:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:《易經》早期管理決策模式與西方管理決策模式之比較分析
書刊名:管理學報
作者:徐木蘭陳必碩 引用關係許金田 引用關係孔祥科
作者(外文):Hsu, Mu-lanChen, Pi-soHsu, Chin-tienKung, Syang-ke
出版日期:2006
卷期:23:3
頁次:頁289-307
主題關鍵詞:管理決策模式易經中國式管理內容分析比較式研究Managerial decision-making modelI-ChingChinese managementContent analysisComparative study
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:37
  • 點閱點閱:119
《易經》是中國古人的智慧結晶,千百年來一直備受後人於日常生活決策時的重視與參考依據。近年來,不論中外都開始盛行將《易經》思想發揮運用於企業的經營管理實務中,然而相關的文章論述大多屬於古文的說文解字式,或是使用者的主觀經驗表達式,較少見源自代社會科學方法基礎下的研究結果。緣此,本研究首先利用內容分析方法,試圖找出《易經》之卦名、卦辭和爻辭中,常見的單字所可能蘊含的現代管理決策概念意義。接著,透過《易經》早期管理決策模式的整理,包含決策的前提假定、情境與步驟等要素,再將之與西方的完全理性決策模式、有限理性決策模式、偏愛決策模式、直覺決策模式與垃圾桶決策模式進行比較性分析。
”I-Ching”, also called as ”Book of Changes”, the ancient Chinese wisdom book, has been often used for helping people to make decision in daily life for thousands of years. Recently, Eastern and Western scholars have started to discuss how to apply the wisdom of ”I-Ching” to the field of business administration and decision-making practices. But the majority scholar to study ”I-Ching” throw energy into ”practice divination” research of respect, only paying attention to the interpretation or critique of the text. So, ”I-Ching”s own values and thoughts of decision-making are limited within the range of the narrow and small one. Unfortunately, related literatures based upon social science research foundation are few. If ”I-Ching”s spirit, principles, thoughts, and methods of decision-making, could be scientifically summed up and arranged, and further to be combined together with modern west decision-making management thoughts. If will produce a meaningful cross-cultural comparison result of managerial decision-making thoughts, Thererfore, this research hopes to be based on modern administrative decision theory structure, analyzing ”I-Ching” Early Management Decision-making Model. Therefore, the authors, first, adopt content analysis method to find out the possible modern management decision-making constructs, i.e. single words frequently appeared in the context of ”I-Ching”. This method attempts to explore ”I-Ching”s administrative decision-making meaning contained. But the analysis result finds that even these 100 single words that appear often most are for the auxiliary word that indicates the trouble or good fortune, unable to appear what kind of obvious modern managerial decision-making meanings or concepts which it contains. Trace it to its cause, single Chinese word is difficult to be determined censured meaning in tension finally. Usually, only a whole phrase or context can be confirmed its explanations or meanings of managerial decision-making result. And then, the authors explain the managerial decision-making model of ”I-Ching”, which includes the premises, the decision contingencies, and the decision process. To represent ”I-Ching” of the eastern early managerial decision-making thought, it was turned into the vocabulary of modernized managerial decision-making academy. Then, by way of managerial decision-making academy in the comparative analysis method, ”I-Ching”s Early Management Decision-making Model is compared with Western management decision models which include rational decision-making model, bounded-rationality decision-making model, intuitive decision-making model, implicit favorite decision-making model, and garbage-can decision-making model, to tentatively interpret the similarities and differences on a great deal of managerial decision-making characteristics. ”I-Ching”s Early Management Decision-making Model is the same as bounded-rationality decision-making model, intuitive decision-making model, implicit favorite decision-making model, and garbage-can decision-making model. All these models argue that individuals are unable to reach full rationality. Because of bounded rationality, difficulty degree of managerial decision-making will increase, but a different one is that bounded-rationality decision-making model, intuitive decision-making model, and implicit favorite decision-making model argue that, the policymaker get used to choose the final