The UX Research reckoning is here | Judd Antin (Airbnb, Meta)

Judd Antin: User-centered performance refers to customer obsession or user-centered practice that is symbolic rather than focused on learning.

Judd Antin：以用户为中心的绩效是指对客户的痴迷或以用户为中心的实践，这种实践是象征性的，而不是专注于学习。

It's hugely common, I would argue.

我认为这很常见。

It's work we do to signal to each other how customer obsessed we are, not because we want to make a different decision.

我们所做的工作是为了向彼此表明我们对客户的关注程度，而不是因为我们想要做出不同的决定。

If your listeners are like, "I don't do that." I'm like, "Think about it for a second.

如果你的听众会说，“我不会那样做。”我想，“想一想。

This is extremely common." Every time a PM comes to a researcher at the end of a product process and says, "Can you just run a quick user study just to validate our assumptions," that's user-centered performance.

这种情况非常常见。”每当产品流程结束时，产品经理找到研究人员并说：“你能进行一次快速的用户研究来验证我们的假设吗？”这就是以用户为中心的绩效。

It's too late to matter.

已经太晚了，无所谓了。

We got to ship it.

我们必须运送它。

What they want is to check the box.

他们想要的是选中该框。

One of my big mantras was, "We don't validate, we falsify.

我的一大口头禅是：“我们不验证，我们伪造。

We are looking to be wrong." Many PMs, many designers are not in that place.

我们正在寻找错误的。”很多产品经理、很多设计师都不在那个地方。

They do not want to be wrong.

他们不想犯错。

They're looking to validate, and that's user-centered performance.

他们正在寻求验证，这就是以用户为中心的性能。

Lenny: Today my guest is Judd Anton.

莱尼：今天我的客人是贾德·安东。

Judd helped build the user research practice at Facebook.

贾德帮助建立了 Facebook 的用户研究实践。

He was a longtime head of research at Airbnb, and his direct reports have gone on to lead research teams at Figma, Notion, Slack, Robinhood, Duolingo, Fair, and other amazing companies.

他曾长期担任 Airbnb 的研究主管，他的直接下属后来领导了 Figma、Notion、Slack、Robinhood、Duolingo、Fair 和其他出色公司的研究团队。

These days, Judd spends his time consulting, helping companies with organizational challenges, product strategy, design, research, hiring, onboarding, and crisis management.

如今，贾德将时间花在咨询上，帮助公司应对组织挑战、产品战略、设计、研究、招聘、入职和危机管理。

In our conversation, we unpack a conclusion that Jud has come to recently about how the user research field is going through a reckoning and what needs to change both within the user research field and how companies leverage user research going forward.

在我们的谈话中，我们解开了贾德最近得出的一个结论，即用户研究领域正在经历一场清算，用户研究领域需要改变什么，以及公司如何利用用户研究来发展。

Lenny: Judd shares what the user research field has gotten wrong over the last decade, how PMs and designers rely on user research too often, and to answer the wrong questions, where user research will continue to provide significant value, and how to best leverage your researchers, why it's important for researchers to think about the business goals more versus just what the users need, what to look for when you're hiring a user researcher, how PMs can be better partners to researchers, and also a phenomenon that I love that Judd describes and often witnesses, that he calls user-centered performance, where everyone acts like they care about the user, but they're just doing it for show and already know what they want to do.

Lenny：贾德分享了用户研究领域在过去十年中犯下的错误，产品经理和设计师如何过于频繁地依赖用户研究，以及回答错误的问题，用户研究将继续提供重要价值，以及如何最好地利用你的研究人员，为什么研究人员更多地考虑业务目标而不是用户需要什么很重要，当你雇用用户研究员时要寻找什么，产品经理如何成为研究人员更好的合作伙伴，以及我喜欢贾德描述和经常目睹的一种现象，他称之为以用户为中心的绩效，每个人都表现得好像他们关心用户，但他们只是为了表演而这样做，并且已经知道他们想做什么。

This episode has a lot of spicy takes and will probably upset some people, but Judd is sharing some real talk, here, that I think we all need to hear.

这一集有很多辛辣的内容，可能会让一些人感到不安，但贾德在这里分享了一些真实的谈话，我认为我们都需要听到。

With that, I bring you Judd Antin after a short word from our sponsors.

在我们的赞助商简短发言后，我为您带来了贾德·安廷 (Judd Antin)。

Lenny: This time of year is prime for career reflection and setting goals for professional growth.

莱尼：每年的这个时候是职业反思和设定职业发展目标的黄金时间。

I always like to spend this time reflecting on what I accomplished the previous year, what I hope to accomplish the next year, and whether this is the year I look for a new opportunity.

我总是喜欢用这段时间反思我去年完成的事情，我希望明年完成的事情，以及今年是否是我寻找新机会的一年。

That's where today's sponsor Teal comes in.

这就是今天的赞助商蒂尔登场的地方。

Teal provides you with the tools to run an amazing job search with an AI powered resume builder, job tracker, cover letter generator, and Chrome extension that integrates with over 40 job boards, Teal is the all-in-one platform you need to run a more streamlined and efficient job search and stand out in this competitive market.

Teal 为您提供了运行令人惊叹的职位搜索的工具，包括人工智能驱动的简历生成器、职位跟踪器、求职信生成器以及与 40 多个职位板集成的 Chrome 扩展程序。Teal 是您运行更精简、更高效的职位搜索并在这个竞争激烈的市场中脱颖而出所需的一体化平台。

There's a reason nearly one million people have trusted Teal to run their job search.

近一百万人信任 Teal 来进行求职是有原因的。

If you're thinking of making a change in the new year, leverage Teal to grow your career on your own terms.

如果您想在新的一年做出改变，请利用青色按照自己的方式发展您的职业生涯。

Get started for free at tealhq.com/lenny.

请访问 tealhq.com/lenny 免费开始使用。

That's tealhq.com/lenny.

这是tealhq.com/lenny。

Lenny: This episode is brought to you by Vanta, helping you streamline your security compliance to accelerate your growth.

Lenny：本集由 Vanta 为您带来，可帮助您简化安全合规性以加速您的成长。

Thousands of fast-growing companies like Gusto, KOM, Quora, and Modern Treasury trust Vanta to help build scale, manage, and demonstrate their security and compliance programs, and get ready for audits in weeks, not months.

Gusto、KOM、Quora 和 Modern Treasury 等数千家快速发展的公司信任 Vanta 帮助扩大规模、管理和展示其安全与合规计划，并在几周而不是几个月的时间内为审计做好准备。

By offering the most in-demand security and privacy frameworks such as SOC 2, ISO 27001, GDPR, HIPAA, and many more, Vanta helps companies obtain the reports they need to accelerate growth, build efficient compliance processes, mitigate risks to their businesses, and build trust with external stakeholders.

通过提供最受欢迎的安全和隐私框架（例如 SOC 2、ISO 27001、GDPR、HIPAA 等），Vanta 帮助公司获取加速增长、构建高效合规流程、降低业务风险以及与外部利益相关者建立信任所需的报告。

Lenny: Over 5,000 fast-growing companies use Vanta to automate up to 90% of the work involved with SOC 2 and these other frameworks.

Lenny：超过 5,000 家快速发展的公司使用 Vanta 自动化 SOC 2 和其他框架所涉及的高达 90% 的工作。

For a limited time Lenny's podcast listeners get $1,000 off Vanta.

Lenny 的播客听众限时享受 Vanta 1,000 美元优惠。

Go to vanta.com/lenny, that's V-A-N-T-A.com/lenny to learn more and to claim your discounts.

请访问vanta.com/lenny（即V-A-N-T-A.com/lenny）了解更多信息并申请折扣。

Get started today.

今天就开始吧。

Judd, thank you so much for being here.

贾德，非常感谢你来到这里。

Welcome to the podcast,

欢迎来到播客，

Lenny: It's my pleasure.

莱尼：这是我的荣幸。

So we actually worked together at Airbnb for many years.

事实上，我们在 Airbnb 合作了很多年。

And as I was preparing for this, I realized how many of the people that you managed went on to do amazing things.

当我为此做准备时，我意识到你管理的有多少人继续做出了惊人的事情。

So I'm just going to read a list of people that worked for you and what they do now.

因此，我将阅读一份为您工作过的人员名单以及他们现在所做的事情。

We had Matt Gallivan, who now leads research at Slack.

我们有 Matt Gallivan，他现在领导 Slack 的研究工作。

We have Janna Bray, who leads research at Notion, Celeste Ridlen, who leads research at Robinhood.

我们有 Janna Bray，她领导了 Notion 的研究；Celeste Ridlen，她领导了 Robinhood 的研究。

Rebecca Grey, who leads research at Fair, Hannah Pileggi, who I think was leading research at Duolingo, Louise Beryl, who leads research at Figma, and then Noam, who was leading research at Wealthfront.

Rebecca Grey 负责 Fair 的研究，Hannah Pileggi 负责 Duolingo 的研究，Louise Beryl 负责 Figma 的研究，然后是 Noam，负责 Wealthfront 的研究。

I think he moved on to something else.

我认为他转向了其他事情。

What a fricking crazy alumni community and group from this one team that you hired and incubated.

你雇佣和孵化的这个团队是一个多么疯狂的校友社区和团体啊。

Judd Antin: No, I've never looked at that list, but I'll tell you, I have been so privileged to work with all these amazing humans.

贾德·安廷：不，我从来没有看过那个名单，但我会告诉你，我很荣幸能与所有这些了不起的人一起工作。

I can't take credit for it.

我不能把这归功于它。

They're just outstanding people.

他们只是杰出的人。

And I'm glad the diaspora is out there, because these people, rock stars.

我很高兴散居国外的人在那里，因为这些人是摇滚明星。

Lenny: Okay.

莱尼：好的。

The main reason that I wanted to do a podcast episode with you is that you wrote this piece that was titled The User Research Reckoning is Here, which I understand caused quite a stir in the research community and I think adjacent communities.

我想和你一起做播客节目的主要原因是你写了这篇题为《用户研究清算就在这里》的文章，我知道这在研究社区和我认为邻近的社区引起了不小的轰动。

And let me just read one of your takeaways at the top of your post to give people a sense of what it was about.

让我在你的帖子顶部读一下你的要点之一，让人们了解它的内容。

You wrote, "The user research discipline over the last 15 years is dying.

您写道：“过去 15 年的用户研究学科正在消亡。

The reckoning is here.

清算就在这里。

The discipline can still survive and thrive, but we'd better adapt, and quick." Before we get into the meat of the piece, could you share a bit about just the reaction to this piece and maybe if it was a surprise and what you expected would happen when you put this out?

这门学科仍然可以生存和发展，但我们最好尽快适应。”在我们深入探讨这篇文章的核心内容之前，您能否分享一下人们对这篇文章的反应，也许这是一个惊喜，以及当您发布这篇文章时您期望会发生什么？

Judd Antin: Yeah, I was definitely surprised.

贾德·安廷：是的，我确实很惊讶。

I wrote it because I wanted to start a conversation about something I was thinking about.

我写它是因为我想开始讨论我正在思考的事情。

I didn't really know who would read it.

我真的不知道谁会读它。

And in the end it turned out a lot of people read it.

最后发现很多人都读过它。

I learned that using the word reckoning may have been a mistake because it inspires a lot of drama in a conversation that I wanted to be really productive and positive.

我了解到使用“计算”​​这个词可能是一个错误，因为它在我想要真正富有成效和积极的对话中激发了很多戏剧性。

Overall, I would say, though, that the response was very positive.

但总的来说，我想说，反应是非常积极的。

It seemed to resonate with a lot of people who reached out to me.

这似乎引起了很多向我伸出援手的人的共鸣。

I spent a lot of time talking to teams, to designers, to researchers, but there were also a ton of critiques.

我花了很多时间与团队、设计师、研究人员交谈，但也收到了大量的批评。

Judd Antin: I would say some of it was like people thought I was throwing research or researchers under the bus, like, "It's researchers' fault.

贾德·安廷：我想说的是，有些人认为我把研究或研究人员扔到了公共汽车下，比如，“这是研究人员的错。

We're doing it wrong." Which I don't believe at all.

我们做错了。”我根本不相信。

And that I wasn't taking responsibility as a research leader or a design leader myself.

而且我自己并没有承担作为研究领导者或设计领导者的责任。

And the most interesting one I would say was the anti-capitalist crew, because one of my points that we'll talk about is that I think researchers need to be more profit focused.

我想说的最有趣的是反资本主义团队，因为我们要讨论的观点之一是我认为研究人员需要更加关注利润。

And there are a lot of people out there who, I think they think that's not cool or not research's job, and I'm like, "Well, what are we doing then, if we're not helping businesses succeed?" But that was the most surprising critique, for sure.

我认为有很多人认为这不酷或者不是研究的工作，我想，“好吧，如果我们不能帮助企业成功，那我们在做什么呢？”但这无疑是最令人惊讶的批评。

Lenny: I've worked with some of those people who are just like, "Why are we growing?

莱尼：我和一些人一起工作过，他们的想法是：“我们为什么要成长？

Why do we focus so much on growth?

为什么我们如此关注增长？

Why do we need to grow this business?"

为什么我们需要发展这项业务？”

Judd Antin: Maybe it's the wrong industry for them.

贾德·安廷：也许这对他们来说是一个错误的行业。

Lenny: Yeah.

莱尼：是的。

I'm not a fan of that.

我不喜欢那样。

Okay.

好的。

Let's actually dig into the meat of your message, and the big takeaway, and the conclusion of what you're finding is happening in user research.

让我们真正深入了解您的信息的实质内容、重要内容以及您在用户研究中发现的结论。

And I know a lot of this comes from a lot of user researchers have been laid off at a lot of companies.

我知道这很大程度上来自于许多公司解雇了许多用户研究人员。

It was one of the hardest hit teams.

这是受打击最严重的球队之一。

And so I think a lot of this comes from that.

所以我认为很多事情都是源于此。

So yeah, so let's just start big and then see where it goes.

所以，是的，让我们从大处开始，然后看看它会走向何方。

Judd Antin: So yeah, everybody who's paying attention has noticed that there have been a bunch of layoffs.

贾德·安廷：是的，每个关注的人都注意到出现了大量裁员。

And I think back in the summer I was thinking, "Listen, this seems to be hitting UX and UX research particularly hard.

我回想起夏天的时候我在想，“听着，这似乎对用户体验和用户体验研究造成了特别严重的打击。

Is there something going on?

有什么事吗？

Is there a bigger picture?" The reason I use the word reckoning is because to me that's like, "Hey, a moment to take stock." And triggered by the fact that a lot of wonderful humans may have lost their jobs, and many more are afraid of losing their jobs.

有更大的图景吗？”我使用“清算”这个词的原因是因为对我来说，这就像“嘿，是时候进行盘点了。”这是因为许多优秀的人可能失去了工作，还有更多的人害怕失去工作。

And so if it's a sign, the fact that research has been hit so hard, it's a sign of what?

那么，如果这是一个迹象，那么研究受到如此严重打击的事实，这说明了什么？

And so the thesis of my article is really, it's a sign that maybe the system is a little more broken than we think and that research is not driving the value or impact that it should or could.

因此，我的文章的主题实际上是，这表明这个系统可能比我们想象的更破碎，而且研究并没有推动它应该或可以实现的价值或影响。

And that's for a bunch of reasons, I think.

我认为这是有很多原因的。

Some of it is stuff that research can do better, and a lot of it is how research is integrated and positioned in companies.

其中一些是研究可以做得更好的事情，而很多是研究如何在公司中整合和定位。

Judd Antin: And at the root of all that, I think, is that we're just doing too much of what I would consider the wrong type of research.

贾德·安廷：我认为，这一切的根源在于我们做了太多我认为是错误类型的研究。

And what I mean by the wrong type of research is I have this framework, and it's in the article, macro, middle range, and micro research, at least three ways to talk about it.

