Skip to content

每个人都是一家公司,而你是自己的CEO?

每个人都是一家公司,而你是自己的CEO?

我们翻译这篇文章的理由

“你就是自己的CEO。”在如今的资本主义社会,公司出于财务压力,会倾向于雇佣短期员工。同时,员工也对应地倾向于把一份工作看做成一个跳板。这甚至还改变了当经理和做同事的工作思路。既然难以培养对公司的忠诚度,塑造对工作的热情就成了公司挽留人才的办法。然而对工作的热情很容易分解成对具体任务的热情,技能掌握了,热情退散了,工作自然也就没有吸引力了。

——张松

👇

每个人都是一家公司,而你是自己的CEO?

作者:Ilana Gershon

译者:郭嘉宁 & 何翔宇 & 张力文

校对:王宇琪

策划:张松 & 伍豪

The quitting economy

辞职经济

When employees are treated as short-term assets, they reinvent themselves as marketable goods, always ready to quit

当职员被当作短期资产时,他们将自己重塑为有市场的商品,随时准备辞职

In the early 1990s, career advice in the United States changed. A new social philosophy, neoliberalism, was transforming society, including the nature of employment, and career counsellors and business writers had to respond. The Soviet Union had recently collapsed, and much as communist thinkers had tried to apply Marxist ideas to every aspect of life, triumphant US economic intellectuals raced to implement the ultra-individualist ideals of Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman and other members of the Mont Pelerin Society, far and wide. In doing so for work, they developed a metaphor – that every person should think of herself as a business, the CEO of Me, Inc. The metaphor took off, and has had profound implications for how workplaces are run, how people understand their jobs, and how they plan careers, which increasingly revolve around quitting.

在二十世纪九十年代早期,美国的职业咨询界发生了变化。新自由主义(一种新的社会哲学)开始改变社会,也改变了雇佣的本质。对此职业顾问与商业作家不得不作出回应。苏联刚刚解体,在社会主义思想家们还在尝试将马克思主义的理念应用到生活的各个方面的时候,得意洋洋的美国经济知识分子已经抢先广泛地实施了极端个人主义的理念,这些理念来源于弗里德里希·哈耶克、米尔顿·弗里德曼以及其他朝圣山学社的成员。在应用到工作上时,他们想出了一个比喻——每个人都应该把自己当成一家企业,当成“自我股份有限公司(ME公司)”的CEO。这个比喻大获成功,并深远地影响了工作场所的运营方式与人们对工作的理解。辞职渐渐成为了职业规划的中心。

注:朝圣山学社(Mont Pelerin Society)是一个由经济学家、企业领袖和其他古典自由主义支持者组成的国际性组织。该组织提倡自由市场经济政策,倡导开放社会的价值。

Hayek (1899-1992) was an influential Austrian economist who operated from the core conviction that markets provided the best means to order the world. Today, many people share this conviction, and that is in part because of the influence of Hayek and his cohort. At the time that Hayek and his circle began making their arguments, it was an eccentric and minority position. For Hayek and the Mount Pelerin group, the centralised economic planning that characterised both communism and fascism was a recipe for disaster. Hayek held that humans are too flawed to successfully undertake the planning of a complex modern economy. A single human being, or even group of human beings, could never competently handle the informational complexities of modern economic systems. Given humans’ limitations in the face of modern economic complexity, freeing the market to organise large-scale production and distribution was the best possible course.

哈耶克(1899-1992)是一位举足轻重的奥地利经济学家,他坚信市场为管理世界提供了最好的工具,他的工作也根据这一核心理念展开。如今,很多人也持有这种信念,部分原因是受到哈耶克及其支持者的影响。在哈耶克与他的圈子刚开始提出这种观点时,这种看法是奇怪且占少数的。对哈耶克和朝圣山学社来说,共产主义与法西斯主义倡导的中央计划经济会造成灾难性后果。哈耶克认为,人类的缺陷太多,不可能成功地对复杂的现代经济做出计划。不论是一个人还是一群人,都没有能力来应对现在经济体系的信息复杂性。鉴于在这种复杂性面前人类显示出的局限,解放市场、让市场自己管理大规模的生产和分配是最好的办法。

