【作者】 余应鸿；

【导师】 张学敏；

【作者基本信息】 西南大学 ， 领导教育学， 2014， 博士

【摘要】 人文社科研究的发展水平,体现着一个国家和民族的思维能力、精神状态和文明素质。在经济全球化,文化多元化背景下,人文社科研究管理对推进人文社科研究的繁荣发展具有重要作用。然而,在高校人文社科研究迅猛发展的同时,高校人文社科研究管理暴露出“重形式轻内涵”、“重结果轻过程”、“重数量轻质量”等诸多问题,高校人文社科研究低水平重复现象严重,具有原创性、开拓性、集成性的传世佳作不多。在“范式”视域下探讨高校人文社科研究管理,其主旨在于超越对高校人文社科研究管理的形而下探究,实现对其根本问题的深度思考。基于托马斯·库恩等学者对“范式”的理解,本研究提出“科研管理范式”,即人文社科研究管理主体所共同信奉的根本信念及由此延伸出的具体管理方式。其根本“信念”包括本体论层面对管理本质的认识、方法论层面对管理方式理论基础的定位、人性论层面对管理主客体中“人”的人性假设等；其“管理方式”是基于科研管理共同体内共同信念基础上的具体管理技术、方法与手段等。由此可见,当前我国高校人文社科研究管理在范式意义上属于现代性管理范式,主要表现为本体论意义上的“科学至上论”、方法论意义上的唯实证主义、价值观意义上的非人文化、与功能类意义上即时功利化指向。人文社科研究以人类社会生活承载的人类精神世界及精神文化为研究对象,其特殊性表征为明确的价值倾向、与意识形态紧密关联及研究过程的灵活与开放、研究成果的难以度量等,它与高校人文社科研究现代性管理范式存在根本性冲突。这种冲突在当前思想解放、精神自由、追求观念创新的时代背景之下尤其突出与强烈。从纵向上看,新中国成立初期,由于受前苏联学科分类的影响,高校基本没有设置独立的人文社科研究管理机构,大多依托自然科学研究管理机构(科研处或科技处)附带管理。文革”期间,高校人文社科研究处于停滞或中断状态,高校人文社科研究管理名存实亡。改革开放以后,高校人文社科研究管理呈现“唯科学”化、“唯数量”化、“唯功利”化等特征,并走向极致。从横向上看,我国高校人文社科研究现代性管理范式表现在诸多方面。在管理理念上,追求成果数量,忽视学术价值；在管理制度上,强化刚性管理；在管理操作层面,强化研究结果,忽视研究过程。现代性管理范式违背了人文社会科学研究的发展规律。突破现代性管理范式,以复杂科学、自组织理论为指导,构建人文管理范式以解决如上矛盾冲突是本研究的旨归。人文管理范式的理论建构,在价值取向上要求刚柔相济(由“刚性”向“柔性”转换)、控导相容(由“控制”向“引导”转换)、显隐相合(由“疏忽”向“重视”转变)、量质相印(由“数量”向“质量”转换)；构建方略上,其科研管理始终要体现人、服务人、立足人,在精神指向上做到文化管理与人本效果统一、人文性与科学性协同、管理者与科研人员和谐,其基本思路是优化和构建人文管理范式关照下的目标体系、路径体系、评价体系和实践机制。人文管理范式的实践探索,首先要建立具有人文性的人文社会科学研究管理共同体,将人文社会科学研究团队和管理者共同纳入该共同体中,共同讨论与规划高校人文社科研究的发展和研究领域的重大改革事项,共同制定科研管理制度。其次,建构人文社会科学研究人文管理支撑体系,大力营造人文环境,加强人文管理范式运行的组织建设,强化人文管理范式运行的制度保障。第三,构建人文管理范式的运行机制,充分发挥牵引机制的拉动作用,激励机制利约束机制的推动功效,确保人文管理范式的有效运行。第四,推行人文管理效果评估。制定形式与人文实质并重、管制预防与善治过程协同、点面结合与理趣相容兼顾的评估原则；建立科学、有效的人文管理评估体系。更多还原

【Abstract】 The development level of researches on humanities and social sciences embodies a nation’s thinking ability, mental state and civilized quality. Under the background of economic globalization and cultural pluralism, the management of researches on humanities and social sciences plays an important part in promoting the prosperity and development of researches on humanities and social sciences. However, while researches on humanities and social sciences among universities are developing rapidly, the management of them has exposed many problems such as "form overweighing content","result overweighing process" and "quantity overweighing quality". Besides, the phenomenon of low-level repetition for researches on humanities and social sciences among universities is serious, and there ae not many original, pioneering and integrated works that can be handled down classic. The main purposes of exploring the management of researches on humanities and social sciences among universities from the perspective of "paradigm" are to transcend physical exploration into the management of researches on humanities and social sciences among universities and to have a deep thinking of the fundamental problems.Based on the understanding of the scholars such as Thomas S. Kunn to "Paradigm" the research proposes "research management paradigm", namely the fundamental belief which the subject of the management of researches on humanities and social sciences believes in and the specific management patterns which are extended by that. The fundamental "belief" includes understanding of management essence on the ontological level, position of the theoretical basis of management patterns on the methodological level, humanity assumption of "person" in the managerial subject and object on the level of humanity, etc;"The management patterns" are specific management techniques, methods, means and so forth on the basis of common belief in the community of research management. Therefore, at present, the management of researches on humanities and social sciences among universities in our country belongs to modern management paradigm in the sense of paradigm, which is characterized by "supremacy of science" in the ontological sense, purely positivism in the methodological sense, unhuman culture in the sense of values and instant utilitarian orientation in the sense of functions.Researches on humanities and social sciences target human spiritual world and spiritual culture in human social life whose particularity is characterized as clear value inclination, close relation with ideology, flexibility and openness of research process, hard metric of research products and so on, and they are in conflict with the modern management paradigm of researches on humanities and social sciences among universities. The conflict is particularly prominent and intense under the background of ideological emancipation, mental freedom and the pursuit of innovative ideas. Longitudinally, in the early decades of the founding of New China, influenced by the discipline classification of former Soviet Union, universities hardly set up independent management institutions for researches on humanities and social sciences, most of which relied on management institutions of natural science research (Scientific Research Department or Science and Technology Department) for incidental management. During the Cultural Revolution, researches on humanities and social sciences among universities were stagnant or suspended, and the management of them existed in name only. After reform and opening up, the management of researches on humanities and social sciences among universities exhibited the features of "scientism""quantification" and "utilitarianism", and moved toward the extreme pole. Synchronically, the modern management paradigm of researches on humanities and social sciences among universities of our country displays in many respects. In management ideas, the quantity of research results is pursued and academic value is neglected; In management system, rigid management is reinforced; In management operations, research results are valued and research process is neglected.The modern management paradigm has violated the law of researches on humanities and social sciences among universities. The aim of the research lies in breaking through the modern management paradigm and building a humanistic management paradigm by following the guidance of complexity science and self-organization theory to resolve the conflicts mentioned above.In terms of the value orientation, the theoretical construction of the humanistic management paradigm requires the combination of stiffness and flexibility (the transformation from "stiffness" to "flexibility"), the compatibility of control and guidance (the transformation from "control" to "guidance"), the consistency of negligence and value (the transformation from "negligence" to "value") and the integration of quantity and quality (the transformation from "quantity" to "quality"); In terms of the construction strategy, its research management should always reflect people, serve people and be based on people, and it should also achieve unification of cultural management and humanistic effect, collaboration of humanity and scientificity and harmony of administrators and researchers, whose basic idea is to optimize and construct objective system, route system, evaluation system and practical mechanism in the light of the humanistic management paradigm.As for the practical exploration of the humanistic management paradigm, firstly, establish a community of humanities and social science research management with the feature of humanity, integrate both the humanities and social science research team and the administrator into the community, jointly discuss and project the development of researches on humanities and social science among universities and major reforms of the research field, and jointly set up research management system. Secondly, construct supporting system of humanistic management for researches on humanities and social sciences, try every effort to create a cultural environment, strengthen the operating organization construction of the humanistic management paradigm and reinforce operating system guarantee of the humanistic management paradigm. Thirdly, construct operating mechanism of the humanistic management paradigm, give full play to the pulling function of traction mechanism and the promoting effect of motivation mechanism and restriction mechanism, and keep the humanistic management paradigm working effectively. Fourth, practice effect evaluation for humanistic management. That is to say, establish the evaluating principles in which form and humanistic essence are paid equal attention, control and prevention collaborate with the process of good governance, and the integration of point and sphere is compatible with rational interest; establish scientific and effective evaluation system of humanistic management.更多还原