定制学 L7-U1-P2 How Leaders Inspire Us

写在前面

原视频来自 TEDxPuget Sound 讲座 Simon Sinek: How great leaders inspire action, September 2009，字幕 (subtitle) 参考自官方网站。

注：本文在字幕基础上会有一些笔者个人的笔记，而且字幕会根据笔者听记和具体课程内容进行修改，如有错误敬请告知。

~~吐槽：讲师语速太快，听校时发现官方字幕多次放弃治疗 (没记全)，哈哈。~~

Introduction: Simon Sinek has a simple but powerful model for inspirational leadership -- starting with a golden circle and the question: "Why?" His examples include Apple, Martin Luther King Jr. and the Wright brothers ...

导言: 在本次讲座中，Simon Sinek 建立了一个简单有效的、能够鼓舞人心的领导力模型。在讲座的一开始，他引入了黄金圈原则，接下来他围绕着 "为什么" 这个问题，以苹果公司、马丁·路德·金、莱特兄弟等等例子进行分析，展开了对模型的探讨。

Video 1

本节共 1 小节，时长 03:01。

How do you explain when things don't go as we assume?

Or better, how do you explain when others are able to achieve things that seem to defy all of the assumptions?

For example: Why is Apple so innovative?

Year after year, after year, after year, they're more innovative than all their competition.

And yet, they're just a computer company. They're just like everyone else.

They have the same access to the same talent, the same agencies, the same consultants, the same media.

Then why is it that they seem to have something different?

Why is it that Martin Luther King led the Civil Rights Movement?

He wasn't the only man who suffered in a pre-civil rights America,

and he certainly wasn't the only great orator of the day. Why him?

And why is it that the Wright brothers were able to figure out controlled, powered man flight

when there were certainly other teams who were better qualified, better funded?

And they didn't achieve powered man flight, and the Wright brothers beat them to it.

There's something else at play here.

competition n. 竞争者，对手；竞争，比赛，角逐，竞赛
orator n. 善于演说的人，雄辩家，讲演者
qualified adj. 具备特定资历的，符合资格的；有条件的，有限度的，有保留的
beat sb. to it 在某事上抢先于某人，占了某人的上风
at play 在起作用；在玩耍

此处第三条中的 Apple (苹果公司) 指一家美国科技公司；第八条中的 Martin Luther King (马丁·路德·金，1929-1968) 指一名非裔美国人，他是 Civil Rights Movement (美国黑人民权运动) 的领袖；第十一条中的 the Wright brothers (莱特兄弟) 指 Wilbur Wright (1867-1912) 和 Orville Wright (1871-1948)，他们首创了让飞机能够受控飞行的控制系统。
注意此处第十一条和第十三条中 flight 的定语 controlled, powered man 和 powered man 在形式上不太常见，结合历史资料可以理解为 "人为控制的、其他动力驱动的"，通常可以使用 man-controlled, powered, manned 等定语代替，注意 man-powered 表示人力驱动而不是其他动力驱动。
注意此处第十三条中的 beat 是动词 beat 的过去式 (而不是 beated)，而它的过去分词为 beaten。

About three and a half years ago, I made a discovery.

And this discovery profoundly changed my view on how I thought the world worked,

and it even profoundly changed the way in which I operate in it.

As it turns out, there's a pattern.

As it turns out, all the great, and inspiring, leaders and organizations in the world,

whether it's Apple or Martin Luther King or the Wright brothers,

they all think, act and communicate the exact same way.

And it's the complete opposite to everyone else.

All I did was codify it, and it's probably the world's simplest idea.

I call it the golden circle.

codify v. 编纂 (法规、法典)

此处第九条中 codify 前没有 to，这是因为当句子结构为 "主+系+表" 时，如果主语部分存在实意动词 do，且表语是一个不定式，那么表语中引导不定式的 to 可以被省略。

Why? How? What?

This little idea explains why some organizations and some leaders are able to inspire where others aren't.

Let me define the terms really quickly.

Every single person, every single organization on the planet knows what they do, 100 percent.

Some know how they do it, whether you call it your differentiated value proposition or your proprietary process or your USP.

But very, very few people or organizations know why they do what they do.

