表達憤怒 態度要果決

【經濟日報╱本報訊】 2011.05.20 03:43 am

或 許現在的你，已經累積了一些生活歷練，所以你知道當自己表達憤怒時，可能會有些不好的狀況出現。因此，當別人對你不好的時候，你可能什麼也不說，只是暗自 在心中惱火，這通常會帶來所謂的「積怨」。但等你最後真的表達自己的感受時，你的反應又太過強烈、激憤，而且沒有任何作用。 這正是為憤怒所苦的人通常會出現的模式──他們不知道該如何用有建設性的方式來表達他們的感受，或是如何直接表明他們想要什麼。如果這樣的模式符合你的狀況，那麼，現在就是學習如何在與別人相處時擁有果決態度的時候了。 當你擁有果決的態度，你就會在試著降低衝突程度並找出問題解決方法時，使用適當的言詞，同時做出適當的處置。注意我們的用詞：「試著」──我們相信果決的溝通方式，最有可能幫助你把問題解決，但這並沒有絕對的保證。 茱蒂絲是一位42歲的已婚主管，育有兩子。平常她和老闆瑪拉雅相處得還不錯，但是，只要瑪拉雅安排了外出旅行的行程，卻沒有事先告知茱蒂絲時，茱蒂絲就會非常生氣。因為瑪拉雅的出差行程，通常都會影響到茱蒂絲的家庭時間。 她經常為了要達到瑪拉雅的要求而更改她與家人的計畫。在心裡，她很憤怒也很厭惡這種狀況，所以她開始考慮要換新工作。 如果茱蒂絲能夠以果決的態度，去面對觸發他們憤怒情緒的人，那麼，他們的問題很可能可以得到合理的解決。但我們也了解，果決的態度有時可能不會帶來你想要的結果。這就是為什麼果決的態度，要和其他憤怒控制技巧一起搭配使用。 當你用果決的態度處理事情時，記得要看著對方，並且保持放鬆，並讓自己帶有令人愉快的態度和堅定的語調。並且記住，你的任務是找出一個雙贏的解決方式，所以必須傾聽對方說話。畢竟，人們都喜歡有人聽他們說話。 表現果決態度最有效的方法，就是在句子一開頭說：「我覺得……」這個簡單的開場白力量非常強大，它能幫助你與家人、朋友和同事間建立起穩固的連結。說話時 不要語帶指責，只要表達你的感受就好。只要稍加練習，你就能夠培養出很有價值的技巧，不但能減少衝突的發生，也能降低你日常生活中憤怒的機會。 （本文摘自暢銷書《不抓狂的管理術──7招讓你成為職場大紅人》，博客來、金石堂、誠品等全台各大書店79折熱銷中） 【2011/05/20 經濟日報】

成功者教養學／劉兆玄 做孩子生命中的貴人

【經濟日報╱林富元】 2011.03.14 02:50 am

劉兆玄，不用我多寫，海峽兩岸以及全世界的華人大多知道他。 劉兆玄是化學博士，曾任清華大學校長、交通部長、行政院副院長、東吳大學校長及行政院院長，現在擔任全國文化總會會長，繼續為台灣、世界華人的文化及心靈而奮鬥努力。 劉兆玄學術有成，功業彪炳，一生奉獻於教育與為民服務，這裡就不再多說。記得多年前，我與劉兆玄經由玉山科技協會的活動而結識之後，由於彼此都喜歡武俠小說，且都是性情中人，他就成了我佩服的偶像與好友，這是我很大的幸福。 謙沖為懷 有風骨的教育家 我眼中的劉兆玄，是位雲淡風輕、平淡自然，而且是擁有清高風骨的真誠領袖，儘管位居高位，功在國家，但永遠是那麼謙虛客氣。 劉兆玄很喜歡麥克阿瑟將軍的演講。一般人都知道麥帥名言：「老兵不死，只是凋零而已」，但他最喜歡的卻是另一句：「很感謝上天為我點上亮光，讓我看到自 己，而可以充分發揮」。點亮光芒，讓孩子們看到自己的長處，讓他們自己自由發展，也許這就是劉兆玄為人處世以及教養學的基本信念吧！ 劉兆玄的父親劉國運將軍，湖南衡陽人。劉國運將軍對建立早期國家空軍團隊、設置台灣的空防實力，以及後來韓戰時期參與協防，都有非常大的貢獻，也是我國輩分最早的空軍將領之一。 慈母嚴師 為孩子打好基礎 他的母親鍾畹芳是劉國運將軍的同鄉，是師範學校培育出來的好老師。他們育有六子，一生非常注重孩子的教育。 他的母親對孩子管理非常嚴格，尤其強調每個孩子都要學習基本國學，做為底子。反觀劉國運將軍的教育方式就較豁達，常會用機會教育的方式點醒孩子。 劉兆玄記得，每逢寒暑假開始第一天，他母親就會訂下功課表，且親自督促教導。從國文到英文，從書法到作文，每天幾點到幾點讀什麼，幾點到幾點學什麼，訂得一清二楚。或許就是如此的文學訓練，讓劉兆玄及兄弟們，後來皆能信手拈來寫出轟動的武俠小說的原因吧！ 原來，高中時的劉兆玄與其他兩兄弟，當時以「上官鼎」的筆名寫了好幾套暢銷的武俠名作，我本人就是他們當年的書迷之一，記得有一套叫《沉砂谷》，我更是喜愛到不忍釋手。 這檔事當然他們是瞞著父母幹的。但為什麼會想寫武俠小說？原因也很簡單，就是覺得功課無聊。許多次他們假裝在寫功課或讀書，還會安排其他兄弟站哨，然後拿出底下藏的草稿紙，父母一不注意就趕快寫稿。 父親訓示 淡淡一句影響深 但是，紙包不住火，父母心裡也早就有數，但並沒有立刻正面反對或阻止。有一天，劉兆玄陪著父親到花園散步，看到各種當令的花卉。劉國運將軍指著花朵說： 「你看這些花多麼漂亮，時節到了，他們自然會綻放。」然後父親又指著其他有些花朵凋零的地方說：「你看，如果有些花提早開放，不一定是件好事。」此時此 刻，劉兆玄聽懂了，他知道父親在提醒他，什麼時候該做什麼事，不要跳得太早。 於是三兄弟就此封筆，到今天似乎就都沒有再寫過。劉兆玄覺得，父親在成長時期常給他各種淡淡的暗示，沒有驚天叫罵或訓斥，卻帶給他最深邃的影響。 另一方面，劉兆玄父母的教育想法其實相當先進，在那個資源貧瘠的年代裡，他們就很注重孩子的「課外活動」。哪個孩子有特殊的需求或愛好，譬如誰喜歡畫畫，他們就會想辦法找老師教。 （五之一，本文摘自《成功者的教養學──孩子的未來，從家庭開始》，經濟日報出版，全省各大書店79折熱銷中） 【2011/03/14 經濟日報】

