加班文化適得其反 浪費(fèi)人的才能
加班，似乎是很多人的家常便飯。
When engineers talk about asset integrity, what they usually refer to is the good practice of servicing and repairing equipment before it breaks.
當(dāng)工程師談到資產(chǎn)完整性的時(shí)候，他們通常指的是在設(shè)備損壞前維護(hù)和修理設(shè)備的良好做法。
Companies that use a lot of machinery take this very seriously; companies that mostly just use people rarely do.
使用大量機(jī)器的企業(yè)非常重視這一點(diǎn)；而主要只使用人力的公司則鮮少重視此事。
Although to my knowledge no other nation than Japan has a word for death by overwork — karoshi — we probably need one.
盡管據(jù)我所知，除日本以外，沒有哪個(gè)國(guó)家有專門指代工作過(guò)度勞累所致死亡的詞語(yǔ)——Karoshi（過(guò)勞死），我們很可能需要一個(gè)這樣的詞。
For while it is tempting to imagine the phenomenon is unique to Japan, it may simply be that it is the first country to look deeply enough to identify it.
因?yàn)楸M管人們很容易以為這種現(xiàn)象是日本獨(dú)有的，實(shí)情可能是日本是第一個(gè)看得足夠深入從而認(rèn)識(shí)到這個(gè)問(wèn)題的國(guó)家。
Coined in the 1970s, the word returned to Japanese newspapers last month when the Tokyo Labour bureau ruled that the suicide of Matsuri Takahashi, a young employee of the advertising agency Dentsu, had been caused by overwork.
這個(gè)在上世紀(jì)70年代發(fā)明的詞語(yǔ)上個(gè)月重現(xiàn)于日本報(bào)端，東京勞動(dòng)局(Tokyo Labour bureau)裁定，廣告公司電通(Dentsu)的年輕雇員Matsuri Takahashi自殺是因工作過(guò)度勞累導(dǎo)致。
She had worked 105 hours of overtime in a single month.
她生前曾在一個(gè)月里加班了105個(gè)小時(shí)。
Most of the chief executives I know — predominantly in the US and UK — routinely work a 12 or 15-hour day, six or seven days a week.
我認(rèn)識(shí)的大多數(shù)首席執(zhí)行官——主要是在美國(guó)和英國(guó)——通常每天工作12或者15個(gè)小時(shí)，每周工作6天或者7天。
Few of them are familiar with studies that routinely show that productivity is not linear.
其中很少有人熟悉通常表明工作效率并非線性的研究。
After about 40 hours a week fatigue sets in, provoking mistakes.
在一周工作約40個(gè)小時(shí)以后，人就會(huì)開始感到疲勞，導(dǎo)致人出錯(cuò)，然后又需要花時(shí)間來(lái)收拾爛攤子：
Any extra hours spent are needed to clear up the mess: reversing poor decisions, soothing ruffled feathers.
修正錯(cuò)誤的決定，平復(fù)憤怒的情緒——到頭來(lái)是白忙活一場(chǎng)。
The classic, but comic, expression of this was produced by the efficiency expert, Frank Gilbreth.
有關(guān)這一點(diǎn)，效率專家弗蘭克.吉爾布雷思(Frank Gilbreth)有一個(gè)經(jīng)典又好笑的描述。
He found he could shave faster if he used two razors but then wasted all the time he saved covering the cuts with plasters.
他發(fā)現(xiàn)如果他同時(shí)使用兩片刀片刮胡子，刮得會(huì)更快，但之后他不得不把節(jié)省出來(lái)的全部時(shí)間，浪費(fèi)在用創(chuàng)口貼處理刀片留下的小傷口上。
While a few chief executives love to boast of their powers of endurance, many insist their jobs simply require long days, weeks and months.
盡管有少數(shù)首席執(zhí)行官喜歡吹噓自己的忍耐力，很多首席官都堅(jiān)稱，他們的崗位就是需要長(zhǎng)時(shí)間工作。
They acknowledge it sets a poor example and a few have learnt to keep weekend emails stored in their outbox.
他們承認(rèn)，這樹立了一個(gè)糟糕的榜樣，有少數(shù)首席執(zhí)行官已經(jīng)學(xué)會(huì)把在周末擬好的電子郵件儲(chǔ)存在發(fā)件箱里。
But the speed with which the death, in 2024, of a Bank of America intern working in the City of London was interpreted as death by overwork showed how fully everyone knew that the economic crisis and relative scarcity of good jobs was taking its toll on those at the bottom of the heap.
