(校稿任务) 第八十九篇 Documenticide
本帖最后由 小编D 于 2012-11-20 13:32 编辑
请对以下文章有翻译兴趣的组员留下你的预计完成时间和邮箱地址，以便小编登记翻译者信息以及文章最终完成时间
本文翻译：kkstrr
Documenticide
去除刻板的文件
Life on planet Earth will perish not from greenhouse gases but documents
使地球上生命凋零的不是温室气体，而是条条框框的刻板文件
I’ve been baptized; I do believe in religion. But I really can’t stand the fact that the Ten Commandments had to be set in stone. The human brain is capable of effectively remembering some 100 words—and much, much more.
我曾经接受过洗礼，是一个十足的宗教信仰者。但是我实在不能理解为什么十诫为什么要刻在石头上。记住100个甚至远远多于100个单词的句子对于人来说是很简单的事情
I don’t object to documents as such. I love books; my home is crowded with them. I much prefer writing and reading to talking, although I’m accused, sometimes, of being a maniacal listener. That is, I’m inclined to listen to anybody’s and everybody’s words, and I tend to remember them, however trivial or insignificant they may seem. Words are like icebergs to me: Too many can sink a Titanic, and hence, they deserve my close attention.
我并不反对诸如此类的文件记录。我喜欢书并且我的房间摆满了书籍。尽管有时我被认为是狂热的聆听者，但相比谈话而言，我仍更倾向于记录和阅读。也就是说我乐于倾听每一个人的谈话，无论这些内容多么琐碎无关紧要，我都下意识地去记住它们。对我来说言语就像是冰山：太多的话也会导致泰坦尼克沉没，因此，它们值得引起我的高度注意。
Some of you may remember my work history from my last column: I thought of ISO’s QMS standards as stone tablets that could, like Moses and the Ten Commandments, save humanity from the slavery of quality control and product inspection, and take us to the holy land of quality assurance. History has taught me I was wrong about this.
你们也许记得我上一个专栏的工作经历：我曾认为ISO的质量管理体系标准就像是摩西和十诫一样的碑碣，可以将人们从质量控制及质量检验的魔咒中解放出来，并将人们带领到质量保证的圣地。我的工作经历使我明白了我的这些观点是错误的。
Since its birth in 2010, ISO 29001, which defines the quality management system for product-and-service supply organizations for the petroleum and natural gas industries, along with similar standards, have yet to be washed clean of their original sin—their documentation. If you take even the last born, ISO 9001:2008, and its sister ISO/TS 16949:2009, the clauses on documentation requirements come first, and requirements for personnel come third. ISO/TS 16949 allows itself two full pages on document control but only about a page and a half on managing human resources.
自ISO 29001在2010年诞生起，它就定义了石油天然气工业产品服务供应组织的质量管理系统，除一些相似的标准之外，此标准并没有去除掉文件化的本质。如果你参照一下最新版的ISO9001:2008及衍生出的ISO/TS 16949你就会发现，文件化的要求条款排在第一位，对人的要求排在第三位。ISO/TS 16949有两整页关于文件控制的说明却只有仅仅一页半的内容是关于人力资源管理的。
I find it curious that humans are “resources,” while documentation is “documentation.” When did documents stop being a resource, or more precisely, a tool for us resourceful humans?
我很好奇人被定义为资源而文件就是文件。文件从什么时候不再是资源或准确地说一个工具为聪明的人类所使用的？(此处用了双关语)
Having worked now for almost 20 years in the system-certification business, I feel I know my way around. In Italy, where I work and live, there’s a saying, “Paper takes it all.” This has nothing to do with a Las Vegas-style game of chance. It suggests that you can write anything you want on a blank sheet of paper—just as you can in a computer document. I’ve seen too many cases of pretending-to-be paperless systems fail as miserably as paper-based ones. Both can be documented to death.
