Essential knowledge for management majors

1. Butterfly effect: In the 1970s, a meteorologist named Lorenz in the United States explained the air system theory that a butterfly's wings in the Amazon rainforest occasionally vibrated, and perhaps two weeks later, it would cause problems in Texas, the United States. A tornado. The butterfly effect means that a very small change in the initial conditions will be continuously amplified, which will make a huge difference in its future state. Some trivial matters can be confused, and some trivial matters, if amplified by the system, are very important to an organization and a country, so you should not be confused.

2. Frog phenomenon: Put a frog directly into the hot water pot. Because it is very sensitive to the bad environment, it will quickly jump out of the pot. If you put a frog into a pot of cold water and heat it slowly, the frog will not jump out of the pot immediately. The final result of the gradual increase in water temperature is that the frog is boiled to death. It's too late, or it's impossible to get out of the pot. The frog phenomenon tells us that some mutation events tend to arouse people's vigilance, but what is easy to cause death is the gradual deterioration of the actual situation without a clear sense of self-perception. -
To
3. The crocodile law: The original intent is to assume that a crocodile bites your foot. If you try to break free from your foot with your hand, the crocodile will bite your foot and hand at the same time. The more you struggle, the more you get bitten. So, in case the crocodile bites your foot, your only way is to sacrifice one foot. For example, in the stock market, the crocodile rule is: when you find that your transaction deviates from the direction of the market, you must stop the loss immediately, without any delay, and without any fluke.
To
4. Catfish effect: In the past, the survival rate of sardines during transportation was very low. Later, someone discovered that if a catfish were put in the sardine, the situation would be changed and the survival rate would be greatly improved. Why is this? It turns out that when the catfish arrives in a strange environment, it will be "irritable" and swim around, which undoubtedly played a stirring effect for a large number of quiet sardines; and the sardines found this kind of more. "Aliens" are naturally nervous too, speeding up their swimming. In this way, the problem of sardine hypoxia is solved, and the sardine will not die.
To
5. Herd effect: wherever the first sheep goes, the following sheep will follow. Herding effect is the earliest term in stock investment, which mainly refers to the phenomenon of investors learning and imitating in the trading process, "have something to learn" and blindly imitate others, which leads them to buy and sell the same stocks in a certain period of time. .

6. The Hedgehog's Law: Two sleepy hedgehogs huddled together because of the cold. But because they had thorns on their bodies, they moved a distance away, but they couldn't stand the cold, so they got together. After several toss, the two hedgehogs finally found a suitable distance: they can get each other's warmth without being pierced. The Hedgehog Law mainly refers to the "psychological distance effect" in interpersonal communication.
To
7. The law of the watch: The law of the watch means that when a person has one watch, he can know what time it is, but when he has two at the same time, he cannot be sure. Two watches can't tell a person a more accurate time, but will make the person who reads the watch lose confidence in the accurate time. The law of watches gives us a very intuitive inspiration in business management, that is, two different methods cannot be used for the same person or the same organization at the same time, two different goals cannot be set at the same time, and even each person cannot be done by two people. Command at the same time, otherwise the enterprise or individual will be at a loss.
To
8. Broken window theory: If the window of a house is broken, no one will repair it. After a short while, other windows will be broken inexplicably; on one wall, if some graffiti appears on the wall and has not been cleaned off, it will soon be on the wall. It is full of messy, unsightly things; in a very clean place, people are embarrassed to throw rubbish, but once there is rubbish on the ground, people will throw it away without hesitation, without feeling ashamed.
To
9. Twenty-eight law (Baledo's law): The Italian economist Valedo at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century believed that in any group of things, the most important accounted for only a small part, about 20%, and the remaining 80 % Although it is the majority, it is secondary. About 80% of society’s wealth is concentrated in the hands of 20% of people, and 80% of people only own 20% of social wealth. This statistical imbalance is ubiquitous in society, economy and life. This is the rule of twenty-eight. The Twenty-Eight Rule tells us that we should not analyze, process and treat problems equally. We must seize the key few in business operation and management; we must find those that can bring 80% of the company’s profits but only account for 20% of the total. For customers, strengthen services to achieve a multiplier effect; business leaders must carefully classify and analyze work, and spend their main energy on solving major problems and grasping major projects. -
To
10. Wooden barrel theory: If the length of the wooden barrels that make up the wooden barrel is not the same, the amount of water in the wooden barrel does not depend on the longest wooden board, but on the shortest wooden board.
To
11. The Matthew Effect: There is a famous saying in the "Bible? The Gospel of Matthew": "Everything that has it should be added to him, so that he has a surplus; if there is none, even what he has will be taken away." Sociologist The concept of "Matthew Effect" is derived from it, which is used to describe the polarization phenomenon that exists in the field of social life.