Hayek understood that markets do not emerge naturally, that traders, consumers and laws construct markets. Once established, markets have tendencies towards monopoly and other business practices that could undercut forming an even playing field. So markets can’t be entirely left to self-regulate; laws and governments are necessary. Indeed, this is the primary reason why governments should exist – to ensure that markets function well. Governments should not be providing services to its citizenry such as public transportation or a postal service – Hayek believed that private interests most efficiently manage these services. Also governments should not be providing forms of welfare to its citizens, since welfare undercuts how the market allocates value and introduces too much centralized planning. Instead, what governments should focus upon is organising markets well, keeping them functioning to promote competition, and thus also promoting innovation. Because market competition is the goal, arbitrarily curtailing this competition through tariffs or other nationalist strategies for undercutting a global market was also deeply undesirable. Hayek wanted a global market.

哈耶克清楚,市场不是自然出现的,而是由商人、顾客与法律建构的。一旦形成,市场就容易产生垄断与其他破坏公平竞争的商业行为。所以我们不能完全放任市场进行自我调节,法律与政府是必要的。事实上,这是政府存在的主要原因——确保市场运行良好。政府不该为公民提供公共交通或邮寄等服务——哈耶克相信私人利益才能最高效地运营这些服务。同样地,政府也不该为公民提供各种形式的福利,因为福利削弱了市场对价值的分配,引入了过多的中央规划。恰恰相反,政府应该重点关注管理好市场,维持市场的运转以促进竞争,继而促进创新。既然政府的目标是市场竞争,那么通过关税或其他国家主义的策略来专制地限制竞争、破坏国际市场便也是极其不可取的。哈耶克想要的是一个国际市场。

This approach to markets and governments, commonly called neoliberalism by its critics, has grown increasingly dominant. As this theory moved off the page and the blackboard, people who wanted to live according to neoliberal principles ran into a basic problem. This is a specific way of dealing with markets, even for those committed in principle to capitalism. So, as more governments and businesses adopted market measures as often as possible, new ways of talking about many aspects of life, including work and careers, arose. Every total way of life, after all, requires its own vocabulary.

这种看待市场与政府的方式通常被批评方称为新自由主义,它的地位与日俱增。随着这个理论离开纸张与黑板,新自由主义原理的实践者们遇到了一个基础的问题。即使对于那些原则上信奉资本主义的人来说,这样处理人和市场的关系都是相当特别的。于是,随着越来越多的政府与公司愈深入地以市场为衡量标准,在谈论到生活的方方面面,比如工作与职业生涯时,新的说法也出现了。毕竟,任何一种生活方式都需要有自己的词汇。

Predictably, saying that ‘the market is the best way to organise or determine value’ overlooks many sorts of life dilemmas. Hayek did understand that his model of making the market so foundational would require a specific kind of person, a new kind of person. But he never developed an effective model for making complicated decisions such as deciding whom to hire for a job opening, or how to fashion a career over a lifetime. Others, the Nobel Prize-winner Gary Becker for example, who coined the idea of human capital, had to come up with concrete models for how people should, in market terms, understand everyday interactions. Inspired by Becker in adopting the market idiom, business writers began to talk about how people need to think about investing in themselves, and viewing themselves as an asset whose value only the market could effectively determine. Over time, a whole body of literature emerged advocating that people should view themselves as a business – a bundle of skills, assets, qualities, experiences and relationships to be managed and continually enhanced.

不难想到,“市场是最好的管理与决定价值的方式”的说法忽视了生活中的各种两难困境。哈耶克意识到了,他这种使市场过于基础化的模型需要一种特定类型的人,一种全新的人。但是他没能建立起一个有效的模型以应对一些复杂的决定,比如决定雇谁来工作,或是怎样规划职业生涯。于是必须要有人来想出具体的模型,使人们能够用市场的术语来理解日常人际互动,比如诺贝尔奖获得者盖瑞·贝克就创造出了人力资本概念。受到贝克采用市场语言的启发,商业作家们开始讨论人们需要考虑“投资”自己,把自己看作“资产”,其“价值”只有市场才能有效地决定。慢慢地,大量的新文献资料产生了,它们号召人们把自己当作一家公司——有一批技术、资产、品质、经验与关系需要经营并持续巩固。

The change that saw business writers, career counsellors and others adopting the view that individual employees, or potential employees, should think of themselves as businesses occurred at the same time that the way the value of a company was assessed also changed. Not so long ago, business people thought that companies provided a wide variety of benefits to a large number of constituents – to upper management, to employees, to the local community, as well as to shareholders. Many of these benefits were long-term.

