(📷 圖說 👉 當年 Bluetooth SIG 工作組年會舉辦在馬德里洲際，碰頭那天有個拆炸彈小遊戲，讓大家可以跨組熱身，不意外成為全組最年輕而負責操作電腦（拆彈員），要在時間內聽懂組員們（都是藍牙界來自各大廠的前輩們啊）的討論並且一邊要翻閱拆彈說明書，印象中好像有完成且沒有墊底，我可能不具備商業敏銳度，但手指敏銳度和抓蟲敏銳度還是有的？！也因為這場互動，與大佬們玩開，而讓後續的規格討論更有節奏。也是一種總能把自己丟進壓力中挑戰揠苗助長，然後試著保持微笑的節奏吧。圖片來源：Ernest。)
✳️ 縱橫古時候與 AI 時代，來看 Keith Rabois 聊聊如何用三個不討喜，換來真心硬團隊
Lenny 這集問 Keith Rabois（Khosla Ventures 董事總經理，PayPal Mafia 一員）一個問題：那些被他早早投資、後來長成 Stripe、Airbnb、YouTube、DoorDash、Ramp、Palantir 的公司，有什麼共同點？
Keith 的答案是：做事節奏（operating tempo）。
那種節奏不只單求快，而且要在會議跟會議之間，就能把問題診斷定位、解法部署出去、成效量測完畢。
⌬ 你公司裡真的在推動事情的，可能只有兩個人
- Keith 在訪談裡丟出一個數字：
- PayPal 被併購那時候 Mountain View 大約 254 人，
- 他算下來真的能把專案從 0 推到落地的人大概只有 12 到 17 位。
- 其他兩百多人呢？他稱呼這群人為 ammunition（彈藥）。
- 能把事情推動起來的那 12 到 17 位，他稱為 barrel（槍管）。
.
- 他還說自己在另一集 podcast 上問 Jack Altman 某一間還算大的公司有幾位 barrel，答案是，兩位。
- PayPal 那個比例已經是科技史上最密的人才倉庫之一，我們平常身處的團隊比例大概不會有多好看。
- 新手 CEO 募了一輪錢、雇了一堆人、burn rate 衝高、每週產出卻沒變多的那種沮喪，就是 barrel 不夠、彈藥一直堆積、最後全部變成協作稅。
⌬ 還在分 PM、設計、工程的團隊，已經落後 Shopify 兩年
- Shopify 已經超過兩年不准 PM 用簡報做產品評審，每次都得直接拿可運作的 demo 出來。
- Keith 用這個例子戳了：傳統 PM、設計師、工程師那種「你寫 spec、我畫稿、他寫 code」的分工，在基礎模型每幾個月就把可能性改寫一次的年代已經失去意義。
- 他被 Peter Fenton 另一集 podcast 說服：剩下的核心技能更像 CEO，隨時要回答「要做什麼、為什麼做」，隨時對齊。
.
- 他還丟了一個讓工程師跟設計師都不太舒服的觀察：
- 在某些頂尖公司裡，消耗最多 token 的人不是工程師，是 CMO，因為他們好奇心最旺盛。
- Lenny 順著提出一個比喻：真正的「ultimate unicorn」是同時具備商業敏銳度（business acumen）的工程師。
- Keith 同意，還補一句 AI 時代會給這種人很高的溢價（premium）。
（這讓我聯想到我去年在 AWS Summit Hong Kong 分享「Reinventing Programming」時的觀察。從 Vibe Coding 往 Spec-Driven Development 收斂，瓶頸不再被寫程式卡住，而是將模糊需求、各種為什麼，拆解成 AI 跟人類都讀得懂的規格。當年在 Bluetooth SIG 那些花在規格文件上的時間，現在每天都在還我利息，這樣看算是溢價的一種嗎？（自己講 XDD）
⌬ 一團和氣的團隊，做不出 alpha
- Keith 有個自己用很多年的投資過濾器：
- 要做 seed 或 series A 投資時，他會在自己腦袋裡跑一個演算法：
- 看看這個案子會不會讓他熟識的 VC 朋友當面笑出來。
- 會笑的，反而可能才是真的有 alpha。
- 他把這種案子叫 ugly baby（醜嬰兒）。
.
- 翻譯成團隊語言就是：把一個想法丟進會議室，整桌人都點頭，那個想法大概已經沒什麼 alpha。
- 因為「全隊都同意」代表這件事落在這群人的共識範圍內，共識範圍裡的東西，別家公司團隊也想得到。
- 真正有張力的想法，往往會讓會議桌上至少一半的人皺眉、甚至當場翻白眼。（我也是超不愛畫押型的會議，而隨身攜帶誠實豆沙，然後期待著翻白眼（？
.
- 他舉 Brian Chesky 第一次跟他講 Airbnb 的場景：
- Brian 給他看 Craigslist 上「我想租別人的臥室」的清單大約 30 筆。
- 三分鐘 monologue 還沒講完，Keith 就決定要投。
- 那不是一個會在會議室裡被舉手通過的點子。
Keith 這三件事，讓我想起前幾天 Block 那邊裁員 40% 的筆記：願意在安逸的時候、還有獲利的時候，主動給自己的團隊一些陣痛。
📷 圖說 👉 當年 Bluetooth SIG 工作組年會舉辦在馬德里洲際，碰頭那天有個拆炸彈小遊戲，讓大家可以跨組熱身，不意外成為全組最年輕而負責操作電腦（拆彈員），要在時間內聽懂組員們（都是藍牙界來自各大廠的前輩們啊）的討論並且一邊要翻閱拆彈說明書，印象中好像有完成且沒有墊底，我可能不具備商業敏銳度，但手指敏銳度和抓蟲敏銳度還是有的？！也因為這場互動，與大佬們玩開，而讓後續的規格討論更有節奏。也是一種總能把自己丟進壓力中挑戰揠苗助長，然後試著保持微笑的節奏吧。
是說每天路過按「👍」或「❤️」本身也不是屬於討喜，但經驗豐富的 Keith 也說，這些不討喜，反而會讓我們彼此堅強到，能夠接住真的需要專注的任務。
#BringBack2016
✳️ 延伸閱讀
- AWS Summit Hong Kong 2025 Dev Lounge: 重塑程式設計: AI 如何轉變企業的程式開發方式
- 面對與 AI 共存：美國上市公司 Block ($XYZ) 組織重組的三個原則
- 從 Vibe Coding 到 Agentic Coding：把話講清楚才是新戰場
✳️ 知識圖譜
(更多關於知識圖譜…)
✳️ 完整筆記
未來工作與 AI 的影響
- idea of a PM makes no sense in the future.
未來，PM 這個角色的概念將不再有意義。 - The skill is more like being a CEO now, which is what are we building and why?
現在所需要的技能更像是 CEO，也就是「我們要做什麼？為什麼要做？」。 - There’s a lot of anxiety in the job market.
就業市場上瀰漫著大量的焦慮。 - AI is going to radically reorient lots of people’s careers, maybe including mine.
AI 將會徹底重塑很多人的職涯，也許包括我自己的。 - What I’ve noticed in some of the best organizations is the number one consumer of tokens is the CMO.
我在一些頂尖組織裡注意到，消耗最多 token 的人是 CMO。 - They don’t need to rely upon deputies and deputies and deputies to get actual work product.
他們不需要層層仰賴下屬的下屬的下屬，才能拿到實際的工作成果。 - I want to hit on some contrarian takes that you have your advice.
我想聊聊你那些反直覺的觀點和建議。 - Don’t actually want to be talking to customers.
不要真的去跟客戶聊。 - I hate talking to customers.
我討厭跟客戶聊。 - I refuse to allow colleagues of mine to talk to.
我也拒絕讓我的同事去跟客戶聊。
高績效的逆向觀點
- You have this idea of criticizing in public versus in private.
你有一個觀點是：公開批評 vs 私下批評。 - High performance machines don’t have psychological safety.
高績效的機器不需要心理安全感。 - They’re about winning.
它們追求的是勝利。
創辦人的人才評估能力
- You’re uniquely great at helping companies build world-class teams.
你在協助公司打造世界級團隊這件事上特別厲害。 - If a founder shows the ability early in his or her career to assess talent ruthlessly and accurately, he or she can go very far with no other abilities whatsoever.
如果創辦人在職涯早期就展現出無情且精準評估人才的能力，那麼即使沒有其他能力，他也可以走得非常遠。 - It feels like it’s never been harder to attract the best talent, really talented people.
感覺現在要吸引最頂尖的人才從來沒有這麼難過。 - When things are going well, they’re not happy.
當事情順利的時候，他們反而不開心。 - The morale actually does go down when people are skating.
當大家在混的時候，士氣其實是會下降的。 - The single role for the CEO is offsetting that complacency.
CEO 唯一的職責就是抵銷這種自滿。 - The better you’re doing, the more the CEO should push.
你做得越好，CEO 就越應該推動。
來賓介紹：Keith Rabois
- Today, my guest is Keith Rabois.
今天我的來賓是 Keith Rabois。 - Keith’s resume both as an operator and investor is absurd.
Keith 不論作為營運者或投資人，他的履歷都很誇張。 - He was an early investor in Stripe, Palantir, Airbnb, YouTube, DoorDash, Ramp, and dozens of other companies.
他是 Stripe、Palantir、Airbnb、YouTube、DoorDash、Ramp 以及數十家其他公司的早期投資人。 - He’s part of the famous PayPal mafia where he was executive vice president of business development and policy.
他是著名 PayPal Mafia 的一員，曾在 PayPal 擔任業務開發與政策的執行副總裁。 - He’s also been chief operating officer at Square, VP of corporate development at LinkedIn.
他也曾任 Square 的營運長、LinkedIn 的企業發展副總裁。 - He’s also co-founded two companies, and he’s currently managing director at Khosla Ventures.
他還共同創辦過兩家公司，目前是 Khosla Ventures 的董事總經理。 - It’s safe to say that Keith is in the 99.9th percentile at identifying talent, building teams, and operating world-class companies.
可以這麼說，Keith 在辨識人才、打造團隊以及營運世界級公司這幾件事上，屬於 99.9 百分位。 - Before we get into it, don’t forget to check out lennysnewsletter.com for an incredible set of deals available exclusively to Lenny’s newsletter subscribers.
在我們開始之前，別忘了去 lennysnewsletter.com 看看，那裡有一系列只給 Lenny’s newsletter 訂閱者的優惠。 - With that, I bring you Keith Rabois.
廢話不多說，為各位帶來 Keith Rabois。 - Keith, thank you so much for being here and welcome to the podcast.
Keith，非常感謝你來上節目，歡迎。 - It’s a pleasure to be with you.
很榮幸能跟你聊。 - Okay.
好的。
把 iPad 當主力裝置
- So, when we were starting this recording, you told me you’re doing this from an iPad, which I’ve never had.
我們在開始錄音時，你告訴我你正用 iPad 錄音，這種事我從來沒遇過。 - And you shared a crazy fact that you haven’t used a computer in like years.
你還分享了一個瘋狂的事實：你已經好幾年沒用過電腦了。 - Talk about what’s going on there.
講講怎麼回事吧。 - Yeah.
嗯。 - So, uh when I when I started working at Square, Jack Dorsey was running the company off an iPad.
我剛到 Square 工作的時候，Jack Dorsey 就是用一台 iPad 在管整家公司。 - And so, I immediately converted in September 2010.
所以我在 2010 年 9 月就立刻轉用 iPad。 - And haven’t looked back.
從那之後就沒再回頭過。 - I haven’t touched a computer since September 2010.
我從 2010 年 9 月開始就沒再碰過電腦。 - Everything I do in my life is either done from my phone, my watch, or my iPad.
我生活中的一切，都是用我的手機、手錶或 iPad 完成的。 - What’s so interesting about this as you were talking is just there’s this trend of engineers starting to code from their phone.
你說的這件事很有趣，因為現在有一個趨勢是工程師開始用手機寫程式。 - Like I had Boris Cherny on and Simon Willison, these two engineers that are like 10x engineers and they’re just like coding from their phone talking to AI.
像我訪過 Boris Cherny 和 Simon Willison，這兩位是 10x 工程師，他們就是用手機跟 AI 對話來寫程式。 - And I feel like you you’ve been preparing for this for a long time.
我覺得你已經為這一天準備了很久。 - Yeah.
是的。 - Try to be ahead of the curve.
我試著走在曲線的前面。 - Jack’s very good at being ahead of the curve.
Jack 非常擅長走在曲線的前面。 - If you just watch what Jack’s doing and follow, you pretty good shape in technology.
在科技領域，你只要看 Jack 在做什麼然後跟著做，狀況通常都不會太差。 - And just understand the benefit.
而且要理解這樣做的好處。 - Is it just avoid distractions?
是為了避免分心嗎？ - Yeah, partially distractions, partially just the flexibility, like taking an iPad with you anywhere is just super easy.
對，一部分是避免分心，一部分是因為靈活性，把 iPad 帶到任何地方都超級方便。 - You know, I some of some laptops have improved since then, but like the screen flexibility, angles, but like just the weight like I carry my iPad with me everywhere.
你知道，雖然有些筆電從那時起也有進步，但像是螢幕靈活度、角度、重量這些，我都把 iPad 隨身帶著走。 - So, there’s no reason there there’s nothing you can’t perform unless maybe if you’re doing heavy duty engineering, which obviously has not been my forte in life, although I may have to start.
所以實在沒理由用其他裝置，沒有什麼事情你不能用 iPad 完成，除非你做重度工程，那顯然不是我的強項，雖然我可能要開始學了。 - Um, there’s no reason to use a more powerful, heavier weight, less flexible machine.
沒有理由用一台更強大、更重、更不靈活的機器。 - Wow.
哇。 - iPad maxing.
iPad maxing。 - Keith Rabois.
Keith Rabois。 - » See if you got my Apple.
» 看看你的 Apple 裝置好不好用。 - As long as it’s an Apple product, it works.
只要是蘋果產品就行。 - So appropriate.
真合適。
贊助：Work OS
- This episode is brought to you by our season’s presenting sponsor, Work OS.
本集節目由本季的主要贊助商 Work OS 帶來。 - What do OpenAI, Anthropic, Cursor, Vercel, Replit, Sierra, Clay, and hundreds of other winning companies all have in common?
OpenAI、Anthropic、Cursor、Vercel、Replit、Sierra、Clay 還有上百家成功公司有什麼共同點？ - They are all powered by Work OS.
他們全部都使用 Work OS。 - If you’re building a product for the enterprise, you’ve felt the pain of integrating single sign-on, SCIM, RBAC, audit logs, and other features required by large companies.
如果你正在為企業客戶打造產品，你一定感受過整合 SSO、SCIM、RBAC、稽核日誌等大型公司要求功能的痛苦。 - Work OS turns those deal blockers into drop-in APIs with a modern developer platform built specifically for B2B SaaS.
Work OS 把這些卡關因素變成隨插即用的 API，提供一個專為 B2B SaaS 打造的現代化開發者平台。 - Literally, every startup that I’m an investor in that starts to expand up market ends up working with Work OS.
我投資的每一家新創，只要開始往上拓展企業客戶，最後都會跟 Work OS 合作。 - And that’s because they are the best.
因為他們就是最好的。 - Whether you are a seed-stage startup trying to land your first enterprise customer or a unicorn expanding globally, Work OS is the fastest path to becoming enterprise ready and unblocking growth.
不論你是想拿下第一個企業客戶的種子期新創，還是正在全球拓展的獨角獸，Work OS 都是讓你快速達到企業級水準、解開成長瓶頸的最快路徑。 - It’s essentially Stripe for enterprise features.
它本質上就是「企業功能版的 Stripe」。 - Visit workos.com to get started or just hit up their Slack where they have actual engineers waiting to answer your questions.
去 workos.com 註冊，或是到他們的 Slack 找他們，那裡有真正的工程師等著回答你的問題。 - Work OS allows you to build faster with delightful APIs, comprehensive docs, and a smooth developer experience.
Work OS 讓你用愉快的 API、完整的文件、流暢的開發者體驗來加速開發。 - Go to workos.com to make your app enterprise ready today.
立刻前往 workos.com，讓你的應用程式達到企業級水準。
聚焦：打造世界級團隊
- As I was preparing for this chat, there’s just like so many directions we could have gone with this.
我在準備這場對談的時候，發現有太多方向可以聊。 - You are so smart at so many things.
你在很多事情上都非常聰明。 - I want to focus on something that I think you’re uniquely great at, which is helping companies build world-class teams.
我想專注在一件我認為你特別擅長的事，就是協助公司打造世界級團隊。
在競爭市場中爭取頂尖人才
- And I want to start in particular with attracting the best talent.
我想特別從吸引最頂尖人才這件事開始。 - And what’s really interesting these days from what I can tell is there’s just like a lot of people that are struggling to find a job.
我觀察到一個有趣的現象：現在有很多人正在掙扎著找工作。 - it’s taking a lot longer to find a job.
找工作要花的時間長很多。 - It’s just there’s all these layoffs.
到處都是裁員消息。 - On the other hand, it feels like it’s never been harder to attract the best talent.
另一方面，要吸引最頂尖的人才感覺從來沒有這麼難。 - There are so many amazing companies doing amazing things.
太多很棒的公司在做很棒的事。 - So much money flying around these hundred million dollar offers and things.
到處都是錢在飛，那些上億美金的 offer 之類的。 - And so from the companies that you are closest to that you see are best at attracting the best talent, what have they figured out?
在你接觸最深、又最擅長吸引頂尖人才的公司裡，他們搞懂了什麼？ - What are they doing differently?
他們有哪些不一樣的做法？ - What are some creative things they do?
有哪些有創意的做法？
團隊是公司的基石
- » Well, let’s start with first principles.
» 讓我們從第一性原理開始。 - The most important lesson I learned when I was working at Square from my board was Vinod Khosla was on my board and he said the team you build is the company you build.
我在 Square 工作時從董事會學到最重要的一課，是 Vinod Khosla（當時是我的董事）告訴我的：你打造的團隊就是你打造的公司。 - And that adage is the most important thing when you’re creating a startup.
這句格言是創業時最重要的事。 - People get distracted with the market with customers with a product with technology ultimately it’s a team.
大家會被市場、客戶、產品、技術分心，但歸根究柢就是團隊。 - If you have the right people everything else will be easy.
如果你有對的人，其他一切都會變得簡單。
從 PayPal Mafia 學到的事
- And if you have the wrong people everything else is going to be difficult.
