群体断层激活及负面效应涌现：熙宁变法缘何从志同道合走向四分五裂?

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2023.00336

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

群体断层构念与决定组织变革成败的高管团队多重人际交互及其演进表征十分契合。但群体断层因为什么而激活? 激活了的群体断层是如何影响高管团队的群体过程及组织绩效产出? 这些问题亟需实证性的探索和检验。本研究基于《王安石年谱长编》, 辅以《宋史》及后人相关专题研究, 采用质性研究中的扎根理论方法, 以王安石越次入对宋神宗到王安石第二次罢相为观察窗口期, 对此期间与他存在密切交互关系的52个关键人物的交互过程、交互结果及成因进行了编码分析。结果发现：(1)群体断层激活及负面效应涌现能完美解释熙宁变法的演进过程及最终的失败; (2)关键岗位人员王安石人际交互风格的不同构面是激活熙宁变法中不同群体断层的主要变量; (3)王安石与直接上级宋神宗、本位群体变法新晋和他位群体同朝老臣之间交互的聚散性, 决定了活化的群体断层效应正负及交互演进表征, 进而决定了熙宁变法的失败。本研究为群体断层激活变量的识别及不同群体断层在同一时空下的叠加效应提供了新的洞见, 同时为组织变革及高管团队多样性的管理提供了实证资鉴和理论指导。

关键词: 群体断层, 熙宁变法, 王安石, 人际交互风格

Abstract:

Over the past five decades, the study of diversity in work groups and organizations has become a significant domain. However, in previous research, the overall consensus seems to imply a tenuous direct relationship between diversity and performance-based outcomes. The concept of group faultlines advocates deconstructing the relationship of group diversity and process with performance output at different levels from a dynamic perspective, which is of great significance for studying group diversity. At the same time, the group faultlines construct fits well with the multiple interpersonal interactions and evolutionary characterization of top management team (TMT) that determines the outcome of organizational change, and thus provides new research perspectives. However, literature on group faultlines has two deficiencies: (1) Group members are regarded as equivalent beings; (2) and the research paradigm is not sufficiently compatible with the mechanism of group faultlines activation and evolution. What activates group faultlines? How do activated group faultlines affect the group process and organizational performance output of the TMT? These issues require urgent empirical exploration and verification.
This study investigates factors that activate the group faultlines and its mechanism affecting group processes and organizational performance output. The normative qualitative research method is used based on the Compilation of Wang Anshi Chronicles, which is associated with the relevant historical materials on the Song Dynasty and later research comments. The observation period is selected as from the time Wang Anshi first attempted to provide a skip level proposal to Emperor Song Shenzong until his second resignation as the Prime Minister of the Song Dynasty as the observation period. The interaction process, results, and causes of 52 key figures with close interaction with Wang Anshi during this period are analyzed.
Results confirm that: (1) The evolution and failure of the Xining Reform can be illustrated by the activation of group faultlines and its negative effects; (2) Wang Anshi, with his key position, different aspects of his interpersonal interaction style are the key variables that activate various group faultlines in the Xining Reform; (3) The convergence and divergence between Wang Anshi and his direct superior Song Shenzong, fellow reformers, and cooperative partners activated the group faultlines, which led to positive-negative effects and interactive evolution characterization, determining the organizational performance output.
Therefore, this study focuses on which variables and their interaction mechanism in a specific field activate the group faultlines, and then determines the group process and organizational performance output, thereby enriching and developing group faultlines theory. This study presents the following conclusions and contributions. (1) The existence of inequivalence of group members. (2) The interpersonal interaction style of key staff is an important variable that activates group faultlines. (3) Group faultlines activation and evolution can perfectly deconstruct the process of organizational change and its ultimate success or failure. (4) Group faultlines theory is a new perspective that is worthy of further research on TMT. Thus, this study provides empirical evidence and theoretical guidance for the (self-)management of multiple interpersonal interactions in TMT in organizational change.

