单项选择题

If one of your research staff announced that he had worked out a way to propel a vehicle on a cushion of air, would you tell him to concentrate on something practical, or suggest taking it further If a member of your development team asked if she could come in late because she had her best ideas at 3 am would you insist that she is in the office at 9 am like everyone else
Current business wisdom is that companies need creative, innovative people to beat competitors. The reality is that companies have always needed new ideas to survive and progress, but in the past they weren"t particularly good at encouraging the people who produced them.
Original thinkers don"t always fit easily into the framework of an organisation. However, the advice from managing director, John Serrano is "Get rid of the dull people and encourage the unusual ones". Essentially, he believes that companies need to learn how to manage their original thinkers in order to ensure that the business profits from their contribution. He also says, "Original thinkers often find it difficult to drive change within the organisation, so they resign, feeling angry and disappointed. It is essential to avoid this."
"You can"t recognise original thinkers by the way they look", says Ian Freeman. An apparently ordinary exterior can conceal a very creative thinker. "His consultancy, IBT Personnel, has devised a structured way to identify original thinkers. We define employees as champions, free-wheelers, bystanders and weak links, and most original thinkers come into the category of free-wheelers. They may miss deadlines if they become involved in something more interesting. They are passionate and highly motivated but have little or no understanding of business directions and systems."
Headhunter George Solomon also thinks original thinkers have their disadvantages. "They may have a bad influence within an organisation, especially given the current management trend for working in teams. The original thinkers themselves may be unaware of any problem, but having them around can be disruptive to colleagues, who have to be allowed to point out when they are being driven crazy by the original thinkers behaviour." Yet, in his opinion, the "dream team" in any creative organisation consists of a balanced mixture of original thinkers and more practical, realistic people.
So, having identified your original thinkers, how do you handle them One well-known computer games company has a very inventive approach. "We encourage our games designers by creating an informal working environment", says director Lorna Marsh. "A company cannot punish risk-takers if it wants to encourage creativity. Management has to provide support, coaching and advice-and take the risk that new ideas may not work. Our people have flexible working hours and often make no clear distinction between their jobs and their home lives."
Original thinkers may fit into the culture of 21st century organisations, but more traditional organisations may have to change their approach. Business psychologist Jean Row believes that the first step is to check that original thinkers are worth the effort. "Are the benefits they bring worth the confusion they cause If so, give them what they want, allow plenty of space, but set clear limits. Give them extremely demanding targets. If they fail to meet them, then the game is up. But if they succeed, your organisation stands only to gain."What does Ian Freeman say about original thinkers

A.They are unenthusiastic and poorly motivated.
B.Their work standards are impossibly high.
C.Their abilities are hard to recognise.
D.They lack awareness of commercial processes.
题目列表

你可能感兴趣的试题

单项选择题

It was a day that Michael Eisner would undoubtedly like to forget. Sitting in a Los Angeles witness box for four hours last week, the usually unflappable chairman of the Walt Disney Co. struggled to maintain his composure. Eisner"s protégé turned nemesis. Jeffrey Katzenberg, his former employee, was seeking $ 500 million in his breach-of-contract suit against Disney, and Eisner was trying to defend his—and his company"s integrity. At one point Eisner became flustered when Katzenberg"s attorney, Bertram Fields, asked if he recalled telling his biographer, Tony Schwartz, "I think I hate the little midget." Later Eisner recalled that the same day, he had received a fax from Katzenberg meant for Fields, thanking the lawyer for "managing" a magazine story that praised Katzenberg at Eisner"s expense: "I said to Schwartz, "Screw that. If he is going to play this disingenuous game … I simply was not going to pay him his money."
Last week"s revelations were the latest twist in a dispute that has entertained Hollywood and tarnished Disney"s corporate image. The dash began five years ago, when Katzenberg quit Disney after a 10-year reign as studio chief, during which he oversaw production of such animated blockbusters as "The Lion King". Disney"s attorneys said that Katzenberg forfeited his bonus—2 percent of profits in perpetuity from all Disney movies, TV shows and stage productions from 1984 to 1994, as well as their sequels and tie-ins—when he left. The company ultimately paid Katzenberg a partial settlement of nearly $117 million, sources say. But talks broke down over how much Disney owed, and the dispute landed in court.
Industry insiders never expected that Disney would push it this far. The last Hollywood accounting dispute that aired in public was Art Buchwalds’s lawsuit against Paramount for profits he claimed to be owed from the 1988 Eddie Murphy hit "Coming to America". Paramount chose to fight Buchwald in court—only to wind up paying him $1 million after embarrassing revelations about its business practices. After that, studios made a practice of quietly settling such claims. But Disney under Eisner would rather fight that settle. And he and Katzenberg are both proud, combative types whose business disagreement deepened into personal animus.
So far, Disney"s image—as well as Eisner"s—has taken a beating. In his testimony last week Eisner repeatedly responded to questions by saying "I don"t recall" or "I don"t know". Katzenberg, by contrast, offered a stack of notes and memos that appeared to bolster his claim. (The Disney executive who negotiated Katzenberg"s deal, Frank Wells, died in a helicopter crash five years ago.)
The trial has also offered a devastating glimpse into the Magic Kingdom~ s business dealings. Internal documents detail sensitive Disney financial information. One Hollywood lawyer calls a memo sent to Katzenberg from a former Disney top accountant "a road map to riches" for writers, directors and producers eager to press cases against Disney. The company declined requests to comment on the case. The next phase of the trial could be even more embarrassing. As Katzenberg"s profit participation is calculated, Eisner will have to argue that his animated treasures are far less valuable than Katzenberg claims. No matter how the judge rules, Disney will look like a loser.At the end of the first paragraph, the pronoun "I" in the quoted sentence "I said to Schwartz, … "refers to______.

A.Eisner
B.Fields
C.Schwartz
D.Katzenberg
单项选择题

It was a day that Michael Eisner would undoubtedly like to forget. Sitting in a Los Angeles witness box for four hours last week, the usually unflappable chairman of the Walt Disney Co. struggled to maintain his composure. Eisner"s protégé turned nemesis. Jeffrey Katzenberg, his former employee, was seeking $ 500 million in his breach-of-contract suit against Disney, and Eisner was trying to defend his—and his company"s integrity. At one point Eisner became flustered when Katzenberg"s attorney, Bertram Fields, asked if he recalled telling his biographer, Tony Schwartz, "I think I hate the little midget." Later Eisner recalled that the same day, he had received a fax from Katzenberg meant for Fields, thanking the lawyer for "managing" a magazine story that praised Katzenberg at Eisner"s expense: "I said to Schwartz, "Screw that. If he is going to play this disingenuous game … I simply was not going to pay him his money."
Last week"s revelations were the latest twist in a dispute that has entertained Hollywood and tarnished Disney"s corporate image. The dash began five years ago, when Katzenberg quit Disney after a 10-year reign as studio chief, during which he oversaw production of such animated blockbusters as "The Lion King". Disney"s attorneys said that Katzenberg forfeited his bonus—2 percent of profits in perpetuity from all Disney movies, TV shows and stage productions from 1984 to 1994, as well as their sequels and tie-ins—when he left. The company ultimately paid Katzenberg a partial settlement of nearly $117 million, sources say. But talks broke down over how much Disney owed, and the dispute landed in court.
Industry insiders never expected that Disney would push it this far. The last Hollywood accounting dispute that aired in public was Art Buchwalds’s lawsuit against Paramount for profits he claimed to be owed from the 1988 Eddie Murphy hit "Coming to America". Paramount chose to fight Buchwald in court—only to wind up paying him $1 million after embarrassing revelations about its business practices. After that, studios made a practice of quietly settling such claims. But Disney under Eisner would rather fight that settle. And he and Katzenberg are both proud, combative types whose business disagreement deepened into personal animus.
So far, Disney"s image—as well as Eisner"s—has taken a beating. In his testimony last week Eisner repeatedly responded to questions by saying "I don"t recall" or "I don"t know". Katzenberg, by contrast, offered a stack of notes and memos that appeared to bolster his claim. (The Disney executive who negotiated Katzenberg"s deal, Frank Wells, died in a helicopter crash five years ago.)
The trial has also offered a devastating glimpse into the Magic Kingdom~ s business dealings. Internal documents detail sensitive Disney financial information. One Hollywood lawyer calls a memo sent to Katzenberg from a former Disney top accountant "a road map to riches" for writers, directors and producers eager to press cases against Disney. The company declined requests to comment on the case. The next phase of the trial could be even more embarrassing. As Katzenberg"s profit participation is calculated, Eisner will have to argue that his animated treasures are far less valuable than Katzenberg claims. No matter how the judge rules, Disney will look like a loser.Katzenberg made a lawsuit against Disney because______.

