评论
打印
Yeah, so much of decision-making in organizations is often about repeating past performance, right?
是啊，组织中的很多决策往往都是在重复过去的业绩，不是吗？
Finding previous patterns and trying to repeat them.
找到以前的模式，并试图再重复使用一次。
It sounds like you’re saying the venture mindset is almost trying to divorce yourself from that, and be open to exceptions, and be open to what’s different and what’s new.
听起来，你说的风险投资思维模式几乎就是试图将自己从这种思维模式中剥离出来，对例外情况持开放态度，对不同的事物和新事物持开放态度。
In the large organization that deals with innovative projects, you always have to think about designing an efficient portfolio allocation.
在一个处理创新项目的大型组织中，你总是必须考虑设计一个有效的投资分配组合。
And try to avoid making an individual micro decisions on every single investment.
并努力避免在每一项投资上做出个人的微观决定。
So in the corporate VC environment, I think the parent company executives should decide on the total budget.
因此，在企业风险投资环境中，我认为应该由总公司高管来决定总预算。
They should decide on the number of investments that can be made.
他们应该决定可以进行的投资数量。
They should overall impose criteria, what kind of startups you can invest in, what kind of startups you can’t invest in.
他们应该全面制定标准，你可以投资什么类型的初创公司，不能投资什么类型的初创公司。
That depends on the overall strategy of the firm.
这取决于公司的整体战略。
But my advice is try to avoid making individual decisions.
但我的建议是，尽量避免做出个人决定。
The other tip that you have in the article is just to set ambitious timelines.
你在文章中的另一个小贴士就是设定雄心勃勃的时间表。
And one thing I hadn’t really understood is that a lot of venture capitalists know that these are highly uncertain deals.
有一件事我并没有真正理解，那就是很多风险资本家都知道，这些都是高度不确定的交易。
You really don’t know how these are going to turn out.
你真的不知道这些事情会变成什么样子。
In all likelihood, most of these are going to fail.
很有可能，这些中的大多数都会失败。
So spending a lot of time thinking about it, trying to game it, and all these different scenarios, it doesn’t actually help you reduce the risk.
所以花很多时间思考，尝试博弈，以及所有这些不同的情况，实际上并不能帮助你降低风险。
You just have to make a decision and move on.
你只需要做出决定，然后继续前进。
And so that’s a big recommendation of yours is just to set ambitious timelines, make decisions quickly on these companies that come to you or these investment opportunities, and just move on and not overthink things.
所以你最大的建议就是设定雄心勃勃的时间表，迅速对那些来找你的公司或这些投资机会做出决定，然后继续前进，不要想太多。
Curt, it is my recommendation.
科特，这是我的建议。
But note that I’m not saying that because you have to make decisions quickly, your decisions are going to be inefficient.
但请注意，我不是说因为你必须迅速做出决定，你的决定将是低效的。
In fact, venture capitalists came up with ways to make fast decisions very efficiently.
事实上，风险资本家想出了非常高效地快速做出决定的方法。
And the chapter is titled How to Say No 100 Times.
这一章的标题是如何说100次不。
We do say it 100 times, because my research shows that for every startup that venture capital firms invest in, on average they say no, so they turn down 100 opportunities.
我们确实说了100次，因为我的研究表明风险投资公司每投资一家初创企业，平均就会拒绝 100 次。
Just think about this, think about all those thousands of startup investments that they decide not to invest in.
想想看，想想那些他们决定不投资的数以千计的初创公司。
And they do it quite efficiently.
而且他们做得很有效率。
So very quickly how they do it, is that the venture mindset thinks about the funnel of all the deals in two different ways.
因此，他们很快就能做到这一点，即风险思维以两种不同的方式思考所有交易的漏斗。
The first, at the top of the funnel, you have a lot of deals.
首先，在漏斗的顶部，你有很多交易。
And I think of this as 100 to 10, using the automobile terminology, you are going to use a fast lane, which means that you are trying to make a very fast decision here as efficiently as possible.
我认为这是100比10，用汽车术语来说，你将使用快车道，这意味着你试图在这里尽可能高效地做出非常快的决定。
And here is one specific trick that venture capitalists use that I found amazingly efficient, and in all my work with large organizations, I observed that they don’t use this trick typically, before I explain this to them.
这是风险资本家使用的一个特别的技巧，我发现它非常有效。在我与大型机构合作的所有工作中，我观察到，在我向他们解释这一点之前，他们通常不会使用这个技巧。
They ask a different type of question.
他们会问一种不同类型的问题。
The typical question that you would ask , Curt, is, “Okay, here’s an investment. Why we would like to proceed with this investment?‘’
你会问一个典型的问题：“好的，这是一项投资。为什么我们要进行这项投资？”
But in the fast lane, 100 to 10 lane, venture capitalists ask a different question.
但在100到10的快车道上，风险资本家提出了一个不同的问题。
They ask, “Why we should not proceed with this investment?”
他们问：“为什么我们不应该进行这项投资？
And just by adding not, it completely changes the picture.
只要加上不，情况就完全不同了。
So that as long as you find a red flag or a critical flaw, you decide not to proceed with this deal and just move on to another investment.
因此，只要你发现了危险信号或关键缺陷，你就决定不继续这项交易，转而进行另一项投资。