1. Birdcage logic: Hang a beautiful birdcage in the most conspicuous place in the room. After a few days, the owner will definitely make one of the following two choices: throw the birdcage away, or buy a bird back and put it back In the bird cage. This is the birdcage logic. The process is very simple. Imagine that you are the owner of this room. As long as someone walks into the room and sees the bird cage, they can’t help but ask you: "Where is the bird? Is it dead?" When you answer: "I never did Raised birds." People will ask, "So, what do you want a birdcage for?" In the end you have to choose between two options, because it is much easier than endless explanations. The reason for the birdcage logic is simple: people mostly adopt inertial thinking. So it can be seen how important it is to cultivate logical thinking in life and work.
To
2. Broken window effect: In psychological research, there is a phenomenon called "broken window effect", that is, if a house has a broken window, no one will repair it, and after a short while, other windows will be broken inexplicably; On a wall, if some graffiti appears and is not cleaned off, soon the wall is covered with messy things that are unsightly. In a very clean place, people will be embarrassed to throw rubbish, but once there is rubbish on the ground, people will throw it away without hesitation, without feeling ashamed. This is really a very strange phenomenon. Psychologists study this "tipping point". How dirty the ground needs to be before people feel that it is so dirty anyway. No matter how dirty it is, it doesn't matter how bad the situation is, people will give up on themselves and let it rot to the end. Any bad thing, if it is not blocked at the beginning, forms a climate, and cannot be changed, it is like a river bank. If a small gap is not repaired in time, the dam can collapse, causing millions of times losses. Crime is actually the result of disorder. In the 1980s, New York City was robbed everywhere and killed every day. Even walking on the road during the day would be scared. Not to mention the subway, the car is dirty and messy, everywhere is smeared with foul sentences, sitting in the subway, everyone is in danger. Although I have not been robbed, a professor was knocked on a sap in broad daylight and his eyes became blind. Since then, his research career has ended. I have been talking about tigers for many years and have not dared to go to a meeting in New York alone. Recently, the appearance and reputation of New York City has improved a lot, which surprised me a lot. A city that has already sunk down has been able to come back from the dead and rise upward. Therefore, when I went out to a meeting and met a criminologist, I immediately asked him for advice. It turned out that New York City used the theory of broken window effect that was taught in books in the past to improve the crime environment and make people less likely to commit crimes. Slowly arrest the criminals, catch the thief, and return to order. At that time, although this practice was criticized as "the ship was sinking and was still washing the deck", New York City still started to maintain the cleanliness of subway cars, and handcuffed people who did not buy tickets for free riders in a row. A train stood on the platform and publicly announced to the people the government's determination to reorganize, and it turned out to be very effective. The police found that people are less likely to commit crimes in clean places, and found that evading fare evasion is very rewarding, because one in seven people who evade fare is a wanted criminal, and one in twenty carries a weapon. Therefore, the police are willing to be very willing. Seriously catch the fare evasion, which makes the gangsters dare not to evade the fare, and dare not bring weapons when they go out, so as not to gain more than the gains and lose too much due to small losses. In this way, New York City starts from the smallest and easiest place, breaking the criminal chain, making this vicious circle impossible to continue-
To
3. Responsibility dispersion effect: At 3:20 on the night of March 13, 1964, in front of an apartment in the suburbs of New York, a young woman named Juno Bibai was assassinated on her way home from work in the bar. When she shouted desperately: "Someone is going to kill! Help! Help!" When she heard the shouting, nearby residents turned on the lights and opened the windows, and the murderer frightened away. When everything calmed down, the murderer returned to commit the crime. When she yelled again, nearby residents turned on the lights again, and the murderer ran away again. When she thought she was fine and went upstairs to her own house, the murderer appeared in front of her again and killed her on the stairs. In the process, although she called for help, at least 38 of her neighbors came to the window to watch, but no one came to rescue her, and no one even called the police. This incident caused a sensation in New York society, and also aroused the attention and thinking of social psychologists. People call this phenomenon of many bystanders failing to save themselves as the responsibility dispersion effect. Psychologists have conducted a large number of experiments and investigations on the causes of the decentralization effect, and found that this phenomenon cannot only be said to be a manifestation of the ruthlessness of the people or the deteriorating morality. Because on different occasions, people's assistance behavior is indeed different. When a person encounters an emergency situation, if only he alone can provide help, he will be soberly aware of his responsibilities and help the victims. If he fails to save him, he will feel guilt and guilt, which requires a high psychological price. And if there are many people present, the responsibility of helping the seeker will be shared by everyone, resulting in scattered responsibilities. Everyone’s shared responsibilities are very few. The bystander may not even realize his own responsibility. A mentality of "I will not save, let others save" has created a situation of "collective indifference". How to break this situation is an important topic that psychologists are studying.
To
4. Parkinson's Law: The famous British historian Northgood Parkinson wrote a book called "Parkinson's Law" through long-term investigation and research. In his book, he explained the reasons and consequences of the expansion of the organization's staff: an incompetent official may have three ways out. The first is to apply for resignation and give up the position to a capable person; the second is to let a capable person to assist. Work by yourself; the third is to use two people with lower levels as assistants. This first way is absolutely impossible, because that will lose many rights; the second way cannot be taken, because the capable person will become his opponent; it seems that only the third way is the most suitable. As a result, two mediocre assistants shared his work, and he himself gave orders from the top that they would not pose a threat to his rights. Since the two assistants are incompetent, they will do their best and find two more incompetent assistants for themselves. By analogy, a leadership system is formed that is bloated, overwhelming, wrangling with each other, and inefficient.
To
5. Halo effect: The famous Russian writer Pushkin suffered a lot from the halo effect. He enthusiastically fell in love with Natalie, known as the "No. 1 Beauty in Moscow", and married her. Natalie looks amazing, but she doesn't agree with Pushkin. When Pushkin reads her written poems to her every time. She always covered her ears and said: "Don't listen! Don't listen!" On the contrary, she always asked Pushkin to accompany her to play and attend some luxurious evenings and dances. Pushkin left his creations for this, and made debts high, and finally paid her back. The death of a duel caused a literary superstar to fall prematurely. In Pushkin's view, a beautiful woman must also have extraordinary wisdom and noble character, but this is not the case. This phenomenon is called the halo effect. The so-called halo effect is that in interpersonal communication, a certain aspect of a person's characteristics conceal other characteristics, thereby causing obstacles to interpersonal cognition. In daily life, the "halo effect" often quietly affects our perception and evaluation of others. For example, some elderly people are not pleasing to young people’s individual shortcomings, or their clothes and lifestyle habits, and they think they must be worthless; some young people will look at their friends everywhere because they admire a certain cuteness of their friends. Cute, it's so-called "one handsome hides one hundred ugly". The halo effect is a generalized subjective psychological conjecture. Its mistakes are: first, it is easy to grasp the individual characteristics of things, and it is used to generalize them individually, just like a blind person touches an elephant, using dots to replace the face; second, it is easy to grasp the individual characteristics of things. , It connects some personalities or appearance characteristics that are not internally connected, and asserts that there must be another characteristic if there is such a characteristic; third, it is all affirmed if it is good, and it is all negated if it is bad. This is a kind of Absolute tendency governed by subjective prejudice. In short, the halo effect is a cognitive obstacle that has a great impact on people's psychology in interpersonal communication. We should try our best to avoid and overcome the side effects of the halo effect in communication. -
To
6. Hawthorne effect: An experimenter effect in psychology. In the 1920s and 1930s, American researchers found the experimenter effect in the experiment on the relationship between working conditions, social factors and production benefits at the Hawthorne plant of Chicago Western Electric Power Company, called the Hawthorne effect. The first stage of the experiment was from 1924 The relationship between working conditions and production benefits starting in November 2015 was set as the experimental group and the control group. As a result, regardless of increasing or controlling the illuminance, the output of the experimental group increased, and the output of the control group with the same illuminance also increased. In addition, factors such as wages and remuneration, break time, daily working length, and number of working days per week have been tested, and it is not clear that these working conditions have any direct impact on production efficiency. The second phase of the experiment was led by Professor Mayo of Harvard University, focusing on the study of the relationship between social factors and production efficiency. It was found that the increase in production efficiency was mainly due to the tremendous changes in the subject's spirit. Workers participating in the experiment are placed in a special laboratory and led by researchers. Their social conditions have changed and they have received attention from all aspects, thus forming a feeling of participating in the experiment, feeling that they are an important part of the company, so that the workers Be motivated from a social perspective to promote the increase in output. This effect tells us that when classmates or themselves are paid attention or watched by the public, the efficiency of learning and communication will be greatly increased. Therefore, we must learn to be friendly with others in our daily lives and understand what kind of behavior is accepted and appreciated by our classmates and teachers. Only when we continue to increase our good behaviors in life and study, can we be more likely to be affected. People's attention and appreciation can make our learning progress continuously and full of confidence!
To
7. Learned helplessness experiment: The learned helplessness effect was first discovered by Overmeer and Siligman, and later was widely discussed in animal and human research. Simply put, many experiments show that after training, dogs can cross the barrierOr engage in other behaviors to avoid the electric shock that the experimenter imposes on it. However, if the dog has received an unpredictable (do not know when it will come) and uncontrollable electric shock (such as the interruption of the electric shock does not depend on the dog's behavior), when the dog later has a chance to escape the electric shock, they also become unable to escape . Moreover, the dog also showed other defects, such as feeling frustrated and depressed, decreased initiative and so on. The dog exhibited this condition because he learned a sense of helplessness early in the experiment. In other words, they realize that no matter what they do, they cannot control the termination of the electric shock. In each experiment, the termination of the electric shock is under the control of the experimenter, and the dog will realize that it has no ability to change this external control, and thus learn a sense of helplessness. If a person has learned helplessness, it becomes a kind of deep despair and sorrow. Therefore, we should broaden our eyes in our study and life, see the real decisive factors behind the incident, and don't let ourselves fall into despair.
To
8. Witnesses' memories: Witnesses, in our understanding, are usually people who provide some objective evidence, who are those who truthfully tell what they have seen and heard with their own eyes. However, psychological research has proved that the testimony provided by many witnesses is not accurate, or it is personally inclined, with personal views and consciousness. The confidence of the witnesses in their testimony does not determine the accuracy of their testimony. The results of this study are surprising. Psychologists Perfekt and Howlins decided to conduct a more in-depth study of this conclusion. In order to examine whether the witness’s testimony has something special, they compared the witness’s memory with the memory of general knowledge. They asked the subjects to watch a short video about the kidnapping of a girl. On the second day, the subjects were asked to answer some questions about the content of the video, and asked them to say their confidence in their answers, and then took a recognition memory test. Next, using the same method, the content is general knowledge questions selected from encyclopedias and popular readings. As happened before, Perfekt and Howlins also found that in the accuracy of the witness’s recollection, those who were confident in their answers were not actually better than those who were not confident, but they were more knowledgeable about general knowledge. In other words, this is not the case. People with high confidence recall their results much better than those with low confidence. People are aware of their own strengths and weaknesses in general knowledge. Therefore, they tend to modify their test results on the confidence scale. General knowledge is a database, which is shared between individuals. It has a recognized correct answer, and the subjects can measure it by themselves. For example, people will know whether they are better or worse than others in sports. However, the witnessed event is not affected by this self-knowledge. For example, in general, they are unlikely to know that they are better or worse than others in terms of hair color of participants in memory events.
To
9. Rosenthal effect: American psychologist Rosenthal and others did a famous experiment in 1968. They went to an elementary school and selected three classes of children from grades one to six to take a meaningful "test for predicting future development". Then the experimenter notified the teacher of the list of students who thought they had "excellent development potential". In fact, this list is not determined based on the test results, but randomly selected. It implied teachers with "authoritative lies", thus mobilizing teachers' expectations of the students on the list. Eight months later, the results of the smart test again found that the grades of the students on the list generally improved, and the teachers also gave them good behavior reviews. This experiment has achieved miraculous results. People call this phenomenon of teachers’ subtle influence on students’ psychology so that students can achieve the progress expected by teachers, which is called the "Rosenthal effect", which is also habitually called Pygmalion effect (Pygmalion is the king of Cyprus in ancient Greek mythology. He had a love for a statue of a girl, and his ardor eventually turned the statue into a real person, and the two fell in love together). Educational practice also shows that if teachers love certain students, they will have higher expectations for them. After a period of time, students will feel the care, love and encouragement of teachers; they often treat teachers with a positive attitude, learn and treat themselves. Students are more self-esteem, self-confidence, self-love, and self-improvement, which induces a positive passion. These students often make the progress expected by the teacher. On the contrary, those students who are neglected and discriminated against by the teacher will experience the teacher’s “bias” in the teacher’s words, behavior, and expressions over time, and will also treat the teacher in a negative manner, treat their own learning, ignore or refuse to obey the teacher. These students often become bad day by day, and eventually become bad elements in society. Although there are some exceptions, the general trend is the same, and it is also a wake-up call for teachers.
To
10. False consensus bias: We usually believe that our hobbies are the same as most people. If you like to play computer games, then you may overestimate the number of people who like computer games. You also usually overestimate the number of people who vote for your favorite classmates, overestimate your prestige and leadership in the group, and so on. Your tendency to overestimate the number of people with the same characteristics as your behavior and attitude is called "false empathy bias." Some factors will affect the strength of your false empathy bias:
(1) When the external attribution is stronger than the internal attribution;
(2) When the current behavior or event is very important to someone;
(3) When you are very certain or convinced of your own opinions;
(4) When your status or normal life and study are threatened;
(5) When it comes to a positive quality or personality;
(6) When you see other people as similar to yourself.