
標題: [轉貼] 考績法草案之陰謀:「以退為進法 (door-in-the-face)」 [打印本頁]
作者: ben912 時間: 2010-3-17 22:55 標題: 考績法草案之陰謀:「以退為進法 (door-in-the-face)」
(一)前言:心理學上的以退為進法(door-in-the-face)
心理學上的以退為進的策略(door-in-the-face)
是先提出誇張要求,等對方堅決反對後,再讓對方同意比較小的要求。
這方面最有名的研究是亞利桑納州立大學的羅伯特與同仁所做的,
他們喬裝成青少年輔導計畫的成員,詢問學生願不願意帶一群少年犯到動物園參觀一天,
只有20%的學生答應了,不令人意外吧。
研究人員不以為意,改用另一策略,這一次他們向另一群學生提出更大的要求,
問他們未來兩年願不願意每週奉獻兩小時,為少年犯提供諮詢,這次獲得大家的回絕。
研究人員提出比較小的要求,他們問學生願不願意帶少年犯參觀動物園一天,有一半學生
答應了。
(二)主文:考績法草案
現在輿論的焦點都在3%,幾乎大家討論的重心也在這個部份,
不過我還是覺得考試院真正的目的是在降低公務人員的待遇,達到節省國家經費的目的。
其中最最重要的,就是取消一甲二乙升等,和75%降到65%這兩個制度變更。
姑且不論5%優等會給國家增加多少經費的問題,光是來看前面那兩個變更會影響到我們升
遷的問題,
其實才是真正嚴重影響到現職公務人員的部份。
舊制75%上限之下,平均每三年會被輪到一次乙等,
這個意思代表最遲每三年可以升一等,表現或運氣好的就是兩年可以升一等。
新制的話,先不要去奢想可以拿優等,還是拿2甲和一甲二乙來看,搭配65%,
代表已經不是每三年可以輪到兩年甲等了,而是每三年都有10%的公務員會拿不到兩年甲
,
對這些人而言,我們實際舉例來看,原本以下三種都能升等:
甲乙乙
乙甲乙
乙乙甲
只有在第三種情況下,第四年拿到甲時,該員才能升等;
如果運氣不好,第四年又拿乙,那要升等根本就遙遙無期。
所以非常粗略來看,每年國家都能省下10%公務員升等的費用,
然後優等5%-丙等3%,實際上增加的就是2%升等的經費。
省下來的8%,就是這個政府的陰謀。
(三)結論:重點在待遇變差
三丙法案只是煙霧彈,是考試院以心理學上的以退為進的策略(door-in-the-face)
先提出誇張要求(三丙資遣),等對方堅決反對後,
再讓對方同意比較小的要求(二甲才能升等、甲等比例75%降到65%)。
考試院真正的目的是在降低公務人員的待遇,達到節省國家經費的目的。
表面上說要激勵公務員的改革,實際上卻是在降低公務員待遇的目的。
我們都被考試院耍了~~~重點在待遇變差
作者: JovanyKutch 時間: 2025-4-10 15:09 標題: Block Blast
This analysis of the civil service performance appraisal draft is insightful. The "door-in-the-face" tactic is a clever way to frame the proposed changes. While everyone is focused on the 3% dismissal, the real impact lies in the changes to promotion criteria. It's like playing Block Blast , focusing on the immediate pieces while the underlying structure crumbles. The long-term effect on career advancement and salary for civil servants is the bigger concern here. The proposed changes feel like a carefully planned strategy.
作者: Laiilisa 時間: 2025-7-2 12:35 標題: Dive Headfirst into the Thrills of Slope Game!
This is a really insightful analysis! The "door-in-the-face" tactic is so relevant here. It feels like we're all focused on the 3% and missing the bigger picture of long-term salary stagnation. The analysis of how the grading changes impact promotions is particularly concerning. To unwind and deal with the frustration, I sometimes play Slope Game; it’s simple but surprisingly addictive for clearing your head. Thanks for shedding light on this!
作者: RandyEngman 時間: 2025-7-9 10:28 標題: Randy B. Engman
What an eye-opener to see psychological tactics like the door-in-the-face method in real-world policy! Reading about these changes to civil servant promotions made me recall when Slice Master used similar negotiation tricks in workplace meetings, asking for huge sacrifices, then settling for less but still affecting everyone. It shows how easy it is for organizations to mask their true intentions with strategic communication.
作者: CorazonShannon 時間: 2025-7-18 12:02
This article cleverly uses the door-in-the-face technique analogy to explain the civil service reform. It highlights how seemingly minor changes, like reducing the percentage for promotions, significantly impact career advancement and ultimately, reduce compensation. Navigating these policy changes feels a bit like trying to survive a complex arena in one of those tricky io games, where every move matters and strategy is key. Stay informed and understand the long-term consequences.
作者: Katherinee 時間: 2025-8-30 17:05 標題: A Fun but Tricky Challenge
A fascinating illustration of negotiation tactics, the door-in-the-face method always intrigued me. At my previous job, a Level Devil challenge arose when my manager asked for a massive project deadline, only to settle for a tight yet more reasonable one. I realized this maneuver pushed us to accept requests we'd initially refuse, not unlike the situations described here where strategic requests shaped outcomes.
| 歡迎光臨 ADJ網路實驗室 (http://dz.adj.idv.tw/) |
Powered by Discuz! 6.0.0 |