And by "why" I don't mean "to make a profit."

That's a result. It's always a result.

By "why," I mean: What's your purpose? What's your cause? What's your belief?

Why does your organization exist?

Why do you get out of bed in the morning? And why should anyone care?

Well, as a result, the way we think, the way we act, the way we communicate is from the outside in. It's obvious.

We go from the clearest thing to the fuzziest thing.

But the inspired leaders and the inspire org-, inspired organizations,

regardless of their size, regardless of their industry,

all think, act and communicate from the inside out.

differentiated adj. 可区分的，已分化的
proposition n. 主张，提议，议题；主题；命题 v. 向 ... 提议；向 ... 求欢
proprietary adj. 具有专利的，具有所有权的；专卖的，专营的 n. (财产) 所有权，所有人
fuzzy adj. (形状或声音) 模糊不清的，失真的；(头发) 绒卷的；绒软的

此处第五条中的 USP 指 Unique Selling Proposition，字面意思为 "独特的销售主张"，通常指 USP 理论 (也称为创意理论)，在这里与 differentiated value proposition 和 proprietary process 有共通之处：它们都要求具有独特性，并且能强有力地促进销售。

He asks rhetorical questions.

rhetorical question 反问句，修辞性疑问句 rhetorical adj. 反问的；辞藻华丽的，花言巧语的，虚夸的；修辞的，修辞性的，雄辩的

Video 2

本节共 2 小节，时长 05:01。

Let me give you an example.

I use Apple because they're easy to understand and everybody gets it.

If Apple were like everyone else, a marketing message from them might sound like this:

"We make great computers. They're beautifully designed, simple to use and user friendly."

"Want to buy one?" "Meh."

And that's how most of us communicate.

That's how most marketing has done, that's how most sales are done, and that's how most of us communicate interpersonally.

We say what we do, we say how we're different or how we're better. We expect some sort of a behavior, a purchase, a vote, something like that.

Here's our new law firm: Uhh, we have the best lawyers with the biggest clients. We have, you know, we always perform for our clients.

Here's our new car: It gets great gas mileage. It has, you know, leather seats. Buy our car.

But it's uninspiring.

meh /me/ int. (表达不在乎) 嗯 adj. 令人感觉印象一般的
client /ˈklaɪənt/ n. 委托人，当事人；客户机
gas mileage 一加仑汽油所行驶的里程

Here's how Apple actually communicates.

"Everything we do, we believe in challenging the status quo.

We believe in thinking differently.

The way we challenge the status quo is by making our products beautifully designed, simple to use and user friendly.

We just happen to make great computers. Want to buy one?"

Totally different, right? You're ready to buy a computer from me.

All I did was reverse the order of the information.

What it proves to us is that people don't buy what you do; people buy why you do it. People don't buy what you do; people buy why you do it.

the status quo /ðə ˈsteɪtəs ˈkwoʊ/ 现状，既存现况
happen to 碰巧发生，偶然发生

This explains why every single person in this room is perfectly comfortable buying a computer from Apple.

But we're also perfectly comfortable buying an MP3 player from Apple, or a phone from Apple, or a DVR from Apple.

But as I said before, Apple's just a computer company.

There's nothing that distinguishes them structurally from any of their competitors.

Their competitors are all equally qualified to make all of these products.

In fact, they tried.

A few years ago, Gateway came out with flat-screen TVs.

They're eminently qualified to make flat-screen TVs.

They've been making these flat-screen monitors for years.

Nobody bought one.

And Dell ... Dell came out with MP3 players and PDAs, and they make great quality products, and they can make perfectly well-designed products.

And nobody bought one.

comfortable /ˈkʌmftəbl/ adj. 感觉舒服的；令人舒服的
product /ˈprɑːdʌkt/ n. 产品，作品，结果；乘积
flat-screen TV 平板电视
eminently adv. 非常，极其，特别；显著地，出众地

此处第七条中 Gateway (捷威公司) 指被宏碁 (qí) 收购的一家美国技术公司。

In fact, talking about it now, we can't even imagine buying an MP3 player from Dell.

Why would you buy an MP3 player from a computer company?

But we do it every day.

People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it.

