I want you to look around the room for a minute and try to find the most paranoid person here --
Kila mtu achukue dakika kuangalia watu humu ndani, jaribu kumtafuta mwenye wasiwasi kuliko wote
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
And then I want you to point at that person for me.
Sasa nionyeshe huyo mtu kwa kidole
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
OK, don't actually do it.
Acha, natania, usinioneshe
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
But, as an organizational psychologist, I spend a lot of time in workplaces, and I find paranoia everywhere. Paranoia is caused by people that I call "takers." Takers are self-serving in their interactions. It's all about what can you do for me. The opposite is a giver. It's somebody who approaches most interactions by asking, "What can I do for you?"
Kama mwanasaikolojia, Nimetumia muda mwingi katika mahali pa kazi, na ninaiona hio paranoia kila mahali. Paranoia inasababishwa na watu nawaita "wapokeaji." Wapokeaji ni wabinafsi katika mahusiano. Wanajali sana: utawahudumiaje wao. Kinyume chao ni "watoaji" Hawa ni watu ambao katika mahusiano yao, huuliza, "Ni namna ipi naweza kukuhudumia?"
I wanted to give you a chance to think about your own style. We all have moments of giving and taking. Your style is how you treat most of the people most of the time, your default. I have a short test you can take to figure out if you're more of a giver or a taker, and you can take it right now.
Ntawapa nafasi ya kutafakari tabia zenu. Sote tumekuwa watoaji na wapokeaji katika nyakati mbalimbali. Tabia yako ni namna unavyohusiana na watu mara nyingi, bila ya kujifikiria Nina jaribio fupi la kuwasaidia kutambua kama wewe ni mtoaji au mpokeaji; na mnaweza kulifanya sasa hivi.
[The Narcissist Test]
[Tambua kama unajihusudu)
[Step 1: Take a moment to think about yourself.]
[Hatua ya 1: Chukua muda kujifikiria.]
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
[Step 2: If you made it to Step 2, you are not a narcissist.]
[Hatua ya 2: Kama umeshaifikia hatua ya pili, haujihusudu.]
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
This is the only thing I will say today that has no data behind it, but I am convinced the longer it takes for you to laugh at this cartoon, the more worried we should be that you're a taker.
Hilo pekee nitasema leo bila ya data za kuthibitisha. Ninaamani kama imekuchukua muda kuicheka hii katuni tuwe na shaka kwamba wewe ni mpokeaji
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
Of course, not all takers are narcissists. Some are just givers who got burned one too many times. Then there's another kind of taker that we won't be addressing today, and that's called a psychopath.
Hakika wapokeaji wote sio wabinafsi Baadhi ni watoaji waliotumika sana na kuchoka. Pia kuna wapokeaji ambao hatutaongelea leo, wale wagonjwa wa akili.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
I was curious, though, about how common these extremes are, and so I surveyed over 30,000 people across industries around the world's cultures. And I found that most people are right in the middle between giving and taking. They choose this third style called "matching." If you're a matcher, you try to keep an even balance of give and take: quid pro quo -- I'll do something for you if you do something for me. And that seems like a safe way to live your life. But is it the most effective and productive way to live your life? The answer to that question is a very definitive ... maybe.
Nilitaka kuthibitisha uhalali wa pande hizi mbili, hivyo nikatafiti zaidi ya watu 30,000 kwenye sekta na tamaduni mbalimbali. Nikakuta kwamba wengi wako katikati - kati ya kutoa na kupokea. Hawa huchagua mtindo wa tatu "kulipiza." Walipizaji huweka usawa kati kutoa na kupokea: nipe nikupe --nitakusaidia ukinisaidia. Inaonekana kama namna salama ya kuishi. Ila, je, ni njia fanisi ya kuishi? Jibu la hakika kwa swali hilo, ni labda.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
I studied dozens of organizations, thousands of people. I had engineers measuring their productivity.
Nimechunguza mashirika kadhaa, maelfu ya watu. Nmepima tija miongoni wahandisi.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
I looked at medical students' grades -- even salespeople's revenue.
Nimeangalia maksi ya wanafunzi wa udaktari na hata mapato ya watu wa mauzo
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
And, unexpectedly, the worst performers in each of these jobs were the givers. The engineers who got the least work done were the ones who did more favors than they got back. They were so busy doing other people's jobs, they literally ran out of time and energy to get their own work completed. In medical school, the lowest grades belong to the students who agree most strongly with statements like, "I love helping others," which suggests the doctor you ought to trust is the one who came to med school with no desire to help anybody.