而如果你有錯的人，其他一切都會變得困難。 - So I actually learned this be Vinod distilled it but I actually learned this back in my PayPal days.
這雖然是 Vinod 幫我提煉出來的，但其實我在 PayPal 時代就學到了。 - So you know in the early 2000s why was PayPal so successful?
你想想看，2000 年代初期 PayPal 為什麼這麼成功？ - Why were there such a generation you know subsequent generations of successful interesting companies for you know 25 years now?
為什麼後來 25 年裡，有一代又一代成功而有趣的公司？ - It’s because Peter Thiel and Max Levchin marshaled an incredible density of talent.
因為 Peter Thiel 和 Max Levchin 集結了一個密度高得驚人的人才庫。 - So it allowed PayPal to succeed where possibly we wouldn’t have and these people went on with interesting ideas, ambition and talent to build epic companies, you know, in all kinds of verticals.
這讓 PayPal 在可能會失敗的情況下成功，而這些人後來帶著有趣的想法、野心和才能，在各種垂直領域打造出偉大的公司。 - So from day one, I’ve always been day one of my technical career uh technology career, I’ve always been focused on how the importance of critical density talent.
所以從我科技職涯的第一天起，我就一直專注在「關鍵人才密度」這件事的重要性上。 - How do you identify, retain, and promote people without talent?
你要怎麼辨識、留住、提拔有才能的人？ - Back in the PayPal days when I first started my career in technology, I actually truthfully was not very good at this.
老實說，在 PayPal 那個時代我剛踏入科技業時，我做這件事其實不太行。 - Um, fortunately, Peter and Max were.
還好 Peter 和 Max 很行。 - So, Max basically hired all the technical talent in the organization.
Max 基本上負責招聘公司裡所有的技術人才。 - Peter pretty much hired everybody else.
Peter 則大致負責招聘其他人。
早期招募的挑戰
- Uh, they used their network primarily.
他們主要靠自己的人脈。 - So, it was very difficult to get a job at PayPal unless you had a first degree or second degree connection uh to the engineering team or to Peter through Stanford, which is a different type of recruiting model.
所以要進 PayPal 很難，除非你是工程團隊的一度或二度人脈，或者透過史丹佛跟 Peter 有連結，這是一種不一樣的招募模式。 - It works really well if you have a strong network.
這種方式如果你有強大的人脈會非常有效。 - I wouldn’t recommend it for everybody, but if you have a network that has, you know, unique talent, there’s no substitute.
我不會推薦給每個人，但如果你的人脈裡有獨特的人才，那是沒有替代品的。 - Interviews are not a great substitute regardless of how strong you are at interview.
不論你面試做得多好，面試都不是一個好的替代方案。 - But when I started my career, I was mediocre at, let’s say, hiring people.
但我剛開始職涯時，在招人這件事上算是中等水準。 - Probably 50/50.
大概 50/50 對半開。 - You know, some good people, some mediocre people.
招到一些好人，也招到一些平庸的人。 - That doesn’t allow you to scale a team with an unfair advantage.
這沒辦法讓你在不公平優勢下擴張團隊。 - But what I learned to do is steal people from other people’s organizations within PayPal.
但我學會了一件事，就是從 PayPal 內部其他人的組織裡挖人。
培養領導槓桿力
- very successfully.
而且很成功。 - So I got feedback from David Sacks who was the COO at the time that I wasn’t going to get promoted again until I until I could demonstrate uh leverage like leadership leverage which he had an equation for of 1 plus 1 has to equal three or more.
我從當時擔任 COO 的 David Sacks 那邊得到回饋，他說我不會再被升職，除非我能展現出領導槓桿力。他有個公式：1 + 1 必須等於 3 或更多。 - So for every incremental person you hire you have to show that you produce disproportionate returns nonlinear returns.
你每多請一個人，就必須展示出不成比例的、非線性的回報。 - And because I wasn’t hiring that well I wasn’t really succeeding at that leverage.
因為我招人的能力沒有那麼好，所以我在這個槓桿上並不成功。 - So when I went around took the feedback into account, I said, “hm, okay, I really want to get promoted.
所以我把這個回饋聽進去後想：「嗯，好，我真的很想升職。 - What do I do?”
我該怎麼做？」 - So I found people within the organization that I felt had talent that were were not being leveraged to the highest potential and ambition and I recruited them to my team and that was very successful.
於是我在組織內找到那些我覺得有才能、但沒有被充分發揮潛力與野心的人，把他們挖到我的團隊，結果非常成功。 - And then I did get promoted actually fairly quickly because these people actually were up to speed.
然後我真的很快就升職了，因為這些人很快就能上手。 - They were able to run really fast and we produced a lot of really important results for the company.
他們能跑得很快，我們為公司產出了很多重要的成果。 - The lesson though that I took away was well that’s great because what it showed to me is I actually could identify talent.
但我從中學到的教訓是，這證明我其實能辨識人才。 - I just couldn’t identify strangers with talent.
我只是不能辨識陌生人是否有才能。 - So people that were in the building that I have lunch with or dinner with or go for a run around the PayPal campus with I was accurate at diagnosing their abilities.
所以那些我在辦公樓裡跟他們吃午餐、晚餐或在 PayPal 園區跑步的人，我能準確判斷他們的能力。 - I just couldn’t do it you know in a 20 minute 30 minute 45 minute interview.
但我沒辦法在 20、30、45 分鐘的面試裡做到這件事。 - So the first hand is just double down on people I know.
所以第一個招數就是加碼投資我認識的人。 - that doesn’t scale perfectly but learn to be excellent at and if I had context assessing people’s abilities, superpowers and you know weaknesses then over the next x years tried to identify uh ability uh a different technique for identifying assessing random people because ultimately if you’re going to build an organization ultimately if you’re going to be a VC you can’t just invest in people you already know so that took some years and required some training anyway way.
這種方式無法完美擴展，但你要學著精通它。如果我有足夠的脈絡來評估人的能力、超能力與弱點，那接下來幾年我就要試著發展出另一種辨識陌生人能力的方法，因為終究要打造一個組織、終究要當 VC，你不可能只投資自己認識的人。這花了我幾年時間，也需要一些訓練。 - I think you can teach some of this to a founder, but one advantage a founder has that’s going to thrive is if a founder shows the ability early in his or her career to assess talent ruthlessly and accurately, he or she can go very far with no other abilities whatsoever.
我覺得這些東西有些可以教給創辦人，但能茁壯成長的創辦人有一個優勢：如果他在職涯早期就展現出無情且精準評估人才的能力，那即便沒有其他能力，他也能走得非常遠。
招募是一種要鍛鍊的技能
- Hiring is like a muscle.
招募就像肌肉一樣。 - You need to exercise it.
你必須鍛鍊它。 - You need to try learn what worked, what didn’t, what what could you have known, what what did you miss, why?
你必須去學習什麼有效、什麼沒效、你本來可以知道什麼、你錯過了什麼、為什麼。 - and you know riff on that and try to get better at it.
然後在這上面反覆琢磨，試著做得更好。 - There are tactics you can learn.
有些技巧是可以學的。 - I think the tactics work pretty well within the middle of a bell curve distribution of moving yourself 10 20 degrees within that bell curve.
我認為這些技巧在鐘形分布的中段相當有效，可以讓你在鐘形曲線裡進步 10 到 20 度。 - I don’t think the tactics can really teach you how to identify call it like top 10 basis points top 50 basis points of talent.
但我不認為這些技巧能真正教你怎麼辨識像是最頂尖 0.1% 或 0.5% 的人才。 - There you have to deviate from the norm.
那裡你必須偏離常規。 - And I think that’s actually true of most lessons in life.
我覺得人生大多數教訓其實都是這樣。 - If you’re going to be extraordinary at any skill, you can’t follow a playbook.
如果你想在任何一項技能上達到卓越，你就不能照本宣科。 - Otherwise, by definition, lots of other people would be, you know, the top 10 basis points.
否則照定義來說，會有很多人都處在最頂尖 0.1%。 - But, but you can get a lot better by learning techniques.
但學技巧仍然能讓你進步很多。 - So, for example, let’s share a couple.
我們來分享幾個例子吧。
嚴格背景調查的技巧
- One thing I think you can learn to do is is be excellent at references.
我覺得你可以學會的一件事就是「擅長做背景調查」。 - It doesn’t work for hiring people right out of college or something because the reference context is going to be a little off.
對剛畢業的應屆生這招不太管用，因為他們的背景脈絡不太對得上。 - But I think without getting better at interviewing and assessing, if you just learn to extract the right information from ruthless referencing.
但即使你沒有變得更會面試、評估，光是學會從嚴格的背景調查中萃取對的資訊就很有用。 - So for example, ruthless referencing to me means uh Tony at DoorDash does 20 references on every single senior hire.
舉個例子，對我來說「嚴格背景調查」的意思是：DoorDash 的 Tony 對每一個資深職位的應徵者都做 20 次背景調查。
20 次。
- » Wow.
» 哇。 - » I bet you he’s pretty good.
» 我打賭他做得相當好。 - I bet he’s been pretty accurate, too.
我打賭他也相當準確。 - Uh so I think you can learn that.
所以我覺得這個是可以學的。 - That’s like a a skill that’s teachable that being absolutely, you know, incredibly dedicated to your craft, you can just get better at.
那是一種可以教的技能，只要你絕對地、異常地投入在這個工藝上，你就能變得更好。
推薦人耗盡策略
- Back in the day, there’s an investor at Greylock, who’s on my board at LinkedIn, David Sze, very successful investor, notable for both LinkedIn and Facebook investments.
以前 Greylock 有個投資人，後來成為我在 LinkedIn 的董事會成員，叫 David Sze，非常成功的投資人，因為 LinkedIn 和 Facebook 兩個投資而出名。 - He used to teach at Greylock, you couldn’t stop referencing a founder until you hit a negative reference.
他在 Greylock 教大家：你不能停止做創辦人的背景調查，直到你聽到一個負面評價為止。 - So you would know you had exhausted the reference when you finally hit a negative reference.
所以當你終於聽到一個負面評價時，就知道你已經把推薦人問完了。 - And so I think there are tactics there in you know muscle building.
我覺得這裡面就有可以鍛鍊的招數。 - How do you get the right information from the right people?
你要怎麼從對的人那裡拿到對的資訊？ - How do you frame the questions etc that will lead you in the right direction.
你要怎麼設定問題的框架，才能引導你朝對的方向去。
推薦人陷阱：問對問題的框架
- Now you have to be careful like let’s say I’ll give you an example where this can go wrong.
不過你要小心，我給你一個會出錯的例子。 - Um, I’m been a longtime investor from the seed round of a company called Faire, founded by uh two of my colleagues at Square.
我從種子輪就一直投資一家叫 Faire 的公司，創辦人是我在 Square 的兩位同事。 - Uh, Max R and Jeff Kolovson uh worked for me um at Square and then the two other co-founders also worked at Square.
Max R 和 Jeff Kolovson 在 Square 為我工作過，另外兩位共同創辦人也在 Square 工作過。 - When people were reference checking Max often most VCs asked the wrong question, which was Max was Max a good employee?
當大家做 Max 的背景調查時，大多數 VC 都問錯問題：Max 是個好員工嗎？ - The answer to that is very mixed and so some venture capitalists including some very good ones were nervous about investing Faire.
這個問題的答案很複雜，所以包括一些很厲害的 VC 在內，有些人對投 Faire 都很猶豫。 - If they frame the question slightly differently which is is Max capable of being a world-class entrepreneur the answer was yes.
如果他們把問題框架稍微改一下：Max 有沒有能力成為世界級的創業家？答案就是肯定的。 - So you again it’s like a tactic you have to understand like what exactly am I trying to extract?
所以這又是一個技巧：你得搞清楚自己到底想萃取什麼資訊。 - same person, wrong question, wrong result.
同樣的人、錯的問題、錯的結果。 - And many people passed unfair and they regret it.
很多人錯過了 Faire，他們後悔了。 - And these are actually quite talented investors, they just didn’t frame the question correctly when they were calling someone like Jack Dorsey up for the reference.
而這些其實是很有才華的投資人，他們只是在打電話給 Jack Dorsey 這類人做背景調查時，沒有把問題的框架搭對。
評估戰略思維的面試問題
- » Any other questions you find really helpful in extracting the right information?
» 還有什麼問題你覺得很能萃取出對的資訊？ - » When when I interview candidates for senior people in leadership positions,
» 當我面試領導職位的資深候選人時， - I always ask them, you know, look at whatever company they’re at and say, “If you were CEO, what would you have done differently?” and you get a feel for their strategic mindset of you know can they drive value creation because almost by definition they’ve come from a company that’s had some traction success so can they end it so for in your case I would have asked you you know if you were CEO of Airbnb what would you have done differently and you learn a lot from that question uh on
我一定會問他們：看看你目前所在的公司，如果你是 CEO，你會做什麼不一樣的事？這樣你就能感受到他們的戰略思維、能不能驅動價值創造。因為按定義來說，他們來自於有一定成績的公司，所以這個問題能測試他們的能力。以你為例，我會問你：如果你是 Airbnb 的 CEO，你會做什麼不一樣的事？這個問題你會學到很多。 - reference to specifically I think the a general arc that’s pretty good is asking the person what would lead to this person being most successful And if something were not to work out, what would be the primary root cause that you can identify of something going wrong?
具體到背景調查，我覺得有個不錯的問題弧線是：問推薦人「什麼會讓這個人最成功？」以及「如果有事不順利，你能指出最可能的根本原因是什麼？」 - I think generally probing on those two arcs leads to a lot of insight.
我覺得用這兩個弧線去探詢，通常能得到很多洞見。 - » And that first question is for the candidate or or is that in the » for the candidate?
» 第一個問題是問候選人嗎？» 是的，問候選人。 - That’s for the candidate specifically.
那個問題就是問候選人本人。 - Got it.
了解。 - » U because it’s not like I don’t want them to criticize Airbnb.
» 我不是要他們批評 Airbnb。 - I don’t that I don’t think that’s that productive.
我覺得那樣不太有產出。 - But you can tell how much of the current business model have they absorbed how much they understand tradeoffs and then they can they create an unfair advantage you know can they they have insights into afterburners and then I have a follow-up question which is usually gold which is let’s say I ask you this question about Airbnb and you give me this great answer I’m like well why didn’t you why weren’t you able to persuade Brian to do it.
但你能看出他們吸收了多少現在的商業模式、理解多少權衡取捨、能不能創造不公平優勢、有沒有對加速器的洞見。然後我會有一個追問，通常是金句：假設我問你 Airbnb 的問題，你給了一個很棒的答案，那我會接著問：那你為什麼沒辦法說服 Brian 去做？ - » So you made this interesting point that there’s like tactics that can help you get better at finding and identifying talent.
» 所以你提了一個有趣的觀點：有些技巧可以幫你變得更會找到和辨識人才。
從招募回饋中學習
- A lot of this is just the feedback loop of doing it a bunch.
這很多是來自於做很多次後形成的回饋循環。 - Sounds like I find the feedback loop is so like it’s hard to actually like like most people interview hire and then don’t really learn much from how it ends up going.
我發現這個回饋循環很難建立起來，大多數人面試、雇用之後，並沒有真的從結果中學到什麼。 - Like there’s this gut thing that happens but they’re not like really thinking about it.
他們有種直覺，但沒有真正思考它。 - Do you have any advice for just how to make the most out of the lesson of seeing how something went?
你有什麼建議，讓我們從觀察某件事的結果中得到最大教訓？ - » So I’ve read some research on the topic and if you ask yourself 30 days after any hire, would you make the same decision?
» 我讀過一些相關研究，如果你在雇用某人 30 天後問自己「我還會做同樣的決定嗎？」 - that 30-day loop is pretty pretty useful and it it basically it’s as accurate as measuring it a year or two years out.
那個 30 天的回饋循環非常有用，它基本上跟一年或兩年後再衡量一樣準確。 - So, you got a pretty tight feedback loop and you can ask the entire hiring team.
所以你有一個相當緊密的回饋循環，而且可以問整個招聘團隊。 - Uh so, I think that is like just a technique that every company should use.
我覺得這是每家公司都應該用的技巧。 - » I want to talk about this framework that you have uh barrels and ammunition because this is really mind expanding and helping people understand who to even hire.
» 我想談談你那個框架，barrels and ammunition，因為它非常開拓思維，能幫助大家理解該雇誰。
一直加人卻沒有更多產出的問題
- So look, most companies raise money, they have some traction, they raise, you know, do a seed round, they get launch, they get some traction, then they raise a lot of money, whether it’s a series A or series B, and then they hire a lot of people infallibly or at least historically.
你看，大多數公司募資、有一點 traction、做個種子輪、launch、再有點 traction，然後募一大筆錢，不管是 A 輪還是 B 輪，接著就會雇一大堆人，無一例外，至少從歷史看是這樣。 - And then the CEO almost without exception gets frustrated because they’ve hired a lot of people, the burn rate has increased a lot, and they don’t feel like that’s more get more is getting accomplished per unit of time, per day, per week, per month, per quarter.
然後 CEO 幾乎毫無例外地會感到沮喪，因為他們雇了很多人，燒錢速度大幅上升，但他們不覺得在每單位時間、每天、每週、每月、每季完成的事情有變多。 - and they get frustrated and so then they sit around at a dinner with other CEOs or people like me or one-on-one conversation with me and are incredibly unhappy and disappointed that I’m spending all this money on all those people but we’re getting less done or the same done and why why after years of sitting through these conversations at dinner with other CEOs or COOs,
他們很沮喪，然後跟其他 CEO 或像我這樣的人吃晚餐或一對一聊天時非常不開心、很失望，覺得「我花了這麼多錢在這些人身上，但我們完成的事更少或一樣多，為什麼？」聽過幾年這種跟其他 CEO 或 COO 的晚餐對話後， - I realized that the fundamental driver of this is that the number of people that can independently drive an initiative from beginning from inception to success is very limited with any within any company and if you hire more people without expanding the number of what I call barrels that can drive from inception to success all you’re doing is stacking people behind the same initiatives and so you’re wasting time energy and increasing your collaboration tax your coordination tax and so that’s
我意識到根本原因是：在任何公司裡，能獨立把一個專案從零推到成功的人非常有限。如果你雇更多人，卻沒有擴張我所謂的「barrels」（能把專案從零推到成功的人），你只是在同一批專案後面堆人而已，浪費時間精力，增加協作稅、協調稅。 - what causes the drag coefficient so for example at PayPal Well, we had about 254 people in Mountain View when we were acquired.