在系统认证领域工作了差不多二十年，我感觉对我的工作驾轻就熟了。在我工作生活的意大利，有一句话是这样说的,”记录至关重要”。这和拉斯维加斯靠技巧取胜的游戏毫无关系。这说的是你可以在空白的纸上记下你所想的任何事情，就像可以在电子文档上记下任何事情一样。我看到很多追求无纸化系统结果却和过分文件化的系统一样糟糕失败的案例。这两种极端的状况都是致命的。
Those of you who work in the field most likely share my experience: During the month preceding a registrar’s audit, the quality manager is at risk for a heart attack, since he must do all the writing that wasn’t done during the previous 12 months.
你们如果同样在这个领域工作，那么你们大多数会与我有同样的经历：在面临稽核前的一个月，品质主管面临着心脏病发生的危险，因为他要准备之前12个月所没有做的文件工作。
A friend of mine, a colleague who dwells in Genoa, where Cristoforo Colombo was born, complains that he had to write a 50-page failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) on the design of an appearance part—a car component that has no function whatsoever other than aesthetically appeasing the car designer and—maybe—the car buyers. My friend had to write this document because it was so “requested” by a primary Italian automaker. (Guess who.)
我的一个同事朋友居住在Cristoforo Colombo出生之乡：Genoa，他曾向我抱怨不得不为一个汽车零部件外观设计写长达50页的失效模式与分析报告，然而此零部件无任何功能作用，这完全是为设计者的爱人审美偏好或获得买家喜好而设计。就因为意大利初级汽车制造商的一个所谓“要求”,我的朋友不得不书写它。
We’re all too prone to listen to, and look at, accidents: Just look at the queues on the opposite motorway lanes when a car accident occurs in front of you, or the spike in viewers when National Geographic or Discovery Channel show accidents or disasters. Yet, despite our focus on catastrophe, automakers’ suppliers are increasingly pushed toward charting manufacturing process flows, documenting design and process FMEAs, and designing control plans to address visual characteristics. What has this to do with vehicle safety?
针对汽车事故，我们太倾向于去听、去看：当一个汽车事故在你眼前发生时，注意看看对面相反方向的汽车路线，或者当国家地理/发现频道播放事故/灾难时，注意看看观众的表情。是的，尽管我们高度注意灾难，汽车供应商却越来越多地注重生产流程图的制作、文件设计、制程FMEA以及控制计划来强调外观特性。然而这些都和汽车安全问题有什么关系呢？
The latest mania is cleanliness of powertrain parts. Automakers pretend this will extend service frequency because lube oil will be less contaminated by metal parts. It’s as if our quality gurus have started to act like ostriches: What they don’t “see” doesn’t exist. When a problem is ignored, it isn’t a problem.
最后就是对动力系统的过分洁净追求。汽车制造商认为这会增加服务频率，因为润滑油污染将会降低。似乎我们的品质管理者就像是把头扎进沙堆的鸵鸟：看不见的东西就是不存在的。当一个问题被忽略时，它就不再是一个问题。
Jumping back, what is all this risk analysis, FMEA, and fault-tree analysis paperwork worth?
让我们再跳回来，风险分析、FMEA、故障树形分析等文件化的分析到底有什么价值？
During the last few years, a leading Japanese automaker recalled 19 million cars—19 million, roughly one-fourth the population of Germany—for safety failures. It’s likely, after reading the first three pages of a 50-page FMEA, that their engineers fell asleep.
在过去几年，一个领先的日本汽车制造商因为安全问题如回了1900万辆汽车，是的1900万，差不多德国人口的1/4。这可能就是汽车工程师刚读完50页FMEA的前三页后就已经睡着了。
The Greek poet Callimachus said, “A big book is a big evil.” He was wise. The more you write, the more mistakes you make. And the more time you waste.
希腊诗人Callimachus曾说，“一本过于厚重的书就是一个负担.”,他完全正确。你写的越多，你犯的错误也越多。与此同时，你浪费的时间也越多。
I’m a fan of the now-defunct automotive quality requirements standard, QS-9000, which recommended that we “do what’s necessary, not necessarily what’s written.” With ISO/TS 16949, our friends in Geneva—ISO’s headquarters—have twisted that principle around. Now, it may well be the Swiss who land on Mars first. And if they do, at least we know that it will be well documented. But many of us remember the science fiction thriller Capricorn One about a Mars landing hoax. In the film, NASA wouldn’t allow the astronauts to disclose the truth—and nearly killed them all in the process. It’s an unfortunate fact that truth is all too often buried under mountains of documentation.