Cha kushtua, ni watoaji wanafanya vibaya kuliko wote, katika kila fani. Wahandisi wanaofanya vibaya kazini ndio wanaotoa fadhila kuliko wanapokea. Wako makini kufanya kazi za watu wengine, hata hawana muda au nguvu ya kufanya kazi zao. Katika udaktari, maksi za chini ni za wanafunzi wanaokubaliana na kauli kama, "Ninapenda kuwasaidia wengine," ambacho inapendekeza umuamini zaidi daktari ambaye hana lengo la kusaidia mtu yeyote.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
And then in sales, too, the lowest revenue accrued in the most generous salespeople. I actually reached out to one of those salespeople who had a very high giver score. And I asked him, "Why do you suck at your job --" I didn't ask it that way, but --
Katika mauzo, mapato ya chini yanaokeana miongoni mwa wauzaji wakarimu. Niliongea na mmoja kati ya wauzaji ambao ni watoaji. Nikamuuliza, "Kwa nini unafanya vibaya hivyo --" Sikuuliza namna hiyo, lakini -
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
"What's the cost of generosity in sales?" And he said, "Well, I just care so deeply about my customers that I would never sell them one of our crappy products."
"Nini gharama ya ukarimu katika mauzo?" Akasema, "Naam, ninawajali wateja wangu kwamba kamwe siwezi kuwauzia bidhaa zetu ovyo. "
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
So just out of curiosity, how many of you self-identify more as givers than takers or matchers? Raise your hands. OK, it would have been more before we talked about these data.
Hivyo, kwa faida yangu, wangapi mnajitambua zaidi kama watoaji kuliko wapokeaji au wanaolipizaji? Inua mkono. OK, ingekuwa zaidi kabla kuongelea hizi takwimu.
But actually, it turns out there's a twist here, because givers are often sacrificing themselves, but they make their organizations better. We have a huge body of evidence -- many, many studies looking at the frequency of giving behavior that exists in a team or an organization -- and the more often people are helping and sharing their knowledge and providing mentoring, the better organizations do on every metric we can measure: higher profits, customer satisfaction, employee retention -- even lower operating expenses. So givers spend a lot of time trying to help other people and improve the team, and then, unfortunately, they suffer along the way. I want to talk about what it takes to build cultures where givers actually get to succeed.
Lakini, kuna cha kushangaza zaidi hapa, kwa sababu watoaji mara nyingi hujitoa wenyewe, huyaboresha mashirika yao zaidi. Tuna ushahidi mwingi -- tafiti nyingi kuhusu tabia za watoaji katika timu au shirika -- na zaidi watu wanavyosaidiana, kufundisha wengine na kushauriana, ndivyo huboresha mashirika katika kila kipimo: faida, kuridhisha wateja, kuvutia wafanyakazi - hata hupunguza gharama za uendeshaji. Hivyo watoaji hutumia muda mwingi kusaidia wengine na kuboresha timu, kwa bahati mbaya, wanajikuta kwenye hasara. Nataka kuzungumzia namna ya kujenga utamaduni ambapo watoaji wanafanikiwa.
So I wondered, then, if givers are the worst performers, who are the best performers? Let me start with the good news: it's not the takers. Takers tend to rise quickly but also fall quickly in most jobs. And they fall at the hands of matchers. If you're a matcher, you believe in "An eye for an eye" -- a just world. And so when you meet a taker, you feel like it's your mission in life to just punish the hell out of that person.
Hivyo nilijiuliza kama watoaji sio watekelezaji bora, wapi ni watekelezaji bora? Nitanza na habari njema: siyo wapokeaji. Wapokeaji hupanda haraka lakini pia huanguka upesi maofisini. Na huanguka katika mikono ya walipizaji. Kama mlipizaji, unafuata sheria ya "jicho kwa jicho" - ndiyo haki. Hivyo unapokutana na mpokeaji, unalifanya jukumu lako kumuadhibu mpokeaji, kumtia adabu.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
And that way justice gets served.
Na hivyo haki hutolewa.
Well, most people are matchers. And that means if you're a taker, it tends to catch up with you eventually; what goes around will come around. And so the logical conclusion is: it must be the matchers who are the best performers. But they're not. In every job, in every organization I've ever studied, the best results belong to the givers again.