A.Disney dismissed him before the contract expired
B.Eisner insulted him in a magazine by calling him "the little midget"
C.Disney did not pay him in accordance with the contract
D.Disney owed him $ 117 million
单项选择题

It was a day that Michael Eisner would undoubtedly like to forget. Sitting in a Los Angeles witness box for four hours last week, the usually unflappable chairman of the Walt Disney Co. struggled to maintain his composure. Eisner"s protégé turned nemesis. Jeffrey Katzenberg, his former employee, was seeking $ 500 million in his breach-of-contract suit against Disney, and Eisner was trying to defend his—and his company"s integrity. At one point Eisner became flustered when Katzenberg"s attorney, Bertram Fields, asked if he recalled telling his biographer, Tony Schwartz, "I think I hate the little midget." Later Eisner recalled that the same day, he had received a fax from Katzenberg meant for Fields, thanking the lawyer for "managing" a magazine story that praised Katzenberg at Eisner"s expense: "I said to Schwartz, "Screw that. If he is going to play this disingenuous game … I simply was not going to pay him his money."
Last week"s revelations were the latest twist in a dispute that has entertained Hollywood and tarnished Disney"s corporate image. The dash began five years ago, when Katzenberg quit Disney after a 10-year reign as studio chief, during which he oversaw production of such animated blockbusters as "The Lion King". Disney"s attorneys said that Katzenberg forfeited his bonus—2 percent of profits in perpetuity from all Disney movies, TV shows and stage productions from 1984 to 1994, as well as their sequels and tie-ins—when he left. The company ultimately paid Katzenberg a partial settlement of nearly $117 million, sources say. But talks broke down over how much Disney owed, and the dispute landed in court.
Industry insiders never expected that Disney would push it this far. The last Hollywood accounting dispute that aired in public was Art Buchwalds’s lawsuit against Paramount for profits he claimed to be owed from the 1988 Eddie Murphy hit "Coming to America". Paramount chose to fight Buchwald in court—only to wind up paying him $1 million after embarrassing revelations about its business practices. After that, studios made a practice of quietly settling such claims. But Disney under Eisner would rather fight that settle. And he and Katzenberg are both proud, combative types whose business disagreement deepened into personal animus.
So far, Disney"s image—as well as Eisner"s—has taken a beating. In his testimony last week Eisner repeatedly responded to questions by saying "I don"t recall" or "I don"t know". Katzenberg, by contrast, offered a stack of notes and memos that appeared to bolster his claim. (The Disney executive who negotiated Katzenberg"s deal, Frank Wells, died in a helicopter crash five years ago.)
The trial has also offered a devastating glimpse into the Magic Kingdom~ s business dealings. Internal documents detail sensitive Disney financial information. One Hollywood lawyer calls a memo sent to Katzenberg from a former Disney top accountant "a road map to riches" for writers, directors and producers eager to press cases against Disney. The company declined requests to comment on the case. The next phase of the trial could be even more embarrassing. As Katzenberg"s profit participation is calculated, Eisner will have to argue that his animated treasures are far less valuable than Katzenberg claims. No matter how the judge rules, Disney will look like a loser.Hollywood studios now try to avoid sealing disputes with their employees in court because they fear that______.

A.involvement in a lawsuit will tarnish their reputation
B.many of their illegal business practices will be found out by the public
C.lawyers will overcharge them for such cases
D.their confidential business information will be divulged
单项选择题

It was a day that Michael Eisner would undoubtedly like to forget. Sitting in a Los Angeles witness box for four hours last week, the usually unflappable chairman of the Walt Disney Co. struggled to maintain his composure. Eisner"s protégé turned nemesis. Jeffrey Katzenberg, his former employee, was seeking $ 500 million in his breach-of-contract suit against Disney, and Eisner was trying to defend his—and his company"s integrity. At one point Eisner became flustered when Katzenberg"s attorney, Bertram Fields, asked if he recalled telling his biographer, Tony Schwartz, "I think I hate the little midget." Later Eisner recalled that the same day, he had received a fax from Katzenberg meant for Fields, thanking the lawyer for "managing" a magazine story that praised Katzenberg at Eisner"s expense: "I said to Schwartz, "Screw that. If he is going to play this disingenuous game … I simply was not going to pay him his money."
Last week"s revelations were the latest twist in a dispute that has entertained Hollywood and tarnished Disney"s corporate image. The dash began five years ago, when Katzenberg quit Disney after a 10-year reign as studio chief, during which he oversaw production of such animated blockbusters as "The Lion King". Disney"s attorneys said that Katzenberg forfeited his bonus—2 percent of profits in perpetuity from all Disney movies, TV shows and stage productions from 1984 to 1994, as well as their sequels and tie-ins—when he left. The company ultimately paid Katzenberg a partial settlement of nearly $117 million, sources say. But talks broke down over how much Disney owed, and the dispute landed in court.
Industry insiders never expected that Disney would push it this far. The last Hollywood accounting dispute that aired in public was Art Buchwalds’s lawsuit against Paramount for profits he claimed to be owed from the 1988 Eddie Murphy hit "Coming to America". Paramount chose to fight Buchwald in court—only to wind up paying him $1 million after embarrassing revelations about its business practices. After that, studios made a practice of quietly settling such claims. But Disney under Eisner would rather fight that settle. And he and Katzenberg are both proud, combative types whose business disagreement deepened into personal animus.
So far, Disney"s image—as well as Eisner"s—has taken a beating. In his testimony last week Eisner repeatedly responded to questions by saying "I don"t recall" or "I don"t know". Katzenberg, by contrast, offered a stack of notes and memos that appeared to bolster his claim. (The Disney executive who negotiated Katzenberg"s deal, Frank Wells, died in a helicopter crash five years ago.)
The trial has also offered a devastating glimpse into the Magic Kingdom~ s business dealings. Internal documents detail sensitive Disney financial information. One Hollywood lawyer calls a memo sent to Katzenberg from a former Disney top accountant "a road map to riches" for writers, directors and producers eager to press cases against Disney. The company declined requests to comment on the case. The next phase of the trial could be even more embarrassing. As Katzenberg"s profit participation is calculated, Eisner will have to argue that his animated treasures are far less valuable than Katzenberg claims. No matter how the judge rules, Disney will look like a loser.It is implied in the last paragraph that______.

A.Disney has profited much less than the general public expected
B.Disney has underpaid many of their employees
C.Eisner"s animated movies didn"t bring as much money as Katzenberg thinks
D.Disney is undergoing a financial crisis
单项选择题

It was a day that Michael Eisner would undoubtedly like to forget. Sitting in a Los Angeles witness box for four hours last week, the usually unflappable chairman of the Walt Disney Co. struggled to maintain his composure. Eisner"s protégé turned nemesis. Jeffrey Katzenberg, his former employee, was seeking $ 500 million in his breach-of-contract suit against Disney, and Eisner was trying to defend his—and his company"s integrity. At one point Eisner became flustered when Katzenberg"s attorney, Bertram Fields, asked if he recalled telling his biographer, Tony Schwartz, "I think I hate the little midget." Later Eisner recalled that the same day, he had received a fax from Katzenberg meant for Fields, thanking the lawyer for "managing" a magazine story that praised Katzenberg at Eisner"s expense: "I said to Schwartz, "Screw that. If he is going to play this disingenuous game … I simply was not going to pay him his money."
Last week"s revelations were the latest twist in a dispute that has entertained Hollywood and tarnished Disney"s corporate image. The dash began five years ago, when Katzenberg quit Disney after a 10-year reign as studio chief, during which he oversaw production of such animated blockbusters as "The Lion King". Disney"s attorneys said that Katzenberg forfeited his bonus—2 percent of profits in perpetuity from all Disney movies, TV shows and stage productions from 1984 to 1994, as well as their sequels and tie-ins—when he left. The company ultimately paid Katzenberg a partial settlement of nearly $117 million, sources say. But talks broke down over how much Disney owed, and the dispute landed in court.
Industry insiders never expected that Disney would push it this far. The last Hollywood accounting dispute that aired in public was Art Buchwalds’s lawsuit against Paramount for profits he claimed to be owed from the 1988 Eddie Murphy hit "Coming to America". Paramount chose to fight Buchwald in court—only to wind up paying him $1 million after embarrassing revelations about its business practices. After that, studios made a practice of quietly settling such claims. But Disney under Eisner would rather fight that settle. And he and Katzenberg are both proud, combative types whose business disagreement deepened into personal animus.
So far, Disney"s image—as well as Eisner"s—has taken a beating. In his testimony last week Eisner repeatedly responded to questions by saying "I don"t recall" or "I don"t know". Katzenberg, by contrast, offered a stack of notes and memos that appeared to bolster his claim. (The Disney executive who negotiated Katzenberg"s deal, Frank Wells, died in a helicopter crash five years ago.)
The trial has also offered a devastating glimpse into the Magic Kingdom~ s business dealings. Internal documents detail sensitive Disney financial information. One Hollywood lawyer calls a memo sent to Katzenberg from a former Disney top accountant "a road map to riches" for writers, directors and producers eager to press cases against Disney. The company declined requests to comment on the case. The next phase of the trial could be even more embarrassing. As Katzenberg"s profit participation is calculated, Eisner will have to argue that his animated treasures are far less valuable than Katzenberg claims. No matter how the judge rules, Disney will look like a loser.We can infer from this passage that______.

A.Katzenberg will undoubtedly win the lawsuit and get all the money he claimed
B.Eisner will remain imperturbable all through the trial
C.Katzenberg will suffer great embarrassment
D.Disney will face more lawsuits from their employees
单项选择题

The Welsh language has always been the ultimate marker of Welsh identity, but a generation ago it looked as if Welsh would go the way of Manx once widely spoken on the isle of Man but now extinct. Government financing and central planning, however, has helped reverse the decline of Welsh. Road signs and official public documents are written in both Welsh and English, and schoolchildren are required to learn both languages. Welsh is now one of the most successful of Europe"s regional languages, spoken by more than a half million of the country"s three million people.
The revival of the language, particularly among young people, is part of a resurgence of national identity sweeping through this small, proud nation. Last month Wales marked the second anniversary of the opening of the National Assembly, the first parliament to be convened here since 1404. The idea behind devolution was to restore the balance within the union of nations making up the United Kingdom. With most of the people and wealth, England has always had bragging rights. The partial transfer of legislative powers from Westminster, implemented by Tony Blair, was designed to give the other members of the club-Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales—a bigger say and to counter centrifugal forces that seemed to threaten the very idea of the union.
The Welsh showed little enthusiasm for devolution. Whereas the Scots voted overwhelmingly for a parliament, the vote for a Welsh assembly scraped through by less than one percent on a turnout of less than 25 percent. Its powers were proportionately limited. The Assembly can decide how money from Westminster or the European Union is spent. It cannot, unlike its counterpart in Edinburgh, enact laws. But now that it is here, the Welsh are growing to like their Assembly. Many people would like it to have more powers. Its importance as figurehead will grow with the opening in 2003, of a new debating chamber, one of many new buildings that are transforming Cardiff from a decaying seaport into a Baltimore-style waterfront city. Meanwhile a grant of nearly two million dollars from the European Union will tackle poverty. Wales is one of the poorest regions in Western Europe-only Spain, Portugal, and Greece have a lower standard of living.
Newspapers and magazines are filled with stories about great Welsh men and women, boosting self-esteem. To familiar faces such as Dylan Thomas and Richard Burton have been added new icons such as Catherine Zeta-Jones, the movie star, and Bryn Terfel, the opera singer. Indigenous foods like salt marsh lamb are in vogue. And Wales now boasts a national airline. Awyr Cymru. Cymru, which means "land of compatriots", is the Welsh name for Wales. The red dragon, the nation"s symbol since the time of King Arthur, is everywhere-on T-shirts, rugby jerseys and even cell phone covers.
"Until very recent times most Welsh people had this feeling of being second-class citizens," said Dyfan Jones, an 18-year-old student. It was a warm summer night, and I was sitting on the grass with a group of young people in Llanelli, an industrial town in the south, outside the rock music venue of the National Eisteddfod, Wales"s annual cultural festival. The disused factory in front of us echoed to the sounds of new Welsh bands.
"There was almost a genetic tendency for lack of confidence", Dyfan continued. Equally comfortable in his Welshness as in his membership in the English-speaking, global youth culture and the new federal Europe, Dyfan, like the rest of his generation, is growing up with a sense of possibility unimaginable ten years ago. "We used to think. We can"t do anything, we"re only Welsh. Now I think that"s changing."According to the passage, devolution was mainly meant to______.

