... 34) 不要将控诉、献言献策、辩论的权利同抉择权混为一谈。讨论并不意味着要通过全体投票来做决定。我们有着极其坦诚的文化，但是有些人错误地认为我们是进行集体决策的，所有的观点都被一视同仁，所有问题必须一致通过。我们并不会给所有的观点赋予同等重视，我不赞成一致通过决策或全体投票。我们的运作模式不仅包括自由辩论，还包括将责任分配到个人。二者可能看起来是冲突的，但是个人责任与自由辩论在桥水联合基金得到了很好的结合，共同促进了高效决策。我们不要求每个人向所有人汇报，与此相反，我们根据对个人能力的评估，将责任与权力都分配给了个人。我需要所有人各司其职，他们对自己做出的成绩负责，当然我们也赋予他们完成任务的权力。如果负责人试图做出一个自认为最佳的决定，而其他知情者持否定意见，负责人完全可以坚持做出自己的决定。当然，该反对意见也应该得到严肃的考量。我们拥有，也应该拥有一个明确的决策层级，理想状态下，这一层级应该是以个人能力为基础的
... 35) Recognize that getting in synch is a two-way responsibility. In any conversation there is a responsibility to transmit and a responsibility to receive. Misinterpretations are going to take place. Often, difficulty in communication is due to people having different ways of thinking (e.g., left- brained thinkers talking to right-brained thinkers) . The parties involved should 1) realize that what they might be transmitting or receiving might not be what was meant, 2) consider multiple possibilities, and 3) do a back and forth so that they can get in synch. People do the opposite — confidently thinking that they’ve communicated their intent clearly, not considering multiple possibilities and then blaming the other parties for the misunderstanding. Learn lessons from your problems in communications to improve.
... 35) 要认识到，达成意见统一是双向责任。 沟通过程中，既有交付的责任，也有接受的责任——在这个过程中一定会出现误解。一般而言，沟通障碍主要是因为人们的思维方式不同。比如，当左脑思维者试图与右脑思维者进行沟通时，就会出现障碍。相关方应该：1）要认识到他们对交付或接受到的信息的认知偏差并非出于本意；2）考虑多重可能性；3）反复之前步骤，以达成意见统一。而人们往往不这样做，大家总是自信他们将自己的意图明确地表达出来了，然后责备对方理解失误。我们需要从自己沟通问题中学习，不断提高。
... 36) Escalate if you can’t get in synch. If you can’t understand or reconcile points of view with someone else, agree on a third party to provide guidance. This person could be your manager or another agreed- upon, believable person or group who can resolve the conflict objectively, fairly, and sensibly. This mechanism is a key element of our culture and crucial for maintaining a meritocracy of ideas.
... 36) 如果意见无法统一，提交上一级进行讨论。如果你无法理解，也无法与他人达成意见一致，那么就应该统一让第三方来提供一些指导。第三方可以是你的管理者、其他约定方、权威人士或团体，此人需要能够客观、公平、合理的处理纠纷。该机制是我们文化中关键的一环，对于维持观点至上的原则至关重要。
In fact, I once toyed with the possibility of developing a voting system based on a believability matrix. Though that might not be possible for practical reasons, it suggests the merit-based decision-making we aspire toward with our current process. The challenging and probing we encourage are not meant to second-guess every decision but to help us assess the quality of our work over time.
实际上，我曾经随意尝试过基于可信度矩阵开发一套投票系统。由于一些实际原因，系统无法施行，但是这一系统展示了我们根据现有的流程建立的基于个人能力的决策过程。我们鼓励质疑与调查，并不意味着我们对每个问题都要进行二次怀疑，只是希望从长期来评估工作质量。
To Get the People Right…
选对人，用对人
...37) Recognize the Most Important Decisions You Make Are Who You Choose to Be Your Responsible Party
...37）要知道，最重要的选择是选谁做负责人
So…
因此你必须做到：
... 38) Remember that almost everything good comes from having great people operating in a great culture. I cannot emphasize strongly enough how important the selection, training, testing, evaluation, and sorting out of people is. If you put the goals and the tasks in the hands of people who can do them well, and if you make crystal clear that they are personally responsible for achieving the goals and doing the tasks, they should produce excellent results. This section is about the people part of the feedback loop process, diagramed below.
