交出管理岗：Elena Verna 讲 HI-IC 时代，影响不再等于手下有多少人｜Lenny's Podcast

她从带几百人的管理者，变成了一个 IC

梯子坏掉的那一半

她说的五件事

她给出的最后一道题

几个词

这一场值不值得看

人物背景与外部对照

完整中英双语逐字转录稿

00:00 - 10:00

I'm going to be talking today about something different. Usually I talk about product-led growth, product-led sales, uh, and how to grow your company. Today, I'd like to talk to you about how to grow your career. You're all incredible leaders already in this place. Uh but my career has taken a turn for something different about uh eight months ago and I've been writing about it more and more and two months ago I nearly got cancelled for writing a post about how our jobs are going to change in the next 12 months and I wanted to speak a little bit more about how that journey has been for me.

中文：今天我想谈一些不同的事情。通常我会谈论以产品为主导的增长、以产品为主导的销售，以及如何发展你的公司。今天，我想和你们谈谈如何发展你的职业生涯。你们在这个地方已经都是非常了不起的领导者了。但大约八个月前，我的职业生涯发生了一些不同的转变，我写的文章越来越多；两个月前，我几乎因为写了一篇关于未来 12 个月我们的工作将如何变化的帖子而被抵制。我想多谈谈这段旅程对我来说是怎样的经历。

I've been a leader at many teams that were mentioned before. I've led hundreds of peoples in some of those teams and now I'm an individual contributor at Lovable and it has been the best career journey that I've ever taken. I want to tell you about why I decided to do it. I want to tell you what needs to be true in organization to do it and I want to challenge you to think about whether this is the right position for you. So as I said my name is Elena Verna. I lead growth at Lovable.

中文：我曾经在之前提到的许多团队中担任过领导。在其中一些团队中，我曾带领过数百人，现在我在 Lovable 担任个人贡献者，这是我职业生涯中最棒的经历。我想告诉你我为什么决定这么做。我想告诉你在组织中需要具备哪些条件才能做到这一点，并且我想挑战你去思考这是否是适合你的职位。正如我所说，我的名字是 Elena Verna。我在 Lovable 负责增长。

I've survived at the company for almost a year and a half. It's been amazing. My goal was to make it a year. So I'm like clear sailing at this point. But uh I built a growth function at Lovable. Then I got fired out of leading that growth function where I became an IC and we tried the decentralized model that every company has to try with growth. And now we're rebuilding the function but I'm staying as an IC. So that is being built separately next to me um on the side. And most of my time now is not spent in those meetings.

中文：我在公司已经生存了将近一年半。这段经历非常棒。我的目标是坚持一年。所以现在我感觉一切顺利。不过，我在 Lovable 建立了一个增长职能。然后我被解雇了，无法继续领导那个增长职能，我变成了一个独立贡献者，我们尝试了每个公司在增长方面都必须尝试的去中心化模式。现在我们正在重建这个职能，但我保持独立贡献者的身份。所以这个职能是在我旁边单独建立的。同时，现在我大部分时间都没有花在那些会议上。

Crossf functional collaboration hell. And it's actually spent building. And there's something really special about that especially with so many of us that got to a leadership levels because we were so good at our craft. Yet the path to graduate to the next level has meant people management. At least that has meant for me. And I've been conditioned so much about it that going back to it has been um really turbulent journey but very refreshing as well. But let's talk about how our careers have been built in the past and what is changing right now.

中文：跨职能协作的地狱。事实上，它已经被花时间去构建。而这其中有一些非常特别的东西，尤其是对于我们中这么多人，因为我们在自己的专业领域非常出色而达到了领导层。然而，晋升到下一个层级的路径意味着需要进行人员管理。至少对我来说是这样。而我在这方面已经被训练得非常多，回到这条路上是一段非常动荡的旅程，但同时也很有启发性。不过，让我们谈谈过去我们的职业是如何建立的，以及现在正在发生的变化。

The ladder was built with an old constraint that more impact that you can have equals more people underneath you. Does anybody feel that that was true? Yeah. So we were all shooting to become a manager. Managing people was important. I still remember I was uh doing an interview with Netflix maybe 15 years ago and I got rejected out of the process because of how many people I managed in the past and that one I love Netflix. I'm a li lifelong subscriber, but it sits dearly um I'm still resentful to this moment because I don't think and I've never felt that impact should be judged by how many people you manage and especially now that equation is breaking because we used to think about it more reports equals more impact.