A.maintain the present status among the nations
B.reduce legislative powers of England
C.create a better state of equality among the nations
D.grant more say to all the nations in the union
单项选择题

The Welsh language has always been the ultimate marker of Welsh identity, but a generation ago it looked as if Welsh would go the way of Manx once widely spoken on the isle of Man but now extinct. Government financing and central planning, however, has helped reverse the decline of Welsh. Road signs and official public documents are written in both Welsh and English, and schoolchildren are required to learn both languages. Welsh is now one of the most successful of Europe"s regional languages, spoken by more than a half million of the country"s three million people.
The revival of the language, particularly among young people, is part of a resurgence of national identity sweeping through this small, proud nation. Last month Wales marked the second anniversary of the opening of the National Assembly, the first parliament to be convened here since 1404. The idea behind devolution was to restore the balance within the union of nations making up the United Kingdom. With most of the people and wealth, England has always had bragging rights. The partial transfer of legislative powers from Westminster, implemented by Tony Blair, was designed to give the other members of the club-Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales—a bigger say and to counter centrifugal forces that seemed to threaten the very idea of the union.
The Welsh showed little enthusiasm for devolution. Whereas the Scots voted overwhelmingly for a parliament, the vote for a Welsh assembly scraped through by less than one percent on a turnout of less than 25 percent. Its powers were proportionately limited. The Assembly can decide how money from Westminster or the European Union is spent. It cannot, unlike its counterpart in Edinburgh, enact laws. But now that it is here, the Welsh are growing to like their Assembly. Many people would like it to have more powers. Its importance as figurehead will grow with the opening in 2003, of a new debating chamber, one of many new buildings that are transforming Cardiff from a decaying seaport into a Baltimore-style waterfront city. Meanwhile a grant of nearly two million dollars from the European Union will tackle poverty. Wales is one of the poorest regions in Western Europe-only Spain, Portugal, and Greece have a lower standard of living.
Newspapers and magazines are filled with stories about great Welsh men and women, boosting self-esteem. To familiar faces such as Dylan Thomas and Richard Burton have been added new icons such as Catherine Zeta-Jones, the movie star, and Bryn Terfel, the opera singer. Indigenous foods like salt marsh lamb are in vogue. And Wales now boasts a national airline. Awyr Cymru. Cymru, which means "land of compatriots", is the Welsh name for Wales. The red dragon, the nation"s symbol since the time of King Arthur, is everywhere-on T-shirts, rugby jerseys and even cell phone covers.
"Until very recent times most Welsh people had this feeling of being second-class citizens," said Dyfan Jones, an 18-year-old student. It was a warm summer night, and I was sitting on the grass with a group of young people in Llanelli, an industrial town in the south, outside the rock music venue of the National Eisteddfod, Wales"s annual cultural festival. The disused factory in front of us echoed to the sounds of new Welsh bands.
"There was almost a genetic tendency for lack of confidence", Dyfan continued. Equally comfortable in his Welshness as in his membership in the English-speaking, global youth culture and the new federal Europe, Dyfan, like the rest of his generation, is growing up with a sense of possibility unimaginable ten years ago. "We used to think. We can"t do anything, we"re only Welsh. Now I think that"s changing."The word "centrifugal" in the second paragraph means______.

A.separatist
B.conventional
C.feudal
D.political
单项选择题

The timing of market entry is critical to the success of a new product. A company has two alternatives: it can compete to enter a new product market first—otherwise known as "pioneering"—or it can wait for a competitor to take the lead, and then follow once the market has been established. Despite the limitations of existing research, nobody denies that there are advantages to being a pioneering company. Over the years, there has been a good deal of evidence to show a performance advantage for pioneers.
For many new products, customers are initially unsure about the contribution of product characteristics and features to the products" value. Preferences for different characteristics and their desired levels are learned over time. This enables the pioneering company to shape customer preferences in its favour. It sets the standard to which customers refer in evaluating followers" products. The pioneering product can become the classic or "original" product for the whole category, opening up a flood of similar products onto the market, as exemplified by Walkman and Polaroid.
The pioneering product is a bigger novelty when it appears on the market, and is therefore more likely than those that follow to capture customer and distributor attention. In addition, a pioneer"s advertising is not mixed up with competitors" campaigns. Even in the long term, followers must continue to spend more on advertising to achieve the same effect as pioneers. The pioneers can set standards for distribution, occupy the best locations or select the best distributors, which can give them easier access to customers. For example, in many US cities the coffee chain Starbucks, as the first to market, was able to open coffee bars in better known locations than its competitors. In many industrial markets, distributors are not keen to take on second and third products, particularly when the product is technically complex or requires large inventories of spare parts.
"Switching costs" arise when investments are required in order to switch to another product. For example, many people have developed skills in using the traditional "qwerty" keyboard. Changing to the presumably more efficient "dvorak" keyboard would require relearning how to type, an investment that in many cases would exceed the expected benefits in efficiency. Switching costs also arise when the quality of a product is difficult to assess. People who live abroad often experience a similar "cost" when simple purchase decisions such as buying detergent, toothpaste or coffee suddenly become harder because the trusted brand from home is no longer available. Pioneering products have the first chance to become this trusted brand. Consequently, the companies that follow must work hard to convince customers to bear the costs and risks of switching to an untried brand of unknown quality.
Unlike other consumer sectors, the value to customers of many high technology products relies not only on their features but also on the total number of users. For example, the value of a videophone depends on the number of people using the same or a compatible system. A pioneer obviously has the opportunity to build a large user base before competitors enter the market. This reduces followers" ability to introduce differentiated products. There are other advantages of a large user base, such as the ability to share computer files with other users. Thus, software companies are often willing to give away products to build the market quickly and set a standard.In the first paragraph, the writer points out that______.

A.there is general agreement on the benefits of pioneering products
B.companies are still uncertain about how to market new products
C.most companies prefer to market new products independently
D.there are now guidelines to help those who wish to pioneer
单项选择题

The Welsh language has always been the ultimate marker of Welsh identity, but a generation ago it looked as if Welsh would go the way of Manx once widely spoken on the isle of Man but now extinct. Government financing and central planning, however, has helped reverse the decline of Welsh. Road signs and official public documents are written in both Welsh and English, and schoolchildren are required to learn both languages. Welsh is now one of the most successful of Europe"s regional languages, spoken by more than a half million of the country"s three million people.
The revival of the language, particularly among young people, is part of a resurgence of national identity sweeping through this small, proud nation. Last month Wales marked the second anniversary of the opening of the National Assembly, the first parliament to be convened here since 1404. The idea behind devolution was to restore the balance within the union of nations making up the United Kingdom. With most of the people and wealth, England has always had bragging rights. The partial transfer of legislative powers from Westminster, implemented by Tony Blair, was designed to give the other members of the club-Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales—a bigger say and to counter centrifugal forces that seemed to threaten the very idea of the union.
The Welsh showed little enthusiasm for devolution. Whereas the Scots voted overwhelmingly for a parliament, the vote for a Welsh assembly scraped through by less than one percent on a turnout of less than 25 percent. Its powers were proportionately limited. The Assembly can decide how money from Westminster or the European Union is spent. It cannot, unlike its counterpart in Edinburgh, enact laws. But now that it is here, the Welsh are growing to like their Assembly. Many people would like it to have more powers. Its importance as figurehead will grow with the opening in 2003, of a new debating chamber, one of many new buildings that are transforming Cardiff from a decaying seaport into a Baltimore-style waterfront city. Meanwhile a grant of nearly two million dollars from the European Union will tackle poverty. Wales is one of the poorest regions in Western Europe-only Spain, Portugal, and Greece have a lower standard of living.
Newspapers and magazines are filled with stories about great Welsh men and women, boosting self-esteem. To familiar faces such as Dylan Thomas and Richard Burton have been added new icons such as Catherine Zeta-Jones, the movie star, and Bryn Terfel, the opera singer. Indigenous foods like salt marsh lamb are in vogue. And Wales now boasts a national airline. Awyr Cymru. Cymru, which means "land of compatriots", is the Welsh name for Wales. The red dragon, the nation"s symbol since the time of King Arthur, is everywhere-on T-shirts, rugby jerseys and even cell phone covers.
"Until very recent times most Welsh people had this feeling of being second-class citizens," said Dyfan Jones, an 18-year-old student. It was a warm summer night, and I was sitting on the grass with a group of young people in Llanelli, an industrial town in the south, outside the rock music venue of the National Eisteddfod, Wales"s annual cultural festival. The disused factory in front of us echoed to the sounds of new Welsh bands.
"There was almost a genetic tendency for lack of confidence", Dyfan continued. Equally comfortable in his Welshness as in his membership in the English-speaking, global youth culture and the new federal Europe, Dyfan, like the rest of his generation, is growing up with a sense of possibility unimaginable ten years ago. "We used to think. We can"t do anything, we"re only Welsh. Now I think that"s changing."Wales is different from Scotland in all the following aspects EXCEPT______.

