外文翻譯---創(chuàng)建并推廣一個(gè)管理會(huì)計(jì)理念平衡記分卡

1、<p>　　本科畢業(yè)論文（設(shè)計(jì)）</p><p>　　外 文 翻 譯</p><p><b>　　原文：</b></p><p>　　Creating and Popularizing a Management Accounting Idea: </p><p>　　The Case of the Bal

2、anced Scorecard</p><p>　　1. Introduction</p><p>　　This study seeks to understand how management accounting techniques, often created in local practice, are developed, extended and popularized in

3、to global management practice. Commonly, the creation and spread of new ideas is depicted as a story of great innovators and the diffusion of ideas, a rationalist story that stresses the pull of fixed ideas. Instead, we

4、concentrate on the fragility and variability of ideas and the importance of ideas being pushed along. We stress the crucial role of cust</p><p>　　We concentrate on the Balanced Scorecard as an example in ord

5、er to provide an in depth understanding of the processes by which management accounting ideas enter the world of specific organizational practices and technologies. The BSC has been outlined in a series of influential ar

6、ticles and best-selling business books (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, 1996) that now forms the basis of a major consulting industry and set of organizational practices. We focus on the processes by which ideas of a strategic&

7、lt;/p><p>　　This study is concerned with the implementation of the key ideas of the BSC. However we do not focus on how one or more organizations adopt and adapt the BSC, which would study adopters and users of

8、 the BSC (Wenisch, 2003, Tuomela, 2006). While such studies can provide valuable insight on how the BSC has been used and adapted across site, such studies take for granted the idea of the BSC as an established technolog

9、y, accept organizational boundaries as more or less fixed, and do not problematize</p><p>　　1.1. The Balanced Scorecard as a Management Innovation</p><p>　　Managerial discourse has seen a shift

10、from financial-oriented management control systems to strategic management accounting systems with a focus on value creation (Ittner and Larker, 2001). A diverse set of managerial accounting techniques have been introduc

11、ed since the 1990s, including the Balanced Scorecard, economic value added, and target costing etc. The BSC has gained currency, seems to have some durability and has spread rapidly during the past decade. According to t

12、he editors of the Harv</p><p>　　? The BSC had its origins in complaints that management accounting was too focused on financial measures (Kaplan, 1984; Hayes and Abernathy, 1980). Revised performance measure

13、ment systems were proposed to capture leading indicators of performance. </p><p>　　In 1991, Kaplan and Norton began to shape the concept with 12 companies through a research project sponsored by a research a

14、rm of KPMG. </p><p>　　In 1992, Kaplan and Norton published the results of this initial study in the Harvard Business Review, presenting the BSC as “measures that drive performance”. The BSC was presented as

15、an innovative system which complemented the financial measures with measures on customer satisfaction, internal processes and the organization’s innovation, learning and growth (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, p.71).</p>

16、<p>　　In 1996, Kaplan and Norton published their first book on the BSC, arguing that it is a way of “translating strategy into action”, a methodology for promoting strategic management. </p><p>　　In 20

17、01, Kaplan and Norton released their second book, The Strategy Focused Organization, which describes the BSC as an enterprise strategic management system, integral for a ‘strategy focused organization’. </p><p

18、>　　In 2004, Kaplan and Norton published their third book on “Strategy Mapping” as a way of “Transforming Intangible Assets into Tangible Results”. The concept of ‘strategy map’, first articulated in 2000, is proposed

19、as a visual way to communicate an organization’s perspectives, objectives, and measures, and the causal linkages between them. The concept of ‘strategy matrix’ is also proposed as a useful visualization and summarization

20、 tool to display objectives, measures, targets, and initiatives. </p><p>　　Kaplan and Norton’s fourth book, “Alignment: using the BSC to create corporate synergies”, explores one of the elements on ‘strategy

21、 focused organizations (SFO)’. We can expect further books that further develop each element of a SFO. </p><p>　　The take up of the idea of the BSC is evidenced by numerous books and articles in academic and

22、 professional journals and magazines, seminars and workshops, case studies and public conferences and software applications devoted to the technique. Moreover, surveys (eg., Malmi, 2001; Kald and Nilsson, 2000; Silk, 199

23、8), suggest that the BSC has been adopted and implemented in various countries and industries. For example, recent surveys indicate that approximately 60% of large US companies now use t</p><p>　　Although th

24、e BSC has attracted considerable interest as a performance measurement innovation (Ittner and Lacker, 1998), it has also been perceived as a management fad (e.g., Collins, 2000). There have been concerns about its variab

25、le success in actual implementation (Malina and Selto, 2001), questions about the logical validity of the idea (Norreklit, 2000), and how its rhetoric obfuscates the weaknesses of the idea (Norreklit, 2003). Others have

26、questioned its universal appeal (Bourgignon et al</p><p>　　1.2. Motivation and Objectives of the Study</p><p>　　There has been little research on how popular management accounting ideas travel a

27、cross time and space, and how and to what extent, these ideas are given local meaning and relevance. A notable attempt to study the spread of management ideas into practice is, however, (Jones and Dugdale 2002), which tr

28、aced the emergence of ABC, and illustrated how it permeates the business world. While our research has similarities to their study, we extend their research not just by focusing on the details of th</p><p>　

29、　Concentrating on one innovation, the BSC, permits an in depth understanding of how new management accounting ideas are not just talked about (whether enthusiastically or skeptically), but how they enter the sphere of or

30、ganizational practices. The BSC has a relatively long history that is well documented by its popularizers (Kaplan and Norton, 1992, 1996; Kaplan, 1998). Kaplan (1998, 1994) largely repeats this history as an account of a

31、 knowledge creation cycle, but, rather improbably, depicts th</p><p>　　Translation processes are crucial in converting an abstract idea into a practical technology. Power (2007) focuses on the rise and discu

32、rsive acceptance of specific ideas and their role in constituting the practices of risk management, and suggests, “all management practices necessarily embody and are constituted by ideas of what they should be”. These i

33、deas which constitute programmatic elements in practice are often linked to larger value systems (Rose and Miller, 1992). In the case of the BSC</p><p>　　We examine both the construction of the object of tec

34、hnology, the BSC, and how some actors are constructed as BSC experts. Sturdy et al. (2006) argue that the translation process has emphasized “the activity of inanimate objects such as technological hardware”, but “the tr

35、ansformation of human actors is underplayed”. The making of experts is an important element in the making and un-making of the ideas themselves (Gendron et al, 2007).</p><p>　　There are two aspects in the co

36、nstruction of experts: within and outside the organization. The construction of experts within the organizations is realized in part through the assignment of managerial responsibilities and designation of new roles. Pow

37、er (2007) illustrates how new roles and positions, such as the Chief Risk Officer, are envisaged and made up in the conceptions of enterprise-wide risk management. We illustrate how the conceptualization of the BSC encom

38、passes the creation of a new </p><p>　　The other aspect of the transformation of expertise relates to the creation of business experts outside the organization in areas such as business technology and manage

39、ment consulting. In the case of the BSC, we illustrate how various management consulting practices and software companies incorporate the BSC as a specialized line of service and product. For instance, we show how the in

40、itial Nolan-Norton research project in 1991 provided the opportunity for those to become the authors of the BSC </p><p>　　Jones and Dugdale (2002) focus on how Activity-Based Costing became an expert system,

41、 but they do not address how experts are themselves made. That study assumes a pre-defined category of experts and elites (such as the Harvard network) that they assume has power. In contrast, our study examines how clai

42、ms to experts and expertise are mobilized through human-technology interactions. We do not assume a preexisting expert power around the BSC, but analyze how BSC expertise is constructed through t</p><p>　　So

43、urce: SandyQu,DavidJ.Cooper,Mahmoud,2010.“Creating and Popularizing a Management Accounting Idea:The case of the Balanced Scorecard”.CAAA Annual Conference,pp.6-13.</p><p><b>　　譯文：</b></p>

44、<p>　　創(chuàng)建并推廣一個(gè)管理會(huì)計(jì)理念——平衡記分卡</p><p><b>　　1.引言</b></p><p>　　該研究意圖弄清通常在地方實(shí)踐中創(chuàng)造的管理會(huì)計(jì)方法是如何發(fā)展、變化和推廣為全球的管理方法。一般地，創(chuàng)造并傳播新的理念被描述成偉大創(chuàng)新者的傳記和概念的普及，理論主義者的故事強(qiáng)調(diào)固定概念的完整性。然而，我們集中精神于概念的弱點(diǎn)、變化和核心概念的