Key words: group faultlines, Xining Political Reform, Wang Anshi, interpersonal interaction style

中图分类号:

B849: C93

李永瑞, 王铭, 宋佳谕. (2023). 群体断层激活及负面效应涌现：熙宁变法缘何从志同道合走向四分五裂?. 心理学报, 55(2), 336-352.

LI Yongrui, WANG Ming, SONG Jiayu. (2023). Activation of group faultlines and its negative effects: Why does Xining political reform move from similar to opposing ambitions?. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 55(2), 336-352.

图/表 8

参考文献 59

[1]	Anderson, C., & Brown, C. E. (2010). The functions and dysfunctions of hierarchy. Research in Organizational Behavior, 30(1), 55-89. doi: 10.1016/j.riob.2010.08.002 URL
[2]	Barta, T., Kleiner, M., & Neumann, T. (2012, April 1). Is there a payoff from top-team diversity? McKinsey Quarterly, 2, 13-15.
[3]	Bunderson, J. S., & van der Vegt, G. S. (2018). Diversity and inequality in management teams: A review and integration of research on vertical and horizontal member differences. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5(1), 47-73. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-032117-104500 URL
[4]	Cho, T. S., & Hambrick, D. C. (2006). Attention as the mediator between top management team characteristics and strategic change: The case of airline deregulation. Organization Science, 17(4), 453-469. doi: 10.1287/orsc.1060.0192 URL
[5]	Chrobot-Mason, D., Ruderman, M. N., Weber, T. J., & Ernst, C. (2009). The challenge of leading on unstable ground: Triggers that activate social identity faultlines. Human Relations, 62(11), 1763-1794. doi: 10.1177/0018726709346376 URL
[6]	Du, J., Lin, X. Y., & Zhao, S. M. (2022). The development and prospect of team faultlines: The evolution trajectory from static to dynamic. Management Review, 34(1), 180-190.
	[ 杜娟, 林新月, 赵曙明. (2022). 团队断层研究评述及展望:静态向动态的演进. 管理评论, 34(1), 180-190.]
[7]	Einstein, A., & Infeld, L. (1942). The evolution of physics: The growth of ideas from early concepts to relativity and quanta. New York: Simon and Schuster.
[8]	Fan, L. Z. (2017). The changes of Wang Anshi's character imagine and their implications before and after the Xifeng Reform. Journal of Sun Yat-sen University (Social Science Edition), 57(2), 54-72.
	[ 范立舟. (2017). 熙丰变法前后王安石形象的变化及其意蕴. 中山大学学报(社会科学版), 57(2), 54-72.]
[9]	Freda, F., Lauder, W. P., McCarthy, D., & Pinault, F.-H.(2017, January 16). Straight talk about gender diversity in the boardroom and beyond. McKinsey & Company. Retrieved May 14, 2020, from https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/leadership/straight-talk-about-gender-diversity-in-the-boardroom-and-beyond.
[10]	Freeman, E. R. (1983). Strategic management: A stakeholder approach (Pitman series in business and public policy). Harpercollins College Div.
[11]	Georgakakis, D., Greve, P., & Ruigrok, W. (2017). Top management team faultlines and firm performance: Examining the CEO-TMT interface. The Leadership Quarterly, 28(6), 741-758. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2017.03.004 URL
[12]	Hambrick, D. C., & Mason, P. A. (1984). Upper echelons: The organization as a reflection of its top managers. Academy of Management Review. 9(2), 193-206. doi: 10.2307/258434 URL
[13]	Hambrick, D. C. (2007). Upper echelons theory: An update. Academy of Management Review, 32(2), 334-343. doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.24345254 URL
[14]	Han, L. F., & Wang, Z. M. (2011). Self-verification and interpersonal congruence: A new perspective on value in diversity. Advances in Psychological Science, 19(1), 73-84.
	[ 韩立丰, 王重鸣. (2011). 自我验证与人际一致性: 团队多样性利用的新视角. 心理科学进展, 19(1), 73-84.]
[15]	Han, L. F., Wang, Z. M., & Xu, Z. W. (2010). A critical review of group diversity research: A reflection based on the group faultlines theory. Advances in Psychological Science, 18(2), 374-384.
	[ 韩立丰, 王重鸣, 许智文. (2010). 群体多样性研究的理论述评——基于群体断层理论的反思. 心理科学进展, 18(2), 374-384.]
[16]	Harrison, D. A., & Klein, K. J. (2007). What’s the difference? Diversity constructs as separation, variety, or disparity in organizations. Academy of Management Review, 32(4), 1199-1228. doi: 10.5465/amr.2007.26586096 URL
[17]	He, S. H. (2017). On national identity and the construction of harmonious ethnic relations. Journal of Guizhou University (Social Sciences), 35(1), 87-92.
	[ 何生海. (2017). 论国家认同与构建和谐的民族关系. 贵州大学学报(社会科学版), 35(1), 87-92.]
[18]	Hutzschenreuter, T., & Horstkotte, J. (2013). Performance effects of top management team demographic faultlines in the process of product diversification. Strategic Management Journal, 34(6), 704-726. doi: 10.1002/smj.2035 URL
