4 Business Ideas That Changed the World: Scientific Management
发布时间 2022-10-06 14:00:58 来源
Welcome to four business ideas that changed the world, a special series of the HBR idea cast.
欢迎来到HBR思想播客中特别系列——改变了世界的四个商业创意。我们将为您呈现精彩纷呈的商业故事。
In 1878, a machinist at a Pennsylvania Steelworks noticed that his crew was not producing nearly as much as he thought they could. Frederick Winslow Taylor began systematic studies to determine exactly how much work should be done.
1878年，一位宾夕法尼亚钢铁工厂的机械工注意到他的团队并没有像他认为的那样高效地生产。弗雷德里克·温斯洛·泰勒开始进行系统研究，以确定应该完成多少工作。
With stopwatches and later stop-motion film, Taylor analyzed the efficiency of workers, tweaking everything down to how they moved their arms, the size of their shovels, and how long they could take a breather. It helped factory owners make more pumps, steel and ball bearings, with lower labor costs.
泰勒通过使用秒表和后来的停格动画片，分析了工人的效率，从他们如何挥动手臂，铲子的大小，以及他们可以休息多长时间等方面进行微调。这帮助工厂主使用更低的劳动成本制造更多的水泵、钢铁和滚珠轴承。
It was the birth of a management theory called scientific management, or Taylorism, and Taylor became the face of it, a world-renowned management consultant before there were any.
这是一种叫做科学管理或泰勒主义的管理理论诞生了，而泰勒成为它的代表人物，在任何人成为世界知名的管理咨询师之前就已经是其中一员了。
Critics said his drive for industrial efficiency depleted workers physically and emotionally, Congress held hearings on it.
批评家们说他为了工业效率而使工人在身体和情感上耗尽，国会对此进行了听证。
Still, scientific management was the dominant management theory 100 years ago, in October of 1922, when Harvard Business Review was founded. It spread around the world, fueled the rise of big business, and helped decide World War 2. And today, it is baked into workplaces from call centers to restaurant kitchens, gig worker algorithms, and offices. Though few of us would recognize it, and few employers would admit to it.
然而，100年前的科学管理理论是当时支配性的管理理论，在1922年《哈佛商业评论》创刊时期就开始传播，并助推大型企业崛起，决定第二次世界大战，更成为现今各行各业的事业体系的基础，包括呼叫中心、餐厅厨房、平台工人算法及办公室。虽然现在很少有人认识到它，雇主也不会承认这一点。
On this special series from HBR IDA Cast, we're exploring four business ideas that change the world. Each week, we talk to scholars and experts on the most influential ideas of HBR's first 100 years. Disruptive innovation, shareholder value, and emotional intelligence. This week, scientific management.
在HBR IDA Cast的这个特别系列中，我们正在探讨四个改变世界的商业想法。每周，我们与学者和专家谈论HBR前100年中最有影响力的想法，包括颠覆性创新、股东价值和情感智能。本周的主题是科学管理。
With me to discuss it, our Nancy Cain historian at Harvard Business School, Michaela Girchelli, an economic historian at UCLA, and Lewis Hyman, a work in labor historian at Cornell University. I'm Kurt Nickish, a senior editor at Harvard Business Review, and your host for this episode.
和我一起讨论的是我们的南希·凯恩历史学家来自哈佛商学院的迈克拉·吉尔切利，来自加州大学洛杉矶分校的经济历史学家路易斯·海曼，以及康奈尔大学工作的劳动史学家。我是哈佛商业评论的高级编辑库尔特·尼克西，也是这一集的主持人。
Let's start with you, how were workers managed at the time that Taylor joined the workforce in 1878?
让我们先从你开始，泰勒加入劳动力市场的1878年时，工人是如何被管理的呢？
It's a great question, and the answer is all over the map. That is, how workers were managed and what their experience of working was in 1878, very enormously, by industry, by place, by tradition, which still had a very big role to play in how workers and management came together to produce a good or a service, although it was by far and away about goods in the late 19th century in America.
这是一个很好的问题，答案是各式各样的。也就是说，1878年工人的管理方式和工作体验在不同行业、地方和传统之间差异很大。这些传统在工人和管理层合作生产商品或服务的过程中仍然扮演着非常重要的角色，尽管在19世纪后期的美国，主要还是关于商品的生产。
You had in the early years of the steel business, an industry that Taylor will get into it, people trying to figure out how, as they learn that making more steel makes the price of each unit of steel go down, in other words, they stumble into economies of scale, and they're struggling to figure out, well, what does that mean for how we put men, mostly men in the steel business, together with capital? You have these different evolving, often chaotic arrangements.
在钢铁业刚开始的时候，泰勒将要进入这个行业，人们试图弄清楚，随着他们了解到生产更多的钢会使每单位钢的价格下降，也就是说，他们偶然发现了规模经济，他们正在努力弄清楚，这对我们如何将男性，主要是男性，与资本结合有何影响？你会看到这些不断发展、通常混乱的安排。
So when we think of high efficiency factory production today, we don't have any, any inkling into what it was like in the late 19th century to be an factory, because it was much, much more learning by doing, and much more disorganized than when we think of, say, semiconductor production today.
所以，当我们今天谈到高效的工厂生产时，我们根本没有意识到19世纪末的工厂是什么样子，因为那时候更多的是通过实践学习，而且比如今天的半导体生产要混乱得多。
Lewis, at the time, what was the understanding of being productive of productivity?
路易斯，在当时，对于生产力的理解是什么？
Well, I'm just going to echo Nancy here that, you know, we think about productivity today is how much stuff could I make? How efficient am I? Well, these ideas are not a historical. The grounded, in a particular set of values that comes out of the transition from working in a shop of an apprentice system to a world where you are working in a factory for a boss, that is the emergence of wage work.
嗯，我只是要重申纳西所说的，你知道，我们今天对生产力的看法是：我能制造多少东西？我有多有效率？好吧，这些观念不是历史性的。它们根植于一组特定的价值观，这些价值观源于从在学徒制的工坊工作到在工厂为老板工作的世界的过渡，也就是薪资工作的出现。
It's not just technology that changes, which we're all very familiar with, but social relationships that we go from a place where the apprentice and the master, in the sense the master of craft like a cobbler, works side by side to produce a few high quality shoes every day to a world where a wage worker wants to produce as many shoes as possible of an uncertain quality.
并不仅仅是技术发生了改变，这我们都非常熟悉，而且社会关系也在发生改变。过去徒弟和大师（大师是指像制鞋匠这样的手艺大师）并肩工作，每天只生产几双高质量的鞋子，而现在工人想尽可能多地生产质量不确定的鞋子。
So workers themselves, as they are apprentice and masters, imagine that why shouldn't I drink beer and sing songs while I make my shoes? This is quite different than the world of the factory where tailor exists.
作为学徒和师傅，工人们自己想，为什么在制作鞋子的时候不能喝啤酒唱歌呢？这与工厂中存在的裁缝的世界大不相同。
Michaela, can you develop that further?
Michaela，你能再深入探讨一下吗？
It's hard to imagine for us today, right? A time where productivity wasn't even an economic principle. It definitely is, but as we just pointed out, despite its centrality in the modern debate, productivity is a fairly recent concept.
对于我们今天来说，很难想象，对吧？一个生产效率甚至不是经济原则的时代。尽管它在现代辩论中占有核心地位，但如我们所指出的，生产效率是一个相当近期的概念。
Businesses of where beer is small, they were average three to four workers. It was very easy for the owner to coordinate their task, to monitor their jobs, and very easy owners and employees were working side by side to producing output.
