一秘密'就能概括。
It's not just the one simple secret where you ask the founder, what is the thing you believe that nobody else does?
这简直是每天都在发生，你发现新事物建立在旧事物之上，然后意识到，哦，事情并不像我想象的那样运作。
It's literally every single day, you figure out something new that builds upon something old, and you realize, oh, things don't work like I thought they would.
它们实际上以不同的方式运作。
They actually work a different way.
你必须愿意忍受的副作用是，优秀团队会抛弃他们的大部分工作成果。
The side effect that you have to be willing to tolerate is that great teams are throwing away most of their work.
在我看来，大多数人招聘中缺失的关键因素就是不容忍。
To me, the missing ingredient in most people's recruiting is intolerance.
你真的应该把公司里的每个员工，包括你自己，都当作试图通过引入平庸人才来摧毁公司的敌方特工。
You should really just treat every employee in the company, including yourself, as an enemy agent that's trying to destroy the company by bringing mediocre talent into the business.
不幸的是，这就是人性。
It's unfortunately just human nature.
我和我的联合创始人在公司里制定了一个新标准：只招天才。
My cofounder and I have a new criterion in our company, geniuses only.
这个词很刺耳，但它设定了极高的标准。
It's a harsh word, but it sets a very high bar.
现在你只需要环顾四周看看谁不是天才。
Now you can just look around for who's not a genius.
你吸引天才的唯一方式——无论这个词对你意味着什么——就是让公司里充满天才。
The only way you're going to attract geniuses, whatever that term means to you, is by having a company full of geniuses.
如果有人不是天才，那么你要么正在过渡到无法再雇佣天才的阶段，要么出于某种原因需要扩大规模。
And if someone's not a genius, then either you're transitioning into the phase where you can no longer hire geniuses, and you just need to scale up for whatever reason.
或者你需要请那个人离开，因为你为想要打造的公司过早雇佣了他们。
Or you need to show that person the door because you hired them prematurely for the kind of company you're trying to build.
这非常困难。
Now this is very difficult.
如果你能每月招到一个天才就已经很幸运了。
You're lucky if you can hire one genius a month.
作为创始人，你必须识别出他们，并竭尽全力招募和激励他们。
You as a founder have to identify them and do whatever it takes to recruit them and motivate them.
因此这本质上是自我限制的，因为一个人很可能不会在你的公司待超过三、四、五年。
So it's inherently self limiting, given that a person probably isn't gonna stick around your company for more than three, four, five years.
尽管在一些优秀的公司里，人们会待上几十年。
Although in some great companies, people stick around for decades.
按照这种流失率，你谈论的是一家30到50人的公司。
At that attrition rate, you're talking about a 30 to 50 person company.
但如果你能组建一个由10位天才组成的团队，你就遥遥领先于其他人了。
But if you can even assemble a team of 10 geniuses, you're way ahead of everybody else.
在大多数成功的公司里，创始人和少数早期成员可能达到天才级别。
At most companies, the successful ones, the founders, and maybe a few early people are at the genius level.
但在急于扩张的过程中，这一点往往被迅速淹没。
But in the urge and the rush to scale, that gets drowned out too quickly.
我认为'天才'这个词实际上有点被低估了。
I think genius is actually even a bit of an underused term.
我认为每个人都有自己擅长的领域。
I think everybody does have a zone of genius.
你要找的是已经发现自己擅长领域的人，或者他们有能力、有潜力在工作中找到或接近自己擅长的领域。
You wanna find people who have already found their zone of genius, or they have the capability, they have the slope to be able to find their zone of genius, or get close to it while they're still working at your company.
作为投资者，我还有一个不公平的优势。
As an investor, also, I have an unfair advantage.
我经常与那些在公司里表现不佳的人共事，最终不得不让他们离开。
I've often worked with people where it hasn't worked out in a company, and I have to let them go.
但我已经足够了解他们，能识别出他们擅长的领域，并告诉他们：'这不是你擅长的领域'。
But I've gotten to know them well enough that I recognize their zone of genius, and I can say, this is not where you're operating in your zone of genius.
