使用者:SIA YANG/沙盒

維基百科，自由的百科全書


非暴力交流（簡稱NCV，也稱為同情交流或協作交流）是一種基於非暴力原則的交流方法。這不是一種為了消除分歧而存在的技術，而是為了增加同理心並通過使用它從而改善人們生活質量的方法。

非暴力交流從個人中心治療中所使用的概念演變而來，並由臨床心理學家馬歇爾·羅森博格在20世紀60年代和70年代開始發展。那時候有一個大型生態系統的研究室、臨床研究和關於非暴力交流的自愈材料。羅森博格的書《非暴力溝通:生活的語言》，作為自愈書籍和心理治療教科書而流行，被公認為是關於這一概念的權威文章。[1][2][3]

非暴力交流是著重於在對話中滿足各方基本需求的有效策略。[4] 目的是人際關係的和諧，還有在未來的合作中獲取更多的知識。[5]值得注意的概念包括拒絕強制性的話語形式，通過觀察而不是評價來獲取事實，真誠而具體地表達感覺和需求，提出有效且具有同理心的請求。

非暴力交流既可以用作臨床心理治療手段，也可以被看作是一種自愈技術，尤其有利於尋求人際關係和工作中的和諧。雖然許多研究表明這種方法具有很高的有效性，但總體而言，對非暴力交流的學術研究還是很有限的。[6] 從循證的角度看，它不像認知行為療法等實踐研究具有較高的地位。該理論的支持者通常依靠臨床和有趣的經驗來支持其有效性。

批判者們通常認為，這種假設方法，僅僅在個人層面具有有效性;大多數的批評言論都涉及到公平和一致性的問題。有些人認為它的模式是自相矛盾的，認為非暴力交流本身帶有一種潛在的強制性(因此是「暴力的」)技術，極有可能被濫用。[7][8] 這種方法需要大量的努力(時間)去學習和應用，並且需要具有一定的教育水平。[6]

歷史[編輯]

馬歇爾·羅森博格在非暴力溝通研討會上的演講(1990)

馬里昂·利特爾(Marion Little, 2008)認為，NVC模式起源於上世紀60年代末，當時羅森博格正在研究學校和美國南部一些組織中的種族融合問題。[9] 該模式的最早版本(觀察、感覺、需求和面向行動的需求)是馬歇爾·羅森博格在1972年編寫的培訓手冊的一部分。非暴力溝通是以正統的心理學理論為基礎的。非暴力交流的發展高度取決於卡爾·羅傑斯和個人中心治療。馬歇爾·羅森博格強調: 1)體驗學習。 2)坦率對待別人的情緒狀態。 3)「以一種能引起他們共鳴的方式」傾聽別人的滿足感。 4)豐富和鼓勵「創意、活躍、敏感、準確、用心聆聽」的經歷。5)觀察「一個人的內心體驗、意識和交流」之間一致性的深層價值。隨後,6)無條件地接受愛或感激，以及類似的更深層次的生動體驗。這些影響了下一節中描述的概念。 [9]

馬歇爾·羅森博格受到埃里希·弗羅姆、喬治·阿爾比以及喬治·A·米勒的影響，在工作中採用了社會聚焦，不再只專注於臨床研究，影響這一轉變的關鍵因素是:(1)個人心理健康取決於一個社區的社會結構（弗羅姆） ，(2) 治療師本身並不能滿足一整個社區的心理需求（阿爾比），還有(3) 如果把心理學自由地傳授給社會，關於人類行為的知識就會增加(米勒)。[9]

羅森博格對有學習障礙兒童的早期研究顯示了他對心理語言學和語言的力量的興趣，以及他非常強調合作。在最初的發展中，非暴力交流模式重新構建了學生與教師的關係，使學生對自己的學習有更大的責任和決策能力。這種模式經過多年的演變，已經包括了制度化的權力關係(即警察-公民、老闆-雇員)和非正式的權力關係(即男人-女人、富人-窮人、成人-青年、父母-孩子)。最終目標是建立一種恢復性的、「夥伴關係」範式和相互尊重的社會關係，而不是一種報應性的、基於恐懼的「支配性」範式。[9]

為了展示交流風格的差異，羅森博格開始使用兩種動物。暴力交流在食肉的豺狼中被視為一種侵略，尤其是統治的象徵。另一方面，食草長頸鹿代表了它的非暴力交流策略。選擇長頸鹿作為「非暴力交流」的象徵，是因為長頸鹿的長脖子表明說話的人頭腦清楚，能意識到其他說話人的反應;因為長頸鹿有一顆寬大的心，代表著非暴力交流富有同情心的一面。在他的課程中，他傾向於使用這些動物，以便讓觀眾更清楚地了解交流中的差異。[10]

到1992年，這種模式已經發展到現在的形式(觀察、感覺、需要和要求)。到2000年代末，自我同理心作為模型有效性的關鍵越來越受到重視。自2000年以來，另一個重點的轉變是將模型作為一個過程來引用。因而更少關注「步驟」本身，而是更多的關注講話者：(「是為了讓別人做自己想做的事，還是為了培養更有意義的關係和相互滿足?」)和傾聽者：(「目的是為一個人要說的話做準備，還是向另一個人表示衷心的、尊敬的關注?」)的意圖以及與他人經歷的聯繫的質量。[9]

概述[編輯]

訓練小組參與者手中的人類基本需求卡片。

「非暴力溝通」認為大多數個人或群體之間的衝突是由於對人類需求的誤解而產生的，由於強制性或操縱性的語言，旨在誘導恐懼、內疚、羞恥等。當在衝突中使用這些「暴力」的交流模式時，會轉移參與者的注意力，使他們無法闡明自己的需求、感受、感知和要求，從而使衝突持續下去。[11]

構成[編輯]

非暴力溝通有四個組成部分:

  • 觀察: 事實（我們所看到、聽到或觸摸到的東西）與我們對意義和重要性的評價不同。非暴力交流不鼓勵靜態泛化。有人說:「當我們把觀察和評價結合起來時，我們說的話很容易得到別人的批評和抵制。」取而代之的是，我們建議關注於特定時間和背景下的觀察。
  • 感情: 情感或感覺，與思想和故事無關。把他們與思想區分開來 (比如「我覺得我沒有得到公平的待遇。」) ，使用源自口語中用作感情的詞表達我們對自己的看法(例如,「不足」), 我們認為別人如何評價我們(例如，「不重要」),或者我們認為別人對我們做了什麼(例如，「誤解」，"忽略"). 據說，感覺反映了我們的需求是否得到了滿足。識別情感據說能讓我們更容易與他人建立聯繫，而且「通過表達情感讓自己變得脆弱，有助於解決衝突。」
  • 需求: 人類的基本需求, 不同於滿足需求的特定戰略. 它假定「我們所做的一切都是是為了服務於我們的需要。」
  • 請求: 請求與要求的區別在於，請求可以聽到「不行」的回答，而不會觸發嘗試強制解決的問題。如果一個人提出請求並收到「不行」的回答，那麼不建議放棄，在決定如何與一個人繼續進行對話之前要先了什麼原因會阻止對方說「好的」。建議請求使用清晰，積極，具體的行動語言。

模式[編輯]

非暴力交流的主要應用模式有三種:

  • 自我同理心： 同情地與我們內心發生的事情聯繫。這可能包括，在沒有責備的情況下，關心我們自己的想法和判斷，關心我們自己的感覺，最重要的是，與是否影響我們自己的需求聯繫起來。
  • 用同理心接受他人：在非暴力交流中，涉及「與對方內心深處的東西以及能讓他們的生活變得美好的東西聯繫起來……」這不是為了理解別人的大腦，我們只是在心理上理解另一個人說的話……移情連接是一種對內心的理解，在這種理解中，我們看到他人的美麗，他人神聖的能量，他們身上鮮活的生命……這並不意味著我們必須和另一個人有同樣的感覺。當我們因為別人難過而難過時，這就是同情。這並不意味著我們有相同的感受;這僅僅意味著我們和另一個人在一起……如果你在精神上試圖理解對方，你就不用出現在他們身邊。」同理心包括「清空頭腦，全身心地傾聽。」非暴力交流建議無論對方如何表達自己，我們都要專注於傾聽潛在的觀察、感覺、需求和要求。有人建議，反映別人所說的話的釋義，突出他們信息中隱含的非語言表達成分，比如你猜測他們可能要表達的感覺和需求，這是很有用的。
  • 誠實的表達：在非暴力交流中，這可能包括對觀察、感覺、需要和請求的表達。如果對話的上下文很清楚，可以省略觀察。如果已經存在足夠的聯繫，那麼感覺也可能會被忽略，或者在語境中命名一種不太可能形成聯繫的感覺。據說，除了說出一種感覺，還要說出一種需要，使人們不太可能覺得你是在讓他們對你的感覺負責。類似地，有人說，在提出需求的同時提出一個請求，人們就不太可能推斷出一個模糊的需求來滿足你的需要。這些部分被認為是協同工作。根據非暴力交流培訓師鮑勃·溫特沃斯的說法，「觀察設置背景，感覺支撐聯繫和走出我們的頭腦，需要支撐聯繫和確定什麼才是重要的，請求闡明你可能喜歡什麼樣的回應。將這些因素結合起來使用，可以最大限度地減少人們迷失的可能性，因為他們可能會切斷對你想從他們那裡得到什麼和為什麼想要的猜測。」

研究[編輯]

一項對2013年研究的系統回顧分析了從2634個引用中挑選出來的13項研究。其中兩項研究來自同行評議的期刊。其中11項研究表明，在使用非暴力交流後共情增加(其中5項具有統計學顯著性證據)，2項沒有。沒有關於非暴力交流的隨機研究。對非暴力交流的學術研究始於20世紀90年代，並隨著時間的推移而不斷增多。[12]

截至2017年，已有15篇碩士和博士論文在108篇或更小的樣本規模上測試了該模型，普遍認為該模型是有效的。[2][9][13][14]

雖然它被廣泛應用於臨床和非專業環境，而且有一些研究表明，這種技術在解決衝突和增加同理心方面是有效的，但心理學家通常不認為它具有與循證實踐(如認知行為療法)相同的地位。這是由於對該方法的學術研究很少。

1972年第一次見到羅森伯格的非暴力交流中心創始人艾倫·羅弗斯在2011年對學術文獻的匱乏做了如下解釋:

幾乎所有的衝突解決方案都有學術背景作為基礎，因此有研究生對其有效性進行了實證研究。非暴力交流以其根源而著稱。馬歇爾羅森博格博士(威斯康星大學臨床心理學)來自臨床心理學全職私人諮詢診所，沒有從事過學術職位。他創立的非暴力交流完全是一個草根組織，直到最近才獲得了一些基金會或贈款資金，100%的資金來自世界各地的公共研究室。隨著獨立研究人員慢慢有了資金來進行發表經同行評議的實證研究，實證數據現在正在緩慢地被獲得。[15]

鮑爾斯和莫菲特(2012)認為，由於缺乏對模型理論基礎的研究以及缺乏對積極結果的可靠性的研究，非暴力交流在學術項目中已經缺席。[16]

康納和溫特沃斯(2012)研究了6個月的非暴力交流培訓和輔導，用來影響財富100強公司的23名高管。報告中提出了各種各樣的成果，包括「談話和會議明顯更有效率，解決問題的時間減少了50%到80%。[17]

2014年的一項研究對華盛頓門羅市門羅懲教中心的885名男性囚犯進行了非暴力交流和正念訓練的效果測試。這項培訓將再犯率從37%降低到21%，據估計，這項培訓每年為州政府節省了500萬美元的監禁費用。人們發現，這種訓練能使人平靜下來，減少憤怒，提高對自己的感受負責、表達同理心、提出要求而不強加要求的能力。[18]

與精神之間的關係[編輯]

正如特蕾莎·拉蒂尼所說:「羅森伯格認為非暴力交流從根本上來說，是一種精神上的修行。」[19] 羅森伯格描述了他的精神生活對非暴力交流發展和實踐的影響:

我認為重要的是，人們要看到精神是非暴力交流的基礎，他們要在頭腦中學習這個過程的機制。這確實是一種精神上的修行，我想把它作為一種生活方式來展示。即使我們沒有提到這一點，人們還是會被這種行為所誘惑。即使他們把這當作一種機械的技巧來練習，他們也會開始體驗到自己和他人之間以前無法體驗到的東西。所以最終他們會感受到這個過程中精神層面的東西，他們開始意識到這不僅僅是一個交流的過程，並意識到這實際上是一種展示某種靈性的嘗試。[20]

羅森伯格進一步指出，他開發非暴力交流是為了讓人們「意識到」他所說的「敬愛的神聖能量」.[20]

一些基督徒發現非暴力交流對他們的基督教信仰是一種補充。[19][21][22][23][24]

許多人發現非暴力交流與佛教是非常互補的，無論是在理論上還是在實踐中都能體現佛教的信仰。[25][26][27]

與其他模式之間的關係[編輯]

馬里昂利特爾研究了與非暴力交流相關的理論框架。菲謝爾、安瑞和派特在20世紀80年代的哈佛談判項目中開發的基於利益的衝突解決、談判和調解模型似乎與非暴力交流有一些概念上的重疊，儘管兩種模型都沒有引用對方。[9]:31–35 利特爾認為，基於概念上的相似性，如果沒有任何證據能證明他們有直接關係的話，戈登有效關係模型(1970)可以作為非暴力交流和基於利益的談判的先驅。[9]:35–41 和羅森博格一樣，戈登也曾與卡爾·羅傑斯共事過，所以模型的相似性可能反映了他們彼此共同影響著對方。[9]:35

蘇珊娜·瓊斯認為主動傾聽和羅森博格推薦的共情傾聽之間有本質區別，因為主動傾聽包括一個具體步驟，反映講話者說了什麼，讓他們知道你在聽，而共情傾聽包括一個持續的過程，全心全意地傾聽，並充分了解對方的經驗，目的是理解和共情對方的需求，意義在於像是切身去經歷另一個人所經歷的事情。[28]

戈爾特·丹尼爾森和哈瓦·考克都注意到非暴力交流的前提和人類需求理論的前提有重疊之處。人類需求理論是一種理解衝突來源和設計衝突解決過程的學術模型，其理念是「當某些個人或群體沒有看到任何其他方式來滿足他們的需求，或當他們需要理解、尊重和考慮他們的需求時，暴力就會發生。」[29][30][31]

查普曼·弗拉克找到了羅森博格主張的觀點與批判性思維之間重疊的部分，尤其是伯特蘭·羅素將善良與清晰的思維結合在一起的構想。

瑪莎•拉斯利認為，這個主張與文化事務研究所開發的「聚焦對話法」有相似之處，「非暴力交流」的觀察、感覺、需求和請求成分與「聚焦對話法」的客觀、反思、解釋和決定階段有關。[32][33]

應用程式[編輯]

非暴力交流已被應用於很多組織和商業環境[34][35]中，以及養育[36][37][38]、教育[39][40][41][42] 、調解[43]、心理治療[44] 、醫療保健[45]、解決飲食問題[46]、司法[47][48][49]、被作為一本兒童讀物的基本根據[50]等其他環境中。

羅森博格介紹了他在衝突地區的和平項目中使用非暴力溝通的方式，這些地區包括盧安達、蒲隆地、奈及利亞、馬來西亞、印度尼西亞、斯里蘭卡、哥倫比亞、塞爾維亞、克羅埃西亞、愛爾蘭和中東，包括有爭議的約旦河西岸。[51]

反饋[編輯]

一些研究人員試圖對非暴力交流的批評和弱點進行徹底的評估，並評估了其應用中的重大挑戰。[12][52][53][54] 這些問題涵蓋了從實踐到理論的一系列潛在問題，包括研究參與者和研究人員收集的關注。

使用非暴力交流的困難和誤用的危險是大家共同關心的問題。此外，比特納[53]和弗萊克[55]發現在使用非暴力交流時存在著一種自相矛盾的潛在暴力行為，這是由於使用非暴力交流不熟練而引起的。比特納進一步指出，使用非暴力交流不太可能讓每個人在現實生活中表達他們的感受和滿足他們的需求，因為這需要過度的時間、耐心和紀律。那些熟練使用非語言文字的人可能會對那些不熟練使用非語言文字的人產生偏見，而寧願只在他們自己之間交談。

另外，非暴力交流的排他性似乎更傾向於受過良好教育的人，更重視那些對語法、詞的選擇和句法有更多了解的人。這可能會導致社會底層的人們難以無障礙運用，這有利於更高層次的社會階層。

非暴力交流是壓迫者的一種工具，讓他們對他人表現出更多的愛和仁慈，從而使壓迫者有能力維持住對受迫害方的壓迫權力。[56]

奧伯斯認為，人們可能會在同理心的過程中隱藏自己的感受，從而顛覆溝通的非暴力[54]

雖然非暴力交流的目的是加強相互珍惜的人之間的關係，但它可能會導致關係結束。我們是有限的生物，擁有有限的資源，通過非暴力交流了解彼此的需求，而滿足所有的需求可能會給這種關係造成太多的壓力。[57]

許多研究人員已經注意到非暴力交流，並為了學習和使用它，投入了大量的時間和精力。[12]

查普曼•弗拉克在回顧羅森博格的一段培訓視頻時，認為關鍵思想的呈現「引人入勝」，而那些軼事「令人謙卑而鼓舞人心」，並指出「他的工作之美」，以及他在與觀眾互動時「靈巧地進行精細的專注思考」。然而，弗萊克想知道羅森博格演講的某些方面是如何理解的，比如他明顯的「對思考場所的模糊看法」，以及他基於沃爾特·維克關於我們思考方式起源的描述。值得批評的是，羅森博格所說的一些看似恰當的答案，與歷史、文學和藝術所提供的具有挑戰性和複雜的人性圖景不符。[55]

