标签: 管理学

注：偏见往往是潜意识里面的东西。越是随着阅历的增加，我们越是容易对人形成偏见。无论是对不同民族，不同地区，不同人种，还是不同性别，甚至与不同的学校。而一些预加的框框，不真实且比较负面地加在了你对某位其他同学身上时，这个潜意识的力量会处处体现出来，形成比较强大的破坏力。而我们需要尽量克服自己大脑的局限性，保持开放与无知的态度去跟每个人相处，以激发整个团队最大最有效的创造力。 以下内容转自stanford business网站。 Stereotyping Makes People More Likely to Act Badly Even slight cues, like reading a negative stereotype about your race or gender, can have an impact. June 5, 2015|by Elizabeth MacBride                 

 0
Google+

51
LinkedIn 
 Feeling belittled and boxed in by a stereotype can also make people more likely to act in a socially deviate way. | Reuters/Cathal McNaughton Most people intuitively know that pervasive negative stereotypes are tough to deal with. Now, researchers at Stanford University have found another, particularly disturbing effect of subtle stereotypes. A series of five studies showed that people are more likely to lie, cheat, steal, or endorse doing so when they feel that they are being devalued simply because they belong to particular groups. For example, imagining a s-e-xist or a racist comment from a boss made women and ethnic minorities more likely to intentionally do inaccurate work, start rumors, or ignore co-workers who need help. In one correlational study, the researchers asked 311 college students whether they worried about being seen negatively because of their ethnicity. The more the college students worried or expected stereotyping, the more likely they were to report engaging in delinquent behavior, like skipping classes, verbally abusing someone, or vandalizing school property. Can You Recall a Time When You Felt Stereotyped? Excerpts from essays people wrote when researchers asked them to recall a time they felt devalued. Women in the military sometimes face stereotypes that question their ability to lead. | Reuters/Kevin Lamarque “While on active duty as a Naval Officer, I placed a sailor for disobeying a direct order. I am a female. The officer reduced the charge to disrespecting a female instructor instead of leaving it as written because he didn’t believe that women should serve in the military.” “My friends got into a discussion about religion and Christianity in general. I tend to stay quiet in these situations but this time I spoke about my beliefs. I was belittled and made fun of when I spoke.” “The male managers at my company always look down on me and assume I am a dumb girl. It is really frustrating to be judged by my appearance.” “I become very uncomfortable when people insist upon telling me Jewish jokes ... Sometimes, it seems like they have no idea if they are offending me or not and they don’t seem to care.” “I was seven years old, on a school bus that had students that were from different racial backgrounds. Students didn’t want to share the bus seat and asked me to move.” “The cashier always puts the change on the counter rather than touch my hand.” – Elizabeth MacBride The research also adds to the growing body of evidence that even slight cues — like reading an article containing a negative stereotype or just remembering a painful instance of being judged unfairly — can have a sizeable impact. “Most people reject overt racism today, but prejudice can exert its negative effects in more subtle ways,” says Peter Belmi, a graduate student and one of the researchers. “Threats to social identity can really harm people’s prospects for success, particularly for individuals who are already socially disadvantaged.” The researchers included Margaret Neale, Stanford GSB management professor; Geoffrey L. Cohen, Stanford psychology professor; and graduate students Belmi and Rodolfo Cortes Barragan. The paper was published in the Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. Neale says she hopes the research can help people understand that the responsibility for criminal and deviant behavior lies not only with individuals, but with society. “We tend to make criminal behavior a dispositional attribute — a quality of the individual. But maybe we are part of the problem that is-- expressed by those people behaving badly,” she says. “We have huge agency and capacity to change the situation.” The research shows that even white Americans, a historically non-stigmatized group, engage in social deviance when they feel they are being negatively stereotyped. “We can create this in other groups, perhaps in almost any other group,” Neale says. The paper also identified the mechanism connecting social deviance and negative stereotyping: People feel disrespected and expect unfair treatment from others when they feel they are being viewed through the lens of a stereotype. This leads them to defy or undermine group norms, according to the paper. “Social identity threats feel particularly disrespectful because they are tied to enduring group memberships. Stereotypes convey to people that they are being judged by their group membership and not by their individual merits,” Belmi says. The team also found that feeling devalued can elicit deviance even among historically non-stigmatized groups. They asked a group of white Americans to write either about a time when they felt devalued by others, or about a time when they did not get what they wanted Then the researchers gave participants a test: unsolvable anagrams, so anyone who reported solving one was considered to have cheated. Participants were nearly twice as likely to cheat if they remembered a time when they had been devalued based on their group identity. Most people reject overt racism today, but prejudice can exert its negative effects in more subtle ways. Peter Belmi, researcher The same effect held true for women of various ethnicities. The researchers asked the women in the study to imagine overhearing that they might not get a promotion either because their boss didn’t like them or because their boss thought women weren’t suitable for a leadership position. Women who heard the latter were more likely to embrace counterproductive work attitudes. The researchers say that people may differ in their response to being negatively stereotyped. So what differentiates those who deviate from those who don’t? Neale says one factor could be how strongly you hold a particular identity. For example, your ethnicity might be a core part of how you see yourself, so you might be more concerned with a racial stereotype. Or, different personality types may be better equipped to defy a negative stereotype — like a woman or a black American who becomes a CEO in part to prove a stereotype wrong. Organizational Behavior, Leadership Management