The goal is not to do business with anybody, with everybody who needs what you have.

The goal is to do business with people who believe what you believe.

Here's the best part: None of what I'm telling you is my opinion.

It's all grounded in the tenets of biology. Not psychology, biology.

If you look at a cross-section of the human brain, looking from the top down,

what you see is that the human brain is actually broken into three major components that correlate perfectly with the golden circle.

Our newest brain, our homo sapien brain, our neocortex, corresponds with the "what" level.

The neocortex is responsible for all of our rational and analytical thought and language.

The middle two sections make up our limbic brains,

and our limbic brains are responsible for all of our feelings, like trust and loyalty.

It's also responsible for all human behavior, all decision-making, and it has no capacity for language.

be grounded in 以 ... 为基础或根据
tenet /ˈtenɪt/ n. 原则；信条，教义
cross-section n. 剖面，截面，横断面；典型，代表
correlate /ˈkɔːrəleɪt/ v. 关联，使互相有关系 n. 相关联的人或物
homo sapien n. 智人，现代人
neocortex /ˌniːoʊˈkɔːrteks/ n. (大脑) 新皮质，指进化程度较高的皮质
limbic adj. (大脑) 边缘叶的；边缘的
loyalty /ˈlɔɪəlti/ n. 忠诚；效忠

In other words, when we communicate from the outside in,

yes, people can understand vast amounts of complicated information like features and benefits and facts and figures.

It just doesn't drive behavior.

When we communicate from the inside out, we're talking directly to the part of the brain that controls behavior,

and then we allow people to rationalize it with the tangible things we say and do.

This is where gut decisions come from.

figure n. 数字；图形，图表；身影，人像，身材；重要人物，代表人物 v. 觉得，认为，想；作为 ... 的一部分出现；计算 (数量或成本)
gut adj. 直觉的，感性的，非理性的 n. 肠；内脏；(非正式、常用复数) 胆量；(非正式) 肚腩 v. 摧毁 (建筑物的) 内部；取出 ... 的内脏 (以便烹饪)

You know, sometimes you can give somebody all the facts and figures,

and they say, "I know what all the facts and details say, but it just doesn't feel right."

Why would we use that verb, it doesn't "feel" right?

Because the part of the brain that controls decision-making doesn't control language.

And the best we can muster up is, "I don't know. It just doesn't feel right."

Or sometimes you say you're leading with your heart or you're leading with your soul.

I hate to break it to you: Those aren't other body parts controlling your behavior.

It's all happening here in your limbic brain, the part of the brain that controls decision-making and not language.

feel v. (事物或事件) 使人感觉；(人) 感觉，体会；触摸，试探，感觉 ... 的存在；认为，觉得；想要 n. 感受，印象，气氛；触感，手感；触摸
muster up v. 召集；鼓起 (勇气) muster /ˈmʌstər/ v. 召集，聚集；使振作 n. 聚集的人群 master /ˈmæstər/ v. 精通，掌握；控制 adj. 熟练的，灵巧的，有技能的；最主要的，最大的 n. 主人，主宰，有控制力的人；能手，有一技之长的人
break it to sb. 把不好的消息告诉某人，很遗憾地告诉某人坏消息 break v. (常指善意地) 说出 (不好的消息)；(消息) 传开；破坏，打破，破解，挣脱，断绝；结束 (困难或不愉快的状态)，戒除 (坏习惯)；(短暂) 休息；减弱 (打击、坠落等的力度)；变调，变声 n. 短暂休息；时来运转

But if you don't know why you do what you do, and people respond to why you do what you do,

then how will anybody, how will you ever get people to, to, to, to vote for you, or buy something from you, or, more importantly, be loyal

and want to be a part of what it is what you, that you do.

Again, the goal is not just to sell to people who need what you have; the goal is to sell to people who believe what you believe.

The goal is not just to hire people who need a job; it's to hire people who believe what you believe.

I always say that, you know, this, uh, if you, if you, if you, um, hire people just because they can do a job, they'll work for your money,

but if you hire people who believe what you believe, they'll work for you with blood and sweat and tears.

And nowhere our, and nowhere else is there a better example at this than with the Wright brothers.

