【原文】
I ①People often believe that to do better work, they should do fewer things. ②Yet the evidence flies in the face of that assumption: Being prolific actually increases originality, because sheer volume improves your chances of finding novel solutions. ③In recent experiments by Northwestern University psychologists Brian Lucas and Loran Nordgren, the initial ideas people generated were the most conventional. ④Once they had thought of those, they were free to start dreaming up more unusual possibilities.
II ①Across fields, volume begets quality. ②This is true for all kinds of creators and thinkers—from composers and painters to scientists and inventors. ③Even the most eminent innovators do their most original work when they’re also cranking out scores of less brilliant ideas. ④Consider Thomas Edison. ⑤In a five-year period, he came up with the lightbulb, the phonograph, and the carbon transmitter used in telephones—while also filing more than 100 patents for inventions that didn’t catch the world on fire, including a talking doll that ended up scaring children (and adults).
III ①Of course, in organizations, the challenge lies in knowing when you』ve drummed up enough possibilities. ②How many ideas should you generate before deciding which ones to pursue? ③When I pose this question to executives, most say you’re really humming with around 20 ideas. ④But that answer is off the mark by an order of magnitude. ⑤There’s evidence that quality often doesn’t max out until more than 200 ideas are on the table.
IV ①Stanford professor Robert Sutton notes that the Pixar movie Cars was chosen from about 500 pitches, and at Skyline, the toy design studio that generates ideas for Fisher-Price and Mattel, employees submitted 4,000 new toy concepts in one year. ②That set was winnowed down to 230 to be drawn or prototyped, and just 12 were finally developed. ③The more darts you throw, the better your odds of hitting a bull’s-eye.
V ①Though it makes perfect sense, many managers fail to embrace this principle, fearing that time spent conjuring lots of ideas will prevent employees from being focused and efficient. ②The good news is that there are ways to help employees generate quantity and variety without sacrificing day-to-day productivity or causing burnout.
VI ①Research also suggests that organizations often get stuck in a rut because they’re playing defense, trying to stave off the competition. ②To encourage people to think differently and generate more ideas, put them on offense.
VII ①That’s what Lisa Bodell of futurethink did when Merck CEO Ken Frazier hired her to help shake up the status quo. ②Bodell divided Merck’s executives into groups and asked them to come up with ways to put the company out of business. ③Instead of being cautious and sticking close to established competencies, the executives started considering bold new directions in strategy and product development that competitors could conceivably take. ④Energy in the room soared as they explored the possibilities. ⑤The offensive mindset, Carnegie Mellon professor Anita Woolley observes, focuses attention on 「pursuing opportunities…whereas defenders are more focused on maintaining their market share.」 ⑥That mental shift allowed the Merck executives to imagine competitive threats that didn’t yet exist. ⑦The result was a fresh set of opportunities for innovation.
【詞彙短語】
1. in the face of 在……面前；不顧
2. prolific [prə'lɪfɪk] adj. 富於創造力的，多產的
3. sheer [ʃɪə] adj. 絕對的，純粹的
4. conventional [kən'venʃ(ə)n(ə)l] adj. 習俗的；老套的
5. dream up 憑空想出；虛構出
6. * beget [bɪ'get] v. 產生；招致
7. crank out 機械地完成；拼湊
8. * phonograph ['fəʊnəgrɑːf] n. 留聲機
9. carbon transmitter 碳精式送話器
10. drum up 徵集，召集；竭力爭取
11. pursue [pə'sjuː] v. 繼續；從事
12. hum [hʌm] v. 忙碌；活躍
13. off the mark 偏離目標
14. max out 到達極限；得最高分
15. pitch [pɪtʃ] n. 故事；創意
16. * winnow ['wɪnəʊ] v. 篩選；選取
17. prototype ['prəʊtətaɪp] v. 製作（產品的）樣本
18. * dart [dɑːt] n. 飛鏢
19. bull’s eye 靶心
20. conjure ['kʌndʒə] v. 想像；想起
21. burnout ['bɜːnaʊt] n. 精疲力竭
22. * drut [rʌt] n. 車轍；槽；溝
23. stave off 擊退；擋開
24. shake up 重新分配；改組
25. bold [bəʊld] adj. 大膽的
26. conceivably [kən'siːvəblɪ] adv. 可想像到地
（註：標*的為超綱詞）
【翻譯點評】
I ①People often believe that to do better work, they should do fewer things. ②Yet the evidence flies in the face of that assumption: Being prolific actually increases originality, because sheer volume improves your chances of finding novel solutions. ③In recent experiments by Northwestern University psychologists Brian Lucas and Loran Nordgren, the initial ideas people generated were the most conventional. ④Once they had thought of those, they were free to start dreaming up more unusual possibilities.
