Making decisions, even in areas you know relatively well, usually involves an element of uncertainty. Sometimes decisions can be made quickly, and uncertainty is acceptable or desirable. Other times, decisions are made slowly and deliberately to remove as much uncertainty as possible.
做决定，即使在你相对熟悉的领域，通常也涉及不确定因素。有时可以快速做出决定，不确定性是可以接受的或是可取的。其他时候，决定是缓慢而慎重地做出的，以尽可能消除不确定性。

Once you are faced with a decision, the question becomes whether you should make it fast or slow.
一旦你面临一个决定，问题就变成了你应该快还是慢地做出决定。

Do you gather as much information as possible, knowing the process of gathering information slows you down and carries a cost? Or do you make it quickly with imperfect information?
你会尽可能多地收集信息，尽管知道收集信息的过程会拖慢你并带来成本吗？还是你会在信息不完美的情况下快速做出决定？

Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon.com, considers decisions like doors. He asks himself if the decision is a one-way door or a two-way door. What’s the difference?
杰夫·贝索斯，亚马逊创始人，把决策看作门。他问自己这个决策是单向门还是双向门。有什么区别呢？

Once you walk through a one-way door, you can’t come back. It’s irreversible. With a two-way door, on the other hand, you can walk through, look around, and easily come back to where you started.
一旦你穿过单向门，你就不能回来。这是不可逆的。另一方面，通过双向门，你可以走过去，四处看看，然后轻松地回到你开始的地方。

In a shareholder letter, Bezos wrote^[1]:
在一封致股东的信中，贝索斯写道 ^[1] ：

Some decisions are consequential and irreversible or nearly irreversible – one-way doors – and these decisions must be made methodically, carefully, slowly, with great deliberation and consultation. If you walk through and don’t like what you see on the other side, you can’t get back to where you were before. We can call these Type 1 decisions. But most decisions aren’t like that – they are changeable, reversible – they’re two-way doors. If you’ve made a suboptimal Type 2 decision, you don’t have to live with the consequences for that long. You can reopen the door and go back through. Type 2 decisions can and should be made quickly by high judgment individuals or small groups.
有些决策是重要且不可逆的，或者几乎不可逆的——单向门——这些决策必须经过系统的、仔细的、缓慢的、深思熟虑和咨询后才能做出。如果你走过去后不喜欢另一边的景象，你无法回到之前的状态。我们可以称这些为第一类决策。但大多数决策不是这样的——它们是可变的、可逆的——它们是双向门。如果你做了一个次优的第二类决策，你不必长期忍受其后果。你可以重新打开门，回到原来的状态。第二类决策可以而且应该由高判断力的个人或小团队快速做出。

As organizations get larger, there seems to be a tendency to use the heavy-weight Type 1 decision-making process on most decisions, including many Type 2 decisions. The end result of this is slowness, unthoughtful risk aversion, failure to experiment sufficiently, and consequently diminished invention. We’ll have to figure out how to fight that tendency.
随着组织规模的扩大，似乎倾向于在大多数决策上使用重量级的第一类决策过程，包括许多第二类决策。其最终结果是缓慢、不加思索的风险规避、实验不足，从而导致发明减少。我们必须想办法对抗这种倾向。

Reversible to Irreversible
可逆到不可逆

Decisions fall somewhere on the continuum from reversible to irreversible. You can tell where a decision lies on this spectrum by asking how much it would cost to undo. The higher the cost to undo, the more irreversible it is. The lower the cost, the more reversible it is.
决策在可逆和不可逆的连续体上占据某个位置。你可以通过询问撤销它的成本来判断决策在这个光谱上的位置。撤销成本越高，它就越不可逆。成本越低，它就越可逆。

Perhaps an example will help illustrate the point. After brushing your teeth this morning, you run to the store to grab some toothpaste. However, they are out of your usual brand. Since the decision is easily reversible, you quickly grab a package that looks decent and take it home. If the toothpaste is terrible, you can easily get another type tomorrow. Now consider an irreversible decision. Imagine you are the manager of an NBA team. You’re thinking about trading one of your star players away. Once made, that decision can’t (easily) be undone.
也许一个例子会有助于说明这一点。今天早上刷完牙后，你跑到商店去买牙膏。然而，他们没有你平时用的品牌。由于这个决定是容易逆转的，你很快拿了一包看起来不错的牙膏带回家。如果牙膏很糟糕，你明天可以很容易地换另一种。现在考虑一个不可逆的决定。想象一下你是一个 NBA 球队的经理。你正在考虑交易掉你的一位明星球员。一旦做出这个决定，就不能（轻易）撤销。

Once you learn to see decisions through the lens of reversible and irreversible, everything changes. It also changes how you make decisions.
一旦你学会通过可逆和不可逆的视角看待决策，一切都会改变。这也会改变你做决策的方式。