紅白喜事和聚餐場合決定職場命運

只要進入職場，任何人都會遇到這樣一件事，聚餐。一個案子的結束、迎新送舊等諸多特殊時刻，公司會有各式各樣的聚餐，有時一個月定期搞一次，或者兩個月搞一次。有人說「聚餐是工作之餘的樂趣所在」，每逢工作告一段落，職場人士就會快樂地享受聚餐的樂趣。

但 有些人對此卻表現得十分勉強，他們總會找各種藉口提前離開，或找各種理由乾脆不出席，因為他們認為聚餐是可去可不去的，對他們來講聚餐只不過是一次「玩 樂」的機會。當上司對他們說不要缺席時，他們不以為然：「這有什麼，把分配給我的工作做好不就得了，吃喝玩樂的事情去不去有什麼關係？」

真是這樣嗎？真的沒什麼關係嗎？答案當然是「NO」。有人說聚餐是業務的延續，我認為這句話千真萬確。

說有笑的聚餐為何是業務的延續
當 然，聚餐場合不是工作的地點，那是吃吃飯、喝喝酒、開開玩笑、大聲吵吵鬧鬧的地方，也可以說是打發時間的地方。但為什麼說聚餐是業務的延續呢？因為一起吃 飯、敬酒乾杯的時候，我們相互向對方表達了各種小小的關切之情，找一些共同的話題，找一些情緒上的共鳴。這是白天在辦公室裡所感受不到的親近，隱約中萌發 出一種連結成命運共同體的同志般的感覺。聚餐時也會交流很多關於公司、同事的資訊，容易增進相互理解，以及交換彼此對工作和公司的看法及態度。

而那些不願參加聚餐的人，吃過飯馬上就消失得無影無蹤的人，就不會知道那些公司裡時下流傳的最新消息。一兩次還無妨，經常缺席就會漸漸被他人排斥在外，就算白天工作再得心應手，也不可能打入企業的核心。

父母對子女最大的願望是什麼？共同相處的時間。看看那些苦於跟子女關係不融洽的父母就能知道，他們總擔心跟子女相處時間太短。相處也不是要做什麼特別的事，旨在建立共同的經歷，並從中尋找共同的話題，引起情緒上的共鳴。

我 認識一個人，當他留學美國的兒子放假回家時，由於分開時間太長，他都不知道應該怎樣對待他的兒子，為此十分苦惱。他想找些話題，可是他們之間的共同經歷太 少，讓他不知道要聊些什麼，該怎麼聊。經過一番考慮之後，他決定跟兒子去爬山露營。雖然這個過程並沒有讓父子之間的對話變得更多，但他們在相同的時間裡經 歷了一次相同的體驗，這有助於他們父子關係的恢復。

對於這種現象，教育心理學家稱之為「時間的質量」。雖然時間很短，但是雙方都完全集中精力並製造了共同的經驗和情緒體驗，這就是能打敗「時間的數量」的好方法。

在 工作生活中，聚餐的作用就在於此。在短時間內，處於同一場所的人們，全身心地投入到共同的經歷和情緒，以及共同的話題中去。在這裡，「時間的質量」發生了 作用，它是在人們之間建立持續牢固的紐帶關係的介質。跳過這段時間，就算他們共同工作一整天，相互間也很難建立起如此親密的關係。話題只圍著業務轉，只是 用異樣眼光看對方，心裡想著「那人到底吃什麼了」，這樣的關係，比起一邊說著「昨天喝多了吧」，一邊同時露出笑容相約去喝解酒湯的關係，當然不可同日而 語。所以，就算聚餐看起來只是吃吃喝喝，打打鬧鬧，就算你身體再疲憊，要做的事堆成山，最好還是去參加。只有這樣才能跟同事找到共同話題，增進彼此的共同 體意識和歸屬感。

還有一些活動你絕對不可以缺席，那就是學術研討會。我們公司每年都會舉辦兩次，全體員工去遠離首爾的安靜的地方開學術研 討會。出去並不是為了特別的學習培訓或發布什麼重要事情，只是搞些娛樂活動，一起度過一夜時光，大家可以藉此機會盡情討論、做遊戲、辦些體育活動。但每次 要到學術討論會的日子時，總有幾個人會對此提出異議。

他們反對的理由總是差不多—「都快忙死了，沒什麼事為什麼還要去搞什麼兩天一夜的……」

這話聽起來也沒什麼錯，而且所有人都參加這個活動又花錢又占用工作時間，還可能造成很大浪費。儘管如此，我還是會強行要求所有人必須參加。為什麼？因為學術研討會的效果是非常大的。

有 研究表明，一個人在工作單位中有朋友時，他的離職率非常低。當然無需做特別說明，大家都知道一個公司的離職率越低，其可成長性和可發展性就越高這個道理。 公司的這種集體學術研討會就具有這種效果。它會拉近各部門員工之間生疏的工作關係，使員工間的交流與溝通變得更順暢，提高相互理解度。整個公司的業務效率 自然也就提高了。

回想當年的我，那時還是個小職員，我也曾經逃避參加學術研討會，不僅是學術研討會，任何一種形式的公司活動我都一概不參 加。我總是想：「耽誤時間搞什麼活動啊？有這時間還不如認真工作呢。」但是現在讓我回頭想想，老天爺啊！真是大錯特錯，我那種思考方式和行動真的對自己一 點幫助都沒有。

這種做法肯定對我的職業生活產生了負面影響，說不定還會降低公司對我的人事評價。那時候真是什麼也不懂啊。我現在才明白， 聚餐、學術研討會和公司的各種活動，都是有其存在理由的。不要逃避公司的聚會、部門的活動，這是想找也找不到的寶貴機會，帶動那些不想參加聚餐的同事一起 去吧，積極和同事朋友們打成一片，跟他們一起開懷大笑吧。

from:

什麼樣的人，企業絕不放手：獵頭專家告訴你的職場現實

作者：申鉉滿

出版日期：2010 年08 月 25 日

轉職面臨選擇，先看品牌後看薪水

擁有高學歷，還有著金融領域絢麗經歷的L，和我是舊識，他也為職業抉擇的問題來找過我。當時他面臨兩個選擇，一個是大型金融公司的約聘高層，另一個是培訓公司的副社長。前者職位較低，而後者職位很高不說，對方還表示將全權委託給他，薪水也達到了一個非常不錯的水準。

當他問我哪個比較好的時候，我毫不猶豫地勸他選擇前者。「雖然是約聘，但在那裡擔任高層兩年以後，您的品牌相對於以前會有很大的提高，再次續約的可能性就很大。即使沒有續約，憑藉這個品牌，也能換到一個不錯的地方去。」但是，他猶豫了一段時間後，還是選擇了後者。

後 來，正如我擔心的那樣，遺憾的事情發生了。由於沒有在培訓領域工作的經驗，他在工作中與雇主發生了很多糾紛，不到兩年就被迫辭職了。而最大的問題是他沒有 什麼地方可去，因為所從事的是和原來行業完全不同的工作，使得自己沒有退路可走。在金融業他的個人品牌已經失效，而在培訓業，他的經驗又十分缺乏。

