想要出國留學、打工度假還是自助旅行嗎？兩位英文老師跟你一起拓展視野、提升英文實力、討論國際時事，Let's Fun Fun 學英文，爽爽出國去！
-- Hosting provided by <a href="https://www.soundon.fm/" target="_blank">SoundOn</a>
by Annie 阿尼、Chloe 克洛伊
5.0(4 reviews)
333 episodes
Updated Daily
Accepts GuestsHas SponsorsLocation 🇹🇼
Podcast Overview
想要出國留學、打工度假還是自助旅行嗎？兩位英文老師跟你一起拓展視野、提升英文實力、討論國際時事，Let's Fun Fun 學英文，爽爽出國去！ -- Hosting provided by <a href="https://www.soundon.fm/" target="_blank">SoundOn</a>
Language
🇨🇳
Publishing Since
9/4/2022
1 verified contact email on file for 出國趣
Pitch yourself as a guest, propose sponsorships, or reach out directly to the host.
Recent Episodes
June 13, 2026
87-4 克洛伊的經濟學人 Chloe's Economist- Z世代在想什麼?+ 小分享: 四十週年歌劇魅影觀感!
How to fight back against Gen-Z socialism The me-first doctrine is a threat to prosperity Jun 4th 2026|5 min read Something new is stirring on the left. A fresh crop of socialists want to remake the economy with price controls,** hefty **wealth taxes and a spree of nationalisations. Supercharged by fury over Gaza, they are winning voters at a formidable pace. Many rose to prominence only recently, like Zack Polanski, who leads the Green Party in Britain, or Zohran Mamdani, the mayor of New York. Others are long-standing political fixtures: the septuagenarian Jean-Luc Mélenchon is on his fourth swing at the French presidency, but thumping support from the 20-somethings of “Generation Z” has put the Elysée back in his sights again. Call it <a href="https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2026/06/04/gen-z-socialism-from-zohran-to-zack-and-beyond">Gen-Z socialism</a>. Not because all its adherents are young—or because it is new for young people to lean leftward—but because it is the brand of leftism, made for the TikTok era, that today’s young revolutionaries support. Forget weighty collectivist ideals or seizing the means of production. Gen-Z socialism is a me-first doctrine. Climate change and race, preoccupations of the 2010s and early 2020s, are now much more peripheral concerns. So are <a href="https://www.economist.com/britain/2026/06/04/british-politics-has-passed-peak-palestine">social issues, barring Gaza</a>. Angst about inflation, housing and artificial intelligence have replaced all that with something cruder. “This country is awash in wealth,” says Avi Lewis, freshly elected leader of the New Democratic Party in Canada, a country where productivity has been all but flat for a decade. “We can have nice things.” Saying that prices should be capped to keep your bills down while someone else pays for your public services is a seductive, shareable message. Plenty of the grievances that animate Gen-Z socialists do stem from real issues. Inflation has been too high, rent in big cities is now often unaffordable and AI could upend the labour market. Dismissing these worries would be foolish. Yet Gen-Z socialism is wrong about how to fix the problems of capitalism. It must be resisted, because it is a profound threat to prosperity. No country’s Gen-Z socialists are quite alike. The realities of power have forced some, like Mr Mamdani, to become more moderate. But they broadly agree on three core