在啤酒规模较小的企业中，通常有三到四名员工。对于业主来说，协调员工任务、监督工作非常容易，而且业主和员工之间一起工作，生产产出也很容易。
The situation dramatically changed with industrial evolution, because the dynamic of the workplace was completely changed.
随着工业革命的到来，情况发生了巨大变化，因为工作场所的动态完全改变了。
Let's think, for instance, companies building railroads and telegraphs. At that point, it became extremely important to assign the best task workers in order to coordinate production across different units and in different parts of the country. As such, the development of the concept of productivity is strongly related to the development of concept of management, intended as a bundle of practices that co-ordinate the tasks and the work of the employees in order to reach the optimum productivity.
我们来想想，比方说修建铁路和电报的公司。在那个时期里，分配最合适的任务工人来协调不同单位和国家各地的生产变得极为重要。因此，生产力的概念发展与管理概念发展紧密相关，意味着应该采取一系列实践来协调员工的任务和工作，以达到最佳生产力。
So this is the business world that Taylor came into. Nancy, who was Frederick Winslow Taylor, and what did he experience in his first job? Frederick Winslow Taylor was the son of Quakers. His father was a successful lawyer who actually had made enough money that he could live a kind of life of leisure. And his mother, a direct descendant of Mayflower voyagers, way back in the 17th century. She was also an ardent abolitionist and suffragette. So he comes from this, again, Patricia, family, with a very active mother.
所以这就是泰勒进入的商业世界。南希，弗雷德里克·温斯洛·泰勒是谁，他在他的第一份工作中经历了什么？弗雷德里克·温斯洛·泰勒是贵格会成员的儿子。他的父亲是一位成功的律师，他赚了足够的钱，可以过一种休闲的生活。他的母亲是五月花号船扶桑西泽游骑队的后代，可以追溯到17世纪。她也是一个热烈的废奴主义者和妇女选举权主义者。所以他来自这个有一个非常活跃的母亲的Patricia家族。
This is a young man who had nightmares as a boy. And then some machine, I said, harnesses to wake him up when he starts to turn so he doesn't have nightmares. This is a young man who, before he goes to a party, makes a list of all the attractive girls and the unattractive girls and resolves to spend equal time with both. This is a young man who he plays croquet, says, oh, here's the geometry of this particular croquet field. And here are the kind of vectors I want to be able to hit to win the game. I mean, he's interested in control, which is an important aspect of scientific management.
这是一个小时候做噩梦的年轻人。然后有一种机器，我说，它会让他醒来，当他开始翻身时，这样他就不会做噩梦了。这是一个在去派对之前，列出所有有吸引力的女孩和不吸引人的女孩的清单，并决定花同样的时间与两者相处的年轻人。这是一个打槌球的年轻人，他说，哦，这个特定的槌球场地的几何形状是这样的。这是我想要击中的向量类型，以赢得比赛。我的意思是，他感兴趣的是控制，这是科学管理的一个重要方面。
This is the Harvard admissions exams with some room despair, but he is these terrible headaches and real eye problems and decides not to enroll in college. And instead he takes a job as a worker. He later will kind of rise to management in Philadelphia in what today we call a machine tool company. It's called Enterprise Adraulics and it makes pumps. And he begins to think then about how do you increase efficiency in labor's relationship to management and in labor's relationship to the machines or the tools they use as part of their role in increasing productivity.
这是哈佛大学的入学考试，有点让人绝望，但他又有严重的头痛和真正的眼睛问题，所以决定不上大学。相反，他找了份工作做工人。他后来在费城的一个现在称为机床公司的企业Adraulics得到了升迁，这家公司生产泵。然后他开始考虑如何增加劳动力与管理之间的效率，以及在劳动力与机器或工具在提高生产力的角色中的关系。
What did he see there at work and what did he end up doing about the problems that he saw? Well, he sees that workers are in his eyes not working as hard as they can. And he becomes interested in how do I kind of tease out that problem, unpack it and what do we do about it? Most workers, including the apprentices that Lewis was talking about, are paid based on what they make or how much they make.
他在工作中看到了什么问题？他最终是怎样处理的呢？他发现工人们没有尽可能地努力工作。他想了解如何解决这个问题，该怎么处理？其中大多数工人，包括路易斯所说的学徒，都是根据他们生产的产品数量或生产的数量来计算报酬的。
So in that kind of system, workers are trying to do more, but ultimately in almost every kind of peace rate or pay for what today an economist like Michaela would call pay for a worker's marginal product. And that setting, almost all managers said, well, after a certain point, you're not going to get any more. So there's if you will, a kind of pay ceiling. Well, workers figure that out real quick and decide, well, I'm only going to work as hard as I need to work in order to make the maximum that my boss will pay me. And that then presents a really interesting problem for Fred Retailer, which is how do I get workers to work more?
在这种系统中，工人们试图做更多的工作，但几乎每种和平费率或经济学家像Michaela所说的给工人边际产品报酬的情况下，几乎所有的经理都会说，在某个时间点之后，你就无法再得到更多的报酬。所以有一种报酬上限。工人很快就明白了这一点，并决定只要工作足够让老板给他们最高的薪酬就可以了。这对Fred零售商来说是一个非常有趣的问题，就是如何让工人多做些工作。
So that's part of the problem, workers aren't working as hard as they can and they're not necessarily working in a standardized way. And that was true in the way that you heard Lewis speak so eloquently about shops and apprenticeships and small scale manufacturing. And even remember, in America, a lot of America is still moving from the farm to the factory. So you have people that have never worked indoors before in a sense, adding to if you will, the uncertainty and the caprice and the variation that Fred Retailer sees and that makes him anxious and determined to clean things up.
所以这是问题的一部分，工人没有尽可能努力地工作，也不一定按标准化的方式工作。正如你听到路易斯如此雄辩地谈到商店、学徒制和小规模制造业的方式一样。甚至要记住，在美国，很多美国人仍在从农场转向工厂。所以你有从未在室内工作过的人，增加了弗雷德零售商所看到的不确定性、变幻莫测和差异，这使他感到焦虑并决心整顿事物。
So he starts conducting experiments to better control what workers are doing, is that right? That's exactly what he starts doing, right? And he comes up with all kinds of what today we'd call, well, we might call them standard operating practice. I was just going to use the word rules, right? Ways of doing things in very specific ways of doing things. Every single job can be reduced to a series, maybe a very small number of tasks done one right way, one right way. And he's trying to reduce, right, the amount, if you will, the standard deviation in what each worker does in a very specific way along a very specific, what today we call production function.
所以他开始进行实验，以更好地控制工人正在做的事情，是这样吗？那就是他开始所做的事情，对吗？他提出了各种我们今天称之为标准操作规程的东西。我本来想用规则这个字，对吗？以非常特定的方式做事情的方式。每一份工作都可以被分解为一系列、可能非常少的任务，按照一种正确的方式完成。他试图减少每个工人按照非常特定的方式，沿着今天我们称之为生产函数的非常特定的路径，执行的标准偏差的数量。
What experiments is he running? What is he making workers do?
他正在进行哪些实验？他让工人做什么？
So one of the things he's doing, for example, in Midvale, where he'll spend some real length of time. So the famous one is a Dutchman, immigrant laborer, who hand picked by Fred Retailer, what he called a first-class man, and he does a series of studies about how Schmidt, which is the name he gives him in his writings, moves Pigire, right? It's not moving on to Canberra Bell. He's moving Pigire. And by showing Schmidt how to do this, right, you bend down this way, you pick it up here, you take this many steps over across the, whatever, the factory floor to move it over here, and then you rest at certain intervals, and you rest for exactly whatever, 90 seconds.. By showing him exactly how to do that, according to Fred Retailer, he increases Schmidt's output. By almost, I think it's three and a half-fold. It's like from 12 tons a day to something like 47 tons of Pigire a day that he's moving. And how he literally dissects that all the way down to how many steps he takes and how many times he does it before he rests for how many seconds, that is the essence of what he's doing for a myriad, scores, and scores of component parts of a job.