我所说的错误类型的研究是指我有这个框架，而且在文章中，宏观、中观、微观研究，至少三种方式来谈论它。

And it's pretty simple, the intuition of what those are.

这非常简单，凭直觉就可以知道这些是什么。

So macro research is big picture, strategic, business focused, forward-looking innovation, look at the market, look at competitors, long-term research to understand where the product should go next, stuff like that.

因此，宏观研究是大局、战略、业务重点、前瞻性创新、观察市场、观察竞争对手、长期研究以了解产品下一步应该走向何方，诸如此类。

Judd Antin: And then you have micro research, which a lot of really technical usability falls into this, all the beautiful stuff that researchers do to enable a really high quality, excellent, pixel perfect thing to go out the door, laser-focused research to understand AB test results, stuff like that.

Judd Antin：然后是微观研究，其中很多真正的技术可用性都落入其中，研究人员所做的所有美丽的事情都是为了实现真正高质量、优秀、像素完美的东西，激光聚焦研究以了解 AB 测试结果，诸如此类。

And then you have this middle range, which is this blobular place where the research questions are middle altitude and a lot of the core, let's say user understanding questions fall here.

然后你有这个中间范围，这是一个球状的地方，研究问题处于中间高度，有很多核心问题，比如说用户理解问题就落在这里。

And a lot of what research is doing is research in that space.

许多研究工作都是在这个领域进行的。

It's, "Let's take a group of people and ask some questions about how they think, feel, behave, how they're using a product or not using a product." And it's just this devastating mix of really interesting to many, including researchers, and not impactful enough for the business.

它是，“让我们找一群人询问一些问题，了解他们的想法、感受、行为、他们如何使用或不使用产品。”这对包括研究人员在内的许多人来说确实很有趣，但对企业的影响却不够大。

That's the core thesis.

这就是核心论点。

Researchers do it because it's interesting, but honestly, and a thing we should talk about, Lenny, is researchers also do it because it's the kind of work we most often get asked to do.

研究人员这样做是因为它很有趣，但说实话，我们应该谈论的一件事是，莱尼，研究人员这样做也是因为这是我们最常被要求做的工作。

Lenny: Yeah.

莱尼：是的。

That's exactly what I was thinking.

这正是我的想法。

As a PM, that's what I want to get answers to, is like, "How should we think about this one product?" And I totally get this.

作为一名产品经理，这就是我想要得到的答案，就像“我们应该如何考虑这个产品？”我完全明白这一点。

Judd Antin: Yeah.

贾德·安廷：是的。

The questions turn out to be really interesting and there are many cases at many companies where it's super impactful.

事实证明，这些问题非常有趣，而且在很多公司都有很多案例，这些问题都产生了巨大的影响。

But the problem with those types of questions is they tend to, they trigger all the worst stuff that researchers experience.

但这些类型的问题的问题在于，它们往往会引发研究人员经历的所有最糟糕的事情。

So they yield results which are interesting, but sometimes hard to operationalize.

因此，它们产生的结果很有趣，但有时很难实施。

They trigger the post hoc bias, really, really, really well where a lot of people can say confidently like, "Oh, that was obvious.

它们触发了事后偏见，真的、真的、真的很好，很多人可以自信地说，“哦，那是显而易见的。

We knew that already." And they fulfill this need for us to feel and be customer obsessed, user-centered, without changing anything.

我们已经知道了。”它们满足了我们的这种需求，让我们感受到并成为客户至上、以用户为中心，而不需要改变任何东西。

So doing too much of that research to me is a symptom of a broken system, and where companies are really different from each other.

因此，对我来说，进行过多的研究是系统损坏的症状，而且公司之间确实存在差异。

I heard from so many after this article and they're like, "Well, my company and my industry is like this or not like this."

读完这篇文章后，我听到很多人说，“好吧，我的公司和我的行业是这样还是不是这样。”

Judd Antin: But in tech, we spent the last many years hiring, hiring, hiring researchers, but maybe, I'm sure most of your listeners are familiar with the idea of a ZIRP.

贾德·安廷：但在科技领域，我们在过去的很多年里一直在招聘、招聘、招聘研究人员，但也许，我相信大多数听众都熟悉 ZIRP 的想法。

Maybe it was a zero interest base phenomenon, where it was okay when the money was easy, to hire researchers, even though we were not setting them up properly.

也许这是一种零利率现象，当钱很容易时，雇用研究人员是可以的，即使我们没有正确地设置他们。

We're were going to set them up to fail.

我们要让他们失败。

We set them up as a service function.

我们将它们设置为服务功能。

We didn't know what research was for.

我们不知道研究的目的是什么。

We didn't know how to really drive impact with it.

我们不知道如何真正发挥它的影响力。

And that's where the reckoning comes from.

这就是清算的来源。

It's like that era is over.

好像那个时代已经结束了。

Research, I think, is more crucial than ever.

我认为，研究比以往任何时候都更加重要。

Good, great researchers are more impactful than ever.

优秀、伟大的研究人员比以往任何时候都更有影响力。

But it's in a new space.

但它是在一个新的空间。

We're in a new space now.

我们现在到了一个新空间。

Lenny: I want to make sure people understand this framework.

莱尼：我想确保人们理解这个框架。

And specifically, how would you best describe the difference between this middle range research and macro research?

具体来说，您如何最好地描述这种中期研究和宏观研究之间的区别？

Judd Antin: Middle range research is usually focused on a more specific set of research questions or a constituency.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：中等范围的研究通常侧重于一组更具体的研究问题或一个选区。

So if macro is like, "Let's understand the overall competitive landscape.

因此，如果从宏观角度来说，“让我们了解一下整体竞争格局。

Let's do a concept car type project where we really look ahead.

让我们做一个真正具有前瞻性的概念车类型项目。

Let's get involved with strategic planning," which is a wonderful thing for researchers to do, do TAM studies, other things like that, that stuff lives in the macro space.

让我们参与战略规划”，这对于研究人员来说是一件很棒的事情，进行 TAM 研究，以及其他类似的事情，这些东西存在于宏观空间中。

Judd Antin: The middle range space is like, what's a good example?

Judd Antin：中频空间就像，什么是一个很好的例子？

"We want to know how Airbnb hosts feel about their payment options." That's a really interesting, reasonable question.

“我们想知道 Airbnb 房东对他们的付款方式有何看法。”这是一个非常有趣、合理的问题。

And we can go out and do research on that, but it's not that specific.

我们可以出去研究一下，但不是那么具体。

It's not really targeted at a business problem yet.

它还没有真正针对业务问题。

It could be.

可能是。

Maybe that's a result of the research, but it yields these middle range insights in which we've learned things like, "Well, hosts want flexibility about their payment options." I'm making this up.

也许这是研究的结果，但它产生了这些中间范围的见解，其中我们学到了诸如“嗯，房东希望他们的付款方式具有灵活性”之类的东西。我正在弥补这个。

And that's a good example where it's like, "It's not that that's not an interesting set of questions, it's just not quite pointed enough." And it's not framed in the language of the funnel, or the business strategy, or the OKRs.

这是一个很好的例子，“并不是说这不是一组有趣的问题，只是不够尖锐。”它不是用漏斗语言、业务策略或 OKR 来构建的。

It's not quite enough aligned enough to that.

对此还不够一致。

It's too blobular in that middle level and it ends up not driving impact.

它在中间层太呈球状，最终无法产生影响。

Lenny: I think it also leads to a lot of the things as you described, people don't like about research.

莱尼：我认为这也导致了很多你所描述的事情，人们不喜欢研究。

It delays everything.

耽误了一切。

You have to wait for the research to be done to have an answer, to make a clear decision.

你必须等待研究完成才能得到答案，才能做出明确的决定。

It also creates this issue that people complain about, that PMs and product teams don't want to just make a decision on their own.

它还造成了人们抱怨的问题，即产品经理和产品团队不想自己做出决定。

They're like, "I will get this additional data point and make sure research tells us this is the right answer instead of just trusting there." God, I guess maybe along those lines, this might be going off a little track, but what's your advice there for, say, product managers or PMs or product teams to not necessarily rely on research for that middle research?

他们就像是，“我会得到这个额外的数据点，并确保研究告诉我们这是正确的答案，而不是仅仅相信那里。”天哪，我想也许沿着这些思路，这可能会有点偏离轨道，但是你对产品经理、产品经理或产品团队有什么建议，让他们不必依赖研究来进行中间研究呢？

Judd Antin: I think the reason why so many PMs ask for those middle range questions is because they haven't really gotten deep with their researcher in a way which can leverage it for maximum impact.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：我认为如此多的产品经理提出这些中等范围的问题的原因是他们没有真正深入了解他们的研究人员，从而发挥最大的影响力。

So if the question is like, "Hey, Judd, you just pointed out a bunch of problems, can you be more solutions oriented?" Well, the solution is simple but not easy to me.

因此，如果问题是这样的：“嘿，贾德，你刚刚指出了一堆问题，你能更注重解决方案吗？”嗯，解决方案很简单，但对我来说并不容易。

It's that we need to restructure the way we make products in a way which integrates research much more fully.

而是我们需要以更充分地整合研究的方式重组我们制造产品的方式。

It looks like consistent relationships in which researchers, and the work, and the insights they provide are a part of the process from beginning to end.

研究人员、他们的工作以及他们提供的见解看起来是一致的关系，从开始到结束都是整个过程的一部分。

Judd Antin: And I think, Lenny, you as a PM, that's how you worked.

贾德·安廷：我认为，莱尼，作为一名产品经理，你就是这样工作的。

I remember you, I know who you worked with.

我记得你，我知道你和谁一起工作。

You worked with great researchers.

您与伟大的研究人员一起工作。

But honestly, most product processes are not that way.

但老实说，大多数产品流程并非如此。

And so that's when research is a service function.

这就是研究成为一种服务功能的时候。

It gets called in right at the end.

它在最后被调用。

It's reactive in the sense that a researcher in the room listening and participating in the conversation could have a ton of impact on framing exactly the right question that will drive maximum business impact, maximum product improvement at that moment, and then go do it quick, and get back, and we're onto the next.

从某种意义上说，它是被动的，研究人员在房间里倾听和参与对话可能会对准确地提出正确的问题产生很大的影响，从而推动最大的业务影响，最大程度的产品改进，然后快速完成，然后返回，然后我们进入下一个。

But they weren't there, the relationship wasn't there.

但他们不在那里，关系也不在那里。

They're not engaged in the project from the beginning.

他们从一开始就没有参与该项目。

And that's the number one root of the problem.

这就是问题的首要根源。

As long as research is a service discipline, I think we're going to be stuck in this spot.

只要研究是一门服务学科，我认为我们就会陷入这个困境。

Lenny: When people might be hearing this, on the one hand, it's research has been not as helpful to teams as they thought, and researchers have been spending time on the wrong thing.

Lenny：当人们听到这个消息时，一方面，它的研究并没有像他们想象的那样对团队有帮助，而且研究人员一直把时间花在错误的事情上。

On the other hand, your advice is integrate research from the beginning, make them more involved throughout.

另一方面，你的建议是从一开始就整合研究，让他们在整个过程中更多地参与。

And I think that might confuse people.

我认为这可能会让人们感到困惑。

How should people think about, like, "Research is actually more important?

人们应该如何思考，比如“研究实际上更重要？

You should integrate them more deeply."

你应该更深入地整合它们。”

Judd Antin: There's a vicious cycle that's been happening, is from where I sit, and this is what I hear from many, many researchers and research leaders, which is a lot of companies hired a lot of researchers with great intentions, didn't quite know how to integrate them.

贾德·安廷：从我的角度来看，正在发生一个恶性循环，这是我从许多研究人员和研究领导者那里听到的，很多公司怀着伟大的意图雇佣了很多研究人员，但不太知道如何整合他们。

And UX research is a newer discipline, so maybe that's not surprising.

用户体验研究是一门较新的学科，所以这也许并不奇怪。

We're still learning how to use it.

我们仍在学习如何使用它。

"Cool, let's evolve." But a lot of companies hired these people, but they hired them into kind of like a service discipline, very reactive, not in the room, not integrated in the way I said.

“好吧，我们一起进化吧。”但很多公司雇用了这些人，但他们雇用他们有点像服务纪律，非常被动，不在房间里，没有像我说的那样整合。

Judd Antin: And so they had less input on the questions to ask, or they're included, but only at the end.

贾德·安廷：所以他们对要问的问题的投入较少，或者他们被包括在内，但只是在最后。

And then they're unable to build those direct relationships, to be there in the room to actually drive the questions and insert insights.

然后他们无法建立这些直接关系，无法在房间里实际推动问题并插入见解。

Because a good researcher is like the repository of insights you need for growth, but they're not there.

因为一个好的研究人员就像你成长所需的洞察力的存储库，但它们并不在那里。

They don't participate in the decision.

他们不参与决策。

So they end up doing research.

所以他们最终进行了研究。

They have jobs to do, so they do research that is too reactive, it doesn't matter, and then it's less impactful.

他们有工作要做，所以他们所做的研究过于被动，无关紧要，然后影响力就会减弱。

Executives conclude that therefore researchers are not as impactful and then they get sidelined or laid off and the cycle continues.

高管们得出的结论是，研究人员因此没有那么有影响力，然后他们就会被边缘化或被解雇，这样的循环仍在继续。

Judd Antin: So I think the short circuit is the constant engagement.

贾德·安廷：所以我认为短路就是持续的接触。

If you take a great researcher and you insert them consistently in a product process, I feel confident that researcher will drive a product improvement, metrics impact, growth, all the things that you want to see as a PM and a product leader.

如果你聘请了一位优秀的研究人员，并将他们持续地插入到产品流程中，我相信研究人员将推动产品改进、指标影响、增长，以及你作为产品经理和产品领导者希望看到的所有事情。

It's just that's the exception, not the norm these days.

这只是例外，而不是当今的常态。

Lenny: This may be a hard question to answer, but when people hear, "If you have a great researcher, here's how you approach it." What are signals that your researchers is great versus not great?

莱尼：这可能是一个很难回答的问题，但是当人们听到“如果你有一位出色的研究人员，这就是你如何处理它”时。您的研究人员优秀与不优秀的信号是什么？

What are some things people could look for to tell them, like, "Oh, maybe I have the wrong researcher on my team."

人们可以寻找哪些信息来告诉他们，比如，“哦，也许我的团队里有错误的研究人员。”

Judd Antin: The best researchers I think are first of all, multi method.

Judd Antin：我认为最好的研究人员首先是多种方法。

The first iteration of user research was primarily a qualitative discipline.

用户研究的第一次迭代主要是定性学科。

But a strong opinion that I have is that is largely one of those models that needs to evolve.

但我强烈认为，这在很大程度上是需要发展的模型之一。

It's not that qualitative user research is no longer important.

这并不是说定性用户研究不再重要。

It's that the best researchers have five tools.

最优秀的研究人员拥有五种工具。

I think they have five tools.

我认为他们有五种工具。

And those five tools are number one, what we would call formative or generative user experience research.

这五个工具是第一位的，我们称之为形成性或生成性用户体验研究。

So looking ahead, innovation focused, really open-ended, maybe more ethnographic, "Let's go out into the field and talk to host and guests on Airbnb.

因此，展望未来，以创新为重点，真正开放式，也许更具民族志性，“让我们走进现场，与 Airbnb 上的房东和房客交谈。

Let's see people using our product in the field," stuff like that.

让我们看看人们在现场使用我们的产品”之类的东西。

So that's formative.

所以这是形成性的。

Judd Antin: The second type is evaluative, so more like usability testing.

Judd Antin：第二种类型是评估性的，所以更像是可用性测试。

The third tool is a basic rigorous survey design.