principles. First, that growth does little to help ordinary people. Theirs is a zero-sum mindset, where a better outcome comes not from creating but from taking—as they fear ai barons will soon do on a vast scale. Second, that spending can be paid for by the richest. Once the left wanted higher taxes for everyone; Gen-Z socialists demand handouts funded by billionaires. The third tenet is a remarkable hostility to private enterprise. Gen-Z socialists are uninterested in letting the market rip and redistributing the proceeds. They would have chunks of everyday life, from housing to groceries, governed by state diktat. Politics has always had zany fringes. The far right is no less barmy—and more dangerous. But what is so worrying about the Gen-Z socialists is how deeply their ideas are bleeding into the centre-left. Desperate to compete, even mainstream Democrats in America now propose mad schemes like exempting over half of tax filers from federal income tax. In Britain the Labour Party, having won power on a centrist platform, has been spooked by the Greens and is rekindling its zeal for higher taxes and state control. Increasingly, the ideas of the Gen-Z socialists can win even when their candidates lose. That is bad news. Rent controls would worsen housing shortages by crushing the incentive to build. The profit margins of big supermarket chains, demonised by Gen-Z socialists, are already wafer-thin after years of ruthless competition—a miracle of modern capitalism. <a href="https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2026/06/04/some-billionaires-pay-too-little-tax">Wealth taxes</a> would become confiscatory and deter innovation. Do not assume that the failure of these policies, if implemented, would bring about an automatic course correction. Europe has struggled for decades to escape the low-growth funk left by its own over-regulation; the rise of statist “Peronists” in Argentina helps explain its century of relative decline. Resisting Gen-Z socialism is therefore an urgent task. The first step is for free-market liberals to stop apologising. A series of popular criticisms of capitalism, each containing a grain of truth, has in aggregate obscured the fundamental wisdom that private enterprise is at the root of human prosperity. Yes, people aren’t always rational, as behavioural economics shows. True, inequality matters and growth is better when broad-based. Free trade and globalisation create losers as well as winners. But this is the best time in human history to be born, given record real incomes, high life expectancy and low rates of extreme poverty. A punchier defence of capitalism would work better in the social-media age than hand-wringing by uncharismatic centrists like Sir Keir Starmer. Centrist governments must also solve the problems driving popular discontent. “Abundance” liberals are right to want to build cheap and plentiful housing and infrastructure. Politicians must stop saddling the young with the burden of funding excessive pensions. The tax system must ensure that meritocracy prevails over inheritocracy: broader-based inheritance taxes and levies on property would help. The