... 38) 要记住，几乎所有的成功都是来自因为优秀的文化以及在其中工作的优秀的人才。人才的挑选、培训、评估、分类，无论如何强调都不为过。如果你将目标和任务置于称职的人手中，而且明确表示他们个人对于完成目标任务负责，那么他们将作出骄人的成绩。该章节将讲述下图中反馈循环流程中人员的环节。
... 39) First, match the person to the design. Understand what attributes matter most for a job, and then ascertain whether an individual has them. This matching process requires 1) visualizing the job and the qualities needed to do it well and then 2) ascertaining if the individual has those qualities.
... 39) 首先，要选择合适的人参与机构设置。 首先要看清某职位描述所应包含的最重要的能力，然后确定某人是否具有这些特质。删选过程需要做到：1）将职位和所需具备的特质明确表达出来；2）确认某人是否具备这些特质。
Look for believable responsible parties who love producing great results. Remember that values are most important—e.g., if “work” is what people have to do to make money, I don’t want people to “work” here. I only want people at Bridgewater who are joining us on an important, shared mission to do great things.
寻找可靠的负责人，他们热衷于创造成绩。记住，价值观是最重要的。例如，如果“工作”只是人们养家活口的被迫选择，我不希望我的员工是在工作。我希望加入桥水基金的人都是和我们有着重要的、共同的使命，去创造辉煌。
The thing that I like least (or dislike most) about my job is fighting to maintain standards, but it must be done. I know that the only way for me to succeed and to be happy is to have good people do it for me, which means that I have to hire, train, and sort out people. It is futile to give responsibilities to people who do not have the qualities required to succeed. It frustrates, and inevitably angers, all parties, which is subversive to the environment. So, hiring, training, and sorting out people so that responsibilities are placed in the hands of people who can be trusted to do an excellent job is the only viable path, and is extremely satisfying.
工作中，我最不喜欢的事情就是需要不停维持标准，但是这事关紧要。我知道如果想要成功，想要快乐，就必须让其他人为我来做这件事。于是，这就意味着，我需要雇佣、培训、挑选人员。如果将任务安排给无法胜任的人来做，这是毫无意义的，也会令所有人困惑，甚至愤怒，破坏整个环境。因此，雇佣、培训、挑选人员，使得各项责任置于能够很好完成工作的人手中是唯一的可行之路，这样做的结果也是十分令人满意的。
39a) Most importantly, find people who share your values. At Bridgewater, those key values are a drive for excellence, truth at all costs, a high sense of ownership, and strong character (by character, I mean the willingness to do the good but difficult things) .
39a) 最为重要的是要找同你价值观一致的人。 在桥水，这些核心价值观就是追求卓越，不惜一切代价探寻真相，强烈的归属感，意志坚定，即愿意去做正确但艰难的事情。
39b) Look for people who are willing to look at themselves objectively and have character. These are not natural talents—they are qualities that anyone can acquire. They are also the qualities that have the biggest influence on whether or not I respect someone. They are essential for success.
39b) 要找愿意客观评价自己且又意志坚定的人。这些不是与生俱来的天分，而是可以后天习得的。这些品质是我确定自己是否尊重某人最重要的依据。这些品质关系到是否能够成功。
39c) Conceptual thinking and common sense are required in order to assign someone the responsibility for achieving goals (as distinct from tasks) .
39c) 根据需要完成的任务和实现的目标，选择具备相关概念性思维和常识的人履职尽责。
... 40) Recognize that the inevitable responsible party is the person who bears the consequences of what is done. Because of this, the RP must choose wisely when delegating responsibilities to others, and he must incentivize and manage them appropriately. There is no escaping that. For example, you are the inevitable RP for taking care of your health because you’re the one who inevitably bears the consequences. If you’re sick, you might choose to delegate the responsibility of figuring out what do to about it to a doctor. However, it is your responsibility to pick the right doctor because you will bear the consequences of that decision. While it is, of course, also the doctor’s responsibility to handle the responsibilities that you delegate to him, you still need to make sure that his incentives are aligned with his responsibilities and that he is doing his job well. The inevitable responsible party can’t delegate all his responsibilities away and expect good outcomes, even in cases in which he has no expertise. So you can’t escape hiring and managing properly.
... 40) 必然负责人是需要承担一切后果的。正因为如此，负责人在委派责任时，应该谨慎斟酌人选。终极责任人需要在激励与管理中获得不断平衡，同时要管理好这些任务，这是其无法逃避的责任。你是自己健康的必然负责人，因为健康受损后你必然会承受相应后果。如果你病了，你可以将寻求方案的责任委派给医生。然而，你依然需要负责挑选一个正确的医生，因为这一决定的后果还是会影响你。当然，医生有责任处理好你委派给他的责任。但是你依然需要确保你给医生的物质刺激与给他的责任相符， 确保他认真完成工作。必然负责人无法将自己所有的责任都委派给别人，同时期待有好的结果，即便是他毫无专长的领域也是这样。所以，你依然无法逃避合理雇佣和管理的责任。
... 41) By and large, you will get what you deserve over time. The results that you end up with will reflect how you and your people learn to handle things. So take control of your situation and hold yourself and others accountable for producing great results. People who wish for a great result but are unwilling to do what it takes to get there will fail.
