大家都学弟子规（修订版 第11版） 任登第、牛淑卿【正版】 下载 pdf 电子版 epub 免费 txt 2025

《大家都学 (第3版)》是中央党校资深教授深思之作。该书认为中国文化的基因就藏在《弟子规》中。《弟子规》可以沟通传统与现代、个人与社会。学习《弟子规》可以立人，可以自立。

教育工作者要首先学好《弟子规》；为人父母要先学好《弟子规》；各级党校、各类大学、中学、小学要把《弟子规》列为必修课。

《弟子规》是个人成长的“养正宝典”。大人小孩都要学习《弟子规》，大家都要学习《弟子规》。

《大家都学 (第3版)》的内容分为七个部分，编写次序分别是入则孝、出则弟（悌）、谨、信、泛爱众、亲仁、余力学文，这就强调了教育的先后次序一定是先学做人，后学做事，也就是先培养德行，后学习知识、技能，它特别强调了教育的重要性，以及道德教育的先后次序问题。

再版序言（中共中央党校 -刘余莉教授）

答读者问 为什么要大家都学《弟子规》

（一）为了建设中国特色社会主义

（二）为了中华民族后继有人，脉脉相传

实践《弟子规》，扎好做人根

——20年春节贺辞

中国特色社会主义和中国传统文化

——纪念中国共产党成立九十周年

（一）中国特色社会主义是先进的人文科学

（二）中国传统文化是全人类秀的文化

（三）学习中国传统文化首先要学好《弟子规》

大的爱民是落实党“育人为本、德育为先”教育方针

——新中国成立六十周年回顾与展望

领导干部当前最需读的书是《弟子规》

教育工作者首先要学好《弟子规》

共产党员为什么要学习《弟子规》

各级党校都应该开设《弟子规》课程

（一）历史的经验

（二）现实的需要

（三）放下官架子，聆听圣人训

《弟子规》是提高共产党员修养的优良读本

（一）加强全心全意为人民服务思想的好教材

（二）做人做事做学问的大智慧

（三）排除障碍认真学

养不教，父之过

——从子女不孝问题引起的思考

（一）错在没有用中国文化教育子女

（二）努力做好君亲师

人以德为本，德以孝为本

——写在“蔡礼旭文集”系列图书出版之前

断恶修善，积功累德

——《大家都学感应篇》序言

《弟子规》进学校势在必行

——《落实 中小学篇》序言

世界三大危机频发，

是对反对中国传统文化者的严重惩罚

要为中国传统文化平反昭雪

——兼评《对中国传统文化的一个基本估计》

（一）中国产生不出现代民主是历史必然， -中国文化何罪之有？

（二）中国文化有精华有糟粕，精华是主要的，糟粕是次要的

（三）孔子讲的是做人之道、治国之本，何谈维护封建专制主义

（四）中国文化是指导人类进化的大智慧，能

任登第教授，中员，中央党校教授，陕西岐山人，928年4月2日生，945年参加革命工作，长期从事报刊和理论研究工作，与王珏教授合著（执笔）《领导人经济思想》，撰著《怎样理解“三个代表”重要思想》（内部出版），主编《省长访谈录》、《百强县县委书记访谈录》、《三存书集》等。近年来潜心研究和传播中国传统文化与当代文化，逐渐摸索出两者的结合点，这个结合点就是《弟子规》，《弟子规》正是当前社会教育、家庭教育、个人成长的立足点。这一思想在当前极具现实价值和补偏救弊的意义。牛淑卿副教授，中员，中国医学科学院阜外医院副教授，山西阳曲人，933年3月3日生，949年5月参加中国人民军队，荣立三等功 960年荣获北京市劳动模范称号 长期从事中西医药业工作 989年离休后，潜心研读中国传统文化。

暂无出版社相关信息，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关书籍摘录，正在全力查找中！

在线阅读地址：大家都学弟子规（修订版 第11版） 任登第、牛淑卿【正版】在线阅读

在线听书地址：大家都学弟子规（修订版 第11版） 任登第、牛淑卿【正版】在线收听

在线购买地址：大家都学弟子规（修订版 第11版） 任登第、牛淑卿【正版】在线购买

弟子规　圣人训　首孝弟　次谨信

泛爱众　而亲仁　有余力　则学文

编辑推荐

大家都学《弟子规》是中央党校教授深思之作。大家都学《弟子规》认为中国文化的基因就藏在《弟子规》中。《弟子规》可以沟通传统与现代、个人与社会。学习《弟子规》可以立人，可以自立。教育工作者要首先学好《弟子规》 为人父母要先学好《弟子规》 各级党校、各类大学、中学、小学要把《弟子规》列为必修课。《弟子规》是个人成长的“养正宝典”。大人小孩都要学习《弟子规》，大家都要学习《弟子规》。大家都学《弟子规》认为 大的爱民是落实党“育人为本、德育为先”的教育方针 教育工作者首先要学好《弟子规》 《弟子规》是提高共产党员修养的优良读本 人的三大需求 一是求食，以维持生命 二是求偶，以延续生命 三是求仁，以光大生命 物种进化的原则是竞争，人类进化的原则是互助。大家都学《弟子规》打通了传统文化与政治文化之间的隔阂，阐明了市场经济能够极大地调动人们的积极性，但是也刺激了人们的自私自利性 而中国传统文化却能有效地抑制人们的自私性，增长为人民服务的功德心。大家都学《弟子规》出版后迅即获得良好口碑，在相关宣传机构、党委系统、中国传统文化研究机构、各大机关、企业、各类学校中已经引起极强烈反响和反馈。大家都学《弟子规》经第九次修订，新增加了《弟子规》的权威易解，阅读和使用起来更方便、易懂、全面。

书籍介绍

《大家都学 (第3版)》是中央党校资深教授深思之作。该书认为中国文化的基因就藏在《弟子规》中。《弟子规》可以沟通传统与现代、个人与社会。学习《弟子规》可以立人，可以自立。

教育工作者要首先学好《弟子规》；为人父母要先学好《弟子规》；各级党校、各类大学、中学、小学要把《弟子规》列为必修课。

《弟子规》是个人成长的“养正宝典”。大人小孩都要学习《弟子规》，大家都要学习《弟子规》。

《大家都学 (第3版)》的内容分为七个部分，编写次序分别是入则孝、出则弟（悌）、谨、信、泛爱众、亲仁、余力学文，这就强调了教育的先后次序一定是先学做人，后学做事，也就是先培养德行，后学习知识、技能，它特别强调了教育的重要性，以及道德教育的先后次序问题。

• 作者：momo 发布时间：2013-12-14 09:13:16

  真是无语了，居然还有这种书存在在这个世界上，是自费出版的吗

• 作者：西四小二 发布时间：2013-04-01 14:41:30

  中央党校资深教授深思之作！

• 作者：咸蛋超人乙 发布时间：2015-07-05 12:57:32

  附录一是唯一可看的。。。。

• 作者：走向共和 发布时间：2017-09-03 10:33:55

  内容还算精彩，不过解析说法部分略显不足

• 作者：小鱼 发布时间：2013-03-25 12:25:29

  个人应学《弟子规》、家庭应学《弟子规》、社会更应学《弟子规》、学而时习之，重要的是每个单元要践行《弟子规》

• 作者：villim 发布时间：2012-02-11 12:32:07

  短短几百字的“弟子规”，还是不错的东西。

• 如何坦诚地管理，硅谷老鸟如是说

  作者：土拨松鼠 发布时间：2017-10-09 16:36:16

  作者Kim Scott是原Google和Apple的中层管理人员，相比讲大道理，她讲了不少亲身经历。

  读此书常触景生情，看到某些片段会回想起自己碰过的钉子。比如前言里Kim提及她犯的一个错误——因为担心伤害一个团队成员感情没有及时指出他的不足，浪费了团队很多时间和不少其他成员的积极性，而对方在被开时也十分震惊。个人也曾犯同样错误，造成严重后果。

  全书核心有两点：care personally, challenge directly。

  翻译过来应该是：关心个人，直接挑战。

  怎么做很有讲究。有人不满时会说You are shit，而乔帮主则会说Your work is shit。指出对方的错误，而不是指责其人格。这些方法因人而异，要考虑文化以及双方关系。说话注意艺术，直接挑战对方也要注意方法；同时双方关系也极其重要。良好的人际关系会让沟通更具效果。

  很多人（包括楼主）在直言方面显得大义凌然、一副为对方着想的样子，却很少照顾对方的感受。关系不到位，对方往往抗拒，甚至跳起来。

  关于如何管理下属野心这个问题，Kim有很好的方法。我们不应老想着压制下属，更好的方法是了解他们的愿景，帮助其做规划（

  这点极其有用

  ）。甚至不排除自己将来为某些有潜力的下属打工。

  另外Kim还提及一个很有意思的话题，就是日常工作中如何鼓励下属批评你。很多时候我们都听不到坦诚的意见，在如何鼓励他人给我们坦诚意见方面，Kim给了我们很好的建议。

  关于一些让很多管理者头疼的问题——如何表扬或批评下属，如何提拔、鼓励、奖励、开除员工，防止职场的疲劳、维系团队稳定，Kim都有较好的讲解。

  管理是一个与人打交道的长期、琐碎的过程，需要非常用心。如作者在书中所说，讲道理并没什么卵用，得结合实际操作才行。

  本书理论结合实操。Kim Scott用多年经验告诉我们实际的步骤，如何更好的处理。

  如果你是老鸟，可以从她那学习如何更进一步；如果是新手，可能更有帮助。

  个人摘选了一些自认为有用的句子，记录下来以便以后快速回顾（因为懒没翻译）：

  PART I: A NEW MANAGEMENT PHILOSOPHY

  1. BUILD RADICALLY CANDID RELATIONSHIPS:

  Bringing your whole self to work

  There are few things more damaging to human relationships than a sense of superiority.

  CARE PERSONALLY: THE FIRST DIMENSION OF RADICAL CANDOR

  Caring personally is not about memorizing birthdays and names of family members. Nor is it about sharing the sordid details of one’s personal life, or forced chitchat at social events you’d rather not attend. Caring personally is about doing things you already know how to do. It’s about acknowledging that we are all people with lives and aspirations that extend beyond those related to our shared work. It’s about finding time for real conversations; about getting to know each other at a human level; about learning what’s important to people; about sharing with one another what makes us want to get out of bed in the morning and go to work—and what has the opposite effect.

  CHALLENGE DIRECTLY: THE SECOND DIMENSION OF RADICAL CANDOR

  Challenging others and encouraging them to challenge you helps build trusting relationships because it shows 1) you care enough to point out both the things that aren’t going well and those that are and that 2) you are willing to admit when you’re wrong and that you are committed to fixing mistakes that you or others have made. But because challenging often involves disagreeing or saying no, this approach embraces conflict rather than avoiding it.

  Former Secretary of State Colin Powell once remarked that being responsible sometimes means pissing people off.

  2. GET, GIVE, AND ENCOURAGE GUIDANCE:

  Creating a culture of open communication

  Just remember that being a boss is a job, not a value judgment.

  Be as specific and thorough with praise as with criticism. Go deep into the details.

  Start by getting feedback, in other words, not by dishing it out. Then when you do start giving it, start with praise, not criticism. When you move on to criticism, make sure you understand where the perilous border between Radical Candor and Obnoxious Aggression is.

  Start by asking for criticism, not by giving it Don’t dish it out before you show you can take it

  Bosses get Radically Candid guidance from their teams not merely by being open to criticism but by actively soliciting it. If a person is bold enough to criticize you, do not critique their criticism. If you see somebody criticizing a peer inappropriately, say something. But if somebody criticizes you inappropriately, your job is to listen with the intent to understand and then to reward the candor.

  How do you criticize without discouraging the person? First, ......, focus on your relationship. Also, ... ask for criticism before giving it, and offer more praise than criticism. Be humble, helpful, offer guidance in person and immediately, praise in public, criticize in private, and don’t personalize.

  3. UNDERSTAND WHAT MOTIVATES EACH PERSON ON YOUR TEAM:

  Helping people take a step in the direction of their dreams

  When assessing a person’s past performance, it’s useful to consider both their results and more intangible things like “teamwork.”

  your job is not to provide purpose but instead to get to know each of your direct reports well enough to understand how each one derives meaning from their work.

  Be a partner, not an absentee manager or a micromanager

  One of the most common mistakes bosses make is to ignore the people who are doing the best work because “they don’t need me” or “I don’t want to micromanage.” Ignoring somebody is a terrible way to build a relationship.

  Managers often devote more time to those who are struggling than to those who are succeeding. But that’s not fair to those who are succeeding—nor is it good for the team as a whole.

  And seeing what truly exceptional performance looks like will help those who are failing to see more clearly what’s expected of them.

  In addition to top ratings, a great way to recognize people in a rock star phase is to designate them as “gurus,” or “go-to” experts. Often this means putting them in charge of teaching newer team members, if they show the aptitude for it.

  Is it time to fire her? There’s no absolute answer to that question, but here are three questions to consider: have you given her Radically Candid guidance, do you understand the impact of Peggy’s performance on her colleagues, and have you sought advice from others?

  --If the answer is yes and you have not seen improvement, or have seen only flickers of improvement, it’s time.

  Make sure that you are seeing each person on your team with fresh eyes every day. People evolve, and so your relationships must evolve with them. Care personally; don’t put people in boxes and leave them there.

  4. DRIVE RESULTS COLLABORATIVELY:

  Telling people what to do doesn’t work

  “If you want to build a ship, don’t drum up people to collect wood and don’t assign them tasks and work, but rather teach them to long for the endless immensity of the sea.”

  The process, which I call the “Get Stuff Done” (GSD) wheel, is relatively straightforward.

  GSD wheel:

  listen -> clarify -> debate -> decide -> persuade -> execute -> learn, and backforth

  Jony Ive, Apple’s chief design officer, once said at an Apple University class that a manager’s most important role is to “give the quiet ones a voice.” I love this. Google CEO Eric Schmidt took the opposite approach, urging people to “Be loud!”

  You have to find a way to listen that fits your personal style, and then create a culture in which everyone listens to each other, so that all the burden of listening doesn’t fall on you.

  Some people feel a quiet listener is not listening at all but instead setting a trap: waiting for others to say the wrong thing so they can pounce. If you’re a quiet listener, then, you need to take steps to reassure those made uncomfortable by your style.

  It’s hard enough to get yourself to listen to your team members and let them know you are listening; getting them to listen to one another is even harder. The keys are 1) have a simple system for employees to use to generate ideas and voice complaints, 2) make sure that at least some of the issues raised are quickly addressed, and 3) regularly offer explanations as to why the other issues aren’t being addressed.

  At Google, people constantly came to me with good ideas—more than I could handle, in fact—and it became overwhelming. So I organized an “ideas team” to consider them. For context, I circulated an article from Harvard Business Review (HBR) that explained how a culture that captures thousands of “small” innovations can create benefits for customers that are impossible for competitors to imitate. One big idea is pretty easy to copy, but thousands of tweaks are impossible to see from the outside, let alone imitate.

  Nothing is a bigger time-sucker or blocker to getting it right than ego. On a broad level, this means intervening when you start to sense that people are thinking, “I’m going to win this argument,” or “my idea versus your idea,” or “my recommendation versus your recommendation,” or “my team feels…” Redirect them to focus on the facts; don’t allow people to attribute ownership to ideas, and don’t get hijacked by how others who aren’t in the room might (or might not) feel.

  Another way to help people search for the best answer instead of seeking ego validation is to make them switch roles. If a person has been arguing for A, ask them to start arguing for B. If a debate is likely to go on for some time, warn people in advance that you’re going to ask them to switch roles. When people know that they will be asked to argue another person’s point, they will naturally listen more attentively.

  One of the reasons that people find debate stressful or annoying is that often half the room expects a decision at the end of the meeting and the other half wants to keep arguing in a follow-up meeting. One way to avoid this tension is to separate debate meetings and decision meetings. Another way to ease the anxiety of the people who want to know when the decision will get made is to have a “decide by” date next to each item being debated.

  I recommend setting up a weekly “big debate” meeting.

  That is why kick-ass bosses often do not decide themselves, but rather create a clear decision-making process that empowers people closest to the facts to make as many decisions as possible. Not only does that result in better decisions, it results in better morale.

  The decider should get facts, not recommendations

  When collecting information for a decision, we are often tempted to ask people for their recommendations—“What do you think we should do?”—but as one executive I worked with at Apple explained to me, people tend to put their egos into recommendations in a way that can lead to politics, and thus worse decisions.

  Even explaining the decision is not enough, because that addresses only the logic; you have to address your listener’s emotions as well. And you must establish that the decider, whether that’s you or somebody else on your team, has credibility if you expect others to execute on the decision.

  But even more democratic, open bosses often get so lost in explaining the rationale for a decision that they forget how people must feel about it, or vice versa.

  Aristotle was troubled that so much rhetoric and persuasion came down to manipulating people’s emotions. He thought that there had to be a better way to get an idea across to a large number of people who don’t have the time or knowledge to understand it completely. He resolved this by explaining that to be legitimately persuasive a speaker must address the audience’s emotions but also establish the credibility and share the logic of the argument.

  When Steve Jobs had an idea, he wouldn’t just describe the idea; he’d share how he got to it. He showed his work.

  But you need to learn to toggle between leading and executing personally. Don’t abandon the first for the second; integrate the two. If you get too far away from the work your team is doing, you won’t understand their ideas well enough to help them clarify, to participate in debates, to know which decisions to push them to make, to teach them to be more persuasive. The GSD wheel will grind to a halt if you don’t understand intimately the “stuff” your team is trying to get done.

  It can take almost superhuman discipline to step back, acknowledge when our results could be a lot better or are simply no good, and learn from the experience.

  PART II: TOOLS & TECHNIQUES

  5. RELATIONSHIPS:

  An approach to establishing trust with your direct reports

  In life, I learned that too much emphasis on shareholder value actually destroys value, as well as morale. Instead, I learned to focus first on staying centered myself, so that I could build real relationships with each of the people who worked for me. Only when I was centered and my relationships were strong could I fulfill my responsibilities as a manager to guide my team to achieve the best results.

  Hard times are made much harder when you’re not at your best. And they can make it particularly hard to “care personally” about the people you work with, not to mention those you live with.

  The essence of leadership is not getting overwhelmed by circumstances.

  It’s even more important to focus on making time for whatever keeps you centered when you are stressed and busy than when things are relatively calm.

  You can guide your team to get results if you’ve built a trusting relationship with each person reporting to you, and there can only be real trust when people feel free at work. The first rule of building the kind of relationship with the people that will make them feel free at work is to relinquish unilateral authority.

  Building trust in any relationship takes time because trust is built on a consistent pattern of acting in good faith. It’s a big mistake to assume too much trust too quickly (e.g., by prying into deeply personal questions when you barely know a person). On the other hand, you do need to start somewhere.

  Probably the most important thing you can do to build trust is to spend a little time alone with each of your direct reports on a regular basis.

  You don’t have to share the same deeply personal values to build good relationships at work; and it’s a terrible idea to try to convince your colleagues that your values are “right” and theirs are “wrong.” But you do need to respect other people’s values when they do share them with you.

  A radically candid relationship starts with the basic respect and common decency that every human being owes each other, regardless of worldview. Once again, the work is the bond everybody on a team does share, and the most productive way to strengthen that bond is by learning how to work together in ways that benefit everyone involved.

  If you have a truly terrible emotional upset in your life, stay home for a day. You don’t want to spread it around any more than you’d want to spread a bad virus around the office, and emotions are just as contagious as germs.

  Emotional reactions can offer important clues to help you better understand what’s really going on with the people you manage.

  So don’t respond to outbursts or sullen silences by pretending they are not happening. Don’t try to mitigate them by saying things like, “It’s not personal,” or “Let’s be professional.” Instead say, “I can see you’re mad/frustrated/elated/____”

  When somebody is frustrated or angry or upset enough about a situation at work that they react emotionally, this is your cue to keep asking questions until you understand what the real issue is. Don’t over-direct the conversation; just keep listening and it will become clear.

  BUILDING RELATIONSHIPS WITH your direct reports takes time and real energy. Sometimes, especially when things are not going well, this will be the most depleting part of your job. Remembering that it is central to your job will help. And if you can power through these times, you may find as I have that these relationships give your work meaning far beyond the results that you achieve together.

  6. GUIDANCE:

  Ideas for getting/giving/ encouraging praise & criticism

  That’s why when you become the boss it’s important to work so hard to earn your team’s trust. You may be worried about earning their respect, and that’s natural. Unfortunately, though, being overly focused on respect can backfire because it’ll make you feel extra defensive when criticized. If, on the other hand, you can listen to the criticism and react well to it, both trust and respect will follow.

  When you encourage people to criticize you publicly, you get the chance to show your team that you really, genuinely want the criticism.

  When you’re the boss, it’s awkward to ask your direct reports to tell you frankly what they think of your performance—even more awkward for them than it is for you. To help, I adopted a go-to question that Fred Kofman, author of Conscious Business and my coach at Google, suggested. “Is there anything I could do or stop doing that would make it easier to work with me?”

  Most people will initially respond to your question with something along the lines of “Oh, everything is fine, thank you for asking,” and hope that’s the end of the conversation.

  One technique is to count to six before saying anything else, forcing them to endure the silence. The goal is not to be a bully but to insist on a candid discussion—to make it harder for the person to say nothing than to tell you what they’re thinking.

  ...... developed a technique called “situation behavior impact” to help leaders be more precise and therefore less arrogant when giving feedback. This simple technique reminds you to describe three things when giving feedback: 1) the situation you saw, 2) the behavior (i.e., what the person did, either good or bad), and 3) the impact you observed. This helps you avoid making judgments about the person’s intelligence, common sense, innate goodness, or other personal attributes.

  If you wait too long to give guidance, everything about it gets harder.

  Be sure to let people know immediately how their work is being received. If you ask somebody to do work to help you prepare for a meeting or a presentation where that person won’t be present, be sure to let them know the reaction to their work.

  I found that praising people at a public all-hands meeting was a great way to share significant accomplishments. However, I often found that following up in person at a 1:1 carried more emotional weight, and following up with an email to the whole team carried more lasting weight.

  When offering guidance to your boss, use the same tips above: be helpful, humble, do it immediately and in person, praise in public (if it doesn’t look like kissing up), criticize in private, and don’t personalize.

  The ability to be Radically Candid with your boss is crucial to your success. One of the most difficult things about being a middle manager ... is that you often wind up responsible for executing decisions that you disagree with. This can feel like a Catch-22. If you tell your team you do agree with the decisions, you feel like a liar—or at the very least, inauthentic. If you tell your team that you don’t agree with the decisions, you look weak, insubordinate, or both.

  Radical Candor is the way out of this dilemma.

  Asking each of my direct reports to give me a performance review before I gave them one was helpful. The main advantage here was that it made the review feel more like a two-way conversation and less like an arrogant one-way judgment.

  Spend half the time looking back (diagnosis), half the time looking forward (plan).

  ONE OF THE most important ways to create an environment in which Radical Candor trumps political BS is to never let one person on your team talk to you about another behind their back.

  ROXANE WALES, WHO worked first at NASA and then in Learning and Development at Google, once told me that one of the most important things any manager of managers could do to foster a culture of guidance was to have so-called “skip level meetings.”

  Never have a skip level meeting without prior consent of your direct report. Instead, ask the managers who report to you to explain the whole thing to their teams beforehand. It’s vital that everyone understands that the meeting with you is in support of, not an attack on, their boss.

  Project the notes you take during the meeting, and let people know that you will share them with the manager.

  THE KEY TO success when implementing any of these suggestions is to return to core principles, rather than following step-by-step instructions....

  Whenever you feel yourself getting lost in the weeds, simply return to these two questions: “Am I showing my team that I care personally?” and “Am I challenging each person directly?” If the answer to both questions is yes, you’re doing just fine.

  7. TEAM:

  Techniques for avoiding boredom and burnout

  He taught every manager on his team to have a succession of three forty-five-minute conversations with each direct report over the course of three to six weeks.

  Russ’s approach was so successful that an internal survey of employee satisfaction showed the people on his team displaying a marked increase in optimism about their futures at Google and their positive feelings about their managers. Nobody from HR had ever seen such an improvement.

  Conversation one: life story

  The second conversation: dreams

  Russ suggests encouraging people to come up with three to five different dreams for the future. This allows employees to include the dream they think you want to hear as well as those that are far closer to their hearts.

  The final part of Russ’s second conversation involves making sure that the person’s dreams are aligned with the values they have expressed.

  Conversation three: eighteen-month plan

  Helping people clarify values and dreams and then aligning them as closely as possible with their current work will invariably make your team stronger.

  Too often, the people who have the most senior roles are given the highest ratings when in fact they are surfing on the productivity of the people working for them. Don’t let that happen!

  In practice, most management teams respond in the reverse manner—a greater percentage of senior rather than junior people get put in the superstar box. If this happens, ask some hard questions and make sure there’s an identifiable, justifiable reason for it.

  An example of a good prescreen is a skills assessment: ask potential candidates to do a project or solve a problem related to the job they’re applying for. This will weed out a number of candidates who look good on paper but can’t actually do the work. It will also give candidates who’d be great at the job but look bad on paper the opportunity to interview.

  Four people is about the right size for an interview committee. Ideally, the interviewing committee is diverse....It’s also helpful if at least one of the interviewers is on another team. This prevents “desperation hiring.” When there’s a “hole” on a team, people become so eager to fill the position that they ignore warning signals. Somebody who isn’t feeling the pain of the hole on the team as acutely is more likely to point out these danger signs.

  Casual interviews reveal more about team fit than formal ones.

  Another good practice is to have people intentionally create more casual moments—take candidates to lunch, walk them to the car. Ask the receptionist and schedulers if they had any reaction to the candidate. In unguarded moments, candidates will do or say revealing things.

  Make interviews productive by jotting down your thoughts right away. Write down your interview feedback; doing that is as clarifying for you as it is for the rest of the committee, and it will result in better hiring decisions.

  The best advice I ever got for hiring somebody is this: if you’re not dying to hire somebody, don’t make an offer.

  Firing people is hard, and it ought to be hard. But if you do three things, you can make it far, far easier on the person you are firing—as well as on yourself and your team.

  Don’t wait too long

  Don’t make the decision unilaterally

  Give a damn

  Follow up

  Announcing promotions breeds unhealthy competition for the wrong things: documentation of status rather than development of skill.

  Focus on the work the person is doing, not the status they’ve achieved in the company for doing it.

  THERE ARE FEW pleasures greater than being part of a team where everyone loves their job and loves working together. You can build a team like that if you have career conversations with each of the people on your team, create growth-management plans for each person who works for you once a year, hire the right people, fire the appropriate people, promote the right people, and reward the people who are doing great work but who shouldn’t be promoted, and offer yourself as a partner to your direct reports.

  8. RESULTS:

  Things you can do to get stuff done together—faster

  Whether you want a structured agenda or you prefer a more free-flowing meeting, the agenda itself should be directed by your direct report, not you. Your job is to hold people accountable when they come unprepared—or to decide that it’s fine to have an agenda-less 1:1 from time to time.

  If you hear only good news, it’s a sign people don’t feel comfortable coming to you with their problems, or they think you won’t or can’t help. In these cases, you need to ask explicitly for the bad news. Don’t let the issue drop till you hear some.

  An effective staff meeting has three goals: it reviews how things have gone the previous week, allows people to share important updates, and forces the team to clarify the most important decisions and debates for the coming week.

  I have found that the most effective solution is simply to fight fire with fire. For the same reason, I blocked off think-time in calendar; I also found it necessary to block off time in my calendar to be alone and execute. I encouraged others to do the same. This helped them say “no” to more unnecessary meetings.

  Awareness of these small problems can be useful in several ways.

  First they’ll help you find the devil in the details.

  Second, being aware of small problems and maybe even rolling up your sleeves and fixing them yourself is the best way to kill the “it’s not my job” or, worse, the “that’s beneath me” mentality on your team. If nothing is beneath your attention, then others will pay attention to details as well.

  Third, when you show that you care about the small things that contribute to customer happiness or the quality of life on your team, suddenly everybody cares more about them, and some of the big things start working better, too.

  “CULTURE EATS STRATEGY for lunch.” A team’s culture has an enormous impact on its results, and a leader’s personality has a huge impact on a team’s culture. Who you are as a human being impacts your team’s culture enormously.

  When you become the boss, you are under the microscope. People do listen to you in an intense way you never experienced before you became a manager. They attribute meaning—sometimes accurately, sometimes not—to what you say, to the clothes you wear, to the car you drive. In some ways, becoming a boss is like getting arrested. Everything you say or do can and will be used against you.

  When you’re the boss and shit happens, it’s your responsibility to learn from it and make a change. If you don’t, you create a culture that doesn’t learn from its mistakes.

  The most amazing thing about a culture is that once it’s strong, it’s self-replicating.

  GETTING STARTED

  Now it’s time to start putting the suggestions in this book into practice.

  SHARE YOUR STORIES

  EXPLAIN RADICAL CANDOR to your team so they understand what you’re up to. You can also ask them to read the book, or show them videos that are on the Radical Candor website. But it’s best if you explain it in your own words.

  PROVE YOU CAN TAKE IT BEFORE YOU START DISHING IT OUT

  START ASKING YOUR team to criticize you. ... And remember, don’t let people off the hook when they don’t say much—because they won’t, at first. Embrace the discomfort to move past it. Pay close attention if you aren’t getting any criticism.

  Soliciting guidance, especially criticism, is not something you do once and check off your list—this will now be something you do daily.

  Now you’re ready to start having career conversations. Begin “career conversations” with your team. Start with people whom you’ve been working with for the longest.

  Like getting criticism from your team, “career conversations” are not something you do once and check off the list. Remember, people change, and you need to change with them!

  In parallel: perfect your 1:1 conversations.

  Next. After you have explained Radical Candor, asked for guidance, had career conversations, and improved your 1:1 conversations, you’ll notice that you are earning your team’s trust and building a better culture. Now you’re ready to start improving the way you give impromptu praise and criticism. Remember, impromptu guidance happens best in one- to two-minute conversations.

  Take a deep breath. Assess.

  Don’t try to do more new things until you feel 1) you’ve made good progress on the fundamental building block of management: getting and giving guidance, 2) you’ve gotten to know your direct reports better, and 3) you’re happy with your 1:1s.

  If the answer to these three questions is “yes,” you’re ready to perfect staff meetings, decisions, and debates for your team.

  Return to guidance. Make sure you are encouraging guidance between people on your team. Establish a “no backstabbing” or require a “clean escalation” norm on your team.

  Fight meeting proliferation. Make sure you’re not getting overscheduled. Think very consciously about what you are doing that you can stop doing. Put some think time in your calendar.

  Plan for the future of your team. Start doing a growth-management plan for each person on your team.

  Return to guidance. Ask your team to start gauging each other’s guidance. There are more of them than there are of you, so anything you can do to get them to give one another more Radically Candid praise and criticism will reinforce a Radically Candid culture and provide you with more leverage than any amount of guidance you can give or get personally.

  Walk around. ... Put aside some time each week to walk around and have informal spontaneous chats with people. If you have a feeling that things are still not going well, and that there’s a lot of skepticism on the team, go back to step one.

  Begin to take a more Radically Candid approach to the processes that your company may have in place. Be Radically Candid when hiring, firing, promoting (see chapter seven), as well as giving formal performance reviews (see chapter six).

  Don’t get too bogged down in the details before plunging in, though, because it is the rewards of the process that will keep you energized and moving forward. Remember: once you build Radically Candid relationships with the people who report to you, you will eliminate a terrible source of misery in the world: the bad boss.

• 【转】徐俊谈《辽史》的点校与修订

  作者：哲夫成城 发布时间：2019-12-29 16:49:20

  备受关注的点校本“二十四史”及《清史稿》修订工程再出新成果——点校本《辽史》修订本日前出版，并将于5月15日首发。为此，中华读书报采访了出版方中华书局总经理徐俊先生，请他回顾了上世纪50年代至70年代《辽史》点校往事，以及本次修订的相关情况。

  

  读书报

  ：继修订本《史记》、两《五代史》之后，新近出版的修订本《辽史》即将上市，请简单介绍一下《辽史》修订本的出版情况。

  徐俊

  ：从《史记》修订本出版开始，“二十四史”修订工程进入编辑出版阶段。尽管我们全力加速，但远远不能满足读者的期待。对此我们有清醒的意识和共识，在质量与进度这对矛盾中，前者大于一切。目前有多部修订本在编辑审稿加工中，将以每年两到三部的进度陆续出版。

  《辽史》修订由北京大学历史学系暨中国古代史研究中心刘浦江教授主持，2007年10月，《辽史》与《元史》一起通过修订方案，国内辽、金、元史学界的多位专家蔡美彪、周清澍、刘凤翥、王曾瑜等先生参与评审。按照修订程序要求，2008年5月，《辽史》修订组提交了五卷修订样稿，我们分送蔡美彪、陈高华、崔文印、许逸民等先生进行书面评审。随后召开《辽史》修订样稿评审会，蔡美彪、刘凤翥、崔文印、许逸民、张帆等先生参加评审，主持人刘浦江教授和部分修订组成员与会。9月，《辽史》修订样稿印本寄送相关专家学者，进一步征求意见。

  从2007年5月确定修订主持人，到2014年7月提交全稿，《辽史》修订工作持续了七年时间。交稿之后，刘浦江教授在身患绝症的化疗间隙坚持工作，断断续续用了两三个月时间，完成了全书统稿和修订前言的撰写，直到11月正式提交前言定稿、凡例及引用文献。遗憾的是，2015年1月6日刘浦江教授因病辞世，未能见到《辽史》修订本的面世。

  读书报

  ：《辽史》点校本，由冯家昇、陈述等先生先后负责点校，1974年出版。有关《辽史》点校的情况，大家似乎所知不多。

  徐俊

  ：《辽史》跟辽史研究一样，一般读者关注较少，关于《辽史》点校的情况大家知道的也很少。我们曾经做过一个统计，全部“二十四史”点校本，印数最少的就是《辽史》，四十年11印次，共计10万套。可见《辽史》和辽史研究的寂寞。

  辽、金、元三史的点校，1958年12月约请翁独健先生承担，到1961年底才开始落实。三史均由翁独健先生统筹，翁先生在征求本人及其所在单位意见后，确定《辽史》由冯家昇担任，《金史》由傅乐焕担任，《元史》由翁独健自己承担、陆峻岭协助。1961年12月7日，翁独健、冯家昇、傅乐焕三位一起参加了在中华书局召开的座谈会，讨论辽、金、元三史点校方案及相关问题处理办法。随着工作的推进，方案经过了不同程度的调整，最终形成了今天我们所见到的点校本。在此期间，三史都经历了比较大的人员变动。

  1966年“文革”爆发，5月22日，傅乐焕先生离开点校驻地中华书局翠微路大院，到陶然亭沉湖自尽。赵守俨先生后来回忆说：“在他离开翠微路大院之前，我是最后一个与他谈过话的，我并没有发现他有何异常。这一不幸事件给了我极大的震动，我感到这是不祥之兆，一场暴风雨就要来临。”1971年点校工作重新启动，冯家昇先生于1970年4月去世，《辽史》和《金史》改由陈述、张政烺先生分别继续点校。《元史》仍由翁独健先生负责，新加入点校的有邵循正先生和内蒙古大学林沉、周清澍先生及蒙古史研究室全体同志。邵循正先生在工作过程中不幸病逝，未能看到《元史》的出版。

  读书报

  ：现在还能知道冯家昇、陈述先生各自承担的工作重点吗？

  徐俊

  ：冯家昇先生的工作除了完成的大部分点校初稿外，主要贡献在点校本的发凡起例，从底本、通校本选择、前人成果借鉴，到一名多译等特殊问题，形成了后期定稿的基本框架。在1963年12月20日的辽、金、元三史座谈会上，冯家昇先生表示“《辽史》计划64年12月底交稿，但可能会拖期”。据1965年8月31日辽金元三史工作会议纪要，“《辽史》全书初点过一遍，校至第六十六卷。做了版本校、本校、他校，并吸收了前人研究成果”，计划1967年完成。到“文革”爆发前夕，1966年4月1日，他在给赵守俨先生的信中说：“从四月到七月底，我的主要工作是杨图（指“重绘杨守敬地图”——引者注）。我打算把《辽史》从九十卷以后校完。从八月到十月，一面作补充，一面作一些校记修改。十一月到十二月底作一些分段与覆点工作。（可能作不完，但保留不会太多。）”以此推算，冯家昇先生完成了超过三分之二的点校和校勘记。

  学术界有“辽史三大家”一说，冯家昇先生是三家之首。冯家昇早年受陈垣、洪业、顾颉刚等影响，致力于辽金史研究。后赴美国国会图书馆、哥伦比亚大学工作，继续从事辽史研究。他与美国学者魏特夫合撰的《辽代社会史》，至今仍堪为辽史研究名著。冯家昇早在1930年代就读燕大时就开始校勘《辽史》，他的辽史研究代表作《辽史源流考》《辽史初校》《辽史与金史、新旧五代史互证举例》，1959年结集为《辽史证误三种》由中华书局出版。

  

  冯家昇先生的《辽史初校》，谨遵陈垣先生的“四校法”：（一）《辽史》百衲本、南北监本、殿本的互校；（二）《辽史》纪、志、表、传之间的本校；（三）他书所存《辽史》引文的查检核校；（四）《辽史》与金、宋、五代、高丽史的互证；（五）仿王先谦《水经注》校注体例，辑录前人关于《辽史》的论述，并加按语。可以说，完成了《辽史》点校最基础的工作。

  接续冯家昇点校《辽史》的是“辽史三大家”中的另一位陈述先生。1971年“二十四史”点校工作重启后，分为南北朝组、辽金元组、明史组、清史稿组，共四个小组。辽金元组“由韩儒林、邵循正、翁独健、张政烺、陈述等组成”，“《辽史》（初步点校完毕）：陈述在冯稿基础上修改加工”，计划1972年上半年付排。陈述先生曾任中国辽金史学会会长、中国辽金契丹女真史学会会长，对现代辽金史学科的建设贡献卓著。陈述先生早年在中研院历史语言研究所工作，1941年11月陈寅恪先生为陈述《辽史补注》作序，盛赞“《补注》之与《辽史》，亦将如裴注之附陈志（陈寿《三国志》），并重于学术之林”。

  

  冯家昇（1904－1970年）和陈述（1911－1992年）。他们两位与傅乐焕（1913－1966年）合称“辽史三大家”

  陈述先生《辽史补注》撰写起始于1930年代史语所时期，但到1971年接手《辽史》点校，《补注》尚在补充撰著之中。此前陈述先生还曾辑校各家所录辽文及其新获者（包括碑刻文献），编为《辽文汇》（后改为《全辽文》由中华书局出版）。《辽史补注》和《辽文汇》的长期积累，对《辽史》点校起到了学术支撑的作用，对冯家昇先生点校的初稿是一个有力的补充。《辽史》于1974年10月出版，当时陈述先生曾请担任“总其成”的顾颉刚先生为《辽史补注》作序，“幸随点校本二十四史以并行”，顾先生序说：“我们这次校点工作，可能有一些缺点错误，但质量都有所提高，由于《补注》的出版，显然又是一个新的突破。”

  

  元修宋、辽、金三史，《辽史》历来被评为“太简略”“最简略”，但因为辽代文献缺乏，《辽史》成为辽史研究的最基本典籍。点校本《辽史》，经过冯家昇、陈述两位辽史大家的整理，为近半个世纪以来的辽史研究提供了一个基本准确规范的通行文本。

  读书报

  ：您参与了修订工程的组织实施，请您谈谈《辽史》修订的有关情况，包括《辽史》修订的一些具体做法。

  徐俊

  ：对于修订承担单位和主持人的遴选，我们主要遵循以下两条原则：一是从延续性考虑，尽量选择原点校单位；一是从学术力量考虑，尽量选择于本史有积累的学科点。北京大学刘浦江教授是当代辽金史学界杰出的年轻学者，在着手“二十四史”修订之初，我拜访蔡美彪先生，谈到辽金史修订，蔡先生就首先推荐了刘浦江。因此，在2006年我们做第一轮调研的时候，《辽史》修订就已经基本确定由北大承担、刘浦江主持。开始我曾想由北大同时承担辽金二史，后来因为张帆参与陈高华先生主持的《元史》修订，这个想法才作罢。

  《辽史》修订前期规定动作和必备程序，极其顺利，各史无出其右。其中有史书差异、原点校本差异、修订组准备等各种因素，但主持人的学术积累和修订力量组织起了关键作用，而《辽史》修订组在这两个方面的优长都非常突出。

  就整个“二十四史”修订来说，相对于其他各史和各史主持人，我们与《辽史》修订组的工作交流机会是相对少的。修订工作顺利，反复讨论就少；修订工作周折，相互探讨甚至开会就多。《辽史》从开始阶段的修订方案、修订样稿，到中间阶段的二次样稿，没有任何磕绊，意见一致，省去了很多工夫。而且《辽史》修订组一些行之有效的做法，在各史初期摸索阶段，还起到了样板示范的作用。

  简单举个小例子。如何吸收前人成果，包括断代史研究成果、与本书密切相关的文献研究成果、针对点校本的校勘成果，等等，是修订最基本的准备工作。修订工作总则对此提出了明确的普查和吸收的要求，但怎么做并不明确。《辽史》修订组的做法非常有启发性。在2007年10月讨论修订方案时，修订组已组织人力对前人有关《辽史》的校勘、勘误论文进行了全面搜集，整理装订成《辽史勘误》一册（250页），收入1942年以来散见于报刊、文集的论文、札记，共62篇。做到这一点，似乎很平常，关键是下一步，他们把每一篇文章里面涉及到的校勘点，都在文章的显要位置标出，然后再将各篇文章所涉及的《辽史》卷次，统编为《辽史各卷勘误索引》。这样《辽史》某卷有哪几篇文章、在什么位置，涉及到哪些校勘问题，一目了然。每个参与修订的人，都可以由此几无遗漏地掌握前人对某一校勘点的意见。

  另外，针对原点校本对新出考古材料和石刻资料用得较少，《辽史》修订组还编制了《辽代石刻新编》，以供修订采用。如何统一把握参与修订的人在资料获取上的均衡一致，一直是我们关注的问题，所以，当我听到刘浦江教授介绍这个做法，并把已经完成的《辽史各卷勘误索引》交给我们的时候，我是由衷地叹服他的工作成效。我们后来在各史都推广了这个做法。这看起来只是一个具体改进，但却是如何减少重复劳动而又消弭遗漏的非常有效的办法。

  再如修订长编，按照修订要求，每史修订在校勘记撰写之前都要撰写修订长编，记录所有校勘点的文本差异、文献依据和考辨过程。当我第一次看到《辽史》修订长编的时候，也为长编的深入和细致深为叹服，长编不但对每一条校勘的文献引用、考证过程有清晰记录，引述今人论文，都一一注明篇名和页码，真正实现了我们提出的一切都可回溯的目标。

  读书报

  ：刘浦江教授将学生培养与《辽史》修订相结合，您怎样评价这种工作方式？

  徐俊

  ：上个世纪的“二十四史”点校，与有关断代史学科建设之间的关系，是人所共知的，很多学术佳话流传至今。点校工作依赖断代史学科的发展，也一定程度上强化了学科的优势。因此在修订工程启动之初，我们除了将通过重点项目培育优秀古籍整理编辑作为我们自身的要求和目标外，也支持承担单位通过修订，培养学术新人，推动学科建设。修订本各史在学术团队的培育上各有建树，《辽史》修订组在这方面尤其突出。

  在接受《辽史》修订之初，刘浦江就表示要采用读书班的形式，在版本对校、本校，并广泛查检已有成果的基础上，对《辽史》逐卷进行集体研读。读书课上对每一个校勘点进行查考研讨，撰写详实的修订长编，斟酌校改取舍，形成校勘记初稿。从2007年5月19日第一次读书课，到2013年6月完成全书会读，长达六年，每周六上午9点到下午5点，北大中古史中心的计算机室，雷打不动地成为《辽史》修订组读书课。事实说明，这是一个行之有效的方式，修订工作有系统、有深度，同时一批学术新人夯实了文献根基，培养了严谨扎实的学术品格，顺利进入专业研究并取得了可喜的成果。修订组成员结合修订工作，出版了专著《〈辽史·百官志〉考订》，撰写了二十多篇学术论文，不少是辽史研究中人们长期关注的问题。刘浦江生前常说自己太寂寞了，希望下一代研究辽金史的人不那么寂寞。这是事关一个学科承续的大关怀！

  刘浦江去世后，我看到修订组同学发的帖子，2013年6月，在《辽史》第一遍会读结束后，他写给同学们的信，充满热情地讲道：“这是收获丰厚的青春，这是无怨无悔的青春！”每每重读至此，我都非常感动。我想对修订组的弟子们来说，这将是他们学术生涯不断前行的永久的精神资粮。

  

  刘浦江

  读书报

  ：刘浦江教授因病去世，给《辽史》修订定稿带来怎样的影响，我想这是大家关心的话题。

  徐俊

  ：《辽史》修订组在2013年6月完成全书会读，此后刘浦江教授于2014年4月被确诊为淋巴癌晚期，7月向中华提交了《辽史》全部116卷修订稿（每卷有校勘记和长编两个文件），11月18日提交前言、凡例及参考文献。这个时候，离他去世只有一个多月的时间，他在病后两次化疗的间隙，顽强地坚持做完了统稿工作。可以说，刘浦江教授是用最后的生命冲刺般地完成了《辽史》修订，没有留下任何棘手的难题。根据他在病中的嘱咐，由自始至终参与修订的邱靖嘉负责统筹，年轻的修订团队与我们编辑组密切配合，圆满完成了最后的排校及定稿清样通读。

  《辽史》修订稿交来后，我们陆续约请了蔡美彪、刘凤翥、王曾瑜、陈智超、宋德金、张帆、吴丽娱、王素等先生外审，其中蔡美彪、刘凤翥二位先生的审稿意见在刘浦江生前收到并已转他参酌。刘浦江教授在前言、凡例及最后一批稿子交来以后，曾经与我们的责任编辑通电话，特别关心外审专家的后续意见。他最后的电话就是问《辽史》修订的反馈意见，而且希望在春节前开一次修订组内部会议，安排春节过后病情平稳期间的最后修改定稿工作。

  《辽史》编辑审读加工和修订组完善修改工作，又经历了一年多时间，修订组不负嘱托，通力合作，保证了最终的修订质量。关于《辽史》修订本所到达的学术高度，需要学术界来检验和评价，不是我一个外行所能评说，但我觉得修订本《辽史》作为辽史研究和辽史文献整理的一个新的标杆，是不用置疑的。

  薪尽火传，刘浦江教授在天之灵一定会感到欣慰的。

  （中华读书报记者/王洪波）