我比较推崇QS-9000汽车质量管理体系，它要求我们“做必要的事，而不是文件所写必须做的事。”我们在日内瓦ISO总部工作的朋友也一直在为ISO/TS16949而苦恼。现在可能是瑞士人第一次登上火星。如果是这样的话，至少此事会被很好地记载。但我们很多人都记得科幻小说摩羯宫一号中所讲的火星登陆骗局。在电影中，NASA不允宇航员揭露这个骗局，这些宇航员甚至差点被杀害。不幸的是真相经常被无数虚假的记载掩盖隐藏着。
I guess most of us dislike bureaucracy, and perhaps even more, bureaucrats, those citizens of the paper community. Starting, let me say, during the mid-1990s, auditors’ work routines began to resemble an iceberg: one-third of the time spent on site auditing, the other two-thirds spent on paperwork. This is a nightmare for people who are far more comfortable doing the technical work they were trained, as technicians, to do.
我想我们大我们大多数人都不喜欢官僚主义甚至有些讨厌官僚主义者，他们是专门从事文字工作的人。这样讲吧，在最开始，20世纪90年代中期，稽核员的例行工作越来越像一座漂浮的冰山，花费三分之一的时间在现场稽核，其余三分之二的时间专门花在文书工作上。这样的工作方式对于专门训练去做技术工作的技术人员来说简直是一个噩梦。
I do think I understand the philosophy, if not the practicality, behind documentation: “I’ll believe it if I can touch it,” and so on. But I strongly object to humans being subjected to demonstrating that they exist: no identity card, no passport, no driver’s license, no health card—in short, no documentation, no person. You can see me, hear me, touch me, but I’m no document.
抛开实际中的情况，我确实完全了解大量文字记录背后的意义：“如果我能接触到这些东西的话我会完全相信。”如此等等。但是我强烈反对人们证明自己存在的方式：无识别卡、无通行证、无驾驶证、无健康证，简而言之，就是没有记录、没有人。
It’s a bit crazy, isn’t it? Phones, computers, magazines, newspapers, TV news. You travel on a train, hundreds of people busy with their “documents,” no one talks to each other, no one looks into each other’s eyes: Is this “humanity?”
听起来有些疯狂，不是吗？电话、电脑、杂志、报纸、电视剧。你坐火车旅行，无数的人沉迷在各种类型的“文件”中 。没有言语交流，没有目光交流：难道这就是”人道主义“。
But OK, we’re all businesspeople; we’ve all got to make our own living. What I’m saying is that we must resist this increasingly meaningless addiction to documentation, at least where we work. I know my viewpoint is biased, but as I like to say, decency has its limits. You can’t reasonably ask me to demonstrate, through documentation, that water is wet.
谈了这么多，一句话：我们都是商人；我们都必须过自己的生活。我所想说的是：至少在我们工作的范围内，我们必须阻止这种持续增长的附加在文书记录上的无意义工作。我知道我的观点有失偏颇，但我仍然想说，正式也是有限度的。你要求我用文字的方式说明水是潮湿的是不合理的。
About The Author
Umberto Tunesi
Umberto Tunesi is a management system auditor for the quality, automotive, environment, social responsibility, and health and safety fields. He brings his natural and educational background to audit companies based on a continual process approach that confutes many-faced value management systems. He lives and works in northern Italy.