hardest challenge will be the disruption caused by advances in AI. The Gen-Z leftists have set out their stall with calls for a moratorium on data centres and a government jobs guarantee. Liberals must be more positive and imaginative in their own prescriptions, using a mixture of taxes, distributed capital ownership and support for workers to make sure that the upsides of labour-market disruption are widely shared. The world is ruled by little else Populists have the wind in their sails; it can sometimes seem as though market liberalism is doomed to political failure. *The Economist *disagrees. A robust defence of the ideas that have brought unprecedented riches has barely been tried. Many of the problems that animate Gen-Z socialists, like high rents, are the result of markets that are insufficiently free, not excessively so. There is time yet for liberalism to once again produce results—and to win the argument. ■ 如何反擊 Z 世代社會主義 「自我優先」的教條是對繁榮的威脅 2026年6月4日 | 5分鐘閱讀時間 左翼陣營中正在醞釀一些新的東西。新一批的社會主義者想要透過價格管制、高額財富稅以及一連串的國有化來重塑經濟。在對加薩局勢的憤怒催化下，他們正以驚人的速度贏得選民支持。許多人直到最近才嶄露頭角，例如領導英國綠黨的柴克·波蘭斯基，或是紐約市市長佐蘭·馬姆達尼。其他人則是政壇的常客：年屆七旬的尚-盧·梅蘭雄正第四次角逐法國總統寶座，而來自「Z 世代」20多歲年輕人的巨大支持，讓他再次將目光投向了愛麗舍宮。 姑且稱之為「Z 世代社會主義」。 這並非因為其所有信徒都很年輕——也不是因為年輕人傾向左翼是什麼新鮮事——而是因為這種左翼主義的品牌是為 TikTok 時代量身打造的，且深受當今全體年輕革命家支持。 忘掉沉重的集體主義理想或奪取生產工具吧。Z 世代社會主義是一種「自我優先」的教條。氣候變遷和種族問題曾是 2010 年代和 2020 年代初期人們關注的焦點，如今已退居到極其邊緣的位置。除了加薩問題之外，社會議題也是如此。 對通貨膨脹、住房和人工智慧的焦慮已經取代了這一切，取而代之的是更粗糙的東西。「這個國家充斥著財富，」加拿大新民主黨新當選的領導人艾維·路易斯說，而該國的生產力在過去十年中幾乎停滯不前。「我們可以擁有美好的事物。」宣稱應該限制價格以降低你的帳單，同時讓別人來為你的公共服務買單，這是一個極具誘惑力且易於分享的訊息。 許多激發 Z 世代社會主義者不滿的情緒，確實源於真實存在的問題。通貨膨脹一直過高，大城市的房租現在往往令人無法負擔，而且人工智慧可能會顛覆勞動力市場。 對這些擔憂不屑一顧將是愚蠢的。然而，Z 世代社會主義在如何解決資本主義問題上是錯誤的。它必須受到抵制，因為它是對繁榮的深刻威脅。 沒有哪個國家的 Z 世代社會主義者是完全相同的。權力的現實已經迫使像馬姆達尼先生這樣的一些人變得更加溫和。但他們大致上認同三個核心原則。 第一，經濟成長對幫助普通人微乎其微。他們抱持的是一種零和思維，認為更好的結果不是來自創造，而是來自掠奪——正如他們擔心人工智慧巨頭很快就會大規模所做的那樣。 第二，政府支出可以由最富有的人來支付。過去的左翼希望對每個人提高稅收；而 Z 世代社會主義者則要求由億萬富翁出資提供福利津貼。 第三，是對私營企業顯著的敵意。Z 世代社會主義者對放任市場自由發展並重新分配收益不感興趣。他們希望日常生活的各個層面，從住房到雜貨，都由國家的強硬命令來管轄。 政治圈一直都有荒誕的邊緣群體。極右翼也同樣瘋狂——而且更加危險。但是，Z 世代社會主義者之所以如此令人擔憂，是因為他們的思想正極深地滲透到中左翼陣營中。為了拼命競爭，甚至連美國主流的民主黨人現在也提出了瘋狂的方案，例如免除超過一半申報者的聯邦個人所得稅。在英國，以中間派政綱贏得政權的工黨已被綠黨嚇壞，正在重新燃起對提高稅收和國家控制的熱情。越來越多情況是，即使 Z 世代社會主義者的候選人落選，他們的思想依然能取得勝利。 這是個壞消息。租金管制會摧毀建造房屋的誘因，從而加劇住房短缺。被 Z 世代社會主義者妖魔化的大型連鎖超市，其利潤率在經歷多年的殘酷競爭後已經薄如蟬翼——這是現代資本主義的奇蹟。財富稅會演變成變相沒收，並阻礙創新。不要假設這些政策一旦實施並遭遇失敗後，會帶來自動的路線修正。歐洲數十年來一直難以擺脫自身過度監管所帶來的低成長泥淖；阿根廷擁護國家主義的「庇隆主義者」崛起，有助於解釋該國經歷長達一世紀的相對衰落。 因此，抵制 Z 世代社會主義是一項迫切的任務。第一步是自由市場自由主義者要停止道歉。一系列對資本主義的普遍批評，雖然每一項都包含著一絲道理，但總體而言，卻掩蓋了「私營企業是人類繁榮的根本基石」這一核心智慧。 誠然，正如行為經濟學所顯示的，人們並不總是理性的。沒錯，不平等確實至關重要，而且當經濟成長基礎廣泛時效果會更好。自由貿易和全球化在創造贏家的同時，也製造了輸家。但是，鑑於創紀錄的實質收入、高預期壽命和極低的極端貧困率，這是人類歷史上最適合出生的時代。在社群媒體時代，對資本主義進行更有力的辯護，會比像施凱爾·斯塔摩爵士這樣缺乏魅力的中間派人士在那裡焦慮束手無策更有效。 中間派政府也必須解決引發民眾不滿的問題。追求「豐裕」的自由主義者渴望建造廉價且充足的住房和基礎設施，這毫無疑問是正確的。政治家們必須停止將資助過高養老金的負擔強加在年輕人身上。稅收制度必須確保唯才主義凌駕於世襲主義之上：更廣泛基礎的遺產稅和房產徵稅將會有所幫助。 最艱巨的挑戰將是人工智慧的進步所帶來的顛覆性衝擊。Z 世代左翼分子(主張社會平等、社會福利與改革進步的人士)已經表明了他們的立場，呼籲暫緩建設數據中心並由政府提供就業保障。自由主義者在他們自己的處方中必須更加積極且富有想像力，透過結合稅收、分散資本所有權以及對勞工的支援，來確保勞動力市場顛覆所帶來的正面效益能被廣泛分享。 世界幾乎不被其他東西所統治。民粹主義者正順風順水；有時這看起來就像是市場自由主義注定要在政治上失敗。《經濟學人》對此持反對意見。對於那些帶來前所未有財富的思想進行堅定辯護，目前還幾乎沒有人嘗試過。許多激勵 Z 世代社會主義者的問題，例如高昂的租金，其實是市場「不夠自由」的結果，而不是「過度自由」所致。自由主義依然有時間再次創造出成果——並在這場辯論中贏得勝利。 -- Hosting provided by <a href="https://www.soundon.fm/">SoundOn</a>
