包容型领导、团队沟通与团队绩效的关系研究——基于江苏省高新技术创业团队的实证研究

本文以江苏省高新技术开发区的创业团队为样本,先后探讨了一种新型的领导风格——包容型领导的三个维度与团队绩效的相关关系,并将团队沟通作为调节变量。采用问卷调查的方式收集了483份问卷,并运用多元层次回归的方法探究其内在作用机制。结果表明,包容型领导和团队沟通对团队绩效均具有显著的正向作用;团队沟通显著调节包容型领导对团队绩效的影响作用。     

西北少数民族的自然观及其生态价值

论文借助文献资料和前人研究成果,从后现代主义生态学的视角出发,对西北少数民族的自然观及其生态价值进行了分析和讨论。作者指出,在伊斯兰教的认知体系中,人类与宇宙间的其他事物都是平等的,通过自身努力来调控和保障自然环境系统的和谐运行是人类责无旁贷的天职。藏传佛教民族自然观的核心是敬畏自然,其主要表现是强调自然物的神圣性;强调人与自然物之间的相互依存。     

论建立高素质教师队伍的有效途径

治国之本是教育,教育之本是教师,高校的教师是发展高等教育事业的主要力量。教师队伍素质的高低,直接影响学校的教学、科研和人才培养的质量。要培养跨世纪的合格人才,关键在于建设好一支高素质的教师队伍。邓小平同志曾经指出：“一个学校能不能为社会主义建设培养合格的人才,培养德、智、体全面发展,有社会主义觉悟的、有文化的劳动者,关键在教师。”下面,就如何提高教师队伍的素质,谈点粗浅的看法。　　一、加强师德教育,培养敬业爱岗精神　　师德,即教师的职业道德,是教师在履行教学职责时,应遵循的具有本职业特点的道德原…     

论加强党的理论建设

理论对实践的指导作用是巨大的,实现理论和实践的统一是我们追求的境界。我们必须以史为鉴,高举邓小平理论旗帜,从“三个代表”的高度,高度重视党的理论建设,培养和造就一批马克思主义理论家,着眼于新的实践与新的发展,从而充分发挥理论对我们伟大事业的指导作用。     

略论抗日民主政权的基本特点

在特殊的历史条件下产生的中国共产党领导的抗日民主政权 ,有着自己鲜明的特点 ,表现在抗日民主政权具有广泛的民族性、高度的民主性、鲜明的人民性。这些特点 ,对于我们今天有中国特色的社会主义经济建设 ,民主政治建设以及党风廉政建设仍具有重要的借鉴价值和现实意义。     

“第三条道路”与和谐社会的构建

“第三条道路”是在全球化发展过程中,面对发达资本主义国家的现实问题提出的。它在政治、经济、社会、福利及国际关系方面都提出了中庸而又务实的方略。这在某些方面对我国构建和谐社会有诸多的借鉴意义。     

绿洲经济的特点与西部大开发的客观要求

中央明确提出了实施西部大开发的战略 ,这是党中央总揽全局 ,面向新世纪作出的宏伟决策。西部地区各族人民在这一历史机遇面前 ,如何不失时机地抓住这一机遇 ,开创新世纪发展的新局面 ?个人结合新疆绿洲、绿洲经济的特点 ,谈一点粗浅的看法 :一、西部开发的生态环境西部地区 ,约一半面积是干旱半干旱地区 ,其经济活动的中心是有限的绿洲 ,这是干旱地区各族人民赖以生存和发展的物质基础。只有保护好原有的绿洲 ,建设和发展新的绿洲 ,才能保证许多开发项目得到落实。所以 ,要进行西部开发 ,就有必要对绿洲和绿洲经济的特点 ,有一个简要的了解…     

外国产品责任法对我国的启示

党的十一届三中全会以来,随着我国改革开放的深入,商品经济的发展呈现了勃勃生机,法制建设也取得了巨大成就。在这一时期,我国陆续制定了一些有关产品责任方面的法律规定,虽然这些法律规定对促进我国改革开放和经济发展、保护消费者合法权益起到了一定积极作用,但不可否认,目前我国有关产品责任的法律规定还很不成熟,一些学者对此提出了诸多的修改建议。在此,笔者也就借鉴外国的产品责任立法,对完善我国产品责任统一立法在下述几个方面进行初步探讨：一、扩大产品的范围我国的产品责任法与许多国家的产品责任法相同,主要调整有形…     

学习建设有中国特色社会主义理论加快我国少数民族地区社会经济发展

学习建设有中国特色社会主义理论,围绕经济建设这个中心,加快我国少数民族地区社会经济发展,缩小与东部沿海地区的差距,这是各族人民当前的一项重要任务。下面谈一点认识：一、稳定、发展与改革开放是建设有中国特色社会主义的重要内容我国是一个统一的多民族的社会主义国家,少数民族人口虽然仅占全国总人口的６％,但分布地区约占全国土地面积的一半以上。所以,少数民族地区的社会稳定、经济发展和改革开放,是建设有中国特色社会主义重要的组成部分。建设有中国特色社会主义,就必须依靠各族人民的紧密团结,促进各民族的共同富裕。…     

从民族志物品收集到东南海洋系文化构建——林惠祥先生收藏与展示实践（1929-1958）

Since the 1980s, critical museum studies have interpreted the‘collecting and exhibi-ting activities’ of a museum as both practical activ-ities as well as a persistent scientific and socio-cul-tural process, and have explored the natures of museum, including the logic and strategy behind these practices. Through reviewing Lin Huixiang ’s collecting and exhibiting practices ( 1929 to 1958 ) , this article aims to explore internal rela-tionships between ( i ) museum practices and ( ii ) the practitioner, all under a particular episteme. This article moreover presents the genealogy of Lin Huixiang ’s academic ideas, museum practices, and‘Southeastern-oceanic-cultural ’ research pro-jects;it covers his earlier activities of ethnographic object collecting and exhibiting practices all the way to the construction of the‘Southeastern-ocean-ic-culture-system ’ within the framework of the‘New Theory of Evolution’ . Seen from a critical perspective, a museum is not a neutral and objective institution but a space full of power and discussion. In addition, in our modern times Museums have become a controver-sial place: the museum’s nature has changed from a‘palace of knowledge’ to a representation-system composed of objects. Eilean Hooper-Greenhill uses the terms“effective history” and“episteme” to ex-amine the history of a museum, and divides it into three stages: ( i ) the irrational cabinet, ( ii ) a classical episteme, and ( iii) a modern episteme. Different epistemes directly influence the collecting and exhibiting practices. Susan Pearce points out that collecting activities express and shape the rela-tionship between the human and material worlds. She distinguishes between “gathering”, “hoard-ing”, and “collecting” and she emphasizes that the term “collecting” points to products of imagi-nation. This imagination metaphorically creates meanings by arrangement and it displays the known world. Therefore, the activity of collecting and ex-hibiting is always practiced under a particular epis-teme;in addition political standpoints, value judg-ments, and academic interests are involved when interpreting the meanings of the objects and the constructing the knowledge order. This article moreover conducts a systematic exploration of Lin Huixiang’s collecting and exhibi-ting practices as well as the genealogy of his aca-demic ideas. All is examined from three aspects:( i) ethnicity, nation, and ethnographic object col-lecting practices; ( ii ) the intellectual, display practices and Museum of Anthropology; ( iii ) the New Theory of Evolution and the establishment of the Southeastern-oceanic-culture-system. The first section of “ethnicity, nation, and ethnographic object collecting practices”focuses on Lin Huixiang’s collecting practices from 1929 until the end of the Second World War. He started to collect aboriginal human objects in Taiwan since 1929 and ethnographical objects in the South Sea since 1937 . As most anthropologists from that area and period, Lin Huixiang’s collecting activities were influenced by patriotism, the establishment of a Chinese anthropology, and by personal academic interests. Chinese anthropologists during the 1920s to 1940s, including Lin Huixiang, believed that nationalism and the ‘Great Harmony ’ would lead to Chinese independence and civilization. And his practices had real significance for China in war-time. On the one hand, these aboriginal objects from Taiwan and the South Sea were regarded as material evidence of an extant“barbarian” culture;this was helpful in understanding that the‘barbari-an’ culture was basically same as that of ours, which then would reduce our ethnic prejudice a-gainst the ‘barbarian’ . On the other hand, these objects also became a means for the public to un-derstand Taiwan, the colony of Japan; in fact, these aboriginal objects even became a symbol of anti-colonialism and aroused the people’s patriot-ism. The second part of “the intelluctual, display practices and Museum of Anthropology” turns to Lin Huixiang’s ideas about the enlightment through a museum and its exhibitions. Lin Huixiang indeed emphasized the educational function of exhibitions and the museum. He displayed his collections to the public, held several exhibitions starting in 1929 , donated all his collections to Xiamen Uni-versity in 1951 , and advocated the establishment of the Museum of Anthropology. Lin Huixiang pointed out that museums were educational institu-tions meant to spread knowledge, and he used specimens, charts, and models to educate the pub-lic. As an anthropologist, Lin Huixiang understood the meaning of an ethnographical museum as an in-strument for teaching, research, and social educa-tion. By reviewing Lin Huixiang’s ‘collecting and exhibiting practices ’ during the period 1929 -1958 , we can clearly come to understand his aca-demic ideas about the discipline of anthropology and about the Southeastern-regional culture. The exhibitions in the Museum of Anthropology of Xia-men University represent his endeavor to construct the Southeastern-oceanic-culture-system within the framework of the New Theory of Evolution. He showed archaeological specimens from the prehis-toric period to the historical period, as well as eth-nographical objects of China’s Southeastern region and Taiwan region, Indonesia, Singapore, India, and of Burma. All objects displayed in exhibitions were used to illustrate the rule of evolution, espe-cially the ethnographic objects that evidenced the primitiveness of human culture; this is helpful to us when exploring the origins of cultures. At the same time, Lin Huixiang compared the cultures of Northern China and Southeastern China, and iden-tified cultural traits specific to the Southeastern ar-ea, aiming to show cultural similarities among China’s Southeastern region and the Taiwan region, and Southeast Asia, which he called the“South-eastern-oceanic-culture-system”.