外文翻譯--工作適應(yīng)在職業(yè)咨詢(xún)中被忽視的一個(gè)領(lǐng)域

1、<p>　　3200英文單詞，1.8萬(wàn)英文字符，中文5700字</p><p>　　文獻(xiàn)出處：Hershenson D B. Work adjustment: A neglected area in career counseling[J]. Journal of Counseling & Development, 1996, 74(5): 442-446.</p><p&g

2、t;<b>　　外文文獻(xiàn)</b></p><p>　　Work adjustment: A Neglected Area in Career Counseling</p><p>　　Author: David B. Hershenson</p><p>　　The author suggests that counselors should

3、devote more attention to work adjustment problems and proposes a systems model for counselors to use in conceptualizing the development of work adjustment and work adjustment problems and in formulating strategies of int

4、ervention to address these problems.</p><p>　　Ever since (and quite possibly because of) Frank Parsons’s (1909) seminal work, Choosing a Vocation, the field of career counseling has focused primarily on care

5、er choice. Even though career choice is now recognized as a longitudinal process rather than the discrete event that Parsons conceived it to be, and even though contemporary career patterns involve multiple choices over

6、the life span; it is still the case that over the course of their lives, most people spend much more of their career wo</p><p>　　concern (Conte, 1983, Osipow, 1976).</p><p>　　In his review of th

7、e career counseling and development literature, Salomone (1993) indicated that “there are at least two important models of work adjustment (Dawis & Lofquist, 1984; Hershenson, 1981; Lofquist & Dawis, 1969) that h

8、ave value to career counselors as they help their clients adapt to new work or school environments” (p. 108). Although both of these models were originally developed within a rehabilitation counseling context, both were

9、intended to be equally applicable to persons with</p><p>　　HERSHENSON’S MODEL</p><p>　　Hershenson’s model of work adjustment (Hershenson,1974,1981;Hershenson & Szymanski, 1992) posits that w

10、ork adjustment is the interaction among three interacting domains (or subsystems) within the person and the person’s work environment. The three subsystems within the person develop sequentially, each largely shaped by a

11、 particular, stage-specific environment. The first subsystem to develop is the work personality, which consists of the person’s self-concept as a worker, the person’s system of </p><p>　　The level of develop

12、ment reached by each subsystem sets a limit on how far the succeeding subsystems can develop. As they develop, however, these three subsystems establish a dynamic balance, so that changes in one subsystem will usually pr

13、ecipitate changes in one or both of the others. Thereby, levels of earlier developing subsystems can be retroactively changed, thus permitting later developing sub- systems to change accordingly. For example, the feedbac

14、k one receives about one’s competencies </p><p>　　Work adjustment involves the interaction between the subsystems in the person and the work setting. The work setting includes three elements: the organizatio

15、nal culture and behavioral expectations, the job demands and skill requirements, and the rewards and opportunities available to the worker. Work adjustment consists of three components: work role behavior (involving acti

16、ng appropriately to one’s position in the work setting, which is primarily related to work personality in the person and th</p><p>　　Although the most likely interactions have been suggested, the relationshi

17、p between subsystems of the person and elements of the work setting can be highly complex. It is possible for work personality, work competencies, or work goals to interact with any of the elements of the work setting an

18、d thereby affect any of the components of work adjustment. For example, a problem with work role behavior may stem from poor work habits (part of work competencies) or misdirected work goals rather than fro</p>&l

19、t;p>　　A SYSTEMS ADAPTATION</p><p>　　Dobren (1994) criticized Hershenson’s model for its failure to specify environmental and contextual variables and suggested that a systems approach (Von Bertalanffy, 1

20、968) could better encompass the complex factors and their interactions that comprise work adjustment. Based on this evaluation, an adaptation of Hershenson’s model to a systems format has been developed, with the aim of

21、more clearly specifying the environmental aspects of the model and their interactions. This adapted model is pres</p><p>　　As seen in Figure 1, within the person are the three sequentially developing, intera

22、ctive subsystems of work personality (WP), work competencies (WC), and work goals (WG). The dynamic balance among these three subsystems is represented by the short, double- headed arrows connecting these subsystems. Wor

23、k adjustment consists of the interaction between these subsystems and the work environment, the fourth ring from the center. The three components of work adjustment, work role behavior (RB), task </p><p>　　L