Naam, watu wengi ni walipizaji. Ina maana, kama wewe ni mpokeaji, hatimaye, balaa hukupata; Kwendako mema, hurudi mema. Hivyo hitimisho lenye mantiki ni: walipizaji ndio wafanyakazi bora. Lakini, hapana, siyo. Katika kila fani, kila shirika, nimechunguza, watoaji, tena, ndio wenye matokeo bora.
Take a look at some data I gathered from hundreds of salespeople, tracking their revenue. What you can see is that the givers go to both extremes. They make up the majority of people who bring in the lowest revenue, but also the highest revenue. The same patterns were true for engineers' productivity and medical students' grades. Givers are overrepresented at the bottom and at the top of every success metric that I can track. Which raises the question: How do we create a world where more of these givers get to excel? I want to talk about how to do that, not just in businesses, but also in nonprofits, schools -- even governments. Are you ready?
Tuangalie baadhi ya takwimu nimekusanya, za mapato ya watu wa mauzo. Unachoona ni kwamba watoaji wako katika vikomo vyote. Wengi wao huleta mapato ya chini, lakini pia mapato ya juu. Mwelekeo huo ni kweli pia kwenye tija za wahandisi na maksi za wanafunzi wa udaktari. Watoaji wana uwakilishi mkubwa chini na juu katika kila kipimo cha mafanikio. Hivyo swali ni: Jinsi gani tunaweza kujenga dunia ambapo watoaji hufanikiwa? Nitazungumzi jinsi ya kufanya hivyo, sio tu katika biashara, ila katika taasisi mbalimbali na hata serikalini. Mko tiyari?
(Cheers)
(Makofi)
I was going to do it anyway, but I appreciate the enthusiasm.
Ningewaambia hata hivyo, ila asante kwa shauku.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
The first thing that's really critical is to recognize that givers are your most valuable people, but if they're not careful, they burn out. So you have to protect the givers in your midst. And I learned a great lesson about this from Fortune's best networker. It's the guy, not the cat.
Kitu cha kwanza muhimu ni kutambua kwamba watoaji ni watu muhimu, ila tusipoangalia, tutawakatisha tamaa. Hivyo, tunabidi kuwalinda watoaji miongoni mwetu Nimejifunza mengi kutoka kwa mwanamitandao bora wa Fortune. Ni huyo mtu, sio paka
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
His name is Adam Rifkin. He's a very successful serial entrepreneur who spends a huge amount of his time helping other people. And his secret weapon is the five-minute favor. Adam said, "You don't have to be Mother Teresa or Gandhi to be a giver. You just have to find small ways to add large value to other people's lives." That could be as simple as making an introduction between two people who could benefit from knowing each other. It could be sharing your knowledge or giving a little bit of feedback. Or It might be even something as basic as saying, "You know, I'm going to try and figure out if I can recognize somebody whose work has gone unnoticed." And those five-minute favors are really critical to helping givers set boundaries and protect themselves.
Anaitwa Adamu Rifkin. Yeye ni mwekezaji mahiri. Hutumia muda mwingi akisaidia wengine. Siri yake ya mafanikio ni kutoa dakika tano za fadhila. Adamu alisema, "Huhitaji kuwa Mama Teresa or Gandhi kuwa mtoaji. Unabidi utafute njia ndogondogo tu za kushika maisha ya watu." Kama kuwatambulisha watu wawili wanaoweza kufaidika kwa kujuana. Inaweza kuwa kutoa maarifa yako au kutoa maoni. Au hata kusema kitu kama, "Unajua, nitajaribu kumtambua mtu ambaye kazi yake hakujatambuliwa. " Hizo dakika tano za fadhila ni muhimu kusaidia watoaji kujiwekea mipaka
The second thing that matters
na kujihami.
if you want to build a culture where givers succeed, is you actually need a culture where help-seeking is the norm; where people ask a lot. This may hit a little too close to home for some of you.
Jambo la pili la msingi katika kujenga utamaduni ambapo watoaji wanafanikiwa, ni kuhamasisha utamaduni wa kutafuta msaada; ambapo watu huuliza na huomba kusaidiwa. Hii inaweza kuwaogopesha baadhi yenu.
[So in all your relationships, you always have to be the giver?]
[katika mahusiano yako, ni lazima uwe mtoaji daima?]