弗萊克指出，非暴力溝通的「強烈意識」和「弱意識」之間的區別在於，前者是一種謹慎和專注的美德，而後者則是對這種天生的自我的模仿。強烈意識提供了一種語言來審視一個人的思想和行為，提倡理解，把自己最好的一面帶給社會並尊重自己的情感。而弱意識的人把語言當作規則，用這些規則來獲得加分，為政治利益而給別人貼上標籤，或者堅持讓別人用這種方式來表達自己。由於擔心羅森博格所說的一些話可能會導致「弱意識」，但弗萊克看到了證據，證實羅森博格在實踐中理解了「強意識」。羅森博格與研討會與會者的合作展示了「事實」。然而，弗萊克警告說，「弱意識的誘惑不會缺席。」弗萊克建議說，這是我給你的解毒劑，「在你所做的事上要保守，在你從別人那裡接受的事上要自由」(也被稱為穩健性原則)，並且要防止「以非暴力溝通的名義演變成微妙的暴力」。[55]

艾倫·高斯威斯克在評價羅森博格的書《非暴力溝通:同情的語言》(1999)時指出:「個體的相對力量被大大高估了，而結構性暴力的關鍵問題幾乎完全被忽視了。」[58]


據普德爾舞者通訊社報導，非暴力交流已經得到了許多公眾人物的認可。[59]

斯文·哈滕斯坦創作了一系列惡搞非暴力交流的漫畫。[60]

據報導，2014年薩蒂亞·納德拉成為微軟(Microsoft)執行長後的第一件事就是讓公司高管閱讀羅森博格的《非暴力溝通》一書。[61]

組織[編輯]

由馬歇爾·羅森伯格創立的非暴力交流中心，為了更加清晰化和品牌化，已經將非暴力交流、同情溝通等術語註冊為商標。[62]

非暴力交流中心認證培訓師是通過在非暴力交流中心裡對非暴力交流過程逐步理解後來教授非暴力交流的人。[63]非暴力交流中心也提供由認證培訓師提供的培訓[64]一些非暴力交流培訓是由一些組織贊助的培訓師提供的，這些組織被認為與馬歇爾·羅森博格創立的非暴力交流中心結盟，但沒有正式關係。[65][66] 其中一些培訓是通過非暴力交流中心公布的。[67] 大量的非暴力交流組織在世界各地如雨後春筍般湧現，許多都有區域性的焦點。[68][69]

另請參閱[編輯]

References[編輯]