[19]	Joshi, A., & Neely, B. H. (2018). A structural-emergence model of diversity in teams. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 5, 361-385. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062421 URL
[20]	Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (1998). Demographic diversity and faultlines: The compositional dynamics of organizational groups. Academy of Management Review, 23(2), 325-340. doi: 10.2307/259377 URL
[21]	Lau, D. C., & Murnighan, J. K. (2005). Interactions within groups and subgroups: The effects of demographic faultlines. Academy of Management Journal, 48(4), 645-659. doi: 10.5465/amj.2005.17843943 URL
[22]	Laukkanen, M. (1994). Comparative cause mapping of organizational cognitions. Organization Science, 5(3), 289-477. doi: 10.1287/orsc.5.3.289 URL
[23]	Li, H. R. (2008). Textual research and discrimination on emperor Song Shenzong and Wang Anshi jointly determined the way how the country governs. Literature, History, and Philosophy, 1, 73-78.
	[ 李华瑞. (2008). 宋神宗与王安石共定“国是”考辩. 文史哲, 1, 73-78.]
[24]	Li, H. R. (2021). A new understanding of Wang Anshi and his new policies in the past twenty years: A paper written for the one thousandth anniversary of the birth of Wang Anshi. Journal of Historical Science, (NOV.), 5-30.
	[ 李华瑞. (2021). 近二十年对王安石及其变法的重新认识——为王安石诞辰一千周年而作. 史学月刊, (11), 5-30.]
[25]	Li, X. (2019). Summary of the symposium on Wang Anshi's academic thoughts in Fuzhou. Journal of East China University of Technology (Social Science), 38(2), 116-119.
	[ 李旭. (2019). 抚州市2018年王安石学术思想研讨会综述. 东华理工大学学报 (社会科学版), 38(2), 116-119.]
[26]	Li, X. H. & Li, L. X. (2019). Clangers of emperor Shenzong of Song in Xining political reform and historical lessons. Leadership Science, (19), 105-107.
	[ 李晓虎, 李利霞. (2019). 宋神宗在熙宁变法中的过失与历史之鉴. 领导科学, (19), 105-107.]
[27]	Lindzey, G. (1952). Review of Field theory in social science. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47(1), 132-133. doi: 10.1037/h0052870 URL
[28]	Liu, C. G. (2018). Wang Anshi's chronicle long compilation. Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company.
	[ 刘成国. (2018). 王安石年谱长编. 北京: 中华书局.]
[29]	Liu, X., & Li, X. J. (2015). Employment-status-based faultlines in diverse employment work groups and their activating factors: A grounded theory exploration. Chinese Journal of Management, 12(7), 1001-1011.
	[ 刘星, 李新建. (2015). 基于扎根理论的多元雇佣工作群体的雇佣身份断层与激活因素研究. 管理学报, 12(7), 1001-1011.]
[30]	Lu, H., Chen, H., Zhou, X. X., & Ke, J. L. (2013). Indigenous research of the working group faultlines-performance model based on grounded theory. Journal of Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, 27(3), 45-52.
	[ 芦慧, 陈红, 周肖肖, 柯江林. (2013). 基于扎根理论的工作群体断层——群体绩效关系概念模型的本土化研究. 管理工程学报, 27(3), 45-52.]
[31]	Ma, Y., Zhang, Q., & Yin, Q. (2021). Top management team faultlines, green technology innovation and firm financial performance. Journal of Environmental Management, 285(4), 112095. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.112095 URL
[32]	Martinez, M. G., Zouaghi, F., & Marco, T. G. (2017). Diversity is strategy: The effect of R&D team diversity on innovative performance. R & D Management, 47(2), 311-329.
[33]	Martz, W. (2013). Evaluating Organizational Performance: Rational, Natural, and Open System Models. American Journal of Evaluation, 34(3), 385-401. doi: 10.1177/1098214013479151 URL
[34]	Mathieu, J. E., Gallagher, P. T., Domingo, M. A., & Klock, E. A. (2019). Embracing complexity: Reviewing the past decade of team effectiveness research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6, 17-46. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015106
[35]	Mathieu, J. E., Maynard, M. T., Rapp, T., & Gilson, L. (2008). Team effectiveness 1997-2007: A review of recent advancements and a glimpse into the future. Journal of Management, 34(3), 410-476. doi: 10.1177/0149206308316061 URL
[36]	Oreg, S., Bartunek, J. M., Lee, G., & Do, B. (2016). An affect- based model of recipients' responses to organizational change events. The Academy of Management Review, 43(1), 65-86. doi: 10.5465/amr.2014.0335 URL
[37]	Ou, A. Y., Seo, J. M., Neoma, D. C., & Hom, P. W. (2017). When can humble top executives retain middle managers? The moderating role of top management team faultines. Academy of Management Journal, 60(5), 1915-1931. doi: 10.5465/amj.2015.1072 URL
[38]	Qi, X. (1959). Wang Anshi Reform. Shanghai: Shanghai People's Press.
	[ 漆侠. (1959). 王安石变法. 上海: 上海人民出版社.]
[39]	Qiu, Y., & Wang, W. Z. (2018). Team faultlines: Literature review and direction of future. Research Science & Technology Progress and Policy, 35(1), 154-160.
	[ 仇勇, 王文周. (2018). 团队断层的内涵, 测量及效应: 研究述评与展望. 科技进步与对策, 35(1), 154-160.]
[40]	Ralph, J., & Gallagher, A. (2015). Legitimacy faultlines in international society: The responsibility to protect and prosecute after Libya. Review of International Studies, 41(3), 553-573. doi: 10.1017/S0260210514000242 URL
[41]	Richard, O. C., Wu, J., Markoczy, L. A., & Chung, Y. H. (2019). Top management team demographic-faultline strength and strategic change: What role does environmental dynamism play? Strategic Management Journal, 40(6), 987-1009. doi: 10.1002/smj.3009 URL
[42]	Roberson, Q. M. (2019). Diversity in the workplace: A review, synthesis, and future research agenda. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 6, 69-88. doi: 10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-012218-015243 URL
[43]	Rock, D., & Grant, H. (2016, November 4). Why diverse teams are smarter. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved July 2, 2020, from https://hbr.org/2016/11/why-diverse-teams-are-smarter
[44]	Shen, L. W. (2004). Zeng Bu and Xi Ning Reform Movement. History Teaching, (8), 25-29.
	[ 沈履伟. (2004). 曾布与熙宁变法. 历史教学, (8), 25-29.]
[45]	Sherbin, L., & Rashid, R. (2017, February 1). Diversity doesn’t stick without inclusion. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved March 21, 2021, from https://hbr.org/2017/02/diversity-doesnt-stick-without-inclusion
[46]	Thatcher, S. M. B., Jehn, K. A., & Zanutto, E. (2003). Cracks in diversity research: The effects of diversity faultlines on conflict and performance. Group Decision and Negotiation, 12, 217-241. doi: 10.1023/A:1023325406946 URL
[47]	Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2011). Demographic faultlines: A meta-analysis of the literature. Journal of Applied Psychology, 96(6), 1119-1139. doi: 10.1037/a0024167 pmid: 21688882
[48]	Thatcher, S. M. B., & Patel, P. C. (2012). Group faultlines: A review, integration, and guide to future research. Journal of Management, 38(4), 969-1009. doi: 10.1177/0149206311426187 URL
[49]	van Knippenberg, D., Dawson, J. F., West, M. A., & Homan, A. C. (2010). Diversity faultlines, shared objectives, and top management team performance. Human Relations, 64(3), 307-336. doi: 10.1177/0018726710378384 URL
[50]	Wang, L. (2018). The tragedy of internal power struggling in Wang Anshi's reform. The World of Literary and History, 11, 67-71.
	[ 王龙. (2018). 王安石变法的内讧悲剧. 文史天地, 11, 67-71.]
[51]	Wang, Z. M. & Zhang, L. (2018). Drawing on the experience of the Xi Ning transformation. Journal of Hebei University of Engineering (Social Science Edition), 35(3), 42-44.
	[ 王志敏, 张蕾. (2018). 熙宁变法的现实借鉴. 河北工程大学学报(社会科学版), 35(3), 42-44.]
[52]	Wang, Z. Y. (1980). Brief discussion on Wang Anshi's reform. Social Sciences in China, (3), 131-154.
	[ 王曾瑜. (1980). 王安石变法简论. 中国社会科学, (3), 131-154.]
[53]	We, X. H., Wang, A. C., Jiang, N. (2018). A meta-analysis of antecedents of team faultline and its effects on team processes and outcomes. Nankai Business Review, 21(5), 139-149.
	[ 卫旭华, 王傲晨, 江楠. (2018). 团队断层前因及其对团队过程与结果影响的元分析. 南开管理评论, 21(5), 139-149.]
[54]	Yao, Z. X. (2005). Exclusion of nonconformists: A main reason for the failure of Wang Anshi reform. Journal of Nanjing University (Philosophy, Humanities and Social Sciences), 42(2), 125-131.
	[ 姚治勋. (2005). 排斥异己是王安石变法失败的重要原因. 南京大学学报(哲学.人文科学.社会科学版), 42(2), 125-131.]
[55]	Zhang, J. H., Liu, X., Ren, F. F., Sun, X. W., & Yu, Q. (2016). The effects of group diversity and organizational support on group creativity. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 48(12), 1551-1560. doi: 10.3724/SP.J.1041.2016.01551 URL
	[ 张景焕, 刘欣, 任菲菲, 孙祥薇, 于颀. (2016). 团队多样性与组织支持对团队创造力的影响. 心理学报, 48(12), 1551-1560.]
[56]	Zhang, X. H. (1995). On the reasons for the failure of Wang Anshi's reform. Journal of Gannan Normal University, (2), 21-25.
	[ 张祥浩. (1995). 论王安石变法失败的原因. 赣南师范学院学报, (2), 21-25.]
[57]	Zhang, X. H. (2011). Fresh research on the failure of Wang Anshi political reform. Journal of Southeast University (Philosophy and Social Science), 13(4), 43-46.
	[ 张祥浩. (2011). 王安石变法失败原因再探讨. 东南大学学报(哲学社会科学版), 13(4), 43-46.]
[58]	Zheng, Z. Q. (2020). From Fan Zhongyan and Wang Anshi to Zhang Dun and Cai Jing——reform warning record in Northern Song Dynasty. Shandong Social Sciences, (1), 164-169.
	[ 郑志强. (2020). 从范仲淹、王安石到章惇、蔡京——北宋改革警示录. 山东社会科学, (1), 164-169.]
[59]	Zhu, H. G. (2012). Influence of Chinese traditional culture on interpersonal interactions: Viewed from the perspective of sociology of management. Journal of Nanjing Normal University (Social Science), 5, 70-77.
	[ 朱华桂. (2012). 管理社会学视阈中的中国传统文化对人际交互关系的影响研究. 南京师大学报(社会科学版), 5, 70-77.]

