提出建议的谬误

IF 3.1 4区 管理学 Q2 BUSINESS Organizational Dynamics Pub Date : 2022-10-01 DOI:10.1016/j.orgdyn.2022.100898
Julia Milner , Trenton Milner
{"title":"提出建议的谬误","authors":"Julia Milner ,&nbsp;Trenton Milner","doi":"10.1016/j.orgdyn.2022.100898","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Have you ever been micro-managed? Have you ever been told ‘to the letter’ what to do in a given situation? Or maybe as a leader you have also fallen into the trap of giving advice? We challenge the assumption that leaders should have the answer for everything. Occasionally, directing works, however, do it too often and at one point, it will turn out to be bad advice. The logical consequence is that leaders work on and increase the quality of the advice they give. We showcase that the alternative to leaders giving ‘bad’ advice is to not give advice at all. We shed light on the concept of leaders acting as coaches and how leaders can empower others to find their own answers. Specifically, we highlight four mind shifts in which leaders can engage if they want to use a coaching style: from ignoring emotions to empathy, from directing to empowering, from problem-focused to solution-focused and from weakness to strengths.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48061,"journal":{"name":"Organizational Dynamics","volume":"51 4","pages":"Article 100898"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The fallacy of giving advice\",\"authors\":\"Julia Milner ,&nbsp;Trenton Milner\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.orgdyn.2022.100898\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Have you ever been micro-managed? Have you ever been told ‘to the letter’ what to do in a given situation? Or maybe as a leader you have also fallen into the trap of giving advice? We challenge the assumption that leaders should have the answer for everything. Occasionally, directing works, however, do it too often and at one point, it will turn out to be bad advice. The logical consequence is that leaders work on and increase the quality of the advice they give. We showcase that the alternative to leaders giving ‘bad’ advice is to not give advice at all. We shed light on the concept of leaders acting as coaches and how leaders can empower others to find their own answers. Specifically, we highlight four mind shifts in which leaders can engage if they want to use a coaching style: from ignoring emotions to empathy, from directing to empowering, from problem-focused to solution-focused and from weakness to strengths.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48061,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Organizational Dynamics\",\"volume\":\"51 4\",\"pages\":\"Article 100898\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Organizational Dynamics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090261622000055\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"管理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Organizational Dynamics","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0090261622000055","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

你曾经被微观管理过吗?你是否曾被“严格”告知在特定情况下该怎么做?或者作为一个领导者,你也掉进了提供建议的陷阱?我们挑战领导者应该对所有问题都有答案的假设。然而,导演作品偶尔也会经常这样做,在某种程度上,这将是一个糟糕的建议。合乎逻辑的结果是,领导者会努力提高他们提出的建议的质量。我们展示了领导者给出“坏”建议的另一种选择是根本不给出建议。我们阐明了领导者作为教练的概念,以及领导者如何授权他人找到自己的答案。具体来说,我们强调了四种思维转变,如果领导者想要使用教练风格,他们可以参与其中:从忽视情绪到同理心,从指导到授权,从关注问题到关注解决方案,从弱点到优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The fallacy of giving advice

Have you ever been micro-managed? Have you ever been told ‘to the letter’ what to do in a given situation? Or maybe as a leader you have also fallen into the trap of giving advice? We challenge the assumption that leaders should have the answer for everything. Occasionally, directing works, however, do it too often and at one point, it will turn out to be bad advice. The logical consequence is that leaders work on and increase the quality of the advice they give. We showcase that the alternative to leaders giving ‘bad’ advice is to not give advice at all. We shed light on the concept of leaders acting as coaches and how leaders can empower others to find their own answers. Specifically, we highlight four mind shifts in which leaders can engage if they want to use a coaching style: from ignoring emotions to empathy, from directing to empowering, from problem-focused to solution-focused and from weakness to strengths.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
31 days
期刊介绍: Organizational Dynamics domain is primarily organizational behavior and development and secondarily, HRM and strategic management. The objective is to link leading-edge thought and research with management practice. Organizational Dynamics publishes articles that embody both theoretical and practical content, showing how research findings can help deal more effectively with the dynamics of organizational life.
期刊最新文献
Trio of human, old and new copilots: Collaborative accountability of human, manuals/standards, and artificial intelligence (AI) Positive mindset: PsyCap’s roles in PERMA+4 and positive organizational psychology, behavior, and scholarship 2.0 Design thinking: Executing your organization's commitment to customer centricity Editorial Board Often wrong, never in doubt: Mitigating leadership overconfidence in decision-making
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1