  1. ^ 协作交流中心. [2011.11.11]. 
  2. ^ 2.0 2.1 簡·布蘭斯考布 (2011), 協作溝通研討會的總結性評估 網際網路檔案館的存檔，存檔日期2015-09-23.,埃默里大學羅林斯公共衛生學院碩士論文。
  3. ^ 蓋茨, 鮑勃; 蓋爾, 簡; 瑞, 簡. 行为苦恼:概念与策略. 拜勒瑞·町戴爾. 2000. 
  4. ^ 印巴·凱斯坦, 米奇·凱斯坦, 非暴力交流的主要假設和意圖
  5. ^ 富勒頓·伊萊恩、蘇格蘭. 在早年发展“非暴力沟通”，以支持解决冲突，并发展与自我和他人有关的情商。. 行為4 學習 (蘇格蘭). 2009，1 [2011.9.22]. 
  6. ^ 6.0 6.1 洪卡德利亞, 卡梅·曼波爾. 非暴力沟通模式的应用对共情发展的影响是什么? (PDF). 心理治療研究理學碩士. 2013.11 [2014.5.16]. 
  7. ^ 非暴力交流可能会带来情绪上的暴力. Real Social Skills. [2019-11-25] （美國英語）. 
  8. ^ Bitschnau, Karoline. 长颈鹿的钳子-我们将在verändern开办一个免费的公社. Paderborn (Junfermann). 2008. 
  9. ^ 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 小馬里昂 (2008) 全心全意:培養同理心發展和解決衝突的能力。 防止暴力的策略 網際網路檔案館的存檔，存檔日期2014-11-02.. MA Thesis, Dispute Resolution, Victoria, B.C., Canada: University of Victoria, 286.
  10. ^ 学习说话的长颈鹿-行动中的非暴力交流. Seed of Peace. 2017-12-01 [2019-11-18] （美國英語）. 
  11. ^ 什么是暴力沟通? (PDF). Heartland Community College. [2019-11-18]. 
  12. ^ 12.0 12.1 12.2 Juncadella, Carme Mampel. 非暴力沟通模式的应用对共情发展的影响是什么?概览 (PDF). MSC in Psychotherapy Studies. October 2013 [16 May 2014]. 
  13. ^ NVC 调查. Center for Nonviolent Communication. [21 September 2017]. （原始內容存檔於11 May 2012）. 
  14. ^ Nash, A.L. (2007) 德高研究所個案研究: 非暴力溝通訓練對解決衝突效果的說明 網際網路檔案館的存檔，存檔日期2015-09-23.. MS Sociology. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg, Virginia: pp.40
  15. ^ 注意NVC的起源. Northwest Compassionate Communication. [22 Sep 2017]. 
  16. ^ Bowers, Richard; Moffett, Nelle. Empathy in Conflict Intervention: The Key to Successful NVC Mediation. Harmony World Publishing. 2012. ISBN 978-1-4776-1460-0. 
  17. ^ Connor, J. M.; Wentworth, R. Training in Collaborative Communication in an Organizational Context: Assessment of Impact. Psychologists for Social Responsibility 30th Anniversary Conference. Washington DC. 12–14 July 2012 [21 Sep 2017]. 
  18. ^ Suarez, Alejandra; Dug Y. Lee; Christopher Rowe; Alex Anthony Gomez; Elise Murowchick; Patricia L. Linn. Freedom Project: Nonviolent Communication and Mindfulness Training in Prison. SAGE Open. 11 February 2014, 4 (2014 4): 10. doi:10.1177/2158244013516154 可免費查閱. 
  19. ^ 19.0 19.1 Latini, Theresa. Nonviolent Communication: A Humanizing Ecclesial and Educational Practice (PDF). Journal of Education & Christian Belief (Kuyer's Institute for Christian Teaching and Learning). 2009, 13 (1): 19–31 [January 19, 2011]. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.614.8339 可免費查閱. S2CID 142887493. doi:10.1177/205699710901300104. （原始內容 (PDF)存檔於July 8, 2011）. 
  20. ^ 20.0 20.1 Spiritual Basis of Nonviolent Communication: A Question and Answer Session with Marshall B. Rosenberg, Ph.D. Center for Nonviolent Communication. [Dec 1, 2011]. 
  21. ^ Prieto, Jaime L. Jr. The Joy of Compassionate Connecting: The Way of Christ through Nonviolent Communication. CreateSpace. 2010: 298. ISBN 978-1-4515-1425-4. 
  22. ^ Rohlfs, Allan. Beyond anger and blame: How to achieve constructive conflict. The Christian Century. Nov 14, 2012, 129 (23) [16 May 2014]. 
  23. ^ van Deusen Hunsinger, Deborah. Practicing Koinonia (PDF). Theology Today. October 2009, 66 (3): 346–367 [16 October 2011]. S2CID 220982415. doi:10.1177/004057360906600306. （原始內容 (PDF)存檔於4 April 2012）. 
  24. ^ Latini, Theresa F. Nonviolent Communication and the Image of God. Perspectives: A Journal of Reformed Thought. May 2007 [Nov 8, 2011]. 
  25. ^ Shantigarbha. NVC in the FWBO: Heart-to-Heart Communication. FWBO & TBMSG News. May 8, 2008. 
  26. ^ Little, Jason. Buddhism and Nonviolent Communication. Shambhala Times. January 31, 2009 [March 14, 2010]. （原始內容存檔於June 25, 2016）. 
  27. ^ Lasater, Judith Hanson; Lasater, Ike K. What We Say Matters: Practicing Nonviolent Communication. Rodmell Press. 2009: 192. ISBN 978-1-930485-24-2. 
  28. ^ Jones, Suzanne (2009) Traditional Education or Partnership Education: Which Educational Approach Might Best Prepare Students for the Future? 網際網路檔案館的存檔，存檔日期2015-09-23. MA Thesis, Communication, San Diego, California. USA. San Diego University: 203.
  29. ^ Danielsen, Gert. Meeting Human Needs, Preventing Violence: Applying Human Needs Theory to the Conflict in Sri Lanka (PDF). [12 March 2013]. （原始內容 (PDF)存檔於4 March 2016）. 
  30. ^ Havva Kök, "Nonviolent Communication in Political Conflicts" 網際網路檔案館的存檔，存檔日期2012-04-25., USAK Yearbook of International Politics and Law, Volume 2, (2009). pp. 349–362
  31. ^ Burton, John 1990b. Conflict: Basic Human Needs. New York: St. Martins Press.
  32. ^ Lasley, Martha (2005) Difficult Conversations: Authentic Communication Leads to Greater Understanding and Teamwork. Group Facilitation: A Research and Applications Journal, Number 7
  33. ^ Stanfield, R. Brian (編). The Art of Focused Conversation: 100 Ways to Access Group Wisdom in the Workplace (ICA series). New Society Publishers. 2000: 240. ISBN 978-0-86571-416-8. 
  34. ^ Miyashiro, Marie R. The Empathy Factor: Your Competitive Advantage for Personal, Team, and Business Success. Puddledancer Press. 2011: 256. ISBN 978-1-892005-25-0. 
  35. ^ Lasater, Ike; Julie Stiles. Words That Work In Business: A Practical Guide to Effective Communication in the Workplace. Puddledancer Press. 2010: 160. ISBN 978-1-892005-01-4. 
  36. ^ Hart, Sura; Victoria Kindle Hodson. Respectful Parents, Respectful Kids: 7 Keys to Turn Family Conflict into Cooperation. Puddledancer Press. 2006: 208. ISBN 1-892005-22-0. 
  37. ^ Kashtan, Inbal. Parenting From Your Heart: Sharing the Gifts of Compassion, Connection, and Choice有限度免費查閱，超限則需付費訂閱. Puddledancer Press. 2004: 48. ISBN 1-892005-08-5. 
  38. ^ Rosenberg, Marshall B. Raising Children Compassionately: Parenting the Nonviolent Communication Way. Puddledancer Press. 2004: 48. ISBN 1-892005-09-3. 
  39. ^ Hart, Sura; Victoria Kindle Hodson. The No-Fault Classroom: Tools to Resolve Conflict & Foster Relationship Intelligence. Puddledancer Press. 2008: 240. ISBN 978-1-892005-18-2. 
  40. ^ Cadden, Catherine Ann. Peaceable Revolution Through Education. Baba Tree. 2009: 160. ISBN 978-0-9825578-0-8. 
  41. ^ Hart, Sura; Victoria Kindle Hodson. The Compassionate Classroom: Relationship Based Teaching and Learning. Puddledancer Press. 2004: 208. ISBN 1-892005-06-9. 
  42. ^ Rosenberg, Marshall B.; Riane Eisler. Life-Enriching Education: Nonviolent Communication Helps Schools Improve Performance, Reduce Conflict, and Enhance Relationships. Puddledancer Press. 2003: 192. ISBN 1-892005-05-0. 
  43. ^ Larsson, Liv. A Helping Hand, Mediation with Nonviolent Communication. Friare Liv Konsult. 2011: 258. ISBN 978-91-976672-7-2. 
  44. ^ Open Hearted Therapy: A Year-long Program for Therapists. NVC Academy. [Nov 30, 2011]. 
  45. ^ Sears, Melanie. Humanizing Health Care: Creating Cultures of Compassion With Nonviolent Communication. Puddledancer Press. 2010: 112. ISBN 978-1-892005-26-7. 
  46. ^ Haskvitz, Sylvia. Eat by Choice, Not by Habit: Practical Skills for Creating a Healthy Relationship with Your Body and Food需要免費註冊. Puddledancer Press. 2005: 128. ISBN 1-892005-20-4. 
  47. ^ BayNVC Restorative Justice Project. [2011-09-21]. （原始內容存檔於2012-03-31）. 
  48. ^ Oregon Prison Project Teaches Empathy, A Key in Lowering Recidivism. [2011-09-21]. （原始內容存檔於2012-04-02）. 
  49. ^ Freedom Project Seattle. [23 April 2016]. 
  50. ^ Allen, J.P.; Marci Winters. Giraffe Juice: The Magic of Making Life Wonderful. www.GiraffeJuice.com. 2011: 142 [Sep 22, 2011]. ISBN 978-0-615-26393-9. 
  51. ^ Rosenberg, Marshall. Nonviolent Communication: A Language of Compassion. Encinitas, CA: Puddledancer Press. 2001: 212. 
  52. ^ Altmann, Tobias. Evaluation der Gewaltfreien Kommunikation in Quer- und Längsschnittdaten (PDF) (學位論文). University of Leipzig, Institut für Psychologie II. 2010 [16 May 2014]. 
  53. ^ 53.0 53.1 Bitschnau, Karoline. Die Sprache der Giraffen. Wie die Gewaltfreie Kommunikation Ihr Leben verändern kann. Paderborn (Junfermann). 2008. 
  54. ^ 54.0 54.1 Oboth, Monika. Inspiration und Herausforderung.. Spektrum der Mediation. 2007, 28: 9–11. 
  55. ^ 55.0 55.1 55.2 Flack, Chapman. The subtle violence of nonviolent language.. CrossCurrents. September 2006, 56 (3) [January 19, 2011]. ISSN 0011-1953. 
  56. ^ Nonviolent Communication can be emotionally violent. Real Social Skills. [2019-11-25] （美國英語）. 
  57. ^ Kashtan, Miki. Does Nonviolent Communication Work. Psychology Today. 2012-12-07 [2019-11-18]. 
  58. ^ Gorsevski, Ellen. Peaceful Persuasion: The Geopolitics of Nonviolent Rhetoric有限度免費查閱，超限則需付費訂閱. State University of New York Press. 2004: 166, 227–228. 
  59. ^ Endorsements of Nonviolent Communication. PuddleDancer Press. [Nov 30, 2011]. 
  60. ^ Hartenstein, Sven. ANVC (Almost Nonviolent Communication). [21 April 2013]. 
  61. ^ MacCracken, Harry. Satya Nadella Rewrites Microsoft's Code. Fast Company. 18 Sep 2017 [25 Sep 2017]. 
  62. ^ Guidelines for sharing NVC, cnvc.org
  63. ^ Certification, cnvc.org
  64. ^ Nonviolent Communication International Intensive Training, cnvc.org
  65. ^ Organizations. nvcworld.com. NVC World. [October 6, 2016]. 
  66. ^ Organization of the NVC Movement, capitalnvc.net
  67. ^ Training Schedule, cnvc.org
  68. ^ International Organisations. nvcworld.com. 2011 [October 19, 2011]. 
  69. ^ Find nvc organizations. cnvc.org. 2011 [October 19, 2011]. （原始內容存檔於September 22, 2014）. 