第三个工具是基本的严格调查设计。

It's the best scaled way to get responses from communities small and large.

这是获得大小社区响应的最佳扩展方式。

You can get a lot out of really well crafted surveys.

您可以从精心设计的调查中获得很多收获。

But to do that, you have to have the fourth tool, which is applied statistics, the best research, know a little bit of stats.

但要做到这一点，你必须拥有第四个工具，即应用统计、最好的研究、了解一点统计数据。

You can't interact in a world of AB testing without knowing basic statistics.

如果不了解基本统计数据，就无法在 AB 测试的世界中进行交互。

Judd Antin: And then in the old version of this, the fifth tool was SQL, because I think good researchers need to be able to run their own queries.

Judd Antin：在旧版本中，第五个工具是 SQL，因为我认为优秀的研究人员需要能够运行自己的查询。

These days, so much of that is dashboarded, that the fifth tool may now be prompt engineering, which is a thing we could talk about, but I think maybe that's the fifth tool is somewhere, is it technical skills that fall in between querying your own data, understanding it very well in companies that are awash with data and then interacting with generative AI.

如今，很多东西都被仪表板化了，第五种工具现在可能是即时工程，这是我们可以讨论的事情，但我认为第五种工具可能在某个地方，它是介于查询自己的数据、在充满数据的公司中很好地理解数据然后与生成人工智能交互之间的技术技能。

Lenny: Amazing.

莱尼：太棒了。

That's such a cool list.

这是一个很酷的清单。

Okay, so just to playback, formative, generative, innovative skills to think bigger and come up with new ideas, usability.

好的，所以只是回放、形成性、生成性、创新性技能，以进行更大的思考并提出新的想法和可用性。

Lenny: Yeah, usability.

莱尼：是的，可用性。

How did you describe it?

你是如何描述的？

I have a different word, here.

我这里有一个不同的词。

Evaluate?

评价？

Evaluative?

评价性的？

Judd Antin: So we're evaluating products and doing more.

贾德·安廷：所以我们正在评估产品并做更多事情。

Really that's the micro level of research.

这确实是微观层面的研究。

Lenny: Survey design, being really rigorous about it, applied statistics, and then SQL/dashboard/prompt engineering.

Lenny：调查设计非常严格，应用统计数据，然后是 SQL/仪表板/提示工程。

Lenny: Maybe just one last question along this thread, also a big question, but any advice for how to evaluate these skills/interview for them?

莱尼：也许只是这个话题的最后一个问题，也是一个大问题，但是对于如何评估他们的这些技能/面试有什么建议吗？

I know this is its own deep topic, but any advice for someone trying to find this person?

我知道这是一个很深的话题，但是对于试图找到这个人的人有什么建议吗？

Judd Antin: I've interviewed hundreds or thousands of researchers, and the way I usually approach that is you want a researcher who's got a Swiss army knife, because if all you have is a hammer, then everything looks like a nail.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：我采访过成百上千的研究人员，我通常的做法是，你想要一个拥有瑞士军刀的研究人员，因为如果你只有一把锤子，那么一切看起来都像钉子。

And so if you give in the context of an interview, let's say, a researcher, a pretty juicy, open-ended research question, and you want to see how they handle it, and a good answer is usually multi-method.

因此，如果你在采访中提出一个非常有趣的、开放式的研究问题，比如说，一个研究人员，你想看看他们如何处理它，而一个好的答案通常是多种方法。

We're not going to handle it in any one way.

我们不会以任何一种方式来处理它。

We're going to say, "Well, here's a couple of ways we could deal with this.

我们会说：“好吧，我们可以通过几种方法来处理这个问题。

Here's how we could do this in a day, or a week, or a month." We usually don't have a month, but sometimes big research projects go on for that long.

以下是我们如何在一天、一周或一个月内做到这一点。”我们通常没有一个月的时间，但有时大型研究项目会持续那么长时间。

"And here are the different sets of methods that we can use."

“这是我们可以使用的不同方法集。”

Judd Antin: So see where they go.

贾德·安廷：所以看看他们去了哪里。

It's actually pretty simple.

其实很简单。

Most researchers are deeper in one than the other, and sometimes you can make up for those five tools with the team.

大多数研究人员对其中一种工具的了解比另一种更深，有时您可以与团队一起弥补这五种工具。

So you have experts who are t-shaped, but maybe deeper in one or several of those ways.

因此，您拥有 T 型专家，但可能在其中一种或多种方面更深层次。

But when I built a team at Meta and at Airbnb, that was my goal, is individually as researchers build up those tools and then as a team build deep expertise that would fill all the gaps.

但当我在 Meta 和 Airbnb 建立团队时，这就是我的目标，即作为研究人员单独构建这些工具，然后作为一个团队构建深厚的专业知识来填补所有空白。

Lenny: Coming back to the main premise of your post, one of your big takeaways is, "Researchers need to be much more business oriented, thinking about what helps the business versus the user." Which I think to a lot of researchers will feel really weird.

莱尼：回到你的文章的主要前提，你的一大收获是，“研究人员需要更加以业务为导向，思考什么对业务和用户有帮助。”我认为很多研究人员都会觉得很奇怪。

Can you just talk about your takeaways there?

您能谈谈您的收获吗？

Judd Antin: So much of user experience practice, not just research, but design too, is focused on empathy and very user-centered.

贾德·安廷：很多用户体验实践，不仅仅是研究，还有设计，都专注于同理心，并且非常以用户为中心。

This is beautiful.

这很漂亮。

I'm not saying that we should abandon that.

我并不是说我们应该放弃它。

I think what I'm saying is there's an overlapping event, where you have the user and profit or the business.

我想我想说的是存在一个重叠的事件，你拥有用户和利润或业务。

And what researchers need to do is be way more explicit about finding that overlap.

研究人员需要做的是更明确地发现这种重叠。

So one thing, when researchers ask for advice, they're like, "Well, what should I do to be more business or profit focused?" I say something like, "Did you read the last quarterly report, If it's a public company?

因此，当研究人员寻求建议时，他们会说：“那么，我应该怎么做才能更加关注业务或利润？”我会这样说：“如果它是一家上市公司，你读过上一季度报告了吗？

Did you listen to the shareholder call?" And they're probably like, "No, it's full of a bunch of language I didn't quite get."

股东电话你听了吗？”他们可能会说，“不，里面充满了我不太明白的语言。”

Judd Antin: And I'm like, "Yep." So there you go.

贾德·安廷：我的回答是：“是的。”所以就这样吧。

That's the language you need to learn.

这就是你需要学习的语言。

Scour your Google Drive folder, your internal folder and look for all of the documents that are about this quarter, or this halves, or next half strategy.

搜索您的 Google 云端硬盘文件夹、内部文件夹，并查找有关本季度、本季度或下半年战略的所有文档。

What are the OKRs?

OKR 是什么？

Understand the metrics and the conversion funnel, know it back and forward, because then what you're doing is you're proposing, if you're in the active conversation, you're saying, 'Cool, I hear you asking that research question.

了解指标和转化漏斗，前后了解，因为那么你所做的就是你的提议，如果你在积极的对话中，你会说，‘酷，我听到你问这个研究问题。

I've identified this is exactly the spot in the funnel where I think we need to do work.

我发现这正是漏斗中我们需要开展工作的地方。

There's an opportunity here.

这里有一个机会。

Or that competitor is eating our lunch with this group of users.

或者那个竞争对手正在和这群用户一起吃我们的午餐。

I know that because I read the competitive report and I understand it deeply.'" So those are skills that some researchers have and a lot are building these days, but historically, last 15 years, it hasn't been a thing we've been as focused on, and I think that's an evolution that needs to happen.

我知道这一点，因为我阅读了竞争性报告，并且对它有深刻的理解。”因此，这些是一些研究人员拥有的技能，而且许多研究人员目前正在培养这些技能，但从历史上看，过去 15 年，这并不是我们一直关注的事情，我认为这是需要发生的演变。

Lenny: I think a lot of PMs listening to this are going to be like, "Hallelujah." This is exactly what I've been trying to convince people of.

莱尼：我想很多产品经理听到这个都会说“哈利路亚”。这正是我一直试图说服人们的。

It's what I've been trying to convince my researchers of, and design often falls into this.

这就是我一直试图说服我的研究人员的，而设计也经常陷入这个困境。

Judd Antin: But Lenny, the opposite is true, too, because you got to take the average PM who lives in that land, all day, every day, and what they do is not in the Venn.

贾德·安廷：但是莱尼，相反的情况也是如此，因为你必须考虑每天都住在那片土地上的普通总理，而他们所做的事情并不在维恩。

I think those are people who are also performing customer centricity and performing user-centeredness a lot, when they're really not interested.

我认为这些人也经常以客户为中心，以用户为中心，但实际上他们并不感兴趣。

And so this is not about researcher.

所以这与研究人员无关。

This takes two sides.

这需要两个方面。

Fixing this broken system takes everyone, researchers, PMs, designers, everyone at a company, but also the way that organization is structured, and integrating itself in a different way.

修复这个破碎的系统需要每个人，研究人员、项目经理、设计师、公司的每个人，而且还需要组织的结构方式，并以不同的方式整合自身。

Everybody's got to come to the table.

每个人都必须来到谈判桌前。

Lenny: Such a good point.

莱尼：这是一个很好的观点。

And you have this actual term that you call user-centered performance, where it's the performance of being user-centered.

这个实际术语称为“以用户为中心的性能”，即以用户为中心的性能。

Can you talk about that and then just what advice you'd give to PMs that, hearing this, are like, "Yes, I love everything you're saying," and then not realizing maybe they're too far in that extreme?

您能否谈谈这个问题，然后您会给产品经理什么建议，让他们听到这些后会说“是的，我喜欢您所说的一切”，然后却没有意识到他们可能走得太极端了？

Judd Antin: User-centered performance is a term I made up, because it's fun to make up terms.

Judd Antin：以用户为中心的性能是我编造的一个术语，因为编造术语很有趣。

And it refers to customer obsession or a user-centered practice that is symbolic rather than focused on learning.

它指的是对客户的痴迷或以用户为中心的实践，这种实践是象征性的，而不是专注于学习。

So it's hugely common, I would argue.

我认为这非常普遍。

It's work we do to signal to each other how customer obsessed we are, not because we want to make a different decision.

我们所做的工作是为了向彼此表明我们对客户的关注程度，而不是因为我们想要做出不同的决定。

And if your listeners are like, "I don't do that." I'm like, "Think about it for a second." Because this is extremely common.

如果你的听众会说，“我不会那样做。”我想，“想一想。”因为这种情况非常常见。

It shows up in explicit ways and implicit ways.

它以显式方式和隐式方式出现。

Judd Antin: So explicitly, I would say every time a PM comes to a researcher at the end of a product process and says, "Can you just run a quick user study just to validate our assumptions?" That's user-centered performance.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：所以明确地说，每当产品流程结束时，产品经理来到研究人员面前并说：“你能进行一次快速的用户研究来验证我们的假设吗？”这就是以用户为中心的性能。

It's too late to matter.

已经太晚了，无所谓了。

That PM is not interested in being wrong at all.

这位总理对犯错根本不感兴趣。

It's too late in the game for that.

游戏中已经太晚了。

We got to ship it.

我们必须运送它。

What they want is to check the box.

他们想要的是选中该框。

So any check the box style research is a wild example of user-centered performance.

因此，任何复选框式的研究都是以用户为中心的性能的一个疯狂的例子。

Judd Antin: I would argue every researcher has probably had to do executive listening sessions because a lot of PMs, founders, product people, but designers, too, they want to get close to the customer.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：我认为每个研究人员可能都必须参加高管聆听会议，因为很多产品经理、创始人、产品人员，但设计师也想接近客户。

And so, like, "Can I do some focus groups?

所以，就像，“我可以做一些焦点小组吗？

I want to be there.

我想去那里。

I want to ask them questions." This is 97% performance.

我想问他们问题。”这是 97% 的表现。

It's well-intentioned, but it isn't focused on learning.

初衷是好的，但没有把重点放在学习上。

It isn't going to drive better outcomes or more impact.

它不会带来更好的结果或更大的影响。

Judd Antin: And then there's all these implicit ways that people engage in that kind of user performance, too.

贾德·安廷：人们也通过所有这些隐含的方式来参与这种用户绩效。

A lot of it comes down to cognitive biases, confirmation bias, ego.

这很大程度上归结于认知偏见、确认偏见和自我。

One of my big mantras was, "We don't validate, we falsify.

我的一大口头禅是：“我们不验证，我们伪造。

We are looking to be wrong." That is the mindset you should use when you're approaching insights and research.

我们希望自己是错的。”这是您在进行见解和研究时应该使用的心态。

"I want to be wrong.

“我想错了。

I want you to do research that shows we were off base in the following ways.

我希望你做一些研究，证明我们在以下方面是错误的。

Tell me exactly how and why in a way that allows me to fix it quickly." But many PMs, many designers are not in that place.

准确地告诉我如何以及为什么，以便我能够快速修复它。”但是许多产品经理、许多设计师都没有做到这一点。

They do not want to be wrong.

他们不想犯错。

They're looking to validate.

他们正在寻求验证。

And that's user-centered performance.

这就是以用户为中心的性能。

Lenny: Oh, man.

莱尼：哦，伙计。

I think a lot of people are hearing this and feeling exposed.

我想很多人都听到了这句话，并感到自己被暴露了。

Lenny: I feel like you're like this Deep Throat person coming from sharing these things people don't want to talk about at the office.

莱尼：我觉得你就像一个深喉人，分享了人们不想在办公室谈论的事情。

Lenny: There's this quote in your post I'm going to read.

莱尼：我将在你的帖子中读到这句话。

"Product managers love to ask for middle range research that they can use to justify decisions they're reluctant to make on their own.

“产品经理喜欢要求进行中间范围的研究，他们可以用这些研究来证明他们不愿意自己做出的决定的合理性。

User designers love to ask for middle range research because it fits their model of what proper design process should look like.

用户设计师喜欢要求进行中间范围的研究，因为这符合他们正确的设计过程应该是什么样子的模型。

Executives love to ask for middle range because they don't really understand what research is for, and helps them do performative user-centeredness.

高管们喜欢要求中等水平，因为他们并不真正理解研究的目的，并帮助他们做到以用户为中心。

In the end, they will decide based on their own opinions."

最终，他们将根据自己的意见做出决定。”

Judd Antin: There is an important place for intuition in product development, of course.

Judd Antin：当然，直觉在产品开发中占有重要地位。

The best designers, researchers, product people develop strong intuition for the product.

最好的设计师、研究人员、产品人员对产品有强烈的直觉。

But you got to understand, intuition is where all of those biases lie.

但你必须明白，直觉是所有这些偏见的根源。

It's where all your blind spots are.

这是你所有的盲点所在。

And what great insights people do, what great researchers do when you're next to them all the time, is they'll expose you.

当你一直在他们身边时，人们所做的伟大见解、伟大的研究人员所做的就是他们会揭露你。

I don't have to be the Deep Throat, because you have somebody who's professional job is ...

我不必成为“深喉”，因为有人的专业工作是......

Keeping you honest is probably the wrong way to put it, but as somebody whose capabilities are about expanding your horizons, making it so that your intuition is constantly improving, you don't have to rely on it when your intuition and the evidence sort of collide in a way that either affirms or falsifies the product decision you made.

让你保持诚实可能是错误的说法，但作为一个能力在于扩大你的视野、使你的直觉不断提高的人，当你的直觉和证据发生冲突，要么肯定或证伪你所做的产品决策时，你不必依赖它。

Now something really good is happening.

现在，一些真正好的事情正在发生。

Judd Antin: And the other thing that is inherent in that quote is I, at Airbnb, wore many hats over the years.

贾德·安廷：这句话中固有的另一件事是，多年来我在 Airbnb 担任过很多职务。

I was head of research two different times.