24、ocated between the person and the work setting in Figure 1 are the three environments that largely shape the development of the three subsystems of the person: first, the family, which principally affects the development

25、 of work personality; next, the school, which primarily affects the development of work competencies; and next, the reference group, which primarily affects the development of work goals. These effects are shown by dashe

26、d lines. By moving outward from family to school to referen</p><p>　　After the person enters the work setting, these three formative environmental systems continue to influence work adjustment. As the person

27、 matures, the family system expands into the person’s living system, which generally continues to include the family of origin (or its internalized, residual influences) but may now also include a mate, children, or sign

28、ificant others with whom the person lives. Even after leaving school, the person must continue to learn to adapt; so learning, including both </p><p>　　The outermost ring in Figure 1, the cultural and econom

29、ic context, includes the cultural and subcultural contexts within which the person, the family, and the person’s social and work relations take place and within which the person learns work-related behavior patterns and

30、develops career goals and expectations. This outermost ring also includes the economic conditions that affect the person’s career options and prospects. This ring is what Bronfenbrenner (1979) called an exosystem, that i

31、s, “o</p><p>　　COUNSELING FOR WORK ADJUSTMENT</p><p>　　In counseling for work adjustment, the counselor focuses on the relationship between the person (the center of Figure 1) and the work setti

32、ng (the fourth ring in Figure 1).In examining this relationship, the counselor and client must also come to understand the effects of the intervening systems of living, learning, and socialization on this relationship ,

33、and the effects of the cultural and economic context on all the constituent elements (including their effects on the counselor's perceptions </p><p>　　Key to abbreviations</p><p>　　Subsystem

34、 of Elements of the Components of </p><p>　　The Person: Work Setting: Work Adjustment:</p><p>　　WP=work personality BE=behavioral ex

35、pectations RB=work role behavior</p><p>　　WC=work competencies SR=skill requirements TP=task performance</p><p>　　WG=work goals RO=rewards and opportunities WS=wor

36、ker satisfaction</p><p><b>　　FIGURE 1</b></p><p>　　System Model of Work Adjustment Development</p><p>　　If the person's problem is with work role behavior (for examp

37、le, harassing coworkers, continually fighting with customers, or refusing to take initiative), the counselor and the client would look first at the work personality subsystem within the client and its interactions with t

38、he organizational climate and behavioral expectations of the work setting. In evaluating any problems in these interactions, the counselor and the client must also examine the effects of the living, learning, and social&

39、lt;/p><p>　　Once the nature of the problem is accurately and fully understood, the intervention should follow directly. If the problem is one of work role behavior, it must be determined whether the source of t

40、he problem is in the person's self-concept as a worker, work motivation, or work-related needs. IS the problem in the person's lack of knowledge or skills to conform to appropriate work role expectations, or does

41、 the problem result from inappropriate expectations for employee behavior made by the work</p><p>　　If the problem is one of task performance, one must determine whether the client possesses the work compete

42、ncies required by the job. If the client does not, then training in these competencies must be arranged. If the client possesses the requisite competencies, then, is the problem the client's inability to implement th

43、em or is it that something in the work setting is creating physical or emotional barriers to implementation? If it is the former, counseling is called for; if the latter, advoca</p><p>　　If the problem is on

44、e of worker satisfaction, one must assess the appropriateness and relevance of the client's work goals to the rewards offered by the work setting. If possible, one should try to bring these factors into compatibility

45、 (by values clarification, counseling, or advocacy). If the two factors cannot be made compatible, then finding a work setting that offers greater compatibility may be necessary.</p><p>　　Additionally, in ea

46、ch situation, one must take into consideration the effects the client's living, learning, and socialization systems have on the problem. In examining each system (also including the work setting and the cultural and

47、economic context), four aspects must be considered: (a) the values and attitudes the system transmits, (b) the behavioral expectations it presents, (c) the resources for resolution of the problem it offers, and (d) the b

48、arriers to solution of the problem the system</p><p>　　Finally, as has been noted, work adjustment may be affected by subsystems within the person other than the one primarily linked to each component of wor

49、k adjustment. Thus, although the linkages between work personality and work role behavior, between work competencies and task performance, and between work goals and worker satisfaction are the most direct, these linkage

50、s are by no means the only possible ones involved in work adjustment.</p><p>　　The factors that the counselor must take into consideration in working with a person with a work adjustment problem, according t

51、o the systems model presented here, are summarized in Figure 2. In this figure, the two principal entities that interact with each other, the person and the work setting, are capitalized. Within the person, the subsystem

52、s of work personality, work competencies, and work goals and their interactions are the primary foci. Within the work setting, behavioral expectations, </p><p><b>　　FIGURE 2</b></p><p&

53、gt;　　Elements to Consider in Counseling for Work Adjustment</p><p>　　Parenthetically, note that although the primary relationships between work competencies and skill requirements and between work goals and

54、rewards and opportunities resemble the linkages between abilities and ability requirements and between needs and reinforcers in the Minnesota theory of work adjustment (Lofquist & Dawis, 1969), there are some major d

55、ifferences. First of all, the model presented here does not postulate a necessary, exclusive linkage to account for task performance (“satisfactor</p><p>　　CONCLUSION</p><p>　　Historically, coun

56、selors have concentrated more on issues of career choice than on issues of work adjustment, even though these latter issues potentially occupy a much greater proportion of most people’s careers. This article has suggeste

57、d that counselors would be well advised to devote more attention to issues of work adjustment and has provided one possible framework for analyzing and intervening on these issues. In conclusion, note that although the m

58、odel presented here is intended to provide</p><p>　　REFERENCES</p><p>　　Anthony, W., Cohen, M., & Farkas, M. (1990). Psychiatric rehabilitation.</p><p>　　Boston: Center for Psyc

59、hiatric Rehabilitation.</p><p>　　Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.</p><p>　　Conte, L. E. (1983). V

60、ocational development theories and the disabled person: Oversight or deliberate omission? Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 26, 316-328.</p><p>　　Dawis, R. V., & Lofquist, L. H. (1984). A psychological

61、 theory of work adjustment. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.</p><p>　　Dobren, A. A. (1994). An ecologically oriented conceptual model of vocational rehabilitation of people with acquired midcareer disab

62、ilities. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 37, 215-228.</p><p>　　Ginzberg, E., Ginsburg, S. W., Axelrad, S., & Herma, J. L. (195 1). Occuputional choice: An approach to a general theory. New York: Colu

63、mbia University.</p><p>　　Hershenson, D. B. (1974). Vocational guidance and the handicapped. In E. L. Herr (Ed.), Vocational guidance and human development (pp. 478-501). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.</p>

64、<p>　　Hershenson, D. B. (1981). Work adjustment, disability, and the three r’s of vocational rehabilitation: A conceptual model. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 25, 91-97.</p><p>　　Hershenson, D. B

65、., & Langbauer, W. R. (1973). Sequencing of intrapsychic stages of vocational development. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 20, 519-521.</p><p>　　Hershenson, D. B., & Lavery, G. J. (1978). Sequencin

66、g of vocational development stages: Further studies. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 12, 102-108.</p><p>　　Hershenson, D. B., & Szymanski, E. M. (1992). Career development of people with disabilities. In

67、 R. M. Parker & E. M. Szymanski (Eds.), Rehabilitation counseling: Basics and beyond (2nd ed., pp. 273-303). Austin, TX: Pro-ed.</p><p>　　Lofquist, L. H., & Dawis, R. V. (1969). Adjustment to work:

68、 A psychological view of man’s problems in a work-oriented society. New York: Appleton- Century-Crofts.</p><p>　　Mortimer, J. T., & Borman, K. M. (Eds.). (1988). Work experience and psychological develop

69、ment through the life span. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.</p><p>　　Neff, W. S. (1985). Work and human behavior (3rd ed.). New York: Aldine. Osipow, S. H. (1976). Vocati

70、onal development problems of the handicapped. In H. Rusalem & D. Malikin (Eds.), Contemporary vocational rehabilita-</p><p>　　tion (pp. 51-60). New York: New York University.</p><p>　　Parso

71、ns, F. (1909). Choosing a vocation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Roe, A. (1956). The psychology of occupations. New York: Wiley.</p><p>　　Salomone, P. R. (1993). Annual review: Practice and research in career c

72、ounseling and development, 1993. The Career Development Quarterly, 42, 99-128.</p><p>　　Super, D. E. (1957). The psychology of careers. New York: Harper.</p><p>　　Von Bertalanffy, L. (1968). Gen

73、eral systems theory: Foundations, development, applications. New York: Braziller.</p><p><b>　　譯文</b></p><p>　　工作適應(yīng)：在職業(yè)咨詢(xún)中被忽視的一個(gè)領(lǐng)域</p><p><b>　　作者：戴維·赫漢森</b&

74、gt;</p><p>　　作者建議咨詢(xún)師應(yīng)該更加關(guān)注工作適應(yīng)問(wèn)題，并提出一個(gè)系統(tǒng)模型，供咨詢(xún)師用來(lái)概念化工作適應(yīng)和工作適應(yīng)問(wèn)題的發(fā)展，以及制定解決這些問(wèn)題的干預(yù)策略。</p><p>　　自從弗蘭克·帕森斯( 1909年)的開(kāi)創(chuàng)性作品《選擇職業(yè)》問(wèn)世以來(lái)(很可能是因?yàn)樵撟髌?，職業(yè)咨詢(xún)領(lǐng)域一直主要關(guān)注職業(yè)選擇。盡管職業(yè)選擇現(xiàn)在被認(rèn)為是一個(gè)縱向的過(guò)程，而不是帕森斯想象中的離散事件

75、，即使當(dāng)代的職業(yè)模式在整個(gè)生命周期中涉及多種選擇；在他們的一生中，大多數(shù)人花在職業(yè)上的時(shí)間比他們選擇職業(yè)的時(shí)間要多得多。然而，在職業(yè)咨詢(xún)理論和實(shí)踐中，職業(yè)工作中涉及的問(wèn)題受到的關(guān)注不成比例地少。這些問(wèn)題引起人們極大關(guān)注的唯一地方是殘疾人的職業(yè)行為，對(duì)他們來(lái)說(shuō)，職業(yè)選擇傳統(tǒng)上更受限制，因此不那么重要( Conte，1983年，Osipow，1976年)。</p><p>　　在對(duì)職業(yè)咨詢(xún)和發(fā)展文獻(xiàn)的回顧中，Salo

76、mone（1993）指出“至少有兩種重要的工作調(diào)整模型（Dawis＆Lofquist，1984; Hershenson，1981; Lofquist＆Dawis，1969），對(duì)職業(yè)生涯有價(jià)值咨詢(xún)師幫助他們的客戶(hù)適應(yīng)新的工作或?qū)W校環(huán)境“（第108頁(yè)）。雖然這兩種模型最初都是在康復(fù)咨詢(xún)的背景下制定的，但兩者都旨在同樣適用于非殘疾人。明尼蘇達(dá)州的工作調(diào)整理論（Dawis＆Lofquist，1984; Lofquist＆Dawis，1969）遵

77、循Parsonian特質(zhì)和因子方法，將能力與工作要求、個(gè)人需求和價(jià)值觀(guān)與特定工作環(huán)境中的強(qiáng)化因素相匹配。Hershenson（1974,1981; Hershenson＆Szymanski，1992）的工作調(diào)整模型采用了一種發(fā)展方法，遵循Ginzberg，Ginsburg，Axelrad和Herma（1951），Roe（1956）和Super（1957）的方向。 Salomone（1993）得出結(jié)論：“在闡明工作和學(xué)校調(diào)整咨詢(xún)的包容性模

78、型之前，Hersens的范式可以被認(rèn)為是一個(gè)很好的開(kāi)端”（第109頁(yè)）。因此，這</p><p>　　HERSHENSON的模型</p><p>　　Hershenson的工作調(diào)整模型( Hershenson，1974，1981；Hershenson & Szymanski，1992 )假設(shè)工作調(diào)整是人和人的工作環(huán)境中三個(gè)相互作用的領(lǐng)域(或子系統(tǒng))之間的相互作用。人體內(nèi)的三個(gè)子系統(tǒng)

79、是按順序發(fā)展的，每個(gè)子系統(tǒng)都很大程度上是由特定的、特定于階段的環(huán)境塑造的。要發(fā)展的第一個(gè)子系統(tǒng)是工作人格，它包括人作為工人的自我概念、人的工作動(dòng)力系統(tǒng)以及人與工作相關(guān)的需求和價(jià)值觀(guān)。在家庭的影響下，學(xué)齡前兒童的工作個(gè)性得到了集中發(fā)展。在學(xué)年中，接下來(lái)要發(fā)展的是工作能力的子系統(tǒng)，它包括工作習(xí)慣、適用于工作的身心技能以及適用于工作環(huán)境的人際交往技能。工作習(xí)慣包括迅速、整潔和可靠等行為模式。與工作相關(guān)的人際交往技能包括對(duì)監(jiān)督做出適當(dāng)反應(yīng)，以及

80、與同事和工作環(huán)境中遇到的其他人相處。工作習(xí)慣、身體和精神技能以及社交技能是學(xué)年發(fā)展的重點(diǎn)，當(dāng)你收到關(guān)于自己的長(zhǎng)處和局限性的反饋時(shí)。當(dāng)一個(gè)人準(zhǔn)備離開(kāi)學(xué)校，進(jìn)入職場(chǎng)時(shí)，第三個(gè)子系統(tǒng)，工作目標(biāo)，成為發(fā)展的重點(diǎn)領(lǐng)域。工作目標(biāo)至少部分受該人的同伴群體或參考群體的影響。在制定時(shí)，工作目標(biāo)應(yīng)該清晰、現(xiàn)實(shí)，并與個(gè)人的工作個(gè)性和工作能力相一致</p><p>　　每個(gè)子系統(tǒng)達(dá)到的開(kāi)發(fā)水平限制了后續(xù)子系統(tǒng)的開(kāi)發(fā)程度。然而，隨著它們的

81、發(fā)展，這三個(gè)子系統(tǒng)建立了動(dòng)態(tài)平衡，因此一個(gè)子系統(tǒng)的變化通常會(huì)導(dǎo)致另一個(gè)子系統(tǒng)或兩個(gè)子系統(tǒng)的變化。因此，早期開(kāi)發(fā)子系統(tǒng)的級(jí)別可以追溯性地改變，從而允許后期開(kāi)發(fā)子系統(tǒng)相應(yīng)地改變。例如，一個(gè)人在學(xué)校收到的關(guān)于自己能力的反饋可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致這個(gè)人改變自己的概念，因?yàn)檫@個(gè)人最初是在學(xué)齡前時(shí)期形成的。因此，由過(guò)度保護(hù)家庭撫養(yǎng)的孩子可能已經(jīng)形成了一種無(wú)所不能的自我概念，作為一名工人，這種自我概念必須根據(jù)他或她在學(xué)校的表現(xiàn)而降低，或者由拒絕家庭撫養(yǎng)的孩子可能

82、已經(jīng)形成了一種較差的自我概念，作為一名工人，這種自我概念必須根據(jù)他或她在學(xué)校的表現(xiàn)而提高。這些變化反過(guò)來(lái)會(huì)影響工作目標(biāo)的發(fā)展。最后，請(qǐng)注意，家庭、學(xué)校和同齡人或參考群體環(huán)境雖然是獨(dú)立的實(shí)體，但并不完全相互獨(dú)立:家庭的地理、經(jīng)濟(jì)和社會(huì)地位通常決定孩子就讀的學(xué)校，學(xué)校經(jīng)常提供同齡人或參考群體。從廣泛的社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)層面對(duì)殘疾人和非殘疾人進(jìn)行研究( Hershenson & Langbauer，1973年；Hershenson &

83、Lavery，1978年)支持了前面描述的三個(gè)子系統(tǒng)的存在，它們的結(jié)</p><p>　　工作調(diào)整涉及人和工作環(huán)境中子系統(tǒng)之間的互動(dòng)。工作環(huán)境包括三個(gè)要素:組織文化和行為期望、工作要求和技能要求，以及員工可獲得的獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)和機(jī)會(huì)。工作調(diào)整由三個(gè)組成部分組成:工作角色行為(涉及到在工作環(huán)境中適當(dāng)?shù)剡m應(yīng)自己的位置，這主要與個(gè)人的工作個(gè)性和工作環(huán)境的行為預(yù)期相關(guān))、任務(wù)績(jī)效(涉及到個(gè)人工作產(chǎn)出的質(zhì)量和數(shù)量，這主要與個(gè)人的工作

84、能力和工作環(huán)境的技能要求相關(guān))和員工滿(mǎn)意度(涉及到工作帶來(lái)的滿(mǎn)足感，這主要與個(gè)人的工作目標(biāo)以及工作環(huán)境中的獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)和機(jī)會(huì)相關(guān))。</p><p>　　雖然已經(jīng)提出了最可能的互動(dòng)，但是人的子系統(tǒng)和工作環(huán)境的元素之間的關(guān)系可能非常復(fù)雜。工作個(gè)性、工作能力或工作目標(biāo)有可能與工作環(huán)境的任何元素相互作用，從而影響工作調(diào)整的任何組成部分。例如，工作角色行為的問(wèn)題可能源于不良的工作習(xí)慣(部分工作能力)或錯(cuò)誤的工作目標(biāo)，而不是工作個(gè)

85、性。同樣，任務(wù)績(jī)效的問(wèn)題可能反映了工作目標(biāo)的沖突或個(gè)人工作動(dòng)機(jī)系統(tǒng)的問(wèn)題(位于工作個(gè)性中)，而不是工作能力的不足。</p><p><b>　　系統(tǒng)適應(yīng)性</b></p><p>　　Dobren (1994)批評(píng)Hershenson模型未能具體說(shuō)明環(huán)境和背景變量，并建議系統(tǒng)方法( Von Bertalanffy，1968 )可以更好地包含復(fù)雜因素及其相互作用，包括工

86、作調(diào)整?；谶@一評(píng)估，Hershenson的模型適應(yīng)了系統(tǒng)格式，目的是更清楚地說(shuō)明模型的環(huán)境方面及其相互作用。圖1展示了這種調(diào)整后的模型。這里使用的特定系統(tǒng)方法遵循Bronfenbrenner ( 1979 )的“一套嵌套結(jié)構(gòu)，每套都在下一套內(nèi)，就像一套俄羅斯娃娃”模型。最內(nèi)層是。。。發(fā)展中的人”(第3頁(yè))。</p><p>　　如圖1所示，人的內(nèi)部是工作個(gè)性(WP)、工作能力(WC)和工作目標(biāo)(WG)三個(gè)依次發(fā)

87、展的交互子系統(tǒng)。這三個(gè)子系統(tǒng)之間的動(dòng)態(tài)平衡由連接這三個(gè)子系統(tǒng)的短雙向箭頭表示。工作調(diào)整包括這些子系統(tǒng)和工作環(huán)境之間的相互作用，即從中心開(kāi)始的第四圈。工作調(diào)整的三個(gè)組成部分，工作角色行為(RB)、任務(wù)績(jī)效(TP)和員工滿(mǎn)意度(WS)，用實(shí)心的單箭頭表示。每個(gè)組件都連接到個(gè)人內(nèi)部的特定子系統(tǒng)以及與其主要相關(guān)的工作設(shè)置的特定元素。箭頭頭部的位置表示工作調(diào)整的該部分被評(píng)估的位置(工作設(shè)置中的RB和TP；WS中的人)。</p>&l

88、t;p>　　圖1中位于人和工作環(huán)境之間的是三個(gè)環(huán)境，這三個(gè)環(huán)境在很大程度上塑造了人的三個(gè)子系統(tǒng)的發(fā)展:首先，家庭，它主要影響工作個(gè)性的發(fā)展；其次，學(xué)校，主要影響工作能力的發(fā)展；其次是參考小組，它主要影響工作目標(biāo)的制定。這些效果由虛線(xiàn)表示。通過(guò)從家庭到學(xué)校，從參考小組到工作環(huán)境，這個(gè)模型顯示了個(gè)人主要受每個(gè)環(huán)境影響的順序。</p><p>　　當(dāng)一個(gè)人進(jìn)入工作環(huán)境后，這三個(gè)形成性的環(huán)境系統(tǒng)繼續(xù)影響著工作調(diào)整。

89、隨著人的成熟，家庭系統(tǒng)擴(kuò)展到人的生活系統(tǒng)中，這個(gè)系統(tǒng)通常繼續(xù)包括原籍家庭(或其內(nèi)部化的殘余影響)，但現(xiàn)在也可能包括配偶、子女或與人生活在一起的重要其他人。即使離開(kāi)學(xué)校，這個(gè)人也必須繼續(xù)學(xué)習(xí)適應(yīng)；因此，學(xué)習(xí)，包括正式和非正式學(xué)習(xí)，仍然是工作調(diào)整的積極因素。這個(gè)人的朋友和社會(huì)交往，早些時(shí)候已經(jīng)影響了這個(gè)人的工作目標(biāo)，隨著這個(gè)人社會(huì)化系統(tǒng)的擴(kuò)大而繼續(xù)。這些持續(xù)的影響在圖1中的前三個(gè)環(huán)上分別表示為生活、學(xué)習(xí)和社會(huì)化系統(tǒng)( Anthony、Coh

90、en和Farkas，1990 )。三個(gè)長(zhǎng)長(zhǎng)的實(shí)心箭頭穿過(guò)這些中間的環(huán)表明，個(gè)人的家庭生活系統(tǒng)、終身學(xué)習(xí)和參考群體社會(huì)化系統(tǒng)會(huì)影響工作調(diào)整的每個(gè)組成部分。與此同時(shí)，正如Bronfenbrenner (1979) 、 Mortimer 和 Borman (1988)所指出的，一個(gè)人的工作調(diào)整也會(huì)反過(guò)來(lái)影響他的家庭、學(xué)習(xí)和社會(huì)化系統(tǒng)。因此，工作問(wèn)題可能會(huì)導(dǎo)致家庭不和或從社交關(guān)系中退出，反之亦然。</p><p>　　圖

91、1中最外面的一環(huán)，文化和經(jīng)濟(jì)背景，包括個(gè)人、家庭以及個(gè)人的社會(huì)和工作關(guān)系發(fā)生的文化和亞文化背景，以及個(gè)人學(xué)習(xí)與工作相關(guān)的行為模式并發(fā)展職業(yè)目標(biāo)和期望的文化和亞文化背景。這個(gè)最外環(huán)還包括影響個(gè)人職業(yè)選擇和前景的經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況。這個(gè)環(huán)就是Bronfenbrenner ( 1979 )所說(shuō)的外部系統(tǒng)，也就是說(shuō)，“一個(gè)或多個(gè)不涉及發(fā)展中人作為積極參與者的環(huán)境，但是其中發(fā)生了影響人的事件”(第237頁(yè))。</p><p>　　圖

92、1 工作適應(yīng)發(fā)展的系統(tǒng)模型</p><p>　　關(guān)于工作適應(yīng)問(wèn)題的咨詢(xún)</p><p>　　在做關(guān)于工作適應(yīng)方面的咨詢(xún)時(shí)，咨詢(xún)師會(huì)重點(diǎn)關(guān)注個(gè)人（圖一的中心：工作人格、工作能力、工作目標(biāo)）與工作場(chǎng)所（圖一中的第四環(huán)：行為預(yù)期、技能要求、獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)和機(jī)會(huì)）之間的關(guān)系。在研究它們時(shí)，咨詢(xún)顧客和客戶(hù)端必須要在主流的文化背景和宏觀(guān)經(jīng)濟(jì)形勢(shì)的一般環(huán)境下來(lái)考慮生活、學(xué)習(xí)和組織社會(huì)化等因素等作為干預(yù)系統(tǒng)對(duì)員工

93、的個(gè)人特性與工作場(chǎng)所之間的關(guān)系（咨詢(xún)師洞察力和社會(huì)實(shí)踐也會(huì)對(duì)個(gè)人和工作場(chǎng)所之間的關(guān)系造成影響）.因此，對(duì)咨詢(xún)師而言首要的任務(wù)就是對(duì)工作適應(yīng)狀況做一個(gè)全面的評(píng)估，并且評(píng)估的第一部分是確定工作適應(yīng)問(wèn)題是涉及到工作角色行為，任務(wù)績(jī)效和員工滿(mǎn)意度三個(gè)中的其中一個(gè)問(wèn)題，還是三者的結(jié)合。</p><p><b>　　關(guān)鍵縮略語(yǔ)</b></p><p>　　個(gè)體子系統(tǒng)

94、 工作環(huán)境因素 工作適應(yīng)成分</p><p>　　WP=工作人格 BE=行為期望 RB=工作角色行為</p><p>　　WC=工作能力 SR=技能要求 TP=任務(wù)績(jī)效</p><p>　　WG=工作目標(biāo)

95、 RO=報(bào)酬和機(jī)會(huì) WS=員工的工作滿(mǎn)意度</p><p>　　如果員工的工作適應(yīng)問(wèn)題是和工作角色的行為有關(guān)（如騷擾同事，持續(xù)地和客戶(hù)發(fā)生沖突或主動(dòng)拒絕客戶(hù)提出的要求），則咨詢(xún)師和客戶(hù)端要先關(guān)注一下工作場(chǎng)所子系統(tǒng)的關(guān)鍵因素以及它們與組織文化和工作行為預(yù)期之間的相互作用。在評(píng)估這些相互作用的任何問(wèn)題時(shí)，咨詢(xún)師和顧客要注意生活、學(xué)習(xí)和社會(huì)系統(tǒng)的影響。同樣地對(duì)于和任務(wù)績(jī)效有關(guān)的工作適應(yīng)

96、問(wèn)題（如質(zhì)量或工作產(chǎn)出不足），咨詢(xún)者要首先關(guān)注員工的個(gè)人工作能力和工作要求，還有干預(yù)系統(tǒng)的影響。如果要和工作滿(mǎn)意度有關(guān)，要首先關(guān)注組織所提出的工作目標(biāo)以及干預(yù)系統(tǒng)和組織可能提供的機(jī)會(huì)。在所有的情況下，必須要在一定的經(jīng)濟(jì)和文化背景下進(jìn)行考查。</p><p>　　一旦能夠準(zhǔn)確、全面的定義工作適應(yīng)問(wèn)題的性質(zhì)，就應(yīng)該采取直接的措施去解決當(dāng)前存在的問(wèn)題。如果和工作任務(wù)角色行為有關(guān)，則必須確定問(wèn)題的根源是員工的自我概念，還

97、是工作動(dòng)機(jī)或者是其他與工作相關(guān)的需求沒(méi)有得到滿(mǎn)足。是員工知識(shí)或技能的缺乏以致于無(wú)法符合目前的工作角色期望，還是由于組織對(duì)于雇員的不恰當(dāng)?shù)男袨槠谕咳绻麊?wèn)題在于員工的工作特性，應(yīng)該采用一對(duì)一或是團(tuán)隊(duì)咨詢(xún)這種干預(yù)方式。如果導(dǎo)致問(wèn)題的原因是由于缺乏技能或知識(shí)，則應(yīng)該提供技能培訓(xùn)；如果是工作環(huán)境出現(xiàn)了問(wèn)題，應(yīng)該為客戶(hù)提供自信心培訓(xùn)或是代表雇主對(duì)客戶(hù)進(jìn)行關(guān)于公司環(huán)境的解讀。</p><p>　　如果問(wèn)題是和任務(wù)績(jī)效有關(guān)，咨

98、詢(xún)師要確定客戶(hù)是否擁有工作所需的工作能力。如果客戶(hù)沒(méi)有，則必須安排一些關(guān)于這方面能力的培訓(xùn)。如果客戶(hù)擁有必要的能力，就需要考慮是因?yàn)榭蛻?hù)無(wú)法將任務(wù)付諸實(shí)踐還是因?yàn)楣ぷ鳝h(huán)境的某些東西導(dǎo)致了身體或情感上的障礙而致使任務(wù)無(wú)法完成。如果是前者，則需要提供咨詢(xún)；如果是后者，組織環(huán)境就要做出一定的改變從而有利于工作任務(wù)的實(shí)現(xiàn)。</p><p>　　如果問(wèn)題是員工的工作滿(mǎn)意度，咨詢(xún)師必須評(píng)估客戶(hù)的工作目標(biāo)和組織多提供的回報(bào)之間

99、的是否適當(dāng)和相關(guān)。如果可能的話(huà)，應(yīng)當(dāng)盡量將這些因素綜合在一起（通過(guò)價(jià)值分類(lèi)、咨詢(xún)、辯護(hù)）。如果兩個(gè)因素不能兼容，那么尋找能夠提供更大兼容性工作場(chǎng)所是十分必要的。</p><p>　　此外，在每種情況下，要將影響客戶(hù)生活、學(xué)習(xí)以及社會(huì)系統(tǒng)有關(guān)的因素考慮在內(nèi)。在研究每個(gè)系統(tǒng)是（也包括工作環(huán)境、文化和經(jīng)濟(jì)背景），必須要考慮四個(gè)方面：1）系統(tǒng)所傳達(dá)的價(jià)值觀(guān)和態(tài)度；2）系統(tǒng)所提出的行為期望；3）系統(tǒng)提供的解決問(wèn)題的資源；4