中文：这个阶梯是建立在一个旧的约束上的，即你能够产生的影响越大，下面的人就越多。有人觉得这是真的么？是的。所以我们都在努力想成为经理。管理人很重要。我仍然记得，大约十五年前我在接受 Netflix 的一次面试时，因为我过去管理的人数而被淘汰在流程之外，那次我非常喜欢 Netflix。我是终生订阅者，但这一点让我感到痛心，我至今仍心存不满，因为我不认为，也从未觉得，影响力应该以你管理的人数来衡量，尤其是在现在这个等式被打破的时候，因为我们过去认为，更多的下属报告意味着更大的影响力。

So you think about IC manager, director, VP is a career ladder that you had to commit to but there's only one currency in it is how many reports do you have? However, right now things are changing and how much you ship or how much you can ship that's how much impact you can drive. So equation is breaking which is what I use the term of high impact IC which is high impact individual contributor but it's not a senior person with no direct reports. I want to be very clear on that.

中文：所以你认为 IC 经理、总监、副总裁是一条必须投入的职业阶梯，但其中唯一的衡量标准是你有多少下属？然而，现在情况在发生变化，你的产出多少或你能产出多少，这就是你能产生多大影响的衡量标准。所以这个等式正在被打破，这就是我所说的高影响力 IC 的概念，即高影响力个人贡献者，但这不是一个没有下属的高级人物。我想对此非常明确。

It is the person that is able to find problem, make a decision, execute, this is important, execute on their own across all of the different functions that require to get to that outcome, ship it and own the outcome in iterating out of that. That's a whole team's charter if you think about 5 10 years ago. now and any individual can do it all because we used to think that the deep expertise and the staff IC role meant a narrow functional focus and engineers have always had staff IC's and that was like usually an architecture driven but now I see it's a deep expertise with broad executional surface and business accountability so why is this suddenly possible some people don't like the next slide I apologize in advance but I actually think of AI as average intelligence I'm sure you will get into AGI world someday, but for now it's still super powerful to have at your fingertips an average marketer, an average engineer, an average analyst, an average designer.

中文：能够发现问题、做出决策、执行的人，这很重要，他们能够在实现结果所需的各个不同职能中独立执行，推动项目并对结果负责并进行迭代。如果你回想五到十年前，这几乎是整个团队的职责。而现在任何个人都可以做到这些，因为我们过去认为深度专长和高级个人贡献角色意味着狭窄的职能专注，工程师一直都有高级个人贡献角色，通常是架构驱动的，但现在我看到的是深度专长加上广泛的执行范围和业务责任。那么为什么这现在突然可能呢？有些人不喜欢下一张幻灯片，我提前道歉，但我实际上把人工智能看作是平均智能，我相信总有一天你们会进入通用人工智能的世界，但现在拥有一个随时可用的普通营销人员、普通工程师、普通分析师、普通设计师仍然非常强大。

Honestly, I don't know about you, that's sometimes better than some of the other teams that I had. But it's incredible to like really get to the point where I know what I needs to get done and I have this average intelligence at my fingertips of all of the specialties that I need to have it done. So only one or two areas of exceptional craft are needed and then the good enough everywhere else to get it to the point where you can learn because remember everything that we're doing is not because we know what to do and not because we know how good or correct looks like.

中文：老实说，我不太清楚你那边的情况，但有时这比我以前的一些团队还要好。但真正做到我知道需要完成什么，而且我掌握了所需所有专业领域的平均智力，这真是令人难以置信。所以只需要一两个领域有卓越的技能，其他地方只要够好就行，这样你就可以学会。记住，我们所做的一切不是因为我们知道该做什么，也不是因为我们知道好的或正确的样子。

It's because we need to learn and we need to see our customer feedback and we need to see their reaction in order to understand what the next step is. So before we had an idea, a meeting, a PM, a designer, a meeting, an engineer, a review, an approval in the ship. And this is a very shortened process of what it used to be before because let's face it, there are probably a hundred more steps along that line with uh 3 months if you're lucky period of where you can accomplish it versus now you can just have an idea, you can build it, and you can learn.