我曾两次担任研究主管。

I was head of design for guest products.

我是客用产品的设计主管。

And my last job was I was head of the design studio, so UX research, UX design, writing, localization, they all reported up to me.

我的上一份工作是设计工作室的负责人，所以用户体验研究、用户体验设计、写作、本地化，他们都向我汇报。

So I've seen this from many disciplinary angles in the UX field.

所以我从用户体验领域的许多学科角度看到了这一点。

And researchers aren't the only ones who are guilty of this.

研究人员并不是唯一对此感到内疚的人。

I would say design has a ton of performance.

我想说设计有很多性能。

And it comes from the fact that we have figured out user-centered design, this process, or design thinking, which IDEO popularized.

它来自于这样一个事实：我们已经弄清楚了以用户为中心的设计，这个过程，或者说设计思维，IDEO 推广了这一点。

Like, "That's what we're supposed to do, right?

就像，“这就是我们应该做的，对吧？

Bezos told us that we, as PMs, had to be customer obsessed.

贝佐斯告诉我们，作为产品经理，我们必须以客户为中心。

So that's what we're supposed to do."

所以这就是我们应该做的。”

Judd Antin: It's a really common and damaging thing when we don't genuinely have that growth learning mindset, and it's easy to sideline researchers.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：当我们没有真正拥有成长学习心态时，这是一件非常常见且具有破坏性的事情，而且很容易让研究人员边缘化。

We don't need them in that situation.

在那种情况下我们不需要它们。

We've got our guts.

我们有胆量。

Isn't the gut where a great PM, a great founder needs to have that gut?

伟大的产品经理、伟大的创始人不都需要有这样的勇气吗？

And they do, but they need to be open to the fact that your gut, is limited, and biased, and narrow, and wrong sometimes.

他们确实这么做了，但他们需要接受这样一个事实：你的直觉是有限的、有偏见的、狭隘的，有时甚至是错误的。

Lenny: The two sides of this is trust your gut opinion, "I don't need research, I don't need data.

莱尼：这有两个方面，那就是相信你的直觉，“我不需要研究，我不需要数据。

I have opinions, and my own experience, and I'm going to use the product, and let's just go with what feels right to me." Versus pure data-driven research driven for designers that are maybe listening for product managers.

我有意见，有我自己的经验，我将使用该产品，让我们按照我觉得合适的方式去做。”与纯粹的数据驱动的研究驱动的设计师可能会倾听产品经理的意见。

Do you have any advice for just where to fall on that spectrum and just how to best leverage research to inform that opinion?

对于该范围内的哪个位置以及如何最好地利用研究来传达该观点，您有什么建议吗？

Judd Antin: Yeah, I taught a class at UC Berkeley this semester on leadership, and we talk about that a lot, because great leaders develop intuition.

贾德·安廷：是的，这学期我在加州大学伯克利分校教授了一门关于领导力的课程，我们谈论了很多，因为伟大的领导者会培养直觉。

It's the pattern matching part of experience, where you develop heuristics which allow you to make good judgments even if you can't quite explain where that judgment came from.

这是经验的模式匹配部分，您可以在其中开发启发式方法，即使您无法完全解释判断的来源，也可以使您做出良好的判断。

That's what the gut is.

这就是肠道。

But it's also, like I said, where bias comes from, where all the cognitive biases, there's a list of 151 of them on Wikipedia, I won't name them, but all those thorny things that lead us astray, the behavioral economists and social psychologists study, those live in the gut.

但正如我所说，这也是偏见的来源，所有认知偏见的来源，维基百科上列出了 151 种偏见，我不会说出它们的名字，但行为经济学家和社会心理学家研究的所有那些导致我们误入歧途的棘手事物，都存在于肠道中。

And so the advice is when you are looking to check your gut, you have to do that thing.

所以建议是，当你想要检查自己的直觉时，你必须这样做。

A lot of your listeners have probably read Thinking Fast and Slow, System 1, System 2.

很多听众可能读过《思考快与慢》、《系统 1》、《系统 2》。

Right?

对吗？

Lenny: I have it here, right under my laptop, actually, holding up my laptop screen.

莱尼：我把它放在这里，就在我的笔记本电脑下面，实际上，它举着我的笔记本电脑屏幕。

Judd Antin: That's so appropriate, Lenny.

贾德·安廷：非常合适，莱尼。

So the secret is not that sexy.

所以秘密并不那么性感。

It's System 2.

这是系统2。

So you engage that slow, methodical process in which you do analytic thinking as a means of checking your gut.

因此，你会进行缓慢而有条理的过程，在这个过程中进行分析性思维，以此作为检查你的直觉的一种手段。

Slow in the grand scheme of things.

在宏伟的计划中缓慢。

Slow meaning not a split second decision, not like months of analysis.

慢意味着不是一瞬间的决定，不像几个月的分析。

That's not what I mean.

我不是这个意思。

Judd Antin: The other thing you can do, and there's really great research on this, is you bring in the wisdom of the crowd.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：你可以做的另一件事是引入群众的智慧，这方面确实有很多研究。

So the wisdom of the crowd is a phrase a lot of people are familiar with, and it works in a specific situation.

因此，群众智慧是很多人都熟悉的一个短语，并且它在特定情况下起作用。

The wisdom of the crowd works when the people involved with the decision are bringing diverse sources of information and judgment to the table.

当参与决策的人将不同来源的信息和判断带到桌面上时，群体的智慧就会发挥作用。

Obviously, if everybody has the same sources of information, then it doesn't matter how many people are out there.

显然，如果每个人都有相同的信息来源，那么有多少人并不重要。

So if you want to check your gut, get a bunch of different guts together, get a bunch of different people in the room who can bring evidence and intuition to bear, and have an open, direct end kind conversation in which we might disagree.

因此，如果你想检查自己的直觉，那就召集一群不同的人在一起，让一群不同的人在房间里，他们可以提供证据和直觉，并进行一次开放、直接的结束式对话，在对话中我们可能会不同意。

You know who's great at that?

你知道谁最擅长这个吗？

Researchers

研究人员

Lenny: Leading those discussions essentially, and getting a bunch of people's opinions.

莱尼：本质上是领导这些讨论，并听取很多人的意见。

Judd Antin: Yeah, this is the structural solution I'm talking about, Lenny, is like, "I never asked for research teams to have their own separate OKRs." I said two things, "Number one, what's the teams?

贾德·安廷：是的，这就是我正在谈论的结构性解决方案，莱尼，就像，“我从未要求研究团队拥有自己单独的 OKR。”我说了两件事，“第一，球队是什么？

Shouldn't the PMs, the engineers, the designers and the research, everybody should have the same set of metrics for success because either we're doing it together or we're not." And then I said, "My metric for success is when they won't have that meeting without you." That's my metric for success.

产品经理、工程师、设计师和研究人员不应该有相同的成功衡量标准吗？因为我们要么一起做，要么不一起做。”然后我说，“我的成功衡量标准是他们在没有你的情况下不会开会。”这就是我的成功衡量标准。

If they cannot have that decision making meeting without the researcher there, that means you've developed influence, strong, trusting relationships, you're an active participant in the process, not just somebody who provides input into someone else's process.

如果没有研究人员在场，他们就无法召开决策会议，这意味着您已经建立了影响力、牢固的、信任的关系，您是该过程的积极参与者，而不仅仅是为其他人的过程提供输入的人。

And that is when researchers can have huge impact.

这就是研究人员可以产生巨大影响的时候。

Lenny: I think of the PM role in a similar way, even though people won't have these meetings with PMs, because they're often at the center of lot of the stuff, but you want to be a PM that people want on their team.

Lenny：我以类似的方式看待 PM 的角色，尽管人们不会与 PM 进行这些会议，因为他们通常处于很多事情的中心，但你想成为人们希望加入团队的 PM。

There's a lot of teams that are like, "We don't want and PMs, we don't need product managers.

有很多团队都说，“我们不需要产品经理，我们不需要产品经理。

They just get in the way." And I find that that's only the case when the product manager's not great, and not really good at their job, because most great PMs just make everyone's life easier.

他们只是碍事。”我发现，只有当产品经理不够出色，并且不太擅长自己的工作时才会出现这种情况，因为大多数优秀的产品经理只是让每个人的生活变得更轻松。

Lenny: You mentioned also, before we started recording, that the biggest challenge for user researchers is in their relationship with their product manager.

Lenny：在我们开始录制之前，您还提到，用户研究人员面临的最大挑战是他们与产品经理的关系。

Can you speak to that and what you've seen there?

您能谈谈您在那里看到的情况吗？

Judd Antin: I'm wary of overgeneralizing, but I can tell you that from my experience and from what I hear, the product research or product insights relationship is one of the most challenged.

贾德·安廷：我对过度概括持谨慎态度，但我可以告诉你，根据我的经验和我所听到的，产品研究或产品洞察关系是最具挑战性的关系之一。

And I think it comes from the fact that fundamentally, many researchers are just not included in the process that PMs are running.

我认为这是因为从根本上来说，许多研究人员没有参与项目管理的运行过程。

And then, actually, I did some asking around before this podcast, and so I thought, "There are some tropes that researchers have about PMs that are worth PMs knowing, just like four or five of them, the things that researchers know PMs say, which drive us nuts because they're not true."

然后，实际上，在这个播客之前我做了一些询问，所以我想，“研究人员对 PM 的一些比喻值得 PM 知道，就像研究人员知道 PM 所说的其中四五个，这让我们发疯，因为它们不是真的。”

Judd Antin: So the first one is that research just slows us down.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：第一个是研究只会减慢我们的速度。

Research is too slow.

研究速度太慢了。

This is bullshit.

这是胡说八道。

A great research team can do research in a day, a week, or a month.

一个优秀的研究团队可以在一天、一周或一个月内完成研究。

It just depends on what you want to get out of it, like, "How much detail do you need?

这仅取决于您想从中获得什么，例如“您需要多少细节？

How many people do we need to talk to?

我们需要与多少人交谈？

What is the depth or breadth?

深度或广度是多少？

Do we need to go to seven different countries to talk about our constituencies in Latin America?" Well, that's not going to happen overnight, but we don't often need that.

我们需要去七个不同的国家谈论我们在拉丁美洲的选民吗？”嗯，这不会在一夜之间发生，但我们并不经常需要这样做。

The other way to look at that is that is it slower to get it wrong and fix it than to take a hot second to do the work to get it right the first time?

另一种看待这个问题的方法是，犯错并修复它比第一次就急忙去做正确的事情要慢吗？

So that's BS.

这就是废话。

Good research doesn't slow us down, it speeds us up.

好的研究不会让我们放慢脚步，而是会加快我们的速度。

Lenny: And also just along those lines, a big part of your premise is you don't need to do as much research as people are doing, like this middle research that a lot of the time is put into.

莱尼：同样，沿着这些思路，你的前提的很大一部分是你不需要像人们所做的那样多的研究，比如投入很多时间的中间研究。

Judd Antin: Yeah.

贾德·安廷：是的。

Research can go super fast.

研究可以进行得非常快。

I think especially, so the macro level research, I hope what it is tied to things like annual planning processes.

我特别认为，宏观层面的研究，我希望它与年度规划流程等事情相关联。

We did a thing at Airbnb several years that we called, it was like Insights 2019, Insights 2020.

几年来，我们在 Airbnb 做了一件我们称之为“洞察 2019”、“洞察 2020”的事情。

They were concept car projects.

它们是概念车项目。

And we spent quite a long time synthesizing the entire year's worth of insights from every place we could get them and then developing with designers and engineers like a concept car for five years in the future.

我们花了相当长的时间从各个地方综合了全年的见解，然后与设计师和工程师一起开发，就像未来五年的概念车一样。

So that's a long process.

所以这是一个漫长的过程。

Judd Antin: But the micro level, there's so much business value to be derived there, so much business value, and it can go so fast, Lenny, it can go so fast.

贾德·安廷：但是从微观层面来看，那里有很多商业价值可以衍生，很多商业价值，而且它可以发展得如此之快，莱尼，它可以发展得如此之快。

You can have results in 48 hours on these things.

这些事情您可以在 48 小时内得到结果。

We did a thing at Airbnb.

我们在 Airbnb 做了一件事。

There's a famous story which I'll only tell in the abstract, because I don't want to out anything, but we call it the multimillion dollar button.

有一个著名的故事，我只简单地讲一下，因为我不想透露任何内容，但我们称之为“数百万美元按钮”。

And basically we did research which revealed that people weren't going down the purchase funnel because they were afraid.

基本上我们所做的研究表明，人们不会因为害怕而进入购买渠道。

The calls to actions on the button was making them afraid that it would initiate a purchase when really it was just taking the next step.

按钮上的操作调用让他们担心它会发起购买，而实际上它只是采取下一步。

Judd Antin: We changed the text on the button with help from our amazing content design, our UX writing team.

Judd Antin：在我们出色的内容设计和用户体验写作团队的帮助下，我们更改了按钮上的文本。

We basically changed seven characters and made Airbnb millions of dollars, because what we found out was really simple.

我们基本上改变了七个角色，让 Airbnb 赚了数百万美元，因为我们发现的事情非常简单。

It was just like, "Hey, this button feels scary.

就像，“嘿，这个按钮感觉很可怕。

The CTA on the button feels scary." So that's a great example of how micro ...

按钮上的 CTA 感觉很可怕。”所以这是一个很好的例子，说明了微......

And that happened in like 48 hours, we would discover that insight, or overnight, basically.

这发生在大约 48 小时内，我们基本上会在一夜之间发现这种洞察力。

And we were like, "Hm, maybe we should test some other CTAs." We did the conversion, we added like 1%, which is really, really hard to do.

我们当时想，“嗯，也许我们应该测试一些其他的 CTA。”我们进行了转换，添加了 1% 左右，这真的很难做到。

So that's a quick example of how that type of quick research can drive a huge amount of business value.

这是一个简单的例子，说明这种类型的快速研究如何能够带来巨大的商业价值。

Lenny: This episode is brought to you by Ahrefs.

莱尼：这一集是由 Ahrefs 为您带来的。

Many of you already know Ahrefs as one of the top tools for search engine optimization.

许多人已经知道 Ahrefs 是搜索引擎优化的顶级工具之一。

It's used by thousands of SEOs and companies like IBM, Adidas and eBay.

数以千计的 SEO 和 IBM、阿迪达斯和 eBay 等公司都在使用它。

What you may not know is that there's a free version that was made with small website owners in mind.

您可能不知道的是，有一个免费版本是专为小型网站所有者设计的。

It's called Ahrefs Webmaster Tools.

它称为 Ahrefs 网站管理员工具。

It's free and it can help you bring more traffic to your website.

它是免费的，可以帮助您为您的网站带来更多流量。

Ahrefs Webmaster Tools will show you keywords that you rank for and backlinks that you can get.

Ahrefs 网站管理员工具将向您显示您排名的关键字以及可以获得的反向链接。

It also performs automated site audits to find what issues prevent your website from ranking higher on Google.

它还执行自动网站审核，以找出哪些问题阻止您的网站在 Google 上排名更高。

Every detected issue comes with a detailed explanation and advice on how to fix it.

每个检测到的问题都附带详细的解释和如何修复的建议。

Visit ahrefs.com/awt, set up a free account, connect your website, and start improving it.

访问 ahrefs.com/awt，设置免费帐户，连接您的网站，然后开始改进它。

That's A-H-R-E-F-S.com/A-W-T.

那是 A-H-R-E-F-S.com/A-W-T。

Lenny: So just to make this even clearer, I think this middle research zone is the stuff that does slow people down, I imagine.

莱尼：为了让这一点更清楚，我认为这个中间研究区域确实会减慢人们的速度。

It's like, "What are the challenges hosts have with payments on Airbnb?" What you're basically saying is, "Spend your time doing the micro stuff like usability research and then the bigger stuff that's part of overall planning.