面對職業的選擇，苦惱的人很多。大家分析比較著眾多條件，為了去一個更好的公司而努力，卻不知這個「比較好的公司」具體指的是什麼。大部分人會含糊地說：「工資和待遇不錯不就是好嗎？」好工作指的是什麼？難道就是薪水高、工作條件好嗎？不，大錯特錯。

我們透過了解一個人畢業的學校、工作、職務，然後把它們連繫起來，就能夠勾畫出他的經歷，正是這個經歷決定了他的品牌。這個根據工作建立起來的品牌，是本人再努力也無法改變的，稍不注意就會貶值，貶值很容易但提升起來卻很難。離職和轉行首先要考慮品牌管理的原因就在於此。

兩個實力相當的人，一個去了領先企業，換工作也都選擇大公司、有名的公司，而另一個在規模小、即將倒閉的公司工作。誰會成功？不用問也知道。假使那個去了大公司的人能力上稍微遜色一些，結果可能也是一樣的。決定這一結果的標準是品牌，工作的品牌。

如 果你現在的公司是一個不能造就自身品牌的地方，就請慎重地考慮離職吧，要找到一個能夠提升自己品牌的地方才行啊。如果遇到能夠培養自己品牌的工作，即使再 累再辛苦也是值得的。做的時間越久，品牌價值越高的工作就是好工作；相反，時間越久，品牌價值反而會下降的工作，即使薪資再高也不要去。

大 部分公司的薪水都和品牌水準相當，但也有薪水和品牌不相當的公司。如果是一家與公司規模和業界知名度相比，薪水過高的公司，你在作出選擇之前一定要仔細了 解清楚。為什麼呢？大體上那些公司的品牌很弱，因此只好用高薪來彌補。因為如果連薪水也給得不高，就招聘不到有能力的人才了，所以才用物質進行彌補。如果 錯進這樣的公司，可能就會降低自己的品牌。但如果是品牌不錯的地方，員工的待遇肯定有一定的水準，不會過高也低不到哪裡去。所以，根據所處領域不同，有時 候即使是大企業，給出的薪水也不是很高，有一些領域內大公司的薪水還不如中小企業高。

薪水就是薪水，品牌就是品牌，不要把兩者混為一談， 這樣才能做出正確的判斷。如果二者只能選擇其一，怎麼辦？那就先注重品牌吧！在這個地方工作，自己的品牌價值是否會得到提升？在這裡工作是否能保持自己的 持續性，培養自己的專業性？在這裡工作是否能夠讓自己的個人品牌得到質的飛躍？根據這幾個問題的答案做出正確的判斷吧！如果答案是確實能夠提升自己的品 牌，那麼在一段時間內不要注重工資、福利、待遇等條件，以後這些都會得到補償的。

對於基層人員來說，能力比品牌更重要；但是如果成了主管，品牌就比能力重要得多了。做事的能力檢驗起來很困難，即使做了檢驗，結果差異也不會很大，但是品牌卻很快就能知道。想要成為董事應該具備董事的品牌，想要成為社長就應該具備社長的品牌。

有 時候談到CEO的身價或CEO的個人品牌價值，並不是紙上談兵。在商場上，品牌是資金和技術無可匹敵的資產，在創業時也要盡可能挖掘和創造符合個人品牌的 事業。所以，從現在開始就積極打造個人品牌吧！不要因小失大，因為不捨得放棄眼前很小的利益，而疏忽了品牌的打造，那樣的話日後會錯失更大的回報。

from:

什麼樣的人，企業絕不放手：獵頭專家告訴你的職場現實

作者：申鉉滿

出版日期：2010 年08 月 25 日

辭職時不需要臨別爭吵

文／川北義則
2010年7月 Web Only

跟現在任職的公司上下相處不和睦，最後可能決定辭職。這時候，最好不要在離去前跟公司內部吵架。因為未來的發展還不明朗，這樣做可能會帶來負面效果。
因為忍不住氣憤而辭職的人，心中一定抱持「這種公司，怎麼可能再進來？」的情緒，於是不去注重應有的禮節。從感情上可以理解當事人的想法，但是在此還是要勸離職者最好小心行事。因為這種臨別的吵架，只會將好不容易才結交到的朋友也變成敵人。
根據日本厚生勞動省（主管勞動與福利的中央機關）的調查，最近的大學畢業生當中，大約有三五％的人，進公司不到三年之間就辭職。再轉職跳巢成習的社會，辭職是無可厚非的個人意志。問題就在辭職的方式，「留得青山在，不怕沒材燒」，要辭職也應該辭得漂亮才好。
最近，許多日本企業好像對辭職者特別的留意。主要是因為最近發生很多企業醜聞，幾乎都是由辭職的員工爆料或內部員工檢舉的。因此企業也開始留心辭職者的言行。
當 然也有人總是努力工作到最後一刻，臨走時還獲得公司增送辭行花束，但是做到這樣好像是有點過於矯情了。也有公司在員工辭職時提心吊膽地說「請別太多話好 嗎？」此時難免讓人懷疑「有什麼麻煩的事」嗎？也有些公司員工跟直屬上司處不好，導致辭職時更上層的上司甚至經營層級的人也會過來詢問，似乎已經有公司開 始顧慮到，應該避免讓辭職的員工對公司抱持惡劣的印象。
人際關係也一樣，離別是非常重要的時刻。即使最初或中途曾經彼此產生不好的印象，只要離別時保持良好氣氛，過去的不愉快就煙消雲散。相反地，最初的印象很好，但是臨別時關係交惡，過去美好的印象就全部抹滅了。

【川北義則小叮嚀】聰明人不隨便樹敵

自己的能力還算強，生活態度也很認真，人際關係也處理得不錯，為什麼人生還是過得不如意？
有這種煩惱的人很多。
如果你是其中之一，不妨先環顧一下你的四周。你一定會留意到，平常毫不在意的人卻變成障礙你的人。至於是什麼障礙呢？就是利用你不注意的時候，扯你的後腿，讓你跌跤受傷。
能幹的男人周遭一定有敵人。如果有人敢說：「我沒有半個敵人」，我想這個人必定沒什麼能耐，或者屬於那種欠缺存在感的「無印人類」。否則，敵人一定會存在他的身邊。
但是，這些敵人不是專扯後腿的人，寧可說是幫助自己提升的人。如果有好的敵人當成對手，相互切磋琢磨，實力當然就會因此提升。會遭人扯後腿的，多半屬於到處樹立無用之敵的人。
所謂的無用之敵，意思是指自己並不在意對方，但是對方卻把你視為敵人，擅自出招攻擊你的人。很多人通常在不知不覺間，就樹立這種敵人。
舉 例來說，最近很多企業都變成「馬賽克職場」。除了正式員工，還有其他企業派來的員工，等候外派的員工、鐘點工、非正式員工，可以說是由各種型態的員工所構 成。如果你是正式員工，照理說，你眼中的對手應該是和你一樣的正式員工吧！你可能不認為非正式員工或鐘點工與你之間會產生問題。但是，如何跟這些人相處， 也是你得面對的問題。
例如，你請鐘點女工幫你複印一些資料，「印好了，」她帶過來給你，「好了嗎？放在那裡，」你指定位置給她時，沒有看她的臉，也沒說「謝謝，辛苦了！」之類的感謝話。如果持續這樣的態度下去，我想她一定會在心裡罵你「這個混蛋」。
雖然在業務上，公司不會詢問鐘點工的意見，但是她一定有機會跟同事聊天說話，要製造攻擊你的流言也很容易。那些在職場中表現出自己很偉大的人，隨便亂說亂做的人，粗線條沒禮貌的人，通常都會遭到這種敵人的暗算。這就是隨便亂樹敵的結果。
在企業裡經常意外落馬的人，不妨從這個角度檢視一下自己的日常行為。企業裡充滿各種不同立場的人，因為不了解這些人的背景，最好將他們視為平常的人，就他們的立場去考慮事物比較妥當。
日本經濟新聞（二○○八年一月十二日發行）曾經就如何在馬賽克職場裡作一個以品格的企業人做調查，主題為「工作者的品格」，跟據調查歸納出十項守則，供讀者參考：

