異類之不一樣的成功啟示錄 第136期:飛機失事的原因

Ratwatte continued, "All the guy had to do was tell the controller, 'we don't have fuel to comply with what you're trying to do.'

他繼續(xù)說："所有飛行員必須同空管員講明，我們沒有足夠的燃油可以支持我們飛達指定機場。"

All they had to do was say, 'We can't do that. We have to land in the next ten minutes.'They weren't able to put that across to the controller"

他們必須去說清楚‘我們無法達成你給的指令，我們必須在十分鐘內著陸。'他們沒有同空管員表達清楚。"

It was clear that Ratwatte was speaking carefully, because he was making the kind of cultural generalization that often leaves us uncomfortable.

很顯然懷特瓦特在敘述時很謹慎，因為他所提到的文化差別經(jīng)常會讓大家很不舒服。

But what happened with Avianca was just so strange-so inexplicable-

但發(fā)生在阿維安卡的事故非常離奇——這起事故的原因遠遠無法用表面現(xiàn)象解釋清楚——

that it demanded a more complete explanation than simply that Klotz was incompetent and the captain was tired.

這絕不只是克魯茲失職和機長疲憊這么簡單，整件事的背后有著更加復雜的原因。

There was something more profound- more structural- going on in that cockpit.

在事故發(fā)生的過程中，駕駛艙內一定發(fā)生了重要的事情。

What if there was something about the pilots' being Columbian that led to that crash?

是否可以說，由于飛行員是位哥倫比亞人，所以導致了飛機失事？

"Look, no American pilot would put up with that. That's the thing," Ratwatte said.

"看，因為美國飛行員不會容忍這一切發(fā)生，這是問題所在。"

"They would just say, 'Listen, buddy. I have to land.'"

懷特瓦特繼續(xù)說道，"他們會說，聽著，哥們兒，我必須著陸"。

In the 1960s and 1970s, the Dutch psychologist Geert Hofstede was working for the human resources department of IBM's European headquarters.

1960年到1970年間，荷蘭的心理學家吉特·霍夫斯泰德一直在IBM歐洲總部的人力資源部門工作。

Hofstede's job was to travel the globe, interviewing employees, asking questions about things like

他的工作主要是到世界各地去走訪當?shù)氐墓蛦T，隨之提出一些問題。

how people solve problems and how they work together and what their attitudes were to authority.

例如，人們解決問題的方式、團隊工作的方式、雇員對權威的態(tài)度，

The questionnaires were long and involved,

問卷很長而且非常詳細。

and over time Hofstede was able to develop an enormous database for analyzing the ways in which cultures differ from one another.

經(jīng)過一段很長的時間，霍夫斯泰德建立起一個龐大的數(shù)據(jù)庫，用來分析文化之間的不同。

Today, "Hofstede's Dimensions" are one of the most widely used paradigms in crosscultural psychology.

今天"霍夫斯泰德維度"已經(jīng)被廣泛地應用于跨文化心理學研究中。

Hofstede argued, for example, the cultures can be usefully distinguished according to how much they expect inpiduals to look after themselves.

霍夫斯泰德提出，根據(jù)個人關心自我、看重自我的程度就可以有效地區(qū)分出文化的不同。

He called that the "inpidualism collectivism scale."

他把這種衡量方法稱為"個人主義和集體主義范疇"。

The country that scores the highest on the inpidualism end of that scale is United States.

如在國家之間進行比較，那么美國的個人主義傾向性最高，

Not surprisingly, the United States is also the only industrialized country in the world that does not provide its citizens with universal healthcare.

毫無疑問，美國也是世界上唯一一個不給公民提供全程醫(yī)療保險的工業(yè)國家。

At the opposite end of that scale is Guatemala.

個人主義傾向性最低的國家是危地馬拉。