Make reversible decisions as soon as possible and make irreversible decisions as late as possible.
尽早做出可逆决策，尽晚做出不可逆决策。

When decisions are reversible, make them fast. Your biggest risk is dragging your feet and not making a decision. The cost to acquire additional information isn’t worth the effort.
当决策是可逆的时，要快速做出决定。你最大的风险是拖延不决。获取额外信息的成本不值得付出努力。

When decisions are irreversible, slow them down. The biggest risk is making the wrong decision. The cost to get the information we need to reduce uncertainty is worth the time and effort.
当决策不可逆时，放慢速度。最大的风险是做出错误的决定。获取我们需要的信息以减少不确定性的成本是值得时间和精力的。

I used this heuristic to quit my job and start my first company. While some people saw this as a huge risk, I didn’t. I realized that if the company failed, I would have learned a lot and could pretty easily return to my old job. It was a risk, but it wasn’t as big as some thought.
我用这个启发式方法辞掉了工作，创办了我的第一家公司。虽然有些人认为这是一个巨大的风险，但我并不这么认为。我意识到，如果公司失败了，我会学到很多东西，并且可以很容易地回到以前的工作。这是一个风险，但并不像一些人想的那么大。

The future is unpredictable.
未来是不可预测的。

Sometimes you can handle the uncertainty or outcomes. Like trying a new restaurant after reading a review or hearing about it from someone at work. Other times, you want to remove as much uncertainty as possible. You wouldn’t decide to marry someone after one amazing date, buy a car without test driving it, or put all your money into a stock you overheard someone talking about in line at the grocery store.
有时候你可以应对不确定性或结果。比如在阅读评论或听同事推荐后尝试一家新餐馆。其他时候，你想尽可能消除不确定性。你不会在一次美妙的约会后就决定与某人结婚，不会在没有试驾的情况下买车，也不会把所有的钱都投入到在杂货店排队时听到别人谈论的一只股票上。

Avoiding Analysis Paralysis
避免分析瘫痪

Make reversible decisions as soon as possible. Make irreversible decisions as late as possible.
尽早做出可逆决策。尽可能晚地做出不可逆决策。

When I mention this rule to people, they ask: how do I know it’s as late as possible?
当我向人们提到这条规则时，他们会问：我怎么知道这是尽可能晚的？

Consider my rule of STOP, LOP, or KNOW. If you stop gathering useful information (STOP), you’re about to lose an opportunity (LOP), or you know what to do (KNOW).
考虑我的规则：停止（STOP）、失去机会（LOP）或知道（KNOW）。如果你停止收集有用的信息（STOP），你就要失去一个机会（LOP），或者你知道该怎么做（KNOW）。

If you stop gathering useful information and there is no prospect of any on the horizon, make the decision. When you’re in charge of operations at a three-letter agency, you make many hard decisions with imperfect information. Once you’ve talked to all the people with useful information, it’s time to act. The problem is a lot of people don’t act. They sit waiting for some magical piece of information that might or might not come that will make the decision clear. I call this unicorn information. We know it’s out there, but we can never find it. You can’t wait for the unicorn, you have to decide. The people that waited for the unicorn didn’t last.
如果你停止收集有用的信息，并且没有任何前景可言，就做出决定。当你负责一个三字母机构的运营时，你会在信息不完美的情况下做出许多艰难的决定。一旦你与所有拥有有用信息的人交谈过，就该行动了。问题是很多人不行动。他们坐等某个可能会或不会出现的神奇信息，这将使决定变得清晰。我称之为独角兽信息。我们知道它在那里，但我们永远找不到它。你不能等待独角兽，你必须做出决定。那些等待独角兽的人没有坚持下去。

If you’re about to lose a meaningful opportunity, make the decision. Recently a big real estate opportunity came across my desk. While not impossible to reverse, it would have been prohibitively costly. As with any decision that involves a lot of money — the biggest check I’ve ever written, I dove into the details wanting to understand everything. At first, there was no rush to make the decision. When interest rates started to rise, the deal got a lot more attractive. My partner called and asked if I was in because it was going forward with or without me. I had to decide, or I’d lose the opportunity.
如果你即将失去一个有意义的机会，就做出决定。最近，我遇到一个很大的房地产机会。虽然不是不可能逆转，但成本会非常高。和任何涉及大量金钱的决定一样——这是我写过的最大的一张支票，我深入细节，想要了解一切。起初，并不急于做出决定。当利率开始上升时，这笔交易变得更加有吸引力。我的合伙人打电话问我是否参与，因为无论有没有我，这笔交易都会继续进行。我必须做出决定，否则我会失去这个机会。