就像“房东在 Airbnb 上付款时遇到哪些挑战？”你基本上想说的是，“花时间做一些微观的事情，比如可用性研究，然后做更大的事情，这是总体规划的一部分。

That's part of the planning cycle.

这是规划周期的一部分。

It's not like every project you're working on, you need to have a whole research project on."

这并不像你正在进行的每个项目都需要有一个完整的研究项目。”

Judd Antin: Exactly.

贾德·安廷：没错。

The micro research should be much more common.

微观研究应该更加普遍。

A lot of researchers think that that's scut work, that usability is something junior researchers do.

许多研究人员认为这是一项枯燥的工作，可用性是初级研究人员所做的事情。

I completely disagree.

我完全不同意。

I think we need to get back there as an industry and be like, "When you make a product easier to use, when you discover problems with functionality, business metrics we care about will go up." I've seen it happen.

我认为作为一个行业，我们需要回到那里，“当你让产品更易于使用时，当你发现功能问题时，我们关心的业务指标将会上升。”我已经看到它发生了。

But that's not just work for interns and new grads, that's for sure.

但这不仅仅是实习生和应届毕业生的工作，这是肯定的。

Judd Antin: And then the planning process, absolutely.

贾德·安廷：当然还有规划过程。

If we're integrated from beginning to end, we can help.

如果我们从始至终都保持整合，我们就能提供帮助。

And the thing about that middle range, I think you're right.

关于中间范围的事情，我认为你是对的。

That's the stuff that makes the stereotype that research is slow, and a lot of times it's also because it's just not pointed enough.

这就是造成研究缓慢的刻板印象的原因，很多时候也是因为它不够针对性。

The researcher can also say in that moment, "I have studied the business plan.

研究人员也可以在那一刻说：“我已经研究了商业计划。

I know exactly where, I've seen the metrics trend, I have an idea about exactly where that's going to go." We still need to do that middle range research.

我确切地知道在哪里，我已经看到了指标趋势，我知道它到底会走向何方。”我们仍然需要进行中间范围的研究。

The question is valuable, but it's now very pointed and the time is worth it.

这个问题很有价值，但现在非常尖锐，花时间是值得的。

Lenny: Amazing.

莱尼：太棒了。

Okay, I want to cure the rest of these tropes.

好吧，我想解决剩下的这些比喻。

Judd Antin: Okay, research is too slow is the first one.

贾德·安廷：好的，第一个是研究太慢。

The second one, I can do my own research.

第二，我可以自己研究。

Why do I need researchers?

为什么我需要研究人员？

And that's true, as product people, I hope you are engaging with customers and listening well.

确实如此，作为产品人员，我希望您能够与客户互动并充分倾听。

But no offense, garbage in, garbage out.

但无意冒犯，垃圾进，垃圾出。

The thing is, anyone can talk to a user.

问题是，任何人都可以与用户交谈。

That does not constitute research or insights work because one user can be powerful, but one user can be idiosyncratic.

这并不构成研究或见解工作，因为一个用户可能很强大，但一个用户也可能很独特。

And a researcher knows how to get to the heart of that really quick.

研究人员知道如何快速深入研究核心问题。

They know how to take that conversation, and understand, and situate it in a way which means like, "Sure, democratize research.

他们知道如何进行对话、理解并以某种方式进行定位，这意味着“当然，使研究民主化。

That's happening.

这就是正在发生的事情。

There are tools out there that will let anybody get customer feedback, voice a customer type stuff." But a researcher is there to help you turn garbage into something that's not garbage and avoid the bias that can come from you just reaching out to your cousin's family and then doing whatever they thought you should do to the product.

有一些工具可以让任何人获得客户反馈，表达客户类型的内容。”但研究人员可以帮助您将垃圾变成非垃圾，并避免您与表亲的家人联系，然后对产品做任何他们认为您应该做的事情而产生的偏见。

So that's the second trope.

这是第二个比喻。

Judd Antin: The third one is AB test everything.

Judd Antin：第三个是 AB 测试一切。

And AB tests are great, but one of my most painful things to do is to sit in a room full of PMs and data scientists who have just seen the results of an experiment that flipped a stat sig, and then they're like, "Cool, I was significantly down over this course of time for these users." And then they just start speculating about why that is, because the AB test rarely tells you why it changed in the way it did.

AB 测试很棒，但我最痛苦的事情之一就是坐在一个满是 PM 和数据科学家的房间里，他们刚刚看到了一项翻转统计信号的实验结果，然后他们会说，“酷，在这段时间里，我对这些用户的表现明显下降了。”然后他们就开始猜测为什么会这样，因为 AB 测试很少告诉你为什么会发生这样的变化。

And then this endless flywheel of AB testing goes and I'm like, "Hey, you don't have to guess.

然后这个无尽的 AB 测试飞轮开始运转，我就像，“嘿，你不必猜测。

I know somebody who can get you an answer or at least evidence that addresses the question of why did we see the test result we did in a very short amount of time?

我知道有人可以为您提供答案或至少提供证据来解决为什么我们在很短的时间内看到我们所做的测试结果？

Or you could use your customers as Guinea pigs, and throw more experiments at them over and over, and spend a long time on it, and come to the same place in the end."

或者你可以把你的顾客当作小白鼠，一遍又一遍地向他们进行更多的实验，并花很长时间，最终到达同一个地方。”

Lenny: I think a similar critique that PMs often have is AB testing is conclusive scientifically, statistically, user research is just talking to a bunch of people.

Lenny：我认为 PM 经常遇到的类似批评是，AB 测试在科学、统计上是结论性的，用户研究只是与一群人交谈。

Why would I trust that?

我为什么要相信这一点？

What is your best way to help PMs realize that this is actually very valuable data and you should listen to it?

帮助产品经理认识到这实际上是非常有价值的数据并且您应该倾听的最佳方法是什么？

It's not just, you know, a story here and there.

你知道，这不仅仅是一个随处可见的故事。

Judd Antin: Yeah.

贾德·安廷：是的。

No, I think they're both right.

不，我认为他们都是对的。

AB testing is as close as we can get to making causal claims about products.

AB 测试是我们对产品做出因果断言的最接近的方法。

Research is usually not oriented towards making causal claims or it should not be, but those causal claims rarely tell you how and why things happen.

研究通常不以因果关系为导向，也不应该如此，但这些因果关系很少告诉你事情如何发生以及为何发生。

And if you want to not make that mistake again in the future, you need to know how and why.

如果您不想将来再犯同样的错误，您需要知道如何以及为什么。

If you want to build a better product in a way that doesn't just answer this narrow question that an AB test answered, you need to know how and why.

如果您想要构建更好的产品，而不仅仅是回答 AB 测试所回答的这个狭隘问题，您需要知道如何以及为什么。

And so you need both.

所以你两者都需要。

Beautiful partnerships between data scientists and research and insights people are, I think what we're going to see in that next evolution.

我认为我们将在下一次演变中看到数据科学家与研究人员和洞察人员之间的良好合作关系。

And if you set that virtuous cycle up, if you set up the engagement where those people are involved from the beginning, you don't make those mistakes.

如果你建立了良性循环，如果你从一开始就让这些人参与进来，你就不会犯这些错误。

You get the causal relationship, which is valuable for one reason and the hows and whys, which are valuable for other reasons.

你会得到因果关系，这对于一个原因是有价值的，而如何和为什么，这对于其他原因来说是有价值的。

Lenny: Awesome.

莱尼：太棒了。

Okay.

好的。

I think there's two more tropes you had.

我认为你还有两个比喻。

Judd Antin: One of them is a simple one, which is like everyone loves to quote that it turns out a totally apocryphal Henry Ford quote about, "If I'd asked my users." It turns out to the best of our knowledge, he did not say that.

贾德·安廷：其中一个很简单，就像每个人都喜欢引用的那样，事实证明这是一句完全杜撰的亨利·福特的名言：“如果我问我的用户。”据我们所知，事实证明他并没有这么说。

And-

还有——

Judd Antin: I know.

贾德·安廷：我知道。

Sorry to burst your bubble, Lenny.

抱歉让你的幻想破灭了，莱尼。

Lenny: Does anyone say anything?

莱尼：有人说什么吗？

I feel like every quote is-

我感觉每一句台词都是——

Lenny: Yeah.

莱尼：是的。

What is reality?

什么是现实？

Geez, can we?

哎呀，我们可以吗？

Well, let's just-

好吧，让我们——

Judd Antin: Okay, maybe he said that.

贾德·安廷：好吧，也许他是这么说的。

He certainly believed that.

他当然相信这一点。

That's what the historians say.

历史学家就是这么说的。

But the reason that makes researchers so angry is because that's not research.

但让研究人员如此愤怒的原因是因为这不是研究。

That's not what researchers do.

这不是研究人员所做的。

A researcher who's going to ask customers what they want is a bad researcher.

一个会询问顾客想要什么的研究人员是一个糟糕的研究人员。

You need a different researcher.

你需要一个不同的研究人员。

I've never done that in my career.

在我的职业生涯中我从未这样做过。

No one on my team has ever run a study that's like that.

我的团队中没有人进行过类似的研究。

So that just makes researchers mad.

这只会让研究人员抓狂。

Judd Antin: And then the last one is about post-hoc bias.

贾德·安廷：最后一个是关于事后偏见的。

It's, "We knew this already.

它是，“我们已经知道了。

That was obvious." And I think a lot about this book, which I would recommend to your listeners.

这是显而易见的。”我对这本书思考了很多，我会推荐给你们的听众。

The author is a sociologist at UPenn named Duncan Watts, and the title is Everything is Obvious If You Already Know the Answer.

作者是宾夕法尼亚大学社会学家邓肯·瓦茨（Duncan Watts），书名是《如果你已经知道答案，一切都是显而易见的》。

And it's about hindsight bias.

这与事后偏见有关。

He makes the argument that we rely too much on intuition, heuristics, and pattern matching in a way that is inappropriate to our experience.

他认为我们过于依赖直觉、启发式和模式匹配，而这种方式与我们的经验不相符。

And it's like it leads us astray.

它就像把我们引入歧途。

It's like a form of self gaslighting.

这就像一种自我煤气灯。

And it happens because we end up selectively remembering things and then constructing narratives around them in a way which makes us feel like we already knew that, when we in fact did not.

之所以会发生这种情况，是因为我们最终会选择性地记住一些事情，然后围绕它们构建叙事，这种方式让我们感觉自己已经知道了，而实际上我们并不知道。

Judd Antin: And he talks about this other, one of those cognitive biases called the narrative fallacy, which is the idea that people love to make convenient, simple stories about the past.

贾德·安廷：他谈到了另一种认知偏见，称为叙事谬误，即人们喜欢对过去编造方便、简单的故事。

If I asked you about your career, Lenny, and how you got to be this amazing podcast host, you'd be like, "Well, let me tell you about this series of events." And we do that.

莱尼，如果我问你的职业生涯，以及你如何成为一名出色的播客主持人，你会说，“好吧，让我告诉你这一系列事件。”我们就是这么做的。

It's part of how we make sense of our lives and the information around us, but it would probably be a lie in the sense that we all twist the evidence we have to fit the narrative we want to be true, because it's simple, and lovely, and makes us happy.

这是我们理解生活和周围信息的一部分，但从某种意义上说，这可能是一个谎言，因为我们都扭曲了我们所拥有的证据，以适应我们想要的真实叙述，因为它简单、可爱，让我们快乐。

Lenny: This is going to sound self-serving, but I find I'm the opposite.

莱尼：这听起来有点自私，但我发现我恰恰相反。

I'm like, "I have no idea how this all came about.

我想，“我不知道这一切是怎么发生的。

Here's some things that happened, and somehow I ended up here." But maybe I'm being very modest and try to not give myself any credit.

发生了一些事情，不知何故我最终来到了这里。”但也许我太谦虚了，尽量不给自己任何荣誉。

Lenny: Thank you for these tropes, by the way.

莱尼：顺便说一句，谢谢你的这些比喻。

This was fun.

这很有趣。

I didn't know you were going to do that.

我不知道你会这么做。

So that's a fun, little collection we've got, here.

所以这是我们这里的一个有趣的小收藏。

Lenny: I wanted to ask about, there's this tweet by Patrick Collison that I've brought up a couple of times on this podcast, that I think is really interesting.

莱尼：我想问一下，帕特里克·科里森（Patrick Collison）的这条推文我在这个播客上提到过几次，我认为它真的很有趣。

And his tweet is this, "In my opinion, the best product will stem from a very strong mental model of the domain and user.

他的推文是这样的：“在我看来，最好的产品将源于领域和用户的非常强大的心理模型。

User research can help you get such a model and validate it along the way.

用户研究可以帮助您获得这样的模型并一路验证它。

But it's important to view the syllogism of UXR as model of user research, to improving your mental model of the user, to what product you should build versus user research tells you what product to build." Does that resonate in any way thoughts on that way of thinking about user research?

但重要的是，将 UXR 的三段论视为用户研究的模型，以改善您的用户心理模型，您应该构建什么产品，而不是用户研究告诉您要构建什么产品。”这是否会与用户研究的思维方式产生共鸣？

Judd Antin: Yeah, there's a double-edged sword we talk about a lot in the research community, which is about making recommendations for design.

贾德·安廷：是的，我们在研究界经常谈论一把双刃剑，那就是提出设计建议。

So the best research doesn't leave it at that.

所以最好的研究不会仅限于此。

It tells you, and it's like the what, the so what, and then the then what.

它告诉你，就像什么，那么什么，然后然后什么。

But the problem with that is some researchers go too far in the other direction, where they're like, "We ran this study, it yielded these insights, and therefore this is what we should build." And everyone else on the team is like, "Whoa, whoa, whoa.

但问题是，一些研究人员在另一个方向走得太远，他们会说，“我们进行了这项研究，它产生了这些见解，因此这就是我们应该建立的。”团队中的其他人都会说：“哇，哇，哇。

Glad to hear your thoughts on the matter, but there's a lot going on here.

很高兴听到你对此事的想法，但这里发生了很多事情。

Maybe we should talk about it." And that makes perfect sense.

也许我们应该谈谈它。”这是完全有道理的。

That's a failure of communication.

那就是沟通失败。

Judd Antin: And I think that speaks to the thing that Patrick is saying, is like, "Good research can sometimes tell us exactly what the problem is and exactly how to fix it." An example of that is the multimillion dollar button I told you about.

贾德·安廷：我认为这符合帕特里克所说的，“好的研究有时可以准确地告诉我们问题是什么以及如何解决它。”我告诉过你的价值数百万美元的按钮就是一个例子。

But in a lot of the bigger picture questions, especially the macro ones and maybe also the really pointed middle range ones, the point isn't really, "This is exactly what we should do and this is exactly what we should build." It is, "Let us develop a framework which is based on actual evidence, and then together as a team figure out how we want to experiment our way to a successful product."

但在许多更大的问题中，尤其是宏观问题，也许还有真正尖锐的中范围问题，重点并不是“这正是我们应该做的，这正是我们应该建立的”。它是，“让我们开发一个基于实际证据的框架，然后作为一个团队一起找出我们想要如何试验我们的成功产品的方法。”

Lenny: To close the loop on this specific thread, what is your advice to teams, researchers to help move out of this reckoning, and to move forward, and help the field, both from a user researcher perspective and also from just a company that maybe laid off a bunch of user researchers or is trying to decide what to do with their researchers?

Lenny：为了结束这个特定主题的循环，您对团队和研究人员有什么建议，以帮助他们摆脱这种清算，继续前进，并帮助该领域，无论是从用户研究人员的角度，还是从一家可能解雇了一群用户研究人员或正在试图决定如何处理他们的研究人员的公司？

Judd Antin: Thank you for asking.