翻譯：人們常常以為：為了把工作做得更好，他們做的事應當越少越好。然而實際證據反駁了這種想法：多產實際會增加創造力，因為絕對數量的積累就增加了找到新穎的解決方案的機會。西北大學心理學家布萊恩•盧卡斯和羅蘭•諾格倫近來的試驗就表明：人們最初想出的主意都是最老套的。一旦過了這個階段，他們就會自由地發揮想像，設想出更加不尋常的可能性。
點評：選篇可分為三個層次，段I是引子，從人們普遍的認識引出創意數量累積到一定程度才能擇優而用的話題；II，III，IV段是第二個層次，先總結規律，然後通過科學發明和娛樂、商業創意的現象論證。V段開始轉折到第三個層次：商業實踐， VI，VII段分析哪些方法可以幫助企業高層管理者拿出更多、更優的創意。段I句①介紹人們的普遍認識：提高工作效率意味著把有限的時間專注於少數幾件最有用的事。兩個比較級「better work」和「fewer things」，簡單明了地點出了數量與質量的反向相關關係。下面的論證，都將圍繞這二者的關係來做文章。句②以「Yet」轉折，提出作者的觀點，許多跡象表明，多產才能增加創造力，因為這樣才能找出更新穎的方案；「actually」表明實際的規律與人們普遍認識相左，而「sheer」更強調數量必須累積到一定程度。「Prolific」和「volume」是對數量這一概念的多樣化表達，不但簡練準確，而且有效避免了重複。句③④通過舉出現象論證，分別以最高級「most conventional」和比較級「more unusual」相對比，強調思維的規律：只有積累到了一定數量，才能想出不尋常的點子。其中句④「dream up」意為「憑空想出」，下文與之同意的還有「crank out」，「come up with」，「conjure」，「drum up」等多個詞組，都表達的是「想出」創意的意思。
II ①Across fields, volume begets quality. ②This is true for all kinds of creators and thinkers—from composers and painters to scientists and inventors. ③Even the most eminent innovators do their most original work when they’re also cranking out scores of less brilliant ideas. ④Consider Thomas Edison. ⑤In a five-year period, he came up with the lightbulb, the phonograph, and the carbon transmitter used in telephones—while also filing more than 100 patents for inventions that didn’t catch the world on fire, including a talking doll that ended up scaring children (and adults).
翻譯：在各個領域，質量都源自數量的累積。這適用於所有創造者和思想家——從作曲家和畫家到科學家和發明家。即便是最傑出的發明家，其最有創意的工作也伴隨著許許多多拼湊起來的不那麼出色的主意。想想託馬斯•愛迪生。在5年的時間裡，他發明了電燈泡，留聲機，以及電話中使用的碳精式送話器。與此同時，他還申請了100多項專利發明，這些發明沒能點燃世人的熱情，其中一個會說話的玩偶還嚇到了孩子（以及大人）。
點評：段II句①是本段中心句，也是作者的主要觀點。「beget」意為「to cause something to happen or exist」，也就是說數量是質量的基礎。句②通過「This is true for all…」說明，這是一個普遍的規律，下面將援引發明家愛迪生的例子加以證明。句③以再次以最高級「most original」和比較級「less brilliant」說明，最好的創意不是孤立存在，而必然以許多相對不那麼出色的創意為基礎。「Even」再次強調規律的普遍性，它適用於普通人，甚至也適用於像愛迪生這樣偉大的發明家。句⑤則以實例論證上述規律。
III ①Of course, in organizations, the challenge lies in knowing when you』ve drummed up enough possibilities. ②How many ideas should you generate before deciding which ones to pursue? ③When I pose this question to executives, most say you’re really humming with around 20 ideas. ④But that answer is off the mark by an order of magnitude. ⑤There’s evidence that quality often doesn’t max out until more than 200 ideas are on the table.
翻譯：當然，在某些組織裡，難點在於知道何時算「夠」。到底應當積累多少創意，才能決定哪些值得繼續？我向管理人員提出這個問題時，大多數人說，創意達到20個左右的時候，就夠忙活了。但這離正確答案還差著一個數量級。有證據表明，除非能提出200多個想法，否則質量往往達不到最優。
點評：段III則開始從商業實踐角度論證，到底創意數量達到多少才算是「最優」？句①的「challenge」隱含：創意越多當然越好，但對追求利潤的商業組織來說，這裡有個極限，超過一定量的話則不利於實現利潤；而知道最合適的點在哪裡並不容易。這也將是下面關於商業實踐論述的主題。「drum up」意為「徵集，召集」。句②提出「多少才算最優」的問題，下面句③④⑤將回答這個問題。「Hum with」意為「忙碌，活躍」，也是值得學習的表達。句④的「order」意為「種類」，例如「considerations of quite another order」，意為「完全不同的考慮」，「magnitude」意為「量級」，「by an order of magnitude」意為（相差）「一個數量級」。句⑤中的「not …until」則表示強調，再次說明數量需要積累；「max out」意為「得最高分，達到最優」。
IV ①Stanford professor Robert Sutton notes that the Pixar movie Cars was chosen from about 500 pitches, and at Skyline, the toy design studio that generates ideas for Fisher-Price and Mattel, employees submitted 4,000 new toy concepts in one year. ②That set was winnowed down to 230 to be drawn or prototyped, and just 12 were finally developed. ③The more darts you throw, the better your odds of hitting a bull’s-eye.