在商业作家与职业咨询师等人开始改变,认为每个员工或潜在员工都应该把自己当作公司来考虑的同时,公司价值的评估方式也改变了。不久前,商界人士还认为公司为不同的人提供了多样的益处,包括上层管理人员,员工,当地社区,以及股东。且许多益处都是长期的。

But as market value overtook other measures of a company’s value, maximising the short-term interests of shareholders began to override other concerns, other relationships. Quarterly earnings reports and stock prices became even more important, the sole measures of success. How companies treated employees changed, and has not changed back. A recent illustration of the ethos came when American Airlines, having decided that its current levels of compensation were not competitive, announced an increase to its staff salaries. The company was, in fact, funnelling money to workers instead of to its shareholders. Wall Street’s reaction was immediate: American Airlines’ stock price plummeted.

但随着市场价值的重要性超过了其他衡量公司价值的方式,股东短期利益的最大化开始凌驾于其他考虑或其他关系。季度收入报告与股票价格变得越来越重要,成为了衡量成功的唯一标准。公司对待员工的方式改变了,且再也没有变回来。美国航空最近就展示了这一点,他们认为其现在的薪酬水平没有竞争力,于是宣布提高员工的薪资。事实上,该公司是在将资金汇集在员工而不是股东身上。于是华尔街立即做出了反应:美国航空的股票价格暴跌。

In general, to keep stock prices high, companies not only have to pay their employees as little as possible, they must also have as temporary a workforce as their particular business can allow. The more expendable the workforce, the easier it is to expand and contract in response to short-term demands. These are market and shareholder metrics. Their dominance diminished commitment to employees, and all other commitments but to shareholders, as much as the particular industry requirements of production allow. With companies so organised, the idea of loyalty receded.

一般来说,公司为了保持股价在高位,不仅要尽可能降低员工工资,还要在其特定业务允许的范围内雇佣临时劳动力。使用劳动力的灵活性越高,就越容易根据短期需求进行扩张和收缩。这些都是市场和股东的要求标准。只要在特定行业内不影响生产,他们就会利用其主导地位削弱对员工的、以及对股东以外的所有承诺。公司组织变得非常严密,而忠诚却在逐渐丧失。

Companies now needed to free themselves as much as possible of long-term obligations, such as pensions and other worker incentives. Employees who work long, and in many cases, intense hours to finish short-term projects, became more valuable. While companies rarely say so explicitly, in practice they often want employees who can be let go easily and with little fuss, employees who do not expect long-term commitments from their employer. But, like employment, loyalty is a two-way street – making jobs short-term, commitment-free enterprises leads to workers who view temporary work contracts as also desirable. You start hiring job-quitters.

现在,企业需要尽可能地摆脱长期义务,比如养老金和其它激励员工的措施。那些为了完成短期项目长时间工作的员工变得更有价值,他们往往在工作中争分夺秒。虽然公司不会这么直白,但他们往往希望不用付出什么代价就能轻易地解雇员工,并且倾向于雇佣不用给予长期承诺的员工。但是,和雇佣关系一样,忠诚是相互的。提供短期岗位、不给予承诺的企业也导致员工倾向于选择临时工作合同。企业开始雇佣会主动辞职的员工。

The CEO of Me, Inc is a job-quitter for a good reason – the business world has come to agree with Hayek that market value is the best measure of value. As a consequence, a career means a string of jobs at different companies. So workers respond in kind, thinking about how to shape their career in a world where you can expect so little from employers. In a society where market rules rule, the only way for an employee to know her value is to look for another job and, if she finds one, usually to quit.

每个人都是自己的CEO,有充分的理由辞职。商界已经接受哈耶克的观点,即市场价值是价值的最佳衡量标准。因此,职业仅意味着在不同的公司做一系列的工作。员工们会以同样的方式做出回应,思考如何在一个对雇主期望如此之低的世界里规划自己的职业生涯。在市场规则主宰一切的社会里,员工了解自己价值的唯一途径就是寻找另一份工作。如果他能找到,通常就会选择辞职。

If you are a white-collar worker, it is simply rational to view yourself first and foremost as a job quitter – someone who takes a job for a certain amount of time when the best outcome is that you quit for another job (and the worst is that you get laid off). So how does work change when everyone is trying to become a quitter? First of all, in the society of perpetual job searches, different criteria make a job good or not. Good jobs used to be ones with a good salary, benefits, location, hours, boss, co-workers, and a clear path towards promotion. Now, a good job is one that prepares you for your next job, almost always with another company.

