《组织社会心理学》学习笔记 032

原文：Consider some examples. Two o'clock research is general and accurate but is also difficult. Psychoanalytic theory (Fenichel 1945), Levinson's book on organizational diagnosis (Levinson 1972), and Bateson's (1972) work are good examples. Six o'clock research is accurate and simple, but its generality is suspect. Coalition theory (Komorita and Chertkoff 1973), much of which is tied to highly contrived situations, is a good example of this position. It's interesting that lab studies as well as case studies share positions at six o’clock. Both preserve accuracy and simplicity and sacrifice general relevance. The final position, ten o'clock research, combines generality and simplicity at the expense of accuracy. Concepts such as the organized anarchy, loose coupling, deviation amplification, and the Peter Principle illustrate this position.

原文：Failure to accept the inevitable tradeoffs implied in the GAS formulation seems to be at the heart of many current research problems. Investigators act as if they can simultaneously accomplish all three aims in their explanations, and that delusion is at the heart of much trivial, inconclusive research. The solution would seem to be either robust compromises or alternation rather than attempts to accomplish all three. If one accepts the reality that at most only two of those three virtues can be realized, then many rules and constraints in inquiry take on a new interpretation. This can be illustrated if we look at three mixed positions: two o'clock research, six o'clock research, and ten o'clock research.