45、延伸。有著被全球成千的機(jī)構(gòu)所使用的潛力，在將一個(gè)概念變?yōu)橐粋€(gè)管理者可以操作的工具時(shí)，我們強(qiáng)調(diào)習(xí)慣和翻譯的重要作用。一個(gè)由于缺乏可操作性，模糊或模棱兩可而被輕易忽略的概念是如何變?yōu)榭山邮艿母镄鹿ぞ?，甚至成為?yōu)秀管理理所當(dāng)然的組成部分？</p><p>　　我們集中注意于平衡記分卡，將其作為一個(gè)例子進(jìn)行深入的理解，管理會(huì)計(jì)理念進(jìn)入世界具體組織操作和方法的過(guò)程。平衡記分卡已經(jīng)被一系列有影響力的文章和暢銷書(shū)籍（卡普蘭和諾

46、頓，1992，1996）概述，現(xiàn)在成為了咨詢行業(yè)和組織經(jīng)營(yíng)的基礎(chǔ)。</p><p>　　我們注意策略業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)價(jià)系統(tǒng)這一概念轉(zhuǎn)換為一系列特定行為的過(guò)程，如今包括了平衡記分卡（BSC）。</p><p>　　該研究關(guān)于平衡記分卡關(guān)鍵概念的執(zhí)行。然而，我們并不關(guān)注一個(gè)或多個(gè)機(jī)構(gòu)采用并適應(yīng)了平衡記分卡以研究平衡記分卡的采用者和使用者（威尼斯， 2003；托米拉，2006）。盡管這些研究可以提供關(guān)于平

47、衡記分卡如何使用和廣泛適用有價(jià)值的見(jiàn)解，平衡記分卡作為一種已確定的方法，理所當(dāng)然的認(rèn)為組織界限幾乎不變，并且沒(méi)有使它的目標(biāo)和發(fā)展產(chǎn)生問(wèn)題。我們關(guān)注新想法和概念如何進(jìn)入管理思維并因此擁有了變?yōu)閺V為所知，被接受和執(zhí)行的潛力。</p><p>　　1.1. 平衡記分卡作為一種管理新方法</p><p>　　管理學(xué)語(yǔ)言見(jiàn)證了從以財(cái)務(wù)導(dǎo)向的管理控制系統(tǒng)向以價(jià)值創(chuàng)造為重點(diǎn)的策略管理會(huì)計(jì)系統(tǒng)的轉(zhuǎn)變（伊特

48、內(nèi)和拉克，2001）。90年代以來(lái)，引進(jìn)了各種各樣的管理會(huì)計(jì)學(xué)方法，包括平衡記分卡，經(jīng)濟(jì)附加值和目標(biāo)成本等等。在過(guò)去十年里，平衡記分卡很快普及，而且似乎流行了一段時(shí)間了。根據(jù)《哈佛商業(yè)評(píng)論》編輯所言，平衡記分卡是近75年以來(lái)最重要的管理學(xué)概念之一（邁耶，2002， 第2頁(yè)）。以卡普蘭和諾頓的平衡記分卡為例，強(qiáng)調(diào)了用非財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)去補(bǔ)充財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)。它強(qiáng)調(diào)了業(yè)績(jī)的四個(gè)維度：財(cái)務(wù)，顧客，內(nèi)部業(yè)務(wù)流程和學(xué)習(xí)與成長(zhǎng)。它還強(qiáng)調(diào)了業(yè)績(jī)指標(biāo)和策略之間的聯(lián)系(

49、奧特里，1999，第374頁(yè))。平衡記分卡是一種能將一個(gè)組織的決策翻譯為可理解，可交流，可執(zhí)行術(shù)語(yǔ)的方法。它促進(jìn)了指標(biāo)性語(yǔ)言的使用，更清楚地定義了抽象概念的意義，比如質(zhì)量，顧客滿意度，組織學(xué)習(xí)與成長(zhǎng)(卡普蘭和諾頓，2001)。平衡記分卡的概念在卡普蘭和諾頓發(fā)表之后（1992）發(fā)展的很快。以下概述其重要的發(fā)展過(guò)程：</p><p>　　平衡記分卡的起源有它的抱怨之處—管理會(huì)計(jì)太過(guò)注重于財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)（卡普蘭，1984；海

50、耶斯和阿伯納西，1980）。經(jīng)過(guò)改進(jìn)的業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)價(jià)體系被提出用來(lái)追求業(yè)績(jī)的領(lǐng)先指標(biāo)。</p><p>　　1991年，卡普蘭和諾頓開(kāi)始形成了一個(gè)關(guān)于12家公司的通過(guò)由一所研究機(jī)構(gòu)，畢馬威會(huì)計(jì)事務(wù)所（KPMG）贊助的一個(gè)研究項(xiàng)目的概念。</p><p>　　1992年，卡普蘭和諾頓在哈佛商業(yè)評(píng)論中公布了這一初步研究結(jié)果，提出平衡記分卡作為“驅(qū)動(dòng)績(jī)效的指標(biāo)”。平衡記分卡作為一個(gè)創(chuàng)新的制度，通過(guò)對(duì)客

51、戶滿意程度，內(nèi)部業(yè)務(wù)流程和組織的創(chuàng)新、學(xué)習(xí)和成長(zhǎng)方面的指標(biāo)，補(bǔ)充了財(cái)務(wù)指標(biāo)。（卡普蘭和諾頓，1992，第71頁(yè)）。</p><p>　　1996年，卡普蘭和諾頓出版了關(guān)于平衡記分卡的第一本書(shū)，認(rèn)為它是一種“將戰(zhàn)略轉(zhuǎn)化為行動(dòng)”的方式，是一種為促進(jìn)戰(zhàn)略管理的方法論。</p><p>　　2001年，卡普蘭和諾頓出版了他們的第二本書(shū)，《戰(zhàn)略中心組織》，描述了作為企業(yè)戰(zhàn)略管理體系的平衡記分卡是一個(gè)

52、不可分割的“戰(zhàn)略中心組織”。</p><p>　　2004年，卡普蘭和諾頓出版了他們的第三本書(shū)《戰(zhàn)略地圖》，作為一種“將無(wú)形資產(chǎn)轉(zhuǎn)換成有形成果”的方法。這個(gè)“戰(zhàn)略地圖”的概念首先在2000年被闡述，它被作為一種直觀的方式來(lái)傳達(dá)一個(gè)組織的觀點(diǎn)、目標(biāo)和措施，以及它們之間的因果關(guān)系而提出，“策略矩陣”的概念也被作為一個(gè)用來(lái)顯示具體目標(biāo)、措施、未來(lái)目標(biāo)和激勵(lì)的有用的可視化和匯總工具而提出。</p><

53、p>　　卡普蘭和諾頓的第四本書(shū)，《組織協(xié)同：運(yùn)用平衡記分卡去創(chuàng)造組織合力》，探討了“戰(zhàn)略中心組織（SFO）”的要素之一。我們可以期待有更多的書(shū)籍去更深入的研究戰(zhàn)略中心組織的每一個(gè)要素。</p><p>　　在使用的平衡記分卡理念是由在學(xué)術(shù)、專業(yè)的期刊和雜志上，研討會(huì)和專題會(huì)上，個(gè)案研究和公眾會(huì)議還有專供技術(shù)的應(yīng)用軟件上的眾多書(shū)籍和文章所證明出來(lái)的。此外，還有調(diào)查（如馬拉米，2001； 卡勒德和尼爾森，200

54、0；斯洛克，1998），揭示著平衡記分卡已經(jīng)被采納，并且在各個(gè)國(guó)家和行業(yè)得到實(shí)施。例如，最近的調(diào)查表明，現(xiàn)在大約60%的美國(guó)大公司使用平衡記分卡（拜年，2006）。根據(jù)一項(xiàng)克蘭菲爾德大學(xué)的研究報(bào)告指出，75%的公司有一個(gè)關(guān)于業(yè)績(jī)衡量的正規(guī)進(jìn)程（被調(diào)查的所有公司的46%），運(yùn)用平衡記分卡作為他們的主要方法（引自平衡記分卡協(xié)作“如何做”培訓(xùn)材料，2006）。平衡記分卡已被納入管理會(huì)計(jì)的教學(xué)，也已經(jīng)成為許多管理咨詢公司提供的一項(xiàng)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)服務(wù)。&l