关于作者
Umberto Tunesi
Umberto Tunesi是质量、汽车、环境、社会责任及健康安全领域的系统审计员。在基于持续过程方法的原则上，他用他系统的专业背景去稽核公司。他住工作生活在意大利北部。
来自http://www.qualitydigest.com
请对以下文章有翻译兴趣的组员留下你的预计完成时间和邮箱地址，以便小编登记翻译者信息以及文章最终完成时间
本文翻译：kkstrr
Documenticide
去除刻板的文件
Life on planet Earth will perish not from greenhouse gases but documents
使地球上生命凋零的不是温室气体，而是条条框框的刻板文件
I’ve been baptized; I do believe in religion. But I really can’t stand the fact that the Ten Commandments had to be set in stone. The human brain is capable of effectively remembering some 100 words—and much, much more.
我曾经接受过洗礼，是一个十足的宗教信仰者。但是我实在不能理解为什么十诫为什么要刻在石头上。记住100个甚至远远多于100个单词的句子对于人来说是很简单的事情
I don’t object to documents as such. I love books; my home is crowded with them. I much prefer writing and reading to talking, although I’m accused, sometimes, of being a maniacal listener. That is, I’m inclined to listen to anybody’s and everybody’s words, and I tend to remember them, however trivial or insignificant they may seem. Words are like icebergs to me: Too many can sink a Titanic, and hence, they deserve my close attention.
我并不反对诸如此类的文件记录。我喜欢书并且我的房间摆满了书籍。尽管有时我被认为是狂热的聆听者，但相比谈话而言，我仍更倾向于记录和阅读。也就是说我乐于倾听每一个人的谈话，无论这些内容多么琐碎无关紧要，我都下意识地去记住它们。对我来说言语就像是冰山：太多的话也会导致泰坦尼克沉没，因此，它们值得引起我的高度注意。
Some of you may remember my work history from my last column: I thought of ISO’s QMS standards as stone tablets that could, like Moses and the Ten Commandments, save humanity from the slavery of quality control and product inspection, and take us to the holy land of quality assurance. History has taught me I was wrong about this.
你们也许记得我上一个专栏的工作经历：我曾认为ISO的质量管理体系标准就像是摩西和十诫一样的碑碣，可以将人们从质量控制及质量检验的魔咒中解放出来，并将人们带领到质量保证的圣地。我的工作经历使我明白了我的这些观点是错误的。
Since its birth in 2010, ISO 29001, which defines the quality management system for product-and-service supply organizations for the petroleum and natural gas industries, along with similar standards, have yet to be washed clean of their original sin—their documentation. If you take even the last born, ISO 9001:2008, and its sister ISO/TS 16949:2009, the clauses on documentation requirements come first, and requirements for personnel come third. ISO/TS 16949 allows itself two full pages on document control but only about a page and a half on managing human resources.
自ISO 29001在2010年诞生起，它就定义了石油天然气工业产品服务供应组织的质量管理系统，除一些相似的标准之外，此标准并没有去除掉文件化的本质。如果你参照一下最新版的ISO9001:2008及衍生出的ISO/TS 16949你就会发现，文件化的要求条款排在第一位，对人的要求排在第三位。ISO/TS 16949有两整页关于文件控制的说明却只有仅仅一页半的内容是关于人力资源管理的。
I find it curious that humans are “resources,” while documentation is “documentation.” When did documents stop being a resource, or more precisely, a tool for us resourceful humans?
我很好奇人被定义为资源而文件就是文件。文件从什么时候不再是资源或准确地说一个工具为聪明的人类所使用的？(此处用了双关语)
Having worked now for almost 20 years in the system-certification business, I feel I know my way around. In Italy, where I work and live, there’s a saying, “Paper takes it all.” This has nothing to do with a Las Vegas-style game of chance. It suggests that you can write anything you want on a blank sheet of paper—just as you can in a computer document. I’ve seen too many cases of pretending-to-be paperless systems fail as miserably as paper-based ones. Both can be documented to death.
在系统认证领域工作了差不多二十年，我感觉对我的工作驾轻就熟了。在我工作生活的意大利，有一句话是这样说的,”记录至关重要”。这和拉斯维加斯靠技巧取胜的游戏毫无关系。这说的是你可以在空白的纸上记下你所想的任何事情，就像可以在电子文档上记下任何事情一样。我看到很多追求无纸化系统结果却和过分文件化的系统一样糟糕失败的案例。这两种极端的状况都是致命的。
Those of you who work in the field most likely share my experience: During the month preceding a registrar’s audit, the quality manager is at risk for a heart attack, since he must do all the writing that wasn’t done during the previous 12 months.
你们如果同样在这个领域工作，那么你们大多数会与我有同样的经历：在面临稽核前的一个月，品质主管面临着心脏病发生的危险，因为他要准备之前12个月所没有做的文件工作。
A friend of mine, a colleague who dwells in Genoa, where Cristoforo Colombo was born, complains that he had to write a 50-page failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) on the design of an appearance part—a car component that has no function whatsoever other than aesthetically appeasing the car designer and—maybe—the car buyers. My friend had to write this document because it was so “requested” by a primary Italian automaker. (Guess who.)
我的一个同事朋友居住在Cristoforo Colombo出生之乡：Genoa，他曾向我抱怨不得不为一个汽车零部件外观设计写长达50页的失效模式与分析报告，然而此零部件无任何功能作用，这完全是为设计者的爱人审美偏好或获得买家喜好而设计。就因为意大利初级汽车制造商的一个所谓“要求”,我的朋友不得不书写它。
We’re all too prone to listen to, and look at, accidents: Just look at the queues on the opposite motorway lanes when a car accident occurs in front of you, or the spike in viewers when National Geographic or Discovery Channel show accidents or disasters. Yet, despite our focus on catastrophe, automakers’ suppliers are increasingly pushed toward charting manufacturing process flows, documenting design and process FMEAs, and designing control plans to address visual characteristics. What has this to do with vehicle safety?
针对汽车事故，我们太倾向于去听、去看：当一个汽车事故在你眼前发生时，注意看看对面相反方向的汽车路线，或者当国家地理/发现频道播放事故/灾难时，注意看看观众的表情。是的，尽管我们高度注意灾难，汽车供应商却越来越多地注重生产流程图的制作、文件设计、制程FMEA以及控制计划来强调外观特性。然而这些都和汽车安全问题有什么关系呢？
The latest mania is cleanliness of powertrain parts. Automakers pretend this will extend service frequency because lube oil will be less contaminated by metal parts. It’s as if our quality gurus have started to act like ostriches: What they don’t “see” doesn’t exist. When a problem is ignored, it isn’t a problem.
最后就是对动力系统的过分洁净追求。汽车制造商认为这会增加服务频率，因为润滑油污染将会降低。似乎我们的品质管理者就像是把头扎进沙堆的鸵鸟：看不见的东西就是不存在的。当一个问题被忽略时，它就不再是一个问题。
Jumping back, what is all this risk analysis, FMEA, and fault-tree analysis paperwork worth?
让我们再跳回来，风险分析、FMEA、故障树形分析等文件化的分析到底有什么价值？
During the last few years, a leading Japanese automaker recalled 19 million cars—19 million, roughly one-fourth the population of Germany—for safety failures. It’s likely, after reading the first three pages of a 50-page FMEA, that their engineers fell asleep.
在过去几年，一个领先的日本汽车制造商因为安全问题如回了1900万辆汽车，是的1900万，差不多德国人口的1/4。这可能就是汽车工程师刚读完50页FMEA的前三页后就已经睡着了。
The Greek poet Callimachus said, “A big book is a big evil.” He was wise. The more you write, the more mistakes you make. And the more time you waste.
希腊诗人Callimachus曾说，“一本过于厚重的书就是一个负担.”,他完全正确。你写的越多，你犯的错误也越多。与此同时，你浪费的时间也越多。
I’m a fan of the now-defunct automotive quality requirements standard, QS-9000, which recommended that we “do what’s necessary, not necessarily what’s written.” With ISO/TS 16949, our friends in Geneva—ISO’s headquarters—have twisted that principle around. Now, it may well be the Swiss who land on Mars first. And if they do, at least we know that it will be well documented. But many of us remember the science fiction thriller Capricorn One about a Mars landing hoax. In the film, NASA wouldn’t allow the astronauts to disclose the truth—and nearly killed them all in the process. It’s an unfortunate fact that truth is all too often buried under mountains of documentation.