solution in accordance with oneself's passing relevant experience. In other words, while managerial decision-making is processing, it emphasize the entity of policymaker, and the degree of policymaker's involvement in the decision process is very high, including setting favorite decision-making principles, choosing alternatives to be considered, and the following cost-effective evaluation. According to ”I-Ching”, managers are under the state of medium degrees of rationality, they are unable to grasp enough necessary information of carrying on managerial decisions. They must make final managerial decisions which depend on probability or life intelligence of ancient to obtain messages of predicting the future. In addition, possible variation tendency of making final decisions are seldom to be emphasized in that above-mentioned western management decision-making theories, namely comparatively lack the concept of contingency in tactics of making managerial decision. But ”I-Ching”s Early Management Decision-making Model has offered this view, it could tell sudden change possibility and provide answers of managers' state of affair in advance. It means that after the managers (the persons who divine) get alike and possible Yao of a divinatory symbol through divining, they make the final decision with the annotation of Kwa Ts'i (卦辭) and Yao Ts'i (爻辭), and making preparation in advance via the annotation of Yao's variation(move Yao's position) which points out the possible change direction of decision situation that may cause the things better or worse. Therefore, managers could build up a quasi information system to authorizing themselves to constantly revising and modifying the decision process. It lets managers have psychological preparation in advance in order to predict or accept the result of the final managerial decision result, even finely tune the behavior a little while the implementation of managerial decision carries out finally, in order to control the appearing of final managerial decision result. Therefore, we could argue that, with respect to western managerial decision-making theories, ”I-Ching”s Early Management Decision-making Model relatively allow managers more interpretation flexibility on making the final decision. In other words, ”I-Ching”s Early Management Decision-making Model permits managers to make final decisions more contingent. We can't regard the practise divination of ”I-Ching” as the mysticism. Although ”I-Ching” can give play to the role of predicting, but itself doesn't has any mysterious strength to help us to surmise the future, However, ”I-Ching” has inherent philosophy reason and concepts. By emphasizing ”I-Ching”s scientific and logical characteristics in evaluating each possible situations, its dynamic thinking holds the prediction function of divining correctly, and embody the meaning to be graspedded by it properly.
期刊論文
1.林建煌(19940200)。孫子的策略形成與執行思想探討。中國行政,55,17-28。  延伸查詢new window
2.羅庚辛(19950200)。孫子領導理論與實證研究。中國行政,57,67-88。  延伸查詢new window
3.Boar, B.(1995)。Sun Tzu and Machiavelli on Strategy。Journal of Business Strategy,16(1),16-18。  new window
4.Frosch, R. A.(2000)。Learning from Lao Tzu: A Leadership Primer。Research Technology Management,43(3),27-28。  new window
5.Wong, Y. Y.、Maher, T. E.、Lee, G.(1998)。The Strategy of an Ancient Warrior: An Inspiration for International Managers。Multinational Business Review,6(1),83-93。  new window
6.Floyd, R. E.(1992)。The Art of War and the Art of Management。Industrial Management,34(5),25-26。  new window
7.Power, D. J.、Aldag, R. J.(1985)。Soelberg's job search and choice model: A clarification, review, and critique。Academy of Management Review,10(1),48-58。  new window
8.謝長宏、方清輝(19861100)。「論語」顯示之儒家管理理念。管理科學學報,3(2),115-128。  延伸查詢new window
9.徐木蘭、余坤東、沈介文(19970300)。傳統文化中企業倫理之探討--中國古籍之研究。中山管理評論,5(1),49-73。new window  延伸查詢new window
10.Simon, H. A.(1986)。Rationality in psychology and economics。Journal of Business,59(4),S209-S224。  new window
11.徐木蘭、陳必碩、許金田、蘇建勳(20030900)。臺灣資訊軟體業的生態軌跡--多元開放性組織理論的觀點。人文及社會科學集刊,15(3),431-474。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.Katz, Robert L.(1974)。Skills of an Effective Administrator。Harvard Business Review,52(5),90-102。  new window