贾德·安廷：谢谢你的提问。

I think I said to you earlier, and I feel some pressure as maybe the first conversation that you've had specifically about research on this podcast.

我想我之前已经对你说过了，我感到有些压力，因为这可能是你第一次专门讨论这个播客的研究。

Judd Antin: And I want to help.

贾德·安廷：我想帮忙。

I believe so much in this discipline of research and insights, and I think when I said, "The UX research discipline of the last 15 years is dying," I didn't mean that I think research is dying, far from it.

我非常相信这个研究和见解学科，我认为当我说“过去 15 年的用户体验研究学科正在消亡”时，我并不是说我认为研究正在消亡，远非如此。

I think that there's a version of it, which we're now moving past and into a new version.

我认为它有一个版本，我们现在正在超越它并进入新版本。

We're going through an evolution, as many do.

和许多人一样，我们正在经历一场演变。

And so the question for me is like, "How can researchers, and the companies, and the other people with whom they work create a new version, a different version, an evolution, which is hugely impactful for the business?"

所以我的问题是，“研究人员、公司以及与他们一起工作的其他人如何才能创建一个新版本，一个不同的版本，一个对业务产生巨大影响的演进？”

Judd Antin: And so the advice I'd give to researchers about that is develop diverse research skills.

贾德·安廷：因此，我给研究人员的建议是培养多样化的研究技能。

Remembering the five or five and a half tool list that I mentioned earlier, really go deep on that business knowledge, so speaking the language of product, and business, and metrics, and understanding exactly how to use your insights like a scalpel, building those strong relationships, which is not a thing that researchers can do by themselves.

记住我之前提到的五个或五个半工具列表，真正深入了解业务知识，因此讲产品、业务和指标的语言，并准确理解如何像手术刀一样使用您的见解，建立那些牢固的关系，这不是研究人员自己可以做的事情。

It requires two-way engagements, and also in a way which allows researchers to do fewer things better.

它需要双向参与，而且还需要让研究人员能够用更少的时间做得更好。

Judd Antin: So most researchers that I know are working on teams where they're like, "I'm the only researcher, and I have seven PMs and 20 designers, and I'm trying to do 10 projects." And no one's going to do a good job that way.

Judd Antin：据我所知，大多数研究人员都在团队中工作，“我是唯一的研究人员，我有 7 位产品经理和 20 名设计师，我正在尝试做 10 个项目。”这样一来，没有人能把工作做好。

So researchers have to learn with their partners about how to say no and focus on the most important things.

因此，研究人员必须与他们的合作伙伴一起学习如何说不并专注于最重要的事情。

But that's only half of it, right?

但这只是一半，对吧？

That's the research side.

那是研究方面。

Judd Antin: I have two thoughts about what companies should be doing.

贾德·安廷：对于公司应该做什么，我有两个想法。

The first one, it's a little bit of an aside, but not really.

第一个，有点旁白，但不是真的。

One thing I learned by through the responses to the article was everybody came out of the woodworks from the variety of insights disciplines that are out there.

我从这篇文章的回复中学到的一件事是，每个人都是从现有的各种见解学科中脱颖而出的。

Because I come from a tradition of user experience research or user research, but there are many insights disciplines in many industries, and they all wanted to claim one type of research or another, and say, "Oh, well, we overhear in consumer insights or market research have been doing that well for years." And there are many insights disciplines.

因为我有用户体验研究或用户研究的传统，但许多行业都有许多洞察学科，他们都想声称一种或另一种类型的研究，并说，“哦，好吧，我们无意中听说消费者洞察或市场研究多年来一直做得很好。”并且有许多洞察学科。

And generally I think creating silos is stupid.

一般来说，我认为创建孤岛是愚蠢的。

Judd Antin: Actually, I'm curious what you think, because here's the number one thing I heard when I joined Airbnb and you were there, is I did it a quick listening tour where I talked to a bunch of product people.

贾德·安廷：实际上，我很好奇你的想法，因为当我加入 Airbnb 并且你也在场时，我听到的第一件事是，我进行了一次快速的聆听之旅，与一群产品人员交谈。

And they all said the same thing.

他们都说了同样的话。

They were like, "Listen, we have all these different people throwing insights over the transom.

他们就像是，“听着，我们有所有这些不同的人在横梁上提出见解。

And it's great.

这很棒。

We want to hear from the data scientists, from the product specialists, from the customer service people, and the voice of the customer, whatever, all that stuff.

我们希望听到数据科学家、产品专家、客户服务人员以及客户的声音，等等。

But they're all coming over the side and we don't know what to make of it.

但他们都从一边过来，我们不知道该怎么办。

It's too much."

太多了。”

Judd Antin: And that, as much as anything, is an argument for companies to stop siloing research disciplines.

贾德·安廷：这也是公司停止孤立研究学科的一个论据。

So when I joined Airbnb, I set out to create an integrated insights function where it's like, "Let's do UX research, let's talk about the market and competitors when we have to.

因此，当我加入 Airbnb 时，我开始创建一个综合洞察功能，就像“让我们进行用户体验研究，必要时让我们讨论市场和竞争对手。

Let's integrate smartly with data science functions.

让我们与数据科学功能智能集成。

Let's integrate all the stuff we're getting from customer service feedback." We brought over what was then the NPS program and said, "Hey, if we're getting customer feedback there, let's all just use it all to fuel this one insights machine." So that's the first piece of advice I'd give companies.

让我们整合从客户服务反馈中获得的所有内容。”我们引入了当时的 NPS 计划并说道：“嘿，如果我们在那里得到客户反馈，那么我们就用它来为这台洞察机器提供动力。”这是我给公司的第一条建议。

Judd Antin: And the second one, without being a broken record, is to think differently about the broken cycle.

贾德·安廷：第二个，虽然不是打破纪录，但是以不同的方式思考打破的周期。

So integrate researchers into a unified, lean process.

因此，将研究人员整合到一个统一、精益的流程中。

So if the researcher is not there from beginning to end, if there are not strong relationships between product people and design people at every level, engineering people at every level, and somebody who's their insights partner, we're going to fall back into this problem where we're just a service discipline, we're not extracting the maximum value, it comes too late, we don't know what questions to ask, we're ignorant about what research can do.

因此，如果研究人员自始至终都不在场，如果各个级别的产品人员和设计人员、各个级别的工程人员以及他们的见解合作伙伴之间没有牢固的关系，我们就会陷入这个问题，我们只是一个服务学科，我们没有提取最大价值，来得太晚了，我们不知道要问什么问题，我们对研究可以做什么一无所知。

And so creating that integrated, lean process where a researcher is arm in arm from the beginning, is the most important advice I'd give.

因此，创建一个集成的、精益的流程，让研究人员从一开始就齐心协力，这是我给出的最重要的建议。

Lenny: That last piece may be the answer to this next question, but the question is how can product managers be better partners to user researchers/get more leverage out of user researchers?

Lenny：最后一部分可能是下一个问题的答案，但问题是产品经理如何成为用户研究人员更好的合作伙伴/从用户研究人员那里获得更多影响力？

Judd Antin: I think that is in many ways the answer, making sure that they are creating a process for the product, for their products, that it integrates user researchers and insights from beginning to end.

贾德·安廷：我认为这在很多方面都是答案，确保他们正在为产品、为他们的产品创建一个流程，从头到尾整合用户研究人员和见解。

Also, being willing to partner with the research on the roofless prioritization.

此外，愿意与无屋顶优先级的研究合作。

I used to say that, "A full plate for a researcher was probably three things, two big projects and a small project, like a side project.

我过去常说：“研究人员的全部工作可能包括三件事，两个大项目和一个小项目，比如一个副项目。

More than that, your researcher is probably not doing a very good job.

更重要的是，你的研究人员可能做得不太好。

And a project may take 48 hours.

一个项目可能需要 48 小时。

That's okay.

没关系。

But so they need your help to prioritize, they need you to participate.

但他们需要你的帮助来确定优先顺序，他们需要你的参与。

Great PMs will take the time to be with researchers to go into the field, even to travel." Did you ever do that, Lenny?

优秀的产品经理会花时间与研究人员一起进入该领域，甚至出差。”你曾经这样做过吗，莱尼？

Lenny: I did.

莱尼：我做到了。

I went with Louise, who introduced, we came up with this, basically told me to chat with you about this topic.

我和路易丝一起去了，她介绍说，我们想出了这个，基本上是让我和你聊这个话题。

Lenny: Thanks, Louise.

莱尼：谢谢，露易丝。

We did a whole tour to Paris, our whole team, or the leads of our team went to Paris to do a bunch of focus groups and a bunch of user research behind actual mirrors.

我们对巴黎进行了一次完整的旅行，我们的整个团队，或者我们团队的领导去了巴黎，进行了一系列焦点小组讨论，并在实际镜子后面进行了一系列用户研究。

I've never done that before that trip, and it was amazing.

在那次旅行之前我从未这样做过，这真是太棒了。

We learned a ton.

我们学到了很多东西。

Judd Antin: Can I tell you a quick story about behind the mirror?

贾德·安廷：我可以告诉你一个关于镜子背后的故事吗？

Judd Antin: This is back from when I was at Facebook.

Judd Antin：这是我在 Facebook 时的事。

And there was the high times there, it was like 2012, '13, and newsfeed is really taking off, ads are going into newsfeed.

那是一段高峰期，就像 2012 年、13 年，新闻源真正起飞，广告正在进入新闻源。

And I was a leader of a team that was working among other things on how to address post quality.

我是一个团队的领导者，该团队致力于解决帖子质量问题。

Like, "How do we think about what's a good post and how do we get feedback about it?" And so there was a team of engineers that thought, "One thing that you can do on Facebook is hide a post." So they were like, "This is easy.

比如，“我们如何看待什么是好帖子以及我们如何获得有关它的反馈？”因此，有一个工程师团队认为，“在 Facebook 上可以做的一件事就是隐藏帖子。”所以他们说，“这很容易。

Let's look at the posts that are hidden the most and use that as the signal of what's a good post on Facebook?" Seems reasonable.

让我们看看隐藏最多的帖子，并将其作为 Facebook 上好帖子的标志？”看起来很合理。

And something tripped me on this one.

在这件事上，有件事让我绊倒了。

And so I did two things.

所以我做了两件事。

Judd Antin: So the first thing I did is I looked at the distribution of hiding by user, and found out that it's power law distributed, like everything on the internet.

贾德·安廷：所以我做的第一件事就是查看用户隐藏的分布，发现它是幂律分布的，就像互联网上的所有东西一样。

There are a few people on Facebook who hide a ton, and then most people don't hide at all.

Facebook 上有少数人隐藏了大量信息，但大多数人根本不隐藏。

And so then what we did was, we call these super hiders, we called them super hiders.

所以我们所做的就是，我们称这些超级隐藏者，我们称他们为超级隐藏者。

And so we said, "Let's find super hiders around the office, and we'll get a super hider in, and we'll do a really traditional user interview." We just wanted to see.

所以我们说，“让我们在办公室里找到超级隐藏者，我们会邀请一个超级隐藏者进来，然后我们将进行真正传统的用户访谈。”我们只是想看看。

So literally the first person who walked in, I remember, because this was a person who had those fingernails that are so long, you don't know how they can do touchscreens, but they did.

我记得，实际上是第一个走进来的人，因为这个人的指甲很长，你不知道他们如何做触摸屏，但他们做到了。

They were amazing at it.

他们对此感到惊讶。

And it was one of those rooms with the glass.

这是那些有玻璃的房间之一。

And I insisted that the ENG directors, the product people, and they were willing, whatever.

我坚持认为 ENG 总监、产品人员以及他们都愿意，无论如何。

Judd Antin: So everybody's behind the glass, and I'm there with them, and the excellent researcher is in the room, and they come in, and we're just doing a traditional think aloud study.

贾德·安廷：所以每个人都在玻璃后面，我和他们在一起，优秀的研究人员也在房间里，他们进来了，我们只是在进行传统的大声思考研究。

And so they go, "Hey, can you open up your Facebook app?

然后他们就说：“嘿，你能打开你的 Facebook 应用程序吗？

We would just love to see what your experience is like." So they open up Facebook, and were looking, and they look at the first story, and they hide it.

我们很想看看您的体验如何。”所以他们打开 Facebook，然后查看，他们查看了第一个故事，然后将其隐藏。

They go to the second story and they hide it.

他们去了第二个故事并将其隐藏起来。

And this went on for a while.

这种情况持续了一段时间。

Judd Antin: And she's definitely using Facebook, but every time she'd finish with a story, she'd hide it.

贾德·安廷：她肯定在使用 Facebook，但每次她讲完一个故事，她都会把它隐藏起来。

And the people in the back room were starting to chatter.

后面房间里的人也开始议论起来。

And they're like, "Wait, what?

他们就像，“等等，什么？

What is happening right now?" And like the good researcher that this person was, they let it continue, and they're like, "Whoa, can you tell me what you're thinking right now?" Come to find out that she was like, "Well, I hid that story because I'd seen it already." The model she was going for was inbox zero, which was sad, because it was infinitely scrolling.

现在发生什么事了？”就像这个人是一个优秀的研究人员一样，他们让它继续下去，他们就像，“哇，你能告诉我你现在在想什么吗？”发现她就像是，“好吧，我隐藏了那个故事，因为我已经看过了。”她想要的模型是收件箱为零，这很遗憾，因为它是无限滚动的。

She would never get there.

她永远不会到达那里。

Judd Antin: And the reason I liked that story is because the people in the back room had their minds blown.

贾德·安廷：我喜欢这个故事的原因是因为后面房间里的人都大吃一惊。

It was not that we assumed that was common behavior, like this person could have been unique, but it was enough, because those people were there, experiencing the research, that N of one allowed them to burst their own bubble and realize, "Okay, we can't think so naïvely about hides as a signal anymore." And we came up with a better solution.

这并不是说我们认为这是常见的行为，就像这个人可能是独一无二的，但这已经足够了，因为那些人​​在那里，经历了研究，其中的一个让他们打破了自己的泡沫并意识到，“好吧，我们不能再天真地将皮革视为一种信号了。”我们想出了一个更好的解决方案。

Lenny: That is an awesome story and such a good example of you don't need statistical significance to get massive insights.

莱尼：这是一个很棒的故事，这是一个很好的例子，说明你不需要统计显着性就能获得大量的见解。

One example just gives you a, "Wow, this might be exactly what's happening.

一个例子只是给你一个，“哇，这可能正是正在发生的事情。

Let's go validate that." Versus, like, "We are confident, 100%, this is what happened." I love that.

我们去验证一下吧。”相反，“我们有信心，100%，这就是发生的事情。”我喜欢那个。

It reminds me actually in the mirror study that I was talking about in Paris, there's a Facebook element to it, too.

这让我想起了我在巴黎谈论的镜子研究，其中也有 Facebook 元素。

We were trying to convince hosts how to feel more comfortable accepting guests who are booking instantly.

我们试图说服房东如何更轻松地接受立即预订的房客。

And one of our theories was if they were connected on Facebook, they would be more comfortable letting someone book instantly.

我们的理论之一是，如果他们在 Facebook 上联系，他们会更愿意让别人立即预订。

Lenny: And we're just like, "Hey, what if you were to connect Facebook and see if they're friends?" And everybody in Paris was very afraid of connecting and giving Facebook any data, way ahead of what the US hosts were feeling.

莱尼：我们就想，“嘿，如果你连接 Facebook 看看他们是不是朋友怎么办？”巴黎的每个人都非常害怕连接 Facebook 并向 Facebook 提供任何数据，这远远超出了美国东道主的感受。

Lenny: So it just made it very clear nobody wants to actually give Facebook any data.

莱尼：所以这很清楚地表明，没有人愿意真正向 Facebook 提供任何数据。

So it was very anti-Facebook at that point.