A.people"s desire for devolution
B.locals" turnout for the voting
C.powers of the legislative body
D.status of the national language
单项选择题

The timing of market entry is critical to the success of a new product. A company has two alternatives: it can compete to enter a new product market first—otherwise known as "pioneering"—or it can wait for a competitor to take the lead, and then follow once the market has been established. Despite the limitations of existing research, nobody denies that there are advantages to being a pioneering company. Over the years, there has been a good deal of evidence to show a performance advantage for pioneers.
For many new products, customers are initially unsure about the contribution of product characteristics and features to the products" value. Preferences for different characteristics and their desired levels are learned over time. This enables the pioneering company to shape customer preferences in its favour. It sets the standard to which customers refer in evaluating followers" products. The pioneering product can become the classic or "original" product for the whole category, opening up a flood of similar products onto the market, as exemplified by Walkman and Polaroid.
The pioneering product is a bigger novelty when it appears on the market, and is therefore more likely than those that follow to capture customer and distributor attention. In addition, a pioneer"s advertising is not mixed up with competitors" campaigns. Even in the long term, followers must continue to spend more on advertising to achieve the same effect as pioneers. The pioneers can set standards for distribution, occupy the best locations or select the best distributors, which can give them easier access to customers. For example, in many US cities the coffee chain Starbucks, as the first to market, was able to open coffee bars in better known locations than its competitors. In many industrial markets, distributors are not keen to take on second and third products, particularly when the product is technically complex or requires large inventories of spare parts.
"Switching costs" arise when investments are required in order to switch to another product. For example, many people have developed skills in using the traditional "qwerty" keyboard. Changing to the presumably more efficient "dvorak" keyboard would require relearning how to type, an investment that in many cases would exceed the expected benefits in efficiency. Switching costs also arise when the quality of a product is difficult to assess. People who live abroad often experience a similar "cost" when simple purchase decisions such as buying detergent, toothpaste or coffee suddenly become harder because the trusted brand from home is no longer available. Pioneering products have the first chance to become this trusted brand. Consequently, the companies that follow must work hard to convince customers to bear the costs and risks of switching to an untried brand of unknown quality.
Unlike other consumer sectors, the value to customers of many high technology products relies not only on their features but also on the total number of users. For example, the value of a videophone depends on the number of people using the same or a compatible system. A pioneer obviously has the opportunity to build a large user base before competitors enter the market. This reduces followers" ability to introduce differentiated products. There are other advantages of a large user base, such as the ability to share computer files with other users. Thus, software companies are often willing to give away products to build the market quickly and set a standard.According to the information in the second paragraph, how do customers approach new products

A.They take some time to develop a liking for them.
B.They make comparisons with other new products.
C.They need some persuasion to purchase them.
D.They consider cost an important feature.
单项选择题

If one of your research staff announced that he had worked out a way to propel a vehicle on a cushion of air, would you tell him to concentrate on something practical, or suggest taking it further If a member of your development team asked if she could come in late because she had her best ideas at 3 am would you insist that she is in the office at 9 am like everyone else
Current business wisdom is that companies need creative, innovative people to beat competitors. The reality is that companies have always needed new ideas to survive and progress, but in the past they weren"t particularly good at encouraging the people who produced them.
Original thinkers don"t always fit easily into the framework of an organisation. However, the advice from managing director, John Serrano is "Get rid of the dull people and encourage the unusual ones". Essentially, he believes that companies need to learn how to manage their original thinkers in order to ensure that the business profits from their contribution. He also says, "Original thinkers often find it difficult to drive change within the organisation, so they resign, feeling angry and disappointed. It is essential to avoid this."
"You can"t recognise original thinkers by the way they look", says Ian Freeman. An apparently ordinary exterior can conceal a very creative thinker. "His consultancy, IBT Personnel, has devised a structured way to identify original thinkers. We define employees as champions, free-wheelers, bystanders and weak links, and most original thinkers come into the category of free-wheelers. They may miss deadlines if they become involved in something more interesting. They are passionate and highly motivated but have little or no understanding of business directions and systems."
Headhunter George Solomon also thinks original thinkers have their disadvantages. "They may have a bad influence within an organisation, especially given the current management trend for working in teams. The original thinkers themselves may be unaware of any problem, but having them around can be disruptive to colleagues, who have to be allowed to point out when they are being driven crazy by the original thinkers behaviour." Yet, in his opinion, the "dream team" in any creative organisation consists of a balanced mixture of original thinkers and more practical, realistic people.
So, having identified your original thinkers, how do you handle them One well-known computer games company has a very inventive approach. "We encourage our games designers by creating an informal working environment", says director Lorna Marsh. "A company cannot punish risk-takers if it wants to encourage creativity. Management has to provide support, coaching and advice-and take the risk that new ideas may not work. Our people have flexible working hours and often make no clear distinction between their jobs and their home lives."
Original thinkers may fit into the culture of 21st century organisations, but more traditional organisations may have to change their approach. Business psychologist Jean Row believes that the first step is to check that original thinkers are worth the effort. "Are the benefits they bring worth the confusion they cause If so, give them what they want, allow plenty of space, but set clear limits. Give them extremely demanding targets. If they fail to meet them, then the game is up. But if they succeed, your organisation stands only to gain."It is important for a company to encourage original thinkers because______.

A.this allows it to promote innovative products
B.this enables it to stay ahead of its rivals
C.they are very flexible about their working hours
D.their talents are ideally suited to the market
单项选择题

The Welsh language has always been the ultimate marker of Welsh identity, but a generation ago it looked as if Welsh would go the way of Manx once widely spoken on the isle of Man but now extinct. Government financing and central planning, however, has helped reverse the decline of Welsh. Road signs and official public documents are written in both Welsh and English, and schoolchildren are required to learn both languages. Welsh is now one of the most successful of Europe"s regional languages, spoken by more than a half million of the country"s three million people.
The revival of the language, particularly among young people, is part of a resurgence of national identity sweeping through this small, proud nation. Last month Wales marked the second anniversary of the opening of the National Assembly, the first parliament to be convened here since 1404. The idea behind devolution was to restore the balance within the union of nations making up the United Kingdom. With most of the people and wealth, England has always had bragging rights. The partial transfer of legislative powers from Westminster, implemented by Tony Blair, was designed to give the other members of the club-Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales—a bigger say and to counter centrifugal forces that seemed to threaten the very idea of the union.
The Welsh showed little enthusiasm for devolution. Whereas the Scots voted overwhelmingly for a parliament, the vote for a Welsh assembly scraped through by less than one percent on a turnout of less than 25 percent. Its powers were proportionately limited. The Assembly can decide how money from Westminster or the European Union is spent. It cannot, unlike its counterpart in Edinburgh, enact laws. But now that it is here, the Welsh are growing to like their Assembly. Many people would like it to have more powers. Its importance as figurehead will grow with the opening in 2003, of a new debating chamber, one of many new buildings that are transforming Cardiff from a decaying seaport into a Baltimore-style waterfront city. Meanwhile a grant of nearly two million dollars from the European Union will tackle poverty. Wales is one of the poorest regions in Western Europe-only Spain, Portugal, and Greece have a lower standard of living.
Newspapers and magazines are filled with stories about great Welsh men and women, boosting self-esteem. To familiar faces such as Dylan Thomas and Richard Burton have been added new icons such as Catherine Zeta-Jones, the movie star, and Bryn Terfel, the opera singer. Indigenous foods like salt marsh lamb are in vogue. And Wales now boasts a national airline. Awyr Cymru. Cymru, which means "land of compatriots", is the Welsh name for Wales. The red dragon, the nation"s symbol since the time of King Arthur, is everywhere-on T-shirts, rugby jerseys and even cell phone covers.
"Until very recent times most Welsh people had this feeling of being second-class citizens," said Dyfan Jones, an 18-year-old student. It was a warm summer night, and I was sitting on the grass with a group of young people in Llanelli, an industrial town in the south, outside the rock music venue of the National Eisteddfod, Wales"s annual cultural festival. The disused factory in front of us echoed to the sounds of new Welsh bands.
"There was almost a genetic tendency for lack of confidence", Dyfan continued. Equally comfortable in his Welshness as in his membership in the English-speaking, global youth culture and the new federal Europe, Dyfan, like the rest of his generation, is growing up with a sense of possibility unimaginable ten years ago. "We used to think. We can"t do anything, we"re only Welsh. Now I think that"s changing."Which of the following is NOT cited as an example of the resurgence of Welsh national identity

A.Welsh has witnessed a revival as a national language.
B.Poverty-relief funds have come from the European Union.
C.A Welsh national airline is currently in operation.
D.The national symbol has become a familiar sight.
单项选择题

The timing of market entry is critical to the success of a new product. A company has two alternatives: it can compete to enter a new product market first—otherwise known as "pioneering"—or it can wait for a competitor to take the lead, and then follow once the market has been established. Despite the limitations of existing research, nobody denies that there are advantages to being a pioneering company. Over the years, there has been a good deal of evidence to show a performance advantage for pioneers.
For many new products, customers are initially unsure about the contribution of product characteristics and features to the products" value. Preferences for different characteristics and their desired levels are learned over time. This enables the pioneering company to shape customer preferences in its favour. It sets the standard to which customers refer in evaluating followers" products. The pioneering product can become the classic or "original" product for the whole category, opening up a flood of similar products onto the market, as exemplified by Walkman and Polaroid.
The pioneering product is a bigger novelty when it appears on the market, and is therefore more likely than those that follow to capture customer and distributor attention. In addition, a pioneer"s advertising is not mixed up with competitors" campaigns. Even in the long term, followers must continue to spend more on advertising to achieve the same effect as pioneers. The pioneers can set standards for distribution, occupy the best locations or select the best distributors, which can give them easier access to customers. For example, in many US cities the coffee chain Starbucks, as the first to market, was able to open coffee bars in better known locations than its competitors. In many industrial markets, distributors are not keen to take on second and third products, particularly when the product is technically complex or requires large inventories of spare parts.
"Switching costs" arise when investments are required in order to switch to another product. For example, many people have developed skills in using the traditional "qwerty" keyboard. Changing to the presumably more efficient "dvorak" keyboard would require relearning how to type, an investment that in many cases would exceed the expected benefits in efficiency. Switching costs also arise when the quality of a product is difficult to assess. People who live abroad often experience a similar "cost" when simple purchase decisions such as buying detergent, toothpaste or coffee suddenly become harder because the trusted brand from home is no longer available. Pioneering products have the first chance to become this trusted brand. Consequently, the companies that follow must work hard to convince customers to bear the costs and risks of switching to an untried brand of unknown quality.
Unlike other consumer sectors, the value to customers of many high technology products relies not only on their features but also on the total number of users. For example, the value of a videophone depends on the number of people using the same or a compatible system. A pioneer obviously has the opportunity to build a large user base before competitors enter the market. This reduces followers" ability to introduce differentiated products. There are other advantages of a large user base, such as the ability to share computer files with other users. Thus, software companies are often willing to give away products to build the market quickly and set a standard.The writer refers to Walkman and Polaroid because they were______.

A.better than any of their followers
B.copied many times by their followers
C.quickly accepted by consumers
D.designed for a particular market
单项选择题

However attractive the figures may look on paper, in the long run the success or failure of a merger depends on the human factor. When the agreement has been signed and the accountants have departed, the real problems may only just be beginning. If there is a culture clash between the two companies in the way their people work, then all the efforts of the financiers and lawyers to strike a deal may have been in vain.
According to Chris Bolton of KS Management Consultants, 70% of mergers fail to live up to their promise of shareholder value, not through any failure in economic terms but because the integration of people is unsuccessful. Corporates, he explains, concentrate their efforts before a merger on legal, technical and financial matters. They employ a range of experts to obtain the most favourable contract possible. But even at these early stages, people issues must be taken into consideration. The strengths and weaknesses of both organisations should be assessed and, if it is a merger of equals, then careful thought should be given to which personnel, from which side, should take on the key roles.
This was the issue in 2001 when the proposed merger between two pharmaceutical companies promised to create one of the largest players in the industry. For both companies the merger was intended to reverse falling market share and shareholder value. However, although the companies" skill bases were compatible, the chief executives of the two companies could not agree which of them was to head up the new organisation. This illustrates the need to compromise if a merger is to take place.
But even in mergers that do go ahead, there can be culture clashes. One way to avoid this is to work with focus groups to see how employees view the existing culture of their organisation. In one example, where two global organisations in the food sector were planning to merge, focus groups discovered that the companies displayed very different profiles. One was sales-focused, knew exactly what it wanted to achieve and pushed initiatives through. The other got involved in lengthy discussions, trying out options methodically and making contingency plans. The first responded quickly to changes in the marketplace; the second took longer, but the option it eventually chose was usually the correct one. Neither company"s approach would have worked for the other.
The answer is not to adopt one company"s approach, or even to try to incorporate every aspect of both organisations, but to create a totally new culture. This means taking the best from both sides and making a new organisation that everyone can accept. Or almost everyone. Inevitably there will be those who cannot adapt to a different culture. Research into the impact of mergers has found that companies with differing management styles are the ones that need to work hardest at creating a new culture.
Another tool that can help to get the right cultural mix is intercultural analysis. This involves carrying out research that looks at the culture of a company and the business culture of the country in which it is based. It identifies how people, money and time are managed in a company, and investigates the business customs of the country and how its politics, economics and history impact on the way business is done.According to the text, mergers can encounter problems when______.

A.contracts are signed too quickly
B.experts cannot predict accurate figures
C.conflicting attitudes cannot be resolved
D.staff are opposed to the terms of the deal
单项选择题

If one of your research staff announced that he had worked out a way to propel a vehicle on a cushion of air, would you tell him to concentrate on something practical, or suggest taking it further If a member of your development team asked if she could come in late because she had her best ideas at 3 am would you insist that she is in the office at 9 am like everyone else
Current business wisdom is that companies need creative, innovative people to beat competitors. The reality is that companies have always needed new ideas to survive and progress, but in the past they weren"t particularly good at encouraging the people who produced them.
Original thinkers don"t always fit easily into the framework of an organisation. However, the advice from managing director, John Serrano is "Get rid of the dull people and encourage the unusual ones". Essentially, he believes that companies need to learn how to manage their original thinkers in order to ensure that the business profits from their contribution. He also says, "Original thinkers often find it difficult to drive change within the organisation, so they resign, feeling angry and disappointed. It is essential to avoid this."
"You can"t recognise original thinkers by the way they look", says Ian Freeman. An apparently ordinary exterior can conceal a very creative thinker. "His consultancy, IBT Personnel, has devised a structured way to identify original thinkers. We define employees as champions, free-wheelers, bystanders and weak links, and most original thinkers come into the category of free-wheelers. They may miss deadlines if they become involved in something more interesting. They are passionate and highly motivated but have little or no understanding of business directions and systems."
Headhunter George Solomon also thinks original thinkers have their disadvantages. "They may have a bad influence within an organisation, especially given the current management trend for working in teams. The original thinkers themselves may be unaware of any problem, but having them around can be disruptive to colleagues, who have to be allowed to point out when they are being driven crazy by the original thinkers behaviour." Yet, in his opinion, the "dream team" in any creative organisation consists of a balanced mixture of original thinkers and more practical, realistic people.
So, having identified your original thinkers, how do you handle them One well-known computer games company has a very inventive approach. "We encourage our games designers by creating an informal working environment", says director Lorna Marsh. "A company cannot punish risk-takers if it wants to encourage creativity. Management has to provide support, coaching and advice-and take the risk that new ideas may not work. Our people have flexible working hours and often make no clear distinction between their jobs and their home lives."
Original thinkers may fit into the culture of 21st century organisations, but more traditional organisations may have to change their approach. Business psychologist Jean Row believes that the first step is to check that original thinkers are worth the effort. "Are the benefits they bring worth the confusion they cause If so, give them what they want, allow plenty of space, but set clear limits. Give them extremely demanding targets. If they fail to meet them, then the game is up. But if they succeed, your organisation stands only to gain."What does Ian Freeman say about original thinkers

A.They are unenthusiastic and poorly motivated.
B.Their work standards are impossibly high.
C.Their abilities are hard to recognise.
D.They lack awareness of commercial processes.
单项选择题

The Welsh language has always been the ultimate marker of Welsh identity, but a generation ago it looked as if Welsh would go the way of Manx once widely spoken on the isle of Man but now extinct. Government financing and central planning, however, has helped reverse the decline of Welsh. Road signs and official public documents are written in both Welsh and English, and schoolchildren are required to learn both languages. Welsh is now one of the most successful of Europe"s regional languages, spoken by more than a half million of the country"s three million people.
The revival of the language, particularly among young people, is part of a resurgence of national identity sweeping through this small, proud nation. Last month Wales marked the second anniversary of the opening of the National Assembly, the first parliament to be convened here since 1404. The idea behind devolution was to restore the balance within the union of nations making up the United Kingdom. With most of the people and wealth, England has always had bragging rights. The partial transfer of legislative powers from Westminster, implemented by Tony Blair, was designed to give the other members of the club-Scotland, Northern Ireland, and Wales—a bigger say and to counter centrifugal forces that seemed to threaten the very idea of the union.
The Welsh showed little enthusiasm for devolution. Whereas the Scots voted overwhelmingly for a parliament, the vote for a Welsh assembly scraped through by less than one percent on a turnout of less than 25 percent. Its powers were proportionately limited. The Assembly can decide how money from Westminster or the European Union is spent. It cannot, unlike its counterpart in Edinburgh, enact laws. But now that it is here, the Welsh are growing to like their Assembly. Many people would like it to have more powers. Its importance as figurehead will grow with the opening in 2003, of a new debating chamber, one of many new buildings that are transforming Cardiff from a decaying seaport into a Baltimore-style waterfront city. Meanwhile a grant of nearly two million dollars from the European Union will tackle poverty. Wales is one of the poorest regions in Western Europe-only Spain, Portugal, and Greece have a lower standard of living.
Newspapers and magazines are filled with stories about great Welsh men and women, boosting self-esteem. To familiar faces such as Dylan Thomas and Richard Burton have been added new icons such as Catherine Zeta-Jones, the movie star, and Bryn Terfel, the opera singer. Indigenous foods like salt marsh lamb are in vogue. And Wales now boasts a national airline. Awyr Cymru. Cymru, which means "land of compatriots", is the Welsh name for Wales. The red dragon, the nation"s symbol since the time of King Arthur, is everywhere-on T-shirts, rugby jerseys and even cell phone covers.
"Until very recent times most Welsh people had this feeling of being second-class citizens," said Dyfan Jones, an 18-year-old student. It was a warm summer night, and I was sitting on the grass with a group of young people in Llanelli, an industrial town in the south, outside the rock music venue of the National Eisteddfod, Wales"s annual cultural festival. The disused factory in front of us echoed to the sounds of new Welsh bands.
"There was almost a genetic tendency for lack of confidence", Dyfan continued. Equally comfortable in his Welshness as in his membership in the English-speaking, global youth culture and the new federal Europe, Dyfan, like the rest of his generation, is growing up with a sense of possibility unimaginable ten years ago. "We used to think. We can"t do anything, we"re only Welsh. Now I think that"s changing."According to Dyfan Jones what has changed is______.

A.people"s mentality
B.pop culture
C.town"s appearance
D.possibilities for the people
单项选择题

The timing of market entry is critical to the success of a new product. A company has two alternatives: it can compete to enter a new product market first—otherwise known as "pioneering"—or it can wait for a competitor to take the lead, and then follow once the market has been established. Despite the limitations of existing research, nobody denies that there are advantages to being a pioneering company. Over the years, there has been a good deal of evidence to show a performance advantage for pioneers.
For many new products, customers are initially unsure about the contribution of product characteristics and features to the products" value. Preferences for different characteristics and their desired levels are learned over time. This enables the pioneering company to shape customer preferences in its favour. It sets the standard to which customers refer in evaluating followers" products. The pioneering product can become the classic or "original" product for the whole category, opening up a flood of similar products onto the market, as exemplified by Walkman and Polaroid.
The pioneering product is a bigger novelty when it appears on the market, and is therefore more likely than those that follow to capture customer and distributor attention. In addition, a pioneer"s advertising is not mixed up with competitors" campaigns. Even in the long term, followers must continue to spend more on advertising to achieve the same effect as pioneers. The pioneers can set standards for distribution, occupy the best locations or select the best distributors, which can give them easier access to customers. For example, in many US cities the coffee chain Starbucks, as the first to market, was able to open coffee bars in better known locations than its competitors. In many industrial markets, distributors are not keen to take on second and third products, particularly when the product is technically complex or requires large inventories of spare parts.
"Switching costs" arise when investments are required in order to switch to another product. For example, many people have developed skills in using the traditional "qwerty" keyboard. Changing to the presumably more efficient "dvorak" keyboard would require relearning how to type, an investment that in many cases would exceed the expected benefits in efficiency. Switching costs also arise when the quality of a product is difficult to assess. People who live abroad often experience a similar "cost" when simple purchase decisions such as buying detergent, toothpaste or coffee suddenly become harder because the trusted brand from home is no longer available. Pioneering products have the first chance to become this trusted brand. Consequently, the companies that follow must work hard to convince customers to bear the costs and risks of switching to an untried brand of unknown quality.
Unlike other consumer sectors, the value to customers of many high technology products relies not only on their features but also on the total number of users. For example, the value of a videophone depends on the number of people using the same or a compatible system. A pioneer obviously has the opportunity to build a large user base before competitors enter the market. This reduces followers" ability to introduce differentiated products. There are other advantages of a large user base, such as the ability to share computer files with other users. Thus, software companies are often willing to give away products to build the market quickly and set a standard.When pioneering products are promoted, the writer notes that______.

A.a heavy financial investment is required
B.a wide variety of advertising methods must be used
C.a clear message is likely to be communicated
D.a long campaign is usually necessary
单项选择题

However attractive the figures may look on paper, in the long run the success or failure of a merger depends on the human factor. When the agreement has been signed and the accountants have departed, the real problems may only just be beginning. If there is a culture clash between the two companies in the way their people work, then all the efforts of the financiers and lawyers to strike a deal may have been in vain.
According to Chris Bolton of KS Management Consultants, 70% of mergers fail to live up to their promise of shareholder value, not through any failure in economic terms but because the integration of people is unsuccessful. Corporates, he explains, concentrate their efforts before a merger on legal, technical and financial matters. They employ a range of experts to obtain the most favourable contract possible. But even at these early stages, people issues must be taken into consideration. The strengths and weaknesses of both organisations should be assessed and, if it is a merger of equals, then careful thought should be given to which personnel, from which side, should take on the key roles.
This was the issue in 2001 when the proposed merger between two pharmaceutical companies promised to create one of the largest players in the industry. For both companies the merger was intended to reverse falling market share and shareholder value. However, although the companies" skill bases were compatible, the chief executives of the two companies could not agree which of them was to head up the new organisation. This illustrates the need to compromise if a merger is to take place.
But even in mergers that do go ahead, there can be culture clashes. One way to avoid this is to work with focus groups to see how employees view the existing culture of their organisation. In one example, where two global organisations in the food sector were planning to merge, focus groups discovered that the companies displayed very different profiles. One was sales-focused, knew exactly what it wanted to achieve and pushed initiatives through. The other got involved in lengthy discussions, trying out options methodically and making contingency plans. The first responded quickly to changes in the marketplace; the second took longer, but the option it eventually chose was usually the correct one. Neither company"s approach would have worked for the other.
The answer is not to adopt one company"s approach, or even to try to incorporate every aspect of both organisations, but to create a totally new culture. This means taking the best from both sides and making a new organisation that everyone can accept. Or almost everyone. Inevitably there will be those who cannot adapt to a different culture. Research into the impact of mergers has found that companies with differing management styles are the ones that need to work hardest at creating a new culture.
Another tool that can help to get the right cultural mix is intercultural analysis. This involves carrying out research that looks at the culture of a company and the business culture of the country in which it is based. It identifies how people, money and time are managed in a company, and investigates the business customs of the country and how its politics, economics and history impact on the way business is done.According to Chris Bolton, what do many organisations do in preparation for a merger

A.Ensure their interests are represented.
B.Give reassurances to shareholders.
C.Consider the effect of a merger on employees.
D.Analyse the varying strengths of their staff.
单项选择题

In politics, in the courts, even on the ubiquitous TV talkshow, it is good form to pick an intellectual fight. People attack each other- hurl insults, even- and it counts as logical argument. I cannot understand it.
It seems that our society favours a kind of ritualized aggression. Everywhere you look, in newspapers and on television, issues are presented using the terminology of war and conflict. We hear of battles, duels and disputes. We see things in terms of winners and losers, victors and victims.
The problem is society"s unquestioning belief in the advantages of the debate as a way of solving disagreements, even proving right from wrong. Our brainwashing begins early at school, when the brightest pupils are co-opted onto the debating system. They get there because they can think up a good argument to support their case. Once on the debate team, they learn that they earn bonus points for the skill with which they verbally attack, or insult, the opposing team. They win if they can successfully convince the audience that they are right, even if the case they are arguing is clearly nonsensual. They do this by proving themselves to be stronger, brighter, more outrageous, even.
The training in this adversarial approach continues at our tertiary institutions. The standard way to present an academic paper, for instance, is to take up an opposing argument to something expressed by another academic. The paper must set out to prove the other person wrong. This is not at all the same thing as reading the original paper with an open mind and discovering that you disagree with it.
The reverence for the adversarial approach spills over into all areas of life. Instead of answering their critics, politicians learn to sidestep negative comments and turn the point around to an attack on accusers. Defense lawyers argue the case for their clients even when they suspect they may be guilty. And ordinary people use the same tactics—just listen to your teenager next time you pull him up for coming home late. You can be sure a stream of abuse will flow about your own time—keeping, your irritating habits, your history of bad parenting.
Unfortunately, the smarter your kid, the better his or her argument against you will be. You"ll be upset, but you"ll comfort yourself that those teenage monsters of yours will one day turn into mature, though adults who can look after themselves—by which you mean, of course, they will be able to argue their way out of sticky situations.
It"s not that you should never use angry words, or take up a position in opposition to someone or something. There are certainly times when one should take a stand, and in such cases strong words are quite appropriate: if you witness injustice, for instance, or feel passionately about another"s folly. Mockery—so cruel when practised on the innocent—can be very useful in such situations. There is no better way to bring down a tyrant than to mock him mercilessly.
What I dislike is the automatic assumption most people have when it comes to disagreements: they should attack, abuse, preferably overpower their opponent, at whatever the cost. The approach is so ingrained that "compromise" has become a dirty word. We feel guilty if we are conciliatory rather than confrontational. We have trained ourselves, or been brainwashed into believing, that to be pleasant is a sign of weakness.
But just think how easy it can be to persuade a "difficult" person to be considerate of you or your wished when you are pleasant to them, and unthreatening. Give them a way out of a potentially aggressive situation without losing face, and they will oblige you willingly.
Discuss a subject without taking an adversarial position and you will find the other person happy to explore the possibilities with you. I"m prepared to bet on it. You"ll get closer to the truth of the matter than you would by going to each other hammer and tongs.The style of this passage is______.

A.descriptive
B.narrative
C.expositive
D.argumentative
单项选择题

If one of your research staff announced that he had worked out a way to propel a vehicle on a cushion of air, would you tell him to concentrate on something practical, or suggest taking it further If a member of your development team asked if she could come in late because she had her best ideas at 3 am would you insist that she is in the office at 9 am like everyone else
Current business wisdom is that companies need creative, innovative people to beat competitors. The reality is that companies have always needed new ideas to survive and progress, but in the past they weren"t particularly good at encouraging the people who produced them.
Original thinkers don"t always fit easily into the framework of an organisation. However, the advice from managing director, John Serrano is "Get rid of the dull people and encourage the unusual ones". Essentially, he believes that companies need to learn how to manage their original thinkers in order to ensure that the business profits from their contribution. He also says, "Original thinkers often find it difficult to drive change within the organisation, so they resign, feeling angry and disappointed. It is essential to avoid this."
"You can"t recognise original thinkers by the way they look", says Ian Freeman. An apparently ordinary exterior can conceal a very creative thinker. "His consultancy, IBT Personnel, has devised a structured way to identify original thinkers. We define employees as champions, free-wheelers, bystanders and weak links, and most original thinkers come into the category of free-wheelers. They may miss deadlines if they become involved in something more interesting. They are passionate and highly motivated but have little or no understanding of business directions and systems."
Headhunter George Solomon also thinks original thinkers have their disadvantages. "They may have a bad influence within an organisation, especially given the current management trend for working in teams. The original thinkers themselves may be unaware of any problem, but having them around can be disruptive to colleagues, who have to be allowed to point out when they are being driven crazy by the original thinkers behaviour." Yet, in his opinion, the "dream team" in any creative organisation consists of a balanced mixture of original thinkers and more practical, realistic people.
So, having identified your original thinkers, how do you handle them One well-known computer games company has a very inventive approach. "We encourage our games designers by creating an informal working environment", says director Lorna Marsh. "A company cannot punish risk-takers if it wants to encourage creativity. Management has to provide support, coaching and advice-and take the risk that new ideas may not work. Our people have flexible working hours and often make no clear distinction between their jobs and their home lives."
Original thinkers may fit into the culture of 21st century organisations, but more traditional organisations may have to change their approach. Business psychologist Jean Row believes that the first step is to check that original thinkers are worth the effort. "Are the benefits they bring worth the confusion they cause If so, give them what they want, allow plenty of space, but set clear limits. Give them extremely demanding targets. If they fail to meet them, then the game is up. But if they succeed, your organisation stands only to gain."What problems can be observed when there are original thinkers in the workforce

A.They may have a negative effect on other workers.
B.They dislike the concept of teamwork.
C.They rush tasks through to completion.
D.They cannot work with less creative colleagues.
单项选择题