中文：这是因为我们需要学习，我们需要看到客户的反馈，我们需要看到他们的反应，从而了解下一步该怎么做。在此之前，我们有一个想法，一次会议，一个产品经理，一个设计师，一次会议，一个工程师，一次审查，以及在发布前的批准。这是过去流程的大大简化版本，因为说实话，如果你幸运的话，这个流程可能还有大约一百个步骤，并且可能需要三个月的时间才能完成，而现在你只需要有一个想法，你可以去构建它，然后去学习。

I live in Lovable all day long. We ship to production through Lovable. I create this deck with Lovable. I do all of my ideiation with Lovable. I do my calendar, my email, everything management with Lovable. Email is probably my worst, but it's okay. When the cost of building falls below the cost of coordinating, the org chart should change. So my question to you is as we're all talking about this being AI-pilled, we're talking about being AI native. That's only tooling portion of it. Are you changing your organizational design underneath you in order to take advantage of all of those skills?

中文：我整天都住在 Lovable。我们通过 Lovable 发货到生产。我用 Lovable 创建这个幻灯片。我所有的创意都是用 Lovable 完成的。我用 Lovable 管理我的日程、邮箱和所有事务。邮件可能是我最差的部分，但还可以。当构建成本低于协调成本时，组织结构图应该改变。所以我的问题是，当我们都在谈论这是 AI 驱动的，我们在谈论 AI 原生化时，那只是工具部分。你是否在你们的组织设计下做出改变，以利用所有这些技能？

In order to take advantage of the people utilizing those tools because if you don't, you're actually not taking advantage of the biggest change that is happening in our system right now. And let me tell you how I became one. As I said, I would love to say that it was very wellcraftrafted and I asked for it. In reality, I got fired out of my job. I didn't get fired out of the company. I got fired out of the responsibilities that I was doing before. And at Lovable, my job has already changed three times in the last year and three months.

中文：为了利用那些使用这些工具的人，如果你不这样做，你实际上就没有利用我们系统中正在发生的最大变化。让我告诉你我是如何成为其中一员的。正如我所说，我很想说这是精心策划的，而且我是主动要求的。实际上，我是被解除原有工作的职责，不是被公司开除。在 Lovable 公司，在过去的一年零三个月里，我的工作已经改变了三次。

And I know it's going to change again. And that's okay because every single time I do what's best contributes to the business and to our customers and I'm staying flexible and everybody's job is changing every three to four months. At Lovable, we have reorgs that are every couple weeks. The only constant is change because we're living through the era that some categorize as a similar to industrial revolution. Well, if you're going through that type of change with AI revolution, whatever you want to call it, then you have to adjust to it because if you're not changing, that means you're not taking advantage of it or you're not going along with the times.

中文：我知道它还会再次改变。这没关系，因为每一次我所做的对业务和我们的客户都是最有利的，并且我保持灵活，每个人的工作每三到四个月都会发生变化。在 Lovable，我们的重组每隔几周就会进行一次。唯一不变的就是变化，因为我们正经历一个有人将其比作类似工业革命的时代。好吧，如果你正在经历 AI 革命的这种变化，不论你怎么称呼它，那么你就必须适应它，因为如果你不改变，那就意味着你没有利用它或者没有跟上时代的步伐。

So, I got fired out of my le the management position. I became an IC team and let me tell you just firsthand that was not an easy path because so much of my identity was tied to that title and knowing that I'm managing my team. I didn't want it to be related to it but inadvertently over the last two decades that I've been in the field it became attached to it. So at the beginning for about a couple of weeks I thought well did I just get promoted and get the best of both worlds or did I just lose my status?

中文：所以，我被解雇了我的管理职位。我变成了一个独立贡献者团队成员，让我亲身告诉你，那条路并不容易，因为我的很多身份认同都与那个头衔有关，而且知道我在管理我的团队。我本不想与此挂钩，但在过去二十年在这个领域中，无意间它还是与之联系在一起了。一开始，大约几周，我想，我是刚被升职，得到了双重好处，还是只是失去了我的身份地位？

Did I just lose additional opportunities in the future that I'll have coming towards me. So no team felt like almost like less important until I saw the continuous impact that I can continue doing in the organization. But the decades of conditioning are hard to shake off. I want to acknowledge it because so many of our identities are wrapped up in our titles at work because we spend so much time at work compared to doing anything else in our lives that it's actually kind of good to shake it up sometimes. So you don't have such a strong connection to what you're doing, especially in the next year or so when all of our jobs are going to change.