所以当时它非常反对 Facebook。

Judd Antin: Yeah, that's so interesting.

贾德·安廷：是的，这很有趣。

Germany and France were always our bellwethers for what the rest of the world would be thinking with data privacy concerns.

德国和法国始终是我们的领头羊，了解世界其他国家对数据隐私问题的看法。

Lenny: Oh, man.

莱尼：哦，伙计。

Okay, a couple more things.

好吧，还有几件事。

A lot of this started with a lot of layoffs within user research.

这很大程度上是从用户研究领域的大量裁员开始的。

And I think between the lines, there's a sense of teams don't need as many researchers as they hired during the ZIRP era.

我认为，言外之意是，团队不需要像 ZIRP 时代那样雇佣那么多研究人员。

I think a question in everyone's mind is just like, "How many researchers do we need?

我想每个人心里都有一个问题，“我们需要多少研究人员？

What is a good ratio?" I imagine there's not a simple answer, here, but just what's your general advice to companies of how many researchers is it right?

什么是好的比例？”我想这里没有一个简单的答案，但您对公司的一般建议是什么，即有多少研究人员是正确的？

Judd Antin: This is a thing I've thought a lot about, especially in my role as the head of the design studio, that was my fundamental question.

贾德·安廷：这是我思考了很多的事情，特别是在我作为设计工作室负责人的角色中，这是我的基本问题。

It's like, "You have all these writers, designers, researchers, how do you structure them, how many, and where, and who works on what?" And the organizing principle for me was always relationships.

就像，“你有这么多作家、设计师、研究人员，你如何组织他们，有多少人，在哪里，谁在做什么？”对我来说，组织原则始终是关系。

You know you have enough when the people who need to have a concept research partner have them.

当需要概念研究合作伙伴的人拥有他们时，您就知道您已经足够了。

And I would much rather create pain in that situation than spread someone too thinly.

我宁愿在这种情况下制造痛苦，也不愿将某人分散得太薄。

So my advice was always like, "Don't try to create a researcher to cover this entire product space.

所以我的建议总是这样的，“不要试图创建一个研究人员来覆盖整个产品领域。

Pair a researcher up with somebody who's going to involve them in a consistent, engaged process, and let them go to work, and see the impact they're going to have, but protect their time.

将研究人员与将让他们参与一致、参与的过程的人配对，然后让他们去工作，看看他们将产生的影响，但要保护他们的时间。

And then other people are like, "Wait a second, that person's doing great work.

然后其他人就会说，“等一下，那个人做得很好。

I want some of that."

我想要一些。”

Judd Antin: And creating that pain for them, because it's a pain of loss, is the number one way to grow headcount.

贾德·安廷：为他们制造这种痛苦，因为这是一种失去的痛苦，是增加员工人数的首要方法。

That's how I always approached getting more headcount, was not arguing abstractly for why research is important, but by asking partners who wish they had it, to do the arguing for me.

这就是我一直在增加员工数量的方法，不是抽象地争论为什么研究很重要，而是通过询问那些希望拥有研究的合作伙伴来为我争论。

And so you're right, there isn't a clean answer for like, "Hey, this is the right ratio," because it really depends on the nature of the product.

所以你是对的，对于“嘿，这是正确的比例”之类的问题没有一个明确的答案，因为这实际上取决于产品的性质。

Like, "Is it a early stage product?

比如，“这是一个早期产品吗？

Is it a late stage product?

是后期产品吗？

Are we talking about a startup or a late stage company?" But I would argue there's always room for a researcher.

我们谈论的是初创公司还是后期公司？”但我认为研究人员总是有空间的。

Lenny, I'll tell you, and I used this in a keynote talk I gave lately.

莱尼，我告诉你，我在最近的主题演讲中使用了这一点。

You published recently a list of, I think it was about 20 B2B companies and their first 10 employees.

您最近发布了一份名单，我认为大约有 20 家 B2B 公司及其前 10 名员工。

Do you remember doing that?

你还记得这样做吗？

Judd Antin: Do you remember how many researchers are anywhere on that list?

贾德·安廷：你还记得这份名单上有多少研究人员吗？

I'll give you a hint.

我给你一个提示。

Judd Antin: It's between zero and two.

贾德·安廷：在零到二之间。

It's one.

是一个。

There's one researcher on that list, anywhere.

任何地方的名单上都有一位研究人员。

Anywhere.

任何地方。

And that's messed up to me.

这让我很困惑。

Now, look, it's just these 20 companies, and each is in their own space, so I'm not going to overgeneralize.

现在，你看，这只是这 20 家公司，每家公司都有自己的空间，所以我不会过度概括。

But a researcher can drive incredible value no matter what stage a company is at, because a good researcher makes you go faster, not slower, and they drive impact because they answer questions which are impossible to answer in any other way.

但无论公司处于哪个阶段，研究人员都可以带来令人难以置信的价值，因为优秀的研究人员会让你走得更快，而不是更慢，而且他们会产生影响，因为他们回答了用其他方式无法回答的问题。

That's true if you're a startup.

如果你是一家初创公司，情况确实如此。

It's true if you're a late stage company.

如果你是一家处于后期阶段的公司，确实如此。

Now, if it's your first 10 employees, one researcher is going to go a long way.

现在，如果是您的前 10 名员工，一名研究人员将会大有帮助。

As you grow, making sure that you're matching up researchers so that they have strong partners in the key parts of the business is the best way to figure out if you have enough.

随着你的成长，确保你匹配研究人员，以便他们在业务的关键部分拥有强大的合作伙伴，这是确定你是否有足够的能力的最佳方法。

Lenny: Interesting.

莱尼：有趣。

So your advice is, as you're starting a company, your pitch is that you'll have a lot more leverage and move faster hiring a researcher versus generally an engineers, but you'd be trading off, essentially.

所以你的建议是，当你创办一家公司时，你的主张是，与一般工程师相比，你将拥有更多的影响力并更快地雇用研究员，但本质上你会进行权衡。

That's what most of the hires end up being.

这就是大多数员工最终的情况。

Judd Antin: I am reluctant to overgeneralize, and I would say I know many founders who are in startup mode are like, "I know what I need to build.

贾德·安廷：我不愿意过度概括，我想说我知道许多处于启动模式的创始人都会说，“我知道我需要构建什么。

The problem is that I need people who can help me execute." And I think that's right.

问题是我需要能够帮助我执行任务的人。”我认为这是对的。

And so everything's a trade off.

所以一切都是一个权衡。

But remember, imagine that you could have that Swiss army knife at your disposal.

但请记住，想象一下您可以使用瑞士军刀。

Maybe you've got an MVP out the door, and you're looking to make your first major iteration, or like many startups, you need to pivot.

也许您已经获得了 MVP，并且正在寻求进行第一次重大迭代，或者像许多初创公司一样，您需要进行转型。

This is where it's like, "Hey, you don't have to do that alone." We deify startup founders who pivot appropriately, but I think that is what we would might call moral luck, where we deify the ones who got it right, and even though they made exactly the same decisions as the one who got them wrong.

这就像“嘿，你不必一个人做这件事。”我们崇拜那些适当转向的初创公司创始人，但我认为这就是我们所说的道德运气，我们崇拜那些做对了的人，即使他们做出了与做错的人完全相同的决定。

Judd Antin: And the fact of the matter is, if you have an insights person with you who has that Swiss army knife of tools, you're not in it alone.

贾德·安廷：事实是，如果你身边有一个有洞察力的人，他拥有瑞士军刀般的工具，那么你并不孤单。

You don't have to guess.

你不必猜测。

Ultimately, it will still come down to a tough decision that you and founders have to make, but you can have evidence that bears on that decision, which you wouldn't be able to get any other way.

最终，这仍然取决于你和创始人必须做出的艰难决定，但你可以拥有与该决定相关的证据，这是你无法通过任何其他方式获得的。

Lenny: To close out on this, and I have just a couple more questions on this thread, I think one of your big messages to researchers is, "You can be empowered.

莱尼：最后，我还有几个关于这个话题的问题，我认为你向研究人员传达的重要信息之一是，“你可以被赋予权力。

It's up to you to do the right sort of research and to move your career in the right direction, not become a researcher people don't need." And there's this quote that you have at the top of your post, where a lot of the reaction, or I guess the way you put it is, "I know what you're thinking, they just don't get it.

你应该做正确的研究并将你的职业生涯推向正确的方向，而不是成为人们不需要的研究人员。”你在帖子的顶部引用了这句话，很多人的反应，或者我猜你的说法是，“我知道你在想什么，他们只是不明白。

We're so misunderstood.

我们被误解太深了

Our plight is to deliver insights that users use to drive business value while we're forgotten, never driving the roadmap, no seat at the table, consistently miscast, only to be laid off in the end." And what I'm hearing from you is like, "You can change that.

我们的困境是提供用户用来推动业务价值的见解，而我们却被遗忘了，从不推动路线图，在谈判桌上没有席位，一贯错误，最终只是被解雇。”我从你那里听到的是，“你可以改变这一点。

You can push back on doing research that isn't actually contributing." But let me ask you, what's your lasting, I don't know, advice you would leave researchers with to be successful?

你可以推迟进行那些实际上没有贡献的研究。”但让我问你，你会给研究人员留下什么持久的、我不知道的建议，以使其取得成功？

Judd Antin: Yeah, it's tough to be operating in a broken system, and so I feel that response, where you feel kind of powerless, but I think that's not likely to lead us past this moment to the next evolution of research.

贾德·安廷：是的，在一个破碎的系统中运作是很困难的，所以我感受到了这种反应，你会感到有点无能为力，但我认为这不太可能引导我们度过这一刻，进入下一个研究发展阶段。

So that's where it's like I don't blame any researcher at all for being in the spot they're in.

所以这就是我根本不责怪任何研究人员所处的位置。

It's been a tough go.

这是一个艰难的过程。

However, crying about our lot is not going to get us anywhere.

然而，为我们的命运哭泣不会给我们带来任何好处。

So I think the point of the article for me, and this is advice I give companies all the time when I do consulting with them, is like, "Hey, we can set this up in a different way, which responds to the current environment in a way which will drive a huge amount of impact." Now, that takes companies making the right choices.

所以我认为这篇文章的要点对我来说，这是我在向公司提供咨询时一直给他们的建议，就像，“嘿，我们可以用不同的方式来设置它，以一种将产生巨大影响的方式响应当前的环境。”现在，这需要公司做出正确的选择。

It also takes researchers owning up and developing skills, pushing back, understanding what research can have the most value, developing the skills, and the knowledge, and language around the business, becoming more influential, being excellent communicators.

它还需要研究人员拥有并发展技能，反驳，了解什么研究可以具有最大价值，发展与业务相关的技能、知识和语言，变得更有影响力，成为优秀的沟通者。

Judd Antin: It's one of the things I would evaluate the most in hiring, especially research leaders, because I needed them to show and teach by example, is like isn't just rigorous research.

贾德·安廷：这是我在招聘时最看重的事情之一，尤其是研究领导者，因为我需要他们以身作则，不仅仅是严格的研究。

It's like if a tree fell in the forest and no one was there to hear it, you need to communicate it effectively, and you need to do it in a way that's appropriate to the audience.

就像森林里一棵树倒下而没有人听到一样，你需要有效地传达它，并且需要以适合观众的方式进行。

Because If I'm talking to you, Lenny, it's different than I'm talking to Brian Chesky at Airbnb.

因为如果我和你说话，Lenny，这和我和 Airbnb 的 Brian Chesky 说话是不一样的。

And so I got to be able to give that presentation effectively, and get right to the heart of it, and speak the right language.

因此，我必须能够有效地进行演示，直击其核心，并使用正确的语言。

And so if you're a researcher, it's not hopeless.

因此，如果你是一名研究人员，这并不是没有希望的。

Actually the discipline, the future is so bright, and we can help it along by continuing to develop these different skills as companies build a model that's more inclusive.

事实上，这个学科的未来是如此光明，随着公司建立更具包容性的模式，我们可以通过继续发展这些不同的技能来帮助它前进。

Lenny: Awesome.

莱尼：太棒了。

Okay.

好的。

I have one just random, tangential question about NPS.

我有一个关于 NPS 的随机、切题的问题。

You have strong opinions about NPS, and I just wanted to hear your perspective on the value of NPS, your experience with NPS.

您对 NPS 有强烈的看法，我只是想听听您对 NPS 价值的看法以及您对 NPS 的体验。

Judd Antin: Yeah.

贾德·安廷：是的。

I do have a strong opinion about NPS.

我对 NPS 确实有强烈的看法。

I like to say, "NPS is the best example of the marketing industry marketing itself." And the problem is this threatens many people's livelihoods, because there's an entire industry of consultants and software providers that want you to believe NPS is a useful and accurate metric.

我想说，“NPS是营销行业营销本身的最好例子”。问题是这威胁到了许多人的生计，因为整个行业的顾问和软件提供商都希望您相信 NPS 是一个有用且准确的指标。

The problem is, the consensus in the survey science community is that NPS makes all the mistakes.

问题是，调查科学界的共识是 NPS 犯了所有错误。

So it's a garbage in, garbage out problem.

所以这是一个垃圾进、垃圾出的问题。

So the likelihood to recommend question is bad for a whole variety of reasons.

因此，出于多种原因，推荐问题的可能性很差。

So it's bad because it's a zero to 11 scale.

所以这很糟糕，因为它是从 0 到 11 的等级。

It's bad because it's usually unlabeled.

这很糟糕，因为它通常没有标签。

So we label the polls, but that's not the gold standard for research.

所以我们给民意调查贴上标签，但这并不是研究的黄金标准。

It's bad because it's 11 items.

这很糟糕，因为它有 11 项。

Judd Antin: And there's a couple of problems with that.

贾德·安廷：这有几个问题。

Number one, we find that precision goes down after five items on average, maybe seven.

第一，我们发现平均五项（也许七项）后精度会下降。

Number two, especially on mobile, if you're taking this survey, what percentage of those options are below the fold?

第二，特别是在移动设备上，如果您参加这项调查，这些选项中有多少百分比位于非首屏？

We are not going to get accurate survey data.

我们不会获得准确的调查数据。

And so from a survey perspective, it's really bad.

所以从调查的角度来看，情况确实很糟糕。

There's also this intuition, which is like, "How likely are you to recommend Windows 11 to your friends and family?" I am not a person who goes around recommending operating systems.

还有一种直觉，就像“您向朋友和家人推荐 Windows 11 的可能性有多大？”我不是一个四处推荐操作系统的人。

The question is fundamentally flawed.

这个问题从根本上来说是有缺陷的。

Judd Antin: The argument is that that question is a good indicator of loyalty, but there's a really simple solution, Lenny.

贾德·安廷：争论的焦点是，这个问题是忠诚度的一个很好的指标，但有一个非常简单的解决方案，莱尼。

Customer satisfaction, a simple CSAT metric, is better.

客户满意度（一个简单的 CSAT 指标）更好。

It has better data properties, it is more precise, it is more correlated to business outcomes.

它具有更好的数据属性，更精确，与业务成果更相关。

I wanted to prove this.

我想证明这一点。

This is something that survey scientists know and marketers don't want you to know.

这是调查科学家知道的事情，而营销人员不想让你知道。

And so we did the work with Mike Murakami, who led survey science at Airbnb, and he's still there, great researcher.

因此，我们与 Mike Murakami 一起开展了这项工作，他是 Airbnb 调查科学的负责人，他仍然是一名出色的研究员。

And we basically redid all that work to find out if all that stuff was true just for Airbnb.

我们基本上重新完成了所有工作，以查明所有这些内容是否仅适用于 Airbnb。

And it is.

确实如此。

It's simple.

这很简单。

Don't ask NPS, ask customer satisfaction

不要问NPS，要问客户满意度

Lenny: And the customer satisfaction question, what's the actual question for people to make sure?

