How confident are you that your self-assessment is right?
你认为你的自我评价是准的吗？有多准？
• Some people see details (trees) , and others see big pictures (forests) . Those who “see trees” see the parts most vividly and don’t readily relate the parts to each other in order to see the big picture—e.g., they might prefer more literal, precise paintings. They are typically left-brained. Others connect the dots to pictures. In fact, they typically don’t even see the dots; they just see the pictures. They are typically right-brained. You can detect which type people are by observing what they focus on. Detailed thinkers can lose sight of the big picture and are more likely to focus in on a part than to go to the higher level and see the relationship between parts. For example, a person who focuses on details can be thrown off by word mistakes like “there“ instead of “their,” while big-picture thinkers won’t even notice the mistake. Similarly, big-picture thinkers can often understand the meaning of sentences even when key words are reversed—e.g., when “up” is mistakenly used instead of “down,” they understand that the person speaking couldn’t have meant “up” in that context. That is because their attention is focused on the context first and the details second. When describing the same meeting, these two different types will frequently focus on completely different things and disagree on their interpretations. In discussions, they can frustrate each other and discount what the other is saying. Similarly, a person of one type interviewing another type will usually yield an unsatisfactory result.
• 有些人善于观察细节（树木），而有些人更注重全局（森林）。那些善于观察树木的人能够对部分体察入微，但却不善于将各个部分联系起来以获得整体。比如，他们可能更喜欢写实的、精确的画作，这种人就是典型的左脑型思维者。而有些人，他们能够将一个个点连接起来，形成画面。实际上，这些人甚至根本看不到点，只能看到画面，这种人是典型的右脑型思维者。根据观察人关注的焦点，你可以判断出该人是哪种类型的思维者。细节思维者可能会看不到全局，他们更愿意去关注某一个部分，而不愿上升到一定的高度，去探究各个部分之间的关系。比如，一个关注细节的人可能纠结于一些小的拼写错误，如“there”和“their”（英文中二者发音相同），而一个胸怀全局的人可能根本不会注意到这一错误。同样的，即便一个句子中的关键词都是颠倒的，也不会影响一个全局思维者对整个句子意思的理解。例如，讲话者将“下”说成了“上”，而全局思维者却能够在理解上下文的基础上，明白讲话者不可能是在说“上”。这是因为全局思维者首先会将注意力放在整体上，其次才是细节。当这两类人描述同一场会议时，他们的关注点可能大相径庭，在对事情的理解上也是南辕北辙。在小组讨论时，他们会相持不下，也会不断驳斥对方的观点。基于同一原因，当某种类型的思维者去面试另一个类型的思维者时，结果也往往不尽人意。
On a scale of -5 to +5 – “detailed” to “big picture – where do you think you fall?
-5到+5分别指示了对细节和全局的关注程度，你的思维模式是介于这之间的哪一个级别？
How confident are you that your self-assessment is right?
你认为你的自我评价是准的吗？有多准？
• Some people rely more on remembering what they were taught when making decisions, and others rely more on their independent reasoning. Let’s call the first group memory-based learners and the second group reasoning-based thinkers. When using the word “learning” I intend to convey “acquiring knowledge by being taught,” and when using the word “thinking” I mean “figuring it out for oneself.” Memory-based learners approach decision-making by remembering what they were taught. They draw on their memory banks and follow the instructions stored there. They are typically left-brained. Reasoning-based thinkers pay more attention to the principles behind what happens. They are typically right-brained. You can tell the difference when what is learned (e.g., CAPM) conflicts with what is logical (e.g., All Weather) . People who rely on memory-based learning will typically be more skeptical of unconventional ideas because their process is to more readily accept what they have been told and because they are less able to assess it for themselves. Those who rely on more on reasoning won’t care much about convention and will assess ideas on their merits. Those who rely on memory-based learning also tend to align themselves with the consensus more than people who rely on reasoning. Memory-based learners are more willing to accept the status quo, while reasoning-based thinkers are less biased by it. They are more likely to be innovative, while those who rely on learning are likelier to be cautious. Performance in school will correlate well with the quality of one’s learning-based thinking, but will not reliably correlate with one’s reasoning-based thinking. The most able learners are easily found, since they are, or were, the best students from the best schools. The best thinkers are tougher to find, as there are no obvious funnels through which they pass, especially before they develop track records in the “real world.”
• 当需要做出决定时，有些人更依赖他们被传授的知识，而有些人则更愿意进行独立论证。我们姑且将第一组称为记忆型学习者，将第二组称为推理型思考者。我一般用“学习”一词表达通过接受他人传授以获得知识，而用“思考”一词表达通过个人努力进行探索。记忆型学习者做选择时会回忆他人是如何教他的。他们会利用记忆库，遵循在记忆库中储存的指令。这就是典型的左脑型思维者。推理型思考者更加注重事件背后的原则，属于右脑型思维者。当习得的知识（如资产评估模型）与逻辑（如全天候情况）发生冲突时，不同思维的人会做出不同的反应。记忆型学习者会对非传统的观念持怀疑态度，因为这类人习惯直接接受被告知的内容，也无法做出自己的判断。相反，那些更依赖推理的人就不会在意陈规，他们更愿意就观点本身做出自己的判断。记忆型学习者会更愿意与多数人的共识保持一致，更愿意接受现状。而推理型思考者却不会如此，他们更具创新精神，不那么谨慎。学校成绩是与一个人的学习型思考相挂钩的，但却无法反应一个人的推理能力。当然，最优秀的学习者是很好找的，他们就是，或者曾经是，最好的学校里的最好的学生。而优秀的思考者却不那么容易找到，因为社会并不存在普遍的衡量其能力的通道。
On a scale of -5 to +5 – “learning” to “thinking”– where do you think you fall?
-5到+5分别指示了对学习和思考的重视程度，你的思维模式是介于这之间的哪一个级别?
How confident are you that your self-assessment is right?
你认为你的自我评价是准的吗？有多准？
Some people are focused on daily tasks, and others are focused on their goals and how to achieve them. Those who “visualize” best can see the pictures (rather than the dots) over time. They have a strong capacity to visualize and will be more likely to make meaningful changes and anticipate future events. They are the most suitable for creating new things (organizations, projects, etc.) and managing organizations that have lots of change. We call them “creators.” They are typically right-brained thinkers. By contrast, those who are focused on the daily tasks are better at managing things that don’t change much or require repetitive processes done reliably, and are typically best at doing clearly specified tasks. They see things much more literally and tend to make incremental changes that reference what already exists. They are slower to depart from the status quo and more likely to be blindsided by sudden events. They are typically left-brained thinkers.
有些人着眼于日常事务，有些人却更关注自己设定的目标以及达成目标的途径。擅长“形象化”的人随着时间的推移，能够看到大画面，而不是一个个的点。他们这种过人的形象化能力能够使他们做出有价值的改变，能够预测未来事件走向。他们更适合去创造新的东西，比如公司、项目，也更能管理好一个变幻莫测的组织机构，我们将这类人称为“创造者”，他们是典型的右脑型思维者。与此相反，那些关注日常事务的人能够更好的管理一尘不变或者需要一丝不苟完成重复流程的事项，他们尤其擅长完成明确细致的工作任务。他们倾向于直观看待事务，利用现有参考进行细微调整。他们不愿意改变现状，遇到紧急情况会措手不及，这类人就是典型的左脑型思维者。
On a scale of -5 to +5—“tasks” to “goals”—where do you think you fall?
-5到+5分别指示了对任务和目标的关注程度，你的思维模式是介于这之间的哪一个级别?
How confident are you that your self-assessment is right?
你认为你的自我评价是准的吗？有多准？
• Some people are “planners,” and others are “perceivers.” Planners like to focus on a plan and stick with it, while perceivers are prone to focus on what’s happening around them and more readily adapt to it. Perceivers see things happening and work backward to understand the cause and how to respond; they work from the outside in; they also see many more possibilities that they compare and choose from; often they see so many that they are confused by them. In contrast, planners work from the inside out, figuring out first what they want to achieve and then how things should unfold. Planners and perceivers have trouble appreciating each other. While a perceiver likes to see new things and change directions often, this is discomforting to planners, who prefer to stick to a plan. Planners weigh precedent much more heavily in their decision-making, and assume that if it was done before in a certain way, it should be done again in the same way, while perceivers tend to optimize on the spot. Planners are typically left-brained, and perceivers are typically right-brained.
