负面预期、冲突回避与抑制性进言：理论建构中的概念化历程

doi:10.12054/lydk.bisu.192

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本文回顾了笔者关于负面预期、冲突回避和抑制性进言的研究历程。中国社会注重关系和人情,人们推崇以和为贵。在个人利益与维持人际和谐产生冲突的情境下,不少人会选择牺牲个人利益以维持表面和谐,原因在于人们担心采取维护个人利益的行动将会冒犯他人。这种负面预期导致人们回避冲突,但回避实则容易引发更多的冲突。笔者通过众多研究试图揭开这一现象背后的机制,并采取有效的方式鼓励人们打破心中的桎梏,直面冲突。笔者将这一主题进一步扩展到工作情境中,开展了与进言相关的研究。希望本文关于笔者探索历程的描述能够启示从事旅游管理研究的学者,在探讨纷繁复杂的现象和真实主动的现实场景时,构建出经得起检验,同时被学术社区接受的概念和理论,促进人们在旅游情境下做出环境友好型行为。

关键词: 冲突回避; 负面预期; 抑制性进言; 理论建构; 中国情境

Abstract:

In this paper, I reflect on the process of research on negative anticipation, conflict avoidance, and prohibitive voice. In Chinese society, social connections and personal favors are treasured, and interpersonal harmony is highly valued. In situations whereby personal interests conflict with the maintenance of interpersonal balance, many people choose to sacrifice their personal interests so as to maintain a superficial sense of harmony. This practice derives from people’s fear that actions taken to safeguard their personal interests will offend others. Negative anticipation leads people to avoid conflicts; however, avoidance may result in more conflicts. In this paper, we have uncovered the mechanism of this phenomenon and explored effective ways to break the shackles of people’s minds and to encourage people to face conflicts. We have further extended this to the work setting and researched how best to encourage people to speak up. It is hoped that our explorations can inspire scholars engaged in tourism management research to develop constructs and theories while exploring complex phenomena and real-life situations. It is also hoped that their constructs and theories will stand the test of time, be accepted by the academic community, and help bring about more environment-friendly behavior among visitors in their tourism activities.

Keywords: conflict avoidance; negative anticipation; prohibitive voice; theory construction; Chinese context

中图分类号:

张志学. 负面预期、冲突回避与抑制性进言：理论建构中的概念化历程[J]. 旅游导刊, 2022, 6(1): 1-23.

ZHANG Zhixue. Negative Anticipation, Conflict Avoidance, and Prohibitive Voice: The Process of Conceptualization in Theory Construction[J]. Tourism and Hospitality Prospects, 2022, 6(1): 1-23.

图/表 1

参考文献 59

[1]	Au E W M, Qin X, Zhang Z X. Beyond personal control:When and how executives’ beliefs in negotiable fate foster entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance?[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2017(143):69-84.
[2]	Baca-Motes K, Brown A, Gneezy A, et al. Commitment and behavior change:Evidence from the field[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2013, 39(5):1070-1084.
[3]	Bandiera O, Prat A, Hansen S, et al. CEO behavior and firm performance[J]. Journal of Political Economy, 2020, 128(4):1325-1369.
[4]	Bloom N, Liang J, Roberts J, et al. Does working from home work? Evidence from a Chinese experiment[J]. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2015, 130(1):165-218.
[5]	Chi N W, Grandey A A. Emotional labor predicts service performance depending on activation and inhibition regulatory fit[J]. Journal of Management, 2019, 45(2):673-700.
[6]	Cialdini R B, Reno R R, Kallgren C A. A focus theory of normative conduct:Recycling the concept of norms to reduce littering in public places[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1990, 58(6):1015-1026.
[7]	Ferraro F, Pfeffer J, Sutton R I. Economics language and assumptions:How theories can become self-fulfilling[J]. The Academy of Management Review, 2005, 30(1):8-24.
[8]	Flynn F J, Lake V K B. If you need help,just ask:Underestimating compliance with direct requests for help[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2008, 95(1):128-143.
[9]	Friedman R, Chi S C, Liu L A. An expectancy model of Chinese-American differences in conflict-avoiding[J]. Journal of International Business Studies, 2006, 37(1):76-91.
[10]	Goldstein N J, Cialdini R B, Griskevicius V. A room with a viewpoint:Using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels[J]. Journal of Consumer Research, 2008, 35(3):472-482.
[11]	Hambrick D C. The field of management’s devotion to theory:Too much of a good thing?[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2007, 50(6):1346-1352.
[12]	Hart E, VanEpps E M, Schweitzer M E. The (better than expected) consequences of asking sensitive questions[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2021(162):136-154.
[13]	Hwang K K. Face and favor:The Chinese power game[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 1987, 92(4):945-974.
[14]	Kallbekken S, Sælen H. ‘Nudging’ hotel guests to reduce food waste as a win-win environmental measure[J]. Economics Letters, 2013, 119(3):325-327.
[15]	Kardas M, Kumar A, Epley N,. Overly shallow? Miscalibrated expectations create a barrier to deeper conversation[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2021, 122(3):367-398.
[16]	Keizer K, Lindenberg S, Steg L. The spreading of disorder[J]. Science, 2008, 322(5908):1681-1685.
[17]	Kerr N L. HARKing:Hypothesizing after the results are known[J]. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1998, 2(3):196-217.
[18]	Kirkman B L, Chen G, Farh J L, et al. Individual power distance orientation and follower reactions to transformational leaders:A cross-level,cross-cultural examination[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2009, 52(4):744-764.
[19]	Leung K. Presenting post hoc hypotheses as a priori:Ethical and theoretical issues[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2011, 7(3):471-479.
[20]	Leung K, Bond M H. The impact of cultural collectivism on reward allocation[J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1984, 47(4):793-804.
[21]	Leung K, Brew F P, Zhang Z X, et al. Harmony and conflict:A cross-cultural investigation in China and Australia[J]. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 2011, 42(5):795-816.
[22]	Liang J, Farh C I C, Farh J L. Psychological antecedents of promotive and prohibitive voice:A two-wave examination[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2012, 55(1):71-92.
[23]	Liang J, Farh L J L. Promotive and prohibitive voice behavior in organizations:A two-wave longitudinal examination[C]// Proceedings of the 3rd International Association of Chinese Management Research Conference. Guangzhou: International Association for Chinese Management Research, 2008.
[24]	Liu C, Hung K. A multilevel study on preferences for self-service technology versus human staff:Insights from hotels in China[J]. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 2021(94):102870.
[25]	MacKenzie D, Millo Y. Constructing a market,performing theory:The historical sociology of a financial derivatives exchange[J]. American Journal of Sociology, 2003, 109(1):107-145.
[26]	Merton R K. Social Theory and Social Structure[M]. New York: The Free Press, 1968:39.
[27]	Michie S, van Stralen M M, West R. The behaviour change wheel:A new method for characterising and designing behaviour change interventions[J]. Implementation Science, 2011(6):42.
[28]	Scott B A, Barnes C M. A multilevel field investigation of emotional labor,affect,work withdrawal,and gender[J]. Academy of Management Journal, 2011, 54(1):116-136.
[29]	Thaler R H, Sunstein C R. Nudge:Improving Decisions about Health,Wealth and Happiness[M]. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008.
[30]	Wei X, Zhang Z X, Chen X P. I will speak up if my voice is socially desirable:A moderated mediating process of promotive versus prohibitive voice[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology, 2015, 100(5):1641-1652.
[31]	Yang J X, Zhang Z X, Tsui A S. Middle manager leadership and frontline employee performance:Bypass,cascading,and moderating effects[J]. Journal of Management Studies, 2010, 47(4):654-678.
[32]	Yao J J, Zhang Z X, Brett J, et al. Understanding the trust deficit in China:Mapping positive experience and trust in strangers[J]. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 2017(143):85-97.
[33]	Ying T Y, Tang J Y, Wen J, et al. Traveling with pets:Constraints,negotiation,and learned helplessness[J]. Tourism Management, 2021(82):104183.
[34]	Zhang Z X. The Role of Guanxi and Renqing in Chinese Reward Allocation[D]. Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong, 1998.
[35]	Zhang Z X. Chinese conceptions of justice and reward allocation[M]//Kim U,Yang K S,Hwang K K. Indigenous and Cultural Psychology:Understanding People in Context. Boston:Springer, 2006:403-420.
[36]	Zhang Z X. The effects of frequency of social interaction and relationship closeness on reward allocation[J]. The Journal of Psychology, 2001a, 135(2):154-164.
[37]	Zhang Z X, Luk W, Arthur D, et al. Nursing competencies:Personal characteristics contributing to effective nursing performance[J]. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 2001b, 33(4):467-474.
[38]	Zhang Z X, Wei X. Superficial harmony and conflict avoidance resulting from negative anticipation in the workplace[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2017, 13(4):795-820.
[39]	Zhang Z X, Wei X, Chao M M, et al. When do conflicts feel right for prevention-focused individuals? The debiasing effect of low need for closure[J]. Management and Organization Review, 2017, 13(2):375-397.
[40]	Zhang Z X, Wei X, Leung K. Buying insurance for harmony:A relational risk perspective on conflict avoidance[C]//Proceedings of the IACM 24th Annual Conference Paper. Istanbul: 2011.
[41]	Zhang Z X, Yang C F. Beyond distributive justice:The reasonableness norm in Chinese reward allocation[J]. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 1998, 1(3):253-269.
[42]	Zhang Z X, Zhang Y, Wang M. Harmony,illusory relationship costs,and conflict resolution in Chinese contexts[M]//Leung A K Y,Chiu C Y,Hong Y Y. Cultural Processes:A Social Psychological Perspective. New York: Cambridge University Press, 2011:188-209.
[43]	陈昭全, 张志学, 沈伟. 管理研究中的理论建构[M]//陈晓萍,沈伟. 组织与管理研究的实证方法. 第3版. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2018:68-102.
	[ CHEN Zhaoquan, ZHANG Zhixue, SHEN Wei. Theory construction in management research[M]//CHEN Xiaoping,SHEN Wei. Empirical Methods in Organization and Management Research. 3rd ed. Beijing: Peking University Press, 2018:68-102.]
[44]	董毅然. 中国式人情观更易导致冲突[N]. 北京科技报, 2005-01-19(B06).
	[ DONG Yiran. The Chinese conception of Renqing more likely to lead to conflict[N]. Beijing Science and Technology News, 2005-01-19(B06).]
[45]	黄囇莉. 人际和谐与冲突:本土化的理论与研究[M]. 台北: 桂冠图书公司, 1999.
	[ HUANG Lili. Interpersonal Harmony and Conflict[M]. Taipei: Laurel Book Company, 1999.]
[46]	魏昕, 张志学. 组织中为什么缺乏抑制性进言?[J]. 管理世界, 2010(10):99-109,121.
	[ WEI Xin, ZHANG Zhixue. The mechanism of reluctance to express prohibitive voices in organizations[J]. Management World, 2010(10):99-109,121.]
[47]	魏昕, 张志学. 上级何时采纳促进性或抑制性进言?--上级地位和下属专业度的影响[J]. 管理世界, 2014(1):132-143,175.
	[ WEI Xin, ZHANG Zhixue. When will superiors adopt promotive and prohibitive voices?-Influence of superiors’ status and subordinates’ expertise[J]. Management World, 2014(1):132-143,175.]
[48]	杨国枢. 心理学研究的中国化:层次与方向[M]//杨国枢,文崇一. 社会及行为科学研究的中国化. 台北: “中央研究院”民族学研究所, 1982:153-188.
	[ YANG Guoshu. Sinicization of psychological research:Levels and directions[M]//YANG Guoshu,WEN Chongyi. Sinicization of Research in Social and Behavioral Sciences. Taipei: Institute of Ethnology,Academia Sinica, 1982:153-188.]
[49]	杨中芳. 试谈大陆社会心理学研究的发展方向[J]. 社会学研究, 1987(4):62-89,105.
	[ YANG Zhongfang. On the development directions of social psychological research in China[J]. Sociological Research, 1987(4):62-89,105.]
[50]	张志学. 论社会心理学研究的本土化[J]. 心理学探新, 1992(3):43-48.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue. On the indigenization of social psychological research[J]. Psychological Exploration, 1992(3):43-48.]
[51]	张志学. 利他取向、榜样学习与亲社会行为关系的实验研究[Z]. 1993a.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue. Altruistic Orientation,Model Learning and Prosocial Behavior:An Experimental Study[Z]. 1993a.]
[52]	张志学. 社会心理学研究的反省与更新[M]//李庆善. 中国人社会心理研究论集·1992. 香港: 香港时代文化出版公司, 1993b:19-42.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue. Introspection and renewal of social psychological research[M]//LI Qingshan. A Collection of Chinese Social Psychological Research·1992. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Times Culture Publishing Company, 1993b:19-42.]
[53]	张志学. 中国人的人际关系认知:一项多维度的研究[J]. 本土心理学研究, 1999a(12):261-288.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue. Chinese cognition of interpersonal relationships:A multidimensional scaling study[J]. Indigenous Psychological Research in Chinese Societies, 1999a(12):261-288.]
[54]	张志学. 寒窗随想:社会心理学学习和研究经验谈[J]. 社会心理研究, 1999b(3):58-64.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue. An essay on studying and doing research in social psychology[J]. Social Psychological Research, 1999b(3):58-64.]
[55]	张志学. 人情在中国人社会互动中的表现:一项关键事件的研究[M]//杨中芳. 中国人的人际关系、情感与信任--一个人际交往的观点. 台北: 远流出版事业股份有限公司, 2001:247-267.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue. The manifestations of Renqing in Chinese social interactions:A critical incident study[M]//YANG Zhongfang. Interpersonal Relationship,Affection and Trust of the Chinese. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co.,Ltd., 2001:247-267.]
[56]	张志学. 人情与冲突:防止好心办了坏事[J]. 北大商业评论, 2005(5):132-137.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue. Renqing and conflict:Prevent doing bad things with good intentions[J]. Peking University Business Review, 2005(5):132-137.]
[57]	张志学, 杨中芳. 关于人情概念的一项研究[M]//杨中芳. 中国人的人际关系、情感与信任- -一个人际交往的观点. 台北: 远流出版事业股份有限公司, 2001:223-246.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue, YANG Zhongfang. A study on the concept of Renqing[M]//YANG Zhongfang. Interpersonal Relationship,Affection and Trust of the Chinese. Taipei: Yuan-Liou Publishing Co.,Ltd., 2001:233-246.]
[58]	张志学, 赵曙明, 连汇文, 等. 数智时代的自我管理和自我领导:现状与未来[J]. 外国经济与管理, 2021, 43(11):3-14.
	[ ZHANG Zhixue, ZHAO Shuming, LIAN Huiwen, et al. Self-management and self-leadership in the digital and AI era:An overview and future directions[J]. Foreign Economics & Management, 2021, 43(11):3-14.]
[59]	赵新元, 王甲乐, 范欣平. 旅游业一线员工工作-家庭冲突的前因后果模型--基于荟萃分析的结构方程模型[J]. 旅游学刊, 2021, 36(9):88-102.
	[ ZHAO Xinyuan, WANG Jiale, FAN Xinping. A model of the antecedents and consequences of work-family conflict among frontline employees in the tourism industries:An approach of Meta-analytic Structural Equation Modeling[J]. Tourism Tribune, 2021, 36(9):88-102.]

阶段 Phase	任务 Task	难点 Difficulty	解决方法 Solution	主要论点 Main arguments
尝试	社会心理学与管理研究接轨	找到具体的话题和问题	思考现象、阅读文献	人情表现为注重建立长久而和谐的人际关系
定位现象	找到现象中值得研究的问题	现象蕴含的机理	访问和调查不同人的想法、与同行讨论	注重人情容易导致冲突回避
概念化	从现象中提取概念	澄清概念的内涵与外延	从文献中寻找理解现象的相关概念	负面预期导致人们担心人际和谐受到破坏
比较	对比不同条件下概念所表征的现象	找出独特的视角	深入洞察现象,并作情境化处理	负面预期在不同行动者之间表现出不对称性（负面臆想）
干预	消除负面预期导致的不良后果	从理论和操作上找到合适的干预方法	情境实验、反复测试	负面预期导致冲突回避;换位思考降低负面预期,从而减少冲突回避
建立理论	负面预期的前因	从众多因素中找出最相关的影响因素	阅读文献、与同行讨论、通过调查测试想法	个人表面和谐和权力距离的导向会导致负面预期,进而导致冲突回避
边界条件	前因与负面预期之间关系的边界条件	进一步寻找与理论最相关而且理论自洽的调节变量	在已有理论基础上进行推理,并对概念模型进行验证	关系的亲密程度负向调节表面和谐与负面预期的关系;个人的防御焦点与认知闭合需求交互影响负面预期
拓展	用负面预期解释组织中进言的缺乏	与主流的进言文献视角存在较大差异	吸收同行的成果、借用同行开创的进言分类、开展现场调查	个人表面和谐和权力距离的导向会导致负面预期,进而缺乏抑制性进言
完善	建立区别两类进言的前因、机制和运作条件的理论	找到可以统合模型中8个概念的基础理论	阅读文献、理论推导、请教同行、与顶级期刊的评审团队对话,不断修改文章	用社会期许反应理论解释组织情境下人们从事促进性进言和抑制性进言的前因、机理和边界条件