莱尼：关于客户满意度问题，人们需要确定的实际问题是什么？

Judd Antin: Overall, how satisfied are you with your experience with Airbnb?

Judd Antin：总体而言，您对 Airbnb 的体验满意吗？

Or it could be some version of that, which is like, "Overall, how satisfied are you with your experience with customer service when you had a problem?" So there could be a more specific version of that question, but those questions have better properties.

或者它可能是其中的某种版本，例如“总体而言，当您遇到问题时，您对客户服务体验的满意度如何？”因此，该问题可能有一个更具体的版本，但这些问题具有更好的属性。

And a lot of people say, "Well, hey, everybody's using NPS.

很多人说：“嗯，嘿，每个人都在使用 NPS。

So at least it gives me a benchmark because I can compare my NPS to industry NPS." The problem with that is the research shows that NPS is idiosyncratic, so it goes up and downs in ways that we don't understand, and there's a lot of inconsistency in how it's asked, that creates variations in the data, which means it's not apples to apples, so you can't even compare your NPS meaningfully to somebody else's.

所以至少它给了我一个基准，因为我可以将我的 NPS 与行业 NPS 进行比较。”问题在于，研究表明 NPS 具有特殊性，因此它会以我们无法理解的方式上下波动，而且它的询问方式存在很多不一致之处，这会造成数据的变化，这意味着它不是同类的，所以你甚至无法将你的 NPS 与其他人的 NPS 进行有意义的比较。

Lenny: I love these hot takes.

莱尼：我喜欢这些热门镜头。

I'm curious to see who comes out of the woodwork, too, when-

我也很好奇谁会突然冒出来，当——

Judd Antin: People are going to be so mad, Lenny.

贾德·安廷：人们会非常生气的，莱尼。

Lenny: I love that.

莱尼：我喜欢这个。

I think, yeah, I've heard this many times and people don't talk about it.

我想，是的，我已经听过很多次了，但人们并没有谈论它。

Okay.

好的。

Is there anything else you want to share or leave people with before we get to our very exciting lightning round?

在我们开始激动人心的闪电回合之前，您还有什么想分享或留给大家的吗？

Judd Antin: Can I?

贾德·安廷：我可以吗？

Yeah, I want to add one thing if I could, because this has come up on your podcast a few times recently, which is about the idea of people doing their own product walkthroughs.

是的，如果可以的话，我想添加一件事，因为最近在您的播客上出现了几次，这是关于人们进行自己的产品演练的想法。

So should a PM just rely on their own dog fooding of the product and their own walkthrough to figure out how to fix it?

那么，产品经理是否应该仅仅依靠自己对产品的测试和自己的演练来找出解决方法呢？

And a couple of times recently this has come up, and I think the consensus seems to be, "Yes, this is a good thing." And I have a contrarian opinion there, too, which is that I think it is really important for everyone to dog food their own products.

最近几次出现这种情况，我认为共识似乎是：“是的，这是一件好事。”我也有一个相反的观点，那就是我认为对每个人来说，狗粮自己的产品非常重要。

The problem is related to relying on your intuition about those products, which is the thing most PMs have trouble with is realizing, "You are nothing like the user.

这个问题与依赖你对这些产品的直觉有关，这是大多数产品经理遇到的麻烦，因为他们意识到，“你与用户完全不同。

You are nothing like them in ways that will bias the way you think about what's good and bad in your product in ways that you can't necessarily recognize.

你在某些方面与他们完全不同，这会以你不一定能认识到的方式对你的产品的好坏产生偏见。

Some things with a product, some problems with a product, you need a pulse to recognize."

产品的一些事情，产品的一些问题，你需要脉搏才能识别。”

Judd Antin: And most good PMs that I know have a pulse and so cool.

贾德·安廷：我认识的大多数优秀产品经理都有脉搏，而且很酷。

But a lot of them require context of use, priorities, constraints that you just don't have and you can't imagine purely on the basis of your own usage.

但其中很多都需要使用上下文、优先级和约束，而这些是您所没有的，并且您无法纯粹根据自己的使用情况进行想象。

So what I think that means is that you should definitely dog food your own product.

所以我认为这意味着你绝对应该用你自己的产品来喂狗。

Doing product walkthroughs to identify lists of potential issues is a great thing to do.

进行产品演练以确定潜在问题列表是一件很棒的事情。

Prioritizing that list, figuring out which ones are more or less a problem, and for whom is an area where you should be extremely wary of relying on your own opinion, expertise, or intuition when you are dog fooding your own product.

优先考虑该列表，弄清楚哪些或多或少是一个问题，以及对谁来说，当你对自己的产品进行测试时，你应该非常谨慎地依赖自己的意见、专业知识或直觉。

Lenny: Thank you for sharing that.

莱尼：谢谢你分享这一点。

It's definitely come up a bunch on this podcast, so I think that's an important lesson for people to take away.

这个播客肯定出现了很多次，所以我认为这对人们来说是一个重要的教训。

Anything else before we get to our very exciting lightning round?

在我们开始激动人心的闪电回合之前还有什么要说的吗？

Judd Antin: I appreciate you, Lenny.

贾德·安廷：我很感激你，莱尼。

Thanks for having me on.

谢谢你邀请我参加。

Lenny: I appreciate you, Judd.

莱尼：我很感激你，贾德。

Well, with that, we've reached our very exciting lightning round.

好了，至此，我们已经进入了非常激动人心的闪电回合。

Are you ready?

你准备好了吗？

Lenny: What are two or three books that you've recommended most to other people?

莱尼：你向其他人推荐最多的两三本书是什么？

Judd Antin: I recently read a business book by Barbara Kellerman called Bad Leadership.

贾德·安廷（Judd Antin）：我最近读了芭芭拉·凯勒曼（Barbara Kellerman）写的一本商业书籍，名为《糟糕的领导力》（Bad Leadership）。

And what I love about it is that we spend a lot of time talking about good leaders, and she really dives into the worst leaders and what makes them bad leaders in a way that I think is really valuable for everybody.

我喜欢的是，我们花了很多时间谈论优秀的领导者，而她真正深入研究了最差的领导者以及他们成为坏领导者的原因，我认为这对每个人都非常有价值。

Judd Antin: I'd also recommend, I read a lot of fiction, so two recommendations, there.

贾德·安廷：我也会推荐，我读了很多小说，所以有两个推荐。

One, a recent Pulitzer Prize winner, Demon Copperhead by Barbara Kingsolver.

其中之一是最近获得普利策奖的《恶魔铜斑蛇》，作者是芭芭拉·金索尔弗 (Barbara Kingsolver)。

It's an outstanding read that also is really sad, and moving, and illustrative, especially if you want to understand rural poverty.

这是一本出色的读物，同时也确实令人悲伤、感人且富有说明性，特别是如果你想了解农村贫困的话。

And then completely other side of the fiction spectrum, if you're interested in science fiction, which I am, read the Murderbot Diaries, it's about a sarcastic killer robot.

然后完全是小说谱的另一面，如果你对科幻小说感兴趣，就像我一样，请阅读《谋杀机器人日记》，它是关于一个讽刺的杀手机器人。

And who doesn't love them?

谁不爱他们呢？

Lenny: I love these fiction recommendations.

莱尼：我喜欢这些小说推荐。

I feel like we need more of these on the podcast, so thank you.

我觉得我们需要在播客上提供更多此类内容，所以谢谢。

Judd Antin: Yeah.

贾德·安廷：是的。

Everybody goes to business books.

每个人都会阅读商业书籍。

Lenny: Yeah, absolutely.

莱尼：是的，绝对是。

What is a favorite recent movie or TV show that you really enjoyed?

您最近最喜欢的电影或电视节目是什么？

Judd Antin: We recently watched The Last of Us and it blew our mind.

贾德·安廷：我们最近看了《最后生还者》，它让我们大吃一惊。

I watched it after I played the video game after long last, if you are a person who plays video games and you haven't played The Last of Us, play it.

我是很久以前玩游戏后才看的，如果你是玩游戏的人，没有玩过《最后生还者》的话，就玩玩吧。

If you don't know, the show is based on the video game, not the other way around.

如果您不知道，该节目是基于视频游戏的，而不是相反。

Lenny: Do you have a favorite interview question you like to ask candidates that you're interviewing?

莱尼：在面试的候选人中，你最喜欢问的面试问题有哪些吗？

Judd Antin: Think of a topic that you had to explain lately that was the most complex, and then explain it to me like I'm five.

贾德·安廷：想一个你最近必须解释的最复杂的主题，然后像我五岁一样向我解释它。

And there are a lot of ways to vary that question, but the reason I like it is because I think, and I've asked this question to VP and C-suite candidates in multiple disciplines, and sometimes it's related to a conversation, like I might ask them to explain something complicated about quantum computing, or music theory, or it could be a complex business decision, but I want to see if somebody can break a complex problem down in a really simple way, and give me an intuition for it in a short amount of time.

有很多方法可以改变这个问题，但我喜欢它的原因是因为我认为，我已经向多个学科的副总裁和高管候选人提出了这个问题，有时它与对话有关，比如我可能会要求他们解释一些关于量子计算或音乐理论的复杂问题，或者这可能是一个复杂的商业决策，但我想看看是否有人可以用一种非常简单的方式分解一个复杂的问题，并在短时间内给我一个直觉。

I think that is a differentiator between good and great for many people.

我认为这对许多人来说是区分好与伟大的因素。

Lenny: Do you have a favorite product you recently discovered that you really like?

Lenny：你最近发现有没有一款你真正喜欢的最喜欢的产品？

Judd Antin: Yeah, this is a really weird one, but my whole family started indoor rock climbing recently, and there's a challenge you have when you top rope, which is that you're looking up all the time.

贾德·安廷：是的，这确实很奇怪，但我全家最近开始室内攀岩，当你在绳索上攀爬时，你会遇到一个挑战，那就是你一直在向上看。

So they make these glasses, which are called belay glasses, and they have an angled mirror embedded in the lens, so that you can look straight ahead, and the view you see is up towards the person who you're belaying.

因此他们制造了这种被称为保护眼镜的眼镜，它们的镜片中嵌入了一个有角度的镜子，这样你就可以直视前方，并且你看到的视野是朝向你所保护的人的。

And I just thought that product is so perfect for that.

我只是认为该产品非常适合这一点。

That's a niche problem and there isn't a better way to solve it.

这是一个小众问题，没有更好的方法来解决它。

Lenny: Do you have a favorite motto that you often come back to, that you share with friends either in work or in life that you find useful?

Lenny：你有没有最喜欢的、经常想起的、在工作或生活中与朋友分享的、你认为有用的座右铭？

Judd Antin: Yeah.

贾德·安廷：是的。

This is going to seem like pandering, Lenny, but I don't know if you remember a conversation that you and I had, it must've been eight years ago.

这看起来像是在迎合，莱尼，但我不知道你是否还记得你和我的一次谈话，那肯定是八年前的事了。

I remember where we were sitting.

我记得我们坐在哪里。

And it was about stoicism.

这是关于斯多葛主义的。

Do you remember this?

你还记得这个吗？

Anyway, we had this conversation.

无论如何，我们进行了这次谈话。

Lenny: I don't, but I was into stoicism for a while.

莱尼：我不这么认为，但有一段时间我很坚忍。

Judd Antin: I know you were, because we talked about it.

贾德·安廷：我知道你是，因为我们讨论过它。

And so the motto comes from stoicism, which is basically, "Focus on the things you can control and ignore the rest." And a lot of people think of this as the serenity prayer or the serenity saying, that was a 20th century invention, but Epictetus was writing about this BC, and I think about it all the time.

因此，这句座右铭来自斯多葛主义，基本上是“专注于你可以控制的事情，忽略其余的事情”。很多人认为这是平静的祈祷或平静的说法，那是20世纪的发明，但爱比克泰德正在写关于公元前的事情，我一直在思考它。

So much of the stress, and pain, and worry that we have in life comes from things we can't control.

我们生活中的很多压力、痛苦和担忧都来自于我们无法控制的事情。

So I try to let those things go.

所以我试着让这些事情过去。

Lenny: Amazing.

莱尼：太棒了。

I learned that lesson from 7 Habits of Highly Effective People, and just the importance of thinking about these circles of you can control, you can influence, and you have no control over, and there's no reason to think about those other things.

我从《高效能人士的七个习惯》中学到了这个教训，思考这些你可以控制、你可以影响、你无法控制的圈子的重要性，没有理由去考虑那些其他的事情。

Lenny: Judd, this was everything I hoped it would be.

莱尼：贾德，这就是我所希望的一切。

We got into some really good stuff.

我们接触到了一些非常好的东西。

I'm excited to hear how people react.

我很高兴听到人们的反应。

Two final questions, where can folks find you if they want to learn about what you're up to, actually share what you're up to these days, and how people can find you, and then also how can listeners be useful to you?

最后两个问题，如果人们想了解你在做什么，可以在哪里找到你，实际上分享你这些天在做什么，人们如何找到你，然后听众如何对你有用？

Judd Antin: Yeah.

贾德·安廷：是的。

Thanks for asking those questions.

感谢您提出这些问题。

People can find me at juddantin.com.

人们可以在 juddantin.com 上找到我。

That's the best way to find out what I'm up to.

这是了解我在做什么的最好方法。

These days, I'm a consultant.

这些天，我是一名顾问。

I help people with UX strategy, org design, and crisis management.

我帮助人们制定用户体验策略、组织设计和危机管理。

Somehow I love dealing with other people's dumpster fires, and I've found that I'm constitutionally good at it somehow.

不知何故，我喜欢处理别人的垃圾箱火灾，而且我发现我天生就擅长处理这件事。

So juddantin.com is the place to find out.

所以 juddantin.com 就是您寻找答案的地方。

I also write.

我也写。

I write a medium post that you can find at onebigthought.com.

我写了一篇中等帖子，您可以在 onebigthought.com 上找到。

And you'll find a lot of the topics we talked about today, including the original post that started this at onebigthought.com.

您会发现我们今天讨论的很多主题，包括在 onebigthought.com 上开始这篇文章的原始帖子。

If there's one thing I could ask your listeners to do is to get next to your researcher.

如果我可以要求你的听众做一件事，那就是靠近你的研究人员。

I just think if you build those relationships and involve a researcher and insights person early and often, beautiful things will happen for you and for the business.

我只是认为，如果你建立这些关系，并尽早并经常让研究人员和有洞察力的人参与其中，那么你和企业都会发生美好的事情。

So that's the thing everyone can do for me.

这就是每个人都可以为我做的事情。

Lenny: I love that.

莱尼：我喜欢这个。

I've always done that.

我一直都是这样做的。

I loved my researchers that I've worked with, many of them reporting to you, and so beautiful takeaway.

我喜欢与我一起工作的研究人员，他们中的许多人向您汇报，以及如此美好的收获。

Judd, thank you so much for being here.

贾德，非常感谢你来到这里。

Judd Antin: Lenny, thank you.

贾德·安廷：莱尼，谢谢你。

It's been a pleasure.

很高兴。

Lenny: Bye, everyone.

莱尼：再见，大家。

Thank you so much for listening.

非常感谢您的聆听。

If you found this valuable, you can subscribe to the show on Apple Podcast, Spotify, or your favorite podcast app.

如果您发现这很有价值，您可以在 Apple Podcast、Spotify 或您最喜欢的播客应用程序上订阅该节目。

Also, please consider giving us a rating or leaving a review, as that really helps other listeners find the podcast.

另外，请考虑给我们评分或留下评论，因为这确实有助于其他听众找到播客。

You can find all past episodes or learn more about the show at lennyspodcast.com.

您可以在 lennyspodcast.com 上找到所有过去的剧集或了解有关该节目的更多信息。

See you in the next episode.

下一集见。