如果你是一名白领,把自己首先视作为一名潜在辞职者是很理性的,当在一个岗位工作一段时间后,最好的结果是辞职去换另一份工作(最糟糕的情况是你被解雇)。那当每个人都想着辞职时,工作会发生什么变化呢?首先,在一个人们不断寻求工作的社会里,有不同的标准定义工作的好坏。过去,通常好的工作意味着不错的薪水、福利、工作地点、工作时间、老板、同事以及明确的晋升途径。现在,好工作意味着可以为下一份工作做准备,而下一份工作往往会去另一家公司。

Your job might be a space to learn skills that you can use in the future. Or, it might be a job with a company that has a good-enough reputation that other companies are keen to hire away its employees. On the other hand, it isn’t as good a job if everything you learn there is too specific to that company, if you aren’t learning easily transferrable skills. It isn’t a good job if it enmeshes you in local regulatory schemes and keeps you tied to a particular location. And it isn’t a good job if you have to work such long hours that you never have time to look for the next job. In short, a job becomes a good job if it will lead to another job, likely with another company or organisation. You start choosing a job for how good it will be for you to quit it.

你可能在工作中学习到日后会使用的技能,或者在一家声誉良好的公司工作,而其他公司都希望挖走它的员工。另一方面,如果你在工作中学到的所有东西都只针对当下的公司而不是可迁移技能;或者它让你陷入当地的管控标准,把你束缚在特定地点;或者工作时间太长,让你没有时间去找下一份工作,那你的工作就不是一份好工作。简而言之,如果一份工作能带来另一份工作(很可能是在另一家公司或机构)的机会,那么它就是一份好工作。你开始根据离职时的前景选择一份工作。

In significant ways, the calculus of quitting changes workplace dynamics. Being a good manager now means helping those whom you manage acquire the skills that will help them to leave for a better job at another company. Good managers know this. I observed a Berkeley continuing education workshop for new managers, and one speaker described her strategies for behaving well to her team. She explained that she did this from the outset by clarifying what she understood their implicit business contract to be. She takes each new member of her team out to lunch in the week they start: ‘So I always say things like: “You don’t work for me, I work for you… My job is to make sure you can do your job well. And one day, you are going to leave this job, right, our careers are long, and we will have many jobs along the way. When you want to leave this job, I hope to be here to help you move on to this next job.”’ From the outset, managers say that they will help those who work under them become job-quitters – to find the next best stepping stone in their career.

很大程度上,辞职的现象慢慢改变了工作场所的格局。现在,管理者心里明白,成为一名优秀的管理者意味着帮助你所管理的人获取技能,以助于他们去别的公司找一份更好的工作。我听过伯克利大学为新晋管理者举办的一个继续教育研讨会,一位演讲者描述了她为团队良好运作所使用的策略。她解释说,她会从一开始便采取行动,阐明自己对他们隐性商业合同的理解。她会在每一位团队新成员加入团队那周约他吃饭,总是这样说道:“不是你为我工作,而是我为你工作。我的工作是确保你能把工作做好。未来某天,你会离开这个工作,我们的职业生涯很长,会有很多工作要做。当你想离开这份工作时,我希望能帮助你找到下一份工作。” 从一开始,经理们就会帮助在他们手下工作的人为离职做准备,为他们的职业生涯找到下一个最佳跳板。

The calculus of quitting also changes what it means to have a good division of labour at work. If your goal is to get a job somewhere else, not all work projects are equally valuable. Workers must jockey for the tasks and projects that might lead to a job elsewhere. They must try to avoid tasks that, either due to intellectual property issues or for other reasons, are too company-specific. Linus Huang, a sociologist at Berkeley, saw this happening in the Silicon Valley startup where he was working when Java was first becoming a popular programming language. There was quite a bit of work in his company involving the general-purpose programming language, C++ , and for many of the company’s needs, it was sufficient. Employees wanted to have practice with Java, however, because Java would make them more marketable in the future. Workers began to evaluate projects in terms of whether they would improve their Java skills. The managers began to struggle to find people who would do the day-to-day programming work, mostly in C++, upon which the company depended. They had no trouble, on the other hand, finding people to work on the few Java projects. When you work a job that presumes you will quit before too long, the tasks that are good for the company might not be good for you.

