声明: 本站全部内容源自互联网,不进行任何盈利行为
仅做 整合 / 美化 处理
I have a confession to make.
我需要澄清一点：
I'm a business professor
我是一位经济学教授，
whose ambition has been to help people learn to lead.
我的目标是去帮助其他人学会领导。
But recently, I've discovered
但是最近，我发现
that what many of us think of as great leadership
大多数人认为良好的领导能力
does not work when it comes to leading innovation.
在创新领域并不管用。
I'm an ethnographer.
我是一位人种论学者。
I use the methods of anthropology
我用人类学的方法
to understand the questions in which I'm interested.
去研究我感兴趣的问题。
So along with three co-conspirators,
与3个同事一起，
I spent nearly a decade observing up close and personal
我花了接近十年的时间， 通过更私密的途径去观察那些
exceptional leaders of innovation.
创新领域的领导者。
We studied 16 men and women,
我们研究了16位男性和女性，
located in seven countries across the globe,
他们分布于全世界七个不同的国家，
working in 12 different industries.
在12个不同岗位上工作。
In total, we spent hundreds of hours on the ground,
我们总共花了数百个小时，
on-site, watching these leaders in action.
在现场关注他们的一言一行。
We ended up with pages and pages and pages of field notes
我们最后得到了一页又一页的笔记，
that we analyzed and looked for patterns in what our leaders did.
从而能够通过分析去弄清 这些领导者的行为模式。
The bottom line?
重点是什么呢？
If we want to build organizations that can innovate time and again,
如果我们想要建立可以 持续不断创新的机构，
we must unlearn our conventional notions of leadership.
我们必须抛开对领导力的传统认识。
Leading innovation is not about creating a vision,
领导创新不是去创造一种理念，
and inspiring others to execute it.
然后启发他人去执行它。
But what do we mean by innovation?
那我们所说的创新是什么意思呢？
An innovation is anything that is both new and useful.
创新是一种既新颖又实用的东西。
It can be a product or service.
它既能是产品也能是服务。
It can be a process or a way of organizing.
它既可以是一个过程， 也可以是一种管理方式。
It can be incremental, or it can be breakthrough.
它可以是一提升长，或者是一项突破。
We have a pretty inclusive definition.
我们有一个很全面的定义。
How many of you recognize this man?
有多少人认识这个人？
Put your hands up.
举起你们的手。
Keep your hands up, if you know who this is.
保持举手，如果你知道这个人。
How about these familiar faces?
那这些熟悉的面孔呢？
(Laughter)
（笑声）
From your show of hands,
从你们举手的情况来讲，
it looks like many of you have seen a Pixar movie,
大多数人都看过Pixar出版的电影，
but very few of you recognized Ed Catmull,
但是几乎没人认出 Ed Catmull,
the founder and CEO of Pixar --
Pixar的创建者和CEO——
one of the companies I had the privilege of studying.
这是我有幸去研究的公司之一。
My first visit to Pixar was in 2005,
我第一次去拜访Pixar是在2005年，
when they were working on "Ratatouille,"
当时他们正在制作《料理鼠王》，
that provocative movie about a rat becoming a master chef.
一部备受关注的关于一只老鼠 成为大厨的电影。
Computer-generated movies are really mainstream today,
现在，电脑制作的电影是主流，
but it took Ed and his colleagues nearly 20 years
但是，Ed和他的团队花了接近20年的时间
to create the first full-length C.G. movie.
才创造出第一部完整的电脑制作的电影。
In the 20 years hence, they've produced 14 movies.
在之后的20年里，他们制作了14部电影。
I was recently at Pixar, and I'm here to tell you
我前不久还去过Pixar， 现在在这里可以告诉你们，
that number 15 is sure to be a winner.
第15部电影肯定会相当卖座。
When many of us think about innovation, though,
当我们当中的很多人想到创新的时候，
we think about an Einstein having an 'Aha!' moment.
我们会想到爱因斯坦灵光一现的时刻。
But we all know that's a myth.
但是我们都知道那是一个迷。
Innovation is not about solo genius,
创新不是关于个人的天赋，
it's about collective genius.
而是关于团体的智慧。
Let's think for a minute about what it takes to make a Pixar movie:
让我们想一想制作一部Pixar电影 都需要些什么：
No solo genius, no flash of inspiration produces one of those movies.
不需要个人才智，不需要灵光一现 去制作那样的一部电影。
On the contrary, it takes about 250 people four to five years,
相反，这需要250人工作4到5年
to make one of those movies.
去完成这样一部电影。
To help us understand the process,
为了让我们明白这整个过程，
an individual in the studio drew a version of this picture.
一名工作室人员画了 这样一个版本的流程图。
He did so reluctantly,
他画的时候很犹豫不决，
because it suggested that the process was a neat series of steps
因为这个过程是一系列紧凑的步骤，
done by discrete groups.
由一些独立的小组所完成。
Even with all those arrows, he thought it failed to really tell you
即使有这些箭头， 他还是认为这并不能真正地告诉你们，
just how iterative, interrelated and, frankly, messy their process was.
这是一个涵盖如此大量重复性和高度关联性， 以及说实话，相当杂乱的过程。
Throughout the making of a movie at Pixar, the story evolves.
故事的发展贯穿一部Pixar电影的制作。
So think about it.
所以，设想一下。
Some shots go through quickly.
一些镜头过得很快。
They don't all go through in order.
它们不全部按顺序过。
It depends on how vexing the challenges are
这取决于当他们在制作 一个特殊情节的时候，
that they come up with when they are working on a particular scene.
遇到的挑战有多么令人烦恼。
So if you think about that scene in "Up"
所以当你想到《飞屋环游记》中
where the boy hands the piece of chocolate to the bird,
小男孩把一块巧克力递给小鸟的场景，
that 10 seconds took one animator almost six months to perfect.
那10秒钟的场景花了一个动漫师 接近6个月的时间去达到完美的效果。
The other thing about a Pixar movie
另外一件关于Pixar电影的事，
is that no part of the movie is considered finished
是电影的任何一个部分都不能算完工，
until the entire movie wraps.
直到整部电影制作完成。
Partway through one production, an animator drew a character
制作到一半时，一位动画师画了一个拥有
with an arched eyebrow that suggested a mischievous side.
弯眉毛的角色， 想表现出他淘气的一面。
When the director saw that drawing, he thought it was great.
当导演看到绘画的时候，他觉得很棒。
It was beautiful, but he said,
画的非常漂亮，但是他说：
"You've got to lose it; it doesn't fit the character."
“你不能采用它，这不符合人物形象。“
Two weeks later, the director came back and said,
两周过后，那个导演回来说，
"Let's put in those few seconds of film."
“我们还是花几秒钟 把弯眉毛放进电影里吧。“
Because that animator was allowed to share
因为那位动画师被允许去分享
what we referred to as his slice of genius,
我们所说的他自己那部分的智慧，
he was able to help that director reconceive the character
他才能够帮助导演重新构建那个角色
in a subtle but important way that really improved the story.
从而以一种微妙而又 重要的方式改进了故事。
What we know is, at the heart of innovation is a paradox.
我们所知道的是， 创新的核心是一个悖论。
You have to unleash the talents and passions of many people
你必须释放很多人的才能和激情
and you have to harness them into a work that is actually useful.
并且有效地利用它们。
Innovation is a journey.
创新是一番旅程。
It's a type of collaborative problem solving,
它是一种团队型解决问题的方式，
usually among people who have different expertise
通常存在于一群拥有不同特长，
and different points of view.
不同观点的人当中。
Innovations rarely get created full-blown.
创新很少在一开始就达到完美。
As many of you know,
正如大部分人知道的那样，
they're the result, usually, of trial and error.
它们通常是尝试和犯错的结果。
Lots of false starts, missteps and mistakes.
很多错误的开始， 错误的步骤和错误的结果。
Innovative work can be very exhilarating,
创新的产品可以令人非常振奋，
but it also can be really downright scary.
但也可以变得十分可怕。
So when we look at why it is that Pixar is able to do what it does,
所以当我们思考为什么Pixar能够获得成功，
we have to ask ourselves, what's going on here?
我们必须先自问， 这是一个怎样的团队呢？
For sure, history and certainly Hollywood,
当然，历史上还有好莱坞，
is full of star-studded teams that have failed.
是一个星光璀璨却不断遭遇失败的团队。
Most of those failures are attributed
大多数的失败是因为
to too many stars or too many cooks, if you will, in the kitchen.
有太多的明星或者说， 有太多的厨师在厨房里了。
So why is it that Pixar, with all of its cooks,
那么为什么Pixar有那么多的“厨师”，
is able to be so successful time and time again?
但仍能一次又一次地成功呢？
When we studied an Islamic Bank in Dubai,
当我们研究一个在迪拜的伊斯兰银行时，
or a luxury brand in Korea, or a social enterprise in Africa,
或者一个韩国的奢侈品牌， 或者一个非洲的社会企业，
we found that innovative organizations
我们发现创新机构
are communities that have three capabilities:
是拥有三个特点的团体：
creative abrasion, creative agility and creative resolution.
创意摩擦，创造的灵活性， 以及创新的解决方式。
Creative abrasion is about being able to create a marketplace of ideas
创意摩擦是指能够通过辩论和讨论的方式
through debate and discourse.
创造出很多想法。
In innovative organizations, they amplify differences,
在创新机构里， 人们会放大差异，
they don't minimize them.
而并不是弱化它们。
Creative abrasion is not about brainstorming,
创意摩擦不是关于头脑风暴，
where people suspend their judgment.
在这个过程中人们只是持保留意见。
No, they know how to have very heated but constructive arguments
不，他们知道如何进行激烈 而又有效的争论，
to create a portfolio of alternatives.
去创造一个充满不确定性的方案汇总。
Individuals in innovative organizations
在创新集体里的个人
learn how to inquire, they learn how to actively listen, but guess what?
要学会如何去询问，如何去主动聆听， 但是你们知道么？
They also learn how to advocate for their point of view.
他们也知道如何去贡献他们自己的观点。
They understand that innovation rarely happens
他们知道如果你不具备多样性的思维， 不知道如何争论，
unless you have both diversity and conflict.
创新就很难实现。
Creative agility is about being able to test and refine that portfolio of ideas
创造的灵活性是关于通过快速 追寻，反应和调整，
through quick pursuit, reflection and adjustment.
来检验并提炼这些点子。
It's about discovery-driven learning
这是以发现为动力的学习过程，
where you act, as opposed to plan, your way to the future.
以不同于计划的方式创造你的未来。
It's about design thinking where you have that interesting combination
这是关于设计一种思维方式，能够把
of the scientific method and the artistic process.
科学方法和艺术过程有趣地结合起来。
It's about running a series of experiments, and not a series of pilots.
这是关于进行一系列的实验， 而不是一系列的试点。
Experiments are usually about learning.
实验通常意味着一种学习。
When you get a negative outcome,
当你得到负面的结果，
you're still really learning something that you need to know.
你依然在学习你需要知道的东西。
Pilots are often about being right.
试点性实践通常要保证可行性。
When they don't work, someone or something is to blame.
当它们的效果不理想时， 某些人或某些事就要对此负责。
The final capability is creative resolution.
最后的能力是具有创造力的解决方式。
This is about doing decision making
这是关于做决定的方式，
in a way that you can actually combine even opposing ideas
通过最终结合包括对立观点的方式
to reconfigure them in new combinations
去重新塑造它们从而形成新的组合，
to produce a solution that is new and useful.
来得到一个新的，有用的解决方法。
When you look at innovative organizations, they never go along to get along.
当你分析创新机构时，会发现他们从不 以牺牲个人观点的方式去融入集体。
They don't compromise.
他们从不妥协。
They don't let one group or one individual dominate,
他们不会让一组人或一个人做主，
even if it's the boss, even if it's the expert.
即使是上司，或是专家。
Instead, they have developed
相反，他们发展出了
a rather patient and more inclusive decision making process
一种既具备耐心又更包容的方式 去达成一个决定，
that allows for both/and solutions to arise
允许双方的解决办法都得到体现，
and not simply either/or solutions.
而不是简单的一方观点。
These three capabilities are why we see
这三种能力就是为什么Pixar
that Pixar is able to do what it does.
能够实现目前成就的原因。
Let me give you another example,
再给你们举一个例子，
and that example is the infrastructure group of Google.
这个例子是关于Google的基础建设部门。
The infrastructure group of Google is the group
Google的基础设施部门是一个
that has to keep the website up and running 24/7.
让网站持续运作的部门。
So when Google was about to introduce Gmail and YouTube,
当Google准备推出Gmail和Youtube时，
they knew that their data storage system wasn't adequate.
他们知道自己的数据库 还无法满足要求。
The head of the engineering group and the infrastructure group at that time
当时工程组和基础设施组的组长，
was a man named Bill Coughran.
是一个叫做Bill Coughran的人。
Bill and his leadership team, who he referred to as his brain trust,
Bill和他的领导小组或者说智囊团，
had to figure out what to do about this situation.
不得不想办法应对这种情况。
They thought about it for a while.
他们思考了很久。
Instead of creating a group to tackle this task,
他们没有选择新建一个团队去 强行执行这个任务，
they decided to allow groups to emerge spontaneously
而是决定让不同的小组 在不同的方案中
around different alternatives.
同时施展他们的才能。
Two groups coalesced.
两个小组合并了。
One became known as Big Table,
一个就是我们现在了解的 大桌(Big Table)，
the other became known as Build It From Scratch.
另一个就是无中生有 (Built It From Scratch)。
Big Table proposed that they build on the current system.
大桌提议他们在现有的系统上工作。
Build It From Scratch proposed that it was time for a whole new system.
无中生有却提议这是 重建另一个系统的时候了。
Separately, these two teams were allowed to work full-time
这两个队被允许分别从他们
on their particular approach.
自己的观点出发来全面开展工作。
In engineering reviews, Bill described his role as,
从工程学的角度来讲， Bill把他的角色描述为
"Injecting honesty into the process by driving debate."
”以倡导争论的方式向过程中注入诚实。“
Early on, the teams were encouraged to build prototypes so that they could
最开始时，各组被鼓励去 打造原型，以能够
"bump them up against reality and discover for themselves
“与现实进行对比，从而发现
the strengths and weaknesses of their particular approach."
自己方案中的优势和不足”。
When Build It From Scratch shared their prototype with the group
当无中生有与另一组分享原型时，
whose beepers would have to go off in the middle of the night
这一组的传呼机就会在半夜响个不停，
if something went wrong with the website,
如果网站出问题的话，
they heard loud and clear about the limitations of their particular design.
他们会被明确告知这个独特设计的局限。
As the need for a solution became more urgent
当对解决方案的需求越来越紧急，
and as the data, or the evidence, began to come in,
然后数据，或者说证据开始浮现时，
it became pretty clear that the Big Table solution
很明显，大桌的解决方案
was the right one for the moment.
是当时最合适的。
So they selected that one.
所以他们选择了那一个。
But to make sure that they did not lose the learning
但是为了确定他们不会失去
of the Build it From Scratch team,
无中生有团队的知识，
Bill asked two members of that team to join a new team that was emerging
Bill让两名无中生有的队员 加入这个新的，正在成长的队伍，
to work on the next-generation system.
来一起建造下一代的系统。
This whole process took nearly two years,
整个过程花了接近两年，
but I was told that they were all working at breakneck speed.
但是我听说每个人都开足马力工作着。
Early in that process, one of the engineers had gone to Bill and said,
在过程刚开始时， 其中一位工程师找到Bill说
"We're all too busy for this inefficient system
”我们的时间全都花在 这个没有效率的体制上
of running parallel experiments."
去执行双向实验了。”
But as the process unfolded, he began to understand
但是当整个系统充分运转起来， 他开始理解
the wisdom of allowing talented people to play out their passions.
这种能让有才能的人 充分释放激情的智慧了。
He admitted, "If you had forced us to all be on one team,
他承认， “如果你强迫我们全部组成一队，
we might have focused on proving who was right, and winning,
我们也许会专注于谁对谁错，
and not on learning and discovering what was the best answer for Google."
而不是学习和寻求对于 Google而言最好的答案。”
Why is it that Pixar and Google are able to innovate time and again?
那么为什么Pixar和Google 可以不断进行创新呢？
It's because they've mastered the capabilities required for that.
原因是他们已经掌握了 这一过程所需要的能力。
They know how to do collaborative problem solving,
他们知道如何去解决集体问题，
they know how to do discovery-driven learning
知道如何进行以探索为动力的学习，
and they know how to do integrated decision making.
也知道如何去做集体决定。
Some of you may be sitting there and saying to yourselves right now,
你们在座的有些人也许会心想，
"We don't know how to do those things in my organization.
“我们不知道如何在我的机构里 实现这个过程。
So why do they know how to do those things at Pixar,
那么为什么在Pixar他们就知道 如何做到这一点呢，
and why do they know how to do those things at Google?"
还有Google也同样做到了呢？“
When many of the people that worked for Bill told us,
当很多为Bill工作的人告诉我们，
in their opinion, that Bill was one of the finest leaders in Silicon Valley,
在他们看来， Bill是在硅谷最好的领导者之一，
we completely agreed; the man is a genius.
我们完全同意，那个人是个天才。
Leadership is the secret sauce.
领导能力是其中的秘诀。
But it's a different kind of leadership,
但这是另外一种领导能力，
not the kind many of us think about when we think about great leadership.