中文：我是否刚刚失去了未来可能会向我靠近的额外机会。所以没有哪个团队让我觉得几乎不重要，直到我看到我可以在组织中持续产生的影响。但几十年的习惯很难摆脱。我想承认这一点，因为我们很多人的身份都与工作头衔紧密相关，因为我们在工作上的时间远比在生活中做其他事情的时间多，因此有时打破这种常规其实是件好事。这样你对自己所做的事情就不会有那么强的依赖感，尤其是在接下来的一年左右，当我们所有的工作都会发生变化的时候。

You're not going to lose a position in your company, but what you're doing is going to change. I don't know how about you, but everything that I'm doing today, daytoday, is completely different from versus what I doing, let's say, 5 years ago or 10 years ago. And I welcome that change. Honestly, I think it's interesting again and it's exciting, but it is hard on your identity and it does take some time to mourn that ladder that you were climbing that you thought was the end goal. But if you realize that at the top of that ladder is not something that is riveting to you, that is not something that you're really really good at managing large teams and crossf functional collaboration because you were good at your craft, then maybe this is a better path and AI can help you continue keeping the influence and the status and even get more impact than potentially you had when you were leading teams.

中文：你不会失去你在公司中的职位，但你正在做的事情会发生变化。我不知道你怎么样，但我今天每天做的所有事情，和 5 年前或 10 年前相比，完全不同。我欢迎这种变化。老实说，我认为这很有趣，也很令人兴奋，但这对你的身份认同来说是一个挑战，也确实需要一些时间来哀悼你曾经攀登的那一梯子，那你以为是终极目标的梯子。但如果你意识到那梯子的顶端并不是你真正感兴趣的事情，那也不是你真正擅长的管理大型团队和跨职能协作的事情，因为你曾经擅长你的专业技能，那么也许这是一条更好的道路，而人工智能可以帮助你继续保持影响力和地位，甚至可能取得比你领导团队时更大的影响力。

So I used to need a PM, designers, engineers, and a lot of calendar time in order to get things done. Now I build things myself and I'm responsible for pricing and packaging in our company. So I build and change pricing page. I build prototypes. I deploy to production myself. I do the user research. I do the analysis. I do all of the optimizations. And then I collaborate with our engineers on some of the bigger model changes that require deeper uh deeper engineering work. But I kind of responsible for it all myself and there's something so exciting about it.

中文：所以我过去需要一个产品经理、设计师、工程师，以及大量的日程时间来完成工作。现在我自己动手构建东西，并且负责我们公司的定价和包装。所以我构建和修改定价页面。我构建原型。我自己部署到生产。我进行用户研究。我进行分析。我执行所有优化。然后我和我们的工程师合作处理一些需要更深入工程工作的重大模型更改。但我基本上自己对所有事情负责，这让我感到非常兴奋。

10:00 - 19:23

I don't know how about you all. We all work in tech and we all have these really long outcomes that we're going after. I like for example in my spare time I love power washing. It is so satisfactory like oddly satisfactory to just like see that clean slate. And to me, this is becoming an HI-IC is also so satisfactory because I can see what I'm doing back into customers hands almost immediately when I'm ready to to push it. There's no this cross functional dependency that is happening and 90% of my time is either building or thinking about what to build next.

中文：我不知道你们怎么样。我们都在科技行业工作，我们都有这些非常长远的目标。我举个例子，我在空闲时间喜欢用高压清洗机。看到干净的表面特别令人满意，甚至有点意外地令人满意。对我来说，这种感觉在做 HI-IC 也同样令人满意，因为我几乎可以立即把我做的东西交到客户手中，一旦准备好就可以推送出去。没有这种跨职能依赖的情况发生，我 90%的时间要么在构建，要么在思考接下来该构建什么。

It is so exciting. I'm back to my craft roots. And yes, it was exciting to run a team, but being stuck in the meetings all day long and waiting on some team's prioritization in order to get it done is no more in my day. And by the way, it's so easy to also just fall into the rhythm of being having your time being stolen away by the meetings that are placed on your calendar versus actually taking time to do what's right for the business and to be do what's right for the customer.