辞职的现象也改变了工作中良好分工的定义。如果你的目标是在其它地方找到工作,那并不是所有的工作项目都具有同等的价值。员工们必须抢夺可能带来其它工作机会的任务和项目,并设法避免那些由于知识产权问题或其它原因而只适合目前公司的任务。伯克利的社会学家李纳斯·黄(Linus Huang)在他工作的硅谷创业公司中观察到了这种情况,当时Java刚刚成为流行的编程语言。公司里有相当多的工作涉及通用编程语言C++,对于许多需求来说,C++已经足够了。然而,员工们希望实践Java,因为这样将使他们在未来更有价值,于是员工开始根据能否提高Java技能来评估不同项目。经理们很难找到愿意使用公司所依赖的C++做日常编程工作的人,相反可以轻松找到从事少数Java项目的人员。当假定你不久就会辞职时,对公司有利的任务或许并不适合你。

The calculus of quitting also changes the nature of being co-workers, and not just because they are jockeying over who does which tasks in a new way. While you might always have wanted to get along with your co-workers, the quitting economy introduced a new instrumental reason why collegiality is especially important. Now that people aren’t supposed to stay all that long at a company, you experience a regular turnover in your workplace. Workers who used to get ahead by impressing their managers by being steady, self-effacing and conscientious no longer have the time to establish the appreciative audience they used to within a company. As a result, these types of workers might no longer be steadily promoted. If their co-workers appreciate them, however, then they might, when it comes time for them to look for their next job, have supporters at other companies. After all, everyone works in the quitting economy, and everyone knows it, creating a different incentive for people to get along with their co-workers. Today, when every job opening has too many applicants, having an insider in the company who can be an ally can make all the difference.

对于辞职的算计还改变了同事关系的本质。这不只是因为他们开始运用新的手段来争夺谁做什么任务。你可能会想和你的同事保持好关系,而辞职经济学带来了一个全新视角,来解释为什么保持良好的同事关系特别重要。工作中的人员变动成为常态,员工不必再像过去那样在同一家公司呆那么久。在过去,踏实、低调、认真的员工总能成功地给领导留下深刻的印象;而今,他们没时间再像过去那样在公司里获得他人赏识了。这样的员工或将无法再稳定地晋升,但如果同事觉得他们还不错,那么他们在找下一份工作时就在其他公司有了支持者,毕竟大家都在辞职经济的环境里,而且都对此一清二楚。这就给了人们新的动机来和同事搞好关系。如今,每个开放的岗位都有特别多的申请者,在这家公司有内部人员作为同盟能让事情变得大为不同。

The environment of the quitting economy also brings about a change in the emotional life of the worker and workplace. When you start imagining yourself as always on the verge of quitting, the emotions you feel for your work change. When companies decided to do away with company loyalty, businesses had to find a new way to help workers foster an emotional connection to work. In the US especially, there is a strong cultural consensus that people should feel passion for their work, and work hard. One hiring manager explained to me that he always chose people who seemed passionate about their work over someone who seemed to have the most experience. He could teach them any necessary skills, he explained, but his need for them to work very long hours meant that he needed people with passion. Since company loyalty is no longer around to guarantee committed workers, passion is now supposed to be the driving force.

辞职经济的大环境还给员工和工作场所带来了情感上的变化。当你开始想象自己一直处于辞职的边缘,你对工作的感觉就变了。一家决定放弃企业忠诚的公司要找到新的方法来帮助员工对工作产生情感连接。尤其是在美国,人们有一种强烈的文化共识,认为员工应该对工作充满激情并努力工作。一个招聘经理告诉我,他总是会选那些看起来对工作有热情的人而非最有工作经验的人。他解释道,他可以教给员工所有必要的技能,但长时间的工作意味着员工需要有激情。如今,鉴于员工忠诚已不再能保证员工尽职尽责地工作,激情则成为让员工工作的驱动力。

Intriguingly, this passion that workers are supposed to feel is restricted to the tasks at work or to learning certain skills. People are not supposed to feel passion for working with particular people. Nor do workers talk about having passion for augmenting the reputation of the company for which they work. Passion is reserved for the tasks that they do or learn to do, for the solutions that they might develop for the company’s market-specific problems. Not surprisingly, the market-specific problems for which workers feel a passion for solving are usually the problems that a range of companies might face. They aren’t specific to that particular company. In the quitting economy, you have to work for passion, and working for passion means focusing on the task, not the company.