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
What you see with successful givers is they recognize that it's OK to be a receiver, too. If you run an organization, we can actually make this easier. We can make it easier for people to ask for help. A couple colleagues and I studied hospitals. We found that on certain floors, nurses did a lot of help-seeking, and on other floors, they did very little of it. The factor that stood out on the floors where help-seeking was common, where it was the norm, was there was just one nurse whose sole job it was to help other nurses on the unit. When that role was available, nurses said, "It's not embarrassing, it's not vulnerable to ask for help -- it's actually encouraged."
Utakachogundua katika watoaji waliofanikiwa ni wanatambua kwamba ni sawa kuwa mpokeaji pia. Kama unamiliki shirika, tunaweza kukurahisishia. Tunaweza kurahishia watu kuomba msaada. Mimi na wenzangu tulifanya utafiti katika mahospitali. Tuligundua wauguzi katika baadhi za wadi waliomba kusaidiwa, kuliko wadi nyingine. Kilichozitofautisha wadi ambazo kuomba msaada ilikuwa kawaida, ni kulikuwa na muuguzi mmoja ambaye kazi yake ni kuwasaidia wengine katika kitengo. Msaada ulipohitajika, wauguzi walisema, "Sio aibu kuomba msaada - bali tabia inayohamasishwa."
Help-seeking isn't important just for protecting the success and the well-being of givers. It's also critical to getting more people to act like givers, because the data say that somewhere between 75 and 90 percent of all giving in organizations starts with a request. But a lot of people don't ask. They don't want to look incompetent, they don't know where to turn, they don't want to burden others. Yet if nobody ever asks for help, you have a lot of frustrated givers in your organization who would love to step up and contribute, if they only knew who could benefit and how.
Kutafuta msaada ni muhimu katika kuwalinda, pia kwa ajili ya ustawi wa watoaji. Na kuhamisisha tabia za watoaji, kwa sababu takwimu zinaonyesha kwamba asilimia 75 hadi 90 ya utoaji huanzia na ombi. Lakini watu wengi hawaulizi. Wanahofia kuonekana hawajui, hawajui wageukia wapi, wanaogopa kuwasumbua wenzao. Ikiwa kamwe hakuna anayeomba msaada, utakuwa na watoaji wengi waliokatishwa tamaa, ambao wangependa kuchangia kwa kusaidia, laiti wangejua nani anahitaji msaada na kwa namna gani.
But I think the most important thing, if you want to build a culture of successful givers, is to be thoughtful about who you let onto your team. I figured, you want a culture of productive generosity, you should hire a bunch of givers. But I was surprised to discover, actually, that that was not right -- that the negative impact of a taker on a culture is usually double to triple the positive impact of a giver. Think about it this way: one bad apple can spoil a barrel, but one good egg just does not make a dozen. I don't know what that means --
Lakini jambo muhimu zaidi kama unataka kujenga utamaduni ambapo watoaji wanafanikiwa, ni kuwa mwangalifu kuhusu nani unaweka kwenye timu yako. Kama unataka utamaduni wa ukarimu na uzalishaji, unapaswa kuajiri watoaji. Lakini nilishangaa kugundua kwamba hiyo haikuwa sahihi -- mapungufu ya mpokeaji ni mara mbili au mara tatu zaidi kuliko manufaa ya mtoaji. Ifiikirie hivi: tunda moja baya linaweza kuharibu kikapu chote, lakini yai moja nzuri haliwezi kuboresha dazeni nzima. Sijui hii ina maana gani--
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
But I hope you do.
Lakini natumaini mnaelewa.
No -- let even one taker into a team, and you will see that the givers will stop helping. They'll say, "I'm surrounded by a bunch of snakes and sharks. Why should I contribute?" Whereas if you let one giver into a team, you don't get an explosion of generosity. More often, people are like, "Great! That person can do all our work." So, effective hiring and screening and team building is not about bringing in the givers; it's about weeding out the takers. If you can do that well, you'll be left with givers and matchers. The givers will be generous because they don't have to worry about the consequences. And the beauty of the matchers is that they follow the norm.
Yani-- weka hata mpokeaji mmoja kwenye timu, na utaona kwamba watoaji wataacha kusaidia. Watasema, "Nimezungukwa na rundo la nyoka na papa. Kwa nini mimi nichangie? " Wakati, ukiweka mtoaji mmoja kwenye timu, huwezi kupata mlipuko wa ukarimu. Mara nyingi zaidi, watu hufikiri, "Afadhali! Huyo anaweza kufanya kazi yetu yote." Hivyo, ufanisi katika kuajiri na kujenga timu haihusishi kuleta pamoja watoaji tu; ila pia kuwatoa wapokeaji nje ya shirika. Ukifanikiwa, utabakiza watoaji na walipizaji. Watoaji watakuwa wakarimu kwa sababu hawana wasiwasi kuhusu kupokea fadhila. Na uzuri wa walipizaji ni kwamba wanafuata musuada uliopo.