Template:Good article 僅在優良條目中使用！

US Navy sailors effectively hauling in a mooring line (2010)

團隊效率 (也稱為團隊效力) is the capacity a team has to accomplish the goals or objectives administered by an authorized personnel or the organization.[1] A team is a collection of individuals who are interdependent in their tasks, share responsibility for outcomes, and view themselves as a unit embedded in an institutional or organizational system which operates within the established boundaries of that system.[2] Teams and groups have established a synonymous relationship within the confines of processes and research relating to their effectiveness[3] (i.e. group cohesiveness, teamwork) while still maintaining their independence as two separate units, as groups and their members are independent of each other's role, skill, knowledge or purpose versus teams and their members, who are interdependent upon each other's role, skill, knowledge and purpose.

There are six different team effectiveness models including Rubin, Plovnick, and Fry's GRPI model,[4] the Katzenbach and Smith model,[5] the T7 model,[6] the LaFasto and Larson model,[7] the Hackman model[8] and the Lencioni model.[9]

Overview[編輯]

The evaluation of how effective a team is, is achieved with the aid of a variety of components derived from research and theories that help in creating a description of the multifaceted nature of team effectiveness. According to Hackman (1987),[10] team effectiveness can be defined in terms of three criteria:

  1. Output – The final outputs produced by the team must meet or exceed the standards set by key constituents within the organization
  2. Social Processes – The internal social processes operating as the team interacts should enhance, or at least maintain, the group's ability to work together in the future
  3. Learning – The experience of working in the team environment should act to satisfy rather than aggravate the personal needs of team members[11]
US Navy Outrigger Paddling team rowing with cohesion, efficacy and without group conflict (2007)

In order for these criteria to be assessed appropriately, an evaluation of team effectiveness should be conducted, which involves both a measure of the teams』 final task performance as well as criteria with which to assess intragroup process. The three major intragroup process constructs examined are intra-group conflict, team cohesion, and team-efficacy. Intra-group conflict is an integral part of the process a team undergoes and the effectiveness of the unit that was formed. Previous research has differentiated two components of intra-group conflict:

  • Relationship conflict – This is the interpersonal incompatibilities between team members such as annoyance and animosity
  • Task conflict – This occurs when members convey divergent ideas and opinions about specific aspects related to task accomplishment

Team cohesion is viewed as 『『a general indicator of synergistic group interaction—or process』』.[12] Furthermore, cohesion has been linked to greater coordination during team-tasks as well as improved satisfaction, productivity, and group interactions.[13] Team efficacy refers to team members』 perceptions of task-specific team competence. This construct is thought to create a sense of confidence within the team that enables the group to persevere when faced with hardship.[14] According to Hackman (2002),[15] there are also 5 conditions that research has shown to optimize the effectiveness of the team:

  1. Real Team – Stability in the group membership over time
  2. Compelling Direction – A clear purpose that relies on end goals
  3. Enabling Structure – The groups dynamic must be producing good, not bad
  4. Social Support – The group must have a system to collaborate properly
  5. Coaching – Opportunities for a coach to give help[16]

The Aristotle project, a multi-year initiative by Google Inc. aimed at defining the characteristics of an ideal team in the workplace, has found somewhat similar conditions for group effectiveness. They found that by far, most important factor is psychological safety. The other key factors in productivity are dependability, structure and clarity, personal meaning, and each team member feeling like they have an impact.[17]

Work teams[編輯]

Work teams (also referred to as production and service teams) are continuing work units responsible for producing goods or providing services for the organization.[18] Their membership is typically stable, usually full-time, and well-defined.[19] These teams are traditionally directed by a supervisor who mandates what work is done, who does it, and in what manner is it executed. Work teams are effectively used in manufacturing sectors such as mining and apparel and service based sectors such as accounting which utilize audit teams.[20]