June 4, 2026
87-3 克洛伊的經濟學人 Chloe's Economist- 去工業化的同時台灣日本和韓國如何變革?+ 小分享: 大學畢業生的就職經驗談!
<a href="https://www.economist.com/leaders">Leaders</a> | Don’t look back in Changhua How East Asia should respond to its China shock As they deindustrialise, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan must reform May 28th 2026|4 min read AMERICA’S artificial-intelligence** boom** has put the rich economies of north-east Asia into overdrive. Taiwan’s output is growing at a blistering 14% annual pace, thanks to soaring sales of chips and servers for data centres. In the past year operating profits at South Korea’s makers of memory chips have risen by over 500%. Even sluggish Japan is benefiting—though it long ago lost its title as the world’s pre-eminent chipmaker. In 2025 all three countries enjoyed record exports and current-account surpluses. The region’s export bonanza, though, obscures an important story in the rest of its economy. As we <a href="https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2026/05/27/japan-south-korea-and-taiwan-are-suffering-industrial-rot">report</a>, outside its highest-tech sectors, rich north-east Asia is deindustrialising. Strong competition from China, paired with increasing specialisation in chips, has disrupted an economic model based on a wider range of manufacturing exports—the model that helped make the region prosperous in the 1980s and 1990s. Even as it booms, north-east Asia increasingly needs reform. The ascendant assembler In the past few years China’s relations with its rich neighbours have been transformed. Once it imported high-value parts from north-east Asia and focused on low-value final assembly. Now it competes across the whole supply chain. Taiwan’s long-running surplus in goods with the mainland flipped into deficit this year, as South Korea’s did years ago (though in the past few months Korean chip exports have returned it to surplus again). In Japan the bilateral deficit with China has plumbed new depths, setting a record earlier this year. Industries from carmaking to chemicals are under intense pressure. As in the West, the perception that domestic manufacturers are competing with goods produced by subsidised Chinese firms is feeding protectionist sentiment. The specialisation in chips is an understandable development that reflects these economies’ maturity. Yet this particular focus also creates fragility. The tech-hardware cycle is notoriously volatile and its vicissitudes increasingly affect the region’s economies. The tech supply chain also relies deeply on America and China for both critical inputs and end-user demand. On an index of export-basket concentration, north-east Asia is 73% higher than the rich-world average, and concentration has risen since 2019. This leaves the region dangerously exposed to protectionism by either superpower. There is nothing wrong with specialisation, as David Ricardo would attest. However, East Asia’s rich economies would be better off if they paired their chip-export juggernauts with dynamic domestic economies. The