而不是我们常说的那种 伟大的领导能力。
One of the leaders I met with early on said to me,
我之前见到的一位领导者告诉我，
"Linda, I don't read books on leadership.
“Linda，我从不读关于领导能力的书。
All they do is make me feel bad." (Laughter)
这些书只会让我感觉很糟。“ （笑声）
"In the first chapter they say I'm supposed to create a vision.
“在第一章他们说我应该创造一种理念。
But if I'm trying to do something that's truly new, I have no answers.
但是如果我要去进行全新的尝试， 我没有答案。
I don't know what direction we're going in
我不知道我们在向什么方向前进，
and I'm not even sure I know how to figure out how to get there."
我甚至都不确定要如何实现目标。“
For sure, there are times when visionary leadership
当然，有时具有预见性的领导能力
is exactly what is needed.
是十分必要的。
But if we want to build organizations that can innovate time and again,
但是如果我们想要打造 可以不断创新的组织，
we must recast our understanding of what leadership is about.
我们必须重新树立我们对于 什么是领导能力的认识。
Leading innovation is about creating the space
领导性创新是关于创造一种空间，
where people are willing and able to do the hard work
让人们愿意并能够努力工作，
of innovative problem solving.
以创新的方式解决问题。
At this point, some of you may be wondering,
现在，你们中的有些人也许在想，
"What does that leadership really look like?"
“领导能力到底是什么呢？”
At Pixar, they understand that innovation takes a village.
在Pixar， 他们知道创新需要集体的力量。
The leaders focus on building a sense of community
领导者们专注于建造集体意识
and building those three capabilities.
和培养那三种能力。
How do they define leadership?
他们怎样定义领导能力呢？
They say leadership is about creating a world
他们说领导能力是关于创造一个
to which people want to belong.
人们想置身于其中的世界。
What kind of world do people want to belong in at Pixar?
在Pixar工作的人们想要 置身于一个什么样的世界呢？
A world where you're living at the frontier.
一个让你身居前沿的世界。
What do they focus their time on?
他们把时间用在哪里了呢？
Not on creating a vision.
不是在创造理念上。
Instead they spend their time thinking about,
相反，他们把时间用在思考
"How do we design a studio that has the sensibility of a public square
“我们如何去设计一间拥有公共意识的，
so that people will interact?
能够让人们沟通融入的工作室？
Let's put in a policy that anyone, no matter what their level or role,
让我们制定规矩：任何人， 抛开他们的级别或角色，
is allowed to give notes to the director
都可以向导演表达
about how they feel about a particular film.
他们对于某部影片的感受。
What can we do to make sure
我们要如何确保
that all the disruptors, all the minority voices in this organization,
所有与集体意见相左的人， 所有少数人的
speak up and are heard?
发言都会被听见呢？
And, finally, let's bestow credit in a very generous way."
还有最后，要能够大方地分享功劳。“
I don't know if you've ever looked at the credits of a Pixar movie,
我不知道你们是否仔细看过 一部Pixar电影片尾的贡献者列表，
but the babies born during a production are listed there.
就连在制作过程中诞生的 所有婴儿都被列出来了。
(Laughter)
（笑声）
How did Bill think about what his role was?
Bill是如何看待他自己的角色呢？
Bill said, "I lead a volunteer organization.
Bill说，“我领导着一个志愿者集体。
Talented people don't want to follow me anywhere.
有才能的人不想到处跟着我。
They want to cocreate with me the future.
他们想与我一起共创未来。
My job is to nurture the bottom-up
我的工作就是从一开始 就不断地在后方鼓励他们，
and not let it degenerate into chaos."
并且不让他们因为退步而造成混乱。“
How did he see his role?
他是如何看待他自己的角色呢？
"I'm a role model, I'm a human glue,
“我是一个榜样， 我是一个人类胶水，
I'm a connector, I'm an aggregator of viewpoints.
我是一个连接者， 我是一个观点的聚集者。
I'm never a dictator of viewpoints."
我从来不是一个观点的独裁者。“
Advice about how you exercise the role?
有任何关于如何实践 自己角色的忠告吗？
Hire people who argue with you.
招聘与你争论的人。
And, guess what?
还有，你猜什么？
Sometimes it's best to be deliberately fuzzy and vague.
有时最好谨慎地表现出一种模糊的态度。
Some of you may be wondering now,
你们有的人现在也许在想，
what are these people thinking?
这些人在想些什么？
They're thinking,
他们在想，
"I'm not the visionary, I'm the social architect.
