经济学人商业 || 以貌识“英雄”
1
导读
感谢思维导图作者
Yao， 男， 准英专研究生， 二笔三口
2
听力|精读|翻译|词组
The eyes have it
以貌识“英雄”
英文部分选自经济学人20190914期Business版块
The eyes have it
以貌识“英雄”
A new book reveals the excessive attention paid to how executives look
一本新书讲述了人们对高管外貌的过度关注
Picture in your mind the typical chief executive. The chances are that you have thought of someone male, in a suit and distinguished-looking. In part, that is because most bosses look like that. It may also be because people instinctively defer to such types.
请大家在脑海中想象一下典型的首席执行官形象。大家多半想到的是一位西装革履、气度非凡的男性。在某种程度上，这是因为大多数老板看上去的确如此，也可能是因为直觉告诉人们他们就应该如此。
In their book “Messengers: Who We Listen To, Who We Don’t And Why”, Stephen Martin and Joseph Marks, two psychologists, outline how people respond to visual status signals. Just why are pedestrians likelier (three times as likely, according to one study) to defy traffic laws to follow a man across the road when he is wearing a suit than the same man dressed in denim? Similarly, motorists stuck at a traffic light are slower to honk their horn if the car in front has a prestige brand.
心理学家斯蒂芬·马丁(Stephen Martin)和约瑟夫·马克斯(Joseph Marks)在他们的《信使：我们该听谁、不该听谁、为什么？》一书中概述了人们对外显的身份地位特征做出的不同反应。研究表明，行人跟在穿着西服的人后面比跟在穿牛仔服的人后面违反交通法规概率增加了两倍。同样，堵在红绿灯路口的司机如果跟在一辆豪车后面（相比于普通汽车），按喇叭的频率会少很多。
One possibility is an evolved respect for those with a higher social position. This is not just about clothes or possessions. A further piece of research cited by the authors involved undergraduates who were shown photos of 50 chief executives from the Fortune 1000 list of big firms. Half of these bosses were from the most profitable groups and half from the least profitable. The undergraduates were asked to judge, on looks alone, which executives had qualities such as competence and dominance. Remarkably, the students tended to pick out those executives who led the most successful companies.
一种可能是人们越来越尊重社会地位高的人。社会地位不仅仅关乎衣服好坏或财产多寡。作者提到了另一项更近一步的研究：研究人员在大学生面前摆放来自《财富》美国1000强企业中50位首席执行官的照片，其中一半高管来自排行榜前列的企业，另一半则来自排行榜末端。研究人员让学生仅根据照片判断哪些高管拥有能力以及主导力等特质。值得注意的是，学生选出的往往是最成功企业的高管。
注：
Fortune 1000：财富美国1000强，是指美国《财富》杂志每年评选的全美最大的1000家公司的排行榜，以公司的营业额为排名。
It is hard to disentangle cause and effect. But it seems more probable that people with a certain type of appearance are likely to get promoted than it is to believe they are innately more competent than everyone else.
其中的因果关系很难理清。但拥有某类外表的人更易获得晋升，似乎比他们天生就比别人能力强的可能性更大。
Humans tend to respect men with particular physical characteristics. When participants in a study were shown pictures of male employees of a business consultancy, with similar clothes and masked faces, they perceived the taller men more positively in terms of team leadership skills. Indeed, research has shown that taller and more attractive men earn more than their shorter and plainer colleagues.
人类倾向尊重具备某类外表的男性。在一项研究中，研究人员向参与者展示了一家商业咨询公司的男性雇员照片，他们穿着相同的衣服，戴着面具。结果发现，参与者认为高个子更具团队领导力。事实上，研究表明，长相出众的高个子男性比相貌平平的矮个子男性挣得更多。
Another business advantage for men turns out to be a face with a higher-than-average width-to-height-ratio. Research showed how square-jawed men negotiated higher signing-on bonuses for themselves than longer-faced, round-jawed peers.
此外，脸型宽高比高于平均水平的男性更具商业优势。研究表明，方下巴的男性比长脸、圆下巴的男性能争取到更高的签约奖金。
注：
Signing-on bonus,签约奖金，经济学术语，也翻译为“签字费”，是公司为了激励新员工的加盟而向其支付的一笔钱。
Physical characteristics also affect recruitment at lower levels. A group of Italian researchers sent CVs to a range of employers, some with photos and some without. Applicants deemed attractive by independent scorers were 20% more likely to get an interview than the same application without a photo. Things are worse for the fairer sex. When photos were included, male jobseekers deemed unattractive were contacted 26% of the time, compared with 7% in the case of unattractive women.
同理，外形特征也会影响普通职位招聘。一组意大利研究人员向不同的雇主投递简历，有些附了照片另一些则没有。此次筛选采用独立评分机制，那些简历附照片的求职者更吸引雇主，获得面试机会的几率比不附照片时高20%。对女性来说情况更糟糕。在附上照片的情况下，男性求职者即便被认为没有魅力，公司联络他们的几率仍有26%，而女性求职者若被认为没有魅力，进一步洽谈的几率仅为7%。
All rather depressing, particularly for women trying to climb the corporate ladder. But there are some intriguing differences in the kind of personalities that boards tend to favour. The stereotype is that executives tend to be ruthless and egotistical—embodied by Gordon Gekko (or rather, the square-jawed Michael Douglas who played him). Not always, it turns out. The authors cite research on how boards choose chief executives. When choosing between two suitably qualified candidates to take charge of a company that is performing well, a board is likely to pick a leader who does not appear to be egotistical and self-interested. But if the company is in trouble, a narcissist stands a better chance. When the going gets tough, in other words, the board opts for a jerk.