对象	N	对象	N	对象	N	对象	N	对象	N	对象	N
宋神宗	801	王雱	16	薛向	11	刘攽	7	唐介	5	范百禄	4
王韶	68	李定	15	赵卨	11	赵抃	7	韩维	5	沈起	4
吕惠卿	45	章惇	14	苏轼	10	郑侠	7	蔡延庆	5	唐坰	4
文彦博	34	程昉	14	李常	10	李师中	7	张琥	5	邓润甫	4
韩绛	29	王珪	13	邓绾	10	刘挚	7	范育	5	许将	4
曾公亮	27	富弼	13	杨绘	9	张利一	7	李评	5	张商英	4
陈升之	21	吕嘉问	13	蔡挺	9	孙觉	6	朱明之	5	张穆之	4
吕公著	19	郭逵	13	李承之	9	王广廉	6	蔡确	5	高遵裕	4
冯京	19	王安国	11	王子韶	8	吕诲	6	冯宗道	5	张载等31人	3
曾布	19	欧阳修	11	王广渊	8	陈襄	6	苏辙	5	吴中复等58人	2
司马光	18	程颢	11	沈括	8	曾孝宽	6	刘述	5	黄庆基等181人	1
吴充	17	侯叔献	11	范纯仁	7	张谔	6	徐禧	5
韩琦	16	吕公弼	11	王安礼	7	曾巩	5	郑獬	4

