1: Experience the world instead of talking about experiencing the world
1. 亲身体验世界，而不是空谈体验世界
The signature behavior of people who routinely achieve innovative outcomes is that they constantly seek to experience the world instead of talking about experiencing the world.
经常获得创新结果的人，他们的典型行为是不断追求体验世界，而不是空谈体验。
Instead of only reading someone else’s market research summary, they go in the field and shop across the category in question. That way they can get a feel for all the intangibles which are lost in translation, as language, photos, and even video are imperfect mediums. Honda’s innovative rethink of the pickup truck came from Saturday mornings spent in the parking lot of Home Depot.
他们不是阅读其他人的市场调研总结，而是亲自出马，去店里购买涉及的商品，从而体会在翻译中丢失的所有无形的东西，因为语言、图片甚至视频都是不完美的载体。本田关于皮卡车的创新再思考来自周六早上苦守家得宝停车场的体验。
Instead of taking someone else’s diagnosis of a problem at face value, they seek a second opinion, and the deliverer of that second opinion is their own person. When there’s a problem on the production line at Toyota, they don’t wait for a PowerPoint to circulate with photos and diagrams of the bug in question. Instead, everyone concerned walks over to experience the bug firsthand. And then they ask: why, why, why, why, and why?
他们不是采用他人对问题的表面诊断，而是寻求不同观点，而第二种观点正是由他们自己人提供的。当丰田车生产线上出现问题时，他们不是等着看问题的PPT，而是所有相关人士都出动，亲自体验问题所在。然后问：为什么，为什么，为什么，为什么，到底为什么？
Instead of spending sixty minutes talking about what might be done, they build four 15-minute prototypes to immediately jump to the lessons that only come when you start breaking things. At the Stanford d.school, we hold “Iron Chef” prototyping sessions where small teams receive a problem statement from the audience (show me a way to run fast on the Moon!), and then they prototype the hell out of it for five minutes. And invariably they get somewhere interesting that would have been unreachable via conversation and hand waving.
他们不是花60分钟讨论可以做什么，而是分成4个15分钟打造原型，立即投入到只有开始分解问题才能学来的经验教训中。在斯坦福设计学院，我们举行“小小大厨”原型研讨会，小团队会收到观众的问题（告诉我在月球上如何跑得快!），然后他们花5分钟打造原型。不可避免地，他们会得到仅仅通过谈话或挥手得不到的有趣东西。
Instead of only reading second-hand source or searching on Google, they go to the place and talk to people and see the sights. Talking to a person living on a dollar a day is much different than reading about it, as important as that background knowledge is. Experiencing the Mona Lisa in person is something quite different than viewing it on your MacBook. In order to understand what was really going on in Dubai, Joi Ito picked up house in Japan and moved there.
他们不是阅读二手信息或在Google上搜索，而是奔赴现场，和人们交谈，眼见为实。直接和生活拮据的人交谈，与间接阅读他们的资料所获得的感受是完全不同的。亲眼观看蒙娜丽莎的画像，和你在电脑屏幕上看截然不同。为了解迪拜的真实情况，伊藤穰一收拾了日本的家，移居迪拜了。
To truly start living as a design thinker, experience the world instead of talking about experiencing the world.
想要真正开始像设计思想家那样生活，去体验世界吧，不要空谈。
2: See and hear with the mind of a child
2. 用童心观察聆听
If experiencing the world firsthand is about wisdom, then being open to what that world tells you requires cultivating the un-wise mind of a child: open, curious, fun-loving.
如果亲自体验这个世界关乎智慧，那么，虚心聆听这个世界所告诉你的东西需要培养童心般的无智：虚心、求知欲、乐趣。
Being open and curious takes practice.
虚心又要充满求知欲需要练习。
Having an open mind requires one to suspend (or at least defer) judgment. This is an acquired skill.
虚心需要停止（至少是延迟）论断。这种技能需要后天努力。
Curiosity must be fed: when asked by a classmate of mine how we should best spend our time preparing ourselves for a life spent designing stuff, the great design guru Sara Little Turnbull said, “Great designers are great readers.” In other words, you must feed your curiosity, because it grows stronger as it is fed, and the cognitive foundation set by that curiosity is what enables one to recognize patterns and make connections across disparate elements of complex systems.