So how do you catch a taker before it's too late? We're actually pretty bad at figuring out who's a taker, especially on first impressions. There's a personality trait that throws us off. It's called agreeableness, one the major dimensions of personality across cultures. Agreeable people are warm and friendly, they're nice, they're polite. You find a lot of them in Canada --
Hivyo ni jinsi gani utamtambua mpokeaji, mapema? Sio rahisi kumtambua mpokeaji hasa kufuata tu hisia zetu za mwanzo. Kuna tabia ambayo hutupotosha . Inaitwa wito upendezi, kati ya vipimo vikuu vya hulka miongoni mwa tamaduni mbalimbali. Watu wapendezi ni wakarimu, wema, wanyenyekevu. Utawakuta wengi wao Kanada --
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
Where there was actually a national contest to come up with a new Canadian slogan and fill in the blank, "As Canadian as ..." I thought the winning entry was going to be, "As Canadian as maple syrup," or, "... ice hockey." But no, Canadians voted for their new national slogan to be -- I kid you not -- "As Canadian as possible under the circumstances."
Ambapo kulikuwa na shindano la kitaifa la kutafuta kauli mbiu mpya ya Kanada kwa kujaza tashbihi, "Mkanada kama ..." Nilidhani kauli mbiu itakayoshinda ingekuwa, "Mkanada kama maple syrup," au, "... Hoki ya barafuni ." Lakini, hapana. Kura zilichagua kauli mbiu mpya kuwa - na siwatanii -- "Mkanada kama iwezekanavyo, katika mazingira haya. "
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
Now for those of you who are highly agreeable, or maybe slightly Canadian, you get this right away. How could I ever say I'm any one thing when I'm constantly adapting to try to please other people? Disagreeable people do less of it. They're more critical, skeptical, challenging, and far more likely than their peers to go to law school.
Sasa kwa wale ambao ni wapendezi, au labda ni wakanada kidogo mtaielewa upesi. Ninawezaje kusema kuwa mimi ni aina moja pekee wakati daima ninajibadilisha kuridhisha wengine? Watu nongwa hujaribu mara chache zaidi. Hawa, wana mashaka, ni wakasoaji, ni changamoto na ndio wenye kwenda kusoma sheria.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
That's not a joke, that's actually an empirical fact.
Hiyo sio utani; ni kweli kama kanuni.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
So I always assumed that agreeable people were givers and disagreeable people were takers. But then I gathered the data, and I was stunned to find no correlation between those traits, because it turns out that agreeableness-disagreeableness is your outer veneer: How pleasant is it to interact with you? Whereas giving and taking are more of your inner motives: What are your values? What are your intentions toward others?
daima nildhani watu wapendezi ni watoaji na watu nongwa ni wapokeaji. Nilipofanya utafiti, nilistaajabu kukuta hakuna uhusiano katika sifa hizo, kwa sababu tabia ya upendezi au nongwa ni gamba la nje tu: Je, watu wanajisikiaje baada ya kuzungumza na wewe? Wakati kutoa na kupokea inategemea nia yako: Je, maadili yako ni yapi? Je, nia yako kwa wengine ni ipi?
If you really want to judge people accurately, you have to get to the moment every consultant in the room is waiting for, and draw a two-by-two.
Kama unataka kusoma watu kwa usahihi, utataka kuwepo katika chumba wakati kila mshauri anasubiri, kupata picha halisi.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
The agreeable givers are easy to spot: they say yes to everything. The disagreeable takers are also recognized quickly, although you might call them by a slightly different name.
Ni rahisi kuwatambua watoaji wapendezi: wao husema ndiyo kwa kila kitu. Wapokeaji nongwa wanatambulika kirahisi pia, ingawa unaweza kuwaita kwa jina tofauti kidogo.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
We forget about the other two combinations. There are disagreeable givers in our organizations. There are people who are gruff and tough on the surface but underneath have others' best interests at heart. Or as an engineer put it, "Oh, disagreeable givers -- like somebody with a bad user interface but a great operating system."