中文：真是太令人兴奋了。我回到了我的手工艺根源。是的，管理一个团队很令人兴奋，但整天被会议困住，并且要等待某个团队的优先级安排才能完成工作，这种日子已经不再属于我了。顺便说一句，也很容易陷入一个节奏——你的时间被日程上安排的会议夺走，而不是实际花时间去做对业务正确的事情，以及为客户做正确的事情。

But you can't just declare people to be HI-ICs. When I transitioned, I really quickly realized that there are constraints in the system that had to be true in order for me to still feel satisfied in my role and in order for me to still be as impactful as I wanted to be. So high is not just a job title. It is an organizational operating system. And you need to be careful with that because there's five things that I believe that needs to be true on your team in order for you to be able to either transition yourself into an individual contributor role and love it or in order for you to hire other VPs or chiefs whatever it is of the titles that people had as an IC's in your team.

中文：但是你不能只是简单地宣布某人是高级个体贡献者（HI-IC）。当我转换角色时，我很快就意识到，系统中必须存在一些约束，这些约束必须成立，才能让我在角色中仍然感到满足，并且能够继续发挥我想要的影响力。所以，“高级”不仅仅是一个职位名称。这是一种组织运营系统。你需要对此保持谨慎，因为我认为你的团队中必须有五件事成立，才能让你自己顺利过渡到个体贡献者角色并喜欢它，或者才能让你去招聘其他副总裁、总监或团队中个体贡献者所拥有的任何职位头衔的人。

So I really urge you to look at these. So number one and this is the most important one. The only way that I can still be impactful is if I have all of the information at my fingertips in order to make the right decision. However, our organizational designs currently gate information by design. You have all of these layers of people filtering information down to individual contributors. Well, that can be no more. You have to trust your people. You have to trust your employees. And you have to flow that information through.

中文：所以我真的敦促你去看看这些。首先，这是最重要的一点。我仍然能够产生影响的唯一方式就是我必须掌握所有信息，以便做出正确的决策。然而，我们的组织设计目前是有意限制信息的。你有所有这些层级的人在向下过滤信息到个人贡献者。嗯，这种情况不能再继续了。你必须信任你的人，信任你的员工，并且必须让信息自由流通。

Now, obviously that requires fewer management layers. So, at Lovable, we don't have titles. We just have individual contributors, we have leads, and then we have heads of the department. But there's no managers, there's no directors, there's no such thing as a VP walking into the room and everybody has to listen or the highest paid or uh opinion that it wins. There's no such thing. everybody's on the same level with just a higher uh just a really high level of who is if there's an issue should it ladder up to in order to scale it we have agents that live in Slack and each team has their own agent and each agent has a mom or a dad or parents that are training that agent and if you have any questions about that team's uh what they're doing or any documentation that you need you can just just discuss it with an agent.

中文：显然，这需要更少的管理层。所以，在 Lovable，我们没有职称。我们只有个体贡献者，有组长，然后有部门负责人。但没有经理，没有总监，也没有副总裁走进房间大家就必须听从，或者最高薪酬的人或者谁的意见就算数的情况。没有这样的东西。每个人都在同一层级，只是在处理问题时有一个高层级的指引。如果需要扩展，我们有在 Slack 上工作的代理，每个团队都有自己的代理，每个代理都有一位父母或指导者在训练该代理。如果你对那个团队正在做的事情或者你需要的任何文档有疑问，你可以直接和代理讨论。

So there's very important path here of accessibility to information as well. Then the authority has to travel with accountability. If I'm going to be a HI-IC, I'm not going to be okay if I have to travel a decision five times up and down in order to get anything done. So team has to trust me. Executive team has to trust me. I actually still sit on the executive team even though I'm an individual contributor. But I have an ability to decide, to ship, and most importantly to fail. And guess what? I failed many times at Lovable.