13.林國雄(19970700)。吉凶禍福的數理解析初探--以食品業為例。交大管理學報,17(2),81-97。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.楊宏聲(1996)。西方「易經」研究的傾向及思考,上。中華易學,17(6),59-62。  延伸查詢new window
15.楊宏聲(1996)。西方「易經」研究的傾向及思考,中。中華易學,17(7),64-67。  延伸查詢new window
16.楊宏聲(1996)。西方「易經」研究的傾向及思考,下。中華易學,17(8),69-72。  延伸查詢new window
17.楊石隱(1996)。儒家思想與管理的關係。孔學與人生,4,89-93。  延伸查詢new window
18.曾仕強(1991)。管理講究象數理占-易經在管理上的四大功能。管理雜誌,209,140-144。  延伸查詢new window
19.張文儒(1994)。「孫子兵法」與現代科學思惟。哲學與文化,21(1),74-83。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.Behling, O.、Eckel, N. L.(1991)。Making Sense out of Intuition。The Academy of Management Executive,February,46-47。  new window
21.Forester, J.(1984)。Bounded Rationality and the Politics of Muddling Through。Public Administration Review,January-February,23-31。  new window
22.Hensler, D. A.、Edgeman, R. L.、Guerrero-Cusumano, J. L.(2000)。East Meets West: Weaving the Threads of Deming, da Vinci and the Tao Te Ching。Total Quality Management,11(4/6),501-508。  new window
23.徐志銳(1991)。「周易」經綸治國論-陰陽說與管理科學。中華易學,12(10),15-21。  延伸查詢new window
24.羅庚辛(1996)。孔子管理思想在臺灣企業管理實務上應用情況之調查研究。中國行政,60,47-79。  延伸查詢new window
25.Rarick, C. A.(1996)。Ancient Chinese Advice for Modern Business Strategists。Sam Advanced Management Journal,Winter,38-43。  new window
26.Simon, H. A.(1987)。Making Management Decisions: The Role of Intuition and Emotion。The Academy of Management Executive,February,59-60。  new window
27.Soelberg, P. O.(1967)。Unprogrammed Decision Making。Industrial Management Review,Spring,19-29。  new window
28.Wee, C. H.(1994)。Sun Tzu's Art of War: Selected Applications to Strategic Thinking and Business Practices。International Review of Strategic Management,5,83-109。  new window
研究報告
1.謝雲飛(1995)。Probing into the Modern's Personnel Management from Han Feizi's Skill。0。  new window
學位論文
1.黃鶯杉(1986)。Management Thoughts of "Military School's Thought" - Strategy and Implementation,0。  new window
2.管偉宏(1998)。A New Classification of Organization Climate on the Basis of Change the Theory,0。  new window
圖書
1.施純協、孫劍秋(2000)。易經與企業經營。臺北市:知行文化事業公司。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.楊先舉(1996)。老子管理學。臺北:遠流出版事業公司。  延伸查詢new window
3.李世俊、楊先舉、賈家瑞(1995)。活用孫子兵法,經營篇:經營者的決策 / 管理 / 行銷 / 領導寶典。臺北市:遠流。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.Kreitner, Robert、Kinicki, Angelo(2001)。Organizational Behavior。New York, NY:McGraw-Hill。  new window
5.Greenberg, J.(1999)。Managing Behavior in Organizations。Prentice-Hall。  new window
6.Robbins, Stephen P.(2003)。Organizational behavior: Concepts, controversies, applications。Prentice-Hall, Inc.。  new window
7.Simon, H. A.(1997)。Administrative behavior: A study of decision-making processes in administrative organization。New York:Free Press。  new window
8.Berelson, Bernard(1952)。Content analysis in communication research。Free Press。  new window
9.Budd, Richard W.、Thorp, Robert K.、Donohew, Lewis(1967)。Content Analysis of Communications。Macmillan Publishing Company。  new window
10.楊國樞(1988)。中國人的銳變。中國人的銳變。臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
11.余英時(1996)。Religion Ethics and Businessman's Spirit in Modern times in China。Religion Ethics and Businessman's Spirit in Modern times in China。Taipei。  new window
12.曾仕強(1997)。Management Theory of I-Ching in 21st Century。Management Theory of I-Ching in 21st Century。Taipei。  new window
13.程振清、何成正(1999)。易經與現代管理。易經與現代管理。臺北縣新店市。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.Harrison, E. F.(1981)。The Managerial Decision-making Process。The Managerial Decision-making Process。Boston, MA。  new window
15.Klein, G.(1998)。Sources of Power: How People Make Decisions。Cambridge:MIT Press。  new window
16.March, J. G.、Olsen, J. P.(1986)。Garbage-can Models of Decision Making in Organizations。Ambiguity and Command: Decision Making in Military Organizations。0。  new window
圖書論文
1.楊孝濚(1989)。內容分析。社會及行為科學研究法。臺北市:東華。  延伸查詢new window
2.Bowers, John W.(1970)。Content Analysis。Methods of Research in Communication。Houghton Mifflin。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE