????最近幾天,，如果你一直在關(guān)注科技新聞，你肯定注意到了《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》一篇描述亞馬遜公司文化的報(bào)道所引發(fā)的軒然大波,。在這篇報(bào)道中，亞馬遜是一家實(shí)行不人道的精英管理的公司,，員工哪怕顯露出一點(diǎn)點(diǎn)弱點(diǎn),，都會(huì)遭到商業(yè)車輪的殘酷碾壓。杰夫·貝佐斯在上周末發(fā)出的一份備忘錄中回應(yīng)稱,，他根本不認(rèn)為此文描述的那個(gè)“沒有靈魂，反烏托邦的工作場(chǎng)所”是自己的公司,。

????一些亞馬遜員工也撰文談到了自己的工作經(jīng)歷,，很多人都談到了公司文化的問題,。亞馬遜基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施總監(jiān)尼克·丘博塔留在媒體上撰文稱,，《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》的報(bào)道“錯(cuò)得離譜”。軟件工程師蒂姆·博雷也撰寫了一篇博客,，稱他在亞馬遜工作期間的感受與該報(bào)道截然不同。

????不過與此同時(shí),，也有不少前亞馬遜員工表示,，這篇報(bào)道的部分內(nèi)容還是比較真實(shí)的，包括被迫長(zhǎng)時(shí)間工作,，把績(jī)效看得重于一切，以及一些人利用公司的“隨時(shí)反饋工具”向同事背后捅刀子等等,。

????那么,，真實(shí)的亞馬遜究竟是什么樣的？是像《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》說的那樣慘無人道,，還是如貝佐斯所言，“與一群天才小伙伴愉快地玩耍,，順便創(chuàng)造未來,？”

????我從來沒有在亞馬遜工作過，不過我倒是認(rèn)識(shí)不少曾在亞馬遜工作過的人,，其中既有職務(wù)較低的，也有級(jí)別較高的,。我敢說,，亞馬遜同時(shí)符合“天使與魔鬼”的兩面,。對(duì)于有些人來說，亞馬遜可能是個(gè)冷酷無情的地方,，讓他們感到自己不受歡迎,，公司對(duì)工作績(jī)效評(píng)價(jià)之嚴(yán)格,，也超出他們的預(yù)期,。但另一些人或許覺得這是一個(gè)具有挑戰(zhàn)性的環(huán)境，能促使他們做到連自己也沒想過自己能夠做到的事情,。

????這種情形或許無法促成一個(gè)好故事,，但我認(rèn)為它可能更接近事實(shí)真相,。毫無疑問，在亞馬遜,，有人濫用內(nèi)部反饋工具給別人背后捅刀子,，也肯定有讓員工拼命苦干的現(xiàn)象，對(duì)員工的個(gè)人問題和需求不夠關(guān)心,。這不奇怪，每個(gè)公司都有這種人,。但這種現(xiàn)象是否深植于亞馬遜的企業(yè)文化之中,？我表示懷疑。

????根據(jù)與一些前亞馬遜員工的交流,，我認(rèn)為根植于該公司企業(yè)文化深處的，是一種要做大事的渴望——即便這在某種程度上意味著要付出個(gè)人犧牲——以及一種感受,，即公司正在做一些很有價(jià)值,，甚至可能具有革命性的事情,。當(dāng)然你可以不信這一套，但這種渴望的確是存在的,。

????這個(gè)原則大體上也適用于很多為其他科技公司工作的人,，比如蘋果,、谷歌、Facebook和微軟的許多員工,。這就是為什么人們常說這些公司有著“宗教似的”狂熱,。因?yàn)楹芏嘣谶@些公司的人相信，他們所做的不僅是一份工作,，而是在做一些意義更重大的事,，一些值得做的事，一些需要多投入一份奉獻(xiàn)精神的事,。