求知欲必须培养：当我的一位同学问设计大师Sara Little Turnbull 如何为设计生涯做好准备时，大师说，“伟大的设计师都是伟大的读者。”换言之，你必须培养满足你的求知欲，因为求知欲越培养就越强烈，而正是求知欲所奠定的认知基础促使我们认识模型，将复杂系统中的离散元素相连接。
Having fun (especially as you work) requires energy and time. But it’s worth it: fun shows ways forward other than the drab grey of the mundane, and it can shake us out of the path of an obvious solution.
乐趣（尤其是在工作中）需要精力和时间。不过物有所值：乐趣指示前方的道路，而不是平庸沉闷的单调灰色，而且也会带我们脱离显而易见的解决方案。
Without the mind of a child, one can’t see or act deeply. We must see and hear with the mind of a child.
没有童心，我们就无法深刻地理解或行动。我们必须用童心观察，用童心聆听。
3: Always ask: “How do we want people to feel after they experience this?”
3. 不停地问“我们希望人们体验了这个之后，会有怎样的感受？”
Too often we focus all of our energy on designing the thing, and forget about the people who will use it. As we approach any design effort, we must step back and always ask: “How do we want people to feel after they experience this?”
通常，我们都将全部精力放在设计上，忘记了使用设计的人们。在设计过程中，我们必须退后一步，不停地问：“我们希望人们体验了这个之后，会有怎样的感受？”
Part of the challenge lies in taking an “ecosystem” approach to the human experience. It’s relatively easy to think about the experience of the end user of the thing you design, but what about the experience to be had by the person who sells it? How could we make that better? Who will service it? Who will retire it? Who will market it? Who will provide training and education? A comprehensive look at all of their needs will help (but not guarantee) a better overall experience for the end user.
挑战在于对采用“生态系统”的方法进行人类体验。考虑设计产品的终端用户的体验相对容易，那么销售者的体验呢？我们如何可以使之改善？谁来维护？谁来引退？谁来营销？谁来提供培训.？纵观大家的所有需求有助于（但不保证）完善终端用户的整体体验。
Another part of the challenge lies in thinking about usage through time. We often design for those few moments that make up the core value proposition. But what about all the other experiences? How does it feel to start using it? What does mastery feel like — is it exhilarating or boring? How does using this expand our human experience? How does it influence our environment? What does it feel like to extend one’s relationship with the offering? Does it help someone get to a state of flow?
挑战的另一部分在于思考随着时间流逝，使用会如何。我们通常为构成核心价值的那些瞬间而设计，那么所有其他体验呢？开始使用时感觉如何？掌握之后感觉又如何——激动人心还是沉闷无聊？使用这个会如何体验我们的人生经验？如何影响我们的环境？用这个来扩展关系感觉如何？是否有助于我们进入涌流状态？
There are many examples where designing for the entire experience has made for success in the world (here’s a list of “well done” vs. “not so well done”):
有很多例子说明针对整体经验的设计已经大获成功（以下是成功公司与不成功公司的对比）
- Apple Store vs. Sony Style
- Dream Dinners vs. Hamburger Helper
- Trekking in Bhutan vs. in Nepal
- Disneyland vs. your local amusement park
- World of Warcraft vs. Second Life
- Mint.com vs. your credit card and bank statements
- 苹果零售店与索尼体验销售店
- 梦幻厨房与汉堡帮手
- 在不丹徒步与在尼泊尔徒步
- 迪斯尼与你当地的游乐场
- 魔兽世界与第二人生
- Mint.com与你的信用卡及银行证明
As Lance Armstrong would say, it’s not about the bike. We must keep asking “How do we want people to feel after they experience this?”
如兰斯·阿姆斯特朗说，这与单车无关。我们必须得不停地问“我们希望人们体验了这个之后，会有怎样的感受？”
4: Prototype as if you are right. Listen as if you are wrong.