這就是造成阻力係數的原因。舉例來說，在 PayPal，我們被併購時 Mountain View 大約有 254 人。 - Of those people, depending about how strict you really want to be, it is considered one of the best talent-rich networks of all time in technology, there’s between 12 to 17 barrels in the organization.
在這些人裡，依照你想要有多嚴格而定，雖然 PayPal 被視為科技史上人才密度最高的網絡之一，組織裡卻只有 12 到 17 個 barrels。 - That’s like an infinite number.
那已經算是無限大了。 - I once asked Jack Altman on a podcast at Lattice, who’s pretty damn big company, how many barrels of the company?
我曾經在 podcast 上問 Lattice 的 Jack Altman，那是一家相當大的公司，問他公司裡有幾個 barrels？ - The answer was two.
答案是兩個。 - That’s a more common answer for a very good company.
對一家非常好的公司而言，這是更常見的答案。 - So you have between two and let’s say 15 barrels at a company that defines the unique number of things you can do in parallel versus sequentially.
所以一家公司可能有 2 到 15 個 barrels，這個數字定義了你能平行（而非循序）做的事情的數量。 - And just hiring more people is not going to change that and if anything it’s just going to cause a collaboration or coordination tax and you’re going to have a drag coefficient you’re going to do less.
單純雇更多人並不會改變這件事，反而只會造成協作或協調稅，產生阻力係數，做的事會變少。 - So the key is to me is if you want to do more or need to do more your market requires you to do more your business model requires you to do more VCs require you to do more you need to have more barrels.
所以對我來說關鍵是：如果你想做更多、市場要求你做更多、商業模式要求你做更多、VC 要求你做更多，你就需要更多 barrels。 - Now the question is how and when and you know all this there’s a lot of details there but fundamentally the ratio of barrels to ammunition is what dictates the number of important initiatives that can be pursued simultaneously » and you’re not saying you don’t want ammunition like it’s valuable to make an impact you need ammunition in addition to » you definitely need ammunition and it depends on what kind of project there are types of projects where an individual barrel may be able to
那問題就是怎麼做、什麼時候做，這裡面有很多細節，但根本上 barrels 對 ammunition 的比例決定了你能同時推進多少重要專案。» 你不是說不要 ammunition 吧？製造影響力是有價值的，你還是需要 ammunition。» 你絕對需要 ammunition，這取決於專案類型，有些專案個別的 barrel 就能搞定， - succeed with very limited or no you know ammunition Sometimes it may be a designer, an engineering team, a PM, a data analysis, blah blah blah to depends on what the project is, what the problem you’re trying to solve is, what’s the proper amount of ammunition.
在很少甚至沒有 ammunition 的情況下成功。有時候 ammunition 可能是設計師、工程團隊、PM、資料分析等等，看你的專案是什麼、要解決的問題是什麼、合適的 ammunition 數量是多少。 - But once you think about the ratios of ammunition to the problem, you can be much more constructive and deliberate and intentional about the team construction.
但一旦你開始思考 ammunition 對問題的比例，你就能在團隊建構上更有建設性、更深思熟慮、更有意圖。 - Most people hearing this, uh, assume they are barrels.
大多數聽到這個的人，都會假設自己是 barrel。
什麼算是 Barrel
- What helps you understand if someone is truly a barrel?
怎麼判斷一個人是不是真的 barrel？ - Can they take an idea and make it happen?
他們能不能把一個想法變成現實？ - Basically, we’re going up that, there’s a hill over there.
基本上就是：那邊有座山。 - That’s the hill.
就是那座山。 - Get us over that hill.
帶我們翻過那座山。 - And one way or the other, they will motivate people if they need to.
不管用什麼方式，如果需要，他們會激勵人。 - They will accumulate resources if they need to.
如果需要，他們會累積資源。 - They will measure what they need to.
該量測的，他們會去量測。 - And they’re going to get your company across that hill.
然後他們會把你的公司帶過那座山。 - That’s a barrel.
這就是 barrel。
Barrel 的特質
- Anything less than that is not a barrel.
任何低於這個標準的，都不是 barrel。 - And so, this is skills like internal pol org stuff, resource like strate like what?
這包括什麼樣的技能？內部政治、組織問題、資源、策略，到底是什麼？ - Yeah, it’s kind of the collection of all the things together.
是的，它有點像是所有這些東西的集合。 - Collection of all those things, basically there’s an outcome.
所有這些東西的集合，基本上就是有一個結果。 - Co wants, co founder wants an outcome, and come hell or high water, this person is going to deliver that outcome.
共同創辦人想要一個結果，不管天塌下來、洪水來襲，這個人都會交出那個結果。 - Then the outcome can be, you know, fairly narrow and not that difficult in the beginning, and then you expand the scope, you know, the complexity, the difficulty that you basically entrust to your barrels.
一開始這個結果可以相當窄、不太難，然後你擴張範圍、複雜度、難度，把這些托付給你的 barrels。 - And, and sometimes they have no line of sight of how to solve it when you start.
有時候一開始他們完全看不到要怎麼解決。 - Sometimes you have a preliminary idea.
有時候你已經有初步想法。 - So it ranges, but ultimately, it’s that skill of, “I’m going to take this off your plate.
範圍很廣，但最終就是那種技能：「我會把這件事從你盤子上拿走。 - You can fire and forget, and this is going to happen.”
你可以發射後就忘掉它，這件事會發生。」 - And it’s not going to happen.
不會發生的是這個： - I am going to come back to you proactively with the issues I’m confronting, what I’ve already tried, the diagnosis of the root causes, and ask for your help with sufficient time for you to intervene and try to brainstorm with me to get us to the right answer.
我會主動回來找你，帶著我面臨的問題、我已經試過什麼、根本原因的診斷，並且預留充足時間給你介入、跟我一起腦力激盪找到對的答案。
能動性與理解
- Agency is the word that comes to mind when you talk about this role.
你描述這個角色時，我腦中浮現的字是「能動性 (agency)」。 - Yeah, I think agency is accurate.
對，我覺得 agency 這個字很準確。 - The problem I have with terms like agency is it’s like a little bit like strategy because in one ear, a lot of people went, and out the other, and they don’t really process the meaning.
我對 agency 這類詞彙的不滿是，它有點像「策略」這個字，很多人左耳進右耳出，並沒有真正理解它的意義。 - Yeah.
是的。
真實案例：冰沙 Barrel
- Who are some examples of barrels that make this real to people?
有沒有什麼 barrel 的例子能讓大家真實感受到這件事？ - Can understand what you’re talking about?
能理解你在說什麼？ - You know, I talked to my YC lecturer in 2014 about how to, how to operate.
我 2014 年在 YC 演講時聊過怎麼營運。 - They can be as simple as the now somewhat famous in technology, smoothie test, which is, you know, we used to have engineers work pretty hard at Square and pretty late.
它可以簡單到像現在科技圈有點知名的「冰沙測試」。當時我們在 Square 的工程師工作得很拚、很晚。 - And I always wanted them to have like food so they wouldn’t be famished, they wouldn’t be distracted.
我一直希望他們有東西吃，這樣他們就不會餓、不會分心。 - And I didn’t really want them to eat like junk food because I, I actually think junk food is bad for you, bad for your brain, etc.
我也不想讓他們吃垃圾食物，因為我覺得垃圾食物對你不好、對大腦不好。 - So settled on delivering and really wanted to provide like a 9:00 p.m. like cold smoothies.
所以我們決定送餐，而且想在晚上九點送冰冷的冰沙。 - And we had at that time a pretty substantial team at Square office team, EAs, you know, this was not a lean mean organization.
當時 Square 的辦公室團隊跟 EA 都很大，這不是個精簡的組織。 - And so I tried through the office team EAs and nothing.
我透過辦公室團隊和 EA 試了，什麼結果都沒有。 - We never got, uh, uh, healthy, delicious, and cold smoothies delivered at 9:00 p.m.
我們從來沒在晚上九點收到健康、好喝、冰冷的冰沙。 - Just kept that one.
就一直卡在那。 - It’s getting frustrating because if the smoothies aren’t cold, then no one’s going to eat them.
越來越令人挫折，因為冰沙不冰的話沒人會吃。 - If they don’t arrive at 9:00, and no one can really bake on, you know, the refresh rate, the refreshments, everything went wrong.
如果不在 9:00 送到，沒人能依賴那個補給節奏，補給、什麼都出問題。 - And then I had this intern named Taylor Francis.
然後我有個叫 Taylor Francis 的實習生。 - Uh, and I was explaining just my frustration.
我那時正在訴說我的挫折。 - It was like his second day or, and he’s like, “I’ll solve it.”
那大概是他來上班的第二天，他說：「我來解決。」 - And I was like, “Okay, kid, you know, good luck with that.”
我心想：「好啊小子，祝你好運。」 - Like I was like, “Sure, keep try anyway.”
我就想：「當然，反正你試試看。」 - Day goes by, 9:00 arrives, and lo and behold, smoothies show up at 9:00 p.m. delivered on the standing desk table where the engineers would congregate.
一天過去，九點到了，瞧瞧，冰沙真的在晚上 9:00 出現在工程師聚集的站立式桌面上。 - I sample them.
我嚐了一口。 - They’re cold.
冰的。 - They taste great.
好喝。 - And I’m like, “Oh my god, I found a barrel.”
我就想：「我的天，我找到一個 barrel 了。」 - And I later gave him almost everything to do.
後來我幾乎把所有事情都交給他。（我查了 Taylor Francis 的 LinkedIn，他從 2012-06 開始擔任 Square 工讀生至今已經 13 年，我腦中閃過「這應該是來交朋友的工讀生」XDD） - I want to go back to actually the first question we did.
我想回到我們的第一個問題。 - You shared some amazing advice for how to, uh, identify great talent.
你分享了一些很棒的辨識頂尖人才的建議。
說服頂尖人才加入
- But I’m still curious when you find that barrel, for example, when like everyone’s throwing money at them, there’s all these amazing teams to join.
但我還是很好奇，當你找到那個 barrel 後，每個人都對他們撒錢、有那麼多很棒的團隊在等他們加入。 - What are some things that companies do to attract and convince them to join their team?
公司有哪些做法可以吸引、說服他們加入團隊？ - » This the standard stuff is still true.
» 標準的那一套還是有效。
賣使命與願景
- Uh mission selling the vision and mission is indispensable.
賣使命、賣願景是不可或缺的。 - Most people who have proven talent anyway, at least in the current world, are going to attract offers from multiple, you know, opportunities.
已經證明過自己才華的人，至少在現在這個世界，會被多個機會搶著要。 - And so you’ve got to convince them that your opportunity is very special.
所以你得說服他們，你的機會非常特別。 - I think one way to do that that’s a little bit more nuanced is convince them that their particular skill overlaps with the critical blockers to the current company.
我覺得有一種比較微妙的做法是：說服他們，他們特定的技能正好跟你公司目前的關鍵卡點重疊。 - Meaning they’re betting on themselves.
意思是他們在賭自己。
把技能對到關鍵卡點
- So for example, if they are superb at let’s say marketing, if the biggest blocker of the company in the company’s current success is not technology, not the product, but we believe it’s marketing, it’s really easy to go to a world-class marketing person and say, not only is this great company building something really cool and interesting that you’ll be proud of, but your particular ability is very unique and differentiated and you can solve this.
舉例來說，如果他們在行銷方面非常厲害，而公司目前成功的最大卡點不是技術、不是產品，而是行銷，那你就很容易跟一個世界級的行銷人說：這家很棒的公司正在做一些你會引以為傲的酷事，而你的能力獨特、有差異化，你可以解決這個問題。 - This is actually how I wound up at Square back in 2010.
這其實就是 2010 年我加入 Square 的原因。 - Um I was actually I just been acquired into Google and um was planning on being a VC actually next after I was kind of like vesting whenever Google is going to compensate us.
我那時剛被併購進 Google，原本計畫在 Google 補償我們的 vesting 結束後去當 VC。 - And then um the investors in Square called me up and they said, “Hey, we’ve been looking for almost a year now for someone who knows something about financial services yet is still entrepreneurial.” and they’re they were like, “Hey, there’s only three of these.”
然後 Square 的投資人打電話給我說：「嘿，我們找了快一年，要找一個懂金融服務又有創業精神的人。」他們說：「全世界這種人只有三個。」 - At the time, 200 was like, “There’s only really two or three of you um in the world, you know, so would you be interested?”
當時是：「全世界真的只有兩三個你這種人，你有興趣嗎？」 - And I said, “Well, maybe.”
我說：「嗯，也許吧。」 - But that was the argument to me that made me leave Google early, like after two weeks and infuriate everybody and bypass, you know, venture for another three years, which had been my plan was because they made the argument that, hey, I was one of three people in the world that could actually do this job.
但就是這個說法讓我提前兩週離開 Google，激怒了一堆人，並且把我去當 VC 的計畫推遲了三年，因為他們說：「嘿，全世界只有三個人能做這份工作，你是其中一個。」
影響力與挑戰
- So there’s like a I don’t know if it’s ego, but it’s also just like impact.
所以有一種，我不知道是不是自我，但也是一種影響力的東西。 - » Yep.
» 對。 - Well, exactly.
沒錯。 - Impact.
影響力。 - Like you have you have talents.
你有才華。 - You want to use them and you want to feel that you’re challenged every day and that what you’re doing really really matters.
你想使用它們，想每天都被挑戰，想覺得自己做的事情真的很重要。 - So that I think that can be extremely helpful.
我覺得這非常有幫助。 - You know, my more important arc in this is I think you have to build a company on undiscovered talent.
在這個主題上，我更重要的論點是：你必須用「尚未被發現的人才」來打造公司。
招募策略
- Like I don’t think you really want to compete for the people that everybody else wants, right?
我不覺得你真的想去跟其他人搶大家都想要的人，對吧？ - And you know, I learned this at PayPal.
我在 PayPal 學到這件事。 - Peter taught me this literally the first day and first week of my job at PayPal that the way to build a company we were jogging around the Stanford campus is we’ve got to find these undiscovered talent that’s the only way to scale organization against these large incomes with infinite money etc.
Peter 在我到 PayPal 上班的第一天和第一週就教我：當時我們在史丹佛校園慢跑，他說打造公司的方式就是必須找到這些未被發現的人才，這是唯一一種能對抗那些有無限資金的大公司、擴張組織的方法。 - And you know, I’ve been on that crusade for 25 years.
我已經為這個主張奮鬥 25 年了。 - For those who are interested, you can link to it.
有興趣的可以連到那個演講。 - I gave a speech at Ramp, you know, how to hire, but talks in detail.
我在 Ramp 給過一場關於「如何招人」的演講，講得相當詳細。 - I also recommend Eric, CEO of Ramp speech, which is fairly similar.
我也推薦 Ramp 的 CEO Eric 的演講，內容相當類似。 - Both videos are online.
兩支影片都在網路上。
新創薪資上限與槓桿
- » I that’s such interesting advice and makes so much sense.
» 這個建議很有趣，也非常有道理。 - You’re not going to be able to afford the people that have done the thing at top companies and also they’re just probably not the people to join early.
你付不起那些已經在頂尖公司做過這件事的人，而且他們可能也不是早期該加入的人。 - » Well, they’re also not maybe the people you want.
» 而且他們可能也不是你想要的人。 - So, there’s ever selection, but you know, it’s like a salary cap.
所以這裡有一種反向篩選，你知道的，這就像薪資上限。 - Most sports these days have salary caps.
現在大多數運動都有薪資上限。 - And when you’re a startup, not only do you have a salary cap, you probably have one-tenth the salary cap of the people you’re competing with.
而當你是個新創，你不只有薪資上限，而且你的上限大概只有競爭對手的十分之一。 - So, you’ve got to figure out how to leverage, you know, less assets to more success.
所以你得想辦法用更少的資源換取更多的成功。 - » What’s just one tip when you’re looking at when you’re looking for undiscovered talent that’s a sign of, okay, this person is really special?
» 當你在尋找未被發現的人才時，有什麼一個訊號可以告訴你「好，這個人真的很特別」？
特殊潛力人才的訊號
- I know you have a lot to talk about here, but just like what’s one tip?
我知道你有很多可以講，但就只給一個訣竅。 - I think it’s basically isolating why other people aren’t going to process them correctly.
我覺得基本上就是去隔離出「為什麼其他人不會正確處理這個人」。 - Like most recruiting at large organizations becomes sort of a homogeneous function.
大型組織的招募往往變成一種同質化的功能。 - And so if you understand why this person is going to get thrown into this black box kind of thing and not get processed accurately, it’s pretty easy.
所以如果你能理解為什麼這個人會被丟進那個黑盒子、不會被準確處理，那就很容易了。 - So I always think about, you know, let’s say this person was interviewing at Meta or Google or Block these days or Coinbase.
所以我都會想：假設這個人去 Meta、Google、Block 或 Coinbase 面試。 - what are they going to miss and then why and then that leads to oh perfect.
他們會錯過什麼、為什麼錯過，然後就會「啊，太完美了」。 - So sometimes it’s just lack of information.
有時候只是因為缺乏資訊。 - Like one of the reasons why, you know, sometimes it’s controversial to say this, but one of the reasons why the net impact of my hire undiscovered talent is you wind up skewing younger.
雖然這樣說有時候有爭議，但我「招募未被發現的人才」這套做法的淨效應之一就是會偏向年輕人。 - It’s not because you need young people.
不是因為你需要年輕人。 - It’s that younger people have by definition less data.
而是年輕人按定義來說資料點較少。 - It’s like a, you know, we use credit scoring, FICO scores.
這就像我們用信用評分、FICO 分數。 - It’s the same thing for employment.
在僱用上也是一樣。 - By the time you’re over 30 some odd things, there’s so many data points about you that this blackbox machine is usually going to process you like many other people.
等到你 30 多歲之後，關於你的資料點太多了，這個黑盒子通常會把你處理得像其他很多人一樣。 - If there’s no data points, it’s very hard for a blackbox machine that does homogeneous evaluation to evaluate you.
如果沒有資料點，做同質化評估的黑盒機器就很難評估你。 - So there is alpha so to speak by definition for people have like no data points.
所以對沒有資料點的人來說，可以說按定義就有 alpha。 - » It’s interesting how this is the same skill as being an investor, picking startups to invest in.
» 有趣的是，這跟當投資人挑新創投資是同一種技能。 - » Yeah, absolutely.
» 是的，完全一樣。 - Okay, I want to talk about something else.