55、t;/p><p>　　雖然平衡記分卡作為績(jī)效評(píng)價(jià)創(chuàng)新已經(jīng)吸引了很多人相當(dāng)大的興趣（伊特內(nèi)和拉克，1998），但它仍然被視為一種管理時(shí)尚（如柯林斯，2000）。他們關(guān)注于它在實(shí)際執(zhí)行中可變的成功（馬麗娜和舍利塔，2001），平衡記分卡在邏輯有效性方面（諾瑞克里特，2000），以及它的言論如何去掩蓋它的弱點(diǎn)（諾瑞克里特，2003）等方面的問(wèn)題。也有人質(zhì)疑其普遍的吸引力（波基諾等，2005； 庫(kù)珀和艾薩梅爾，2007），并

56、且告誡說(shuō)，平衡記分卡要適應(yīng)于在通訊、獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)機(jī)制、策略和信息特征的變化多樣性（魯非特和斯?fàn)柕拢?003；奧特里，1999）。這種同樣存在于典型的其他管理會(huì)計(jì)創(chuàng)新中的擔(dān)憂，提出了懷疑和疑問(wèn)，也成為了組織采用和執(zhí)行管理阻力和障礙的根源。盡管（或者有些時(shí)候，作為一種回答）有以上的批評(píng)，平衡記分卡已經(jīng)成為一個(gè)管理者所相信的，他們可以運(yùn)用的詳細(xì)而且具有意義的方法。</p><p>　　1.2.研究的動(dòng)機(jī)和目標(biāo)</p>

57、;<p>　　在時(shí)間和空間上，只有少量的研究關(guān)于管理會(huì)計(jì)的概念是如何普及，并且怎樣和在某種程度上，這些概念被給予了本土的意義和聯(lián)系。盡管如此，一項(xiàng)研究管理學(xué)概念變?yōu)閷?shí)際的顯著的嘗試（瓊斯和達(dá)格代爾，2002），這一研究追溯了作業(yè)成本法的出現(xiàn)，同時(shí)說(shuō)明了它是如何滲透到世界的商業(yè)活動(dòng)中去。我們的研究就與他們的研究相似，我們深入了他們的研究不僅僅關(guān)注于平衡記分卡的細(xì)節(jié)，同時(shí)因?yàn)槲覀儥z驗(yàn)平衡記分卡的概念如何變成廣泛采納的實(shí)踐。例如

58、，商業(yè)模型和戰(zhàn)略地圖，信息技術(shù)和知識(shí)性管理系統(tǒng)，業(yè)績(jī)?cè)u(píng)估方法，咨詢方式等。</p><p>　　平衡記分卡，關(guān)注創(chuàng)新，需要深刻的理解不僅僅是關(guān)于新的管理會(huì)計(jì)概念是如何說(shuō)的（不論是積極的或是懷疑的），同時(shí)還有它們?nèi)绾芜M(jìn)入組織的活動(dòng)。平衡記分卡有一個(gè)被他的推廣者完善記錄的相對(duì)較長(zhǎng)的歷史（卡普蘭和諾頓，1992，1996；卡普蘭，1998）?？ㄆ仗m（1998，1994）大量重復(fù)這段歷史，作為對(duì)知識(shí)創(chuàng)造循環(huán)的解釋，但是，

59、描述它的過(guò)程非常平穩(wěn)而沒(méi)有沖突，這是非常不合理的。借鑒吉登斯的全球和本地聯(lián)系的想法(比照，瓊斯和達(dá)格代爾，2002)，現(xiàn)在的研究說(shuō)明了一些過(guò)去未記錄的翻譯，中斷，操縱和緊張，這些涉及了概念的導(dǎo)出和重新嵌入的過(guò)程。特別地，我們研究了在近代二十世紀(jì)八十年代，平衡記分卡這一概念如何從地方實(shí)踐中出現(xiàn)，并且它隨后是如何普及的，因此使它能夠作為一個(gè)能想到的，可管理的概念運(yùn)行。我們也描述了該過(guò)程（例如，策略執(zhí)行）和人們是如何構(gòu)建的，即使面臨懷疑者，圍

