英文
It's one of the most common questions I hear: 'How can I influence my boss? How can I manage up?'

My response disappoints people who are looking for a subtle, clever interpersonal strategy for manipulating a manager. I put the onus right back on the employee.

Anyone who wants to influence their boss has to start by accepting that the manager actually does want to do better. Many employees seem to think their bosses have no desire to improve. How do I know this? Because whenever I ask mid-level managers if they want to improve their management skills, and if they are open to suggestions, they say yes. Most of them genuinely seem to mean it. But when I ask if they think their bosses share that desire for improvement and feedback, they usually give me a skeptical look and shake their heads -- without realizing the contradiction of their response.

This discrepancy can be attributed to the fundamental attribution error, a concept I learned in a social psychology class I took in college. According to the theory, we tend to assume that other people's faults stem from internal, fundamental flaws. But we attribute our own faults to temporary environmental factors. For instance, when our boss manages poorly, we believe that he does it because he intends to and is inherently a bad leader. When we manage poorly, we're simply making a mistake because of the pressure we're under.

Of course, this makes no sense. Until we realize and address our natural but dangerous biases, we won't be able to give our managers the benefit of the doubt and accept that they are really open to our suggestions for improvement. When we do that, we can move on to the second step of managing upward: Taking the right approach.

The key to doing this second step right is mastering something I call the 'kind truth.' To understand the kind truth approach, it is helpful to look at the two most ineffective standard approaches.

The 'activist' method is best demonstrated when a frustrated employee charges into the manager's office as a self-appointed representative of the people, defiant and determined to put the clueless leader in his place. This often works on television and in movies, but in reality it is usually ineffective. It puts the leader in an extremely difficult situation, forced to choose between defending himself in the face of an apparent revolt and cowering under pressure. Most leaders with any pride will choose to defend.

The other approach that doesn't work is the sycophantic method, whereby a well-intentioned employee ingratiates himself to the leader by regularly agreeing with him and telling him how wonderful he is, with the intention of one day slipping in helpful and subtle suggestions for improvement. This doesn't work because subordinates who suddenly find themselves in the good graces of a boss quickly realize that they like their new status. So they balk when it comes to being honest and putting their improved position at risk. And their boss isn't usually going to beg them to be tough on him, happy to have new friends.

The best approach, the kind truth method, involves honestly empathizing with the manager's situation, and expressing that empathy. By appreciating what the manager is facing and why he might be struggling, you open him up to hearing a well-intentioned suggestion about how he can do a better job.

How do I know this works? Because for many years I used it and found myself rewarded for doing so by my superiors. I was the guy that people pushed into the CEO's office and said, 'You tell him!' Virtually every time I spoke the kind truth, I found that the CEO listened to me and heeded my advice. Over time I found that he started turning to me. He knew I wouldn't rant and rave at him, nor kiss up. Instead, I would offer candid, helpful advice.

What if this approach doesn't work for you? What if you are punished or shunned for this? That is probably a good sign that it's time to polish your résumé, without guilt or second thoughts, and find someone new who is open to being upwardly managed.
中文
我经常听见有人问这样一个问题：“怎么才能影响我的老板？怎样才能让上司听从我的意见？”

我的回答会令那些希望听到一个巧妙睿智策略以便掌控老板的人感到失望，因为我把球踢回给了下属自己。

任何想要影响上司的人首先必须承认，上司自己也想把自己的工作做得更好。很多员工觉得，自己的老板根本就是在原地打转。但我为什么会有这种观点呢？因为我问过很多中层管理者是否愿意提高管理技能，是否愿意接受别人的建议。他们的回答是愿意，而且绝大多数的态度都很真诚，并非敷衍了事。然而，当我问及他们认为自己的上司是否也渴望把自己的工作做得更好并获得反馈意见时，这些管理者通常都面露疑色，大摇其头，而根本没有意识到这一态度的自相矛盾之处。

这一双重标准可以用“基本归因错误”(fundamental attribution error)理论来解释，这是我在大学的社会心理学课上学到的。 根据该理论，人们往往会把别人犯的错误归咎于其内在的劣根性，而把自己犯的错误归咎于临时性的外部因素。举例而言，当上级管理不当时，我们会认为这是故意所为，他本来就当不了好领导；而当我们自己管理不当时，只会觉得这是因为压力太大，犯了个错误而已。

当然，这种想法毫无道理。我们必须了解并正确面对自己这种发自天性但很危险的偏见，否则就会无端怀疑上司的做法，也不会相信他们真的会接受建议并做出改进。迈出这一步后，我们就可以进入影响上司的第二个阶段：采取正确的沟通方式。

做好第二步的关键是掌握一种我称之为“善意真相”(kind truth)的东西。为理解这种做法，我们首先来看两种最难产生效果的一般方式。

第一种是“激进”方式，比方说一个愤怒的员工冲进经理办公室，把自己当作广大员工的代言人，藐视权威，决心煞煞面前这个一头雾水经理的威风。这种做法往往在电视剧和电影情节里会发挥作用，但在现实中通常没什么效果，只会让上级陷入一个左右为难的处境，逼他要么在这种谋反行为面前采取自卫行动，要么当缩头乌龟，而大多数有自尊的领导会选择自卫。

另一种没有效果的做法是“逢迎”方式，比方说一个善意的员工想让自己的意见被上司所接受，因此曲意奉承，搞好关系，希望有朝一日能巧妙提出一些促使领导改进的建议。这种做法也很难奏效，因为那些因逢迎而得到上级青睐的下属很快意识到，自己喜欢这种融洽的上下关系，所以在需要坦诚直言的时候反而缩手缩脚，生怕危及现状。此外，上司通常也不会要求他们多提批评意见，而只是很高兴结交了新的朋友。

最佳的做法是“善意真相”方式，这要求员工设身处地为上司考虑，并表达出这种感受。 当上级感觉到你理解他身处的环境和面临的问题时，就会敞开心扉，接受善意的建议，改进自己的工作。

我怎么知道这种做法管用呢？因为多年来我对自己的上级一直采取这种沟通方式，并且获益匪浅。我总是被大家推进总裁办公室，让我替他们说话。每次我都说出“善意真相”，而老板总是会仔细地听取并接受我的建议。经过一段时间，我发现他开始主动向我征询意见，因为他知道我不会冲他夸夸其谈，大喊大叫，或是溜须拍马，而是会提出真诚而有用的建议。

要是你用了这种方式但没有效果怎么办？要是你因此受到报复和被孤立怎么办？这也许清楚表明，你现在可以毫无内疚或毫不犹豫地跳槽，另找一个能敞开心怀接受下属意见的好东家。