他现在正在做的事情之一，就是在Midvale这个地方呆上一段真正长的时间。其中著名的一个例子是一个荷兰移民工人，由Fred Retailer亲自挑选并称之为一流人才。他做了一系列研究关于如何让他在写作中称为Schmidt的人移动Pigire。他不是移动到Canberra Bell，而是移动Pigire。通过向Schmidt展示如何做到这一点，例如这样弯腰，这里采摘，步伐跨过工厂地面，移动到这里，然后在某些间隔处休息，休息时间正好是九十秒......根据Fred Retailer的说法，他通过精确地展示如何做到这一点，将Schmidt的产量提高了近三倍半。从每天12吨增加到每天约47吨的Pigire。他实际上从每个工作的许多组成部分中解剖出每一个细节，包括他走的步数、每次操作的次数以及休息多少秒，这就是他为许多不同的工作所做的本质。
I think an important part of what Nancy is talking about is not just the imagination of work, but the imagination of the worker. And what's crucial here is that his idea of Schmidt is an idea that appeals to the readers of his theory. So he describes him as a first-rate man in terms of his ability, very strong, very industrious, but also, quote, mentally sluggish, that this is someone who is not really able to solve problems for himself. Mikaela writes about him that he is so stupid that the word percentage has no meaning for him. So it's not simply possible to give him incentives through peace rights to make him work harder. He has to be guided by the hand of a manager.
我觉得，南希谈论的重要部分不仅仅是对工作的想象，更是对工人的想象。关键在于，施密特的理论吸引了读者们的赞同，因为他把施密特描述成一个非常厉害、非常勤奋的一流人才，但同时也是个“思维迟缓”的人，他无法独立解决问题。米卡埃拉写道，他的智商如此低下，以至于“百分比”这个词对他来说毫无意义。因此，不能简单地通过和平权利来激励他更加努力地工作，他必须被管理者手把手地引导。
Mikaela Taylor is coming up with this system then to make workers do things a certain way. And he leaves Midvale Ironworks in 1890 and spends the next year consulting with various companies, both at home steel, one of them, to help them increase productivity. He eventually even refashioned himself as a management consultant, perhaps the first one ever, right? Yes, exactly. So Taylor developed himself a new profession and called himself a consulting engineer in management. In this role, Taylor wrote and it observing a long list of prominent firms in many industries, cities and towns.
Mikaela Taylor正在设计这个系统来让工人按照一个特定的方式工作。他在1890年离开了Midvale Ironworks，然后花了一年时间与各种公司咨询，其中包括家庭钢铁公司，以帮助他们提高生产力。他最终甚至重新塑造了他自己，成为一个管理顾问，也许是有史以来第一个，对吗？是的，确切地说。因此，泰勒发展了一个新职业，称自己为管理咨询工程师。在这个角色中，泰勒写作并观察到许多行业、城市和城镇中的知名公司。
Ismengol, when he was working with these different companies in different roles, was to develop the core ideas of the asscientific management, like the idea of asscientific selection of workers and importance of differential pay incentives in order to motivate the workers to increase productivity. So the fact that he spent many years consulting around the country actually helped him to put together the principle of asscientific management that will become the title of Ismengol's book published in 1911.
伊斯曼戈在不同的公司担任不同的职务时，致力于发展“科学管理”的核心思想，比如通过科学的工人选拔和不同的薪酬激励来激发工人提高生产效率。因此，他花费了多年的时间在全国各地进行咨询，实际上有助于他构建《科学管理原则》的基础，该书于1911年出版。
It was how did workers feel about Taylor's methods? Not good Kurt, not good. It was an incredibly exhausting way to work with somebody else telling you what to do all day, how to move your body. Having somebody stand there with a stopwatch? No, you don't feel like a man, you feel like a dog, right? You are being inspected constantly and it is very hard to feel good about what you do and you're listening to his watch rather than your body over when you're tired and maybe your wages go up. Maybe they go up 50% and your productivity goes up to 250%. But ultimately you don't care because it's not just about that one day of loading and pig iron, this is your whole life.
工人们对泰勒的方法感觉如何？不好，库尔特，不好。这种方式让人觉得非常疲惫，整天听别人告诉你该做什么，如何移动身体。有人拿着秒表站在那里？你不会觉得自己是一个男人，而是像一只狗，对吧？你一直被检查，很难感到工作的满意度，你会听着他的手表，而不是听从你的身体，当你感到疲倦的时候，也许你的工资会涨，也许会涨50%，你的生产力也会提高到250%。但最终你并不在意，因为这不仅仅是一天装载猪铁，这是你的整个生活。
How did factory managers and owners that Taylor worked with feel about him and his results? So the answer is very much mixed in terms of how managers and firm owners reacted to Taylor. There was a personal piece which was he was I think autocratic and very, very convinced. I mean there's something very naively utopian about Frederick Taylor. He thought he was going to build a world in which there was so much surplus created by all this increased labor productivity that there would be no reason to fight about the surplus. He thought this was going to be such a benefit to everyone concerned that he could never understand why not only workers but firm owners and managers who didn't always welcome his, you know, it was either my way or the highway with Frederick Taylor or Fred Taylor. And I think both in terms of his attitude and in terms of his didactic sense of this is the way we'll do it. He confused and he angered a variety of different kinds of managers, particularly for men, but also for owners. He really was certain that there was one right way and it was his way.
泰勒与之合作的工厂经理和所有者对他和他的成果的感觉非常复杂。在个人方面，他非常专制和坚定。泰勒有着非常天真的乌托邦思想。他认为通过提高劳动生产率创造的巨额盈余可以帮助所有人，从而消除争端。他不仅仅没有得到工人的支持，甚至经常得罪了一些公司所有者和经理，因为他认为只有他的方法才是唯一正确的方法。他的态度和自以为是的教义感让各种不同类型的经理感到困惑和愤怒，特别是对于男性经理，而且还包括一些所有者。他毫不怀疑认为只有一种正确的方法，那就是他的方法。
So somehow despite all this resistance both from workers and some of the people who employed him, this method ends up becoming a movement. Michaela when did scientific management start attracting followers outside just the word of mouth work that Taylor was getting here and there at different companies? The first large scale diffusion happened in 1903 when a theater presented the first paper at the American Society of Mechanical Engineers' annual conference.
那么尽管工人和一些雇用他的人都反对，这种方法最终成为了一种运动。Michaela，在Taylor偶尔在不同公司中得到口耳相传的工作以外，科学管理何时开始吸引到追随者？第一次大规模传播是在1903年，当时一家剧院在美国机械工程师协会年会上呈现了第一篇论文。
In the following years also between 1904 and 1912, Taylor devoted his time and his money to promote and diffuse the principle of scientific management. He traveled a lot around the country, giving lectures and university, talking at professional societies and in this way the ideas of the terrorism started spreading in the US. However, the third point happened in 1910 when there was an Interstate Commerce Commission Euring and one of the attorney argued that the US railroads could have saved up to $1 million a day if they introduced the scientific management principle that Euring was extremely popular at the time, widespread coverage in the newspapers, Taylor's scientific management ideas were on every leap and the idea of efficiency in the way the productivity drive that is one of the core characteristics of the US business model in the 20th century start becoming a national idea.
