评论
打印
In a post-financial crisis world, it's easy to hate on Wall Street. But what I've been looking for is a rational explanation -- what exactly has gone so very wrong over there?
进入这个后金融危机时代，很容易对华尔街咬牙切齿。但我一直想找出合理解释——华尔街到底是出了什么问题？
In Michael Lewis' new book, Flash Boys, the author provides the most compelling answer I have found -- much of Wall Street suffers from a complete and utter lack of mission. The book provides a powerful cultural critique.
我在迈克尔·路易斯的新作《闪光男孩》（Flash Boys）中发现，作者为我们提供了最令人信服的答案——华尔街多数人根本就毫无使命感。围绕这个观点，这本书展开了强有力的文化批判。
John Doerr, one of venture capital's legends, has a memorable saying: He only backs entrepreneurs who are "missionaries" not "mercenaries." This is a key part of his investment thesis.
风投界传奇人物约翰·多尔有一句令人难忘的名言：他只支持那些堪称“传教者”而非“雇佣兵”的创业者。这也是他投资理念的关键所在。
The difference? Mercenaries are in it for themselves (usually money). Missionaries are in it to change the world around them for the better.
两者之间有什么区别？雇佣兵创业主要是为了自己（往往是冲着挣大钱去的），而传教者却是为了让世界变得更美好。
The Bay Area is chock full of mission-driven companies. It's easy to satirize Silicon Valley's over-earnest desire to "change the world." It's also fair to ask if the desire is disingenuous, since "change" doesn't necessarily imply "for the better." But the real question is, does a company's mission actually matter?
湾区就塞满了充满使命感的公司。要挖苦硅谷那股热情过头的“改变世界”的愿望很容易，质疑这种愿望是不是虚伪夸大也不无道理，因为“改变”并不必定意味着“更好”。但真正的问题是，公司的使命感到底是不是重要？
One clear way a mission pays off is in helping a company recruit top talent. Despite public perception of how easy it is to win at startups in Silicon Valley, there is not a monetarily rational reason for the accelerating brain drain of some of our most educated, financially well-positioned future executives from Wall Street to Silicon Valley.
使命感显而易见的一大好处就是能帮助企业招到顶尖人才。尽管一般人都知道在硅谷的创业企业要取得成功不难，但从赚钱的角度来说，还是无法解释为什么华尔街一些学识出众、日进斗金的未来高管会加速流向硅谷。
Employee compensation at Google (GOOG) (including stock grants) averages about $190,000 at a year while at Goldman Sachs (GS) it's north of $500,000. The odds of striking it rich at an early-stage startup are amazingly low. For talented money-seekers, Wall Street remains a relative sure thing compared to the risks of a startup.
谷歌公司（Google）员工的平均年薪（包括股票期权）约为19万美元，而高盛公司（Goldman Sachs）则超过50万美元。想要在一个初创公司里一夜致富，机会少得出奇。对那些一心想赚钱的优秀人才来说，与充满风险的初创公司相比，华尔街还是一个更有把握赚大钱的地方。
But after reading Flash Boys, the trends we've being seeing lately at some of the nation's top business schools make perfect sense. At the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, for instance, the percentage of MBAs entering investment banking dropped to 13.3% last year from 26% in 2006. During the same period, those entering tech more than doubled to 11.1%.
但在读了《闪光男孩》之后，我们最近在美国一些顶尖商学院看到的趋势就完全能说得通了。比如在宾夕法尼亚大学（the University of Pennsylvania）的沃顿商学院（ Wharton School），去年MBA毕业生进入投资银行的比例就从2006年的26%腰斩到了13.3%，而同期进入科技公司的比例则翻了一倍，达到了11.1%。
It's easy to see why Wall Street could lose talent to Silicon Valley. Who would want to work in an industry where the only acceptable answer to the question "Why?" is "for money." Past a certain threshold of earnings it makes rational sense to optimize for more than just money. Another way to look at this: Picture two recent MBAs at Thanksgiving dinner. One works for Google, bringing self-driving cars to the market; the other works at Goldman. Who is going to talk proudly about their job, and who is going to sheepishly avoid the subject?
要弄清华尔街的人才为什么会流向硅谷并不是一件困难的事。谁会想在一个对“为什么要干这行？”这个问题只能回答“赚大钱”的行业里工作呢。达到一定的收入门槛后，不光是为了钱而工作就是很合情合理的事情了。可以换个角度看这个问题：想象一下在感恩节晚餐上有两位刚毕业的MBA遇上了，其中一位在谷歌工作，刚把自动驾驶汽车推向市场，另一位则在高盛高就。谁会充满自豪地谈起自己的工作呢，又是谁会不好意思地回避这个话题呢？
A company mission provides a purpose; it forms a connection between a company and their customer. Missions make companies worth working for. The most successful Silicon Valley companies almost universally exude a sense of mission (think Apple (AAPL), Salesforce.com (CRM), and Google), while the vulnerable incumbents have lost their sense of purpose (think HP (HP) and Microsoft). Microsoft (MSFT) resoundingly achieved their mission of "a new computer in every home," but must now find a new calling to stay relevant.
一家公司的使命能提供一种目标，能在公司和客户之间建立联系。它也使公司成为值得为之效力的地方。硅谷那些最成功的公司几乎都散发着强烈的使命感【想想苹果公司（Apple），Salesforce.com和谷歌公司吧】，而那些现在不堪一击的江湖老大则丧失了目标感【比如惠普公司（HP）和微软公司（Microsoft）】。微软早已成功实现了“每家每户一台电脑”的伟大使命，现在亟需找到一个新的使命维持自己的市场地位。
In the absence of mission, companies devolve into uninspiring backwaters with no purpose and little connection with their customers. They become the kind of companies that would screw over their customer to make profit in the short term at the expense of everything and everyone else. In the fullness of time, and provided an even playing field, I believe all mercenary companies will be out-competed by missionaries.
没有了使命，公司就会堕落成死气沉沉的一潭死水，没有目标感，跟客户也缺乏有力的联系。它们就会变成短期内通过拼命压榨客户来赚钱的公司，同时还会不惜损害其他所有事物和所有人的利益。我相信，长期来看，在公平竞争的环境中，所有那些雇佣兵企业都会被传教士企业比下去。
There is hope for Wall Street. The story in Flash Boys centers on the improbable founding of the stock exchange IEX. Brad Katsuyama founded IEX with the mission to bring transparency and accountability back to the stock market. The team overflows with Silicon Valley's brand of tech-startup missionary zeal. Flash Boys tells what happens when their business and mission collide solidly with Wall Street's mercenary culture. It's an amazing story.
不过华尔街希望犹存。《闪光男孩》的主要故事是围绕不太可能建立的股交所IEX展开的。布拉德o胜山创建了IEX，他的使命是要让股市重新变得透明、有责任感。他的团队充满了硅谷著名科技公司的那种带有使命感的热情。这本书主要讲述了他们的业务和使命与华尔街的雇佣兵文化之间产生的强烈碰撞。这真是个令人称奇的故事。
IEX's journey is an improbable one. Their odds are no better than the average startup. I'd bet on them though, IEX has a powerful mission.
IEX的发展之路并不怎么真实。他们胜出的机会并不比普通的创业公司高多少。不过我还是看好他们，至少IEX拥有强烈的使命感。
