????進入這個后金融危機時代，很容易對華爾街咬牙切齒。但我一直想找出合理解釋——華爾街到底是出了什么問題？

????我在邁克爾?路易斯的新作《閃光男孩》（Flash Boys）中發現，作者為我們提供了最令人信服的答案——華爾街多數人根本就毫無使命感。圍繞這個觀點，這本書展開了強有力的文化批判。

????風投界傳奇人物約翰?多爾有一句令人難忘的名言：他只支持那些堪稱“傳教者”而非“雇傭兵”的創業者。這也是他投資理念的關鍵所在。

????兩者之間有什么區別？雇傭兵創業主要是為了自己（往往是沖著掙大錢去的），而傳教者卻是為了讓世界變得更美好。

????灣區就塞滿了充滿使命感的公司。要挖苦硅谷那股熱情過頭的“改變世界”的愿望很容易，質疑這種愿望是不是虛偽夸大也不無道理，因為“改變”并不必定意味著“更好”。但真正的問題是，公司的使命感到底是不是重要？

????使命感顯而易見的一大好處就是能幫助企業招到頂尖人才。盡管一般人都知道在硅谷的創業企業要取得成功不難，但從賺錢的角度來說，還是無法解釋為什么華爾街一些學識出眾、日進斗金的未來高管會加速流向硅谷。

????谷歌公司（Google）員工的平均年薪（包括股票期權）約為19萬美元，而高盛公司（Goldman Sachs）則超過50萬美元。想要在一個初創公司里一夜致富，機會少得出奇。對那些一心想賺錢的優秀人才來說，與充滿風險的初創公司相比，華爾街還是一個更有把握賺大錢的地方。

????但在讀了《閃光男孩》之后，我們最近在美國一些頂尖商學院看到的趨勢就完全能說得通了。比如在賓夕法尼亞大學（the University of Pennsylvania）的沃頓商學院（ Wharton School），去年MBA畢業生進入投資銀行的比例就從2006年的26%腰斬到了13.3%，而同期進入科技公司的比例則翻了一倍，達到了11.1%。

????要弄清華爾街的人才為什么會流向硅谷并不是一件困難的事。誰會想在一個對“為什么要干這行？”這個問題只能回答“賺大錢”的行業里工作呢。達到一定的收入門檻后，不光是為了錢而工作就是很合情合理的事情了。可以換個角度看這個問題：想象一下在感恩節晚餐上有兩位剛畢業的MBA遇上了，其中一位在谷歌工作，剛把自動駕駛汽車推向市場，另一位則在高盛高就。誰會充滿自豪地談起自己的工作呢，又是誰會不好意思地回避這個話題呢？

????一家公司的使命能提供一種目標，能在公司和客戶之間建立聯系。它也使公司成為值得為之效力的地方。硅谷那些最成功的公司幾乎都散發著強烈的使命感【想想蘋果公司（Apple），Salesforce.com和谷歌公司吧】，而那些現在不堪一擊的江湖老大則喪失了目標感【比如惠普公司（HP）和微軟公司（Microsoft）】。微軟早已成功實現了“每家每戶一臺電腦”的偉大使命，現在亟需找到一個新的使命維持自己的市場地位。

????沒有了使命，公司就會墮落成死氣沉沉的一潭死水，沒有目標感，跟客戶也缺乏有力的聯系。它們就會變成短期內通過拼命壓榨客戶來賺錢的公司，同時還會不惜損害其他所有事物和所有人的利益。我相信，長期來看，在公平競爭的環境中，所有那些雇傭兵企業都會被傳教士企業比下去。

????不過華爾街希望猶存。《閃光男孩》的主要故事是圍繞不太可能建立的股交所IEX展開的。布拉德?勝山創建了IEX，他的使命是要讓股市重新變得透明、有責任感。他的團隊充滿了硅谷著名科技公司的那種帶有使命感的熱情。這本書主要講述了他們的業務和使命與華爾街的雇傭兵文化之間產生的強烈碰撞。這真是個令人稱奇的故事。