在随后的几年中，即1904年至1912年之间，泰勒花费时间和金钱推广和传播科学管理原则。他到美国各地旅行，讲授大学课程，在专业协会发表演讲，通过这种方式，科学管理的理念开始在美国传播。然而，第三点发生在1910年，当时有一位州际商务委员会的律师争论说，如果美国铁路公司引入了科学管理原则，他们每天可以节省高达100万美元的费用。由于Euring在当时非常受欢迎，广泛报道在报纸上，泰勒的科学管理理念成为热门话题，效率和生产力增长的想法成为美国20世纪企业模式的核心特征之一，开始成为一个国家性的理念。
Nancy right around the same time workers go on strike at an arsenal just outside Boston to protest Taylor's methods of fun fact Harvard business review was actually headquartered there at the arsenal. I interviewed there when I got this job. What happened at that strike?
那时候，泰勒的管理方法引起了外面波士顿一个兵工厂工人罢工的抗议，恰好在这个时候南希正在那里。有趣的是，哈佛商业评论就在那个兵工厂总部。当我得到这份工作时，我就在那里面试了。那次罢工发生了什么？
So Taylor sent one of his disciples to institute basically time motion studies and he shows up with a stopwatch and he starts timing different workers doing different things. I'm sure he's got a clipboard and he's writing things down. One worker says I won't let you time me and management immediately fires him because management is interested in what Taylor's work can bring to productivity at the arsenal. So the worker is fired on the spot and then all the other workers just walk off the job and strike.
所以，泰勒派了一个追随者来进行时间运动研究，他拿着秒表，开始计时不同工人做不同的事情。我肯定他有一个剪贴板，他在写东西。一个工人说我不会让你计时我，管理部门立即解雇了他，因为管理部门对泰勒的工作能为兵工厂的生产力带来什么很感兴趣。然后工人被现场解雇，其他所有工人就走开了，罢工了。
And so it's a very good example of the assumption that there's one right way that only a certain small group of people called managers and scientific management experts today we might call them consultants have the only small group of elite folks have that one right way and that they have the power to put that one right way in place regardless of the experience it offers for workers. And again you think about the suddenness of this transition for many many workers between 1880 and 1920 coming literally in many cases off a vessel from Europe or some other part of the world as immigrants and moving into factories and the abruptness right and that massive discrepancy in power the idea that what you know and what you've learned on a job isn't worth anything if there's only one way to do it and the only people that can tell you that are the small group of high priests in industrial capitalism.
所以，这是一个非常好的例子，表明有一种假设，认为只有一种正确的方法，只有一个称为经理和科学管理专家的特定小群体，今天我们可能称之为顾问，才拥有这种唯一正确的方法，他们有权力将该方法放置在工人面前，无论对工人的经验意义如何。再次，考虑到在1880年到1920年期间，许多工人的突然转变，他们中的许多人从欧洲或其他地方的船上作为移民来到工厂工作，以及权力上的巨大差异，即只有一种做事的方法，如果只有少数产业资本主义的高级大祭司才能告诉你如何做，那么你所了解和学习的东西就毫无价值。
And that strike got so much attention Congress investigated it. Right, Congress investigates another moment for Taylorism to take the spotlight on some kind of national stage and on Capitol Hill it wasn't greeted with unconditional approval quite the opposite piece here that was very very important. A Congressman named William Wilson who's the chair of the committee that's investigating Taylor is worried about all the things we've been talking about here is it all about just increasing speed. So lots of folks on Capitol Hill like Wilson were concerned and so were labor leaders about the skills that Lewis was talking about the lots of workers develop on the job in lots of different kinds of businesses and industries and production processes.
那次罢工受到了国会的极大关注。没错，国会调查了泰勒主义另一个备受瞩目的时刻，而在国会山，它并没有受到无条件的赞扬，恰恰相反，这是非常重要的一篇文章。调查泰勒的委员会主席威廉·威尔逊议员担心我们一直在谈论的所有事情都只是为了增加速度。因此，国会山上的许多人，如威尔逊议员和劳工领袖们，都对刘易斯所谈到的许多工人在各种不同的企业、行业和生产过程中所掌握的技能感到担忧。
What happens to that if we're breaking down every single task into these tiny component parts and basically saying there's no room for any kind of discretion or experience or innovation to happen on the part of working men and women. Lewis and he mentioned labor leaders there how did the larger labor movement figure into this backlash?
如果我们把每一个任务都拆成这些微小的组成部分，基本上就是在说，在工人和工人社群中，就没有任何自由裁量权、经验或创新的空间。路易斯提到了工会领袖，大型劳工运动如何在这个反弹中扮演角色？
Well, I think they figured into it in the way that Nancy was talking about as not just a question of making more widgets, moving more pig iron, but the larger political meaning of it for a democratic citizenry. A long question throughout the 19th century was how can wage work exist in a democracy in the sense that how can you obey for eight, ten, twelve hours a day and then expect it to be free the rest of your time? How is it possible for someone who is so broken and dominated to then exercise political freedom?
嗯，我认为他们在其中扮演的角色，正像南茜所谈到的那样，不仅仅是制造更多零件，移动更多生铁，而是对于民主公民来说更重要的政治含义。在整个19世纪中，一个长期存在的问题是，薪水工作如何存在于民主中？也就是说，你如何能够每天听从八、十、十二个小时的命令，然后期望其余的时间是自由的？一个身心受到压迫和支配的人如何能够行使政治自由？
This is exactly what the president of the American Federation of Labor, Sam Gobbers, tells Congress. He says, I grant you that if this tailor system is put into operation as we see it and as we understand it, it will mean great production in goods and things. But insofar as man is concerned, it means destruction. And that is the question of tailorism. Of course, you can make more stuff, but what is the cost? What is the cost in democracy? What is the cost in the long term health of those workers?
这正是美国劳工联合会主席山姆·高伯斯在国会所说的。他说，“如果我们按照我们所看到和理解的方式将这个缝纫工业系统实施，我承认这将在商品和物品方面带来巨大的生产。但就人而言，它意味着破坏。 这就是缝纫主义的问题所在。当然，你可以生产更多的东西，但是代价是什么？民主的代价是什么？那些工人的长期健康成本是多少？”
Gobbers tells Congress that tailorism was the antithesis of industrial education because what compers was all about was the idea that workers could be educated to be more productive. Why did they need those managers coming in with their stopwatches? Why couldn't they themselves begin to figure out better production processes? And so in some ways, this anticipates the insights at Toyota later in the 20th century, this kind of bottom-up worker knowledge of the obviously, gopers doesn't call it Toyotaism. But the fundamental question for gopers is what are humans for?
Gobbers告诉国会，泰勒制是工业教育的反义词，因为康普斯所关注的是工人可以受教育以提高生产力的想法。为什么他们需要那些拿着秒表的经理人呢？他们为什么不能自己开始思考更好的生产流程呢？所以某种程度上，这预见了20世纪晚期丰田的洞见，这种自下而上的工人知识，显然，Gobbers并不称之为丰田主义。但Gobbers的根本问题是人类的存在意义是什么？
What is the range of human capacities? What is it the worth of a person if they are expected to become like a machine? And so for gopers, then productivity is not a neutral idea, but essentially about the power between workers and owners in that exact moment, but also in the future of America, for whom do the benefits of productivity flow? Does it go to the owners of capital? Does it go to the workers themselves? I think that is the great debate.
人类的能力范围是什么？如果人们被期望像机器一样工作，他们的价值是什么？因此，对于共和党人来说，生产力不是一个中性的概念，而是关于工人和所有者在现在和未来的权力，对于谁获得生产力的利益？它是流向资本所有者还是流向工人自己？我认为这是一个伟大的辩论话题。
You know, maybe I do get paid enough that I get an extra beer on the weekend. But what does that mean if I'm so exhausted, so worn out, so soulbroken, by this kind of work that I don't even want to leave my house on the weekend? Michaela, what was the upshot of that congressional hearing? Did it stunt the spread of scientific management? Or was this one of those? Any publicity is good publicity, sort of things?