但2024年在倫敦金融城(City of London)工作的那名美國(guó)銀行(Bank of America)實(shí)習(xí)生的死，如此快地被理解為過(guò)勞死，表明每個(gè)人都完全清楚，經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)和好工作的相對(duì)稀缺正在摧殘那些處于金字塔底層的人。
This mirrors what Professor Michael Marmot, the British epidemiologist, discovered when he conducted a longitudinal study of 10,000 Whitehall civil servants: that stress tended to concentrate at the top and the bottom of the pyramid.
這與英國(guó)流行病學(xué)家邁克爾.馬爾莫(Michael Marmot)教授對(duì)1萬(wàn)名白廳公務(wù)員進(jìn)行的縱向研究的發(fā)現(xiàn)一致：壓力似乎集中于金字塔的頂端和底層。
But when Marianna Virtanen continued the study to look at the long-term consequences of that stress, she found working 11 or more hours a day doubled the risk of a major depressive episode.
但當(dāng)瑪麗安娜.弗塔嫩(Marianna Virtanen)繼續(xù)研究這種壓力的長(zhǎng)期后果時(shí)，她發(fā)現(xiàn)每天工作11個(gè)小時(shí)或者更久，會(huì)使人出現(xiàn)重度抑郁期的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)加倍。
A lifetime of long hours was also associated with cognitive loss in middle years: reasoning, problem solving, creativity were all poorer.
一輩子長(zhǎng)時(shí)間工作也與中年時(shí)期認(rèn)知能力下降（推理能力、解決的問(wèn)題能力和創(chuàng)造力都出現(xiàn)退化）存在相關(guān)性。
All of this damage is invisible.
這些損害都是看不見的。
If it were not — if some of the wear and tear resulted in visible injury — perhaps companies would take more care.
如果并非如此，也就是說(shuō)，如果一些損害會(huì)導(dǎo)致可見的傷害，也許企業(yè)會(huì)更加注意。
But it is very hard for most people to accept that thinking is a physical activity, performed by the brain — which, like every organ, has limits to its capacity.
但大多數(shù)人很難接受這一觀點(diǎn)，即思維活動(dòng)是由大腦完成的一種生理活動(dòng)，而大腦，就像每一個(gè)器官一樣，它的能力是有限度的。
We can see machinery break down, we notice broken arms and legs.
我們可以看到機(jī)械損壞，我們可以注意到斷胳膊斷腿。
We do not see broken minds — until it is too late.
我們看不到破碎的心靈——直到已經(jīng)為時(shí)太晚。
A proliferation of supposed antidotes to overwork — mindfulness, resilience training — may promise some respite but few of these programmes are any kind of a cure.
正念、韌性訓(xùn)練等人們以為可以消除過(guò)勞的項(xiàng)目的流行，或許能帶來(lái)一些暫時(shí)的緩解，但這些項(xiàng)目很少能稱得上治本的對(duì)策。
Designed to increase endurance, they perpetuate the problem.
這些項(xiàng)目旨在提高人的忍耐力，反而會(huì)讓問(wèn)題持續(xù)得更久。
We know machines have limits; we like to imagine that we do not.
我們知道機(jī)器有極限；但我們卻喜歡想象我們自身沒有極限。
Tough corporate cultures that measure performance by the hour inevitably lead to fatigue and tunnel vision, and adversely affect problem-solving.
靠工作時(shí)間來(lái)衡量員工表現(xiàn)的嚴(yán)酷企業(yè)文化不可避免地會(huì)導(dǎo)致疲勞和視野狹窄，不利于解決問(wèn)題。
They are efficient in the sense that they reduce costs but dangerous in spheres where reputation and judgment count
從減少成本的角度來(lái)看，這樣的企業(yè)文化是有效的，但在聲譽(yù)和判斷很重要的領(lǐng)域，這樣的企業(yè)文化很危險(xiǎn)。
If we want creativity, originality and mastery of complex problems, we must accept the physical limitations of the human brain.
如果我們想要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造性、原創(chuàng)性以及掌握復(fù)雜問(wèn)題，我們必須接受人腦存在生理極限。
As long as we ignore more than 100 years of research into human productivity and manage people as though they were robots with faulty batteries, we waste talent and sacrifice our own integrity
如果我們無(wú)視100多年來(lái)對(duì)人類工作效率的研究，把人當(dāng)做配備著有缺陷的電池的機(jī)器人一樣去管理，我們就浪費(fèi)了人的才能，犧牲了我們自身的健康。
你怎么看待加班這件事呢？
加班，似乎是很多人的家常便飯。
When engineers talk about asset integrity, what they usually refer to is the good practice of servicing and repairing equipment before it breaks.