60、繞這一概念的專家，使它能夠被認(rèn)為可操作甚至在各種時(shí)點(diǎn)是需要的。</p><p>　　將抽象概念轉(zhuǎn)換為實(shí)踐方法的轉(zhuǎn)變過(guò)程至關(guān)重要。帕瓦（2007）專注于具體概念接受程度的高低和它們?cè)陲L(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理實(shí)踐組成中的作用，他提出“所有的管理作法必然體現(xiàn)和由它們所應(yīng)該的概念構(gòu)成”，這些在實(shí)踐中構(gòu)成項(xiàng)目要素的概念通常與更大價(jià)值系統(tǒng)相關(guān)（羅斯和米勒，1992）。在平衡記分卡案例中，較大的價(jià)值體系包括定量的重要性和戰(zhàn)略管理的價(jià)值。<

61、;/p><p>　　我們研究這兩個(gè)目標(biāo)方法的結(jié)構(gòu)，平衡記分卡和執(zhí)行者如何像平衡記分卡專家一樣進(jìn)行構(gòu)建。思特帝等（2006）認(rèn)為轉(zhuǎn)換過(guò)程強(qiáng)調(diào)“單一對(duì)象的活動(dòng)例如技術(shù)硬件”，但“行動(dòng)者的轉(zhuǎn)化被淡化了”。在概念本身懸而未決時(shí)，專家的決策是重要的要素。（根德倫等，2007）。</p><p>　　專家的構(gòu)建存在兩個(gè)方面：組織的內(nèi)部和外部。內(nèi)部組織構(gòu)建的專家認(rèn)識(shí)到部分通過(guò)管理責(zé)任的指定和新角色的分配。帕

62、瓦（2007）描述了新角色和職務(wù)，例如首席風(fēng)險(xiǎn)官，如何設(shè)想和決定企業(yè)全面風(fēng)險(xiǎn)管理的概念。我們說(shuō)明了平衡記分卡的概念包括新管理職位的創(chuàng)造如何通過(guò)對(duì)戰(zhàn)略管理辦公室(OSM)的角色指定和分配管理責(zé)任。同樣，在組織內(nèi)，冠軍平衡記分卡經(jīng)常被看作是技術(shù)專家。</p><p>　　對(duì)其他的專業(yè)知識(shí)轉(zhuǎn)化方面涉及到外部組織領(lǐng)域的商業(yè)專家，例如經(jīng)營(yíng)技術(shù)和管理咨詢。在平衡記分卡案例中，我們說(shuō)明了各種管理咨詢行為和應(yīng)用了平衡記分卡的軟件

63、公司如何作為一個(gè)專門(mén)的服務(wù)和生產(chǎn)線。例如，我們展示了1991年諾頓的最初研究計(jì)劃，這些證明了他作為平衡記分卡概念的創(chuàng)造者，而在研究中的管理者和執(zhí)行者成為了這一概念的先鋒和最初采用者。我們也說(shuō)明了專門(mén)服務(wù)公司的成立，平衡記分卡的合作（BSCol），其與眾多技術(shù)公司的聯(lián)盟，如何為在管理咨詢，軟件和商業(yè)技術(shù)中的專家發(fā)展提供機(jī)會(huì)，從而去幫助組織應(yīng)用平衡記分卡。</p><p>　　瓊斯和達(dá)格代爾（2002）關(guān)注作業(yè)成本法

64、如何成為一個(gè)專家系統(tǒng)，但是他們沒(méi)有解釋他們本身如何成為專家。研究假設(shè)預(yù)先界定的專家和精英（比如哈佛網(wǎng)絡(luò)）的分類，假定他們有能力。相比之下，我們的研究探討說(shuō)明專家和專門(mén)知識(shí)通過(guò)人為技術(shù)交流如何調(diào)動(dòng)起來(lái)。我們假定平衡記分卡之前不存在專家影響力，但分析了如何通過(guò)經(jīng)驗(yàn)和理論知識(shí)之間的相互作用來(lái)構(gòu)建平衡記分卡。這樣做，我們提供了一種不同的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，不是根據(jù)預(yù)先給出實(shí)力的代理商，而是根據(jù)如此認(rèn)真的采用技術(shù)以至技術(shù)的出現(xiàn)和發(fā)展成為我們實(shí)驗(yàn)的對(duì)象。這一點(diǎn)很