“我不是一个有远见的人， 我是一个社会建筑师。
I'm creating the space where people are willing and able
我在创建空间， 让那里人们想要并且能够
to share and combine their talents and passions."
去分享并融合他们的才能和激情。“
If some of you are worrying now that you don't work at a Pixar,
如果你们其中的一些人 在担心你们没有在Pixar上班，
or you don't work at a Google,
或者不在Google工作，
I want to tell you there's still hope.
我想告诉你们，仍然有改进的空间。
We've studied many organizations
我们也研究了很多并不是
that were really not organizations you'd think of
你们所想像的以创新
as ones where a lot of innovation happens.
而著称的机构。
We studied a general counsel in a pharmaceutical company
我们研究了一个制药公司的 总法律顾问，
who had to figure out how to get the outside lawyers,
这个人不得不想办法让外围律师
19 competitors, to collaborate and innovate.
和19个竞争对手一起进行合作和创新。
We studied the head of marketing at a German automaker
我们研究了一个德国汽车制造商的 营销总管，
where, fundamentally, they believed that it was the design engineers,
他们从根本上相信设计工程师们
not the marketeers, who were allowed to be innovative.
才是应该具备创新能力的人， 而并不是市场销售者。
We also studied Vineet Nayar at HCL Technologies,
我们还研究了在HCL Technologies， 一个印度外包公司任职的
an Indian outsourcing company.
叫做Vinneet Nayar的人。
When we met Vineet,
当我们见到Vineet时，
his company was about, in his words, to become irrelevant.
据他所说， 他的公司正在变得无关紧要。
We watched as he turned that company into a global dynamo of I.T. innovation.
我们看着他把那个公司变成了一个 IT创新领域的全球引领者。
At HCL technologies, like at many companies,
像其他许多公司一样，在HCL科技，
the leaders had learned to see their role as setting direction
领导者们已经学会了去 把自己当做设置方向的角色，
and making sure that no one deviated from it.
并且确保没有人去偏离它。
What he did is tell them it was time for them
他所做的是去告诉他们，是时候
to think about rethinking what they were supposed to do.
该重新思考他们应该做什么了。
Because what was happening is that everybody was looking up
因为当时所有人都在 依据上层的决策而行动，
and you weren't seeing the kind of bottom-up innovation
你还看不到像Pixar或Google那样
we saw at Pixar or Google.
从下到上的创新。
So they began to work on that.
所以他们开始向那个方向靠近。
They stopped giving answers, they stopped trying to provide solutions.
他们不再给出答案，他们 不再尝试去给出解决方案。
Instead, what they did is they began to see
取而代之的是，他们开始发现
the people at the bottom of the pyramid, the young sparks,
在金字塔底层的，年轻的，
the people who were closest to the customers,
与客户最亲近的人，
as the source of innovation.
才是创新的来源。
They began to transfer the organization's growth
他们开始把机构的成长模式
to that level.
转移到那个级别。
In Vineet's language, this was about inverting the pyramid
用Vineet的话来说， 这是关于颠倒金字塔，
so that you could unleash the power of the many
以便你可以通过松开少数人的束缚
by loosening the stranglehold of the few,
去释放众人的力量，
and increase the quality and the speed of innovation
并且增强创新的质量和速度，
that was happening every day.
这的确是每天都在发生的事。
For sure, Vineet and all the other leaders that we studied
当然，Vineet和其他所有 我们研究过的领导者们，
were in fact visionaries.
实际上都是理念者。
For sure, they understood that that was not their role.
当然，他们明白那不是他们的角色。
So I don't think it is accidental that many of you did not recognize Ed.
所以我认为你们当中的 许多人没有认出Ed不是偶然。
Because Ed, like Vineet, understands that our role as leaders
因为像Vinnet一样，Ed明白 我们作为领导者的角色
is to set the stage, not perform on it.
是去布置舞台，而不是在上面表演。
If we want to invent a better future,
如果我们想创造一个更好的未来，
and I suspect that's why many of us are here,
并且我认为那正是我们中的 许多人在这里的原因，
then we need to reimagine our task.
我们就需要去重新构想我们的任务。
Our task is to create the space
我们的任务是去创造一个空间，
where everybody's slices of genius
在那里，每个人的才华
can be unleashed and harnessed,
都能被释放和驾驭，
and turned into works of collective genius.
并且转变成集体智慧的成果。
Thank you.
谢谢。
(Applause)
（掌声）