对象	N	对象	N	对象	N	对象	N	对象	N	对象	N
宋神宗	801	王雱	16	薛向	11	刘攽	7	唐介	5	范百禄	4
王韶	68	李定	15	赵卨	11	赵抃	7	韩维	5	沈起	4
吕惠卿	45	章惇	14	苏轼	10	郑侠	7	蔡延庆	5	唐坰	4
文彦博	34	程昉	14	李常	10	李师中	7	张琥	5	邓润甫	4
韩绛	29	王珪	13	邓绾	10	刘挚	7	范育	5	许将	4
曾公亮	27	富弼	13	杨绘	9	张利一	7	李评	5	张商英	4
陈升之	21	吕嘉问	13	蔡挺	9	孙觉	6	朱明之	5	张穆之	4
吕公著	19	郭逵	13	李承之	9	王广廉	6	蔡确	5	高遵裕	4
冯京	19	王安国	11	王子韶	8	吕诲	6	冯宗道	5	张载等31人	3
曾布	19	欧阳修	11	王广渊	8	陈襄	6	苏辙	5	吴中复等58人	2
司马光	18	程颢	11	沈括	8	曾孝宽	6	刘述	5	黄庆基等181人	1
吴充	17	侯叔献	11	范纯仁	7	张谔	6	徐禧	5
韩琦	16	吕公弼	11	王安礼	7	曾巩	5	郑獬	4

人员名单(人数)	子群归类	与王安石关系
宋神宗(1人)	变法决策	君臣
吕惠卿、曾布、李定、章惇、程昉、吕嘉问、程颢、侯叔献、薛向、李常、邓绾、李承之、王子韶、沈括、曾孝宽、郑侠、张琥、蔡确、范百禄、唐坰、邓润甫、刘挚、苏辙、孙觉、许将、张商英、徐禧(27人)	变法新晋	上下
司马光、文彦博、韩绛、曾公亮、陈升之、吕公著、冯京、韩琦、王珪、富弼、欧阳修、吕公弼、苏轼、范纯仁、杨绘、刘攽、赵抃、李师中、王广廉、吕诲、陈襄、张谔、唐介、韩维、范育、李评、冯宗道、郑獬、沈起、刘述、曾巩(31人)	同朝老臣	朋侪
王韶、郭逵、赵卨、蔡挺、张利一、蔡延庆、张穆之、高遵裕、王广渊(9人)	同朝武将	——
吴充、王雱、王安国、王安礼、朱明之(5人)	亲朋家人	——