The timing of market entry is critical to the success of a new product. A company has two alternatives: it can compete to enter a new product market first—otherwise known as "pioneering"—or it can wait for a competitor to take the lead, and then follow once the market has been established. Despite the limitations of existing research, nobody denies that there are advantages to being a pioneering company. Over the years, there has been a good deal of evidence to show a performance advantage for pioneers.
For many new products, customers are initially unsure about the contribution of product characteristics and features to the products" value. Preferences for different characteristics and their desired levels are learned over time. This enables the pioneering company to shape customer preferences in its favour. It sets the standard to which customers refer in evaluating followers" products. The pioneering product can become the classic or "original" product for the whole category, opening up a flood of similar products onto the market, as exemplified by Walkman and Polaroid.
The pioneering product is a bigger novelty when it appears on the market, and is therefore more likely than those that follow to capture customer and distributor attention. In addition, a pioneer"s advertising is not mixed up with competitors" campaigns. Even in the long term, followers must continue to spend more on advertising to achieve the same effect as pioneers. The pioneers can set standards for distribution, occupy the best locations or select the best distributors, which can give them easier access to customers. For example, in many US cities the coffee chain Starbucks, as the first to market, was able to open coffee bars in better known locations than its competitors. In many industrial markets, distributors are not keen to take on second and third products, particularly when the product is technically complex or requires large inventories of spare parts.
"Switching costs" arise when investments are required in order to switch to another product. For example, many people have developed skills in using the traditional "qwerty" keyboard. Changing to the presumably more efficient "dvorak" keyboard would require relearning how to type, an investment that in many cases would exceed the expected benefits in efficiency. Switching costs also arise when the quality of a product is difficult to assess. People who live abroad often experience a similar "cost" when simple purchase decisions such as buying detergent, toothpaste or coffee suddenly become harder because the trusted brand from home is no longer available. Pioneering products have the first chance to become this trusted brand. Consequently, the companies that follow must work hard to convince customers to bear the costs and risks of switching to an untried brand of unknown quality.
Unlike other consumer sectors, the value to customers of many high technology products relies not only on their features but also on the total number of users. For example, the value of a videophone depends on the number of people using the same or a compatible system. A pioneer obviously has the opportunity to build a large user base before competitors enter the market. This reduces followers" ability to introduce differentiated products. There are other advantages of a large user base, such as the ability to share computer files with other users. Thus, software companies are often willing to give away products to build the market quickly and set a standard.According to the final paragraph, the high technology market differs from other consumer markets in that______.

A.it is still a relatively new area of consumerism
B.it is not dependent on product characteristics alone
C.there are so many different types of product on the market
D.there is such a great demand for high technology products
单项选择题

However attractive the figures may look on paper, in the long run the success or failure of a merger depends on the human factor. When the agreement has been signed and the accountants have departed, the real problems may only just be beginning. If there is a culture clash between the two companies in the way their people work, then all the efforts of the financiers and lawyers to strike a deal may have been in vain.
According to Chris Bolton of KS Management Consultants, 70% of mergers fail to live up to their promise of shareholder value, not through any failure in economic terms but because the integration of people is unsuccessful. Corporates, he explains, concentrate their efforts before a merger on legal, technical and financial matters. They employ a range of experts to obtain the most favourable contract possible. But even at these early stages, people issues must be taken into consideration. The strengths and weaknesses of both organisations should be assessed and, if it is a merger of equals, then careful thought should be given to which personnel, from which side, should take on the key roles.
This was the issue in 2001 when the proposed merger between two pharmaceutical companies promised to create one of the largest players in the industry. For both companies the merger was intended to reverse falling market share and shareholder value. However, although the companies" skill bases were compatible, the chief executives of the two companies could not agree which of them was to head up the new organisation. This illustrates the need to compromise if a merger is to take place.
But even in mergers that do go ahead, there can be culture clashes. One way to avoid this is to work with focus groups to see how employees view the existing culture of their organisation. In one example, where two global organisations in the food sector were planning to merge, focus groups discovered that the companies displayed very different profiles. One was sales-focused, knew exactly what it wanted to achieve and pushed initiatives through. The other got involved in lengthy discussions, trying out options methodically and making contingency plans. The first responded quickly to changes in the marketplace; the second took longer, but the option it eventually chose was usually the correct one. Neither company"s approach would have worked for the other.
The answer is not to adopt one company"s approach, or even to try to incorporate every aspect of both organisations, but to create a totally new culture. This means taking the best from both sides and making a new organisation that everyone can accept. Or almost everyone. Inevitably there will be those who cannot adapt to a different culture. Research into the impact of mergers has found that companies with differing management styles are the ones that need to work hardest at creating a new culture.
Another tool that can help to get the right cultural mix is intercultural analysis. This involves carrying out research that looks at the culture of a company and the business culture of the country in which it is based. It identifies how people, money and time are managed in a company, and investigates the business customs of the country and how its politics, economics and history impact on the way business is done.The proposed merger of two pharmaceutical groups failed because______.

A.major shareholders were Opposed
B.there was a fall in the demand for their products
C.there were problems combining their areas of expertise
D.an issue of personal rivalry could not be resolved
单项选择题

In politics, in the courts, even on the ubiquitous TV talkshow, it is good form to pick an intellectual fight. People attack each other- hurl insults, even- and it counts as logical argument. I cannot understand it.
It seems that our society favours a kind of ritualized aggression. Everywhere you look, in newspapers and on television, issues are presented using the terminology of war and conflict. We hear of battles, duels and disputes. We see things in terms of winners and losers, victors and victims.
The problem is society"s unquestioning belief in the advantages of the debate as a way of solving disagreements, even proving right from wrong. Our brainwashing begins early at school, when the brightest pupils are co-opted onto the debating system. They get there because they can think up a good argument to support their case. Once on the debate team, they learn that they earn bonus points for the skill with which they verbally attack, or insult, the opposing team. They win if they can successfully convince the audience that they are right, even if the case they are arguing is clearly nonsensual. They do this by proving themselves to be stronger, brighter, more outrageous, even.
The training in this adversarial approach continues at our tertiary institutions. The standard way to present an academic paper, for instance, is to take up an opposing argument to something expressed by another academic. The paper must set out to prove the other person wrong. This is not at all the same thing as reading the original paper with an open mind and discovering that you disagree with it.
The reverence for the adversarial approach spills over into all areas of life. Instead of answering their critics, politicians learn to sidestep negative comments and turn the point around to an attack on accusers. Defense lawyers argue the case for their clients even when they suspect they may be guilty. And ordinary people use the same tactics—just listen to your teenager next time you pull him up for coming home late. You can be sure a stream of abuse will flow about your own time—keeping, your irritating habits, your history of bad parenting.
Unfortunately, the smarter your kid, the better his or her argument against you will be. You"ll be upset, but you"ll comfort yourself that those teenage monsters of yours will one day turn into mature, though adults who can look after themselves—by which you mean, of course, they will be able to argue their way out of sticky situations.
It"s not that you should never use angry words, or take up a position in opposition to someone or something. There are certainly times when one should take a stand, and in such cases strong words are quite appropriate: if you witness injustice, for instance, or feel passionately about another"s folly. Mockery—so cruel when practised on the innocent—can be very useful in such situations. There is no better way to bring down a tyrant than to mock him mercilessly.
What I dislike is the automatic assumption most people have when it comes to disagreements: they should attack, abuse, preferably overpower their opponent, at whatever the cost. The approach is so ingrained that "compromise" has become a dirty word. We feel guilty if we are conciliatory rather than confrontational. We have trained ourselves, or been brainwashed into believing, that to be pleasant is a sign of weakness.
But just think how easy it can be to persuade a "difficult" person to be considerate of you or your wished when you are pleasant to them, and unthreatening. Give them a way out of a potentially aggressive situation without losing face, and they will oblige you willingly.
Discuss a subject without taking an adversarial position and you will find the other person happy to explore the possibilities with you. I"m prepared to bet on it. You"ll get closer to the truth of the matter than you would by going to each other hammer and tongs.Which of the following words does NOT refer to "debate"

A.Intellectual fight.
B.Conflict.
C.Victim.
D.Dispute.
单项选择题

However attractive the figures may look on paper, in the long run the success or failure of a merger depends on the human factor. When the agreement has been signed and the accountants have departed, the real problems may only just be beginning. If there is a culture clash between the two companies in the way their people work, then all the efforts of the financiers and lawyers to strike a deal may have been in vain.
According to Chris Bolton of KS Management Consultants, 70% of mergers fail to live up to their promise of shareholder value, not through any failure in economic terms but because the integration of people is unsuccessful. Corporates, he explains, concentrate their efforts before a merger on legal, technical and financial matters. They employ a range of experts to obtain the most favourable contract possible. But even at these early stages, people issues must be taken into consideration. The strengths and weaknesses of both organisations should be assessed and, if it is a merger of equals, then careful thought should be given to which personnel, from which side, should take on the key roles.
This was the issue in 2001 when the proposed merger between two pharmaceutical companies promised to create one of the largest players in the industry. For both companies the merger was intended to reverse falling market share and shareholder value. However, although the companies" skill bases were compatible, the chief executives of the two companies could not agree which of them was to head up the new organisation. This illustrates the need to compromise if a merger is to take place.
But even in mergers that do go ahead, there can be culture clashes. One way to avoid this is to work with focus groups to see how employees view the existing culture of their organisation. In one example, where two global organisations in the food sector were planning to merge, focus groups discovered that the companies displayed very different profiles. One was sales-focused, knew exactly what it wanted to achieve and pushed initiatives through. The other got involved in lengthy discussions, trying out options methodically and making contingency plans. The first responded quickly to changes in the marketplace; the second took longer, but the option it eventually chose was usually the correct one. Neither company"s approach would have worked for the other.
The answer is not to adopt one company"s approach, or even to try to incorporate every aspect of both organisations, but to create a totally new culture. This means taking the best from both sides and making a new organisation that everyone can accept. Or almost everyone. Inevitably there will be those who cannot adapt to a different culture. Research into the impact of mergers has found that companies with differing management styles are the ones that need to work hardest at creating a new culture.
Another tool that can help to get the right cultural mix is intercultural analysis. This involves carrying out research that looks at the culture of a company and the business culture of the country in which it is based. It identifies how people, money and time are managed in a company, and investigates the business customs of the country and how its politics, economics and history impact on the way business is done.Creating a new culture in a newly merged organisation means that______.