trouble is that domestic demand is too low—a legacy, in part, of outdated economic structures that hold down consumption in order to promote exports above all else. The time has come to sweep these old systems away. Two-tier labour markets guarantee employment for insiders, often working for big exporters, while inflicting wage penalties and precarity on everyone else. Freeing up labour markets would improve the matching of workers and firms, lifting real wages. Pension systems favour staff at exporters but are stingy for others, leaving the region with some of the rich world’s highest rates of relative poverty among the elderly. Higher minimum incomes would boost aggregate spending. Taiwan has <a href="https://www.economist.com/leaders/2025/11/13/the-hidden-risks-in-taiwans-boom">engineered a weak currency</a>, and South Korea and Japan use the state to allocate credit. Less financial engineering would let resources flow to the firms that will use them best. North-east Asia must allow failing manufacturers to die a natural death. Support should be stopped for mighty firms such as TSMC and Samsung Electronics, which do not require lavish subsidies to compete. And although East Asian countries can hardly avoid relying on markets in America and China—the world’s two biggest economies—they can cut other barriers to trade. Some of these barriers are local. Grievances from colonial times mean that South Korea and Japan still do not have a bilateral free-trade agreement. South Korea should join the Japan-led CPTPP, a top-notch trading pact. The danger is that, spooked by the China shock, the region’s governments will instead double down on aggressive industrial policy. South Korea has promised $530bn in chipmaking subsidies and Takaichi Sanae, Japan’s prime minister, is overseeing state-led investment into 61 “strategic” goods. Using the power of the government to promote exports succeeded for these economies when they were poor and trying to catch up with the West. It is not an approach that works in places that are already rich. Doubling down on exports will leave north-east Asia poorer and more exposed. Instead, the region’s best economic bet is to become more dynamic at home and more diversified abroad. ■ 東亞應如何回應其「中國衝擊」 隨著去工業化發生，台灣、南韓與日本必須進行改革 2026年5月28日｜閱讀時間 4 分鐘 美國的人工智慧熱潮已讓東北亞的富裕經濟體全速運轉。由於資料中心所需晶片與伺服器銷售激增，台灣的產出正以驚人的年率 14% 成長。過去一年裡，南韓記憶體晶片製造商的營業利潤增加了超過 500%。即使是長期低迷的日本也從中受益——儘管它早已失去全球首要晶片製造國的地位。2025年，這三個國家都創下了出口與經常帳盈餘的新紀錄。 然而，該地區的出口榮景掩蓋了其餘經濟中的一個重要故事。正如我們所報導的，在最高科技產業之外，富裕的東北亞正經歷去工業化。來自中國的強大競爭，加上日益專注於晶片產業，已經擾亂了一種以更廣泛製造業出口為基礎的經濟模式——正是這種模式在1980與1990年代幫助該地區走向繁榮。即使正處於繁榮之中，東北亞也愈來愈需要改革。 崛起的組裝者 過去幾年間，中國與其富裕鄰國的關係已經發生轉變。過去，中國從東北亞進口高附加價值零組件，自己則專注於低附加價值的最終組裝。如今，中國已在整條供應鏈上展開競爭。 台灣長期對中國大陸維持的貨物貿易順差，今年已轉為逆差；南韓則早在數年前就出現同樣情況（雖然過去幾個月南韓晶片出口回升，又讓其恢復順差）。在日本，對中國的雙邊貿易逆差已跌至前所未有的低點，並於今年稍早創下紀錄。從汽車製造到化學工業，各產業都面臨沉重壓力。如同西方國家一樣，人們認為本國製造商正在與受到中國政府補貼的企業所生產的商品競爭，這種看法正在助長保護主義情緒。 專注於晶片產業是一種可以理解的發展，反映出這些經濟體的成熟。然而，這種特定的聚焦也帶來脆弱性。科技硬體產業週期向來波動劇烈，而其起伏如今愈來愈影響整個地區的經濟。此外，科技供應鏈在關鍵投入與最終需求方面都高度依賴美國與中國。在一項衡量出口商品籃集中度的指數上，東北亞比富裕國家平均高出 73%，而且自2019年以來集中度還在上升。這使該地區危險地暴露於任何一方超級大國所採取的保護主義措施之下。 專業分工本身並沒有錯，正如大衛．李嘉圖所主張的那樣。然而，如果東亞富裕經濟體能夠在其強大的晶片出口機器之外，同時擁有充滿活力的國內經濟，它們的處境將會更好。