... 41) 总的来说，日积月累，你就会得到你想要的。你所获得的成果将反映你与你的团队是如何学习处理任务的。因此，请把握局势，让你与团队其他人对获得成果负责。那些眼高手低的人，注定一败涂地。
... 42) The most important responsible parties are those who are most responsible for the goals, outcomes, and machines (they are those higher in the pyramid) . Give me someone who can effectively be responsible for an area—i.e., who can design, hire, and sort to achieve the goal, and I can be comfortable about all that is in that area. Therefore, they are the most important people to choose and manage well.
... 42) 最重要的负责人要为目标、结果和组织机构负主要责任（即位于金字塔上层的人）。如果我有某个能够有效负责某领域的人，他可以执行规划、雇佣、分类以实现目标，那么我会对该领域十分放心。因此，任用好和管理好这群人才是最重要的。
... 43) Choose those who understand the difference between goals and tasks to run things. Otherwise you will have to do their jobs for them. The ability to see and value goals is largely innate, though it improves with experience. It can be tested for, though no tests are perfect.
... 43) 选择那些明白“目标”与“任务”之间差异的人来做事。 否则你就必须替他们完成他们的工作。 清楚认识并珍视目标是一种天生的能力，也会随着经验的增多而提升。该能力能够被测试，但是测试并不完美。
... 44) Recognize that People Are Built Very Differently
... 44) 要知道每个人都生而不同
So…
因此：
... 45) Think about their very different values, abilities, and skills. Values are the deep-seated beliefs that motivate behaviors; people will fight for their values, and values determine people’s compatibility with others. Abilities are ways of thinking and behaving. Some people are great learners and fast processors; others possess common sense; still others think creatively or logically or with supreme organization, etc. Skills are learned tools, such as being able to speak a foreign language or write computer code.
... 45) 思考他们在价值观、能力和技能上的差异。价值观即推动行为的深层信仰。人们会为价值观而奋斗，价值观决定了人们与他人相处的模式。能力是人们思考与行为的方式。有些人学习能力强，能够快速处理问题，有些人有丰富的常识，也有人拥有创新思维、逻辑思维，或者有优秀的组织能力。技能则是指学会使用的工具，比如说一门外语，编写计算机程序等。
While values and abilities are unlikely to change much, most skills can be acquired in a limited amount of time (e.g., most master’s degrees can be acquired in two years) and often change in worth (e.g., today’s best programming language can be obsolete in a few years) .
一个人的价值观和能力不易改变，但是大多数技能却能够在限定时间内获得。例如，大多数硕士学历可以在两年内获得。而且大多数技能的价值是会发生改变的，例如，今年先进的编程语言在几年后可能就落伍了。
It is important for you to know what mix of qualities is important to fit each role and, more broadly, with whom you can have successful relationships. In picking people for long-term relationships, values are most important, abilities come next, and skills are the least important.
你必须知道每个角色所需要的能力，更宽泛而言，你与谁能够维持成功的关系。在考虑长期关系人选时，价值观是最重要的，能力次之，技能最微不足道。
... 46) Understand what each person who works for you is like so that you know what to expect from them.
... 46) 要了解你每个员工的情况，才能知道你能从他们身上有何种期待。
... 47) Recognize that the type of person you fit in the job must match the requirements for that job.