好，我想聊別的。
持續施壓的角色
- I asked a few people that know you well that work with you at various companies what to talk to you about.
我問了幾位很熟你、也在不同公司跟你共事過的人，要跟你聊什麼。 - And one person said that when I asked him what to talk about, he said my immediate reaction is that he is a bar raiser.
其中一個人說，他第一個反應是「他是一個 bar raiser（提高標準的人）」。 - No matter what kind of numbers we put up, he pushes us to do more.
不管我們做出什麼樣的數字，他都會推我們做更多。 - In fact, often it seems like the better we do, the harder he pushes.
事實上，常常是我們做得越好，他推得越用力。 - Uh does that resonate?
這個說法你有共鳴嗎？ - » Yeah, I think that’s true.
» 是的，我覺得是真的。 - I mean, I think look, ultimately, um, I’ll I’ll channel someone else’s feedback, but it’s it’s the same vein.
我想，最終，我引用別人的話，但精神是一樣的。 - So, uh, a friend of mine who’s a CEO once asked Mike Moritz.
我有個 CEO 朋友曾經問過 Mike Moritz。 - It’s like, what’s the most common denominator of the best CEOs ever?
他問：歷史上最頂尖的 CEO 們最大的共同點是什麼？ - And he said, it’s the relentless application of force.
他說：是「無情地施加力量」。 - Quote, I think that’s the job of the CEO.
引用一下，我覺得那就是 CEO 的工作。 - People eventually get comfortable, complacent.
人最終會變得舒適、自滿。 - The more success you have, the more complacent the organization tends to get.
你越成功，組織就越容易自滿。 - And the single role for the CEO is offsetting that complacency.
CEO 唯一的職責就是抵銷這種自滿。 - So for the point, the more success you have, the better you’re doing, the more complacency naturally kicks in.
所以重點是：你越成功、做得越好，自滿就越自然地進來。 - And unless you’ve erected a network effect, you do not want to get complacent.
除非你已經建立起網絡效應，否則你絕對不能自滿。 - And even then debate whether you should, but like fundamentally most businesses are not network effect businesses.
就算有了網絡效應也還可以辯論該不該自滿，但基本上大多數公司並不是網絡效應型的生意。 - They are not going to run on, you know, on their own for a long time.
它們不會長時間靠自己跑下去。 - So, I think that’s one insight is the better you’re doing, the more the CEO should push.
所以我覺得一個洞見是：你做得越好，CEO 就越該推。 - Secondly, um it’s a little bit like sports when you’re growing up.
第二，這有點像你成長過程中玩的運動。 - People when they’re winning take advantage of feedback better than when they’re losing usually like so for example, you know, now what I do is mostly mostly VC, mostly a board member, mostly like a consigary to founder.
人在贏的時候通常比輸的時候更能善用回饋。舉例來說，我現在主要是當 VC、當董事、當創辦人的諮詢顧問。 - And when a company’s struggling, maybe what’s less intuitive, and you may have picked up on this in your research and, you know, interviews of people who know me, when a company’s struggling, I’m actually usually a very non-critical and more like a coach and supporter because the company, the founder knows they’re struggling.
當一家公司掙扎的時候，可能比較反直覺的是，你或許在你的研究和訪問熟識我的人時注意到了，當公司掙扎時，我通常是非常不批評、比較像教練和支持者的角色，因為公司、創辦人自己都知道他們在掙扎。 - Being critical doesn’t really help them solve their problems.
批評其實沒辦法幫他們解決問題。 - That’s when being supportive can actually somewhat counterintuitively be more important.
那種時候支持反而有點反直覺地更重要。 - But when the company’s thriving, it’s really important to be critical and isolating things that will eventually be problems while everybody in the company is really happy and borderline complacent.
但當公司蓬勃發展時，趁公司裡每個人都很開心、近乎自滿時，挑出最終會變成問題的事情並批評，反而非常重要。 - So you you kind of want to be the opposite as a default.
所以你預設就要做相反的事。
創投視角
- And that’s like a s a really good sports coach.
這就像一位非常好的運動教練。 - When you’re winning is when to polish everything and really master the details.
你贏的時候才是琢磨一切、真正掌握細節的時候。 - when you’re losing, you definitely also have to be exciting people and embracing the future and selling the future.
你輸的時候，你也絕對要激勵人、擁抱未來、賣未來。 - » So is the advice say someone’s listening a founder or product leader the advice here is just keep pushing harder, set the bar higher as things even if you’re doing great.
» 所以這個建議，假設聽眾是創辦人或產品領導者，建議就是一直更用力推、把標準設得更高，即使你做得很好。 - » Yeah, if you’re doing great.
» 對，如果你做得很好。 - Well, also you have to remember like I I I remember giving a speech once in Square is like you get to a certain threshold creates inflection momentum gets you a certain, you know, valuation and all the all these like attributes, but it’s kind of like winning a Super Bowl.
而且你得記得，我記得有一次在 Square 演講說過，到了某個門檻你會出現拐點動能，得到某個估值和所有這些屬性，但這有點像贏了一次 Super Bowl。 - You get the last year was great.
去年很棒。 - Last four quarters were wonderful.
過去四個季度都很美妙。 - It’s like winning the Super Bowl.
就像贏了一場超級盃。 - You got to come back next year and start your record zero zero again.
但你下個球季回來，戰績又是 0 勝 0 負。 - And you got to remember that actually venture is like that.
你得記得，創投其實也是這樣。 - You know, I’m only as good as my last investment.
我永遠只跟我最後一次投資一樣好。
持續驅動的影響
- I’ve had like 13 years or whatever of pretty damn good investments.
我有過大約 13 年相當棒的投資紀錄。 - But like truth, I have to wake up every day and find some undiscovered founder that’s going to change the world.
但事實是，我每天都得醒來去找一個未被發現、會改變世界的創辦人。 - And if I don’t do that, it doesn’t matter what I’ve done the last 13 years.
如果我不這麼做，我過去 13 年做了什麼都不重要。 - And a company’s kind of like that.
一家公司也有點像這樣。 - The company can skate on autopilot for a while.
公司可以自動駕駛混一段時間。 - Venture, you really can’t ever skate.
但創投這行，你真的永遠不能混。 - » I definitely saw this with Brian Chesky.
» 我在 Brian Chesky (co-founder and CEO of Airbnb) 身上絕對看到這個。 - just felt like things were going great and we just shipped amazing products and growth is up and he’s just just always like pedal to the metal no matter what just like come on when are we going to take a little break and it’s interesting because when we did have little breaks here and there moral actually went down because people are like what am I working on I don’t know that’s not that exciting » Brian and I are usually in sync a lot um there’s a really good interview where I interviewed
那時感覺一切都很順利，我們剛出了很棒的產品、成長都在上升，但他總是「全力踩油門」，我會想「拜託，我們什麼時候可以稍微休息一下」。有趣的是，當我們真的偶爾休息一下，士氣反而下降了，因為大家會想「我在做什麼？我也不知道，沒什麼意思」。» Brian 和我通常很合拍，我有一段很好的訪談是我訪問 - him also at the same conference of how to hire uh when he talks mostly about founder mode but I generally subscribed to virtually all of Brian’s views.
他在同一場「如何招人」的會議上，他主要在講 founder mode，但我基本上贊同 Brian 幾乎所有的觀點。 - He even taught me some of these things himself.
他甚至有些事是他親自教我的。
就業市場焦慮與 AI
- Uh but the the more important point I think you identified which is very subtle is really talented people are like superb athletes and when things are going well and people are really kind of coasting, they’re not happy.
但你指出的更重要、也很微妙的一點是：真正有才華的人就像頂尖運動員，當事情順利、大家都在混時，他們並不開心。 - They have an internal claw tempo.
他們有一種內在的節奏。 - They just want to create things and create value and drive drive and like you know like the morale actually does go down for the best people in the world when people are skating.
他們就是想創造東西、創造價值、推動推動，當大家都在混時，世界上最頂尖的人士氣反而會下降。 - » Okay.
» 好。 - So actually along those lines there’s a lot of anxiety in the market in the job market about the future of careers or am I going to have a job?
沿著這個話題，現在就業市場上有大量焦慮，大家擔心職涯的未來、我會不會有工作？ - Am I going to like where are things going?
事情會走向哪裡？ - And it just feels like people are working very very hard.
感覺大家工作得非常非常拚。 - They’re just putting a lot of hours especially the most AI pelt people.
大家投入很多工時，尤其是最被 AI 衝擊的人。 - It just feels like they’re working harder than ever.
感覺他們工作得比以前更拚。 - I don’t know if you saw this thing Tyler Cowen put out of just like work harder.
不知道你有沒有看到 Tyler Cowen 那個「努力工作」的貼文。 - Now is the time to work harder because AI is eating away at your value.
他說現在是該努力工作的時候，因為 AI 正在蠶食你的價值。 - You know, I pro you probably talked to a lot of people looking for career advice of just like this feels scary and uh I feel like I’m working too hard.
你大概有很多人來找你要職涯建議：「這感覺好可怕、我覺得我工作得太拚」。 - What should I do?
我該怎麼辦？ - I don’t know.
我不知道。 - Do you have any just like advice for folks?
你有什麼建議給大家嗎？ - » Well, I do think AI AI is going to radically reorient, you know, lots of people’s careers, maybe including mine.
» 我確實覺得 AI 將會徹底重塑很多人的職涯，可能包括我的。 - So, I think that’s actually true.
我覺得這是真的。 - And I think the way to thrive in a rapidly emerging technology world is to be intellectually curious.
我覺得在這個快速興起的科技世界裡要茁壯，方法就是保持智識上的好奇心。 - So for example, you know, I’m a business person historically.
舉例來說，我從歷史上來看是個商業人。 - You know, I did actually code when I was really young, but like basically professionally just a business person.
我很小的時候確實寫過程式，但專業上基本上就是個商業人。 - What I’ve noticed in some of the best organizations is the number one consumer of tokens is the CMO.
我在一些頂尖組織裡注意到，消耗最多 token 的人是 CMO。 - » CMO.
» CMO。 - These people are intellectually curious » and so they’re like, “Wow, there’s all these cool things I can do now with my hands.
這些人在智識上充滿好奇 »，所以他們會說：「哇，我現在可以親手做這麼多酷事。 - Either I had to rely on other teams or never got access the way I wanted and blah blah blah and they just do it.”
以前我得依賴其他團隊，或從來沒有以我想要的方式取得權限，現在我自己就可以做。」 - This is actually true at Opendoor.
這在 Opendoor 是真的。 - It’s true at another great company that I’m on the board of that’s incredible.
在我擔任董事的另一家很棒的公司也是真的。 - And I so I think you can be intellectually curious and future proof yourself um more than just yes you can work harder and a big subscriber to like no days off and working all the time and all that stuff but fundamentally the intellectual curiosity is able to learn new things and that is how you embrace the future.
所以我覺得你可以保持智識上的好奇心、讓自己面向未來，而不只是更努力工作。我也很支持「no days off」、一直工作這套，但根本上是智識上的好奇心、能學新東西，這才是你擁抱未來的方法。 - So, and you said CMO is who’s using both these two companies interesting.
你說 CMO 在這兩家公司都是用得最多的，很有趣。
產品三角的未來
- » Both massive, you know, awesome companies with lots of engineers and I think that’s that’s very encouraging.
» 兩家都是很大、很棒、有很多工程師的公司，我覺得這非常鼓舞人心。 - Um, you know, for for the executive particularly like this this is definitely like the best executive in the company.
對某些主管特別是這樣，這絕對是公司裡最頂尖的主管。 - » And what are they building?
» 他們在做什麼？ - Is it like landing pages and test paid tests?
是 landing page、測試付費活動之類的嗎？ - » Well, sometimes it’s like more like what we would have thought of analytics.
» 有時更像是我們所想的分析。 - M » sometimes it’s actually campaigns like actual campaigns.
嗯 » 有時候是實際的行銷活動。 - It’s just like they product.
他們就是「產品」它。 - Um and so they’re just like shipping things and like or shipping, you know, drafts of things or giving the CEO insights into things themselves.
他們就是出貨東西、或者出貨某些東西的草稿，或者親自給 CEO 一些洞見。 - » I want to get your take on the future of specifically the product triad.
» 我想聽你對於「產品三角」未來的看法。 - Uh you work with a lot of product people, engineers, designers.
你跟很多產品人、工程師、設計師合作。 - Uh, everyone’s always wondering what the hell is going to happen with my career.
大家都在想我的職涯到底會發生什麼事。 - Thoughts on just the future of those three specific roles?
對這三個特定角色的未來有什麼想法？ - » Well, I saw this podcast or listened to this podcast that Peter Fenton did and he convinced me that the idea of a PM makes no sense.
» 我看過或聽過一集 Peter Fenton (GP at Benchmark) 做的 podcast，他說服我「PM 的概念是沒有意義的」。 - Basically, in the future, if you think about decomposing the logic is what does a PM usually do?
基本上，如果你拆解這個邏輯：PM 通常做什麼？ - They take these inputs from customers.
他們從客戶取得輸入。 - They create this sequential road map that’s well organized over the next year.
他們做出一個井然有序的、未來一年的順序型 roadmap。 - Blah blah blah blah blah.
等等等等。 - That world is like ridiculous.
那個世界很荒謬。 - Like right now the capabilities of foundation models or companies like Lovable and you know things like that are just so improving such a rapid rate that it makes no sense to have a year-long road map and they they just like incoherent.
現在基礎模型或像 Lovable 這類公司的能力進步如此快速，做一個一年期的 roadmap 是沒有意義的，根本不連貫。 - There are things that were impossible to do in November that are actually pretty easy to do right now in March.
有些事情在 11 月還做不到，現在 3 月已經相當容易了。 - And so I think you need to build an organization that’s incredibly adapt at, you know, people say nimble and all this stuff, but incredibly adapt at changing the road map almost on the fly.
所以我覺得你必須打造一個非常擅長隨時改 roadmap 的組織，大家會說 nimble、靈活之類的，但就是非常擅長即時更改 roadmap。 - And I think intermediaries like conventional PMs don’t make a lot of sense versus being prepared intellectually, embracing, exploiting, noticing.
我覺得像傳統 PM 這類中介者不太有意義，相對於在智識上做好準備、擁抱、利用、注意到變化。 - So someone needs to notice that oh wow we can actually do this but then exploiting it this week is the future of a very a high growth stellar startup will notice that something’s now possible this week and create new features and new value for customers next week.
所以要有人注意到：哇，我們現在真的可以做這件事了，然後本週就利用它。一家高成長的明星新創未來的樣子是，本週注意到某件事現在可以做了，下週就為客戶創造新功能與新價值。 - » That’s such an interesting area of discussion.
» 這是個非常有趣的討論領域。
技能轉向商業敏銳度
- A lot of people listening to this RPM set when I try to defend that role just to see if see if I can convince you otherwise.
很多 RPM 的人會聽到這個，我來幫這個角色辯護一下，看我能不能說服你不同意。 - Uh, and by the way, I will say Marc Andreessen had this really good visual of just what’s happening here is like every f all those three functions, it’s like the standoff where they’re all like I’m gonna take, the future is my role.
順帶一提，Marc Andreessen 有個很好的視覺化說明：這三個職能就像在對峙，每一個都覺得「未來是我的」。 - The future is design.
未來是設計的。 - That’s engineering is the future.
那是工程的未來。 - So the way I see it is as AI makes it easier to build and kind of eats the middle of the software development process.
我看的方式是：當 AI 讓打造變得更容易，把軟體開發過程的中段吃掉。 - Just anyone can build.
任何人都能打造東西。 - You tell AI here’s what I want.
你告訴 AI「我想要什麼」。 - Um, the hard part, the the gap at least for now is figuring out what to build and then aligning everyone around what to build.
困難的部分、目前的缺口，是搞清楚要打造什麼，然後讓所有人對齊要打造什麼。 - I agree with that.
我同意。 - I actually think like whether you talk about someone who used to be a PM or someone used to be a designer or called an engineer, the skill is more like being a CEO now, which is what are we building and why?
我其實覺得不論你說的是以前的 PM、以前的設計師還是工程師，現在所需要的技能更像是 CEO，也就是「我們要做什麼？為什麼要做？」 - » Exactly.
» 沒錯。 - » And to be a successful engineer, that trait’s critical to be a successful designer because the tools and the the ability to actually create the thing an object is going to be easier and easier.
» 要當成功的工程師，這個特質至關重要；要當成功的設計師也一樣，因為工具和實際把東西做出來的能力會越來越容易。 - But the art is knowing what to build.
但藝術在於知道要打造什麼。 - You know, another competitor of mine, Alfred Lin at likes to talk about being a chef.
我的另一個對手 Alfred Lin (林君叡, 紅杉資本的合夥人, 台灣出生) 喜歡用「當主廚」來比喻。 - When you’re a chef at like a a prime restaurant, you’re not actually cooking the dish.
當你是一家頂級餐廳的主廚時，你其實不是在煮菜。 - You’re sampling, you know, your colleagues and, you know, editing their work a little bit.
你是在試吃同事們做的菜，並稍微調整他們的作品。 - But fundamentally, it’s half a commercial role.
但根本上，這有一半是個商業角色。 - Being a chef in a famous restaurant is what’s our value proposition, how do we differentiate ourselves, how do we brand ourselves, what’s our segment, what’s our pricing, you know, etc.
在著名餐廳當主廚要思考的是：我們的價值主張是什麼、我們如何差異化、我們如何打造品牌、市場區隔、定價等等。 - What’s our location even?
甚至「我們在哪裡開店」。 - That’s what makes, you know, a famous chef.
這才是讓一位主廚成名的東西。 - It’s not they’re literally cooking the dish all the time.
並不是他們真的整天在煮菜。 - » Okay, I 100% agree.
» 好，我 100% 同意。
獨角獸：商業導向的工程師
- Interestingly enough, PMs are called mini CEOs often.
有趣的是，PM 常常被叫做迷你 CEO。 - And I think the important thing is it’s not like what do you call this person?
我覺得重點不是你怎麼稱呼這個人。 - I think the question is what skill will be most like where human brain still going to be necessary.
問題是：在哪裡人腦仍然必要、什麼技能最關鍵。 - » Business acumen.
» 商業敏銳度。 - It’s basically a business acumen, » right?
基本上就是商業敏銳度，» 對吧？ - Like what will help this company grow and succeed and » exactly?