????僅舉一例：相比于蘋果聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人史蒂夫·喬布斯對(duì)待員工的嚴(yán)厲程度,，亞馬遜員工受到的待遇簡(jiǎn)直就是春風(fēng)拂面,。喬布斯經(jīng)常告訴員工，如果誰(shuí)工作干得不好,，大家就應(yīng)該“憎恨他”,。當(dāng)喬尼·艾維等高管質(zhì)疑他的苛刻時(shí),，他說，粉飾太平不會(huì)幫助任何人——包括那些表現(xiàn)不佳的員工,。

????前蘋果公司員工本·湯普森現(xiàn)在經(jīng)營(yíng)著一家訂閱式科技分析服務(wù)Stratechery,。他近日回憶稱，在蘋果工作期間他曾經(jīng)遭到上級(jí)嚴(yán)厲批評(píng),，最終情緒崩潰，趴在辦公桌上大哭起來,。但心情平復(fù)后,，他又回頭去做那個(gè)讓他受到批評(píng)的項(xiàng)目，對(duì)其進(jìn)行了顯著的改進(jìn),，該產(chǎn)品直至今日仍在使用。他回憶道：“我沉下心來,，重頭開始,，在接下來幾天還是幾周的時(shí)候，竟然真的實(shí)現(xiàn)了概念上的突破,。我知道它是我做出的最佳成就之一?！?/p>

????我認(rèn)為,，亞馬遜之所以沒被歸入這類科技公司里，是因?yàn)槿藗兛偸前阉醋饕患伊闶凵?，而不是蘋果那種能夠生產(chǎn)神奇的產(chǎn)品來改變?nèi)藗兊纳睿o人們帶來快樂的公司,?！都~約時(shí)報(bào)》的報(bào)道基本也是持這個(gè)調(diào)調(diào),，在描述員工受到不人道的待遇時(shí),，該報(bào)道稱：“亞馬遜使用像‘使命’這樣的字眼，來描述可可脆餅或自拍桿的快遞業(yè)務(wù)”,，意思就是,，賣點(diǎn)雜貨怎么也難稱得上是“使命”,。

????我個(gè)人也并不覺得把《冰雪奇緣》娃娃早幾秒鐘送到顧客手里，是一件值得為之奮斗終生的事情,，但我認(rèn)為,，在杰夫·貝佐斯和亞馬遜其他高管看來，他們所做的事具有革命性意義,。他們將亞馬遜看成一種完全不同的零售商，一家更加高效,、更關(guān)注顧客的數(shù)據(jù)型零售商,。他們對(duì)亞馬遜事業(yè)的狂熱，和喬布斯對(duì)iPhone圖標(biāo)和配色方案的狂熱并無二致,。

????不管什么時(shí)候，如果你的公司不僅想要快速增長(zhǎng),，做現(xiàn)有行業(yè)的攪局者,，同時(shí)還想從根本上重新創(chuàng)造某種事物,，那么你就必須得有狂熱的行為?！都~約時(shí)報(bào)》描述的那些內(nèi)容不會(huì)讓任何一個(gè)曾在華爾街工作過的人感到驚訝,，也不會(huì)讓任何一個(gè)曾在某個(gè)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)高度激烈的行業(yè)里工作過的人感到驚訝,。

????這不是在為《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》中報(bào)道的任何行為做辯解。（如《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》稱亞馬遜未對(duì)懷孕和患癌的員工給予應(yīng)有待遇,，對(duì)亞馬遜對(duì)待倉(cāng)庫(kù)工人的一些做法也給予了批評(píng),。）我只是認(rèn)為,，有關(guān)亞馬遜的企業(yè)文化的故事,，要比《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》的那種“亞馬遜是邪惡王國(guó)”的敘事筆法復(fù)雜得多。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：樸成奎

????審校：任文科

????If you’ve been following the technology press over the past few days, you will have seen some of the fallout from a New York Times piece on the workplace culture at Amazon AMZN 0.70% , which portrayed the company as an inhuman meritocracy, where people are thrown under the wheels of commerce if they show even the slightest weakness. In an internal memo he sent out on the weekend, Jeff Bezos said that he didn’t recognize the “soulless, dystopian workplace” described in the newspaper’s story.