問題在於國內需求過低——這在某種程度上是過時經濟結構的遺留結果。這些結構壓抑消費，以便把促進出口放在首位。 現在是時候徹底掃除這些舊制度了。雙軌勞動市場保障了體制內人士的就業——這些人往往受僱於大型出口企業——卻讓其他人承受薪資懲罰與不穩定的工作環境。放寬勞動市場限制將改善勞工與企業之間的配對效率，並提高實質工資。 退休金制度偏袒出口企業員工，卻對其他人相當吝嗇，使得該地區老年人口的相對貧窮率居於富裕國家之列的高位。提高最低所得將有助於提升整體支出。 台灣一直維持疲弱的匯率，而南韓與日本則利用國家力量配置信貸。減少這類金融工程，將能讓資源流向最能有效運用它們的企業。 東北亞必須允許失敗的製造商自然退出市場。像台積電與三星電子這樣強大的企業，其實不需要慷慨補貼也能維持競爭力，因此應停止對其提供支持。 此外，雖然東亞國家幾乎無法避免依賴美國與中國——這兩個全球最大的經濟體——但它們可以降低其他貿易障礙。其中一些障礙源自區域內部。殖民時代遺留下來的恩怨意味著南韓與日本至今仍未簽署雙邊自由貿易協定。南韓應加入由日本主導的《跨太平洋夥伴全面進步協定》（CPTPP），這是一項高水準的貿易協定。 危險在於，受到「中國衝擊」驚嚇後，該地區政府反而會加倍推動積極的產業政策。南韓已承諾提供 5,300 億美元的晶片製造補貼，而日本首相高市早苗則正在監督由政府主導、涵蓋 61 項「戰略商品」的投資計畫。 當這些經濟體仍然貧窮、試圖追趕西方時，利用政府力量促進出口確實取得了成功。然而，對於已經富裕的國家而言，這並不是一種有效的方法。進一步押注出口將使東北亞變得更加貧窮，也更加脆弱。 相反地，該地區最佳的經濟策略，是讓國內經濟變得更具活力，同時讓對外經濟關係更加多元化。■ -- Hosting provided by <a href="https://www.soundon.fm/">SoundOn</a>
May 29, 2026
87-2 克洛伊的經濟學人 Chloe's Economist- 如何讓員工滿意? 員工問卷調查的秘密+ 小分享:我第一份工作的問卷調查!
The secrets to a good employee survey Likert or not Mar 19th 2026|4 min read 1. “This sentence is false” is an example of a logical inconsistency known as the liar paradox. If this sentence is true, then it is indeed false. But if this sentence is false, then it must be true. This is the kind of thing that makes philosophers go weak at the knees and gives normal people a headache. 2. A small echo of the liar paradox can be heard in a ritual of modern management: the annual employee survey. Imagine being asked to react to this statement: “This survey is a complete waste of time.” If enough people Strongly Agree with this proposition, then it’s probably true. But if a company is the kind of place where employees are prepared to give such honest feedback, then isn’t it likely to be false? 3. Employee surveys are a staple of corporate life. Knowing what workers are thinking is an important goal. High employee churn imposes financial and operational costs. There is lots of research to suggest that employee satisfaction leads to better financial outcomes. But set-piece surveys are really useful only if three conditions are met: they are properly designed, they are used in conjunction with other tools and they lead somewhere. 4. Among other things, proper design means grappling with the problem that employees are not necessarily incentivised to be honest. Faced with a Likert scale and the proposition that “My bosses have the communication skills of a banana,” you might Strongly Agree but still opt to Neither Agree Nor Disagree on your submitted form. Promises of confidentiality and anonymity can help, but only to a point. 5. Impression management, a fancy name for making yourself look good, can skew results on questions about things like job-safety practices. There are ways to mitigate this, however. A recent study by Emma Zaal of the University of Groningen and her co-authors found that using different survey formulations can have a big impact on responses. In a survey of Dutch adults, which asked questions like whether they had sent text messages while driving a car, the inclusion of face-saving options such as “occasionally” or “only when no other option” elicited a very different set of answers from binary “yes” or “no” options. 