但如果你以后要做其他事情，请告诉我，因为我很可能会想投资。
But if you ever end up doing this other thing, let me know because I probably wanna invest.
事实上，在几个案例中这种做法取得了相当不错的效果。
And that has actually worked out reasonably well in a couple of cases.
所以你是对的。
So you're right.
人们往往只需要处在合适的环境中。
People often just need to be in the right environment.
你无法改变的是动力问题。
The thing you can't fix is motivation.
如果有人就是缺乏动力，如果他们不愿全身心投入，如果他们生活中还有其他事情分心，那么这时候你就只能选择放弃了。
If someone's just unmotivated, if they don't wanna apply themselves fully, if they have other things going on in their life, then you just have to cut them off at this point.
有个较少被提及的情况是，你常常会在错误的时间遇到对的人。
One of the things that's less talked about is often you'll meet the right person at the wrong time.
他们只是有内部问题、生活问题、家庭问题、健康问题，这些事情让他们无法达到你所需的工作水平，这是很遗憾的情况。
They just have internal problems, life problems, home problems, health problems, things that are going on that make them not capable of functioning at the level that you need, and that's a sad situation.
但这种情况经常发生。
But it happens all the time.
说到这个，人们常说'我精疲力尽了'。
On a related note, people say, oh, I'm burned out.
我需要休息一两个月来恢复精力。
I need to take a break for a month or two and recharge.
根据我的经验，这种说法大多不成立。
In my experience, that's largely not true.
通常，倦怠意味着你要么在做没有成效的事，要么从根本上就不喜欢这份工作。
Usually, burnout is a sign you're working on something that either isn't working or you don't enjoy the work fundamentally.
单纯休假解决不了问题。
Just taking time off won't fix it.
如果你真正享受所做的工作，通常它会给你更多精力和动力。
If you're really enjoying what you do, generally, that'll give you more energy and more motivation.
确实有少数特例，比如众所周知埃隆·马斯克会鞭策团队工作到凌晨四点，深夜召开员工会议，进行疯狂的高强度推进。
There are rare cases, like, I know Elon is famous for flogging his teams until four in the morning and calling staff meetings at otters the night and doing crazy death marches.
这就是他所建立和塑造的文化。
That's the culture that he sets and builds.
这没问题。
That's fine.
在这种情况下，我能理解某些人会精疲力竭。
In those situations, I could see certain people burning out.
但即便如此，他们表达的意思其实是：我未来无法持续承受这样的工作强度。
But even there, what they're saying is, I cannot sustain this workload in the future.
所以在这种情况下，休假也解决不了问题，因为回来后他还会用同样的方式给你布置任务。
So even there, taking time off doesn't work because when you come back, he's gonna put you to task the same way as earlier.
因此通常当有人说'我精疲力尽了'，我就理解为'我想辞职'，即使他们自己未必意识到这点。
So generally, when someone says, I'm burned out, I just read that as I wanna quit, Even if they don't necessarily realize that themselves.
你必须谨慎选择引入组织的人选，因为他们会在不知不觉中带来自己的审美取向。
You have to be careful about who you bring into the organization because they will bring their own sense of aesthetics without even knowing it.
他们会无意识地雇佣与自己相似的人。
They will hire people that are like them without knowing it.
比如在AngelList，团队中有人要在两个顾问候选人之间做选择，他差点选错人，理由是'我觉得和这个顾问共事会更有趣'。
For example, at AngelList, one of the people on the team was trying to decide between two consultants that we wanted to hire, and he was picking the wrong one because he was like, I think I'll have more fun with this consultant.
那个更有趣的候选人在性格、行为方式和沟通风格上都更像他们自己。
The fun one was more like them in their personality and their way of carrying themselves and communicating.
而我理解的乐趣是打造优秀产品并取得成功。
My idea of fun is working on great products and succeeding.
大卫·多伊奇会说：'当你感到快乐时，你正处在学习能力的边界上进行学习'。
David Deutsch would say something like, when you're having fun, you're learning at the edge of your capability to learn.