中文：所以在这里有一个非常重要的途径，那就是信息的可获取性。同时，权力必须伴随着责任。如果我要成为高级个人贡献者（HI-IC），我不能接受为了完成任何事情而需要把一个决定来回传递五次。因此，团队必须信任我。执行团队必须信任我。实际上，即使我是个人贡献者，我仍然坐在执行团队中。但我有能力做决定、推进工作，最重要的是能够失败。你猜怎么着？我在 Lovable 失败过很多次。

From the outside, it might look up up and to the right, but I've cost Lovable many millions of dollars in my failed experiments, but we've learned such an important information out of them that it helped us unlock more growth as a result. But we allow everybody to have meaningful failures that yes do impact revenue and nobody freaks out about it as long as there's learning that can be propagated through. And then the scope isn't defined by function. So I'm not just doing growth. Sometimes I show I ship core features. Sometimes I get involved in marketing.

中文：从外部来看，它可能看起来是在上升和向右发展，但我在失败的实验中让 Lovable 损失了数百万美元，但我们从中学到了如此重要的信息，以至于它帮助我们解锁了更多的增长。不过，我们允许每个人经历有意义的失败，是的，这些失败确实会影响收入，但只要有可以传播的学习成果，没有人会因此慌乱。并且工作的范围不是由职能来定义的。所以我并不只是做增长。有时我会展示我推出的核心功能。有时我会参与市场营销。

Sometimes I go do back my growth product stuff. So um it's kind of all of it. But remember one does not simply own it and it needs six approval. So if it's cheaper to try than to debate, make sure that when experiments are cheap, approval chains are the expensive part. So really think about organizing your team this way. As well as decoupling pay and status from headcount. This one is important. It is so ingrained in us that if we want to get more pay, we have to get promoted to manager to director to VP.

中文：有时我会去处理我负责的增长产品相关的事情。所以嗯，这基本上涵盖了所有内容。但记住，没有人能轻易拥有它，而且它需要六道审批。所以如果尝试比争论便宜，确保当实验成本低时，审批链才是成本高的部分。所以要认真考虑以这种方式组织你的团队。同时，将薪酬和地位与人数脱钩。这一点很重要。我们已经根深蒂固地认为，如果想获得更高的薪水，就必须升职，从经理升到总监，再到副总裁。

When I moved into my HI-IC, I did not have a change in my pay grade. In fact, I believe that if we truly believe into this AI change that is happening in all our lives, then IC's should get paid more than managers because as an IC, you can drive more outcome and impact than the manager in the old system. So otherwise everybody rationally becomes manager and there's managers everywhere and most importantly there's lots of terrible managers everywhere cuz um all of us had one through our career. Uh we're not going to name any names but a lot of those people never wanted to be a manager either.

中文：当我搬到我的 HI-IC 岗位时，我的薪级没有变化。事实上，我认为如果我们真的相信正在发生在我们所有人生活中的这次人工智能变化，那么 IC 应该比经理拿得更多的薪水，因为作为一个 IC，你可以比旧体系中的经理创造更多的成果和影响。否则，每个人理所当然地都想成为经理，结果到处都是经理，最重要的是，到处都是很多糟糕的经理，因为嗯，我们职业生涯中都有遇到过这样的人。呃，我们不会点名，但很多这样的人也从不想成为经理。

They were pushed into that ladder and maybe for once we don't have to do that anymore. And most importantly, I actually ran a survey and we s saw that 42 out of 51 people managers actually wanted to go back into IC role. I actually think that I don't know how I can be an effective manager if I don't know how I see work looks anymore. And I see work now looks so different versus what it looked like 5 to 10 years ago. I feel like I need to experience it in order to be an effective manager in the future.

中文：他们被推入了那条阶梯，也许这一次我们不必再这样做了。最重要的是，我实际上做了一个调查，我们看到在 51 位管理者中，有 42 位实际上希望回到个人贡献者的角色。我其实认为，如果我不知道工作现在是什么样子，我不知道自己如何才能成为一个有效的经理。而且我看到现在的工作与五到十年前相比已经大不相同。我觉得我需要亲身经历它，才能在未来成为一个有效的经理。

So I love to take this opportunity to actually learn what one person could do. So if I am going to lead team in the future, I can direct them appropriately. But money and status has to be equal. And that's important because that's why most of us go into the manager because we still want to get paid. Let's not forget we're in a capitalism world and we're not doing this for free. And if you want to attract those people, be expected to actually pay them those leadership level salaries. But do expect a leadership level outcomes out of them as well.

中文：所以我很喜欢利用这个机会真正学习一个人可以做什么。所以如果将来我要带领团队，我可以适当地指导他们。但金钱和地位必须平等。这很重要，因为这也是我们大多数人选择当经理的原因——我们仍然希望得到报酬。别忘了，我们生活在资本主义世界中，我们不是无偿工作的。如果你想吸引这些人，就必须预期真正支付他们领导层的薪水。但也应预期他们能交出领导层水平的成果。

Don't ask people to do both. Uh we actually I've tried to do both manager and IC and a lot of people say, "Oh, I love getting back to my IC roots while I'm still running a team." That's a huge context shift that is really difficult to manage. So some people can do it and I applaud you if you're one of those people. Overall, it's very difficult. You're either a manager or you're individual contributor and you can do a lot of context changes in your individual role and then you can do a lot of context changes in your manager role but switching between the two is just becomes nearly impossible.

中文：不要让人同时做两件事。呃，其实我尝试过同时做经理和个人贡献者（IC），很多人会说，“哦，我喜欢在管理团队的同时回到我的个人贡献者角色。”这是一个巨大的情境变化，非常难以应对。所以有些人可以做到，如果你是其中之一，我为你点赞。总体来说，这非常困难。你要么是经理，要么是个人贡献者，你可以在个人角色中做很多情境转换，也可以在经理角色中做很多情境转换，但在两者之间切换几乎是不可能的。

So you have to pick a path and um really think about scaling through yourself as opposed to scaling through people because it's such a change in mentality of how we do things and um we have to rewire our brains a little bit. But this has been a never more great opportunity in time for you to go back to your craft if craft is what you were great at. if craft was the reason that you got promoted to where you are right now because how silly is it that we take people out of the roles that they're really good at in order to move up the ladder in corporation and now you can go back and you can still exercise all of the leadership qualities that you've learned and you hard earned but doing it as an individual contributor.

中文：所以你必须选择一条道路，并且真正思考如何通过自身成长来扩展，而不是通过别人来扩展，因为这涉及到我们做事方式的思维方式的巨大变化，我们需要稍微重新连接一下大脑。但这是一个前所未有的绝佳机会，让你回到你的专业领域，如果专业是你擅长的领域的话。如果专业是你升职到现在位置的原因，那么升职的方式多么荒谬——我们会把一个人在他非常擅长的岗位上调开，仅仅是为了在公司里往上爬。现在你可以回到原来的岗位，同时仍然可以运用你学到的、辛苦获得的所有领导力品质，但以个人贡献者的身份去实现。

So I think the AI's most interesting effect on organization is not replacing job. No matter how sensational those headlines are and how many impressions um they drive for people who just want to make waves, I think it's separating impact from headcount. And I urge you all to think about that for yourself because right now is the opportunity in time for you to potentially to go back for you to continue having the impact for you to love what you do every single day. So take a hard look at your job. Do you really love it?

中文：所以我认为人工智能对组织最有趣的影响不是替代工作。不管那些标题多么耸人听闻，也不管它们为那些只想引起轰动的人带来了多少点击量，我认为它是在把影响力与员工人数分开。我敦促大家自己思考这个问题，因为现在是一个机会时期，让你有可能继续产生影响，让你每天都热爱你所做的事情。所以请认真审视你的工作。你真的喜欢它吗？

Do you really love how you're spending your day today? Does that give you energy? If yes, keep going. This presentation is not for you. But I've talked to too many people that feel the drain, that don't feel the energy, that don't love where they are. And AI is presenting an incredible opportunity for us to find the career yet again that gives us that energy. So management needs to be a career path, not a promotion. Thank you all.

中文：你真的喜欢今天如何度过你的一天吗？那给你带来能量吗？如果是，继续前进。这次演讲不是为了你。但是我和太多人谈过，他们感到精疲力竭，感受不到能量，不喜欢自己所处的地方。而人工智能为我们提供了一个令人难以置信的机会，让我们再次找到那份能给我们带来能量的职业。所以管理应该是一条职业道路，而不是一次晋升。谢谢大家。