这一结果令人沮丧，尤其是对于那些希望能在公司有所发展的女性。但是，就董事会青睐的高管性格而言，却有一些有趣的不同之处。一般人们印象中的高管都冷酷自大——代表人物就是戈登·盖柯(Gordon Gekko)（由方脸的迈克尔·道格拉斯扮演）。但事实上并非总是如此。作者援引关于董事会如何挑选首席执行官的研究：如果一家公司的业绩出色，董事会在两名资质相当的候选人中挑选适合的首席执行官时，更愿意选一位看起来不那么自大，不以自我为中心的候选人。但是，如果公司处于困境之中，自我中心型的候选者获胜几率更大。换言之，在公司境况窘迫时，董事会不惜选择一个混蛋。
Perhaps board members don’t think of it that way. One long-established phenomenon is the “halo effect”. If a person (or company) is rated highly in terms of one characteristic, they get good marks across the board. As the authors recount, this applies when employees are being assessed by their managers for qualities such as intelligence, decisiveness and leadership. Broadly speaking, managers divided staff into “good” and bad” workers; few employees were deemed to be intelligent but indecisive, for example.
也许董事们并不是这么想的。“光环效应”是一个众所周知的现象。如果一个人（或公司）的某一特征备受好评，那么他在所有方面都能赢得高分。作者称, 当经理对手下的员工进行智力、决策力以及领导力评估时，也会发生类似情况。一般来说，经理会把员工归类为“好员工”与“坏员工”，却很少会对员工做出“聪明，但不够果断”的评价。
注：
Halo effect: 晕轮效应，又称“光环效应”、“光晕效应”、“月晕效应”，属于心理学范畴。晕轮效应是指人们对他人的认知首先根据初步印象，然后再从这个印象推论出认知对象的其他特质。也就是，人们对人的认知和判断往往只从局部出发，扩散而得出整体印象，即是常常以既定印象概全。
What this fascinating book reaffirms is that people’s assessments of others are extremely subjective, and easily led astray by appearances. That suggests a lot can be achieved by using artificial intelligence in hiring and promotion decisions, providing the programming is done correctly and focuses on candidate qualifications. A computer shouldn’t be distracted by a handsome face.
这本书引人入胜，再次强调了人们对他人的评价极其主观，而且容易受到外表的影响。这意味着，如果在招聘和提拔员工时采用人工智能，将会大有改进，当然前提是正确设定程序，着重候选人的资质。毕竟电脑可不会被俊秀的脸蛋牵着鼻子走。
翻译组：
Celine，女，英专，外应MA
Sophie, 女，HR民工，经济学人粉丝
Yifei，女，英专硕士，专八，catti二笔
校对组：
Humi，女，CATer，Catti二笔
Hannah，女，教书匠，经济学人粉丝
Megan, 女，外事民工，热爱是唯一的信仰
3
观点|评论|思考
本次感想由Monica卡卡西独家奉献
Monica卡卡西 ，女，爱翻译，学写作，一个上升天蝎月亮双子的清奇菇凉
看完这篇文章，发现dress for successful有用的哎！
读书的时候，课上老师给我们讲小时候人人熟知的故事，坐井观天。最后，不知道怎么的，他引到了，谁能说人类自己不是那只青蛙呢？
当时听的时候，似懂非懂。后来生活中、工作中，慢慢地去看去想，发现自己有意无意的会选择自己熟悉的思考方式，遇见某一个人某一件事总是按照之前的套路去说话判断。（我真的是那种买衬衣，会一个款式集齐好几种颜色的人。）
自我反思的时候意识到，喔，原来自己就是那只青蛙啊，在既有的identity里带着壳子，拿着标签，选择最熟悉的方式认识世界，也总是或多或少的带着偏见，带着傲慢。
你说可以完全避免么？不能。因为，人是社会性动物，我们在一个流动的社会中长大，在人与人的沟通交流中磨合，在带有时代标记的文化氛围中成长，又与生俱来地带着些祖辈留下的集体无意识基因，我们不能完全逃离自己既有的经验，只能说尽量有意识地去避免。
文章最后作者写道，在招聘和选拔员工时如果采用了人工智能，这种对他人主观评价，且受外表影响的概率将会有所改进。
这也是《经济学人》文章的高明之处，它不会完全肯定地说，哎，人类完全可以避免。这种对人性抱有的尊重和清醒的认识，是值得我们学习的地方。毕竟人工智能的评价，需要提前设定好正确的程序。而正确的程序需要谁来设定呢？仍是由人类自己设定。
到这里，我只能说，人是一种懒惰的生物。选择自己熟悉的东西，喜欢好看的东西都是人的正常反应，正如贪吃好色的猪八戒比整日阿弥陀佛的唐僧更受人们的喜欢是一个道理，因为他真实可爱，与人类相似。但，人之所以为人，高明的地方在于人是一根能思想的芦苇。
4
愿景
小组
现有经济学人讨论群一个,如果您也有兴趣，可联系小编WeChat : foxwulihua。由于每天加小编人很多，为提高效率，大家添加小编，暗号“请求加入TE讨论群",小编通过后，请做好以下三点：
1.点赞转发公众号任一文章到朋友圈（相对比较“猥琐”，但是不进群不强求）