人员名单(人数)	子群归类	与王安石关系
宋神宗(1人)	变法决策	君臣
吕惠卿、曾布、李定、章惇、程昉、吕嘉问、程颢、侯叔献、薛向、李常、邓绾、李承之、王子韶、沈括、曾孝宽、郑侠、张琥、蔡确、范百禄、唐坰、邓润甫、刘挚、苏辙、孙觉、许将、张商英、徐禧(27人)	变法新晋	上下
司马光、文彦博、韩绛、曾公亮、陈升之、吕公著、冯京、韩琦、王珪、富弼、欧阳修、吕公弼、苏轼、范纯仁、杨绘、刘攽、赵抃、李师中、王广廉、吕诲、陈襄、张谔、唐介、韩维、范育、李评、冯宗道、郑獬、沈起、刘述、曾巩(31人)	同朝老臣	朋侪
王韶、郭逵、赵卨、蔡挺、张利一、蔡延庆、张穆之、高遵裕、王广渊(9人)	同朝武将	——
吴充、王雱、王安国、王安礼、朱明之(5人)	亲朋家人	——

年代	交互条目原文	要点提取
1069(1)	1. 闰十一月十六日, 差曾布看详衙前条例	差遣曾布
1070(4)	2. 四月五日, 以曾布, 王庭筠、宋温其、杜纯等为编敕副定官	委布为官
	3. 八月二十三日, 以曾布编修中书条例	重用曾布
	4. 因吕惠卿以父丧去, 遂以曾布为腹心。九月六日, 以布入侍经筵	腹心曾布
	5. 九月六日, 以曾布同判司农寺	加官曾布
1071(3)	6. 二月八日, 以曾布检正中书五房公事。御史中丞杨绘上章劾擅权	超拔曾布
	7. 七月六日, 以张琥为文诘杨绘、刘挚论助役法。琥辞, 曾布为之	布力助石
	8. 七月六日, 以曾布所言进呈, 且札与杨绘、刘挚令分析	力挺曾布
1072(1)	9. 十二月十八日, 以吕惠卿同检正中书五房公事。神宗欲罢曾布, 固留之。二十一日, 以曾布为翰林学士, 又请留之编修中书条例, 神宗不许	帝欲罢布庇护曾布
1074(7)	10. 正月二十七日, 以曾布、吕惠卿察访河北东西路	股肱曾布
	11. 二月九日, 以曾布权三司使	加布要职
	12. 三月二十三日, 曾布携魏继宗来见, 具言吕嘉问主市易榷固掊克。闻之, 默然	布言法非、安石默然
	13. 三月二十四日, 因曾布于崇政殿具奏市易法不便, 遂留身, 乞神宗且容推究	布奏法非、安石乞究
	14. 三月二十四日夜, 因神宗批问吕嘉问实欺罔, 乃具奏明其不然, 令吕惠卿、曾布同根究市易务不便事	令布究法
	15. 曾布出榜厚赏募告者。…遂欲夜收曾布所张榜, 未果	布榜言非、石止未果
	16. 是年九月左右, 晤曾布, 诵曾公亮柬, 叹爱不已	晤布叹怀
1075(3)	17. 五月二十二日, 进呈曾布案, 又进呈马珫、范纯粹所争。韩绛非之	进呈布案
	18. 八月十五日, 于中书言曾布之恶	公言布恶
	19. 十月上旬, 神宗以手扎问可否召回曾布。讫不召	弃用曾布
王安石与曾布交互关系开放式编码		重用庇护、奉命根究、逆我弃用