更改

===决策===

===决策===

''Administrative Behavior'',<ref name="BarnardSimon1947">C. Barnard and H. A. Simon. (1947). ''Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-making Processes in Administrative Organization''. Macmillan, New York.</ref> first published in 1947 and updated across the years, was based on Simon's doctoral dissertation.<ref name="Simon1976">{{Harvnb|Simon|1976}}</ref> It served as the foundation for his life's work. The centerpiece of this book is the behavioral and cognitive processes of humans making rational decisions. By his definition, an operational administrative decision should be correct, efficient, and practical to implement with a set of coordinated means.<ref name="Simon1976"/>

赫伯特·A·西蒙对于决策研究的核心集中体现在了《管理行为（Administrative Behavior）》<ref name="BarnardSimon1947">C. Barnard and H. A. Simon. (1947). ''Administrative Behavior: A Study of Decision-making Processes in Administrative Organization''. Macmillan, New York.</ref>一书中。本书是基于西蒙的博士论文编写的<ref name="Simon1976">{{Harvnb|Simon|1976}}</ref> ，1947年第一次出版，多年来不断更新，这是他一生工作的基础。这本书的核心是人类做出理性决定的认知和行为过程。按照他的定义，一个可操作的行政决策应该是正确的、有效的、实用的，并且要有一套协调的方法来实施<ref name="Simon1976"/>。

{{Quotation|[If] there were no limits to human rationality administrative theory would be barren. It would consist of the single precept: Always select that alternative, among those available, which will lead to the most complete achievement of your goals.<ref name="Simon1976"/> (p xxviii)}}

西蒙认识到管理理论在很大程度上是人类决策的理论，因此必须同时以经济学和心理学为基础。他表示:

 

Contrary to the "[[homo economicus]]" stereotype, Simon argued that alternatives and consequences may be partly known, and means and ends imperfectly differentiated, incompletely related, or poorly detailed.<ref name="Simon1976"/>

如果人类理性的施展可以没有约束，那么行政理论就会是荒谬的。它将只包含一个简单的规则: 在所有可供选择的的选项中，永远选择那一个最能完整达成自己目标的选项<ref name="Simon1976"/>。

与“经济人”假设相反，西蒙认为所有选项和后续结果都可能只是被部分了解的，且方法和目的没有被完全区分，甚至可能不完全相关<ref name="Simon1976"/>。

Simon defined the task of rational decision making is to select the alternative that results in the more preferred set of all the possible consequences. Correctness of administrative decisions was thus measured by:

西蒙定义了理性决策的任务是选择那些能最大化实现目标的选项。因此，衡量管理决定是否正确的标准是:

Simon attempted to determine the techniques and/or behavioral processes that a person or organization could bring to bear to achieve approximately the best result given limits on rational decision making.<ref name=Simon1976/> Simon writes:

任何试图在实际情况下实现这个模型的特定个人或组织都无法满足这三个要求。西蒙认为，在许多现实的案例中，不可能知道所有的备选方案，或者每个备选方案产生的所有后果<ref name="BarnardSimon1947"/>。

<blockquote>

<blockquote>

The human being striving for rationality and restricted within the limits of his knowledge has developed some working procedures that partially overcome these difficulties. These procedures consist in assuming that he can isolate from the rest of the world a closed system containing a limited number of variables and a limited range of consequences.<ref>{{Harvnb|Simon|1976|p=82}}</ref>

受到有限知识的约束，却又孜孜不倦地追求理性的人类已经开发出一些技术，部分地克服了“有限理性”地困难。比如说，人们假设自己可以从这个世界中分离出一个封闭的系统，其中只包含有限数量的变量，产生有限范围的后果。<ref>{{Harvnb|Simon|1976|p=82}}</ref>

</blockquote>

</blockquote>

Therefore, Simon describes work in terms of an economic framework, conditioned on human cognitive limitations: ''Economic man'' and ''Administrative man''.

因此，西蒙用一个经济学框架来描述自己地工作，这个框架以人类的认知局限为条件: 经济人和管理人。

 

Simon followed [[Chester Barnard]], who stated "the decisions that an individual makes as a member of an organization are quite distinct from his personal decisions".<ref>{{Harvnb|Barnard|1938|p=77}} cited by {{Harvnb|Simon|1976|pp= 202–203}}</ref> Personal choices may be determined whether an individual joins a particular organization and continue to be made in his or her extra–organizational private life. As a member of an organization, however, that individual makes decisions not in relationship to personal needs and results, but in an impersonal sense as part of the organizational intent, purpose, and effect. Organizational inducements, rewards, and sanctions are all designed to form, strengthen, and maintain this identification.{{citation needed|date=January 2014}}

西蒙是切斯特·巴纳德的追随者。巴纳德说：“一个人作为一个组织的成员时所做的决定，与他的作为一个个体时做出的决定是不同的”<ref>{{Harvnb|Barnard|1938|p=77}} cited by {{Harvnb|Simon|1976|pp= 202–203}}</ref>。当然一个人无论是否假如一个组织，他都可以做出个人决策。哪怕他加入了组织，在组织外的私人生活，他也可以根绝自己的偏好做选择。然而，作为一个组织的成员时，个人所做的决定与个人的需要和结果无关，而是作为组织意图、目的和效果的一部分，在非个人意义上做出的。组织的激励、奖励和制裁都是为了形成、加强和保持这种认同而设计的。

Simon<ref name="Simon1976"/> saw two universal elements of human social behavior as key to creating the possibility of organizational behavior in human individuals: Authority (addressed in Chapter VII—The Role of Authority) and in Loyalties and Identification (Addressed in Chapter X: Loyalties, and Organizational Identification).

西蒙认为人类社会行为的两个普遍要素—— 权威，和忠诚以及身份认同<ref name="Simon1976"/> ，是从人类个体行为重诞生出组织行为学的关键。

Loyalty was defined by Simon as the "process whereby the individual substitutes organizational objectives (service objectives or conservation objectives) for his own aims as the value-indices which determine his organizational decisions".<ref>{{Harvnb|Simon|1976|pp= 218}}</ref> This entailed evaluating alternative choices in terms of their consequences for the group rather than only for oneself or one's family.<ref>{{Harvnb|Simon|1976|pp= 206}}</ref>

西蒙将忠诚定义为“个人用组织目标替代自身目标作为决策制定的价值取向的过程”<ref>{{Harvnb|Simon|1976|pp= 218}}</ref>。这意味着评估各种选项时要考虑对组织的影响，而不仅仅是对自己或家庭的影响<ref>{{Harvnb|Simon|1976|pp= 206}}</ref>。

Decisions can be complex admixtures of facts and values. Information about facts, especially empirically-proven facts or facts derived from specialized experience, are more easily transmitted in the exercise of authority than are the expressions of values. Simon is primarily interested in seeking identification of the individual employee with the organizational goals and values. Following [[Lasswell]],<ref>{{Harvnb|Lasswell|1935|pp=29–51}} cited by {{Harvnb|Simon|1976|pp=205}}</ref> he states that "a person identifies himself with a group when, in making a decision, he evaluates the several alternatives of choice in terms of their consequences for the specified group".<ref>{{Harvnb|Simon|1976|p=205}}</ref> A person may identify himself with any number of social, geographic, economic, racial, religious, familial, educational, gender, political, and sports groups. Indeed, the number and variety are unlimited. The fundamental problem for organizations is to recognize that personal and group identifications may either facilitate or obstruct correct decision making for the organization. A specific organization has to determine deliberately, and specify in appropriate detail and clear language, its own goals, objectives, means, ends, and values.{{citation needed|date=January 2014}}

决策可以是事实和价值的复杂混合体。有关事实的信息，尤其是经过实践证明的事实或来自专门经验的事实，在行使权力时比表达价值时更容易传播<ref>{{Harvnb|Lasswell|1935|pp=29–51}} cited by {{Harvnb|Simon|1976|pp=205}}</ref>。西蒙主要感兴趣的是寻求员工个体对组织目标和价值观的认同。继拉斯韦尔之后，他指出，“当一个人在做决定时，根据选择对特定群体的影响来评估选项时，他就把自己与一个群体联系起来了。”<ref>{{Harvnb|Simon|1976|p=205}}</ref> 。一个人可以认同任何数量的社会、地理、经济、种族、宗教、家庭、教育、性别、政治和体育团体。事实上，数量和种类是无限的。组织的基本问题是认识到个人和群体认同可能有助于或阻碍组织的正确决策。一个特定的组织必须有意识地决定，并且以适当的细节和明确的语言规定它自己的目标、目的、手段、目的和价值观。

Simon has been critical of traditional economics' elementary understanding of decision-making, and argues it "is too quick to build an idealistic, unrealistic picture of the decision-making process and then prescribe on the basis of such unrealistic picture".<ref>Simon, Herbert. https://www.ubs.com/microsites/nobel-perspectives/en/herbert-simon.html</ref>

西蒙一直对传统经济学对决策的基本理解持批评态度，他认为，传统经济学“轻率地对决策过程构建一幅理想主义的、不切实际的图景，然后再根据这种不切实际的图景开出处方”<ref>Simon, Herbert. https://www.ubs.com/microsites/nobel-perspectives/en/herbert-simon.html</ref>。

===人工智能===

===人工智能===