當(dāng)工程師談到資產(chǎn)完整性的時(shí)候，他們通常指的是在設(shè)備損壞前維護(hù)和修理設(shè)備的良好做法。
Companies that use a lot of machinery take this very seriously; companies that mostly just use people rarely do.
使用大量機(jī)器的企業(yè)非常重視這一點(diǎn)；而主要只使用人力的公司則鮮少重視此事。
Although to my knowledge no other nation than Japan has a word for death by overwork — karoshi — we probably need one.
盡管據(jù)我所知，除日本以外，沒有哪個(gè)國(guó)家有專門指代工作過(guò)度勞累所致死亡的詞語(yǔ)——Karoshi（過(guò)勞死），我們很可能需要一個(gè)這樣的詞。
For while it is tempting to imagine the phenomenon is unique to Japan, it may simply be that it is the first country to look deeply enough to identify it.
因?yàn)楸M管人們很容易以為這種現(xiàn)象是日本獨(dú)有的，實(shí)情可能是日本是第一個(gè)看得足夠深入從而認(rèn)識(shí)到這個(gè)問(wèn)題的國(guó)家。
Coined in the 1970s, the word returned to Japanese newspapers last month when the Tokyo Labour bureau ruled that the suicide of Matsuri Takahashi, a young employee of the advertising agency Dentsu, had been caused by overwork.
這個(gè)在上世紀(jì)70年代發(fā)明的詞語(yǔ)上個(gè)月重現(xiàn)于日本報(bào)端，東京勞動(dòng)局(Tokyo Labour bureau)裁定，廣告公司電通(Dentsu)的年輕雇員Matsuri Takahashi自殺是因工作過(guò)度勞累導(dǎo)致。
She had worked 105 hours of overtime in a single month.
她生前曾在一個(gè)月里加班了105個(gè)小時(shí)。
Most of the chief executives I know — predominantly in the US and UK — routinely work a 12 or 15-hour day, six or seven days a week.
我認(rèn)識(shí)的大多數(shù)首席執(zhí)行官——主要是在美國(guó)和英國(guó)——通常每天工作12或者15個(gè)小時(shí)，每周工作6天或者7天。
Few of them are familiar with studies that routinely show that productivity is not linear.
其中很少有人熟悉通常表明工作效率并非線性的研究。
After about 40 hours a week fatigue sets in, provoking mistakes.
在一周工作約40個(gè)小時(shí)以后，人就會(huì)開始感到疲勞，導(dǎo)致人出錯(cuò)，然后又需要花時(shí)間來(lái)收拾爛攤子：
Any extra hours spent are needed to clear up the mess: reversing poor decisions, soothing ruffled feathers.
修正錯(cuò)誤的決定，平復(fù)憤怒的情緒——到頭來(lái)是白忙活一場(chǎng)。
The classic, but comic, expression of this was produced by the efficiency expert, Frank Gilbreth.
有關(guān)這一點(diǎn)，效率專家弗蘭克.吉爾布雷思(Frank Gilbreth)有一個(gè)經(jīng)典又好笑的描述。
He found he could shave faster if he used two razors but then wasted all the time he saved covering the cuts with plasters.
他發(fā)現(xiàn)如果他同時(shí)使用兩片刀片刮胡子，刮得會(huì)更快，但之后他不得不把節(jié)省出來(lái)的全部時(shí)間，浪費(fèi)在用創(chuàng)口貼處理刀片留下的小傷口上。
While a few chief executives love to boast of their powers of endurance, many insist their jobs simply require long days, weeks and months.
盡管有少數(shù)首席執(zhí)行官喜歡吹噓自己的忍耐力，很多首席官都堅(jiān)稱，他們的崗位就是需要長(zhǎng)時(shí)間工作。
They acknowledge it sets a poor example and a few have learnt to keep weekend emails stored in their outbox.
他們承認(rèn)，這樹立了一個(gè)糟糕的榜樣，有少數(shù)首席執(zhí)行官已經(jīng)學(xué)會(huì)把在周末擬好的電子郵件儲(chǔ)存在發(fā)件箱里。
But the speed with which the death, in 2024, of a Bank of America intern working in the City of London was interpreted as death by overwork showed how fully everyone knew that the economic crisis and relative scarcity of good jobs was taking its toll on those at the bottom of the heap.