... 47) 岗位用人要与职位要求相匹配。
How People’s Thinking Abilities Differ
人类思维能力的差异
In my many years of running Bridgewater I have learned that people’s thinking abilities differ and that it is important to understand these differences so that they are appropriately considered when assigning people to roles. I have tried to find experts who understood these differences to help me better understand and test for them. I have found a few truly insightful people amid a mass of mediocrity. I have also found that there are all sorts of theories from all sorts of people about how people think and why, so very little should be treated as fact. It seems that “political correctness” and the reluctance to objectively discuss differences in innate abilities have stood in the way of forthright and thoughtful research on this important subject. While the search for good advice and tests has been challenging, it has also been invaluable. What follows is a mix of my theories based on my personal observations and a collection of valuable things I have learned from others. I know I have only scratched the surface of learning about how people think, why they think differently, and how to test for these different thinking abilities, so I am excited about the potential of learning more.I believe, but am not certain about, the following:
以我多年经营桥水基金的经验来看，人与人之间的思维能力是有差异的。只有了解了这些差异，才能知人善任。我曾找来一些熟悉思维差异的专家来帮助我更好的理解和验证这些差异。在大量平庸之辈中，不乏极具洞见者。我同时也发现，诸多学者有诸多关于人类是如何进行思考及其成因的理论，但是只有极少的理论是事实。人们似乎是出于“政治正确”的考虑，抑或不太情愿客观地讨论人类天资的差别，也就无法对这一重要领域进行直截了当的、深刻的研究。虽然寻找良好的建议和测试的过程充满挑战，但这一工作却意义非凡。如下内容综合了我的个人观察以及对前人文献的学习。人类是如何思考？为何人类有不同的思维方式？以及如何对不同的思维能力进行测试？对于这些问题，我的学习只触及到了皮毛，我热切地期待学到更多的知识。以下这些是我所相信，但并不十分确定的观点：
I have particularly valued psychologist Bob Eichinger.
我认为心理学家鲍勃·艾兴格（Bob Eichinger）的理论尤为有价值。
I am convinced that we are just scratching the surface of understanding differences in how people think and how to test for it, so there is great potential for others to follow this path. Unfortunately, most of the world’s experts I have met are more theoretical than practical.
我相信，在理解人类思维差异和测试方法方面，我们的理解只涉及到了皮毛。后人循此路径进行研究，还将大有可为。然而甚为可惜的是，我所接触到的专家都过于注重理论研究而忽视了实用意义。
There are two big differences in how people think that are due to the brain’s coming in two big halves and different people relying differently on them.58 This was explained by Caltech Professor Roger Sperry, who won a Nobel Prize in medicine for attributing these two ways of thinking to different reliances on the two hemispheres. As a result of this discovery, these two ways of thinking are called “left-brained” and “right-brained.” Professor Sperry helped us understand that:
人类思维的两种最大的差异来源于大脑的构造，我们的大脑是由两个半球组成的，不同的人对于两个半球的依赖程度不同。加利福利亚理工学院的罗杰·斯佩里（Roger Sperry）教授对这一发现进行了解释。斯佩里教授研究了对大脑半球不同依赖造成的两种思维方式，也因此而获得了诺贝尔医学奖。而这一发现得出一个结论，两种不同的思维方式被称为“左脑思维”和“右脑思维”。斯佩里教授帮助我们理解了：
A good book on this is A Whole New Mind by Daniel H. Pink, and a good article on the science of this is “A Wandering Mind Heads Straight Toward Insight” by Robert Lee Hotz from The Wall Street Journal.
在该领域值得借鉴的著作有丹尼尔·H·平克（Daniel H Pink) 的《全新思维》（A Whole New Mind) ，以及罗伯特·李·霍兹刊登于《华尔街日报》的“游离的思维更易洞察一切” 。
The left hemisphere reasons sequentially, analyzes details, and excels at linear analysis. Left-brained thinkers do these things well. They are also called linear thinkers. When they excel at this type of thinking they are called “bright.”
左脑善于循序渐进式推理，分析细节，线性分析能力强。左脑型思维者在以上方面表现突出，也因此被称为线性思维者，如果某人在此类思维中优于常人，我们可称其为“聪明”。
“Bright” people have high IQs, are highly analytical thinkers, and can solve complex mental problems.
聪明的人有高智商，善于分析，能够解决复杂的心理问题。
The right hemisphere reasons holistically, recognizes themes, and synthesizes the big picture. Right-brained thinkers do these things well. People who think this way are also called lateral thinkers. Those who excel at this kind of thinking are called “smart.”
右脑善于整体推理，能够识别主题，整合全局。右脑型思维者在以上方面表现突出，也因此被称为水平思维者，如果某人在此类思维中优于常人，我们可称其为“睿智”。
"Smart"people have common sense, are good at synthesizing, and can imagine what is possible.
睿智的人有常识，善于整合，富于想象。
Long before I knew that there was a Professor Sperry I saw these differences. I bet you’ve seen them too.**
在知道斯佩里教授之前，我早已察觉到这两种思维方式的不同，我想你也应该察觉到了
On a scale of -5 to +5 – left-brained to right-brained – where do you think you fall?
-5到+5分别指示了左脑型思维和右脑型思维，你的思维模式是介于这之间的哪一个级别？