此处第八条中的 is 使用了倒装，而 nowhere else 引导的地点状语提前至句首，以强调否定程度。

Video 3

本节共 2 小节，时长 05:13。

Most people don't know about Samuel Pierpont Langley.

And back in the early 20th century, the pursuit of powered man flight was like the dot com of the day. Everybody was trying it.

And Samuel Pierpont Langley had, what we assume, to be the recipe for success.

I mean, even now will you ask people, "Why did your product or why did your company fail?", and

people always give you the permu-, same permutation of the same three things:

under-capitalized, the wrong people, bad market conditions.

It's always the same three things, so let's explore that.

Samuel Pierpont Langley /ˈsæmjuːl ˈpɪrˌpɑːnt ˈlæŋli/ n. (人名) 塞缪尔·皮尔庞特·兰利

此处第一条中的 Samuel Pierpont Langley (1834-1906) 是一名天文学家、物理学家，发明了热辐射计。
此处第四条中的 will 是语法错误，even now 做时间状语时，主句不需要倒装。

Samuel Pierpont Langley was given 50,000 dollars by the War Department to figure out this "flying machine."

Money was no problem.

He held a seat at Harvard and worked at the Smithsonian and was extremely well-connected;

he knew all the big minds of the day.

He hired the best minds money could find and the market conditions were fantastic.

The New York Times followed him around everywhere, and everyone was rooting for Langley.

Then how come we've never heard of Samuel Pierpont Langley?

well-connected adj. 社会关系优越的，出身名门的；紧密联系的
root for 全力支持，赞助，为 ... 加油 root v. 使 ... 生根；翻寻；用欢呼支持 n. 根，根本；根源，祖先

此处第三条中的 Harvard 指 Harvard University (哈佛大学)，而 Smithsonian 指 Smithsonian Institution (史密森学会)，讲师用这两个实体来例证兰利具备很多所谓的有助于成功的条件。
此处第六条中的 the New York Times (纽约时报) 是一家在全世界影响力很大的新闻机构。

A few hundred miles away in Dayton, Ohio, Orville and Wilbur Wright,

they had none of what we consider to be the recipe for success.

They had no money; they paid for their dream with the proceeds from their bicycle shop.

Not a single person on the Wright brothers' team had a college education, not even Orville or Wilbur.

And the New York Times followed them around nowhere.

proceeds pl. (事件或活动带来的) 收入 (注: 作名词时只用复数形式)

此处第一条中的 Dayton (代顿) 是美国 Ohio (俄亥俄) 州西南部的城市。

The difference was, Orville and Wilbur were driven by a cause, by a purpose, by a belief.

They believed that if they could figure out this flying machine, it'll change the course of the world.

Samuel Pierpont Langley was different.

He wanted to be rich, and he wanted to be famous.

He was in pursuit of the result. He was in pursuit of the riches.

And, lo and behold, look what happened.

course n. 路线，航线，河道；过程，课程，疗程；做法；一顿饭里的一道菜 v. 快速地流动，奔流
lo and behold int. (表达惊讶) 你看，你瞧

The people who believed in the Wright brothers' dream worked with them with blood and sweat and tears.

The others just worked for the paycheck.

They tell stories of how every time the Wright brothers went out. They would have to take five sets of parts,

because that's how many times they would crash before they came in for supper.

And, eventually, on December 17th, 1903, the Wright brothers took flight,

and no one was there to even experience it.

We found out about it a few days later.

And further proof that Langley was motivated by the wrong thing:

The day the Wright brothers took flight, he quit.

He could have said, "That's an amazing discovery, guys, and I will improve upon your technology," but he didn't.

He wasn't first, he didn't get rich, he didn't get famous, so he quit.

People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it.

And if you talk about what you believe, you will attract those who believe what you believe.

But why is it important to attract those who believe what you believe?

Something called the law of diffusion of innovation, and if you don't know the law, you definitely know the terminology.

The first two and a half percent (2.5%) of our population are our innovators.

The next thirteen and a half percent (13.5%) of our population are our early adopters.