但2024年在倫敦金融城(City of London)工作的那名美國(guó)銀行(Bank of America)實(shí)習(xí)生的死，如此快地被理解為過(guò)勞死，表明每個(gè)人都完全清楚，經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)和好工作的相對(duì)稀缺正在摧殘那些處于金字塔底層的人。
This mirrors what Professor Michael Marmot, the British epidemiologist, discovered when he conducted a longitudinal study of 10,000 Whitehall civil servants: that stress tended to concentrate at the top and the bottom of the pyramid.
這與英國(guó)流行病學(xué)家邁克爾.馬爾莫(Michael Marmot)教授對(duì)1萬(wàn)名白廳公務(wù)員進(jìn)行的縱向研究的發(fā)現(xiàn)一致：壓力似乎集中于金字塔的頂端和底層。
But when Marianna Virtanen continued the study to look at the long-term consequences of that stress, she found working 11 or more hours a day doubled the risk of a major depressive episode.
但當(dāng)瑪麗安娜.弗塔嫩(Marianna Virtanen)繼續(xù)研究這種壓力的長(zhǎng)期后果時(shí)，她發(fā)現(xiàn)每天工作11個(gè)小時(shí)或者更久，會(huì)使人出現(xiàn)重度抑郁期的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)加倍。
A lifetime of long hours was also associated with cognitive loss in middle years: reasoning, problem solving, creativity were all poorer.
一輩子長(zhǎng)時(shí)間工作也與中年時(shí)期認(rèn)知能力下降（推理能力、解決的問(wèn)題能力和創(chuàng)造力都出現(xiàn)退化）存在相關(guān)性。
All of this damage is invisible.
這些損害都是看不見的。
If it were not — if some of the wear and tear resulted in visible injury — perhaps companies would take more care.
如果并非如此，也就是說(shuō)，如果一些損害會(huì)導(dǎo)致可見的傷害，也許企業(yè)會(huì)更加注意。
But it is very hard for most people to accept that thinking is a physical activity, performed by the brain — which, like every organ, has limits to its capacity.
但大多數(shù)人很難接受這一觀點(diǎn)，即思維活動(dòng)是由大腦完成的一種生理活動(dòng)，而大腦，就像每一個(gè)器官一樣，它的能力是有限度的。
We can see machinery break down, we notice broken arms and legs.
我們可以看到機(jī)械損壞，我們可以注意到斷胳膊斷腿。
We do not see broken minds — until it is too late.
我們看不到破碎的心靈——直到已經(jīng)為時(shí)太晚。
A proliferation of supposed antidotes to overwork — mindfulness, resilience training — may promise some respite but few of these programmes are any kind of a cure.
正念、韌性訓(xùn)練等人們以為可以消除過(guò)勞的項(xiàng)目的流行，或許能帶來(lái)一些暫時(shí)的緩解，但這些項(xiàng)目很少能稱得上治本的對(duì)策。
Designed to increase endurance, they perpetuate the problem.
這些項(xiàng)目旨在提高人的忍耐力，反而會(huì)讓問(wèn)題持續(xù)得更久。
We know machines have limits; we like to imagine that we do not.
我們知道機(jī)器有極限；但我們卻喜歡想象我們自身沒有極限。
Tough corporate cultures that measure performance by the hour inevitably lead to fatigue and tunnel vision, and adversely affect problem-solving.
靠工作時(shí)間來(lái)衡量員工表現(xiàn)的嚴(yán)酷企業(yè)文化不可避免地會(huì)導(dǎo)致疲勞和視野狹窄，不利于解決問(wèn)題。
They are efficient in the sense that they reduce costs but dangerous in spheres where reputation and judgment count
從減少成本的角度來(lái)看，這樣的企業(yè)文化是有效的，但在聲譽(yù)和判斷很重要的領(lǐng)域，這樣的企業(yè)文化很危險(xiǎn)。
If we want creativity, originality and mastery of complex problems, we must accept the physical limitations of the human brain.
如果我們想要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造性、原創(chuàng)性以及掌握復(fù)雜問(wèn)題，我們必須接受人腦存在生理極限。
As long as we ignore more than 100 years of research into human productivity and manage people as though they were robots with faulty batteries, we waste talent and sacrifice our own integrity
如果我們無(wú)視100多年來(lái)對(duì)人類工作效率的研究，把人當(dāng)做配備著有缺陷的電池的機(jī)器人一樣去管理，我們就浪費(fèi)了人的才能，犧牲了我們自身的健康。
你怎么看待加班這件事呢？