????Some Amazon employees have also written about their experiences at the company, and many have taken issue with the description of its culture. Head of infrastructure Nick Ciubotariu wrote a piece at Medium in which he said the NYT story was “blatantly incorrect,” and veteran software engineer Tim Bray also wrote a blog post saying his experience at Amazon was nothing like what the paper described.

????At the same time, however, a number of former Amazon staffers have said certain parts of the New York Times story rang true, including the pressure to work long hours, the focus on performance above all else, and in some cases a culture of back-stabbing fueled by the company’s anonymous Anytime Feedback Tool.

????So which is the real Amazon? The one that is cruel and inhuman, or the one that Jeff Bezos says involves “having fun with a bunch of brilliant teammates, helping invent the future?”

????I’ve never worked at Amazon, but I know a number of people who have—both at lower levels and in more senior positions—and I would be willing to bet that the company fits both of these profiles at the same time. For some, it is probably a cruel place where they feel unwelcome, and their performance is judged more harshly than they would like, but for others I expect it is a challenging environment that makes them do things they might not have even thought they were capable of.

????That may not make for a great story, but I think it’s probably a lot closer to reality. I have no doubt that there are people at Amazon who mis-use the internal feedback tool, or drive their employees too hard, or are unsympathetic when it comes to personal issues and needs. Every company has those people. But is this hard-wired into Amazon culture? I doubt it.

????What I think is hard-wired into the company’s culture, based on conversations with former Amazon employees, is a desire to do great work—even if that requires some level of personal sacrifice — and a feeling that the company is doing something worthwhile, perhaps even revolutionary. You can dismiss this idea if you want, but it seems to be true.

????This is the same general principle that applies to many people who work for other technology companies you’ve probably heard of, including Apple AAPL 1.03% , Google GOOG 0.44% , Facebook FB -0.49% and (in its day) Microsoft MSFT 0.68% . It’s why these companies are often described as being cult-like: Because many who work there believe that they aren’t just doing a job, they are working on something that is larger than themselves, something worthwhile, something that requires an extra level of commitment.

????To take just one example, Apple co-founder Steve Jobs’ treatment of his staff makes anything that Amazon has done (or likely ever will do) seem like a day at the beach. He routinely told employees that they “should hate each other” for doing poor work, and when fellow executives like Jony Ive questioned his harshness he said sugar-coating it wouldn’t help anyone—including the employees who were under-performing.

????Former Apple employee Ben Thompson, who now runs a subscription-based technology analysis service called Stratechery, recalls in his most recent update how he was criticized harshly by a superior and wound up crying at his desk. But after he stopped feeling sorry for himself, he turned the project he was criticized for into something much better that is still in use today: “I hunkered down, started from the beginning, and at some point over the next few days or weeks had a real conceptual breakthrough,” he says. “And I knew it was some of my best work ever.”

????I think part of the reason that Amazon gets singled out is that it is seen as just a retailer, not a company like Apple that is making magical products to improve people’s lives or fill them with joy. This tone runs throughout the New York Times piece, which talks about how employees are subjected to inhuman treatment “with words like ‘mission’ used to describe lightning-quick delivery of Cocoa Krispies or selfie sticks.” The implication is that selling things somehow isn’t a worthwhile goal.

????I don’t personally think that shipping Frozen dolls to customers a few seconds faster is something I want to devote my life to, but I believe that Jeff Bezos and his senior staff see what they are doing as revolutionary to some extent. I think they see Amazon as being a completely different type of retailer—a much more efficient, and data-driven, and customer-focused one—and they are as fanatical about that as Steve Jobs was about iPhone icons and color schemes.

????Whenever you have a company that is trying to not only grow rapidly and disrupt existing industries, but to reinvent how something works on such a fundamental level, you are going to have fanatical behavior. The kind of thing that the New York Times describes would not surprise anyone who has worked on Wall Street, or in any large company involved in a hyper-competitive industry.

????That’s not meant to justify any of the behavior that is detailed in the NYT story, whether it’s poor treatment of pregnant or cancer-stricken employees, or any of the other criticisms of Amazon’s practices involving warehouse workers and so on. I just think the story of Amazon’s culture is a lot more complex than the “Amazon is an evil empire” narrative that the Times chose to give us.