如果你不快乐，那意味着什么？
If you are not having fun, what does that mean?
你没有获得新东西，也就没有在学习。
You're not getting anything new, you're not learning.
如果这件事让你焦虑，这意味着什么？
If it's anxiety inducing, what does that mean?
这意味着它超出了你的能力范围。
That means it's beyond your capability.
所以当你在能力边缘运作时，你就进入了心流状态。
So if you're operating at the edge of your capability, you're in flow.
你在学习、在行动，承受着恰到好处的压力让它变得有趣，但又不至于焦虑，这很享受。
You're learning, you're doing, you're being stressed enough for it to be interesting, but not so stressed that you're anxious, and it's fun.
也许每个瞬间并不都那么有趣，但当你日复一日、周复一周、月复一月地回顾时，它是充满乐趣的。
It may not be fun moment to moment, but when you look back day to day, week to week, month to month, it is fun.
还有什么比在你能力边缘以最高水平打磨技艺更值得做的事呢？
What else would you rather be doing than practicing your craft at the highest level of capability at your edge?
所以我确实认为'乐趣'这个标准适用于商业和工作。
So I do think the fun criterion applies to business and to jobs.
比如在我最近的公司里，设计师们痴迷设计到了这种程度——我们正在筹备新办公空间。
For example, at my most recent company, the designers are obsessed with design to the point where we are getting a new office space.
设计办公空间本不是他们的职责。
It's not their job to design it.
没人要求他们来设计。
Nobody asked them to design it.
我们可能压根没想让他们插手设计。
We probably didn't even want them to design it.
但他们就是忍不住要事无巨细地设计每个细节。
They can't help but design it down to a t.
简直细致入微。
It's meticulous.
同样地，我向他们要了一本书，用来记录我们工作过程中的各个检查点和我们团队的人员。
Similarly, I asked them for a book in which we could just collect various checkpoints along the way of the work that we're doing, the people that we have.
他们正在设计自己的装帧工艺。
They're designing their own bookbinding.
他们专门购置打印机，用特殊纸张来印刷。
They got their own printer to print it with a special paper.
他们很执着。
They're obsessive.
他们无法接受只完成80%的设计。
They can't 80% design something.
沃伦·巴菲特 famously 曾因不愿下注而拒绝高尔夫赌局。
Warren Buffett famously refused to put a bet on a golf game because he doesn't bet.
他不冒险。
He doesn't take risks.
他只做短线操作。
He only does short things.
这就是他的整个模式。
That's his whole model.
同理，优秀的工程师不会允许自己写出劣质代码。
The same way, a good engineer will not let themselves write a shoddy piece of code.
我知道你想务实，想走捷径，想尽快交付，但真正伟大的工程师不会制造粗制滥造的东西。
And I know you wanna be practical, and you wanna cut corners, and you wanna get things out the door, but a truly great engineer is not going to create something shoddy.
伟大的设计师不会半途而废。
A great designer is not going to halfway design something.
我会删除获得1万赞的推文，只因发现语法或拼写错误，或想到更好的表达方式。
I will delete tweets that have 10,000 likes on them because I catch a grammar or spelling error, or I think of a better way to formulate it.
直接删掉重发。
I'll just kill it.
我不在乎浏览量，因为我只求做到完美。
I don't care about the views because I want it to be done just right.
人们有时会在推特上嘲笑我，因为我发完推文后会改变主意，在获得大量关注后又删除它，或者调换两个词的顺序，又或者修改一个词。
People make fun of me on Twitter sometimes because I'll put out a tweet, then I'll change my mind, and I'll delete it after it's gotten a lot of traction, and I'll reverse the order of two words or I'll change one word.
然后第二天醒来，过了编辑窗口，我又觉得还是喜欢最初版本，于是把原版重新发出来。
Then I'll wake up the next morning, pass the edit window, and I decide I like the original one, and I'll post the original one back up.
虽然失去了所有的传播势头，但我并不在意。
And I've lost all the virality and all the momentum, but I don't care.