什麼能幫這家公司成長與成功，» 沒錯。 - I understand the company’s business equation, where we’re trying to go and what the inputs and connection outputs are » and I can » on my own » create things that move the needle or potentially move the needle.
我理解公司的商業方程式、我們要去哪、輸入和輸出是什麼，» 而且我可以 » 自己 » 創造能撥動指針或潛在能撥動指針的東西。 - It’s very exciting because you know you can actually drive impact like much more easily now as an individual.
這很令人興奮，因為你現在作為一個個體就能更容易地驅動影響力。 - My conclusion based on what you just shared is of the three roles which role is best at that and in historically it would be PMs.
根據你剛剛分享的，我的結論是：這三個角色裡哪個最擅長這個？歷史上會是 PM。 - Obviously, I think the important thing here is it’s like the best, you know, it’s like great PMs or great engineers, designers will do well, but I think interestingly what you’re describing to me is what it sounds like what a great PM would be really good at.
顯然，重點是頂尖的 PM、頂尖的工程師、設計師都會做得很好，但有趣的是，你描述的聽起來像是頂尖 PM 會擅長的事情。 - Basically, » if they were if they were exceptional, I think that’s right.
基本上，» 如果他們夠卓越，我覺得這個說法是對的。 - But I think the best a lot of the best engineers I’ve worked with have commercial instincts like Max Levchin has this on steroids.
但我覺得我合作過的很多頂尖工程師都有商業直覺，像 Max Levchin 就強到爆表。 - Jeremy Stoppelman, you know, who’s worked with me very closely at PayPal before he started Yelp and got promoted to be engineering director and vice president of PayPal, had commercial instincts, you know, back when he was an individual contributor.
Jeremy Stoppelman 在創辦 Yelp 之前在 PayPal 跟我密切合作，被升為工程總監和 PayPal 副總裁，他在還是個別貢獻者的時候就有商業直覺。 - So, I think there are great engineers who are technically proficient that have always understood the business building.
所以我覺得有些頂尖工程師既技術精通又一直懂商業建構。 - » Yeah, I think that’s like the ultimate unicorn is an engineer that is also very business-minded.
» 是的，我覺得真正的獨角獸就是同時具備商業思維的工程師。 - » It’s going to put a premium.
» 這會帶來溢價。 - I think this will at the age of AI will put an incredible premium on that because they’re not going to need a large team.
我覺得 AI 時代會給這種人很高的溢價，因為他們不需要一個大團隊。
AI 對工程團隊的衝擊
- You’re not going to be marshalling the forces » like you know another example is a good friend of mine is director of engineering at Ramp.
你不需要去調度大軍，» 另一個例子是，我的好朋友是 Ramp 的工程總監。 - He ships as much code personally.
他個人出貨的程式碼就很多。 - So he he has a team of about 20 people.
他帶了一個大約 20 人的團隊。 - He personally ships as much code as he used to as an individual contributor while he’s managing a team of 20 because the tools are so great and he’s become a leading pioneer in the usage of AI and he’s basically using AI as a as a second team.
他個人出貨的程式碼跟他以前當個別貢獻者時一樣多，同時還在管 20 人團隊，因為工具非常好，他成為使用 AI 的先驅，基本上把 AI 當成第二團隊。 - He’s basically like okay you’re the team manager you do this you do this you do this stitch this together check this out blah blah blah and I think that is definitely the future.
他基本上就是「好，你是團隊經理，你做這個、你做那個、你串起來、你檢查這個」之類的，我覺得那絕對是未來。 - » I 100% agree engineers that are very good at that are just extra valuable.
» 我 100% 同意，擅長這個的工程師就是格外有價值。 - Uh what’s your take on design in the future of design the value of design?
你對設計、設計的未來、設計的價值有什麼看法？ - » Well, you know, it’s interesting.
» 嗯，這很有趣。
設計與程式碼正在融合
- I design and code are merging and it’s not it’s not clear to me who triumphs of like is it code becomes design or design just translate automatically into code.
我覺得設計和程式碼正在融合，我不清楚誰會勝出，是程式碼變成設計，還是設計自動翻譯成程式碼。 - Um I’ll base some investments that you bet on both in some ways, but I think they’re merging in a way where they’re not separate, you know, thoughts anymore.
我有些投資是兩邊都押，但我覺得它們正在融合到不再是兩種獨立的領域。 - I am so excited to tell you about this season’s supporting sponsor, Vanta.
我非常興奮跟你介紹本季的支持贊助商 Vanta。 - Vanta helps over 15,000 companies like Cursor, Ramp, Duolingo, Snowflake, and Atlassian earn and prove trust with their customers.
Vanta 幫助超過 1.5 萬家公司，包括 Cursor、Ramp、Duolingo、Snowflake 和 Atlassian，贏得並證明他們與客戶之間的信任。
贊助：Vanta
- Teams are building and shipping products faster than ever thanks to AI.
拜 AI 所賜，團隊打造和出貨產品的速度比以往都快。 - But as a result, the amount of risk being introduced into your product and your business is higher than it’s ever been.
但結果是引進到你的產品和事業裡的風險也比以往任何時候都高。 - Every security leader that I talk to is feeling the increasing weight of protecting their organization, their business, and not to mention their customer data.
我跟每位資安負責人聊到的，都感受到保護組織、事業、更別說客戶資料的重量越來越大。 - Because things are moving so fast, they are constantly reacting, having to guess at priorities, and having to make do with outdated solutions.
因為事情變化太快，他們不斷在反應、不得不猜測優先順序、不得不將就過時的解決方案。 - Vanta automates compliance and risk management with over 35 security and privacy frameworks, including SOC 2, ISO 27001, and HIPAA.
Vanta 自動化合規與風險管理，涵蓋超過 35 種資安與隱私框架，包括 SOC 2、ISO 27001 和 HIPAA。 - This helps companies get compliant fast and stay compliant more than ever before.
這幫助公司快速合規並維持合規，比以往任何時候都更有效。 - Trust has the power to make or break your business.
信任有能力成就或摧毀你的事業。 - Learn more at vanta.com/lenny.
在 vanta.com/lenny 了解更多。 - And as a listener of this podcast, you get $1,000 off Vanta.
身為本 podcast 的聽眾，你可以得到 1,000 美元的 Vanta 折扣。 - That’s vanta.com/lenny.
就是 vanta.com/lenny。
設計職缺市場停滯
- What I’m seeing is something really interesting happening with design.
我看到設計領域正在發生一件有趣的事。 - On the one hand, I just did some analysis on the job market for design and it’s basically plateaued in terms of the number of open design roles over the past three years, just hasn’t gone anywhere.
一方面，我剛分析了設計的職缺市場，過去三年開放的設計職缺數量基本上停滯，沒有變化。 - It’s flat.
是平的。 - We had, uh, the head of Claude design, Jenny Wen, on the podcast and she had this kind of insight that the design process, there’s no time for the design, the traditional design process.
我們訪過 Claude 的設計負責人 Jenny Wen，她有個洞見：傳統的設計流程已經沒有時間做了。 - There’s like engineers are shipping 17 things a day.
工程師一天要出貨 17 件事。 - There’s no time to sit there and help mock and prototype and all these things.
沒有時間坐下來幫忙做 mockup、prototype 之類的事。
Shopify 要求可運作的 Demo
- Well, let me give you a couple of concrete examples.
讓我給你幾個具體例子。 - So, at Shopify, the way they develop, they’ve developed, they’ve been doing this for over two years now.
Shopify 的開發方式，他們已經這麼做超過兩年了。 - So, this may seem normal, but they have not let PMs, uh, provide like PowerPoint or Keynote presentations on product for like two years.
雖然這看起來很正常，但他們已經兩年不讓 PM 用 PowerPoint 或 Keynote 簡報來報告產品。 - Every presentation on product has to be a workable demo.
每一次的產品報告都必須是可運作的 demo。 - And they just expect the PMs to create the products, and the execs just refuse to look at static, you know, we’re gonna have this feature.
他們期望 PM 自己創造產品，主管們拒絕看靜態的「我們要有這個功能」。 - No, I want everything working.
不，我要一切都能跑。 - This is for two years.
這持續兩年了。 - So, I think that, you know, again, like everything’s just merging together.
所以我覺得一切都在融合。 - » That’s so interesting.
» 太有趣了。
設計作為差異化關鍵
- You would think though, because there are so many products launching every single day, like there’s just endless things to pay attention to, you would think design would be a differentiator more and more.
你會以為，因為每天都有太多產品在發布、有無止境的事情要關注，設計應該越來越會成為差異化關鍵。 - » I do agree with that.
» 我確實同意。 - I, I do agree with that, actually.
我其實同意。 - I think the alpha is in design.
我覺得 alpha 在設計裡。 - Just like in marketing, it’s not the tools, it’s not the channels, not the metrics, it’s the storytelling.
就像行銷一樣，重點不是工具、不是通路、不是指標，而是說故事。 - It’s how do you cut through the clutter in the snappiest, most compelling possible way?
你要怎麼用最簡潔、最有說服力的方式從一堆雜訊中脫穎而出？ - There’s kind of an NP problem.
這有點像個 NP 問題。 - There’s so many different words you can use to express the same concept.
你可以用這麼多不同的字來表達同一個概念。 - But the person who can say, this is the way to frame it, you know, the proverbial thousand songs in your market is worth like all the tools in the world.
但能說出「這就是該有的框架」的人，那種你市場裡諺語式的「一千首歌」，比世界上所有工具都值錢。 - » Yeah.
» 對。 - Uh, so that’s the other part of my insight recently is just as AI makes it easier to build, it’s kind of expanding from the middle out, and what remains is figuring out what to build and making it, iterating on the idea, and then it’s at the other end of the spectrum, which is distribution, getting anyone to pay any attention to what the heck you’ve done, because again, there’s so much happening every single day.
這也是我最近另一個洞見：當 AI 讓打造變得容易，從中段往外擴張，剩下的就是搞清楚要打造什麼、把它做出來、迭代想法，然後另一端就是發行 (distribution)，讓任何人注意到你到底做了什麼，因為每天都發生太多事。 - » Yeah.
» 對。 - Cutting through the clutter.
從雜訊中脫穎而出。 - I mean, that’s always been critical.
這向來都是關鍵。 - I mean, one of the time when people are pitching me as an investor, it’s one of the things I’m dialing into, you know, immediately is how the how the hell is this going to cut through the clutter?
當有人對我這個投資人在 pitch 的時候，我會立刻轉到一件事上：這要怎麼從雜訊裡脫穎而出？ - It’s one of the reasons why I don’t like to take like customer feedback into account because by definition, when you put something in front of a customer, that’s not a proxy for the real world.
這也是我不喜歡採納客戶回饋的原因之一，因為按定義，當你把東西放到客戶面前時，那並不能代表真實世界。 - In the real world, you have to cut through the clutter while they’re going to their Barry’s Bootcamp, while they’re doing their job, while they’re raising their kids, you know, etc., etc., while they’re walking, while they’re on the subway, like that, like, you know, an isolated fake experiment doesn’t give you actionable insights and often is directly involved.
在真實世界，你必須在他們去 Barry’s Bootcamp、在工作、在養小孩、走路、搭地鐵的時候從雜訊中脫穎而出。一個孤立的假實驗沒辦法給你可操作的洞見，常常還是反向誤導的。 - » Interestingly, on that line, uh, there’s a few companies that are launching.
» 有趣的是，沿著這條線，有幾家公司正在發表。 - Similey is one that is simulating humans.
其中一家叫 Similey，他們在模擬人類。 - I don’t know if you heard about this company.
不知道你有沒有聽過這家公司。 - They basically are building AI models of actual people so that you can simulate your marketing launch and your product experience with people before you launch.
他們基本上是建造真人的 AI 模型，讓你在發布之前能模擬你的行銷活動和產品體驗。
AI 內容超越人類內容
- » I don’t know if I’ve seen that specific company.
» 我不知道有沒有看過這家特定公司。 - I have um seen one or two uh sort of pitches.
我看過一兩個類似的 pitch。 - My my general question as a refrain on those type of companies is what are they training on?
我對這類公司一貫的問題是：他們是用什麼來訓練的？ - Because like again, if they’re not training on the right data, it’s dangerous to say you’re simulating humans.
因為如果他們沒用對的資料訓練，說自己在模擬人類就很危險。 - » Yeah.
» 對。 - Yeah, that is the question.
對，那就是問題。 - Oh man, what a weird world.
哎呀，這世界真奇怪。 - Along these lines, actually, you have this uh I don’t know if you call it a hot take that AI content is going to surpass human content and that’s just the future.
沿著這條線，你有一個不知道算不算 hot take 的觀點：AI 內容會超越人類內容，那就是未來。 - I » inevit that’s inevitable.
我 » 那是無法避免的。 - M someone was I was talking to someone and then she was saying in like the Chinese TikTok uh app it’s just like all AI videos now and it’s like very good.
嗯，我跟某人聊到，她說中國的抖音上現在幾乎都是 AI 影片了，而且品質很好。 - She like actually enjoys watching these videos and these stories.
她真的很享受看這些影片和故事。
人類與 AI 內容並存
- » I think there’ll be like a binary sort.
» 我覺得會有一種二元的分類。 - Maybe I could see products and content thriving that is clearly still human generated and that there’s some desire for authenticity just like for example you know this piece of art is a Warhol.
也許我看到還會有一類產品和內容茁壯成長，是明顯由人類產生的，因為大家對真實性還是有渴望，就像例如「這件藝術品是 Warhol 畫的」。 - Anybody could create this now high fidelity, but there’s still an appreciation for this was created by Andy Warhol.
現在誰都能高保真地創作出來，但人們仍然欣賞「這是 Andy Warhol 創作的」。 - I think there’s going to be a curated experience uh with a premium of provenance, you know, that you know was human created and then there’s just going to be sort of a rank filtering of what’s the best content and whether it’s AI generated or not.
我覺得會有一種精心策展的體驗，帶著「來源溯源」的溢價（你知道是人類創作的），然後另一邊就是純粹排序篩選出最好的內容，不管是不是 AI 生成。 - It’s a little bit like the Ben Thompson trajectory thing of curation, you know, versus algorithm.
這有點像 Ben Thompson 講的「策展」對「演算法」的軌跡。 - There’s going to be two polls and the curation may be for human created stuff and then there’s going to be the algorithm which is just what’s the best.
會有兩個極端，策展可能用於人類創作的東西，演算法則只是「什麼是最好的」。 - » I 100% believe that that makes so much sense.
» 我 100% 相信，這太有道理了。
AI 寫作的限制
- I was just thinking the other day it’s so interesting that AI is getting very good at video like videos are actually fun to watch that are AI generated and then like images are getting really good but writing is still really bad that is AI generated in and it’s ironic that it’s called a large language model.
我前幾天還在想，有趣的是 AI 在影片方面變得很厲害，AI 生成的影片真的好看了，圖片也越來越好，但 AI 生成的寫作還是很糟。諷刺的是它被叫做「大型語言模型」。 - It’s all context text trained and it’s just like that’s the thing it’s least good at which is really weird.
它全是用上下文文字訓練的，但寫作偏偏是它最不擅長的，很怪。 - » Well, I think part of it that’s the economic decision of token rationing by um the LLMs like they they basically are when you prompt they’re kind of trying to make their economics work within a bell curve distribution.
» 我覺得部分原因是 LLM 在「token 配給」上的經濟決策，當你給 prompt 時，它們在試著讓經濟學在鐘形分布範圍內運作。 - And so for example, if use a prompt an LLM to write something that’s very short, the quality is significantly better than if it’s a page paragraph, I mean page to chapter to book.
舉例來說，如果你用 prompt 讓 LLM 寫一段很短的東西，品質會顯著比讓它寫一整頁、一章、一本書好得多。 - I think it’s token rationing rationing versus actual quality.
我覺得是 token 配給跟實際品質的取捨。
第一段的藝術
- » You would think though, you know, like I don’t know if it was Hemingway just like if I had more time I would have made it shorter like it takes it’s more work.
» 不過你會以為，不知道是不是海明威說過，「如果我有更多時間，我會把它寫得更短」，那其實更費功夫。 - But then you have I think the writing right now what works best is short many short examples and then humans » picking editing » reprompting.
但我覺得現在寫作最有效的是：許多短的範例，然後人類 » 挑選、編輯 » 再 prompt。（跟我們土炮工作法使用的嘔吐法 » 分類法 » 再加 multi-shot 類似。） - » It’s a little bit like when I used to be a litigator 25 plus years ago.
» 這有點像我 25 年前還是訴訟律師的時候。 - » The hardest part of writing a brief or all the art and all the magic was the first paragraph.
» 寫訴狀最難、所有藝術和魔法都在第一段。 - If I could write that first paragraph really well, the chance I would win the case and convince the judge would go through the roof.
如果我能把第一段寫得非常好，我贏官司、說服法官的機率就會飆升。 - So, what I would actually do is I might have three weeks to write a brief.
所以實際上，我可能有三週時間寫一份訴狀。 - I might spend the first week or more walking around the office thinking through how am I going to nail the first three sentences.
我可能會花第一週甚至更久在辦公室繞著走，思考要怎麼搞定前三句。 - Once I figured out how I wanted to frame those first three sentences, I could write 30 pages in like two days.
一旦我搞清楚怎麼框前三句，我兩天就能寫出 30 頁。 - But getting that right could take a week or two.
但要把前三句寫對可能要花一兩週。 - Sometimes it would occur to me in the shower where literally the, you know, shower or in the middle of a run, it’s like, “Oh my god, here’s how I distill it.”
有時候是在洗澡時或跑步跑到一半時靈光乍現：「我的天，這就是該怎麼提煉它。」 - Then I could just sit down and power through the rest of the brief.
然後我就能坐下來把訴狀剩下的部分一口氣寫完。 - And I think it’s a little bit like that.
我覺得有點像那樣。 - The power through the rest of the brief works well.
「一口氣寫完剩下的部分」這招很好用。 - You still need the first three sentences.
但你還是需要前三句。
法律經驗的價值
- » Is there a story from that time in your life that would be interesting to share?
» 那段人生有沒有什麼故事可以分享？ - I didn’t even know about that.
我之前都不知道這件事。 - » So yeah, not everybody knows.
» 是的，不是每個人都知道。 - You know, I spent the first four and a half years of my professional career as a law clerk and then litigator.
我職業生涯的前四年半是擔任法律助理，然後做訴訟律師。 - Um, which occasionally comes in handy truthfully.