诸多公司，一过百人，尤其是快速膨胀的那种，管理者无不为员工激情不再犯愁，沟通成本明显增加，聚而不会，会而不议，议而不决，决而不行，谁都有理，可就是事没能解决。遇到脾气大的管理者强力推动，可以针对性地解决一二，但终归是杯水车薪。有人说这是体制问题，一把手问题，都是些从根上动大手术、换老板的方子，没一个真能治得病的法子。有一滩大便把这个现象推向了顶点。 某单位的某一天，行政A经理跑进COO办公室，汇报说厕所的屎冲不干净，希望装配水箱加压装置解决。COO听后大怒：“屎冲不干净都来找我？”A忙解释说：“我已经多次和集团工程总监反映水压不够的问题，但工程总监坚持认为是使用厕所的人没有冲水，而不是新办公楼的水压问题，反而埋怨我们行政部没有做好卫生宣传工作。”听后，COO立刻委派助理到厕所进行实地考察，并实战测试厕所的水压。助理向COO汇报，n个厕所共4n个粪坑有8个存在水压问题，COO责成A经理协调处理。 翌日A经理将书面报告呈交给了总经理，根据集团工程总监的意见，由于加压泵将耗费10万元投资，建议增加2名后勤人员专门负责厕所卫生。HR总监考虑到人员成本的问题，没有批准报告，于是该问题被暂时搁置。于是一个多月就过去了。 一个月后，来了个国外重要客户，内急方便，COO亲自领到WC，便池隔间门打开，一摊大便赫然矗立，COO尴尬之极，无奈瘦小身材怎么也挡不住高大客人的视线，客人摇摇头笑了笑倒也没吭声，后面的谈判客人一直心不在焉，最后草草收场没有签约。谁都不能解决COO的困惑：这么长时间、几个经理，一个厕所的冲水问题没解决？ 谁的问题谁的责任？ 公司生产上的同类问题还有很多，到底是人的问题、机制的问题？ 如何解决？ 每家企业都或多或少有类似的扯皮现象，一个问题由下至上反映，再经过跨部门的商讨后可能由于某种客观原因而被搁置，最后被渐渐淡忘。虽然企业面对的管理问题有很多，比如业务开拓、成本控制、运营管理等等，某些问题会被分类成紧迫重要的和无关重要的。可是，再无关重要的问题如果得不到彻底解决也会给企业带来负面作用，日后要是想处理这些久拖不决的问题，我们将要付出比当时更高的管理成本和代价。比如说，如果目睹上述“惨像”的是一位大客户的老总，那很可能该公司会召开一次全体部门经理以上的会议，从老总到部门经理都要花甚至一个小时的时间去检讨和解决这个因为一泡大便所引起的问题，真让人啼笑皆非啊！ 所以说，在企业管理中哪怕是再小，再无关重要的问题，如果得不到解决，会为企业带来至少以下三方面的危害： 1. 处理那些久拖不决的问题会比在问题出现时立刻处理花费更高的管理成本的代价，因为处理者将要花费额外的时间去了解、回忆和证实问题的成因和过程； 2. 经过时间的催化和跨部门的工作交接，小问题会逐渐变成大问题。 3. 在企业的运营管理中，如果有很多小问题经常是久拖不决的，除了可能归咎于人的因素外，更多的是显示了企业没有形成“解决问题的机制”，也就是说这家企业解决问题靠的是人，而不是靠制度。 另外一种结果： 回到上面的例子，其实行政部经理、工程总监和总经理各自都履行了自己的岗位职责，并且都在发现问题时迅速作出了相应的动作，因此他们的责任心没有问题。那问题究竟出在哪里？ 曾经有文章给类似文章给出了三条原因，一是行政部经理和工程总监忽略了他们潜在的岗位职责；二是从COO、行政部经理到工程总监都没有对问题形成具体的时间表，项目管理SMART原则没学好；三是内部没有市场化。说得都挺对，反正旁观者都会说，问题在哪个部门就是那个部门的事呗，皮球经过一个又一个门，最后到了一个屋里就再也推不出去了，这个屋就是COO、其次是行政部经理和工程总监。其他的部门呢？要我说最大的问题在岗位职责的制定部门那里，臆测可能是人力资源吧，职责没清楚，全怨承担职责的人能行吗？ 凡事只要涉及不止一个人，就必然会涉及四类职责，见下面的表格：    策划的人对事件负全责，负有推动职责，不可被动地等待；实施的人是被推动的。有可能这些职责的承担者是同一各部门或同一个人，这也没关系，反正是策划是没退路的，必须推动拿出结果来。这在岗位职责的写法上适当变化一下就可以了，这属于微观管理学的范畴。不涉及战略、目标、绩效、平衡记分卡等大问题。对各类事情活动按照这四类角色的分配进行明确下来。有事直接找策划示问。项目管理学的产生和快速发展就是这个方法是否实用的最好证明。 在此案例中，毫无疑问，行政部经理应该是策划者，工程总监是实施者，COO是辅助的决策和给予资源支持的。这里的行政部经理的职责是最重的，即使因为预算不能批，行政部经理也要要到一个结论：那就是容忍大便冲不干净，因此可能带来的问题给决策者摆明，请决策者权衡定夺。 管理者要研究点微观管理学，挺好的战略规划、挺好的战略合作伙伴毁在一炮屎上，所以很好的宏观管理学都是放之四海而皆准的道理，就像买猪肉，不同的做法出来不同的味，研究下微观管理学，就是研究了红烧猪肉的配料、火候、程序了，味道自然会好了，天天把精力放在猪肉自身上，那就是一堆生肉，怎么也不会变成佳肴。 财富论坛上，欧美高管大谈战略规划，国内企业家谈的是执行力，缺什么就会热衷研究什么，欧美是厨艺已经很好了，需要研究后臀间还是里脊肉的原料，他们精通制作的方法；国内企业先需要研究的是厨艺，我们的选肉功夫绝对超前了，可惜手艺没练好。 这恰恰是微观管理学需要研究的内容。