我不想与草率的言论产生关联。
I don't want to be associated with a slipshod statement.
它必须准确无误且无法被精简。
It has to be correct and incompressible.
它必须用有趣的方式道出我认可的真理。
It has to say something true to me in an interesting way.
比起受欢迎程度，艺术表达的正确性更为重要。
And that's more important that the art is correct than that it's popular.
是啊。
Yeah.
有句老话说：能力不足的人，你交代任务后需要检查他们的工作成果。
There's an old quote that people who are not good at their jobs, you ask them to do something, they try and do it, and then you have to check their work.
最优秀的人则会交给你意想不到的惊喜——那些你自己永远无法构想出的成果。
The best people, you ask them to do something, and they come back with something that you never could have come up with yourself, and never could have imagined.
这就是高能动性人群，创始人模式，随你怎么称呼。
It's high agency people, founder mode, whatever you wanna call it.
这类人会主动以最佳方式承担责任。
But it's people who take responsibility for doing the job the best way possible.
你只需向他们传达你认为需要完成的事项即可。
You just have to communicate to them what it is that you think needs to be done.
这不仅仅是沟通的问题。
And it's not just communication.
沟通属于管理范畴。
Communication is a management thing.
它也是领导力的体现。
It's a leadership thing.
所以你需要激励他们，不是用那些肤浅的口号式鼓舞，而是帮助他们理解你认为这件事至关重要的深层洞见。
So you also have to motivate them, not in some cheesy rah rah way, but to help them understand the insight you have as to why you think it's so important.
如果你认为某件事确实重要，那么你要么说服他们同等重视，要么被他们说服放弃——因为可能是你判断失误了。
And if you think it's really important, then it's your job to either convince them equally that it's important or to be talked out of it yourself because you might have made a mistake.
一旦他们认同了事情的重要性，凭借足够的主观能动性，他们就会以最完美的方式去执行。
And then once they're convinced it's important, they're high agency enough that they will just go and do it in the absolute best way possible.
关于你提到的创造力，他们会在过程中不断产生新认知和新创意来解决问题。
And to your point about creativity, they'll come up with new knowledge and new creativity along the way to figure out how to solve the problem.
他们会用你意想不到的方式解决问题。
And they'll solve it in a way you didn't even know.
有时与人交谈时，不真诚的人会揪住你的字眼不放。
Sometimes you're in a conversation with someone, and a disingenuous person is going to latch on to the exact words you said and jump on you.
而聪明人会理解你真正想表达的意图，极高智慧的人往往会回答你真正想问的问题，而非表面提出的问题。
Whereas a smart person is going to understand the intention of what you're actually trying to say, and a highly intelligent person will often answer the question not that you asked, but the question you really wanted to ask or you meant to ask.
如果要总结这次对话，创业公司的首要原则就是绝不在人才标准上妥协。
If I was going to sum up this whole conversation, the prime directive of a startup is to never compromise on talent.
我宁愿承受客户体验的短期损失，也不愿在团队质量上做出短期或长期的让步。
I would rather take a short term hit on customer experience than take a short or long term hit on the quality of the team.
我用两个词总结：精选人才。
I would summarize it in two words, curate people.
我当前及未来所有公司的用人哲学是：我只想与天才共事。
And the philosophy that I have going forward in my current company and all subsequent ones is that I only wanna work with geniuses.
我只想和积极主动的人共事。
I only wanna work with self motivated people.
我只想和谦逊低调的人共事。
I only wanna work with low ego people.
我只想与建设者、工程师、艺术家这些行业顶尖人才合作，仅此而已。
I only wanna work with people who are builders and engineers and artists and are at the top of their craft, and that's all there is to it.
你必须愿意精心筛选人才。
You just have to be willing to curate people.
顺便说一句，我们还没谈到解雇，但那是另一面。
We haven't talked about firing, by the way, but that's the other side of it.
你总会犯错。
You will always make mistakes.
物色人才很难。
Sourcing is hard.
招聘人才很难。
Recruiting is hard.
领导团队很难。
Leadership is hard.