• 有些人是计划者，而有些人是观察者。计划者能够投入一项计划并坚持执行，而观察者更倾向于将注意力放在观察计划周围的因素上，更能适应周遭的变化。观察者先看到结果，再倒推回去，获知起因，从而找到应对方案。他们的工作方式是由外及里的，他们也能看到更多可供比较和选择的可能性。有时，因为可能性过多以至于观察者无法决断。相反，计划者是由里及外的工作方式，他们会先确定期待实现的内容，再寻求事情的展开方式。计划者与观察者彼此很难互相欣赏。观察者喜欢新事物，喜欢时常变换方向，这会让计划者感到不安，因为后者更愿意坚持原有计划，在决策时往往遵循先例，认为这类事肯定在过去碰到过，并以某种方式得以解决，现在也应该以同样的方式来解决，而观察者们则倾向于现场进行优化。规划者就是典型的左脑型思维者，而观察者就是典型的右脑型思维者。
On a scale of -5 to +5—“planner” to “perceiver”—where do you think you fall?
-5到+5分别指示了计划者和观察者，你的思维模式是介于这之间的哪一级别?
How confident are you that your self-assessment is right?
你认为你的自我评价是准的吗？有多准？
• Some people are driven more by their emotions, and others are driven more by their intellect. We all have emotions and intellect. When they conflict, some people will give in to their emotions, while others maintain control of their emotions and are driven by their intellect. I am told this is more due to relative reliance on the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex, but I’m not sure. Once again, these two different types typically can’t understand and typically frustrate each other.
• 有些人他们做事受情感驱使，有的人则由理智驱使。我们每个人都有情感和理智，而二者冲突时，有的人会向情感妥协，而有的人能更好的控制情感，让理智占上风。我得知这是由于不同的人对杏仁核或者前额皮质的依赖程度不同，我对此不太确认。与上述诸多情况相同，这两类人无法理解彼此，往往会针锋相对。
On a scale of -5 to +5—“driven by emotion” to “driven by intellect”—where do you think you fall?
-5到+5分别指示了情感驱动和理智驱动，你的思维模式是介于这之间的哪一级别？
How confident are you that your self-assessment is right?
你认为你的自我评价是准的吗？有多准？
• Some people are risk-takers, and others are risk-averse.
• 有些人愿意接受风险，而有些人则尽可能避免风险
On a scale of -5 to +5—“driven by emotion” to “driven by intellect”—where do you think you fall?
-5到+5分别指示了避免风险和接受风险，你的思维模式是介于这之间的哪一级别？
How confident are you that your self-assessment is right?
你认为你的自我评价是准的吗？有多准？
• Some people are introverts, and others are extroverts. The most important difference between them is their willingness to fight for truth. Introverts tend to find the necessary conflicts more difficult.
有些人是内向的，而有些人是外向的。二者之间最大的不同在于他们是否愿意去为真相奋斗。内向的人认为接受这些必要的冲突更为艰难。
On a scale of -5 to +5—“introvert” to “extrovert”—where do you think you fall?
-5到+5分别指示了内向和外向，你的思维模式是介于这之间的哪一级别？
How confident are you that your self-assessment is right?
你认为你的自我评价是准的吗？有多准？
There are lots of important ways in which people think differently that I won’t continue on about.
人类思维差异还有很多，在此不一一赘述。
... 48) Use personality assessment tests and quality reflections on experiences to help you identify these differences. These should be done openly so that these important differences are embraced and considered in our interactions.
... 48) 通过性格测试以及员工工作经历中反映的性格特点来帮助自己了解他们之间的差异。这些工作需要公开完成，以便大家能够在合作中充分认识并考虑这些重要不同。
... 49) Understand that different ways of seeing and thinking make people suitable for different jobs. Since nature created different ways of thinking and since nature never creates anything without a purpose,61 each way of thinking has purposes. Often, thinking well for some purposes necessitates thinking poorly for others. It is highly desirable to understand one’s own ways, and others’ ways, of thinking, and their best applications. While there is no best quality, there are certainly some qualities that are more suitable for some jobs (e.g., being a math wiz is important for a job that requires a math wiz) . So don’t treat everyone the same.
... 49) 要知道，每个人的观察与思考方式不同，也因此适合不同的职位。大自然创造了不同的思维方式，这样做是有自己的道理的。每一种思维方式都有自己存在的原因。一般而言，针对某些目的的思维方式，在进行其他目的的思维时，会表现糟糕。一定要理解个人的思维方法和其应用领域。当然，不存在所谓最好的性格，却有更适合做某些工作的性格。比如，如果一个职位需要数学天才，那么在岗的人最好是个数学天才。不要对所有人不加区分对待。
Even the “mistakes” that nature makes have a purpose; they are essential for the evolutionary process.