阶段 Phase	任务 Task	难点 Difficulty	解决方法 Solution	主要论点 Main arguments
尝试	社会心理学与管理研究接轨	找到具体的话题和问题	思考现象、阅读文献	人情表现为注重建立长久而和谐的人际关系
定位现象	找到现象中值得研究的问题	现象蕴含的机理	访问和调查不同人的想法、与同行讨论	注重人情容易导致冲突回避
概念化	从现象中提取概念	澄清概念的内涵与外延	从文献中寻找理解现象的相关概念	负面预期导致人们担心人际和谐受到破坏
比较	对比不同条件下概念所表征的现象	找出独特的视角	深入洞察现象,并作情境化处理	负面预期在不同行动者之间表现出不对称性（负面臆想）
干预	消除负面预期导致的不良后果	从理论和操作上找到合适的干预方法	情境实验、反复测试	负面预期导致冲突回避;换位思考降低负面预期,从而减少冲突回避
建立理论	负面预期的前因	从众多因素中找出最相关的影响因素	阅读文献、与同行讨论、通过调查测试想法	个人表面和谐和权力距离的导向会导致负面预期,进而导致冲突回避
边界条件	前因与负面预期之间关系的边界条件	进一步寻找与理论最相关而且理论自洽的调节变量	在已有理论基础上进行推理,并对概念模型进行验证	关系的亲密程度负向调节表面和谐与负面预期的关系;个人的防御焦点与认知闭合需求交互影响负面预期
拓展	用负面预期解释组织中进言的缺乏	与主流的进言文献视角存在较大差异	吸收同行的成果、借用同行开创的进言分类、开展现场调查	个人表面和谐和权力距离的导向会导致负面预期,进而缺乏抑制性进言
完善	建立区别两类进言的前因、机制和运作条件的理论	找到可以统合模型中8个概念的基础理论	阅读文献、理论推导、请教同行、与顶级期刊的评审团队对话,不断修改文章	用社会期许反应理论解释组织情境下人们从事促进性进言和抑制性进言的前因、机理和边界条件