我不喜欢'管理'这个词，因为优秀的人才不需要被管理。
I don't like the word management because great people don't need to be managed.
但解雇和放手同样困难，可你必须这么做。
But firing and letting go of people is hard too, but you have to do it.
你永远不可能有100%的成功率，甚至远远达不到。
You're never gonna have a 100% hit rate, not even close to it.
如果你不解雇人，那说明你在自欺欺人。
If you're not firing, it means that you're deluding yourself.
所以你必须让不匹配的人离开。
So you do need to let people go who don't match up.
否则，你只会招募到比他们更弱的人，你的公司会慢慢衰败。
Otherwise, you're only going to recruit people who are weaker than them, and your company will slowly deteriorate.
关于招聘天才的另一个注意事项：只招天才。
One other side note on hiring geniuses, only hire geniuses.
这是当前的座右铭，显然如此。但你不是在填补空缺。
That's the current motto, obviously, But you're not trying to fill slots.
你不是在填补职位。
You're not trying to fill roles.
这是你常会陷入的陷阱。
That is a common trap you fall into.
比如，我需要填补一个营销职位。
Well, I need to fill a marketing role.
于是我就面试一堆营销人员，然后从里面挑最好的那个。
So I'm just going to interview a bunch of marketing people, and then I'll hire the best one out of that set.
错。
Nope.
如果不是天才，就别录用。
If they're not a genius, don't hire them.
作为创始人，你要清楚自己需要哪些大致能力，然后寻找具备这些能力的天才。
Just be aware as a founder of what are the rough capabilities you need, and then look for geniuses who can fill those capabilities.
如果你发现一个天才不符合任何现有需求，但就是值得聘用，立刻招进来。
And you find a genius who doesn't fill any of those capabilities, but is somehow hireable, hire them right away.
所以要网罗天才，储备人才。
So collect geniuses, warehouse them.
你永远不会后悔。
You'll never regret it.
但你的挑战可能是如何让他们保持兴趣，因为你可能没有适合他们的岗位。
But your challenge may be to keep them interested because you may not have the right fit for them.
但优秀的人总有一种能力，能识别出问题所在并参与解决，即使那并非他们'分内'的工作。
But great people have a way of identifying whatever the problem is and getting involved even if it's not their, quote, unquote, job.
所以当你发现真正杰出的人才时，只要有可能，就该不计岗位空缺直接聘用。
So when you find someone who's truly great, you just hire them anyway if you can, regardless of whether you have a slot or not.
试图将优秀人才硬塞进圆形、方形、三角形孔洞般的框架是种错误。
It's a mistake to try and fit great people into pegs and squares and triangles and holes.
真正的天才都极具独特性。
The real geniuses are incredibly idiosyncratic.
他们彼此毫无相似之处。
They don't resemble each other.
你无法用条条框框来约束他们。
You cannot fit them into a box.
试图填补某个职位本质就是在把人塞进框架。
By trying to fill a role, you're inherently trying to fit somebody into a box.
所以我甚至认为你本就不该为岗位招聘。
So I don't even think you necessarily wanna hire for roles.
没错。
Yes.
你需要员工掌握对公司重要的技能，但优秀人才远比我们人为设定的僵化框架灵活——这些框架更多是大公司和人力资源部门的产物。
You want people to have skill sets that matter for your company, but good people are much more flexible than these artificial rigid boxes that we make out, which are more of a function of HR and large companies.
小公司不该照搬万人规模企业的做法，比如人力资源体系、岗位设定、薪酬分级这类制度。
Small companies should not be applying large company practices that come from multi 100 or multi thousand person companies, things like HR and roles and compensation brackets and things of that nature.
作为创始人，你永远都在打破常规。
As a founder, you're always hacking the system.
因此你必须时刻保持灵活应变。
So you always have to be incredibly flexible on your feet.
当你发现天才时，直接招揽就对了。
And when you recognize genius, just recruit them.
关于 Bayt 播客
Bayt 提供中文+原文双语音频和字幕，帮助你打破语言障碍，轻松听懂全球优质播客。