2019-11-03 Warren Buffett: This is the ‘most surprising’ lesson I didn’t learn in business school
参考自：《Warren Buffett: This is the ‘most surprising’ lesson I didn’t learn in business school》，这篇文章有自己的解读也参考巴菲特的理解。
Great leaders think differently. But take a cursory glance at the majority of consumer products around you, and you’ll see an interesting trend you might not have noticed before: in nearly every industry, from automobiles to computers to clothing, companies tend to produce products that are extremely similar to those of their competitors.
理性的人会选择think differently，处于一个竞争的社会环境中，think differently是自然、理性的结果，但是绝大部分产品或者企业都只是相互模仿：extremely similar to those of their competitors.
Sure, sometimes it’s because there’s plenty of space in the market. But other times, it’s just a blatant attempt to cash in on a trend and boost short-term earnings. And it’s not just products, either — it’s branding, politicizing, team structuring. Companies copy each other in all kinds of ways.
昨天的视频会议中讨论到这个问题，茅台100块的成本卖2000块，但是这个生意不是想做就能做的，大部分人的选择都是基于即时满足的抄袭：it’s just a blatant attempt to cash in on a trend and boost short-term earnings. ，延迟满足有很大的赔率，但是这种心理上的屏障是无法克服的，比如，我们刚刚分析过的Vitsoe，参考：《VITSOE仿制品的延迟满足》，白痴指数在10倍以上。
Warren Buffett addressed this occurrence in his 1989 letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders, in which he reflected on the hard lessons he learned about investing and managing in the preceding 25 years.
这篇股东信已经收录在我们的官网，参考：《1990-03-02 Warren Buffett's Letters to Berkshire Shareholders》，1989年巴菲特59岁，相信不是59岁才想明白这件事的，The institutional imperative，这个说法只在1989年的股东信里出现过，之后再没有这么讲过，如此深痛的反思为什么不愿意再提及？人性负面的东西真没什么好说的。
1.The institutional imperative
The “most surprising discovery,” he wrote, is “the overwhelming importance in business of an unseen force that we might call ‘the institutional imperative.’ In business school, I was given no hint of the imperative’s existence, and I did not intuitively understand it when I entered the business world.”
我们也是花了很长时间才弄明白性格缺陷的生成原因，以及运作的规律，心理学界基于人道的问题也不想说的太清楚。
The billionaire continued: “I then thought that decent, intelligent and experienced managers would automatically make rational business decisions.But I learned over time that isn’t so. Instead, rationality frequently wilts when the institutional imperative comes into play.”
理性的心理状态跟一个人的安全感有关，跟读了多少书，身处什么样的位置是没有关系的。
Buffett explained that the institutional imperative can manifest when, for example, “any business craving of the leader, however foolish, will be quickly supported by detailed rate-of-return and strategic studies prepared by his troops.”
缺乏安全感的都只有模仿的能力，无论多少人都是1后面的零，马斯克搞了SpaceX证明NASA几十年的工作都是屁，收购推特后裁掉80%的员工证明80%也是屁。
It can also occur when “executives mindlessly imitate the behavior of their peer companies — whether they are expanding, acquiring, setting executive compensation or whatever — no matter how foolish it may be to do so.”
即时满足是一种非常强烈的心理需求，是不假思索的，只要放在眼面前的都会跟着干，比如，直播卖货的网红倒数54321，大批剪掉脑袋的生物会按着指令做，这些生物的脑袋在遇到网红之前就已经剪掉了，准确的时间是在5岁以前。
2.Why it can be problematic
This force can drive leaders, even the ones with top credentials, to adopt misguided approaches purely because everyone else is doing it.
跟所处的地位无关，反过来这些缺乏安全感的为什么能身处高位？上帝的意思在这些人身上不起作用？我觉得不是的，应该是数学上的随机分布，在赌场10把全赢的概率即使很低也是存在的，再有上帝的意思是不会错的，缺乏安全感的因果不可能消失，可能会出现在其他的维度。
Why does this happen? Buffett noted that much of it has to do with managers having poor capital management skills, along with the tendency to seize upon any evidence or data — no matter how inaccurate — that supports their resistance to change.
any evidence or data — no matter how inaccurate — that supports their resistance to change.，这些连续的心理活动清晰地说明恐惧的作用，在我看来，我们很多人身上还滴着血，小时候被折磨的程度至今清晰可见，如果能看到周围都是滴着血的人，你会跟巴菲特和芒格做出同样的选择，无论是自己的人生，还是股票。
The lesson, put another way, is that if you spend time closely observing your rivals (some of whom might have an exaggerated sense of their own abilities) and adopting their practices, you might all go down making the same mistakes.