????IEX的發展之路并不怎么真實。他們勝出的機會并不比普通的創業公司高多少。不過我還是看好他們，至少IEX擁有強烈的使命感。（財富中文網）

????本文作者扎卡里?羅森是Pantheon公司聯合創始人兼首席執行官。這家公司位于舊金山，它擁有一個專業化的網站平臺，可以讓開發者、營銷人員和IT用戶創建、發布、運行他們所有的文檔管理和博客系統網站。

????譯者：清遠

????In a post-financial crisis world, it's easy to hate on Wall Street. But what I've been looking for is a rational explanation -- what exactly has gone so very wrong over there?

????In Michael Lewis' new book, Flash Boys, the author provides the most compelling answer I have found -- much of Wall Street suffers from a complete and utter lack of mission. The book provides a powerful cultural critique.

????John Doerr, one of venture capital's legends, has a memorable saying: He only backs entrepreneurs who are "missionaries" not "mercenaries." This is a key part of his investment thesis.

????The difference? Mercenaries are in it for themselves (usually money). Missionaries are in it to change the world around them for the better.

????The Bay Area is chock full of mission-driven companies. It's easy to satirize Silicon Valley's over-earnest desire to "change the world." It's also fair to ask if the desire is disingenuous, since "change" doesn't necessarily imply "for the better." But the real question is, does a company's mission actually matter?

????One clear way a mission pays off is in helping a company recruit top talent. Despite public perception of how easy it is to win at startups in Silicon Valley, there is not a monetarily rational reason for the accelerating brain drain of some of our most educated, financially well-positioned future executives from Wall Street to Silicon Valley.

????Employee compensation at Google (GOOG) (including stock grants) averages about $190,000 at a year while at Goldman Sachs (GS) it's north of $500,000. The odds of striking it rich at an early-stage startup are amazingly low. For talented money-seekers, Wall Street remains a relative sure thing compared to the risks of a startup.

????But after reading Flash Boys, the trends we've being seeing lately at some of the nation's top business schools make perfect sense. At the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School, for instance, the percentage of MBAs entering investment banking dropped to 13.3% last year from 26% in 2006. During the same period, those entering tech more than doubled to 11.1%.

????It's easy to see why Wall Street could lose talent to Silicon Valley. Who would want to work in an industry where the only acceptable answer to the question "Why?" is "for money." Past a certain threshold of earnings it makes rational sense to optimize for more than just money. Another way to look at this: Picture two recent MBAs at Thanksgiving dinner. One works for Google, bringing self-driving cars to the market; the other works at Goldman. Who is going to talk proudly about their job, and who is going to sheepishly avoid the subject?

????A company mission provides a purpose; it forms a connection between a company and their customer. Missions make companies worth working for. The most successful Silicon Valley companies almost universally exude a sense of mission (think Apple (AAPL), Salesforce.com (CRM), and Google), while the vulnerable incumbents have lost their sense of purpose (think HP (HP) and Microsoft). Microsoft (MSFT) resoundingly achieved their mission of "a new computer in every home," but must now find a new calling to stay relevant.

????In the absence of mission, companies devolve into uninspiring backwaters with no purpose and little connection with their customers. They become the kind of companies that would screw over their customer to make profit in the short term at the expense of everything and everyone else. In the fullness of time, and provided an even playing field, I believe all mercenary companies will be out-competed by missionaries.

????There is hope for Wall Street. The story in Flash Boys centers on the improbable founding of the stock exchange IEX. Brad Katsuyama founded IEX with the mission to bring transparency and accountability back to the stock market. The team overflows with Silicon Valley's brand of tech-startup missionary zeal. Flash Boys tells what happens when their business and mission collide solidly with Wall Street's mercenary culture. It's an amazing story.

????IEX's journey is an improbable one. Their odds are no better than the average startup. I'd bet on them though, IEX has a powerful mission.

????Zachary Rosen is co-founder and CEO of Pantheon, a San Francisco-based company whose professional website platform lets developers, marketers, and IT users build, launch, and run all their Drupal & WordPress websites.