4. 设计原型时就当做你是正确。聆听时就当自己是错误的。
To make change in the world, we must constantly engage in a yin-yang cycle of prototyping. This implies a commitment to two behaviors:
为了改变世界，我们必须不断在原型设计的阴阳圈里忙碌。这意味着要从事两种行为：
Prototype as if you are right.
Listen as if you are wrong.
设计原型时就当你是正确的。
聆听时就当自己是错误的。
What is a prototype? A prototype is nothing other than a single question, embodied. In a way quite similar to the scientific method, productive prototyping is about asking a single question at a time, and then constructing a model in the world which brings back evidence to answer your question. In order to believe in the evidence that comes back to you, you need to prototype as if you already know the answer. A strong belief in your point of view will push you to find more creative solutions to the question at hand.
什么是原型？原型不过是具体化的简单问题。生产性原型与科学方法相当类似，一次只问一个问题，然后在实际中建在模型，带回证据解答问题。为了相信返回的证据，你需要像已经知道答案那样建立原型。坚定地相信自己的观点会推动你为手边的问题找到更多创造性的解决方案。
Once your prototype is ready for the world, it is important to listen as if you are wrong. You (and everyone around you) must be willing to respect the evidence that the prototype brings back, whether you life it or not. You must also go out of your way to put your prototype in to the world. Hiding it in a closet is only cheating the process, and ultimately, yourself. My colleague Dennis Boyle, who is one of the world’s truly great design thinkers and a remarkable product development guru, has a saying which we like to refer to as Boyle’s Law. It goes like this:
一旦你的原型可以投入实际使用，听取别人意见时能有一种自己可能是错了的心态就非常重要了。你和（你周围的所有人）必须心甘情愿地尊重原型带回来的事实，不论你是否喜欢。你也必须走出来把你的原型放到实际中。把原型藏起来不过是欺骗这个过程，最终就是欺骗你自己。我的同事Dennis Boyle（丹尼斯·波义尔）是全世界名副其实的伟大设计思想家之一，也是杰出的产品开发大师，他有一句我们称为波义尔定律的名言：
“never attend a meeting without a new prototype”
“绝不参加没有新原型的会议”
This serves to both push and pull. It pushes you to prototype earlier and with more frequency, because you want to (and have to) meet with other people in the course of life. And it pulls you toward a more productive state, because you can’t have a meeting without having a new prototype, which means that you spend less time talking in pointless meetings and more time doing productive explorations. Doing is very important.
这既有推动作用，又有牵引作用。它推动你尽早尽量多地打造原型，因为你想（而且不得不）在漫长的人生中与其他人相遇。这使你进入多产状态，因为没有新原型就没有会议，这意味着你花较少时间在毫无意义的会议上，而把更多时间花在生产性探索上。行动很重要。
There is an important build on Boyle’s Law, which goes by the handle of Raney’s Corollary. Coined by another one of my colleagues, Colin Raney, his corollary states:
波义尔定律还有一个非常重要的加强版，叫做雷尼推论，是我的另一位同事Colin Raney (科林·雷尼)杜撰的，内容如下：
“you only learn when things start breaking”
“只有当事情开始支离破碎时，你才能学习”
The goal of a prototype is not to be right, but to get an answer. That answer is what allows you move forward with wisdom.
原型的目的不是正确，而是获得答案。答案是让你向着智慧前进的东西。
When we engage in both of these behaviors, prototyping as if we are right but listening as if we are wrong, we engage ourselves in a continuing cycle of do-try-listen. When faced with the challenge of bringing something new in to the world, this cycle leads to concrete results that have a better chance of changing the world, as they are born of lessons from the world. As such, I much prefer the word “prototyping” (a verb) over the word “prototype” (a noun). It is about doing. Prototyping is how things move forward.
当我们参与这两个活动即设计原型时就当你是正确的，聆听时就当自己是错误的时，我们就进入了行动-试验-聆听的不断循环中。当面临将新事物带到这个世界上的挑战时，这个循环就产生具体结果，很可能改变这个世界，犹如它们是这个世界经验教训的结果。因此，比起“原型”（名词），我非常喜欢“打造原型”（动词）。这关乎行动。打造原型是前进的原因。