有趣的是,职员们只会对工作任务或技能学习充满这种热情,他们不再因和某个人工作而感到激情澎湃。同样,扩大公司名气也不再使员工们感到兴奋,能让他们产生热情的是那些他们正在做或学着去做的任务,以及他们为了解决公司的某个市场问题而可能采取的解决措施。可想而知,那些能激起员工热情的市场问题通常不只在某一家公司出现,而是某一类公司都会有。在辞职经济里,你必须带着激情去工作,而为了激情而工作意味着专注于任务而非公司。

Cultivating their feelings of passion for tasks that bring market remuneration makes workers more mobile. It is easier for them to consider moving to another company where they can still do the work about which they feel passionately. One executive recruiter told me she used this focus on passion to help convince executives to leave, regardless of the financial incentives put in place by their current company. She would tell an executive she was trying to recruit that if they no longer felt any passion for their work, then they were harming all their colleagues at work, who now had to work with someone who no longer enjoyed work to its utmost. In short, when one of the main reasons to work somewhere is because you feel passion, when you stop feeling that passion, it is easier to quit.

要使员工对能增加市场财富的任务充满激情,这增强了他们的流动性。他们更愿意去能让他们继续做让他们感到热血澎湃的工作的公司。一个执行招聘人员告诉我,她会借助于工作激情这一点来让主管们不去考虑现任公司的财务奖励,进而说服他们辞职。面对心仪的招聘人选,她会告诉他们,如果他们不再对自己的工作抱有激情,那么他们的同事将被迫与不再尽情享受工作的人一起工作,这对同事来说是一种伤害。简而言之,激情是你进行某份工作的主要原因之一,当它消逝后,你会很容易辞职。

In a way new to the world, and begun by the re-orientation of companies to maximise shareholder value, quitting work is now central to what it means to have a job in the first place. People apply for jobs with the conscious plan to quit, with an eye toward what other jobs the job for which they are applying might help them get. Managers welcome new employees by promising to position them as advantageously as possible to quit in a few years. Co-workers, the ones who like you, are now hoping you will quit – since if you do, you might help them get a good job somewhere else. As is often the case, history brings unintended consequences, even to doctrinaire and theoretical ideas. Hayek’s philosophy has led to workers thinking of themselves as the CEO of Me, Inc; and to survive in the neoliberal world of work, the CEO of Me, Inc must be a quitter.

作为一种全新的方式,辞职源于公司为最大化股东利益而做的重新定位,如今它已是人们找工作的初心。在找工作时,人们对辞职有着很清楚的计划,他们把目光投向现在申请的工作将能帮助他们得到的工作。在欢迎新员工时,经理们会向员工保证尽量把他们放在最利于短期辞职的岗位。如今,同事们和你的想法一样,他们希望你能辞职,因为你辞职后可能会帮他们在其他公司找到好工作。正如我们常说的,历史会带来无意的结果,哪怕是教条的、理论的想法也会受到影响。哈耶克的哲学已经让工人们觉得自己是“Me公司”的CEO;而为了在工作的新自由主义世界里存活,“Me公司”的CEO必须辞职。

每个人都是一家公司,而你是自己的CEO?

  • 本文原载于 Aeon

  • 原文链接:https://aeon.co/essays/how-work-changed-to-make-us-all-passionate-quitters

一、了解取经号 |我们是谁,在做什么,如何加入
二、学习贴士|如何打印输出PDF如何使用微信读书订阅取经号
三、翻译服务| 咨询邮箱:woohow@qujinghao.com
四、社交媒体 |微信公众号:取经号;微博:取经号JTW
五、译文归档 | 访问网站:qujinghao.com
六、学习社群 |翻译社(暂停中)

每个人都是一家公司,而你是自己的CEO?

Be First to Comment

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注