你知道，或许我赚的钱够多，可以在周末喝上一杯额外的啤酒。但如果这种工作让我如此精疲力尽、筋疲力尽、心力交瘁，以至于我甚至不想在周末离开家，那这意味着什么呢？Michaela，那个国会听证会的结果是什么？是否抑制了科学管理的传播？还是其中的一个？任何公开宣传都是好的宣传，类似这样的事情吗？
It was definitely one of any publicity, it's good publicity. In the sense that on paper, the committee report stated that neither the theater system or other management system should impose on the workers against their will. And also that any system of shop management should be the outcome of a mutual consensus between the workers and the managers. However, the committee declined to make any recommendation for this legislation. And so, Taylor was very lucky to have the Congress come up with a very mild report. And Taylorism could continue to be spread and to be adopted not only in the US, but also worldwide in the years to come.
这绝对是宣传中的一种，好的宣传。在文件上，委员会报告表明，剧院系统或其他管理系统都不应迫使工人违背他们的意愿。并且任何商店管理系统都应该是工人和经理之间相互一致的结果。然而，该委员会拒绝对这项立法作出任何建议。因此，泰勒非常幸运，国会提出了一个非常温和的报告。泰勒主义可以继续在未来的年份中在美国和全世界范围内被传播和采用。
Coming up after the break, we're going to follow that spread and discover how Taylorism got baked into our modern life and work. One hundred years later, have the human and social costs of increased productivity been resolved. Stay with us.
广告过后，我们将跟随这种传播并发现泰勒主义是如何被融入我们的现代生活和工作中的。一百年后，增加生产力所带来的人力和社会成本是否已得到解决。请继续收看。
Welcome back to four business ideas that changed the world, scientific management. Nancy, Taylor died in 1915, really kind of at the height of scientific management as an overt practice. This is a time when business schools were cropping up around the United States. Harvard Business Review was founded in 1922. The practice of management is taking shape and scientific management kind of has pulled position there.
欢迎回到改变世界的四种商业创意之一——科学管理。Nancy Taylor在1915年去世，正值科学管理作为一种公开实践的高峰期。那时，商学院在美国各地如雨后春笋般涌现。哈佛商业评论于1922年创刊。管理实践正在形成，而科学管理在其中占据了重要的地位。
What effect did it have on the US economy in the 20th century? You know what the British management scholar Lindell Erwick observed that America owes to Taylor a large of incalculable proportion of the immense productivity and high standard of living that began to take hold as the 19th century became the 20th century. I'm very skeptical of that. Scientific management took hold with, you know, corresponding to larger effects in certain industries and not in others.
这个问题是询问20世纪对美国经济产生了什么影响。你知道，英国管理学者林德尔·厄里克观察到，美国应该感激泰勒的贡献，这在19世纪末20世纪初开始的巨大生产力和高生活水准中具有不可估量的比例。但我对此持怀疑态度。科学管理在某些行业得到了广泛应用，而在其他行业则没有相应的效果。
Taylorism didn't really affect retailing. It really didn't affect other industries where labor was a very, very important piece of the story in terms of the contribution of labor. You could say chemical, a huge, or proctor in gamble, a huge consumer products company. It's not clear that Taylorism had a big effect in that company, say, between the years of 1890 and 1950. It's just, Taylorism took hold in places where labor's contribution could be sliced into these tiny slices. Taylor played a big role there. That's a big idea that mattered, right?
泰勒主义并没有真正影响到零售业。在那些劳动力非常非常重要的行业中，它确实没有影响到其他领域。比如化学行业，一个非常大的公司，比如宝洁，一个庞大的消费品公司。在1890年到1950年期间，泰勒主义是否对该公司产生了很大的影响还不清楚。只是泰勒主义在那些能够把劳动力的贡献切成这些微小的部分的地方扎根了。泰勒在那里扮演了重要的角色。这是一个重要的理念，对吧？
But in terms of actually hiking up productivity industry by industry and the leading industries that created the 20th century American economy, I think we're on more shaky ground.
但是，就实际提高行业生产力和创造20世纪美国经济领先产业方面而言，我认为我们的地位更加不稳定。
Let me say one other thing though, that's really important to the power of the idea of scientific management. Peter Drucker, well-known management consultant writer, thoughtful commentator on the evolution of business and management.
让我再说一件事，这对于科学管理理念的影响非常重要。彼得·杜拉克，著名的管理顾问作家，对企业和管理演变的思考评论家。
Someone said that Taylor was so important he displaced marks in the pantheon of critical thinkers of the modern age, including Darwin, Freud, and originally Marx and they said, nope, make way for Fred Taylor, Karl Marx goes out.
有人说 Taylor 是如此重要，他取代了现代关键思想家中的马克思、弗洛伊德和原始的马克思，他们说，不要让路给弗雷德·泰勒。
I disagree with that completely, right? Karl Marx understood that if Frederick Taylor would come along, commoditize labor, diminish its human creative, innovative potential, and squeeze it into a piece of a machine.
我完全不同意那个观点，对吗？卡尔·马克思明白，如果弗雷德里克·泰勒出现，把劳动变成商品，并减缓它的人类创造性、创新性潜力，把它压缩到机器的一部分中。
And that's what scientific management did in so many ways, subtly and less subtly. It really moved Marx's prediction for the role of labor and industrial capitalism ahead by leaps and bounds.
这就是科学管理在许多方面做的事情，既隐晦且又明显。它真正地让马克思对于劳动力和工业资本主义角色的预测取得了飞跃的进展。
He codified Marx by saying labor is a commodity. We can get it to do exactly what we want. We want first-class pieces of commodity like Mr. Schmidt and we're going to tell him exactly how to do things down to the second.
他通过称劳动力是一种商品来对马克思进行了规范化。我们可以让它完全按照我们的意愿行事。我们想要像施密特先生这样的一流商品，我们会告诉他要做什么，到秒为止。
Now you contrast that with other kinds of productive processes, both in the Toyota system, Japanese capitalism or German capitalism or the beginnings of the information revolution in Silicon Valley and the situation is completely different. In all those instances, you have massive game-changing increases in productivity.
你把它与其他生产流程对比一下，比如丰田系统、日本和德国的资本主义以及硅谷信息革命的初期阶段，情况完全不同。在所有这些情况下，生产力都得到了巨大的飞跃性的提高，这对游戏规则产生了极大的影响。
Sticking with the communists here, Lewis One, surprising fan of Taylor's ideas was the revolutionary Vladimir Lenin. Can you tell us more about that?
坚持共产主义的路线，刘易斯·1号，惊人地支持泰勒的思想，这个革命家弗拉基米尔·列宁也是其中之一。您能更详细地告诉我们吗？
Sure. Initially, Lenin was very skeptical of scientific management following other kinds of labor critics that it was just a way to sweat more labor, that is, to put people in sweatshops, to increase their productivity, but not really pay them for the full value of that increased productivity.
当然。初始时，列宁非常怀疑科学管理，因为其他类型的劳动批评家认为它只是一种让工人流更多汗的方法，也就是把人们放在血汗工厂里，增加他们的生产率，但并没有真正支付他们增加的生产力的全部价值。
But he changes his mind. In 1917, he releases his book, The State and Revolution, which if you're the kind of person who is romantic about Marx, this book will not make you romantic about Lenin.
不过他改变了主意。1917年，他出版了《国家与革命》一书。如果你是那种对马克思充满浪漫想象的人，这本书会让你对列宁的浪漫想象破灭。
If Marx imagines a future where we work a few hours a day, we fish a little, we do philosophy. In some sense, this is imagining us all as capitalist, living off the prosperity. Well, this is not Lenin's vision at all.
如果马克思想象一个未来，我们每天工作几个小时，钓一点鱼，做一些哲学。从某种意义上讲，这是把我们都想象成了资本家，依靠繁荣生活。然而，这完全不是列宁的愿景。
In Lenin's vision, he's very much in line with Taylor's thinking. Only instead of management, there is the state. Lenin suggests that every worker should have six hours of physical work daily, and then four hours of working for the state. So a total of 10 hours. And this is a very different conception from Marx, and certainly a different conception of what labor leaders like Goppers want to see the future as.
在列宁的设想中，他的想法非常符合泰勒的思想。只不过，他所谈的不是管理问题，而是国家问题。列宁建议每个工人每天应该进行6个小时的体力劳动，再进行4个小时为国家服务的工作。这样总共是10个小时。这和马克思的观念非常不同，当然也不同于工会领袖如戈珀斯所希望看到的未来。
But it speaks to the underlying brutality and anti-humanism in a certain ways of Taylorism and of course, Leninism.
但它揭示了泰勒主义和列宁主义某些方式中的根本残忍和反人道的本质。如果需要的话，可以进行改写。
Yeah. Well, he thought it worked, right? And he wanted to implement it so that the Soviet Union would be competitive.
是啊，他觉得这个方法可行，对吧？他希望实施此方法，使苏联更具竞争力。
Michaela, we just heard about Lenin there, but how did Taylor's ideas spread outside the US?
迈克拉，我们刚才听到了关于列宁的事，但是泰勒的思想是如何在美国之外传播的？
Taylor's idea took key characteristics to spread outside the US. The first one is that they were very adaptable, meaning that they were not specific to given for size or given sector. And this goes back to what we discussed before.
泰勒的想法有关键的特点，在美国以外广泛传播。其中第一个特点是它们非常适应性强，这意味着它们不是特定于给定的规模或特定的行业。这和我们之前讨论过的联系起来。
The fact that Taylor has developed his ideas after widespread consulting in different industries in different firms across the US. And the second key characteristics is that Taylor's ideas were complemented by firm specific practices.
泰勒经过在美国不同公司不同行业的广泛咨询后，发展了自己的想法。第二个关键特点是泰勒的想法得到了公司特定实践的补充。
For instance, Taylorism was very well accepted in Japan, but the interpretation of the productivity drive in Japan was a little bit different relative to the US. The idea of increasing productivity in Japan was mostly related to the management of waste and reducing waste as much as possible.
比如说，泰勒制在日本非常受欢迎，但是相对于美国，日本对于提高生产力的理解略有不同。在日本，提高生产力的概念主要与管理浪费和尽可能减少浪费有关。
And in a way, these were the first steps of the lean production and the lean management system that would become predominant in Japan, in the leases and then in the 70s.
实际上，这些是在日本借鉴并在70年代之后得以广泛应用的精益生产和精益管理系统的首次步伐。
Taylorism also spread in Europe. It ended up being adopting in many countries, including Britain and France, that were the two European countries more active in the adoption of the Taylorism.
泰勒制度也在欧洲广泛传播。它得到了多个国家的采纳，其中包括英国和法国，这两个欧洲国家在采用泰勒制度方面更为积极。
So was the industrial efficiency of the US in World War II? Did that strengthen this notion of exporting scientific management?
美国在二战中的工业效率是怎样的？这是否加强了出口科学管理的概念？
Yes, absolutely. In the early 40s, the technical and scientific knowledge of the Samu-European countries like Germany and the US was very comparable. However, what was key for the US to win in the war was being able to produce at much higher speed than all the other European countries.
当然。在40年代初，像德国和美国这样的萨姆欧洲国家的技术和科学知识是非常相似的。然而，对于美国赢得战争的关键是能够以比所有其他欧洲国家更高的速度生产。
And indeed, the US invested a lot in the programme for diffusion of managerial knowledge and scientific management. One of the most famous programmes sponsored by the US between 1914 and 1945 was managerial consulting to large US companies involved in work production.
事实上，美国在经理知识和科学管理的推广计划上投入了大量资金。美国在1914年到1945年间支持的最著名计划之一是为从事劳动生产的大型美国公司提供经理咨询。
After World War II, the US sponsored many programmes to diffuse managerial technology. World War II definitely helped to create the so-called US way of doing business. That was exported in Europe and Japan in the aftermath of World War II.
二战后，美国赞助了许多项目来传播管理技术。二战肯定有助于创造所谓的美国商业方式。这种方式在二战后被出口到欧洲和日本。
Lewis, as we move forward in the 20th century, the economy moves away from the factory in the shop floor, more service sector, more professional services. The scientific management made that transition, too. It has a huge shadow, a long shadow over how we think about the workplace. And this urge to quantify workers, to quantify time, existed as much in the typing pools, words per minute, as it did in moving tons of pig iron.
路易斯，在我们迈向二十一世纪的道路上，经济从工厂转向了更多的服务业和专业服务领域。科学管理也随之转型。它的阴影，对我们对工作场所的思考产生了巨大的影响和长期的影响。对工人和时间进行量化的需求，在打字池中的每分钟单词数与运输大量重物的需求一样存在。
The movements and machines of fry cooks as much as textile workers. And now, of course, in the gig economy, on bikes and cars and on computers where workers are constantly surveilled, treated like a commodity, watched by algorithms that are very much the descendants of Taylor's stopwatch. And so Taylor is everywhere.
炸薯条师傅的动作和机器，和纺织工人一样重要。现在，在零工经济中，他们骑自行车、驾驶汽车，或者坐在电脑前，不断地受到监控，被当作商品对待，而这些监控算法可谓是泰勒手表的直接延伸。因此，泰勒的影响无所不在。
And it's built into a kind of visceral sense of how to manage. You don't really get an alternative in America to Taylorism until Douglas McGregor develops his famous theory X and theory Y.
它内在于一种直观的管理方式。在美国，直到道格拉斯·麦格雷戈发展出著名的理论X和理论Y之前，你不会真正得到《泰勒主义》的替代方案。
And theory X is basically Taylor. And theory Y is commerce that workers actually like being engaged with their work. They actually want to take pride in their work. They respond to incentives. They can actually calculate percentages.
“理论X基本上是泰勒的思想，它认为工人需要被管理和控制才能高效工作。而理论Y则强调商业中的工人实际上喜欢参与工作。他们真的想为自己的工作感到自豪。他们会对激励做出回应，而且能够实际计算百分比。”
And part of the reason why this theory Y is possible to imagine by the 1960s is that in the one hand, you have several generations of mass education, both in grade school and in high school, but also the cutoff of immigrants.
这个理论Y之所以能够在上世纪60年代被想象出来的原因之一，是因为一方面有几代人进行了大规模的小学和中学教育，另一方面是移民的截止。
So that this is exactly the moment when the number of people who are born outside the US is its lowest point ever. So it's very easy to imagine other Americans like yourself if you are a manager. And so we see this story of who is like us and who is different than us, again, play out in this possibility of a new way to think about management. But even in those theories that are beginning to be developed in the 1960s, there is a sense that productivity remains everything.
这就是美国外来移民数量史上最低谷的时刻。如果你是一名经理，很容易想象其他像你一样的美国人。所以，我们可以看到这个关于谁跟我们相似，谁跟我们不同的故事，在这种新的管理思考方式的可能中得到体现。但即使在20世纪60年代开始形成的那些理论中，大家也都认为生产力至关重要。
Nancy Lewis is talking there about scientific management kind of baked into the contemporary offices and workplaces. Are we scientifically managed? One of the really interesting aspects, just again, to feed on the question of what Lewis just said, is how scientific management in the last 40 years has come to retailing, has come to call centers, has come to Amazon warehouses, has come to restaurants, how scientific management as the economy has shifted has increased its reach.
南希·路易斯在那里谈论现代办公室和工作场所中注入了一种科学管理。我们是科学管理吗？一个真正有趣的方面，就是再次回答路易斯刚才说的问题，即在过去的40年里，科学管理如何进入零售、呼叫中心、亚马逊仓库、餐厅等领域，随着经济的转变，科学管理的影响范围不断扩大。
You see that both in the recent unionization drives at Amazon, which have been undergirded by particular workers' experiences, including how many times can use the restroom? How many times can and how much time has to elapse before you go back to the restroom? How many boxes are supposed to pack? We see it there, we see it in call centers where if you scratch the surface of most call centers, which regardless of where they're physically located, you will find people with headsets managed down to the minute, not only in terms of bathroom breaks, but how many calls they have to handle per 15 minute interval. It's extraordinary. Call centers are the new, you know, midvale steel.
你看，最近亚马逊的工会组织运动都得到了特定工人的经历的支持，比如他们可以使用厕所的次数，多久之后可以再次使用厕所，需要打包多少个箱子等等。不管这些呼叫中心在哪里，如果你深入了解，你会发现大多数呼叫中心的人都是按照分钟管理的，不仅限于上厕所的次数，还包括每15分钟内需要处理多少个电话。这是非常特别的，呼叫中心就像是新的中间钢铁。
So I think that yes, I think that we are scientifically managed in many, many different kinds of work. Not all occupations are scientifically managed, but many, many of them were that weren't say 60 years ago, and that speaks not only to its ability to adapt and evolve to new industries and new kinds of economic activity.
我认为，是的，我认为我们在许多不同类型的工作中都受到科学管理。并不是所有职业都受到科学管理，但很多职业在60年前不是这样的，这不仅表明了它适应和发展新产业和新经济活动的能力。
Also speaks again to the huge hegemony that scientific management has had on the question of how should workers and management do what they do together. The idea that, you know, kind of leaves us all in the dust is Frederick Taylor's scientific management. And that's today, right, and it was true in 1910. And to me, that's just so astounding. Why this, this answer, why this right way? Because there isn't one right way, and the history of capitalism shows us that. Even the history of Silicon Valley shows us that. But still, it's scientific management that has left all kinds of other ideas, at least in America in the dust.
这段话谈到了科学管理在工人和管理层如何共同工作的问题上所占有的巨大霸权。这个想法会让我们都感到力不从心，而这个想法就是弗雷德里克·泰勒的科学管理。这种想法在今天仍然是有道理的，在1910年它也是正确的。这让我感到震惊。为什么要这种答案，为什么要这种正确的方法呢？因为并没有一种正确的方法，这是资本主义历史所证明的事实。甚至硅谷的历史也告诉我们这个道理。但是科学管理仍然让其他很多想法，至少在美国，都成了过眼云烟的事情。
Yeah, Makayla, how is scientific management regarded today? If I use that term with people, a lot of people don't even know it.
嗯，Makayla，今天人们对科学管理的看法如何？如果我把这个术语跟人们提起，很多人甚至都不知道它的意思。
Yes, scientific management idea. It doesn't have a very good perception, not today, in the sense that scientific management is seen as the program that then equates the worker activity in order to increase productivity. But indeed, almost all the firms all over the world adapt the scientific management principle.
是的，科学管理理念。它并没有很好的形象，不仅仅是现在，因为科学管理被视为把工人活动等同于为了增加生产力的计划。但实际上，全世界几乎所有的公司都接受科学管理原则。
In the sense that all the production is organized today, not only in the industry, but also in services, is strongly shaped by the idea of productivity. And this is also testified by the increasing importance of managers, the rise of managers' compensations, that are considered key inputs for firm success..
从今天开始组织所有生产，不仅是在工业中，而且在服务业中，都在很大程度上受到生产率思想的影响。这也被经理的重要性越来越大所证实，经理的薪酬也被认为是公司成功的关键因素之一。
So definitely the legacy of Taylor, even if maybe not proper acknowledged, is present in all the type of businesses.
所以，泰勒的传统肯定存在于所有类型的企业中，即使可能没有得到适当的认可。
Lewis, how much do we owe our understanding of being productive and efficient, and even feeling productive, or hating waste to Taylor?
Lewis，我们理解生产力和效率的程度，甚至产生成就感或讨厌浪费的程度，归功于泰勒多少？
Well, Kurt, it's interesting. I think that the way we think about productivity is rooted in Taylor. And it's also Taylor that roots us into very particular conception of work, that on the one hand, there is a worker who is valuable, who is creative. This is the manager as worker, right? This is the Silicon Valley programmer who is still lauded today. On the other hand, there is the worker who is not creative, and in some sense, not valuable. This is the person we should treat like a machine.
嗯，Kurt，这很有趣。我认为我们对生产力的看法根源于泰勒。而且，正是泰勒让我们有了非常特定的工作观念，一方面有一个有价值、有创造力的工人，这就是管理者作为工人，对吧？这也是今天仍然受到推崇的硅谷程序员。另一方面，有一个没有创意、在某种意义上不具有价值的工人。这就是我们应该像对待机器一样对待的人。
When we look at the history of Silicon Valley, we often see the history of these technologists and coders, these creatives who play ping pong, whatever, who sit around in Bahamas shorts, just not really doing anything, but then having a great thought. And they're drinking beer on the job, just like they did in Taylor's time.
当我们看看硅谷的历史时，通常会看到这些技术人员和编码人员的历史，这些有创造力的人在打乒乓球、穿着巴哈马短裤，就坐在那里，不是真的做什么事情，但是却拥有伟大的想法。他们工作时喝啤酒，就像在泰勒时代一样。
Exactly, they did, right? But behind that is a whole world of production that gets written out of the history. In the 1970s and 80s, we hear the story of Steve Jobs and the Waz and Apple. But we hear less about the hundreds of thousands of people who actually worked in assembly plants in Silicon Valley. And we're trying to. Oftentimes, when these factories were talked about, they were talked about as robots building robots. But every time somebody said robot, if you actually look at the actual people who worked there, how things were actually made in these lean production sites, it was actually women, usually women of color, who are usually immigrants.
对，他们确实这样做了吧？但在这背后，是一整个被抹去了的生产世界。1970年代和80年代，我们听到了史蒂夫·乔布斯、沃兹和Apple的故事。但我们很少听到实际在硅谷装配工厂工作的成千上万的人们。我们正在努力了解这些。经常地，当这些工厂被谈论时，人们都会说它们是由机器人建造的。但是每当有人说“机器人”时，如果你真正去看看在这些精益生产工地上实际上是如何制造产品的，你会发现实际上是通常是有色人种的妇女，通常是移民。
And so we still have this imagination of some work being valuable and some people being valuable. And they sort of reinforce one another. What is the meaning of this today? Well, we are still thinking of productivity as something very bifurcated between those who we don't need them to be productive. They are 10X programmers. They are creative entrepreneurs. They can do amazing things into few minutes as long as we give them time to think. And then we imagine people who can't think. People who aren't deserving of time. People who aren't deserving of that kind of creative human potential.
因此，我们仍然有一种想象，认为有些工作是有价值的，有些人是有价值的。它们彼此加强。今天的意义是什么？嗯，我们仍然认为生产力在那些不需要高生产力的人之间是非常二分的。他们是10倍程序员。他们是有创意的企业家。只要我们给他们时间去思考，他们就能在几分钟内做出惊人的事情。然后我们想象那些不能思考的人。那些不值得花时间的人。那些不配拥有那种创造性人类潜力的人。
For me, that is the moral meaning of productivity, this question of who we value and what do we value?
对我来说，生产率的道德意义就是关于我们价值谁和价值什么的问题。
So I want to ask each of you where scientific management leaves us today in this world of work.
我想问你们每个人，在这个工作世界里，科学管理今天还对我们产生了哪些影响。
What kind of future are we pointed to now? And I'll go around the horn, but Nancy, maybe start with you.
我们现在面临什么样的未来？我会让每个人都发言，但南希，也许你可以先开始。
So I just want to pick up some threads. There's a runoff of one's humanity in scientific management, runoff of a giant sucking sound that says some people, just to echo Lewis, are more important than others. Some people make bigger contributions than others. Some work is more valued than others. And therefore, some people are more valued than others.
所以我只想捡起一些线索。在科学管理中出现了人性的流失，听起来就像是一个巨大的吸音，表明有些人，只是为了回应路易斯的话，比其他人更加重要。有些人做出的贡献比其他人更大。有些工作比其他工作更有价值。因此，有些人比其他人更有价值。
But simply not, it's just not, those are not very good eye beams to go into a century now, increasingly dominated by automation, artificial intelligence, and a very kind of unabashed and not terribly thoughtful embrace of all things technological. The storyline here is not playing. In all kinds of directions, not just morally and not just in terms of political, social, economic equality and the massively destructive effects of the huge ramp-ups in inequality, wealth and income we've seen over the last 50 years around the world.
但仅仅不是这样，这些眼光现在进入一个主要由自动化、人工智能和对技术事物毫不掩饰、不太深思熟虑的拥抱支配的世纪，是不太好的。这里的故事情节没有得到播放。它涉及各种方向，不仅在道德上、政治上、社会上、经济上平等方面，而且还涉及富裕和收入在全球范围内过去50年来的巨大增长所产生的破坏性影响。
But even holding those away, the storyline here doesn't look like it ends terribly well. And I think that piece, which Compers was talking about, you know, and so are other labor leaders. In all throughout the first three or four decades of the 20th century, in which a few politicians today are talking about, that's a very important nugget for all of us to chew on.
但即便不考虑这些，这个故事情节似乎也不会以一种很好的方式结束。我认为Compers谈到的那部分内容，你们也知道，其他劳工领袖也一样。在20世纪的前三、四十年里，一些今天的政治家也在谈论这个话题，这对我们所有人来说都是非常重要的一点。
Mckayla?
请提供需要翻译的原文。
I will take more an economic perspective here, and I see that the legacy of the reason as a lot to do with productivity. The idea of increasing productivity will remain with us also in the future. It may however change the recent studies, for instance, focusing on the productivity of working for a moment of how the technology that allows us to work together and we saw that during the pandemic allows us to increase productivity even without being physically in the same place. So I think that the productivity is still there, how to manage workers is still there, but the way which is happening is changing, moving from the factory perspective, the workplace perspective, to more of the work percent, no matter where it is performed.
我会从更经济的角度来看待这个问题，我认为理性的遗产与生产力密切相关。提高生产力的想法将来仍将伴随我们。然而，它可能会改变最近的研究，例如，关注在某个时刻工作的生产力以及允许我们共同工作的技术（就像在疫情期间我们看到的那样），即使不在同一地方，也能增加生产力。因此，我认为生产力仍然存在，如何管理工人仍然存在，但发生的方式正在改变，从工厂的角度、工作场所的角度转变成更多的工作百分比，无论在哪里执行。
Lewis?
None
Yeah, I think that this question of what is the meaning of tailor and productivity in the digital age as Nancy and Mckayla were just saying is the essential one.
嗯，我认为像南希和麦凯拉刚刚说的在数字化时代裁缝和生产力的意义是一个至关重要的问题。
So the question remains as a data century ago, who benefits from increased productivity? And in the digital era, there is again the promise of machines continuing to liberate us from drudgery, to enable us to become more fully human in our work.
所以问题仍然存在：在一个世纪以前，谁会从生产力的提高中受益？在数字时代，再次承诺机器将继续使我们摆脱单调乏味的工作，使我们能够在工作中更加充分地展现人性。
And this is important because we have a lot of challenges in the 21st century, and there's so much talent in the world that right now is sitting behind a cash register making change or hauling water back from a stream to her house.
这很重要，因为在21世纪我们面临许多挑战，而且世界上有很多人才，但现在他们却坐在收银机后面找零，或是从溪流中抬水回家。
And so we need technology to liberate us from these, and we don't need it for workplace surveillance. So I think the question about productivity is less about technology than the social imagination.
所以，我们需要技术来解放我们，不需要它来进行工作场所监控。因此，我认为生产力的问题不在于技术，而在于社会想象力。
How do we bring ourselves into this conversation about increasing our productivity so that we can turn over that drudgery to our machines, to our computers so that we can focus on human potential, human relationships, and human work? That's Nancy Cain at Harvard Business School, Mckayla Girjeli at UCLA, and Lewis Hyman at Cornell.
我们该如何投入到这个关于提高我们生产力的讨论中，这样我们就可以将那些繁琐的工作交给我们的机器、电脑来处理，这样我们就可以专注于人类的潜力、人际关系和人类工作。这是哈佛商学院的南希·凯因、加州大学洛杉矶分校的麦凯拉·吉尔杰利和康奈尔大学的刘易斯·海曼所说的。
This time, in four business ideas that changed the world, disruptive innovation. HBR editor Amy Bernstein will talk to three experts about how our understanding has evolved of how new entrants succeed in the marketplace and how to hack it in your favor.
这次，关于改变世界的四个商业创意和颠覆性创新，HBR编辑艾米·伯恩斯坦将与三位专家交谈，探讨我们对新进入者在市场中如何成功以及如何利用这些策略的理解已经进化的情况。
That's next Thursday right here in the HBR IDA cast feed after our regular Tuesday episode.
这个活动是在我们定期的星期二节目之后，在HBR IDA cast的订阅中，下个星期四就会举行。
This episode was produced by Anne Sanny. We get technical help from Rob Eckhart, our audio product manager is Ian Fox and Hannah Bates is our audio production assistant. Thanks to Maureen Hope.
这一集是由Anne Sanny制作的。我们获得了Rob Eckhart的技术支持，我们的音频产品经理是Ian Fox，而音频制作助理则是Hannah Bates。感谢Maureen Hope。
Thanks for listening to four business ideas that changed the world, a special series of the HBR IDA cast. I'm Kurt Nickish.
谢谢收听HBR IDA播客的一系列特别节目“改变世界的四个商业创意”。我是库尔特·尼克什。
Hi, it's Allison. Before you go, I have a question. What do you love about HBR?
嗨，我是艾莉森。在您离开之前，我有一个问题。你喜欢HBR的什么？
I worked at newspapers before I came to HBR and the thing that has impressed me most is the amount of attention and care that goes into each and every article.
我来到哈佛商业评论之前在报纸工作过，让我印象最深的是每篇文章所付出的关注和用心。
We have multiple editors working on each piece. They put their all into translating these ideas typically from academia or from companies in practice into advice that will really change people's lives in the workplace.
我们有多个编辑在每篇文章上工作。他们全身心投入地将学术界或实践中的想法翻译成真正能够改变人们在职场生活中的建议。
If you love HBR's work, the best thing you can do to support us is to become a subscriber. You can do that at hbr.org slash subscribe IDA cast, all one word, no spaces. That's hbr.org slash subscribe IDA cast. Thanks.
如果你喜爱HBR的工作，最好的支持方式是成为我们的订阅者。你可以在hbr.org/subscribeIDACast进行订阅，其中IDACast是连在一起没有空格的一个单词。谢谢。