The next 34% are your early majority, your late majority and your laggards. [late majority: 34%, laggards: 16%]

The only reason these people buy touch-tone phones is because you can't buy rotary phones anymore.

terminology n. 术语，专有名词；术语学；用辞
adopter n. (新技术) 采用者；收养者
laggard n. 迟钝懒散者，迟缓者；涣散的机构；落后者，技不如人者 adj. 落后的，迟钝的，迟缓的
touch-tone phone n. 按键式拨号的电话 rotary phone n. (老式) 旋转拨号电话

此处第二条中的 diffusion of innovation 指 Diffusion of Innovations Theory (创新扩散理论)，该理论尝试描述新的观念或技术引入社会体系时的演变过程。
此处第六条是口语化的非正式表达，在正式表达里，the reason is 后面的部分不能用连词 because 引导，但可以使用 that 引导的表语从句。

We all sit at various places at various times on this scale,

but what the law of diffusion of innovation tells us is that if you want mass-market success or mass-market acceptance of an idea,

you cannot have it until you achieve this tipping point between 15 and 18 percent market penetration, and then the system tips.

And I love asking businesses, "What's your conversion on new business?"

They love to tell you, "Oh, it's about 10 percent," proudly.

Well, you can trip over 10% of the customers.

We all have about 10% who just "get it."

That's how we describe them, right?

That's like that gut feeling, "Oh, they just get it."

times pl. 时代；倍数，次数 prep. 乘以
tipping point n. (量变引起质变的) 临界点，转折点，引爆点，雪崩点，倾斜点 tip v. 倾斜，倾倒；轻触，轻轻地打；给 ... 小费 n. 尖端；小费；建议
conversion n. 兑换，转化；(状态或形式的) 改变，转型，变换；皈依，信仰改变
trip over (使) 绊倒；绊倒在 ...

The problem is: How do you find the ones that get it before you're doing business with them versus the ones who don't get it?

So it's this here, this little gap that you have to close, as Geoffrey Moore calls it clu-, uh, "Crossing the Chasm".

Because, you see, the early majority will not try something until someone else has tried it first.

And these guys, the innovators and the early adopters, they're comfortable making those gut decisions.

They're more comfortable making those intuitive decisions that are driven by what they believe about the world

and not just what product is available.

These are the people who stood in line for six hours to buy an iPhone when they first came out,

when you could have just walked into the store the next week and bought one off the shelf.

These are the people who spent 40,000 dollars on flat-screen TVs when they first came out, even though the technology was substandard.

And, by the way, they didn't do it because the technology was so great; they did it for themselves.

It's because they wanted to be first.

versus prep. 与 ... 相对，与 ... 对比；对抗
chasm /ˈkæzəm/ n. 鸿沟，巨大分歧；深裂口，裂隙，深坑
intuitive adj. 凭直觉获知的；直觉的
stand in line 排队；站成一排
substandard adj. 不达标的，不合规格的，标准以下的

此处第二条中的 Geoffery Moore 是一名组织学理论家、管理顾问、作者，他因编写 Crossing the Chasm 一书而闻名。注意此处官方字幕错误地使用了 Jeffrey Moore，它和 Geoffrey Moore 发音相同。

People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it. And what you do simply proves what you believe.

In fact, people will do the things that prove what they believe.

The reason that person bought the iPhone on the first ... in the first six hours, just stood in line for six hours,

was because of what they believed about the world, and how they wanted everybody to see them: They were first.

People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it.

Video 4

本节共 2 小节，时长 04:26。

So let me give you a famous example, a famous failure and a famous success of the law of diffusion of innovation.

First, the famous failure.

It's a commercial example.

As we said before, a second ago, the recipe for success is money and the right people and the right market conditions, right? You should have success then.

Look at TiVo.

From the time TiVo came out about eight or nine years ago to this current day,

they are the single highest-quality product on the market, hands down, there is no dispute.

They were extremely well-funded. The market conditions were fantastic.

I mean, we use TiVo as a verb.

I TiVo stuff on my piece-of-junk Time Warner DVR all the time.

hands down adv. 唾手可得地，轻而易举地
piece-of-junk adj. 老旧的，不能用的；一文不值的

此处第五条中的 TiVo 指一种数字录影机，内置选台器、电子节目指南及硬盘，并可录制节目。
此处第十条中的 Time Warner 指 Time Warner Cable，是一家美国有线电视公司，而 DVR 指 Digital Video Recorder (数字录影机)。

But TiVo's a commercial failure.