Tunasahau makundi mengine mbili. Kuna watoaji nongwa katika mashirika. Hawa wanaonekana wagumu kwa nje lakini hujali sana maslahi ya wengine. Au kama mhandisi anavyoiweka, "Ah, watoaji nongwa ni - kama mtu mwenye kiolesura kibaya cha mtumiaji
(Laughter)
lakini mfumo mzuri."
(Vicheko)
If that helps you.
Kama inawasaidia.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
Disagreeable givers are the most undervalued people in our organizations, because they're the ones who give the critical feedback that no one wants to hear but everyone needs to hear. We need to do a much better job valuing these people as opposed to writing them off early, and saying, "Eh, kind of prickly, must be a selfish taker."
Watoaji nongwa hawathaminiwi katika mashirika yetu, kwa sababu huotoa changamoto ambazo watu hawataki kusikia hata kama tunahizitaji. Tunahitaji kuwathamini zaidi watu hawa badala ya kuwapuuza, na kusema, "Eh, wanakera, lazima awe mpokeaji nongwa."
The other combination we forget about is the deadly one -- the agreeable taker, also known as the faker. This is the person who's nice to your face, and then will stab you right in the back.
Kundi jingine hatari tunasahau ni- mpokeaji mpendezi, pia anajulikana kama muigizaji. Huyu ni mtu mwema akiwa mbele yako, na ukigeuka hukuchoma.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
And my favorite way to catch these people in the interview process is to ask the question, "Can you give me the names of four people whose careers you have fundamentally improved?" The takers will give you four names, and they will all be more influential than them, because takers are great at kissing up and then kicking down. Givers are more likely to name people who are below them in a hierarchy, who don't have as much power, who can do them no good. And let's face it, you all know you can learn a lot about character by watching how someone treats their restaurant server or their Uber driver.
Napenda kuwakamata hawa watu katika usahili kwa kuuliza swali, "Je, unaweza kunipa majina ya watu wanne ambao umewasaidia kimsingi kazini?" Wapokeaji watakupa hayo majina manne, na wote watakuwa na mafinikio zaidi kuliko wao, kwa sababu wapokeaji ni wastadi katika kunyenyekea wakuu wao na kudharau walio chini. Watoaji wanajua zaidi majina ya watu chini ya uongozi wao, ambao hawana mamlaka mingi, ambao hawana mchango muhimu kwao. Hakika, tunafahamu kuwa tunajifunza mengi kuhusu tabia ya mtu kwa kumuangalia anavyohusiana na mhudumu au dereva wa Uber.
So if we do all this well, if we can weed takers out of organizations, if we can make it safe to ask for help, if we can protect givers from burnout and make it OK for them to be ambitious in pursuing their own goals as well as trying to help other people, we can actually change the way that people define success. Instead of saying it's all about winning a competition, people will realize success is really more about contribution.
Hivyo tukifanya yote vizuri, kama tutatoa wapokeaji katika mashirika, kama tutaweza kuwahakikishia usalama wanaoomba msaada, kama tutaweza kuwalinda watoaji wasichoke na kuwawezesha kutimiza malengo yao na pia kusaidia watu wengine, tunaweza kubadilisha mtizamo wa watu wanavyotizama mafanikio. Badala ya kuona ni mashindano, watu watatambua mafanikio kama mchango kijumuiya zaidi.
I believe that the most meaningful way to succeed is to help other people succeed. And if we can spread that belief, we can actually turn paranoia upside down. There's a name for that. It's called "pronoia." Pronoia is the delusional belief that other people are plotting your well-being.
Naamini kuwa njia kuu ya kufanikiwa ni kuwasaidia watu wengine wafanikiwe. Na kama tunaweza kusambaza imani hio, tunaweza kweli kuigeuza paranoia. Kuna jina kwa ajili hiyo inaitwa "pronoia." Pronoia ni imani kwamba wengine wanapanga mema kwa ajili yako.
(Laughter)
(Vicheko)
That they're going around behind your back and saying exceptionally glowing things about you. The great thing about a culture of givers is that's not a delusion -- it's reality. I want to live in a world where givers succeed, and I hope you will help me create that world.
Kwamba wanakuzunguka na kuimba sifa zako. Uzuri wa utamaduni wa watoaji ni kwamba hio sio njozi, huo ndio uhalisia. Ningependa kuishi kwenye dunia ambayo watoaji wanafanikiwa. Natumaini nyote mtanisaidia kujenga ulimwengu huo.
Thank you.
Asanteni.
(Applause)
(Makofi)