翻譯：斯坦福教授羅伯特•蘇頓指出，皮克斯的電影《汽車總動員》是從大約500個創意中挑選出來的。而為費雪和美泰提供創意的玩具設計公司「天際線」，員工一年提交的新玩具概念達到4,000個，進行繪圖或原型製作的壓縮到230個，最終開發出來的只有12個。扔出的飛鏢越多，才越有可能擊中靶心。
點評：段IV通過兩個成功的商業實踐的例子，說明了那些最好的創意是海量當中篩選出來的。句①中的「pitch」原意為「音高；程度」，在這裡指的是「故事創意」。句②中的「winnow down」意為「篩選，選取」。
V ①Though it makes perfect sense, many managers fail to embrace this principle, fearing that time spent conjuring lots of ideas will prevent employees from being focused and efficient. ②The good news is that there are ways to help employees generate quantity and variety without sacrificing day-to-day productivity or causing burnout.
翻譯：雖然道理很容易理解，但許多管理人士仍不能接受這一原則，他們擔心員工花在思考大量創意上的時間，會使注意力分散，降低效率。不過好在有很多辦法可以幫助員工提高創意的數量和種類，而不至於犧牲日常的效率或耗盡能量。
點評：文章從段V開始進入第三個層次，就如何更好地激發創意同時又不犧牲效率給出商業建議。句①中的「Though」點出，雖然理想狀態下創意越多越好，但不符合商業企業的現實。「Focused」和「efficient」兩個關鍵詞說明，這兩個要求非常重要；同時也暗指，下面介紹的方法不但能夠獲得創意，而且能確保員工的效率和專注。句②中「quantity」和「variety」則是另外兩個關鍵詞，只有滿足這些條件，才是有效的創意；分詞結構「without sacrificing」則再限定了一個條件：創意產出不能犧牲日常效率，也不能耗費過多精力以免員工精疲力竭。
VI ①Research also suggests that organizations often get stuck in a rut because they’re playing defense, trying to stave off the competition. ②To encourage people to think differently and generate more ideas, put them on offense.
翻譯：研究還表明，組織機構墨守成規而停滯不前的原因，往往是他們處於努力抵擋競爭的守勢。為鼓勵人們另闢蹊徑，產生更多的創意，應把他們放在攻勢的位置。
點評：段VI和段VII以總分的形式，介紹了如何換一種思路，站在競爭者的角度，從而得到更好的創意。段VII總說，句①關鍵詞為「playing defense」，與之相應的則是句②中的「put… on offense」，這既構成鮮明對比，也說明而下一段將對比 「攻勢」和「守勢」這兩種不同思路而進行論述。「get stuck in a rut」則意為「墨守成規，停滯不前」。
VII ①That’s what Lisa Bodell of futurethink did when Merck CEO Ken Frazier hired her to help shake up the status quo. ②Bodell divided Merck’s executives into groups and asked them to come up with ways to put the company out of business. ③Instead of being cautious and sticking close to established competencies, the executives started considering bold new directions in strategy and product development that competitors could conceivably take. ④Energy in the room soared as they explored the possibilities. ⑤The offensive mindset, Carnegie Mellon professor Anita Woolley observes, focuses attention on 「pursuing opportunities…whereas defenders are more focused on maintaining their market share.」 ⑥That mental shift allowed the Merck executives to imagine competitive threats that didn’t yet exist. ⑦The result was a fresh set of opportunities for innovation.
翻譯：當默克的執行長肯•弗萊澤聘請未來思維的麗莎•波德爾來改變現狀時，她恰好就是這麼做的。波德爾將默克的高層管理人員分成幾個小組，然後讓他們提出有哪些辦法可以讓公司破產。這些高管不再謹小慎微，守成不變，他們開始大膽思考競爭者有可能採取的任何新的戰略和產品開發方向。當他們探索種種可能時，房間裡的氣氛沸騰起來。卡內基-梅隆教授安妮塔•伍利指出，進攻式思維把注意力放在「追求機會……，而守方則更在意維護市場份額」。這種思維方式的轉換，使默克高管能設想出那些尚不存在的競爭威脅。其結果是一系列嶄新的創新機會。
點評：段VII舉出默克公司商業實踐的案例，說明換一個思路可以讓公司獲得嶄新的創意機會。句①「That’s what … did…」很好的承接了上一段。句③ 通過「Instead of…」的對比，描寫了從「守勢」換到「攻勢」之後，默克公司高管心態和做法的轉變。句⑤以 「whereas」的聯繫詞進行連接，進一步對比了這兩種心態。⑥⑦句說明，一個思路的變化可以帶來新視角和嶄新的創意機會。