1、稱呼對方名字
2、別展現讓人誤解的優越感
3、別忘記感謝的念頭
4、用語言表達自己的情緒
5、不要太過度表達情緒
6、要求明確
7、習慣他們的委託
8、不要持有被害意識
9、不可以排斥對方
10、保持適度的距離感

這十條，你實踐了多少？
英國的天才作家王爾德（Oscar Wilde，生於一八五四年~一九○○年）曾經有句名言：「人們通常在選擇自己的敵人時，太過粗心。」
我覺得事實就是如此。一般人只要稍微感覺不愉快，就可以將對方列為仇敵。那種強迫對方接受自己的態度，到底只能樹立無用的敵人而已。把心力用來樹立無用的敵人絕對是錯誤的行為。

Yes! 50 Scientifically Proven Ways to Be Persuasive

Noah Goldstein’s, Steve Martin’s (no, not that Steve Martin’s) and Robert Cialdini’s Yes! 50 Scientifically Proven Ways to Be Persuasive is a pop psych book, where a bunch of research in psychology is distilled into one readable volume.
50 scientifically proven ways constitute 50 chapters of the book, longest of which take 7 pages. The authors take the position that persuasion is a science, not art, hence with the right approach anybody can become the master in the skill of persuasion. So, what are the 50 ways?

1. Inconvenience the audience by creating an impression of product scarcity. It’s the famous change from “Call now, the operators are standing by” to “If the line is busy, call again”, that greatly improved the call volume by creating the impression that everybody else is trying to buy the same product.
2. Introduce herd effect in highly personalized form. The hotel sign in the bathroom informed the guests that many prior guests chose to be environmentally friendly by recycling their towels. However, when the message mentioned that majority of the guests who stayed in this specific room chose to be more environmentally conscious and reused their towels, towel recycling jumped 33%, even though the message was largely the same.
3. Ads quoting negative behavior en masse reinforces negative behavior. Petrified Forest National Park A/B tested two versions of a sign imploring people not to steal pieces of petrified forest from the park. One mentioned large amounts of petrified forest taken away on an annual basis, the other one simply asked the visitors not to remove petrified wood. The first one actually tripled the theft ratio as it showed stealing petrified wood as something commonplace. Same effect was observed after airing an ad that implored women to vote, but mentioned that 22 million single women did not vote last year. That kind of information actually portrays not voting as more socially acceptable.
4. Avoiding magnetic middle. A California survey measured energy usage of a neighborhood on a week-by-week basis. When the average electricity consumption for the neighborhood was calculated, researchers sent thank-you cards to those using the energy conservatively, and a nice reminder to perhaps conserve to those who used electricity liberally. Net effect? While the liberals tried to cut down on unnecessary energy usage, the conservatives, finding out they’re way below average, suddenly became way more liberal with their energy usage, which actually increased the amount of energy used by the neighborhood. Proposed solution that worked? Sending a smiley face card to conservatives with a request to keep doing what they were doing, instead of pointing out they were at the right end of the bell curve.
5. Too many options necessitate selection, and hence frustration, when brain decides it’s unnecessary work. The example here is given by a company that manages retirement funds for other companies, and hence has access to retirement information of 800,000 employees. When employees were offered a choice of 2 funds, roughly 75% signed up for a retirement program. When the number of funds was increased to 59%, even though qualitatively this was a better deal for employees, only 60% decided to sign up. When Head & Shoulders brand killed off 11 flavors of the shampoo, leaving only 15 on the market, the sales rose 10%.
6. Giving away the product makes it less desirable. Researchers gave one group of people a picture of a pearl bracelet and asked to evaluate its desirability. Another group of people was given the same task, but prior to that was shown an ad, where the same bracelet was given away for free, if you bought a bottle of expensive liqueur. The second group considered the bracelet much less desirable, since mentally a lot of potential buyers (35% of them to be exact) shuffled the bracelet onto “trinkets they give away for free” shelf in their brain.
7. A more expensive product makes the old version look like a value buy. An example here is a Williams-Sonoma bread maker. After an introduction of a newer, better, and pricier version, the sales of the old unit actually increased, as couples viewed the new item as “top of the line”, but old product was all of a sudden reasonably-priced, even though a bunch of features were missing.
8. If a call to action is motivated by fear, people will block it, unless call to action has specific steps. A group of people received a pamphlet describing the dangers of tetanus infection. It didn’t describe much else. The second group of people got a description of tetanus infection, plus a set of instructions on how to get vaccinated. The second group exhibited much higher sign-up rate for tetanus vaccination than the first one, where many participants tried to block out the high-fear message urging that something as rare as tetanus would never happen to them.
9. A small gift makes people want to reciprocate. People who received a small no-strings-attached gift from a stranger were twice as likely to buy raffle tickets from him than those who were just pitched on raffle tickets.
10. Hand-written Post-It note improves response rate on inter-office letters. Researchers distributed three sets of questionnaires around the office. The first set included a hand-written Post-It note requesting completion of the survey. The second set got the same survey, with the request to return it hand-written on Page 1. Third group got the same survey with their name mentioned (in type) on page 1 of the survey. Response rates? 75%, 48%, 36%. People appreciated personalized approach, and somehow a Post-It note even highlighted the extra work that someone did before sending out the survey.
11. How restaurant mints are a personalized affair. Let’s a say a restaurant provides mints for its customers on the way out. If the amount of tips per week is the baseline for that restaurant, let’s make the waiters include a mint as they give the check to the customer. The tips go up by 3.3%. However, when the waiters offer the mints themselves, prior to signing the check, the tipping amount went up by 14.1%. In yet another experiment, the waiter would present the patrons with 1 mint per guest, then give them the check, then turning around to leave, then, as if remembering something sudden, turning around and giving them yet another mint per guest. Result? 23% increase in tips, as this signaled high amount of personalization.
12. Attaching no strings increases response to the message. Using the same hotel as the one mentioned in Chapter 2, researchers tried out two different versions of the sign. The first one: if you reuse the towels, a donation will be made to a nonprofit environmental organization.  The second version: the donation has already been made, since the hotel trusted you’d reuse the towels anyways. Recipients of the second message reused their towels 45% more than the recipients of the first one.
13. As time goes by, the value of a favor increases in the eyes of the favor-giver, and decreases in the eyes of the favor-receiver. Researchers asked a group of people in the random office environment to exchange favors and then rate the value of the given/received favor in their eyes. A few weeks later the same employees were reminded of the favor, and asked to evaluate the favor again. Favor-givers consistently assigned higher value to a given favor, while as the time passed by, favor-receivers tended to assign lower value to the received favor.
14. Asking for small favors changes self-perception, introducing ways for big favors. Researchers asked a group of homeowners to place a large “Drive Carefully” sign on their front lawn. Only 17% agreed. With the second group of homeowners, 76% of people were ok with road traffic people maintaining the sign on their beautiful lawns. What was the difference between two groups? A few weeks earlier group B was asked to display a small non-intrusive window sign asking drivers to slow down. This mental foot-in-the-door technique made homeowners from the group B view themselves as socially responsible and safety-aware, hence a request for a larger favor few weeks later didn’t startle them.
15. Labeling people into a social group tends to increase their participation ratio. A group of people was interviewed regarding their voting patterns. Half of them were told that based on their response criteria, they were very likely to vote, since they were deemed to be more politically active. Later on the election day that specific half did indeed turn up a participation rate that was 15% higher than participation of the control group.
16. Asking people to substantiate their decision will lead to higher commitment rate on that decision. Researchers called a group of people asking them how likely they were to vote in an upcoming election. Those who responded positively were either asked nothing, or asked why they felt they would vote. Any reason would suffice, but when the election day came, the turnout for the control group (who all responded “Yes” to the question of whether they were going to vote) was 61.5%. Turnout for the group that actually gave a reason (any reason)? 86.7%. A restaurant stopped telling customers “Please call to cancel your reservation” and started asking “Will you call and let us know if you need to cancel?” Net result? Number of reservation no-shows dropped from 30% to 10%.
17. Writing things down improves commitment. Group A was asked to volunteer on AIDS awareness program at local schools, and was asked to commit verbally. Group B was asked for the same kind of volunteer project, but was given a simple form to fill in. 17% of volunteers from Group A actually showed up to their assigned local school. From Group B 49% of volunteers showed up.
18. The fact that circumstances changed allows people to change their viewpoints without being viewed as inconsistent. People are generally not thrilled to change their viewpoints on something, as they fear they will display lack of consistency and be called a flip-flopper. Convincing people that their old decision (to stick with the old product) was completely 100% correct under old circumstances allows them to be more responsive to the messages that imply a new product/idea is better because the circumstances radically changed since then.
19. Sometimes asking people for help makes them more open. Group A was given some bogus research that included a sum of prize money. After the experiment, the researcher approached them and asked whether it wouldn’t be inconvenient if they had to give the money back, since the researcher was using his own money. Group B was not approached with such request after their portion of bogus experiment was done, and was allowed to keep the money. After this both groups were asked to rate their impression of the researcher. Even though it was the first group who didn’t get to keep any money, all of them consistently rated the researcher higher on likability scale.
20. Asking for little goes a long way. Researchers went door-to-door asking for American Cancer Society donations. Group A just asked for a donation, group B ended their spiel with “even a penny would help”. Results? 28.6% response rate for Group A vs. 50% response for Group B.
21. Lower starting prices attract higher bids. This is a reference to a study of eBay items where people consistently bid items with a lower starting price higher. The explanation seems to focus on the fact that people invest more time into updating bids for a lower-priced item to let it go.
22. How to impress a potential customer with credentials without being labeled as a show-off? Public speakers have someone else introduce them, a real estate company made a slight improvements to their phone service by directing people to “Jane, who has 10 years of experience with houses in upper price range”, and physicians display their diplomas on the walls.
23. The danger of being the smartest person in the room. The expert card frequently trumps any other card in the room. The example here is that the scientists who discovered the double-helix of the DNA were never prime DNA experts, which made them “hungrier” for new discoveries, and made them question established rules.
24. Devil’s advocate example works with large organizations. Leaders who consistently seek out dissenting opinions earn more respect, and generally have better agreement with people in the room than those who rule by laying down the law and persecuting dissenters.
25. Negative examples are memorized better than positive examples. When one group of firefighters went through the list of real-life mistakes other firefighters have made, and another group just went through the list of positive things to do, the first group demonstrated better judgment when faced with real-life tests. Our brain seems to discount the best practices, but single out bad examples of someone else making a mistake.
26. Admitting negatives up-front might lead to better communication. When Progressive says that they will compare your rate against their competitors’, and when original VW Bug was introduced in the US, both companies pursued a strategy of highlighting the negative stuff only to open conversation about the true values their product has to offer.
27. Spinning negative facts as positive allows customers to make a mental link towards the positive. Among the viewers who viewed an ad advertising restaurant’s cozy atmosphere, an ad advertising the restaurant and lack of parking spaces, and an ad mentioning both, the third group made a connection between cozy atmosphere and bad parking situation. The restaurant was so cozy, the customers reasoned, that they didn’t even have enough parking spots, which made them even cozier in the eyes of a customer.
28. Admitting you’re wrong makes people trust you more. Company A published an investors relations report, contributing slump in sales to overall economic climate. Company B said slump of sales was relevant to a few bad decisions by top management. Net result? Investors viewed company B more positively. You’d think that they’d be viewed as a bunch of screw-ups, but admission of a mistake made investors more confident the situation was under control, while company A investors got the uneasy feeling of the ship floating in the waters with captain losing control.
29. Similarities raise the response rate. A person named Cindy Johnson received a survey request by mail from someone named Cynthia Johannson. Someone named John Smith received a survey from Gregory Jordan. The name similarity in the first case (note that it’s just phonetic similarity, none of the names are the same) brought up the response rate to 56% vs. regular 30%.
30. People like the sound of their name, and that defines their vocation. There are three times as many dentists named Dennis as any other names. Number of Florences living in Florida is disproportionately high, same goes for Louises living in Louisiana.
31. Verbalization helps interaction. Waiters who repeat customers’ order to them make 70% more in tips than waiters who just say “Okay”. Our mind subconsciously appreciates the effort taken to ensure the things are perfectly right.
32. Just smiling makes for a poorer customer service. Group A was exposed to a hotel clerk smiling, while peppering the customer with questions regarding their preferences and ways to improve their hotel stay. Group B had just a smiling clerk performing her duties. Group B was more likely to rate the smile as fake.
33. People pay more for the stuff that’s about to disappear. Oldsmobile sales rose after GM announced the end of life for the line. Australian beef purchases rose after customers learned this year’s supply would be severely diminished because of the weather conditions. Concorde sales took off right after British Airways announced the hyper-speed flights would be shut down.
34. When people feel something is about to go away, they will stick to perception of the product being better than the new one. In majority of blind tests customers chose New Coke over Classic Coke. Yet when New Coke was introduced, massive protests were staged. When the same drink was packaged into Classic Coke and New Coke bottles, customers still claimed they preferred the Classic Coke and could taste the difference, even though labeling was the only thing that differed two drinks.
35. “Because” makes any explanation rational. In a line to Kinko’s copy machine a researcher asked to jump the line by presenting a reason “Can I jump the line, because I am in a rush?” 94% of people complied. Good reason, right? Okay, let’s change the reason. “Can I jump the line because I need to make copies?” Excuse me? That’s why everybody is in the line to begin with. Yet 93% of people complied. A request without “because” in it (“Can I jump the line, please?”) generated 24% compliance.
36. Asking people to choose reasons themselves might backfire. Two groups were given an ad by BMW. Group A saw an ad saying “So many reasons to buy a BMW. Can you name 10?” Group B saw an ad saying “So many reasons to buy a BMW. Can you name 1?” After the ad both groups were asked to evaluate their likelihood of buying a BMW. Similar to what’s described in Chapter 5, people who had to name 10 reasons actually named Mercedes-Benz, a competitive brand, as their probable choice, while Group B named BMW as their likely next vehicle, compared to Mercedes-Benz.
37. People like stocks with more pronounceable names. Research of stock tickers between 1999 and 2004 looked at the relationship between the phonetic fluency of the stock and its rise through IPO, then 12 months later, then throughout its lifetime. The result? Stocks with more pronounceable names produced higher returns, even though nobody yells out the tickers on the exchange floor anymore.
38. Rhyming makes the phrases more convincing. People were asked to evaluate the practical value of parables “Caution and measure will win you treasure” and “Caution and measure will win you riches”. In general proverb A was considered to be more practical and insightful than proverb B.
39. Amount of information is context-dependent. A group of people was given an ad for department store A, extolling in great detail the 6 departments that A had. Another group was given a short blurb on store A, presenting mainly abstract information. After that store B was presented to both groups with information on 3 departments given to both groups. The first group thought they preferred A, since A volunteered more information and B seemed shadier in comparison. The second group did exactly the opposite and preferred store B, which volunteered detailed info on 3 departments, while A’s message was an abstract blurb.
40. Incentive programs need a good start. A car-wash place gave one group of customers a free car wash after 8 washes, and everybody got their first stamp after their visit. Group B got a free car wash after 10 car washes, with 3 stamps on the card. Both groups needed to make 7 more trips to get a free wash. 19% of the Group A returned, while 34% of the Group B did.
41. Abstract names allow the customers to come up with reasoning. Crayola found out that naming colors Cornflower Yellow and Kermit Green worked better than no adjectives attached to colors. The more abstract the connection, the better it seemed to work, as people spent mental time working out the connection between the abstraction and the product in their mind.
42. Ad campaigns that do not incorporate brands tend to not be remembered. A good portion of people when asked which company was represented by a bunny and the phrase “going, going, and going” named Duracell as the advertiser. Duracell sales increased with the launch of Energizer Bunny campaign.
43. Mirrors make people more self-conscious. A group of trick-or-treating kids was told to pick up one candy from the jar in the living room, while the adult was in a different room on some pretense. Group A had a large mirror placed by the candy jar, group B did not have the mirror. 8.9% of kids with the mirror in the room and 33.7% of the kids with no mirror treated themselves to extra candy. Another group of people was brought in for what was advertised as gel research, and was given a hand paper towel to wipe the gel off while heading for the exit. With the mirror in the hallway, 24% of participants littered, dropping the towel on their way out, with no mirror, 46% threw the paper towel on the floor without bothering to find a trash can.
44. Negative emotions make people pay more. Group A was exposed to an emotional movie about the death of someone close to the main character. Group B saw no such movie. Both groups were asked then to name a fair price at which they’d buy the object presented to them. Group A tended to give prices 30% above Group B’s.
45. Tired people tend to be more receptive to arguments. No wonder those magic bullet infomercials run so late at night. Both groups were presented to product demo, and then asked to evaluate the possibility of buying it. Group A was tired and a bit sleep-deprived, group B was in good physical condition. Group A was much more prone to buy.
46. Caffeine increases the argumentativeness of a strong argument. Group A drank regular orange juice, group B drank orange juice infused with caffeine. Both groups were then presented with a statement on controversial issue. Except one statement then made weak and hasty arguments, while the second statement made a strong case. Both groups equally dismissed the weak argument case. As far as strongly argumentative case, group B was 30% more receptive. A faster-working brain under the influence of caffeine seems to appreciate good arguments.
47. Face time still beats e-mail time. Group A was given time to get to know one another in person, then resolve a conflict via e-mail. Group B got a similar task, except no face-to-face communications. 6% of the Group As failed to come up at a good resolution, while 29% of Group Bs arrived at impasse.
48. Individualism is perceived differently in many countries. In US and Western Europe a chewing gum campaign that accentuated “you, only better” seemed to get more success, than a similar campaign in Eastern Europe and Asia, with much more collectivism built into the culture. In those countries, emphasizing that chewing gum was much more tolerable for other people who can smell your breath, was perceived better.
49. Notion of commitment among various cultures differ. A group of American students was asked to complete a short marketing survey. A few weeks later they got invited for the second survey, which was going to take twice as long. No pay for either survey. The same experiment was conducted among Asian students. The response rates among American students was 22%, response rate among Asian students was 10%. Research suggests that while American students relied only on their own experience, Asian students found out that few of their peers responded to the first request to complete the survey, which triggered their negative response.
50. Response to voice mail differs among Americans and Japanese. When faced with a voicemail message, 50% of Americans, and 85% of Japanese hang up. Respondents from Japanese test group pointed out the personal touch of the conversation (intonation, pauses, volume) was important to them and impossible to reproduce over voicemail.

If you liked reading review of this book, check out my review of Predictably Irrational, which is written by a psychology professor and explores the topic of human irrationality in our perfectly rational world.

from:
http://www.moskalyuk.com/blog/yes-50-scientifically-proven-ways-to-be-persuasive/1624/trackback

父後七日（得獎散文）

轉自劉梓潔的部落格
http://blog.chinatimes.com/essayliu/archive/2006/12/25/138703.html?page=2#FeedBack
感動的話，記得去買書喔！



今嘛你的身軀攏總好了，無傷無痕，無病無煞，親像少年時欲去打拼。



葬儀社的土公仔虔敬地，對你深深地鞠了一個躬。



這是第一日。



我們到的時候，那些插到你身體的管子和儀器已經都拔掉了。僅留你左邊鼻孔拉出的一條管子，與一只虛妄的兩公升保特瓶連結，名義上說，留著一口氣，回到家裡了。



那是你以前最愛講的一個冷笑話，不是嗎？



聽到救護車的鳴笛，要分辨一下啊，有一種是有醫～有醫～，那就要趕快讓路；如果是無醫～無醫～，那就不用讓了。一干親戚朋友被你逗得哈哈大笑的時候，往往只有我敢挑戰你：如果是無醫，幹嘛還要坐救護車？！



要送回家啊！



你說。



所以，我們與你一起坐上救護車，回家。



名義上說，子女有送你最後一程了。



上車後，救護車司機平板的聲音問：小姐你家是拜佛祖還是信耶穌的？我會意不過來，司機更直白一點：你家有沒有拿香拜拜啦？我僵硬點頭。司機倏地把一張卡帶翻面推進音響，南無阿彌陀佛南無阿彌陀佛南無阿彌陀佛南無阿彌陀佛。



那另一面是什麼？難道哈利路亞哈利路亞哈利路亞哈利路亞？！我知道我人生最最荒謬的一趟旅程已經啟動。



（無醫～無醫～）



我忍不住，好想把我看到的告訴你。男護士正規律地一張一縮壓著保特瓶，你的偽呼吸。相對於前面六天你受的各種複雜又專業的治療，這一最後步驟的名稱，可能顯得平易近人許多。



這叫做，最後一口氣。



到家。荒謬之旅的導遊旗子交棒給葬儀社、土公仔、道士，以及左鄰右舍。（有人斥責，怎不趕快說，爸我們到家了。我們說，爸我們到家了。）



男護士取出工具，抬手看錶，來！大家對一下時喔，十七點三十五分好不好？



好不好？我們能說什麼？



好。我們說好。我們竟然說好。



虛無到底了，我以為最後一口氣只是用透氣膠帶黏個樣子。沒想到拉出好長好長的管子，還得劃破身體抽出來，男護士對你說，大哥忍一下喔，幫你縫一下。最後一道傷口，在左邊喉頭下方。



（無傷無痕。）



我無畏地注視那條管子，它的末端曾經直通你的肺。我看見它，纏滿濃黃濁綠的痰。



（無病無煞。）



跪落！葬儀社的土公仔說。



我們跪落，所以我能清楚地看到你了。你穿西裝打領帶戴白手套與官帽。（其實好帥，稍晚蹲在你腳邊燒腳尾錢時我忍不住跟我妹說。）



腳尾錢，入殮之前不能斷，我們試驗了各種排列方式，有了心得，折成L形，搭成橋狀，最能延燒。我們也很有效率地訂出守夜三班制，我妹，十二點到兩點，我哥兩點到四點。我，四點到天亮。



鄉紳耆老組成的擇日小組，說：第三日入殮，第七日火化。



半夜，葬儀社部隊送來冰庫，壓縮機隆隆作響，跳電好幾次。每跳一次我心臟就緊一次。



半夜，前來弔唁的親友紛紛離去。你的菸友，阿彬叔叔，點了一根菸，插在你照片前面的香爐裡，然後自己點了一根菸，默默抽完。兩管幽微的紅光，在檀香裊裊中明滅。好久沒跟你爸抽菸了，反正你爸無禁無忌，阿彬叔叔說。是啊，我看著白色菸蒂無禁無忌矗立在香灰之中，心想，那正是你希望。







第二日。我的第一件工作，校稿。



葬儀社部隊送來快速雷射複印的訃聞。我校對你的生卒年月日，校對你的護喪妻孝男孝女胞弟胞妹孝姪孝甥的名字你的族繁不及備載。



我們這些名字被打在同一版面的天兵天將，倉促成軍，要布鞋沒布鞋，要長褲沒長褲，要黑衣服沒黑衣服。（例如我就穿著在家習慣穿的短褲拖鞋，校稿。）來往親友好有意見，有人說，要不要團體訂購黑色運動服？怎麼了？！這樣比較有家族向心力嗎？



如果是你，你一定說，不用啦。你一向穿圓領衫或白背心，有次回家卻看到你大熱天穿長袖襯衫，忍不住虧你，怎麼老了才變得稱頭？你捲起袖子，手臂上埋了兩條管子。一條把血送出去，一條把血輸回來。



開始洗腎了。你說。



第二件工作，指板。迎棺。乞水。土公仔交代，迎棺去時不能哭，回來要哭。這些照劇本上演的片場指令，未來幾日不斷出現，我知道好多事不是我能決定的了，就連，哭與不哭。總有人在旁邊說，今嘛毋駛哭，或者，今嘛卡緊哭。我和我妹常面面相覷，滿臉疑惑，今嘛，是欲哭還是不哭？（唉個兩聲哭個意思就好啦，旁邊又有人這麼說。）



有時候我才刷牙洗臉完，或者放下飯碗，聽到擊鼓奏樂，道士的麥克風發出尖銳的咿呀一聲，查某囝來哭！如導演喊action！我這臨時演員便手忙腳亂披上白麻布甘頭，直奔向前，連爬帶跪。



神奇的是，果然每一次我都哭得出來。







第三日，清晨五點半，入殮。葬儀社部隊帶來好幾落衛生紙，打開，以不計成本之姿一疊一疊厚厚地鋪在棺材裡面。土公仔說，快說，爸給你鋪得軟軟你卡好睏哦。我們說，爸給你鋪得軟軟你卡好睏哦。（吸屍水的吧？！我們都想到了這個常識但是沒有人敢說出來。）



子孫富貴大發財哦。有哦。子孫代代出狀元哦。有哦。子孫代代做大官哦。有哦。唸過了這些，終於來到，最後一面。



我看見你的最後一面，是什麼時候？如果是你能吃能說能笑，那應該是倒數一個月，爺爺生日的聚餐。那麼，你跟我說的最後一句話是什麼？無從追考了。



如果是你還有生命跡象，但是無法自行呼吸，那應該是倒數一日。在加護病房，你插了管，已經不能說話；你意識模糊，睜眼都很困難；你的兩隻手被套在廉價隔熱墊手套裡，兩隻花色還不一樣，綁在病床邊欄上。



攏無留一句話啦！你的護喪妻，我媽，最最看不開的一件事，一說就要氣到哭。



你有生之年最後一句話，由加護病房的護士記錄下來。插管前，你跟護士說，小姐不要給我喝牛奶哦，我急著出門身上沒帶錢。你的妹妹說好心疼，到了最後都還這麼客氣這麼節儉。



你的弟弟說，大哥是在虧護士啦。







第四日到第六日。誦經如上課，每五十分鐘，休息十分鐘，早上七點到晚上六點。這些拿香起起跪跪的動作，都沒有以下工作來得累。



首先是告別式場的照片，葬儀社陳設組說，現在大家都喜歡生活化，挑一張你爸的生活照吧。我與我哥挑了一張，你翹著二郎腿，怡然自得貌，大圖輸出。一放，有人說那天好多你的長輩要來，太不莊重。於是，我們用繪圖軟體把腿修掉，再放上去。又有人說，眼睛笑得瞇瞇，不正式，應該要炯炯有神。怎麼辦？！我們找到你的身份證照，裁下頭，貼過去，終算皆大歡喜。（大家圍著我哥的筆記型電腦，直嘖嘖稱奇：今嘛電腦蓋厲害。）



接著是整趟旅程的最高潮。親友送來當作門面的一層樓高的兩柱罐頭塔。每柱由九百罐舒跑維他露P與阿薩姆奶茶砌成，既是門面，就該高聳矗立在豔陽下。結果曬到爆，黏膩汁液流滿地，綠頭蒼蠅率隊佔領。有人說，不行這樣爆下去，趕快推進雨棚裡，遂令你的護喪妻孝男孝女胞弟胞妹孝姪孝甥來，搬柱子。每移一步，就砸下來幾罐，終於移到大家護頭逃命。



尚有一項艱難至極的工作，名曰公關。你龐大的姑姑阿姨團，動不動冷不防撲進來一個，呼天搶地，不撩撥起你的反服母及護喪妻的情緒不罷休。每個都要又拉又勸，最終將她們撫慰完成一律納編到折蓮花組。



神奇的是，一摸到那黃色的糙紙，果然她們就變得好平靜。



三班制輪班的最後一夜。我妹當班。我哥與我躺在躺了好多天的草席上。（孝男孝女不能睡床。）



我說，哥，我終於體會到一句成語了。以前都聽人家說，累嘎欲靠北，原來靠北真的是這麼累的事。



我哥抱著肚子邊笑邊滾，不敢出聲，笑了好久好久，他才停住，說：幹，你真的很靠北。







第七日。送葬隊伍啟動。我只知道，你這一天會回來。不管三拜九叩、立委致詞、家祭公祭、扶棺護柩，（棺木抬出來，葬儀社部隊發給你爸一根棍子，要敲打棺木，斥你不孝。我看見你的老爸爸往天空比劃一下，丟掉棍子，大慟。）一有機會，我就張目尋找。



你在哪裡？我不禁要問。



你是我多天下來張著黑傘護衛的亡靈亡魂？（長女負責撐傘。）還是現在一直在告別式場盤旋的那隻紋白蝶？或是根本就只是躺在棺材裡正一點一點腐爛屍水正一滴一滴滲入衛生紙滲入木板？



火化場，宛如各路天兵天將大會師。領了號碼牌，領了便當，便是等待。我們看著其他荒謬兵團，將他們親人的遺體和棺木送入焚化爐，然後高分貝狂喊：火來啊，緊走！火來啊，緊走！



我們的道士說，那樣是不對的，那只會使你爸更慌亂更害怕。等一下要說：爸，火來啊，你免驚惶，隨佛去。



我們說，爸，火來啊，你免驚惶，隨佛去。







第八日。我們非常努力地把屋子恢復原狀，甚至風習中說要移位的床，我們都只是抽掉涼席換上床包。



有人提議說，去你最愛去的那家牛排簡餐狂吃肉（我們已經七天沒吃肉）。有人提議去唱好樂迪。但最終，我們買了一份蘋果日報與一份壹週刊。各臥一角沙發，翻看了一日，邊看邊討論哪裡好吃好玩好腥羶。


 我們打算更輕盈一點，便合資簽起六合彩。08。16。17。35。41。


 農曆八月十六日，十七點三十五分，你斷氣。四十一，是送到火化場時，你排隊的號碼。



（那一日有整整八十具在排。）


開獎了，17、 35 中了，你斷氣的時間。賭資六百元（你的反服父、護喪妻、胞妹、孝男、兩個孝女共計六人每人出一百），彩金共計四千五百多元，平分。組頭阿叔當天就把錢用紅包袋裝好送來了。他說，台號特別號是53咧。大家拍大腿懊悔，怎沒想到要簽？！可能，潛意識裡，五十三，對我們還是太難接受的數字，我們太不願意再記起，你走的時候，只是五十三歲。



我帶著我的那一份彩金，從此脫隊，回到我自己的城市。



有時候我希望它更輕更輕。不只輕盈最好是輕浮。輕浮到我和幾個好久不見的大學死黨終於在搖滾樂震天價響的酒吧相遇我就著半昏茫的酒意把頭靠在他們其中一人的肩膀上往外吐出菸圈順便好像只是想到什麼的告訴他們。



欸，忘了跟你們說，我爸掛了。



他們之中可能有幾個人來過家裡玩，吃過你買回來的小吃名產。所以會有人彈起來又驚訝又心疼地跟我說你怎麼都不說我們都不知道？



我會告訴他們，沒關係，我也經常忘記。



是的。我經常忘記。



於是它又經常不知不覺地變得很重。重到父後某月某日，我坐在香港飛往東京的班機上，看著空服員推著免稅菸酒走過，下意識提醒自己，回到台灣入境前記得給你買一條黃長壽。



這個半秒鐘的念頭，讓我足足哭了一個半小時。直到繫緊安全帶的燈亮起，直到機長室廣播響起，傳出的聲音，彷彿是你。



你說：請收拾好您的情緒，我們即將降落。





（第二屆林榮三文學獎 散文獎首獎 20061225自由副刊）

2010年6月閱讀筆記

5顆星：

The Omnivore’s Dilemma（到底要吃什麼？--速食、有機和自然野生食物的真相）--只要會吃東西，都一定要看

  

A Year In The Life Of An Esl Student: Idioms And Vocabulary You Can’t Live Without--非常實用，不知有無中文版。

Food Rules-很簡單易懂又實際。

Food Inc.: A Participant Guide: How Industrial Food is Making Us Sicker, Fatter, and Poorer-And What You Can Do About It （食品帝國）--看了之後，也許會覺得美國的食品衛生標準不再是圭皋。大陸的「迅雷」有「食品帝國」紀錄片，可以去看看，有字幕。

4顆星：

The Selfish Gene 自私的基因--

作者Richard Dawkins教授是達爾文物競天擇的支持者。裡面提為何一般都是母親在照顧小孩的論點非常有趣，也許有人會覺得它挺學術，我個人很喜歡這類風格的書。

臺灣人的醜陋面--一位老師的著作，發人深省。

Taking Minutes of Meetings：老闆、助理、秘書等人員應該要看看，裡面當然不只有說到怎麼寫會議記錄，還有會議中各人應該扮演的角色和後續跟進問題。

How to Make People Like You in 90 Seconds or Less（讓人立刻喜歡你：瞬間贏得好人緣的成功祕訣）：有陌生人恐懼症或是大神經的人可能可以看一下。方法不錯，就怕有人會錯意或是誤用，會讓情況更糟，另也有可能造成矯枉過正。

3顆星：

How to Talk to Anyone - 92 Little Tricks for Big Success in Relationships

三星。業務人員應該要全讀，一般人可以挑著看。自然及誠懇最重要。

2顆星：

Truth, Knowledge, or Just Plain Bull（是邏輯還是鬼扯？）--本以為是一本深入淺出的書，結果是一本非常學術的著作，不太適合一般大眾口味。也許改天心境不同時來看，應該會有更多顆星吧！

1顆星：

徐薇最有笑英文遊戲書--對我來說是有閒的時候可以翻一下，見仁見智。