老實說偶爾還滿派得上用場的。 - Like sometimes trading off business risk against legal risk is a valuable thing to do.
例如有時候在商業風險和法律風險之間做取捨是有價值的。 - Um, sometimes it’s not accidental that many of my best investments um or in financial services in heavy heavily regulated areas because I think I can sort of do the legal risk assessment in my own brain.
我很多最好的投資都在金融服務這類高度受監管的領域，這不是偶然，因為我可以在自己的腦袋裡做法律風險評估。
創業思維與律師思維
- This was definitely true back in the day when I invested in YouTube.
我當年投資 YouTube 時絕對是這樣。 - Um but um I think most things that lawyers learn are very uh inconsistent with being entrepreneur.
但我覺得律師學的大多數東西跟當創業家是非常不一致的。 - So when you’re graded as a lawyer, you learn every exam in law school virtually is uh issue spotting.
當你是律師被評分時，法學院幾乎每一場考試都是「找問題」。 - So you get credit for identifying patterns like identify all the issues and then resolve them.
你的分數來自於辨識所有問題、然後解決它們。 - So you learn to identify everything that can go wrong.
所以你學會辨識所有可能出錯的事。 - Moderately useful but very not useful as an entrepreneur.
這對創業家來說有點用，但其實非常沒用。 - I mean sure you can identify all the reasons a company could fail not that difficult to do the art is you know solving those uh so you know not the best training and then you also measure your productivity by hours worked you know literally your bill per hour it took me two years maybe a year and a half after converting to technology to stop tracking all my time I used to literally write down in my notebook half hour of this meeting 20 minutes on this you know blah blah » that is So funny.
我是說當然你可以列出公司可能失敗的所有原因，那不難，藝術是怎麼解決它們，所以那不是最好的訓練。而且你還用工時來衡量自己的生產力，按時計費。我轉到科技業後花了兩年、可能一年半才停止追蹤時間。我以前真的會在筆記本上寫「這場會議半小時、那件事 20 分鐘」之類的，» 這太好笑了。（我的筆記本也都在記錄這種時間，包含我家窗外的鴿舍那群鴿子繞一圈回來需要幾分鐘之類的。是說我當年怎麼沒去考法律系 XDD）
律師在科技業
- And David Sacks was a lawyer, too.
David Sacks 也是律師。 - It’s like interesting.
很有趣。 - » That’s true.
» 沒錯。 - Peter was a lawyer.
Peter 也是律師。 - Peter was smart enough to quit after uh five months and four days.
Peter 聰明到只做了五個月又四天就辭職。 - I think David never practiced or maybe even smarter uh than both of us.
我覺得 David 從沒實際執業，可能比我們倆都聰明。 - » Okay.
» 好的。
逆向想法與共識
- I want to hit on some uh hot takes, contrarian takes that you have.
我想聊聊你的一些 hot take 和反向觀點。 - You have a number of these.
你有不少這種觀點。 - I heard you share in a podcast recently.
我最近在 podcast 上聽你分享過。 - They asked you um why don’t you have as many contrarian takes these days?
他們問你：你為什麼這幾年比較少有反向觀點？ - And you’re like, well, they’ve just all been proven right.
你說：因為它們都已經被證明對了。 - And that’s the problem is, you know, if you have good ideas, eventually you want them to be adopted.
這就是問題：如果你有好點子，最終你會希望它們被採納。 - It’s a little bit like a uh, you know, when you’re an investor, you want to be contrarian.
這有點像當投資人時你想當反向操作者。 - So Airbnb, you start with a contrarian take, but eventually if the company’s going to succeed, it has to become consensus like everybody in the world has to use it and believe in it and trust it.
像 Airbnb，你從一個反向觀點開始，但最終如果公司要成功，它必須變成共識，全世界的人都得用它、相信它、信任它。 - So you want that inflection like you don’t want to just have contrarian takes and then nobody believe it.
所以你想要那個拐點，你不想只是有反向觀點然後沒人相信。 - So you do need a refresh rate.
所以你需要一個更新速率。 - Um, and then the question is how do you have a, you know, how do you find new ideas?
然後問題是：你怎麼找到新點子？ - But you want to actually exhaust them.
但你想真的把它們用盡。 - » Okay.
» 好。
不愛聽客戶輸入
- So, one that I think people still dis would disagree with is that your advice is for um for unless you’re building an enterprise company, you don’t actually want to be talking to » Yeah.
我覺得有一個大家還不太能接受的觀點是：你的建議是「除非你在做企業級公司，否則你其實不該跟客戶聊」» 對。 - I hate talking to customers.
我討厭跟客戶聊。 - I refuse to allow colleagues out and talk to customers.
我也拒絕讓同事去跟客戶聊。 - You know, there’s the the famous, you know, you can talk with the famous stuff and the Steve Jobs, you know, the horses and the old faster horses and all this stuff, but I think it’s more important is it’s often directionally wrong.
有那個著名的故事，Steve Jobs、馬、更快的馬之類的，但我覺得更重要的是它常常方向就錯了。 - customers don’t know what they want and they’re very bad because it’s a subconscious decision especially for consumers like what I purchase what I wear is not a conscious decision and when you’re consciously trying to answer a subconscious decision you actually give misleading information even when you’re trying you know the proverbial example I like to use but it’s instructive is ask anybody who drives a super fancy car like a Porsche or a Lamborghini like why they bought the car 99% of the
客戶不知道自己要什麼，他們很糟，因為那是潛意識的決策，特別是消費者，我買什麼、穿什麼都不是有意識的決定。當你有意識地試著回答一個潛意識決策時，即使你很努力，你給的資訊還是會誤導人。我喜歡用的、有教育意義的例子是：去問任何一個開頂級豪車（像 Porsche 或 Lamborghini）的人為什麼買那台車，99% - time they will tell you every reason except the real reason that once you realize that you’re like I’m never asking customers anything.
的時候他們會告訴你所有原因，除了真正的原因。一旦你意識到這件事，你就會想「我永遠不要問客戶任何事」。 - Now it’s hardcore enterprise customer development does work because there is a there is a decision maker and the decision maker is mostly making utilitarian decision and yes there’s political forces within the organization and they may you may or may not be able to tap into those but fundamentally extracting that information is valuable but a consumer SMB micro merchant product unmitigated disaster » and so the implication here is you need to rely on your instincts and gut and experience
硬核的企業客戶開發是有用的，因為有決策者，而決策者大多在做實用主義的決定，組織內當然有政治力量，你可能能也可能不能切入，但根本上萃取這些資訊是有價值的。但消費者、SMB、微型商家的產品，那就完全是場災難。» 所以這裡的意涵是：你必須依靠直覺、本能和經驗。
信任直覺與市場需求
- Yeah, I mean humans are humans.
對，人就是人。 - I have this other line I like which is everything important you need to learn about humans was written by Shakespeare.
我有另一句喜歡的話：所有你需要學的關於人類的重要事情，莎士比亞都寫過了。 - Just read Shakespeare.
去讀莎士比亞。 - Like that’s better than all the customer research.
那比所有客戶研究都好。 - Um now you are producing a movie and ultimately this movie doesn’t just need to be critically acclaimed.
現在你在拍一部電影，最終這部電影不只需要影評讚賞。 - You have to sell tickets.
你必須賣出票。 - So if you’re not selling tickets, you have to question, okay, is the trailer wrong?
所以如果你票賣不掉，你必須質問：好，是預告片不對嗎？ - is our distribution, you know, where we’re trying to meet people to let them know about the movie.
是我們的發行不對嗎，是我們試圖讓人知道這部電影的方式不對嗎？ - Is that wrong?
那個錯了嗎？ - Fortunately, unlike a movie, you can go back and say, “Have I casted this somewhat incorrectly?
還好不像電影，你可以回頭說「我選角是不是有點不對？ - Is the script slightly off?”
劇本是不是有點不對？」 - You know, etc.
等等。 - But the goal is selling tickets, and that’s what you want to optimize for.
但目標是賣票，那就是你想優化的對象。 - But if you don’t sell tickets successfully, economically, efficiently, you definitely want to go back in a loop and try to reorient things.
但如果你沒有以經濟高效的方式賣出票，你絕對要回到循環裡，嘗試重新調整。 - to show that you are selling tickets.
來證明你在賣出票。 - » So this is like CALTV kind of stuff is what I’m hearing here.
» 我聽起來像是 CAC/LTV 那一類的東西。
客戶回饋的危害
- And so your your insight here is just like it’s not only like it’s like uh it’s not going to help you.
你這裡的洞見是：不只是它幫不了你。 - You’re saying more so it’s actually harmful.
你更進一步說，它其實是有害的。 - » It’s harmful.
» 是有害的。 - And then people will say, “Yeah, like I’ve sat in so many meetings and this would infuriate me, but where people will be like, I talked to eight customers, blah blah blah blah blah, and I know that this isn’t statistically represented, but then they pontificate for an hour and then then they’re like, oh, I know this is not, you know, blah blah blah blah.”
我參加過很多讓我火大的會議，有人會說「我跟八位客戶聊過了」，然後他們會說「我知道這在統計上沒有代表性」，然後又滔滔不絕講一小時，最後又說「我知道這不是……」。 - And but once you hear this stuff, it’s like you can’t take this out of your brain.
但一旦你聽到這些東西，你沒辦法把它們從腦袋裡拿出來。 - And then every other subsequent meeting is like this this stuff is just locked in the customer’s brain.
之後每一場會議，這些東西都鎖在你的腦袋裡。
鎖定企業級客戶
- So yes, in an enterprise where you have like I I work with a company in AI that has 30 must-win accounts, that’s like the goal for the company over the next few years.
所以是的，在企業端，例如我合作的一家 AI 公司有 30 個必贏的客戶，那就是公司未來幾年的目標。 - Make sure all 30 and we’re doing really well.
確保 30 個都拿下，我們做得很好。 - Get all 30 using our problem.
讓 30 個都使用我們的解決方案。 - Great.
很好。 - We actually can talk to all 30 customers and we can actually meet the decision maker all 30 customers and we can influence the CEO at all 30 customers.
我們真的可以跟 30 個客戶都聊，可以真的見到 30 個決策者，可以影響 30 個客戶的 CEO。 - That is a useful exercise.
那是個有用的練習。 - If you’re targeting a billion people on the planet, you are not getting a representative feedback.
如果你的目標是地球上十億人，你不會得到有代表性的回饋。 - » Being a a contrarian and take many people would not believe this is good advice.
» 這是個反向觀點，很多人不會覺得這是個好建議。
客戶回饋陷阱
- Do you have a story maybe or an example of just like wow this like someone talking to a customers saying going in the wrong direction for a while?
你有沒有什麼故事或例子，是有人聽客戶的話結果走錯方向一段時間的？ - » Oh, all the all the time they’re called failed companies.
» 喔，一直都有，那些公司叫做「失敗的公司」。 - You know there’s a re there’s a reason why I mean there’s a darwinistic efficiency to this too which is just like hey there are things you can that like is it feasible to do xy or z.
這背後也有達爾文式的效率，意思是「嘿，有些事是可以驗證可行性的」。 - for let’s let’s get like Door Dash.
拿 DoorDash 為例。 - I don’t I don’t I don’t think customers told us that we want a button on our phone to click to deliver food.
我不認為客戶告訴我們「我想在手機上有個按鈕，按一下就能送餐」。 - But you could talk to restaurants and say, “Hey, would you put this placard here so that people walking into your store know in the future they can get delivered?” » Okay.
但你可以跟餐廳說：「你會願意放這個告示牌，讓走進你店裡的人知道未來能外送嗎？」» 好。 - Yeah, maybe.
嗯，也許吧。 - Then could you run an experiment of how many deliveries per hour would you have to do to you know break even and is there enough density you know within like there are ways to improve the odds that you can make the business work but I don’t think launching the company saying hey we found 10 people in Palo Alto you know do you want this button on your phone so you know when Tony and Evan walked into my office originally the epiphany I had was well they had a stat which is 93% of the restaurants
然後你可以做實驗：每小時要送多少單才能損益兩平、密度夠不夠。有方法可以提高把生意做起來的機率，但我不認為「在 Palo Alto 找 10 個人問你想不想在手機上有這個按鈕」就能讓公司起飛。所以當 Tony 和 Evan 走進我辦公室時，我的頓悟是：他們有個數字，美國 93% 的餐廳 - in the United States don’t deliver.
不提供外送。 - I was like, “Okay, seems like it should be a higher percentage than seven.”
我想：「好，比 7% 高的比例似乎才合理。」 - Convinced.
信服了。 - Um, and then when they were describing what they wanted to create, Andrew Mason of Groupon fame had famously said, “These phones, these devices should have two buttons.
然後當他們描述他們想做的東西時，Groupon 的 Andrew Mason 曾經說過一句名言：「這些手機應該有兩個按鈕： - I’m bored and I’m hungry.”
我無聊和我餓了。」 - And uh, I was like, “Oh my god, you’re the I’m hungry button.”
我想：「我的天，你們就是那個『我餓了』的按鈕。」 - And then so it just clicked in my brain.
然後我腦袋裡就咔嚓一聲。 - And then it was like, “Okay, now we need to make it economically possible to scalably do this.
接著就是「好，現在我們得讓它在經濟上可以規模化地實現。 - Good luck guys.
各位好運。」 - » And this advice is not just consumer.
» 這個建議不只適用於消費者。 - You’re also talking like Door Dash has like SMBish.
DoorDash 也算是有點 SMB。 - » Yeah.
» 對。 - Like Square and things like that.
像 Square 之類的。 - » Square.
» Square。 - Yeah.
對。 - » Square is a good example.
» Square 是個好例子。 - Like anything submid it’s directionally dangerous.
任何中小規模以下的東西，方向上都很危險。 - » And the advice here is basically trust your insights.
» 這裡的建議基本上是相信你的洞見。 - Like you need to have the insight yourself.
你必須自己擁有那個洞見。 - You can’t find it.
你不能去找。 - » I think typically the best companies Yeah.
» 我覺得通常最頂尖的公司，對。 - » there’s foundational insight.
» 都有根本性的洞見。 - And you know people don’t necessarily want to hear that but like there’s logic you can acid test and pressure test the logic like there are like you know to some extent like when Brian first pitched me on Airbnb there was some interesting evidence he already had that this was going to be successful.
大家不一定想聽，但這裡有邏輯可以做酸性測試和壓力測試，到一定程度上是可驗證的。當 Brian 第一次跟我 pitch Airbnb 時，他已經有一些有趣的證據顯示這會成功。
根本性洞察與市場驗證
- The number one that one stuck with me at the time was he gave me the exact number of Craigslist listings that said I want to rent someone’s bedroom.
當時對我衝擊最大的，是他給我 Craigslist 上「我想租別人的臥室」這類刊登的精確數量。 - And it was actually a reasonable number.
那其實是一個合理的數字。 - It was like 30 in the Bay Area.
灣區大約 30 筆。 - But given that you had to literally type it in and you know sort of have the epiphany yourself, I was like that’s a lot actually.
但考慮到你必須親自打字輸入、自己有那個頓悟，我覺得「那其實很多」。 - That’s like a probably a real market there.
那大概是個真實的市場。 - And I was already like as soon as he said that I was already leaning in and by the time he finished his three-minute monologue I was like this is the coolest thing ever.
他一說那個我就已經前傾在聽了，到他三分鐘的獨白講完，我就覺得「這是史上最酷的東西」。 - I need to invest.
我必須投資。 - » Yeah.
» 對。 - And I think Airbnb is a good example where he was solving his own problem saw an opportunity wasn’t like talking to people hey would you do this sort of thing and and people would have said you know if he sampled the wrong people definitely would have got feedback that was like no like very very high risk.
我覺得 Airbnb 是個好例子，他在解決自己的問題、看到機會，並不是去問人「嘿你會不會做這種事？」如果他抽樣到錯誤的人，得到的回饋一定是「不會，風險很高」。 - Like that’s a good example where you’ sample 10 random people, good chance that nine plus% would say, “No, I would never do that.” » You know what’s really interesting?
那是個好例子，你隨機抽樣 10 個人，很有可能 90% 以上都會說「不，我永遠不會做那種事」。» 你知道真正有趣的是什麼嗎？
Taylor Swift 的創作流程
- I was just watching Taylor Swift’s acceptance speech at this award show, iHeart Media, something or other, and she gave this really powerful speech that when she was starting out, she was just kind of at home uh working on songs, learning piano, just in a room on her own uh and had thousands of hours to just iterate and learn and get better versus today, if you were to do this, you’d be posting it, sharing it, people giving you feedback constantly.
我剛剛在看 Taylor Swift 在 iHeart Media 之類的頒獎典禮上的得獎感言，她講了一段很有力的話：她剛起步的時候只是在家裡寫歌、學鋼琴，獨自一人在房間裡，有數千小時可以迭代、學習、進步。但今天如果你這樣做，你會邊做邊發、分享，人們會不斷給你回饋。 - and her advice is just like find ways to just not expose yourself to people for a long time.
她的建議就是：找方法讓自己有很長一段時間不暴露在人前。 - So I have a couple of friends who are like in artists in the music industry and I think what she’s saying is one of the reasons why it’s sometimes difficult for artists who had success to recreate the success because the first success was not data driven was not customer feedback driven it was like I’m creating this and it’s resonating then because they have an audience someone either they or their manager whoever the label blah blah blah blah blah wants them to get feedback back and it
我有幾個音樂產業的藝術家朋友，我覺得她說的是：為什麼一些已經成功的藝術家很難複製成功？因為第一次成功不是資料驅動的、不是客戶回饋驅動的，而是「我在創作這個，它引起共鳴」。然後因為他們有了觀眾，他們自己或經紀人或唱片公司就會想要他們去拿回饋， - creates derivative, you know, sort of works, not strictly legally, but like derivative works that are less inspired.
結果就創造出衍生作品，不是法律意義上的衍生作品，而是比較缺乏靈感的衍生作品。 - Um, there’s a podcast that Jack Altman did with uh my friend Alex from the Chainsmokers.
Jack Altman 有一集 podcast 是跟我朋友 The Chainsmokers 的 Alex 聊。
創新中的醜嬰兒
- He actually talks about this at some length that they created this song that actually didn’t resonate with their core uh their normal audience um but actually resonated with a different audience um which is interesting.
他相當深入地談到這個：他們做了一首歌，其實沒有跟他們核心、平常的觀眾產生共鳴，反而跟另一群觀眾產生共鳴，這很有趣。 - Um, so I think you can get trapped with success if you It’s a It’s a good illustration.
所以我覺得成功可能會把你困住，這是個好例子。 - Actually, » there’s also this concept of the ugly baby in Creativity Inc.
其實，» 還有「醜嬰兒」這個概念，出自《Creativity Inc.》。 - I don’t know if you read that book at Catmull about every idea at Pixar.
不知道你有沒有讀過 Ed Catmull 那本關於 Pixar 每個點子的書。 - Like every great idea starts as this ugly baby that no one wants to like help and pay attention to and just like get this out of here.
每個偉大的點子一開始都是醜嬰兒，沒人想幫忙、沒人想關注、只想趕快丟掉。 - » It’s like a startup.
» 這就像新創。 - I mean that is actually the startup.
那其實就是新創。
投資人對醜嬰兒的視角
- Like I use this prism as an investor which is when I make a seed investment or series A investment let’s say I want half of my friends who are VCs to laugh at me like literally laugh because I I know most of the people I compete with pretty well and so I’m running this algorithm through my brain are these people going to laugh if so like this is a great invest potentially great investment because it’s an ugly baby and ugly babies are the ones where there’s real alpha » that’s so interesting
我作為投資人會用這個稜鏡：當我做種子或 A 輪投資時，我希望我有一半 VC 朋友會嘲笑我，真的笑出來。因為我相當熟悉大多數競爭對手，所以我在腦袋裡跑一個演算法：這些人會笑嗎？如果會，這就是一個很棒的投資（潛在很棒的投資），因為它是醜嬰兒，醜嬰兒才有真正的 alpha。» 太有趣了。 - you say that I did some research recently on what are signs we interviewed this me and Terrence Rohan I don’t know if you know him VC uh we interviewed early employee people that have joined early generational companies many times and like they open AI they joined open AI early before anyone knew about it Palantir really early Stripe and so we asked them what did you look for and there’s three patterns and one of them was exactly that the idea people laughed at them they thought it was crazy
你提到這個，我跟 Terrence Rohan（一位 VC，不知道你認不認識他）最近做了一些研究，我們訪問了多次很早就加入世代型公司的早期員工，例如他們在沒人知道 OpenAI 時就加入了 OpenAI、極早期加入 Palantir、Stripe，我們問他們當初看到了什麼。有三種模式，其中一個就是這個：他們的點子被人嘲笑，大家覺得很瘋狂。 - this is never going to work Palantir for example open AI for example » yeah my parents used to laugh at almost all my jobs attack Um, you know, it used to be very funny.
「這永遠行不通」例如 Palantir、OpenAI。» 對，我父母以前幾乎嘲笑我所有的工作，那時很好笑。 - They thought I was going to be homeless because most of them did not make sense to them.
他們以為我會變成街友，因為我做的事大多在他們眼裡都沒道理。 - » Classic parents.
» 經典的父母。 - No idea what the hell people do in tech.
完全不知道科技業的人到底在做什麼。 - » They did they did appreciate Stripe though.
» 不過他們很欣賞 Stripe。 - Uh, my mom always appreciated Stripe and, you know, always trying to lobby me to invest and I finally listened.
我媽一直很欣賞 Stripe，一直在遊說我投資，我終於聽了。 - » Nice.
» 不錯。 - Good job, mom.
媽，做得好。 - She earned her keep.
她值回票價。 - Okay, we just uh shifted perspective because uh Keith’s iPad was dying.
好，我們剛換了個角度，因為 Keith 的 iPad 快沒電了。
iPad 缺點與產品契合度
- Classic.
經典。 - That’s maybe the downside of the iPad.
這也許是 iPad 的缺點。 - » The downside of the iPad is they use it too much.
» iPad 的缺點是他們用太多了。 - » It’s like that’s product market fit.
» 那就叫產品市場契合。 - Okay.
好。
AI 新創的存活與耐久度
- I want to actually follow up on this discussion we’re having about just uh finding great companies.
我想接著我們剛剛關於「找到好公司」的討論。
AI 新創的存在主義問題
- Uh a lot of people are starting AI companies now.
現在很多人在創 AI 公司。 - There’s so many launching.
太多家在發表了。 - Uh as an investor, I’m just curious what’s a sign that this is a worthwhile idea considering the endless number of startups launching.
作為投資人，我好奇在無數新創發表的當下，怎樣算是一個值得做的想法？ - And maybe what are some just like flags that like okay maybe don’t work on that idea?
或者有什麼警訊是「好，這個點子可能不要做」？ - Well, the existential question that everybody talks about these days is, you know, are the foundation labs just going to be so proficient that there’s no oxygen?
大家最近都在談的存在主義問題是：基礎模型實驗室會不會強到讓其他公司沒有氧氣？ - Because if you’re building a successful startup, you need to build for like 8 to 20 years into the future.
因為如果你在打造一家成功的新創，你需要為未來 8 到 20 年打造。 - Like whether you just discount a caps flow analysis or some other prism, it doesn’t matter.
不管你用 DCF 還是其他稜鏡都一樣。 - Ultimately, you have to build for something that’s durable for decades.
終究你必須為一個能持續數十年的東西打造。 - And the rate of progress at the foundational by the foundational labs and not just one multiple of them really does start creating questions about the sustainability of even companies that are look like they’re thriving in the short term.
而基礎模型實驗室的進步速度（不只一家，而是好幾家），真的開始讓「即使短期內看起來蓬勃的公司」也面臨永續性的問題。 - So that’s one question.
這是一個問題。
新創的累積優勢
- The second question I’d ask is very typical.
我會問的第二個問題很典型。 - I’ve always asked this question for like 25 years which are what are the accumulating advantages of the startup?
我問這個問題已經 25 年了：這家新創的累積優勢是什麼？ - You do want to believe that over time you create an unfair advantage and there are different species of accumulating advantages.
你會希望相信隨著時間你能創造出不公平優勢，而累積優勢有不同種類。 - You know the one that people immediately gravitate to but it’s only one illustration of a set of options is network effects but you want something that over time makes the business better and better and better arguably easier and easier at some point.
大家會立刻聯想到的是網絡效應，但那只是其中一種，你想要的是隨時間讓生意越來越好、某個時點甚至越來越容易做的東西。 - » Do you see those sorts of things at the beginning like when you’re seeing an you know seed-stage startup?
» 你在看種子期新創時就能看到這些東西嗎？ - Yeah, it’s a great question because I think people can conflate uh two things.
對，這是個好問題，因為我覺得人們會混淆兩件事。 - There’s a difference between seeing it and understanding the potential.
「看到它」和「理解潛力」是不同的。 - So, what I’m looking for when I meet a founder is can they articulate where the accumulating advantages can be in theory conceptually.
我見創辦人時找的是：他們能不能在理論上、概念上清楚說明累積優勢可以在哪裡。 - They don’t have to have demonstrated it.
他們不必已經展示過。 - Yes, there’s an occasional example once every 5 years you might find one where you can see you can actually point your finger on it empirically.
是的，每五年偶爾會有一個例子，你可以實證地用手指出來。 - But that that’s way too strict a bar for an early stage investor.
但對早期投資人來說這個標準太嚴格了。 - But you re I personally want the founder to articulate to me where they can build accumulating advantages and maybe even sequentially identify when they would start either taking advantage of them, leveraging them or measuring them.
我個人想要創辦人跟我說明，他們可以在哪裡建立累積優勢，甚至可能依序指出他們什麼時候會開始利用、槓桿或量測它們。
創辦人導向的投資哲學
- So when you’re looking at when you’re when you’re evaluating startups these days, I know this is like a very hard question to answer, but just what do you is there anything in particular you’re looking for that you get really excited about?
當你最近在評估新創時，我知道這個問題很難回答，但有沒有什麼讓你特別興奮的東西？ - I’m a founder driven investor.
我是創辦人導向的投資人。 - So the only thing I really care about is does this founder have a non-zero chance of changing an industry or the world?
所以我真正關心的就是：這位創辦人有沒有非零的機率改變一個產業或世界？ - And if they do for a seed or series A investment, I’m in period.
如果有，種子或 A 輪我就投了，句號。 - Don’t ask any other questions.
不問別的問題。 - That’s all I need to identify.
我只需要辨識這個。 - Not every investor who’s been successful has the same algorithm they’re running.
不是每個成功的投資人都跑同一個演算法。 - There are technology-driven investors like I would say Marc Andreessen’s probably like something like that.
有些是技術驅動的投資人，像 Marc Andreessen 大概就是這種。 - But Vinod’s a mix.
但 Vinod 是混合型。 - He’s both founder driven and a technology driven investor.
他既是創辦人導向也是技術導向的投資人。 - There are investors who are sort of product-market driven investors.
也有一些是產品市場導向的投資人。 - My colleague David Weiden I would say is that.
我的同事 David Weiden 我會說屬於這類。
成功公司的特質
- I think Alfred Lin and Sequoia is mostly that.
我覺得 Sequoia 的 Alfred Lin 主要也是這類。 - So you can have different uh sort of approaches, mental models, paradigms, but for me it’s is this founder extraordinary?
所以可以有不同的方法、心智模型、範式，但對我來說就是：這個創辦人是否非凡？ - Do I have reason to believe that this founder is the next Brian Chesky?
我有沒有理由相信這位創辦人會是下一個 Brian Chesky？ - » You mentioned that you’re an investor in all these all these companies you listed are doing incredibly well and you work with a lot of you’re on the boards of a lot of really successful, incredibly uh good teams and companies.
» 你提到你是這些公司的投資人，你列舉的這些公司都做得非常好，而且你在很多非常成功、非常優秀的團隊和公司擔任董事。 - Is there just something they are doing the way they operate that is different from companies that are not as successful?
他們的營運方式有沒有什麼跟那些較不成功的公司不同的地方？
速度與節奏的重要性
- » I think the subtle signal let’s say very early is speed.
» 我覺得在很早期，一個微妙的訊號是速度。 - And you know it’s one of those things that’s easy to say but let me try to be more concrete.
這是那種很容易說、但讓我更具體一點的事。 - There’s a tempo, an operating tempo that a successful company develops that is very that develops very early in a company’s trajectory and is incredibly impressive.
一家成功的公司會在其發展軌跡很早期就發展出一種「營運節奏」（operating tempo），非常令人印象深刻。 - I remember when Roelof Botha was on my board at Square, he and he led the series B. So he joined our board and six months in, so two board meetings and he said to me, he’s like, I haven’t seen this kind of tempo since our PayPal days.
我記得 Roelof Botha 在 Square 加入我的董事會時，他主導了 B 輪。他加入董事會六個月後，也就是兩次董事會之後，他跟我說：「我從 PayPal 時代之後就沒看過這種節奏了。」 - and he had been a VC at that point for nine years.
他那時當 VC 已經九年。 - And when I was curious, I said like, you know, what are you noticing?
我很好奇就問：「你注意到什麼？」 - And he’s like, at board meeting X, you guys identify an opportunity or problem, and by the next board meeting, you’ve shipped solutions, addressed it, featured just constantly, consistently.
他說：「在第 X 次董事會上，你們辨識出一個機會或問題，到下一次董事會時，你們已經出貨解決方案、處理完了，持續一致地做到。」 - And I I think that’s right.
我覺得這是對的。 - Like so the time between the seed and series A at Faire was pretty tight and I remember at the time my chief of staff was Delian Asparouhov and Delian said to me after the second Faire board meeting that he shadowed me at he said if there’s if there’s one company in Silicon Valley that would cause me to leave being the VC it’d be Faire and I was like interesting why he’s like the pace of execution and his answer was exactly the same as Roelof’s.
所以在 Faire，種子到 A 輪的時間非常短，我記得當時我的幕僚長是 Delian Asparouhov。Delian 在他陪我參加完第二次 Faire 董事會後跟我說：「如果矽谷有一家公司會讓我離開 VC 工作的話，那就是 Faire。」我想：「有意思，為什麼？」他說：「執行的步調」。他的答案跟 Roelof 一模一樣。 - He’s like, “There is something slightly off.”
他說：「有件事有點不對勁。」 - And by the next morning meeting, not only have they identified the root causes, but they’ve shipped and reacted and and measured the impact of the solution.
到第二天早上的會議，他們不只辨識出根本原因，還已經出貨、反應、量測過解決方案的影響。 - And that compounds that speed really does come out.
那種速度會複利累積，真的會浮現。
人才密度與招募哲學
- So that’s just one trait and but you see it it in like it did lead me to for example preempt the series A of Ramp.
那只是其中一個特質，但你會看到它。例如它讓我在 Ramp 提前下手 A 輪。 - So I led the seed in like Mayish of 2019 and gave a term sheet to preempt the A in September.
我大約在 2019 年 5 月主導了種子輪，9 月就給了 term sheet 提前鎖定 A 輪。 - So pretty quick.
相當快。 - One of the two signals was how fast Ramp was able to be on the precipice of shipping the cards.
兩個訊號之一是 Ramp 多快就接近要出貨卡片。 - I’d been working in financial services for a long time at that point, you know, 19 years or so, and there’s just a lot of moving pieces to ship a card.
當時我在金融服務領域工作了很長一段時間，大約 19 年，要出貨一張卡片有很多移動零件。 - you need these program managers and you need the sponsoring bank and you need this and this and this usually takes 9 to 12 months best case nine ramp was on the precipice in like 3 months and I was like oh my god like I’m just never seen that velocity that was one of two maybe three inputs and I was like yes makes sense to double down already even if we hadn’t shipped anything yet so I think that’s one critical density of talent you see companies just creating an unfair advantage the team
你需要 program manager、發卡銀行等等等，通常要 9 到 12 個月，最好的情況下 9 個月。Ramp 在 3 個月就快要出貨了，我想：「我的天，我從沒看過這種速度。」這是兩三個輸入之一，我想：「沒錯，即使我們還沒出貨任何東西，加碼是合理的。」所以這是一個關鍵的人才密度，你會看到一些公司在創造不公平優勢。
人才密度
- was x when you invested it’s Wow, this DM is getting better, you know, deeper, better, etc.
你投資時團隊是 X，過了一段時間你會覺得「哇，這個團隊變得更好、更深、更厲害」。 - So, that that’s another signal.
那是另一個訊號。
內部人才養成
- The third thing that I’ve noticed though, you know, is I think they have a different hiring philosophy ultimately.
我注意到的第三件事是，他們最終有一種不同的招募哲學。 - And maybe there’s exceptions to this, but most of the companies I work with that are thriving have basically skipped hiring senior people, senior experienced people.
也許有例外，但我合作的大多數蓬勃發展的公司基本上都跳過資深、有經驗的人。 - It’s mostly internally grouped talent.
大多是內部培養的人才。 - And I think that model has worked really well.
我覺得那個模式運作得非常好。 - It’s definitely true of Ramp, definitely true of Trade Republic.
Ramp 絕對是這樣，Trade Republic 也絕對是這樣。 - It it seems to be a mostly common ingredient, but there’s probably exceptions.
這似乎是一個相當常見的成分，但可能有例外。
創造價值 vs 保存價值
- » Wow, that is an incredible answer.
» 哇，這是個了不起的答案。 - instead of traits.
而不只是特質。 - Uh just to be clear what you’re saying on that third piece.
我想釐清你第三點說的是什麼。 - So it’s not hire like fancy VPs from other successful companies and instead develop people internally as a trade- internally and almost turned it into a competitive advantage meaning a strategy like we’re just not even going to interview people.
也就是說不從其他成功公司挖花俏的 VP，而是內部培養人才，幾乎把這當成一種競爭優勢，意思是「我們連面試都不面試」這種策略。 - We’re not going to try.
我們不會嘗試。 - We’re just going to promote from within.
我們只會內部升遷。 - And I I think in some roles, you know, it’s not like you hire a GC, you know, typically right out of law school.
我覺得有些角色不會這樣，例如你通常不會從法學院應屆畢業生裡找一個總法律顧問。 - But although we have done that once and it worked out pretty well, believe it or not, but but I wouldn’t recommend that.
雖然我們做過一次，結果還不錯，信不信由你，但我不會推薦這樣做。 - You know, I have this blog post, well, Delian wrote this blog post of lessons he learned from Keith and one talks about hiring senior people and the the rough prism is are you hiring for value creation or value preservation?
我有篇部落格文章，其實是 Delian 寫的「跟 Keith 學到的教訓」，其中一篇談招募資深人員，大致的稜鏡是：你是為了「創造價值」還是「保存價值」在招人？ - If you’re hiring for value preservation, typically sub experience is useful.
如果你是為了保存價值在招人，通常經驗是有用的。
用幕僚長角色培養人才
- On the value creation side, it’s probably not.
在創造價值的這邊，經驗大概沒那麼有用。 - » It’s interesting how much of this comes back to just your initial point about hiring and the team being everything.
» 有趣的是，這些都回到你一開始的觀點：招募和團隊就是一切。 - Step.
對。 - So, number two was talent density and three is uh helping people develop and be, you know, into the role versus finding someone.
第二是人才密度，第三是幫助人成長並進入角色，而不是去外面找人。 - And then obviously speed all trickles down from just who you’re hiring.
然後速度顯然從你雇了誰開始往下滲透。 - » Yeah.
» 對。 - I mean, I’ve watched people use like even chief of staff roles to groom talent.
我看過有人甚至用幕僚長這類角色來培養人才。 - um the one company board meeting I was at this week that is phenomenal um on any metric and the last two his head his CMO who’s who’s fantastic is performing miraculously um was his last chief of staff and his new head of product probably is his last chief is is his current chief of staff and just like created this institution a factory where he can absorb ambitious talented people and over one or two years in Osmosis is train them to be senior successful leaders.
我這週參加的一場董事會，那家公司在任何指標上都很驚人，他的 CMO 表現得堪稱奇蹟，而那個 CMO 是他上一任的幕僚長；他的新產品負責人大概就是他現任的幕僚長。他打造了一個機構，一個工廠，可以吸收有野心的有才華的人，並在一兩年內透過耳濡目染把他們訓練成資深、成功的領導者。 - » When you talk about speed, I think about Ramp uh for sure.
» 你講到速度，我絕對會想到 Ramp。
Ramp 的速度與成功指標
- Uh when Jeff was on the podcast, their CPO, he just like our title was velocity, velocity, velocity.
Jeff（Ramp 的 CPO）來上 podcast 時，他說我們的口號就是「速度、速度、速度」。 - And I know they have like days.
我知道他們有「天數」。 - If you go to days.ramp.com, it’s like the number of days since they launched.