我比较推崇QS-9000汽车质量管理体系，它要求我们“做必要的事，而不是文件所写必须做的事。”我们在日内瓦ISO总部工作的朋友也一直在为ISO/TS16949而苦恼。现在可能是瑞士人第一次登上火星。如果是这样的话，至少此事会被很好地记载。但我们很多人都记得科幻小说摩羯宫一号中所讲的火星登陆骗局。在电影中，NASA不允宇航员揭露这个骗局，这些宇航员甚至差点被杀害。不幸的是真相经常被无数虚假的记载掩盖隐藏着。
I guess most of us dislike bureaucracy, and perhaps even more, bureaucrats, those citizens of the paper community. Starting, let me say, during the mid-1990s, auditors’ work routines began to resemble an iceberg: one-third of the time spent on site auditing, the other two-thirds spent on paperwork. This is a nightmare for people who are far more comfortable doing the technical work they were trained, as technicians, to do.
我想我们大我们大多数人都不喜欢官僚主义甚至有些讨厌官僚主义者，他们是专门从事文字工作的人。这样讲吧，在最开始，20世纪90年代中期，稽核员的例行工作越来越像一座漂浮的冰山，花费三分之一的时间在现场稽核，其余三分之二的时间专门花在文书工作上。这样的工作方式对于专门训练去做技术工作的技术人员来说简直是一个噩梦。
I do think I understand the philosophy, if not the practicality, behind documentation: “I’ll believe it if I can touch it,” and so on. But I strongly object to humans being subjected to demonstrating that they exist: no identity card, no passport, no driver’s license, no health card—in short, no documentation, no person. You can see me, hear me, touch me, but I’m no document.
抛开实际中的情况，我确实完全了解大量文字记录背后的意义：“如果我能接触到这些东西的话我会完全相信。”如此等等。但是我强烈反对人们证明自己存在的方式：无识别卡、无通行证、无驾驶证、无健康证，简而言之，就是没有记录、没有人。
It’s a bit crazy, isn’t it? Phones, computers, magazines, newspapers, TV news. You travel on a train, hundreds of people busy with their “documents,” no one talks to each other, no one looks into each other’s eyes: Is this “humanity?”
听起来有些疯狂，不是吗？电话、电脑、杂志、报纸、电视剧。你坐火车旅行，无数的人沉迷在各种类型的“文件”中 。没有言语交流，没有目光交流：难道这就是”人道主义“。
But OK, we’re all businesspeople; we’ve all got to make our own living. What I’m saying is that we must resist this increasingly meaningless addiction to documentation, at least where we work. I know my viewpoint is biased, but as I like to say, decency has its limits. You can’t reasonably ask me to demonstrate, through documentation, that water is wet.
谈了这么多，一句话：我们都是商人；我们都必须过自己的生活。我所想说的是：至少在我们工作的范围内，我们必须阻止这种持续增长的附加在文书记录上的无意义工作。我知道我的观点有失偏颇，但我仍然想说，正式也是有限度的。你要求我用文字的方式说明水是潮湿的是不合理的。
About The Author
Umberto Tunesi
Umberto Tunesi is a management system auditor for the quality, automotive, environment, social responsibility, and health and safety fields. He brings his natural and educational background to audit companies based on a continual process approach that confutes many-faced value management systems. He lives and works in northern Italy.
关于作者
Umberto Tunesi
Umberto Tunesi是质量、汽车、环境、社会责任及健康安全领域的系统审计员。在基于持续过程方法的原则上，他用他系统的专业背景去稽核公司。他住工作生活在意大利北部。
来自http://www.qualitydigest.com
没有找到相关结果
已邀请:
RSS Feed
10 个回复
dlbsh (威望:1) (江苏 苏州) 电子制造 主管 - 分析些问题
赞同来自: