{"resolved":true,"match_type":"uuid","source_type":"original_book","book_id":"01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e","title":"总体绩效资本主义新精神","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787513647939","requested_by":"printed_page","book":{"source_type":"original_book","book_id":"01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e","id":"01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e","uuid":"01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e","title":"总体绩效资本主义新精神","normalized_title":"总体绩效资本主义新精神","author":null,"edition":null,"publisher":null,"year":null,"isbn":"9787513647939","isbns":["9787513647939"],"parsed":true,"ai_readable":true,"document_type":"book","page_count":221,"navigation_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e","title_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/title/%E6%80%BB%E4%BD%93%E7%BB%A9%E6%95%88%E8%B5%84%E6%9C%AC%E4%B8%BB%E4%B9%89%E6%96%B0%E7%B2%BE%E7%A5%9E","fixed_page_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/ai/book/01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e/page/{printed_page}","path_api_url_template":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/book/01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e/page/{printed_page}","read_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/read/01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e","page_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e/page","search_url":"https://workshop.closeclaw.top/api/ai/books/01d9787f-4c57-445a-9e15-ce10dae3b33e/search"},"page":{"printed_page":29,"pdf_page":38,"physical_index":38,"physical_index_base":0,"printed_page_status":"recognized","page_sha256":"3e634fb63b939d9e52b1114ff94ef5d61d10fee669011a7e7a7afb02d0374af9"},"chapter":"第二章服务业经济的绩效/52","content":"生产体制、消费以及社会关系的这种结构性变革，从长远来看，并未损耗掉影响整体绩效发展的所有积极要素。这种变革与政府实施“改革”的动力紧紧联系在一起，而且正如文森特·德·高乐雅克（Vincent de Gaulejac)所提出的那样，与“量化症(参见美国社会学家皮提瑞姆·索罗金(Pitirim Sorokin)的作品，他对这一概念有着权威的解释。)”的动机也密切相关。量化症是对数据与量化的一种狂热追求，是一种“测量上的病态执念”(Vincent deGaulejac，2005?;2011，P.188)。在国家的“现代化”趋势（详见第四章）之后，与我们所料不同的是：多种态度交叉叠加的越发深入。寄希望于评估公共政策以带来良好效果的人，认为这具有程序性正确的特点；而与之相反，更看重效益及其指数的人则将其在公共行为选择之前或之后合法化。这种双重判断标准带来大量麻烦。对公共政策和绩效测度上的评估态度的矛盾，正是建构主义和现实主义观点产生差异和混乱的源头。这个矛盾一方面维护着测度观点上的非政府主义特点，另一方面又在个人问题还是集体问题上保持模棱两可的态度。资本主义及其内部协调上的操盘手们(其中，经济学家与管理者是顶级操盘手)。在个人和社会两个层面上不时转换着观点。比如，他们提出个人绩效的积累可以产生社会和集体绩效，然而同时却忽视了公共财产的确认与维护问题。\n\n引言\n\n29","previous_page":28,"next_page":30}