????你得出了什么觀點(diǎn)？

????任何文化里都有關(guān)于世界如何運(yùn)轉(zhuǎn)的一系列假設(shè),，這些假設(shè)很難被挑戰(zhàn),，因此它們就慢慢地變成教條。比如飲料公司就認(rèn)為人們喜歡甜味,，但是究竟怎樣界定喜歡呢,？

????在企業(yè)里，人們幾乎不可能跳出品牌進(jìn)行思考,。以制藥公司為例,，哪怕病人已經(jīng)生命垂危，昏迷不醒了,，制藥公司還是覺(jué)得病人可以選擇藥物的具體品牌,。甲骨文公司（Oracle）信奉的教條就是摩爾定律：速度提高兩倍，體積縮小兩倍,，這就是他們基本的見(jiàn)解,。英特爾（Intel）已經(jīng)在干兩件大事：智能手機(jī)和平板電腦，但他們錯(cuò)過(guò)了搭這兩條順風(fēng)船的第一時(shí)間,。為什么呢,？因?yàn)樘幚砟芰σ呀?jīng)不那么重要了，更重要的是電池壽命和用戶體驗(yàn),。

????那么企業(yè)為什么會(huì)錯(cuò)過(guò)身邊的變革,？

????經(jīng)常是心理問(wèn)題導(dǎo)致的,。在制藥行業(yè)，他們用一群二十八九歲的銷售代表根據(jù)10000個(gè)病人積累的經(jīng)驗(yàn)向醫(yī)生賣(mài)藥,。你認(rèn)為醫(yī)生和銷售代表之間有健康的信任關(guān)系嗎,？沒(méi)有，這也就是為什么他們只有兩分鐘的時(shí)間向醫(yī)生推銷樣品,，而樣品大概占成本的40%,。改變這種情況的唯一方法是讓對(duì)方明白世界并不是這樣的。

????為什么你和你的團(tuán)隊(duì)比貝恩（Bain）和麥肯錫（McKinsey）等咨詢公司更擅長(zhǎng)向企業(yè)展示這一點(diǎn)?

????我們有從一個(gè)世界進(jìn)入另一個(gè)世界的出色能力,，所以我們喜歡招聘人類學(xué)畢業(yè)生和記者,。他們可能是最擅長(zhǎng)從一個(gè)世界進(jìn)入另一個(gè)世界的人了。他們會(huì)選擇用哪些措辭,，哪些東西適合某個(gè)特定文化,。所以我們會(huì)研究不同的世界，在各個(gè)世界以及他們使用的不同的東西里存在一些共性,。我們把這種鏈條稱作“目的鏈”——你之所以做這件事,，是為了做成那件事。

????但是說(shuō)到做一件事是為了做成另一件事,，這個(gè)說(shuō)法聽(tīng)起來(lái)不是很理性,，而且你不是說(shuō)過(guò)人類本質(zhì)上是非理性的嗎？

????是的,?？纯次覀兪窃鯓咏Y(jié)婚的，怎么挑剃須刀的,，都是在許多選擇中糾結(jié)的過(guò)程,。再看看買(mǎi)車的人，他們會(huì)做各種調(diào)查,，然后買(mǎi)一輛自己覺(jué)得對(duì)的車,。我們買(mǎi)電視的時(shí)候，經(jīng)常會(huì)買(mǎi)與房子的裝修最搭調(diào)的,。這些都暗示了“我”是一個(gè)什么樣的人,。它不是一件理性的事，但它可以被研究,。

????And what is it you bring to the table?

????In any culture, you have a set of assumptions about how the world works. They're hard to challenge, then those grow into orthodoxies. The example at beverage companies is [the idea] that sweetness drives liking, but what does it mean to like something?

????Inside companies, it is nearly impossible to think outside the brand. At pharmaceutical companies, for instance, even when the patient is knocked out fighting for his life, [companies] still think people have a brand choice. Or at Intel (INTC), their dogma is Moore's law: twice as fast, twice as small. That's been their foundational insight. Intel has had two things happen: the smartphone and the tablet. They [missed] the boat on two main developments, and why?Because processing power isn't as important. It's about battery life, user experience.

????So why do companies miss out on the changes around them?

????It often comes from psychological things. In the pharma industry, they are selling to doctors with 10,000 patients in their experience, using a sales force of 28- to 29-year-olds. Do you think there's a healthy trust between the doctor and the sales rep? No. Which is why they have about two minutes of time [with doctors] which they buy with samples, and samples are around 40% of the cost. It's a waste. The only way to change that is to show that the world is different, that there is a way.

????What makes you and your team better at showing companies this than, say, other consulting firms like Bain or McKinsey,？

????We have great skill moving from one world to another. That's why we hire anthropologists and journalists: They are probably some of the best at moving from one world to another. They pick up on what words to use, what is meaningful in certain cultures. So we study worlds, and within all worlds are commonalities in the different stuff they use. We call these chains of "in order to" -- you do this, in order to do that.

????But describing doing one thing, in order to do another thing, isn't that pretty rational, and aren't you saying we're essentially irrational?

????Oh yes, look at the way we marry, or what razors brands we end up with; it happens in this swirl of decisions. We look at people who buy cars, and they do all this research, and then go with the one that feels right. With televisions, it's often the one that fits in my house; that says something about who I am, and that's not a rational thing, but it can be studied.