Задача по теме: "Понимание информации в тексте"

Audrey Hepburn was an icon. Rising to fame in the 1950s, she was one of the greatest actresses of her era. In 1953, Hepburn became the first actress to win an Academy Award and a Golden Globe Award. Even today, over half a century later, she remains one of just 15 people to earn an “EGOT” by winning all four major entertainment awards: Emmy, Grammy, Oscar, and Tony. By the 1960s, she had starred on average in more than one new film per year and, by everyone’s estimation, she was on a trajectory to be a movie star for decades to come. But then something strange happened: she stopped acting.

Despite being in her 30s and at the height of her popularity, Hepburn basically stopped appearing in films after 1967. She performed in television shows or movies just five times during the rest of her life. Instead, she switched careers. She spent the next 25 years working tirelessly for UNICEF, providing food and healthcare to children in war-torn countries. She performed volunteer work throughout Africa, South America, and Asia. In December 1992, she was awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom for her efforts, which is the highest civilian award of the United States. 

What made Audrey Hepburn end her successful career? Peter Drucker, the well-known management consultant, once encapsulated this idea by writing, “There is nothing more useless than doing efficiently something which should not be done at all.” In other words, making progress is not just about being productive. It is about being productive on the right things. But how do you decide what the “right things” are? One of the most trusted approaches is to use the Pareto Principle, which is more commonly known as the 80/20 Rule.

The 80/20 Rule states that, in any particular domain, a small number of things account for the majority of the results. For example, about 80 percent of NBA championships are won by 20 percent of the teams. When applied to our life and work, the 80/20 Rule can help us separate “the vital few from the trivial many.” For example, business owners may discover the majority of revenue comes from a handful of important clients. The 80/20 Rule would recommend that the most effective course of action would be to focus exclusively on serving these clients and stop serving others because they account for a small portion of the bottom line.

However, there is a downside to this approach, which is often overlooked. For example, in 1967, Audrey Hepburn was on the crest of a wave, yet she was trying to decide how to spend her time. Many of Hepburn’s best films were romantic comedies. They attracted large audiences, earned her awards, and were an obvious path to greater fame and fortune. Romantic comedies were effective for Audrey Hepburn. If she had used the 80/20 Rule as part of her decision-making process, she would have discovered a clear answer: do more romantic comedies. In fact, even if we take into account her desire to help children through UNICEF, an 80/20 analysis might have revealed that starring in more romantic comedies was still the best option because she could have maximized her earning power and donated the additional earnings to UNICEF.

Of course, that would be effective if she wanted to continue acting, but she didn’t want to be an actress because she wanted to serve. That means no reasonable analysis of the best use of her time in 1967 would have suggested that volunteering for UNICEF was the most effective use of her time in the future. A new path will never look like the most effective option in the beginning. When Audrey Hepburn dialled down her acting career in 1967, volunteering didn’t seem nearly as effective. However, three decades later, she received the Presidential Medal of Freedom — a remarkable feat she is unlikely to have accomplished by acting in romantic comedies. This proves Hepburn’s decision was the best option for her.

(Adapted from ‘When the 80/20 Rule fails: the downside of being effectiveʼ by Clear James)