6. Employers can look at unvarnished feedback, most obviously on workplace-review sites such as GlassDoor. Artificial intelligence has the ability to build a coherent picture out of a mass of unstructured comments. In one recent paper, Tom Reader and Alex Gillespie of the London School of Economics looked for evidence of high-pressure cultures in employee reviews of European firms. Reviews that suggested very ambitious targets and expediency in reaching them were predictive of companies experiencing a future corporate scandal. 7. Frequency is another aspect of good design. A lot can change in the space of a year; an annual survey is a long time to wait for an update on employee sentiment. Retrospective evaluations are also subject to biases like the peak-end rule, which describes how people overweight the most extreme and the closing moments of an experience when they recall it. In one famous experiment, Daniel Kahneman and others put volunteers through two unpleasant tasks: the first involved holding their hands in icy water for a minute, and the second for 90 seconds, though for the final 30 seconds the water’s temperature rose by a little. The first experience was objectively less painful but, given a choice, the second was the one people chose to repeat. 8. Shorter “pulse” surveys cannot eradicate these problems, but are a way to gather more timely data. HappyOrNot, a Finnish company that makes those smiley-face feedback terminals you see in airports and elsewhere, also installs its machines inside companies as a way of keeping track of employee sentiment on a daily or weekly basis. 9. Good design and multiple sources of information contribute to a successful employee survey. But nothing matters more than being seen to act on feedback. If you say that your bosses have the communication skills of a banana and then hear nothing back, you have the faint satisfaction of knowing you are right but not much else. Surveys that prompt no follow-up action deepen cynicism rather than enthusiasm. 10. All of which leads to another paradox. Surveys are most useful in organisations that care about what their employees think. But organisations that care about what their employees think often have less need for surveys.■ 員工滿意度調查成功的秘訣 不論你喜不喜歡（Likert scale 刻度調查的雙關語） 2026年3月19日 | 4 分鐘閱讀 「這句話是假的」是一個被稱為「說謊者悖論」的邏輯矛盾案例。如果這句話是真的，那麼它確實是假的；但如果這句話是假的，那麼它就必須是真的。這種事情會讓哲學家雙膝發軟，並讓一般人感到頭痛。 在現代管理的一項儀式中，可以聽到說謊者悖論的微弱迴聲：那就是年度員工調查。想像一下，當你被要求對這句話做出反應：「這次調查完全是浪費時間。」如果有足夠多的人「強烈同意」這個命題，那麼它很可能是真的。但如果一家公司是那種員工願意提供如此誠實反饋的地方，那麼這句話難道不更有可能是假的嗎？ 員工調查是企業生活的家常便飯。了解員工在想什麼是一個重要的目標。高員工離職率會帶來財務和營運上的成本。有大量的研究表明，員工滿意度能帶來更好的財務成果。但是，這種固定形式的調查只有在滿足三個條件時才真正有用：它們經過妥善設計、與其他工具配合使用，並且能帶來實際的改變。 其中，妥善的設計意味著必須解決一個問題：員工不一定有動機保持誠實。面對李克特量表（Likert scale）以及「我的老闆具備香蕉般的溝通技巧」這個命題時，你內心可能「強烈同意」，但最終在提交的表單上還是會選擇「既不同意也不反對」。保護隱私和匿名的承諾會有所幫助，但也只能起到一定程度的作用。 印象管理（這是一個讓自己看起來面子好看的精緻名稱）可能會在有關工作安全規範等問題上扭曲調查結果。然而，有一些方法可以減輕這種情況。格羅寧根大學的艾瑪·扎爾（Emma Zaal）及其合著者最近發表的一項研究發現，使用不同的問卷設計表述會對回答產生重大影響。在一項針對荷蘭成年人的調查中（詢問他們是否曾在開車時發送簡訊），加入「偶爾」或「僅在別無選擇時」等顧及面子的選項，所引出的答案與二分法的「是」或「否」選項截然不同。 雇主可以參考未經修飾的反饋，最顯而易見的是在 GlassDoor 等職場評價網站上。人工智慧有能力從大量非結構化的評論中，拼湊出一個清晰完整的輪廓。