Self-managed work teams[編輯]

Self-managed work teams (also referred to as autonomous work groups) allow their members to make a greater contribution at work and constitute a significant competitive advantage for the organization.[21] These work teams determine how they will accomplish the objectives they are mandated to achieve and decide what route they will take to complete the current assignment.[22] Self-managed work teams are granted the responsibility of planning, scheduling, organizing, directing, controlling and evaluating their own work process. They also select their own members and evaluate the members' performance. Self-managed work teams have been favored for their effectiveness over traditionally managed teams due their ability to enhance productivity, costs, customer service, quality, and safety.[23][24] Self-managed work teams do not always have positive results, however. These teams can be expensive to start, have the potential for the greatest conflict, and are often difficult to monitor the progress of.[25] The move to self-managed work teams at Levi Strauss & Co. in the 1990s pitted highly skilled and efficient workers against their slower counterparts, who the faster workers did not feel were sufficiently contributing to the team.[26]

Parallel teams[編輯]

Parallel team solving a problem (2013)

Parallel teams (also referred to as advice and involvement teams) pull together people from different work units or jobs to perform functions that the regular organization is not equipped to perform well. These teams are given limited authority and can only make recommendations to individuals higher in the organizational hierarchy.[27] Parallel teams are used for solving problems and activities that are in need of revision or improvement.[28] Examples of parallel teams are quality circles, task forces, quality improvement teams, employee involvement groups. The effectiveness of parallel teams is proven by the continuation of their usage and expansion throughout organizations due to their ability to improve quality and increase employee involvement.[29][30]

Project teams[編輯]

主條目：Project team

Project teams (also referred to as development teams) produce new products and services for an organization or institution on a one-time or limited basis, of which the copyrights of that new product or service will belong to the establishment that it was made for once it is completed. The task of these teams may vary from just improving a current project, concept or plan to creating an entirely new projects with very few limitations. Projects teams rely on their members being knowledgeable and well versed in many disciplines and functions, as this allows them to complete the task effectively.[31] Once a project is completed, the team either disbands and are individually moved to other special functions or moves on to other projects and tasks that they as a unit can accomplish or develop. A common example of project teams are cross-functional teams.[32] A project team's effectiveness is associated with the speed with which they are able to create and develop new products and services which reduces time spent on individual projects.[33]

Management teams[編輯]

Management teams (also referred to as action and negotiation teams) are responsible for the coordination and direction of a division within an institution or organization during various assigned projects and functional, operational and/or strategic tasks and initiatives.[34] Management teams are responsible for the total performance of the division they oversee with regards to day-to-day operations, delegation of tasks and the supervision of employees.[35] The authority of these teams are based on the members position on the company's or institution's organizational chart. These management teams are constructed of managers from different divisions (e.g. Vice President of Marketing, Assistant Director of Operations).[36][37] An example of management teams are executive management teams, which consists of members at the top of the organization's hierarchy, such as chief executive officer, board of directors, board of trustees, etc., who establish the strategic initiatives that a company will undertake over a long term period (~ 3–5 years).[38] Management teams have been effective by using their expertise to aid companies in adjusting to the current landscape of a global economy, which helps them compete with their rivals in their respective markets, produce unique initiatives that sets them apart from their rivals and empower the employees who are responsible for the success of the organization or institution.[39][40]

See also[編輯]

References[編輯]