这段内容的意思是如果自己的内核不够强大很可能被带偏，《高效能人才的七个习惯》中反复强调了这个逻辑，书里的内核指第一个习惯（面对现实）和第二个习惯（以终为始），面对现实对应马斯克所说的反馈回路，以终为始即第一性原理。
This is a common occurrence in many organizations, and it isn’t always visible to investors. Even Buffett himself would agree that avoiding the institutional imperative is incredibly hard to do.
困难的不是如何识别，而是自己的心理状态，我们提了一个自己的逻辑：一个人的本质决定所有行为，反过来，任何单个行为都能看到一个人的本质。
“After making some expensive mistakes because I ignored the power of the imperative, I have tried to organize and manage Berkshire in ways that minimize its influence,” he wrote in the letter. “Furthermore, Charlie [Munger] and I have attempted to concentrate our investments in companies that appear alert to this problem.”
如果你能像巴菲特一样看到周围都是滴着血的人，你会怎么做？巴菲特做了两方面的工作，公司内部的决策集中在少数人身上，公司外部的投资同样集中在少数股票。
That means paying close attention to the leaders of companies: What’s their management style? Do they have wisdom and rationality? Are they able to think focus on the long-term? Most important of all, are they aware [of the institutional imperative] enough to take action and create an environment that will mitigate the tendency?
能意识到的必然有行动，没有行动的必然意识不到，更奇怪的是两者不能相互转化。
Learning about the institutional imperative has also taught Buffett to “go into business only with people whom I like, trust and admire.”
规避风险的根本逻辑在于此。
While this policy doesn’t always ensure success, it’s sensible to believe that you can accomplish wonders if you primarily associate yourself with people who possess decent economic characteristics and a willingness to accept change when change is needed.
a willingness to accept change when change is needed.，对照马斯克的描述：a person has a good feedback loop, can seek criticism from others, and can improve. ，有什么区别？缺乏安全感的就能看出区别来。
As William Penn is believed to have once said, “Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it.”
这个描述又把理性神秘化了，理性即rationality，就是have reasons，这里的reasons需要足够的支撑，也不需要把足够支撑理解多了，足够的意思是能在人群中区分出姚明的足够，要明白缺乏安全感的大脑是根本不区分的。
热门主题
Recent Articles
2025-11-26 Ilya Sutskever.We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research
Refer To：《Ilya Sutskever – We're moving from the age of scaling to the age of research》。 Transcript 00:00:00 – Explaining model jaggedness 00:00:00 – 讲解模型的“锯齿感” Ilya Sutskever 00:00:00 You know what’s crazy? That all of this is real. ...2025-11-24 ChatGPT.Reward+Compression
问： Reward负责方向，Compression负责具体的执行工作，对人来说，Reward的方向就两种，一种基于恐惧，一种基于有安全感，在恐惧的方向上，Compression出来的东西都是胡言乱语的东西，因为这个方向根本上就没有可以收敛的地方，就像田渊栋说的首先这些信息是可以泛化的；在有安全感的方向上Compression的机制才能正常发挥。 ChatGPT： 对，你这次这段把结构说得很干净了，其实已经可以当你自己的“最终版定义”用了： reward 负责方向，compression ...2025-11-25 ChatGPT.评价Geico的商业模式
问： Geico的报告中有两个很重要的定性分析，一是直销；二是只服务特定人群：公务员或者军人，这是都能想明白但做不明白的想法（Simple Idea）。这是CEICO的假设，我认为巴菲特所定义的聪明的假设就是一种泛化，那么普通人，受恐惧影响的reward function看到类似这样的假设会有什么样的心理上的反应？ 这个问题的原文：《1953-03 Warren Buffett.Western Insurance Securities Company》。 ChatGPT： ...2025-11-23 ChatGPT.精准执行的能力层是原创性的假设
你的直觉是对的： “高度压缩”这一层，不论是田渊栋这篇 Li² 框架里讲的 feature emergence / grokking，还是巴菲特式把一公司压缩成几个关键变量，本质上都在证明：大脑/模型有一种“把复杂结构高维信息压成少量有用特征”的能力。 “植物神经”这一层当然是实验上几十年反复确认的。 夹在中间的那层——你叫“精准执行系统”的那一层——在神经科学和心理学里确实有大量证据，但被拆成一堆名词（procedural memory、motor ...2025-11-18 ChatGPT.巴菲特说的“aha” moment是不是等于人工智能的泛化？
短回答：差不多就是一个东西，但不是完全等号——更精确说，巴菲特的“aha moment”是“从记忆到泛化的跃迁 + 自己意识到这次跃迁”的那个瞬间。AI 的“泛化”是这个跃迁的“客观数学版本”。 ⸻ 1. 为什么说“基本等于”AI 里的泛化？ 你自己在 I.H.183 里已经给了一个定义：“‘aha’ moment 就是人工智能里的‘泛化’”，并且强调两点： 产生不简单，要经历大量类似事件； 不神秘，已经可以用数学来表达原理。 田渊栋那篇访谈，把“顿悟 / grokking”直接解释成： ...