即便是大自然所犯的“错误”也是处于一定理由的，它们都是成长过程的需要。
Sometimes I see people dealing with each other, especially in groups, without regard for these differences. This is nonsensical. Both people expressing their own views and those considering others’ views need to take into account their differences. These differences are real, so it’s dumb to pretend they don’t exist.
有时，我察觉到团队中员工彼此相处时没有考虑到这些差异，这是不理智的。不论是在表达自己见地还是思考他人观点时，都应该将彼此的差异纳入考虑。这些差异是真实存在的，千万不要假装看不到。
49a) People are best at the jobs that require what they do well.
49a) 人们在所擅长的领域工作表现最佳。
49b) If you’re not naturally good at one type of thinking, it doesn’t mean you’re precluded from paths that require that type of thinking, but it does require that you either work with someone who has that required way of thinking (which works best) or learn to think differently (which is very difficult and sometimes impossible) .
49b) 若你天生不擅长某种思维方式，并不意味着就做不好需要这种思维方式的工作。 你需要与其他拥有所需思维方式的人一起合作，这是最理想的方式。你也可以学习换个思维方式，但这样做很困难，有时甚至不太可能。
...50) Don’t hide these differences. Explore them openly with the goal of figuring out how you and your people are built so you can put the right people in the right jobs and clearly assign responsibilities. This is good for both your team and for Bridgewater as a whole.
...50) 不要隐藏这些差异，坦诚沟通，以深入了解自己和员工，把合适的人用在合适的岗位上，并明晰任务分工。这对于你的团队和桥水公司而言，都是大有裨益的。
... 51) Remember that people who see things and think one way often have difficulty communicating and relating to people who see things and think another way. Keep in mind how difficult it is to convey what it means to think in an alternative way for the same reason it would be difficult to convey what the sense of smell is to someone who doesn’t have the ability to smell.
... 51) 要记住，看待事物与思维方式不同的人，在交流和相处上是存在困难的。记住，要求一个人转换思维方式就如同试图向一个没有嗅觉的人来解释嗅觉的含义一样难。
... 52) Hire Right, Because the Penalties of Hiring Wrong Are Huge
... 52) 请招对人，因为用错人的代价极为惨重
So…
因此：
... 53) Think through what values, abilities, and skills you are looking for. A lot of time and effort is put into hiring a person, and substantial time and resources are invested in new employees’ development before finding out whether they are succeeding. Getting rid of employees who aren’t succeeding is also difficult, so it pays to be as sure as possible in hiring. Refer to our diagram that shows how to achieve your goals by comparing them with the outcomes you’re getting, and think of the people part as shown below. By constantly comparing the picture of what the people are like with the qualities needed, you will hire better and evolve faster.
... 53) 仔细审度自己想要的员工应具备什么样的价值观、能力和技能。我们花费大量的时间和精力来招揽人才，然后在认定这些人是否是可造之材之前还需要投入大量的时间和资源来培养新员工。淘汰不合格的员工同样很艰难，因此需要在招聘的时候慎之又慎。参考下图，了解如何通过将目标与成果进行对比进而达成目标。如下图所示，思考关于人员的部分的描述。只要不断将图中人的性格与职位所需的特质进行比对，你就会在招聘上更胜一筹，发展更快。
... 54) Weigh values and abilities more heavily than skills in deciding whom to hire. Avoid the temptation to think narrowly about filling a job with a specific skill.While having that skill might be important, what’s most important is determining whether you and they are working toward the same goals and can work in the same ways and share the same values.
... 54) 招聘员工时，要多考虑员工的价值观与能力，这比技能更重要。不要总是希望为一个职位设定一个具体的技能。也许拥有那项技能很重要，但是最重要的是确保你和招聘来的员工能够为同一个目标、以同样的方式、同样的价值观一起工作。
The importance of a skill will vary according to the job. The more knowledge-dependent and independent in nature the job is (e.g., a 62programmer or lawyer whose job isn’t to think about the direction of the company) , the more relevant the required skills are.
根据每个职位的不同，技能的重要性也相应变化。职位的知识依赖度和独立度越高，所需技能的相关度越高。比如程序员或律师，他们的工作职责就不包括考虑公司的运作方向。
... 55) Write the profile of the person you are looking for into the job description.
... 55) 招聘时，在岗位说明里描述希望招到一个什么样的员工。
...56) Select the appropriate people and tests for assessing each of these qualities and compare the results of those assessments to what you’ve decided is needed for the job. Synthesize the results of those tests to see if there is a “click.”