  1. ^ Aubé, Caroline; Rousseau, Vincent. Interpersonal aggression and team effectiveness: The mediating role of team goal commitment. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. September 2011, 84 (3): 567. doi:10.1348/096317910X492568. 
  2. ^ Halvorsen, Kristin. Team decision making in the workplace: A systematic review of discourse analytic studies. Journal of Applied Linguistics and Professional Practice. 2013, 7 (3): 273–296. doi:10.1558/japl.v7i3.273. 
  3. ^ Kozlowski, Steve W.J.; Ilgen, Daniel R. Enhancing the Effectiveness of Work Groups and Teams. Psychological Science in the Public Interest. December 2006, 7 (3): 77–124. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.115.953 可免費查閱. PMID 26158912. doi:10.1111/j.1529-1006.2006.00030.x. 
  4. ^ The GRPI Model of Team Effectiveness. 
  5. ^ The Wisdom of Teams. 
  6. ^ Driving Team Effectiveness (PDF). 
  7. ^ Teamwork. 2019-02-02. 
  8. ^ A Normative Model of Work Team Effectiveness (PDF). 
  9. ^ Five Dysfunctions of a Team. 
  10. ^ Hackman, J. Richard. The design of work teams. Handbook of Organizational Behavior. 1987: 315–42. 
  11. ^ Hackman, J. R.; Wageman, R. A Theory of Team Coaching. Academy of Management Review. 1 April 2005, 30 (2): 269–287. doi:10.5465/AMR.2005.16387885. 
  12. ^ Barrick, Murray R.; Stewart, Greg L.; Neubert, Mitchell J.; Mount, Michael K. Relating member ability and personality to work-team processes and team effectiveness.. Journal of Applied Psychology. 1998, 83 (3): 377–391. doi:10.1037/0021-9010.83.3.377. 
  13. ^ Mach, Merce; Dolan, Simon; Tzafrir, Shay. The differential effect of team members' trust on team performance: The mediation role of team cohesion. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. September 2010, 83 (3): 771–794. doi:10.1348/096317909X473903. hdl:2445/122936 可免費查閱. 
  14. ^ Collins, Catherine G.; Parker, Sharon K. Team capability beliefs over time: Distinguishing between team potency, team outcome efficacy, and team process efficacy. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology. December 2010, 83 (4): 1003–1023. doi:10.1348/096317909X484271. 
  15. ^ Hackman, J. Richard. Leading teams: Setting the stage for great performances. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. 2002. 
  16. ^ Hackman, J. Richard. What Makes for a Great Team?. American Psychological Association. June 2004 [12 October 2014]. （原始內容存檔於June 2004）. 
  17. ^ Duhigg, Charles. What Google Learned From Its Quest to Build the Perfect Team – NYTimes.com. The New York Times. 2016-02-25 [2016-12-02]. 
  18. ^ Seibert, Scott E.; Wang, Gang; Courtright, Stephen H. Antecedents and consequences of psychological and team empowerment in organizations: A meta-analytic review.. Journal of Applied Psychology. September 2011, 96 (5): 981–1003. PMID 21443317. doi:10.1037/a0022676. 
  19. ^ Carton, Andrew M.; Cummings, Jonathon N. A Theory of Subgroups in Work Teams. Academy of Management Review. July 2012, 37 (3): 441–470. doi:10.5465/amr.2009.0322. 
  20. ^ Carton, Andrew M.; Cummings, Jonathon N. The impact of subgroup type and subgroup configurational properties on work team performance.. Journal of Applied Psychology. September 2013, 98 (5): 732–758. PMID 23915429. doi:10.1037/a0033593. 
  21. ^ Haas, M. R. The Double-Edged Swords of Autonomy and External Knowledge: Analyzing Team Effectiveness in a Multinational Organization. Academy of Management Journal. 1 October 2010, 53 (5): 989–1008. doi:10.5465/AMJ.2010.54533180. 
  22. ^ Neck, C. P. From Groupthink to Teamthink: Toward the Creation of Constructive Thought Patterns in Self-Managing Work Teams. Human Relations. 1 August 1994, 47 (8): 929–952. doi:10.1177/001872679404700804. 
  23. ^ Manz, Charles C.; Neck, Christopher P. Teamthink: beyond the groupthink syndrome in self-managing workteams. Journal of Managerial Psychology. 1995, 10 (1): 7–16. doi:10.1108/02683949510075155. 
  24. ^ Cohen, S. G.; Ledford Jr, G.E. The Effectiveness of Self-Managing Teams: A Quasi-Experiment. Human Relations. 1 January 1994, 47 (1): 13–43. doi:10.1177/001872679404700102. 
  25. ^ thompson, leigh. Making the team : a guide for managers Sixth. 2017-01-03. ISBN 978-0134484204. 
  26. ^ King, Ralph T Jr. Jeans Therapy – Levi's Factory Workers are Assigned to Teams, and Morale Takes a Hit. The Wall Street Journal. May 20, 1998. 
  27. ^ Arditti, Fred D.; Levy, Haim. A Model of the Parallel Team Strategy in Production Development. American Economic Review. December 1980, 70 (5): 1089–1097. 
  28. ^ Öztürk, Pinar; Rossland, Kari; Gundersen, Odd Erik. A multiagent framework for coordinated parallel problem solving. Applied Intelligence. 21 November 2008, 33 (2): 132–143. doi:10.1007/s10489-008-0154-7. 
  29. ^ Sundaresan, Shankar; Zhang, Zuopeng. Parallel teams for knowledge creation: Role of collaboration and incentives. Decision Support Systems. December 2012, 54 (1): 109–121. doi:10.1016/j.dss.2012.04.008. 
  30. ^ CORDERY, JOHN; SOO, CHRISTINE; KIRKMAN, BRADLEY; ROSEN, BENSON; MATHIEU, JOHN. Leading Parallel Global Virtual Teams. Organizational Dynamics. 2009, 38 (3): 204–216. doi:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2009.04.002. 
  31. ^ Lapoint, Patrica A.; Haggard, Carrol R. DESIGN PROTOTYPES INC. PROJECT MANAGEMENT (A): SELECTION OF THE PROJECT TEAM. Journal of the International Academy for Case Studies. 2013, 19 (6): 121–125. 
  32. ^ Sarin, Shikhar; O'Connor, Gina Colarelli. First among Equals: The Effect of Team Leader Characteristics on the Internal Dynamics of Cross-Functional Product Development Teams. Journal of Product Innovation Management. March 2009, 26 (2): 188–205. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5885.2009.00345.x. 
  33. ^ Reed, April H.; Knight, Linda V. Project Duration and Risk Factors on Virtual Projects. Journal of Computer Information Systems. 2013, 54 (1): 75–83. doi:10.1080/08874417.2013.11645673. 
  34. ^ Bunderson, J. S. Team Member Functional Background and Involvement in Management Teams: Direct Effects and the Moderating Role of Power Centralization. Academy of Management Journal. 1 August 2003, 46 (4): 458–474. JSTOR 30040638. doi:10.2307/30040638. 
  35. ^ Guchait, Priyanko; Hamilton, Katherine; Hua, Nan. Personality predictors of team taskwork understanding and transactive memory systems in service management teams. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management. 2014, 26 (3): 401–425. doi:10.1108/IJCHM-05-2013-0197. 
  36. ^ Ou, A. Y.; Tsui, A. S.; Kinicki, A. J.; Waldman, D. A.; Xiao, Z.; Song, L. J. Humble Chief Executive Officers' Connections to Top Management Team Integration and Middle Managers' Responses. Administrative Science Quarterly. 8 January 2014, 59 (1): 34–72. doi:10.1177/0001839213520131. 
  37. ^ Kor, Yasemin Y.; Mesko, Andrea. Dynamic managerial capabilities: Configuration and orchestration of top executives' capabilities and the firm's dominant logic. Strategic Management Journal. February 2013, 34 (2): 233–244. doi:10.1002/smj.2000. 
  38. ^ Souitaris, Vangelis; Maestro, B. M. Marcello. Polychronicity in top management teams: The impact on strategic decision processes and performance of new technology ventures (PDF). Strategic Management Journal. June 2010, 31 (6): 652–678. doi:10.1002/smj.831. 
  39. ^ Nielsen, Bo Bernhard; Nielsen, Sabina. Top management team nationality diversity and firm performance: A multilevel study. Strategic Management Journal. March 2013, 34 (3): 373–382. doi:10.1002/smj.2021. 
  40. ^ Qian, Cuili; Cao, Qing; Takeuchi, Riki. Top management team functional diversity and organizational innovation in China: The moderating effects of environment. Strategic Management Journal. January 2013, 34 (1): 110–120. doi:10.1002/smj.1993. 
取自「https://zh.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:SIA_YANG/沙盒&oldid=65029294」