在最近的一篇論文中，倫敦政治經濟學院的湯姆·里德（Tom Reader）和亞歷克斯·吉萊斯皮（Alex Gillespie）在歐洲企業的員工評論中，尋找是否存在高壓文化的證據。那些暗示目標非常宏大、且在達成目標時不擇手段的評論，預示著這些公司未來將會經歷企業醜聞。 頻率是妥善設計的另一個面向。在長達一年的時間裡，很多事情都會發生變化；對於獲取員工情緒的最新動態而言，年度調查是一段漫長的等待。回溯性的評估也容易受到像是「峰終定律」（peak-end rule）等偏誤的影響，該定律描述了人們在回憶一項經歷時，會過度重視最極端以及結束時的時刻。在一個著名的實驗中，丹尼爾·康納曼（Daniel Kahneman）等人讓志願者經歷兩項令人不快的任務：第一項涉及將手放在冰水中一分鐘；第二項則是放 90 秒，不過在最後的 30 秒內，水溫稍微上升了一點。第一種體驗客觀上痛苦較少，但如果可以選擇，人們卻選擇重複第二種。 更短期的「脈搏」（pulse）調查雖然無法完全消除這些問題，但卻是收集更即時數據的一種方法。HappyOrNot 是一家芬蘭公司，負責製造你在機場和其他地方看到的那些笑臉反饋終端機，該公司也將這些機器安裝在企業內部，作為每日或每週追蹤員工情緒的一種方式。 好的設計和多元的信息來源有助於員工調查的成功。但沒有任何事情比「被看見對反饋採取行動」更重要。如果你說你的老闆具備香蕉般的溝通技巧，隨後卻沒聽到任何回應，你只會得到一種知道自己是對的、卻於事無補的微弱滿足感。沒有引發任何後續行動的調查，非但不能深化熱情，反而會加深諷刺與犬儒主義。 這一切引出了另一個悖論：調查在那些關心員工想法的組織中最有用。然而，關心員工想法的組織，往往較不需要進行調查。■ -- Hosting provided by <a href="https://www.soundon.fm/">SoundOn</a>
333 total episodes available
Recent guests on 出國趣
Guests from recent episodes — sign up to see every guest that has ever appeared on this show.
CHLOE
Guest
MAY
Guest
Similar Podcasts
Discover related shows you might enjoy
Deep-dive analytics for 出國趣
Frequently asked questions
Have a different question and can't find the answer you're looking for? Reach out to our support team by sending us an email and we'll get back to you as soon as we can.
- What is 出國趣?
- How often does this podcast release new episodes?
This podcast updates daily.
- Where can I listen to this podcast?
This podcast is available on 7 platforms including Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and more. You can also use the RSS feed directly.
- Does this podcast accept guests?
Yes, this podcast regularly features guests.
Legal Disclaimer
Pod Engine is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or officially connected with any of the podcasts displayed on this platform. We operate independently as a podcast discovery and analytics service.
All podcast artwork, thumbnails, and content displayed on this page are the property of their respective owners and are protected by applicable copyright laws. This includes, but is not limited to, podcast cover art, episode artwork, show descriptions, episode titles, transcripts, audio snippets, and any other content originating from the podcast creators or their licensors.
We display this content under fair use principles and/or implied license for the purpose of podcast discovery, information, and commentary. We make no claim of ownership over any podcast content, artwork, or related materials shown on this platform. All trademarks, service marks, and trade names are the property of their respective owners.
While we strive to ensure all content usage is properly authorized, if you are a rights holder and believe your content is being used inappropriately or without proper authorization, please contact us immediately at hey@podengine.ai for prompt review and appropriate action, which may include content removal or proper attribution.
By accessing and using this platform, you acknowledge and agree to respect all applicable copyright laws and intellectual property rights of content owners. Any unauthorized reproduction, distribution, or commercial use of the content displayed on this platform is strictly prohibited.