如果你去 days.ramp.com，會看到他們從發表至今的天數。 - And they’re just always looking at that number.
他們就是一直盯著那個數字。 - How long is it?
已經多久了？ - » Oh yeah.
» 喔，對。 - Every board meeting starts with that.
每次董事會都從這個開始。 - The first slide day day 1184 » and they’re like what are they worth?
第一張投影片：第 1184 天 » 他們現在值多少？ - like a hundred billion.
像 1000 億美元。 - Not quite, but they’re not.
沒到那麼多，但他們不是。 - » Probably not quite that much, but like a reasonable fraction of that.
» 大概沒那麼多，但是那個的合理一部分。 - » Okay, that was incredibly valuable.
» 好，這非常有價值。
公開批評的哲學
- Okay, one last hot take that uh I know you have that I want to make sure we share is this idea of criticizing in public versus in private.
好，最後一個 hot take，我知道你有，我想確定我們會分享出來：就是「公開批評 vs 私下批評」這個想法。 - Talk about that.
講講這個。 - » Yeah, so this is um a lesson I actually absorbed from one of the great founders I work with.
» 是的，這是我從合作過的一位偉大創辦人身上吸收到的教訓。 - And you know, you like many great founders, they have their own management philosophy.
像許多偉大創辦人一樣，他們有自己的管理哲學。 - And one of the most important tenants is criticize people in public.
其中最重要的信條之一就是：在公開場合批評人。 - And when you decompose the logic of it, it’s so obviously true, but almost no one does this and very few people talk about it even if they do it.
當你拆解這個邏輯時，會發現它顯然是對的，但幾乎沒人這麼做，即使有人這麼做也很少有人談論。 - So if you think about it, when you give people feedback negative, uh, individually, you’re optimizing for the atomic unit, not the system.
想想看，當你私下給人負面回饋時，你是在優化原子單位，而不是系統。 - The reason why to do it in public is it’s more important for all the colleagues to understand that there’s an issue, it’s being addressed versus, like, they, they usually have, uh, suspicions, let’s say, or concerns.
公開做的原因是：對所有同事來說，理解「有一個問題、它正在被處理」更重要。否則大家通常會有疑慮或擔憂。 - And if you’ve channeled the negative feedback to the individual, they don’t know that you’re addressing this, that you’re on top of, you’re aware, you’re addressing it.
如果你只把負面回饋給了那個人，其他人不會知道你在處理、你在意、你已經發現並在處理。 - Now, it’s a collaborative, um, and then also it lets other people kind of raise their hand and say, you know what, I can kind of help with that or, you know, etcetera.
公開做之後，它變成協作的，也讓其他人能夠舉手說「你知道嗎，我可以幫忙這個」之類的。 - And so it becomes like a team building exercise in some way versus like, oh, you have this deficiency, go fix it yourself.
它在某種程度上變成一種團隊建立練習，而不是「喔，你有這個缺陷，自己去修」。 - And then the rest of the company, you know, is nervous about why this problem is persisting.
否則公司其他人會緊張為什麼這個問題一直沒解決。 - » When people hear this, they may, it may feel like, oh, wait, I’m just, it’s like, it feels aggressive to be criticizing everyone publicly.
» 當大家聽到這個，可能會覺得「等等，這樣公開批評每個人感覺很咄咄逼人」。（Ernest：我咄咄，已中槍 XDD）
在批評與環境間取得平衡
- Uh, any advice for just like, how do you not make it this, like, I don’t know, scary environment, or is that part of it?
有什麼建議讓這不會變成一個可怕的環境，還是這就是其中一部分？ - » Well, I think you want to win, you know, and there’s probably an art to this, like I would say, you know, some of the best coaches in sports probably do a bit of both.
» 我覺得你想贏，這裡面有一種藝術。我會說一些頂尖的運動教練可能兩種都做一點。 - Um, like there’s things they will say in front of the team and then there’s things that probably, you know, channel to the individual player.
有些事情他們會在團隊面前說，有些事情則是私下對個別球員說。 - So probably a mix, you know, could be very effective too.
所以混合也可能非常有效。
心理安全感與高績效
- » It feels like you’re not a, a focus on psychological safety as a core tenant.
» 感覺你不會把心理安全感當成核心信條。 - No, I don’t believe in that at all.
不，我完全不相信那個。 - Like high performance machines don’t have » Like for those who want to, you know, a good book that’s off central casting for you is, uh, read Jordan Rules.
高績效的機器不需要 » 如果你想看一本符合我這種風格的書，就去讀《Jordan Rules》。 - » Or watch The Last Dance if you like.
» 或者看《最後一舞》也行。 - But like fundamentally, read Jordan Rules.
但根本上去讀《Jordan Rules》。 - If you want to be Michael Jordan, you got to act like Michael Jordan.
如果你想成為 Michael Jordan，你就得像 Michael Jordan 那樣行動。 - » Do you feel like that’s negatively correlated, this idea of psychological safety with success?
» 你覺得心理安全感跟成功是負相關的嗎？ - And there just » For the most part.
» 大部分是這樣。 - » Yeah.
» 對。 - Interesting.
有意思。 - I’m going to take us to failure corner.
我要帶我們進入「失敗角落」。
個人失敗故事
- Okay.
好的。 - So, failure corner.
失敗角落。 - So, you know, you talk about all these things you’ve done that are incredibly well, all these companies you invested in, all these businesses you’ve built, PayPal, all these things.
你談到所有你做得非常好的事，那些你投資的公司、你打造的事業、PayPal 等等。 - People don’t realize there’s also a lot of failures along the way.
大家不知道一路上其實也有很多失敗。 - Is there a story of a time you failed in your career or investing that, uh, might illuminate the down, you know, when things don’t go great?
有沒有什麼職涯或投資失敗的故事，能說明事情不順利的低谷？ - » Well, I mentioned, I mentioned one.
» 我提過一個。 - I alluded to one by accident.
我意外暗示過一個。 - I talked about being aqua hired or whatever into Google and being stuck there.
我講過被 acqui-hire 進 Google 然後卡在那裡。 - I’m so clearly not successful.
那顯然是不成功的。 - Um, that was a slide.
那是個低點。 - Uh, so, you know, we did sell for like 187 million, but not nowhere near the ambition.
我們確實賣了 1.87 億美元，但離我們的野心差很遠。 - You know, didn’t really achieve any of our goals product-wise or company-wise.
我們在產品或公司層面都沒真正達成目標。 - Investing teaches you, you know, mostly about failures.
投資教你的大多是關於失敗。
管理失敗的藝術
- You know, if you’re a world-class investor in the early stages, 30 to 40% hit rate is great and golden by definition.
如果你是早期階段的世界級投資人，30% 到 40% 的命中率就很好、按定義是金字塔頂端。 - That’s like 50 to 60, you know, percent, 70% failing there.
那意味著 50% 到 60%、70% 的失敗率。 - It’s a little bit like those old Nike commercials where there’s the Michael Jordan one where it’s like, you know, I’ve missed 109 game-winning shots in my career, or there’s the tennis one, I think it’s Federer that’s like, you know, I, something like, I win 60% of my points.
這有點像那些老的 Nike 廣告，Michael Jordan 那支說「我職業生涯錯失了 109 球致勝球」，還有網球那支大概是 Federer 說「我大概贏了 60% 的得分」。 - I think I’m like the best tennis player ever, but I lose 40%.
我覺得我大概是史上最強的網球員，但我輸了 40%。 - So, there’s a lot of that in venture.
創投界有很多這種事。 - You definitely have failures all day long.
你絕對整天都在失敗。 - I think one of the arts is like not getting too caught up in failure.
我覺得藝術之一是不要被失敗困住。 - Actually, I, I think over and I, I actually gave this feedback in the board meeting recently, which is someone, you know, well, mentioned, well-meaning, one or two board members are like, well, let’s do retros on our failures and the company’s doing really well.
我最近在董事會給過這個回饋：有人善意地提了，一兩位董事會成員說「我們來對失敗做覆盤吧」，而那家公司其實表現得很好。 - So I was like you know what honestly I’m not sure I would do this.
我說：「老實說我不確定我會這麼做。」 - I was like, I don’t want to deter people from taking ambitious shots on goal.
我說：「我不想嚇阻大家去做有野心的嘗試。」 - And if you overemphasize failures and you real people think they’re going to get criticized, this is where psychological safety maybe has some validity, which is be ambitious, be bold.
如果你過度強調失敗，讓人覺得會被批評，這就是心理安全感可能有一些有效性的地方：要有野心、要大膽。 - Don’t worry about the failing part unless there’s things you missed that you know could have been factored in.
不要擔心失敗的部分，除非有些你錯過的事情本可以被納入考慮。 - But you want people to take risk and you want people to be excited about raising their hands for very difficult problems and challenges because that’s how you create value.
但你要人冒險，要人對舉手承接非常困難的問題和挑戰感到興奮，因為那才是創造價值的方式。 - And so I was like, “No, let’s let’s really not do these retros.
所以我說：「不，我們真的不要做這些覆盤。 - » Let’s just focus on winning.” » Contrarian takes all around.
» 我們就專注在贏球。」» 全方位的反向觀點。
Lightning Round 開場
- » Keith, is there anything else you wanted to share?
» Keith，你還有什麼想分享的嗎？ - Anything else you want to leave listeners with before we get to our very exciting lightning round?
在我們進入激動人心的 lightning round 之前還有什麼想留給聽眾的？ - » I’m excited for your lightning round.
» 我很期待你的 lightning round。 - This is usually like one of the best parts of your podcast.
這通常是你 podcast 最棒的部分之一。 - » Okay, first question.
» 好，第一個問題。
書單推薦：The Upside of Stress
- What are two or three books that you find yourself recommending most to other people?
有哪兩三本書是你最常推薦給別人的？ - So the number one one is called The Upside of Stress um by Kelly McGonigal a professor at Stanford and basically it argues in an incredibly compelling way that if you want to be happy healthy or wealthy you need more stress in your life not less.
第一本是史丹佛教授 Kelly McGonigal 寫的《The Upside of Stress》，基本上以一種非常有說服力的方式論證：如果你想快樂、健康或富有，你的人生需要更多壓力，而不是更少。 - So it’s magic the evidence she marshals is effectively uncriticable that at the outcome level at the biochemical level it it is transformative to people to read this book.
她整理的證據基本上無懈可擊，從結果層面到生物化學層面，讀這本書對人都是變革性的。 - So highly recommend it.
強烈推薦。
影集推薦：紐倫堡大審
- favorite recent movie or TV show you’ve uh you’ve enjoyed » TV actually just watched Nuremberg trial highly recommend uh Nuremberg um there’s a lot of lessons there that are applicable to the modern world um so I won’t spoil it all but even I’m a kind of a student of history and politics and watching the movie I probably learned five or 10 things that I never knew before so highly and it’s extreme I mean obviously It’s not an exciting thrilling movie,
你最近喜歡的電影或影集是？» 電視我剛看了紐倫堡大審，強烈推薦《紐倫堡》，裡面有很多教訓適用於現代世界。我不劇透，但即使我算是歷史和政治的學生，看那部電影大概還學到 5 到 10 件我以前不知道的事，所以強烈推薦。它不是一部刺激的電影， - but extremely well produced movie and incredibly useful to understand, you know, some of the travesties of history and how to prevent them in the » Where do you find this?
但製作非常精良，對於理解一些歷史上的悲劇以及如何防止它們再發生非常有用。» 在哪裡可以找到這部？ - Is that one of the streaming services?
是某個串流服務嗎？ - » It’s either on Netflix or iTunes or both.
» 是 Netflix 或 iTunes 或兩者都有。 - » Sweet.
» 很好。
產品發現：Eight Sleep
- Okay.
好。 - Uh, is there a product that you’ve recently discovered that you really love?
有沒有什麼你最近發現非常喜歡的產品？ - » Rarely.
» 很少。 - Um, you know, I do find I do find products that I’m addicted to.
我確實會發現一些讓我著迷的產品。 - Like, you know, I don’t this crusade about Eight Sleep, which is another one of my conventions is, you know, you must sleep eight hours a day.
像我對 Eight Sleep 的這個聖戰，這也是我另一個堅持：你必須每天睡八小時。 - You must prioritize sleep even when you’re very busy.
即使非常忙也必須優先睡眠。 - Um, I am an investor and so I’m somewhat biased in Eight Sleep, but it transforms people’s lives.
我是 Eight Sleep 的投資人所以有點偏心，但它真的改變人的生活。 - So, I’m still addicted to that one.
所以我還是迷它。 - I don’t know if there’s like a new product that, you know, I’ve been fanatically addicted to recently.
我不知道最近有沒有什麼新產品讓我狂熱沉迷。 - » Hey, Sleep counts.
» 嘿，睡眠也算。
人生座右銘：No Days Off
- Do you have a life motto that you find yourself coming back to in work or in life?
你有沒有一個人生座右銘是你在工作或生活中常常回到的？ - » No days off.
» No days off。 no days off.
# no days off。- I don’t believe in taking days off for workout.
我不相信運動可以休息日。 - I don’t believe taking days off from work period.
我也不相信工作可以休息日，就這樣。 - Um the derivation for those who are interested is when uh Bill Belichick won the Super Bowl for like whatever billionth time with the Patriots.
對有興趣的人解釋一下出處：Bill Belichick 帶領愛國者隊不知道第幾次贏得 Super Bowl 時。 - Um as back-to-back Super Bowl wins, I think he started the championship celebration parade with this chant of no days off.
他連續兩年贏 Super Bowl，我記得他在冠軍慶祝遊行上開始喊「no days off」。 - So that’s that’s kind of my mantra.
所以那就是我的箴言。 - » And when you say no days off, uh are you saying like work every day like you know like work the weekend sort of thing or or what do you » that too?
» 當你說 no days off，你的意思是每天都工作、週末也工作之類的，還是什麼？» 那也算。 - But like so let’s talk about the workout side.
但我們先講運動這邊。 - I believe I’ve missed seven days in seven years of working out and it it still kills me like half of those I still annoyed that I missed like I still really really had reoriented my schedule.
我相信過去七年我只有七天沒運動，這還是讓我很在意，其中一半我至今仍懊惱錯過，我真的會重新調整行程。（Ernest：天啊真的超高標！跟好、跟上！） - I should have been able to hit at least four of those and I measure it and I post it at the end of every year.
那七天裡至少有四天我本來可以做到，我會量測並在每年年底發出來。 - Um, last year I missed none, so I was very happy.
去年我一天都沒錯過，所以我很開心。 - But I don’t believe in excuses basically.
但我基本上不相信藉口。 - No days off is a proxy for I don’t believe in excuses.
No days off 是「我不相信藉口」的代稱。 - » And do you work out every day?
» 你每天都運動嗎？ - Is that the rule?
那是規則嗎？ - » Oh, » I mean literally there’s only seven days in the last seven years I haven’t worked out.
» 喔，» 我是說字面上過去七年只有七天我沒運動。 - » That includes all kinds of illness, sickness, travel, international time zone travel, weddings.
» 那包括各種生病、出差、跨國時區旅行、婚禮。 - » It’s like no excuses.
» 就是沒有藉口。 - » Like actually every day.
» 真的是每天。 - All right.
好的。 - And » more than once, typically more than once a day.
而 » 而且通常一天不只一次。 - And you’ve told me uh before we started recording, you had a Barry’s class this morning.
在開始錄音前你跟我說，你今天早上上了一堂 Barry’s 課。 - You have another one later today.
你今天稍晚還有一堂。 - » I do.
» 對。 - I uh and and a lift.
還有重訓。 - » Okay.
» 好。
PayPal Mafia 與超越預期者
- Final question.
最後一個問題。 - So, you were famously part of the PayPal mafia.
你是著名的 PayPal Mafia 一員。 - I’m curious if there was someone there that’s like overperformed.
我好奇那裡有沒有人是超越預期的。 - Someone that you worked with that you never thought would be that good.
跟你共事過、但你從沒想過會這麼厲害的人。 - » Honestly, no.
» 老實說沒有。 - I wound up investing in, you know, most of most of the derivative companies and stuff.
我最後投資了大多數的衍生公司。 - And so I think I had a good Spidey sense of which people, you know, had had at least founder level ambition um and could potentially build something.
所以我覺得我有不錯的「蜘蛛感」，知道哪些人至少有創辦人等級的野心、有可能打造出什麼。 - Sorry, I wish I could give you a better answer.
抱歉，我希望能給你更好的答案。 - » They would have been mad at you anyway, so this is the safer answer.
» 不管怎樣他們都會生你的氣，所以這是比較安全的答案。 - » Well, it depends.
» 這要看情況。 - If they’ve been super successful, they » Peter Thiel.
如果他們超成功 » Peter Thiel。 - No, just kidding.
不，開玩笑的。 - » Yeah.
» 對。 - Yeah.
對。 - Yeah.
對。 - Elon Musk.
Elon Musk。
來賓的感謝
- Uh Keith, thank you so much for doing this.
Keith，非常感謝你來。 - I learned so much.
我學到很多。 - Uh that’s going to help a lot of founders, a lot of people building stuff.
這會幫助很多創辦人、很多在打造東西的人。
在線上找到來賓
- Two final questions.
最後兩個問題。 - Where can folks find you online if they want to reach out and how can listeners be useful to you?
大家想找你的話可以在哪裡找到你？聽眾可以怎麼幫到你？ - » Yeah, so x.com.
» 在 x.com。 - I tweet prolifically.
我發文很多。 - Um you mentioned my pin tweet.
你提到我的 pin tweet。 - So that’s probably the easiest way.
那大概是最簡單的方式。 - » Sweet.
» 很好。
結尾與致謝
- Keith, thank you so much for being here.
Keith，非常感謝你來。 - » Pleasure to be with you.
» 很榮幸跟你聊。 - Thanks for the invitation.
謝謝邀請。 - » Uh thanks for accepting it.
» 謝謝你接受邀請。
Podcast Outro
- Bye everyone.
大家再見。 - Thank you so much for listening.
非常感謝你的收聽。 - If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.
如果覺得這集有價值，可以在 Apple Podcasts、Spotify 或你喜歡的 podcast app 上訂閱本節目。 - Also, please consider giving us a rating or leaving a review as that really helps other listeners find the podcast.
也請考慮幫我們評分或留評論，這對其他聽眾找到節目很有幫助。 - You can find all past episodes or learn more about the show at lennyspodcast.com.
你可以在 lennyspodcast.com 找到所有過往集數，或了解更多節目資訊。 - See you in the next episode.
我們下集見。