They've never made money.

And when they went IPO, their stock was at about 30 or 40 dollars and then plummeted, and it's never traded above 10.

In fact, I don't think it's even traded above 6, except for a couple of little spikes.

plummet v. (数字、比率、价格) 暴跌，骤降，陡直落下 n. 骤降；铅锤，铅垂线
spike n. 激增；尖状物，长钉，钉鞋 v. 用尖物刺穿；向饮料中加酒精；使激增；阻止，拒绝刊登 (文章)，弃置 (文章) 不用

Because, you see, when TiVo launched their product, they told us all what they had.

They said, "We have a product that pauses live TV, skips commercials, rewinds live TV and memorizes your viewing habits without you even asking."

And the cynical majority said,

"We don't believe you. We don't need it. We don't like it. You're scaring us."

rewind v. 倒带，重绕磁带 n. 重绕；倒带装置

What if they had said,

"If you're the kind of person who likes to have total control over every aspect of your life, boy, do we have a product for you.

It pauses live TV, skips commercials, memorizes your viewing habits, etc., etc."

People don't buy what you do; they buy why you do it. And what you do simply serves as the proof of what you believe.

serve as 用作 ...，充当 ...；起 ... 的作用

此处第三条中的 etc. 是 et cetera /ˌet ˈsetərə/ 的缩写，在举例子时表示 “还有其他例子但不一一列举” 的意思。

Now let me give you a successful example of the law of diffusion of innovation.

In the summer of 1963, 250,000 people showed up on the mall in Washington to hear Dr. King speak.

They sent out no invitations, and there was no website to check the date.

How do you do that?

Well, Dr. King wasn't the only man in America who was the, who was a great orator.

He wasn't the only man in America who suffered in a pre-civil rights America.

In fact, some of his ideas were bad.

show up 露面，(使) 显露；揭露，使难堪

此处第二条中的 the mall in Washington 指 National Mall (国家广场)，位于 Washington, D.C. (华盛顿哥伦比亚特区)。

But he had a gift.

He didn't go around telling people what needed to change in America.

He knew ... He went around and told people what he believed.

"I believe, I believe, I believe," he told people.

And people who believed what he believed took his cause, and they made it their own, and they told people.

And some of those people, uh, created structures to get the word out to even more people.

And lo and behold, 250,000 people showed up on the right day at the right time to hear him speak.

How many of them showed up for him?

Zero. They showed up for themselves.

It's what they believed about America that got them to travel on a bus for eight hours to stand in the sun in Washington for, in the middle of August.

It's what they believed, and it wasn't about black versus white -- 25% of the audience was white.

Dr. King believed that there are two types of laws in this world:

Those that are made by a higher authority, authority and those that are made by men.

And not until all the laws that are made by men are consistent with the laws made by the higher authority will we live in a just world.

It just so happened that the Civil Rights Movement was the perfect thing to help him bring his cause to life.

We followed not him, not for him, but for ourselves.

And by the way, he gave the "I have a dream" speech, not the "I have a plan" speech.

just adj. 公正的，合理的，应得的；正义的，正直的 adv. 仅仅，只不过；正在，正好，恰好；实在，就是，简直

此处第三条中的 will 使用了倒装，而 not until 引导的时间状语提前至句首，以强调否定程度。

Listen to politicians now, with their comprehensive 12-point plans. They're not inspiring anybody.

Because there are leaders and there are those who lead.

Leaders hold a position of power or authority, but those who lead inspire us.

Whether they're individuals or organizations, we follow those who lead, not because we have to, but because we want to.

We follow those who lead, not for them, but for ourselves.

And it's those who start with "why" that have the ability to inspire those around them or find others who inspire them.

Thank you very much.

Grammar & Speaking

account for 对 ... 做出解释，说明 ... 的原因，导致 ...；对 ... 负有责任；占 (数量或比例)
justify v. 证明 ... 有理或正当；使文本的每行对齐

洒洒水啦～