If you know what to do, make the decision. When you’re the boss, sometimes you have to let people go. While you can offer feedback and coach and hope things will change, sometimes you wake up and know what to do. Once you know it’s best for both parties to move on, the biggest mistake is waiting.
如果你知道该怎么做，就做出决定。当你是老板时，有时你不得不让人离开。虽然你可以提供反馈和指导，并希望事情会有所改变，但有时你醒来时就知道该怎么做。一旦你知道双方都最好继续前进，最大的错误就是等待。

Fast is not always Reckless.
快并不总是鲁莽。

Reversible decisions don’t need to be made the same way as irreversible decisions.
可逆决策不需要像不可逆决策那样做出。

Reversible decisions are not an excuse to act recklessly or be ill-informed, but rather an acknowledgement that imperfect decisions are ok.
可逆决策不是鲁莽行事或信息不足的借口，而是对不完美决策的认可。

Fast decisions are a competitive advantage. Warren Buffett has famously given a yes/no decision on acquisitions in less than 48 hours. Fast decisions are one advantage that start-ups have over incumbents.
快速决策是一种竞争优势。沃伦·巴菲特曾在不到 48 小时内对收购做出过是/否的决定。快速决策是初创公司相对于现有企业的一个优势。

A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week.
一个现在激烈执行的好计划胜过下周的完美计划。

General George Patton 乔治·巴顿将军

Bezos considers 70% certainty as the cut-off point where it is appropriate to make a decision. That means acting once we have 70% of the required information, instead of waiting longer. Making a decision at 70% certainty and then quickly course-correcting is much more effective than waiting for 90% certainty.
贝索斯认为 70%的确定性是做出决策的临界点。这意味着在我们拥有 70%的所需信息时就采取行动，而不是等待更长时间。在 70%的确定性时做出决策，然后迅速纠正方向，比等待 90%的确定性要有效得多。

More Information does not mean Better Outcomes.
更多信息并不意味着更好的结果。

In Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking, Malcolm Gladwell explains why decision-making under uncertainty can be so effective. We usually assume that more information leads to better decisions — if a doctor proposes additional tests, we tend to believe they will lead to a better outcome. Gladwell disagrees: “In fact, you need to know very little to find the underlying signature of a complex phenomenon. All you need is evidence of the ECG, blood pressure, fluid in the lungs, and an unstable angina. That’s a radical statement.”
在《眨眼之间：不假思索的思维力量》中，马尔科姆·格拉德威尔解释了为什么在不确定性下做决策会如此有效。我们通常认为更多的信息会带来更好的决策——如果医生建议进行额外的检查，我们往往认为这会带来更好的结果。格拉德威尔不同意：“事实上，你只需要知道很少的东西就能找到复杂现象的基本特征。你所需要的只是心电图、血压、肺部积液和不稳定型心绞痛的证据。这是一个激进的说法。”

In medicine, as in many areas, more information does not necessarily ensure improved outcomes. To illustrate this, Gladwell gives the example of a man arriving at a hospital with intermittent chest pains. His vital signs show no risk factors, yet his lifestyle does and he had heart surgery two years earlier. If a doctor looks at all the available information, it may seem that the man needs to be admitted to the hospital. But the additional factors, beyond the vital signs, are not important in the short term. In the long run, he is at serious risk of developing heart disease.
在医学领域，与许多其他领域一样，更多的信息并不一定能确保改善结果。为了说明这一点，格拉德威尔举了一个例子：一个男人因间歇性胸痛来到医院。他的生命体征没有显示出任何风险因素，但他的生活方式却显示出风险，而且他两年前做过心脏手术。如果医生查看所有可用的信息，可能会认为这个男人需要住院。但除了生命体征之外的其他因素在短期内并不重要。从长远来看，他确实有严重的心脏病风险。

Gladwell writes: 格拉德威尔写道：

… the role of those other factors is so small in determining what is happening to the man right now that an accurate diagnosis can be made without them. In fact, … that extra information is more than useless. It’s harmful. It confuses the issues. What screws up doctors when they are trying to predict heart attacks is that they take too much information into account.
那些其他因素在决定这个人现在发生什么事情中的作用是如此之小，以至于可以在没有它们的情况下做出准确的诊断。事实上，那些额外的信息不仅无用，反而有害。它们混淆了问题。当医生试图预测心脏病发作时，搞砸他们的是他们考虑了太多的信息。

Once you understand that reversible decisions are a great way to inject randomness, gather information, or even delegate to others, things change.
一旦你明白可逆决策是注入随机性、收集信息或甚至委托他人的一种好方法，事情就会改变。

The biggest risk to irreversible decisions is deciding before you need to. The biggest risk to reversible ones is waiting until the last minute.
做出不可逆决策的最大风险是过早决定。做出可逆决策的最大风险是等到最后一刻。

Make reversible decisions as soon as possible and make irreversible decisions as late as possible.
尽早做出可逆决策，尽晚做出不可逆决策。

*

End Notes 尾注

^[1] https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1018724/000119312516530910/d168744dex991.htm