A.management styles become more flexible
B.there is more chance of the merger working
C.staff will find it more difficult to adapt to the changes
D.successful elements of the original organisations are lost
单项选择题

If one of your research staff announced that he had worked out a way to propel a vehicle on a cushion of air, would you tell him to concentrate on something practical, or suggest taking it further If a member of your development team asked if she could come in late because she had her best ideas at 3 am would you insist that she is in the office at 9 am like everyone else
Current business wisdom is that companies need creative, innovative people to beat competitors. The reality is that companies have always needed new ideas to survive and progress, but in the past they weren"t particularly good at encouraging the people who produced them.
Original thinkers don"t always fit easily into the framework of an organisation. However, the advice from managing director, John Serrano is "Get rid of the dull people and encourage the unusual ones". Essentially, he believes that companies need to learn how to manage their original thinkers in order to ensure that the business profits from their contribution. He also says, "Original thinkers often find it difficult to drive change within the organisation, so they resign, feeling angry and disappointed. It is essential to avoid this."
"You can"t recognise original thinkers by the way they look", says Ian Freeman. An apparently ordinary exterior can conceal a very creative thinker. "His consultancy, IBT Personnel, has devised a structured way to identify original thinkers. We define employees as champions, free-wheelers, bystanders and weak links, and most original thinkers come into the category of free-wheelers. They may miss deadlines if they become involved in something more interesting. They are passionate and highly motivated but have little or no understanding of business directions and systems."
Headhunter George Solomon also thinks original thinkers have their disadvantages. "They may have a bad influence within an organisation, especially given the current management trend for working in teams. The original thinkers themselves may be unaware of any problem, but having them around can be disruptive to colleagues, who have to be allowed to point out when they are being driven crazy by the original thinkers behaviour." Yet, in his opinion, the "dream team" in any creative organisation consists of a balanced mixture of original thinkers and more practical, realistic people.
So, having identified your original thinkers, how do you handle them One well-known computer games company has a very inventive approach. "We encourage our games designers by creating an informal working environment", says director Lorna Marsh. "A company cannot punish risk-takers if it wants to encourage creativity. Management has to provide support, coaching and advice-and take the risk that new ideas may not work. Our people have flexible working hours and often make no clear distinction between their jobs and their home lives."
Original thinkers may fit into the culture of 21st century organisations, but more traditional organisations may have to change their approach. Business psychologist Jean Row believes that the first step is to check that original thinkers are worth the effort. "Are the benefits they bring worth the confusion they cause If so, give them what they want, allow plenty of space, but set clear limits. Give them extremely demanding targets. If they fail to meet them, then the game is up. But if they succeed, your organisation stands only to gain."In what way is the games company"s approach to original thinkers special

A.It allows them to work from home whenever they wish.
B.It uses different forms of disciplinary action for them.
C.It promotes a relaxed atmosphere in the workplace.
D.It encourages them to reduce the risks that they take.
单项选择题

In politics, in the courts, even on the ubiquitous TV talkshow, it is good form to pick an intellectual fight. People attack each other- hurl insults, even- and it counts as logical argument. I cannot understand it.
It seems that our society favours a kind of ritualized aggression. Everywhere you look, in newspapers and on television, issues are presented using the terminology of war and conflict. We hear of battles, duels and disputes. We see things in terms of winners and losers, victors and victims.
The problem is society"s unquestioning belief in the advantages of the debate as a way of solving disagreements, even proving right from wrong. Our brainwashing begins early at school, when the brightest pupils are co-opted onto the debating system. They get there because they can think up a good argument to support their case. Once on the debate team, they learn that they earn bonus points for the skill with which they verbally attack, or insult, the opposing team. They win if they can successfully convince the audience that they are right, even if the case they are arguing is clearly nonsensual. They do this by proving themselves to be stronger, brighter, more outrageous, even.
The training in this adversarial approach continues at our tertiary institutions. The standard way to present an academic paper, for instance, is to take up an opposing argument to something expressed by another academic. The paper must set out to prove the other person wrong. This is not at all the same thing as reading the original paper with an open mind and discovering that you disagree with it.
The reverence for the adversarial approach spills over into all areas of life. Instead of answering their critics, politicians learn to sidestep negative comments and turn the point around to an attack on accusers. Defense lawyers argue the case for their clients even when they suspect they may be guilty. And ordinary people use the same tactics—just listen to your teenager next time you pull him up for coming home late. You can be sure a stream of abuse will flow about your own time—keeping, your irritating habits, your history of bad parenting.
Unfortunately, the smarter your kid, the better his or her argument against you will be. You"ll be upset, but you"ll comfort yourself that those teenage monsters of yours will one day turn into mature, though adults who can look after themselves—by which you mean, of course, they will be able to argue their way out of sticky situations.
It"s not that you should never use angry words, or take up a position in opposition to someone or something. There are certainly times when one should take a stand, and in such cases strong words are quite appropriate: if you witness injustice, for instance, or feel passionately about another"s folly. Mockery—so cruel when practised on the innocent—can be very useful in such situations. There is no better way to bring down a tyrant than to mock him mercilessly.
What I dislike is the automatic assumption most people have when it comes to disagreements: they should attack, abuse, preferably overpower their opponent, at whatever the cost. The approach is so ingrained that "compromise" has become a dirty word. We feel guilty if we are conciliatory rather than confrontational. We have trained ourselves, or been brainwashed into believing, that to be pleasant is a sign of weakness.
But just think how easy it can be to persuade a "difficult" person to be considerate of you or your wished when you are pleasant to them, and unthreatening. Give them a way out of a potentially aggressive situation without losing face, and they will oblige you willingly.
Discuss a subject without taking an adversarial position and you will find the other person happy to explore the possibilities with you. I"m prepared to bet on it. You"ll get closer to the truth of the matter than you would by going to each other hammer and tongs.You may use angry words______.

A.when you are in sticky situations
B.if someone takes up a position in opposition to you
C.if you are angry at other people"s folly
D.when you are the only innocent one
单项选择题

However attractive the figures may look on paper, in the long run the success or failure of a merger depends on the human factor. When the agreement has been signed and the accountants have departed, the real problems may only just be beginning. If there is a culture clash between the two companies in the way their people work, then all the efforts of the financiers and lawyers to strike a deal may have been in vain.
According to Chris Bolton of KS Management Consultants, 70% of mergers fail to live up to their promise of shareholder value, not through any failure in economic terms but because the integration of people is unsuccessful. Corporates, he explains, concentrate their efforts before a merger on legal, technical and financial matters. They employ a range of experts to obtain the most favourable contract possible. But even at these early stages, people issues must be taken into consideration. The strengths and weaknesses of both organisations should be assessed and, if it is a merger of equals, then careful thought should be given to which personnel, from which side, should take on the key roles.
This was the issue in 2001 when the proposed merger between two pharmaceutical companies promised to create one of the largest players in the industry. For both companies the merger was intended to reverse falling market share and shareholder value. However, although the companies" skill bases were compatible, the chief executives of the two companies could not agree which of them was to head up the new organisation. This illustrates the need to compromise if a merger is to take place.
But even in mergers that do go ahead, there can be culture clashes. One way to avoid this is to work with focus groups to see how employees view the existing culture of their organisation. In one example, where two global organisations in the food sector were planning to merge, focus groups discovered that the companies displayed very different profiles. One was sales-focused, knew exactly what it wanted to achieve and pushed initiatives through. The other got involved in lengthy discussions, trying out options methodically and making contingency plans. The first responded quickly to changes in the marketplace; the second took longer, but the option it eventually chose was usually the correct one. Neither company"s approach would have worked for the other.
The answer is not to adopt one company"s approach, or even to try to incorporate every aspect of both organisations, but to create a totally new culture. This means taking the best from both sides and making a new organisation that everyone can accept. Or almost everyone. Inevitably there will be those who cannot adapt to a different culture. Research into the impact of mergers has found that companies with differing management styles are the ones that need to work hardest at creating a new culture.
Another tool that can help to get the right cultural mix is intercultural analysis. This involves carrying out research that looks at the culture of a company and the business culture of the country in which it is based. It identifies how people, money and time are managed in a company, and investigates the business customs of the country and how its politics, economics and history impact on the way business is done.According to the text, intercultural analysis will show______.

A.what kind of benefits a merger can lead to
B.how the national context affects the way a company is run
C.how long it will take for a company culture to develop
D.what changes companies should make before a merger takes place
单项选择题

If one of your research staff announced that he had worked out a way to propel a vehicle on a cushion of air, would you tell him to concentrate on something practical, or suggest taking it further If a member of your development team asked if she could come in late because she had her best ideas at 3 am would you insist that she is in the office at 9 am like everyone else
Current business wisdom is that companies need creative, innovative people to beat competitors. The reality is that companies have always needed new ideas to survive and progress, but in the past they weren"t particularly good at encouraging the people who produced them.
Original thinkers don"t always fit easily into the framework of an organisation. However, the advice from managing director, John Serrano is "Get rid of the dull people and encourage the unusual ones". Essentially, he believes that companies need to learn how to manage their original thinkers in order to ensure that the business profits from their contribution. He also says, "Original thinkers often find it difficult to drive change within the organisation, so they resign, feeling angry and disappointed. It is essential to avoid this."
"You can"t recognise original thinkers by the way they look", says Ian Freeman. An apparently ordinary exterior can conceal a very creative thinker. "His consultancy, IBT Personnel, has devised a structured way to identify original thinkers. We define employees as champions, free-wheelers, bystanders and weak links, and most original thinkers come into the category of free-wheelers. They may miss deadlines if they become involved in something more interesting. They are passionate and highly motivated but have little or no understanding of business directions and systems."
Headhunter George Solomon also thinks original thinkers have their disadvantages. "They may have a bad influence within an organisation, especially given the current management trend for working in teams. The original thinkers themselves may be unaware of any problem, but having them around can be disruptive to colleagues, who have to be allowed to point out when they are being driven crazy by the original thinkers behaviour." Yet, in his opinion, the "dream team" in any creative organisation consists of a balanced mixture of original thinkers and more practical, realistic people.
So, having identified your original thinkers, how do you handle them One well-known computer games company has a very inventive approach. "We encourage our games designers by creating an informal working environment", says director Lorna Marsh. "A company cannot punish risk-takers if it wants to encourage creativity. Management has to provide support, coaching and advice-and take the risk that new ideas may not work. Our people have flexible working hours and often make no clear distinction between their jobs and their home lives."
Original thinkers may fit into the culture of 21st century organisations, but more traditional organisations may have to change their approach. Business psychologist Jean Row believes that the first step is to check that original thinkers are worth the effort. "Are the benefits they bring worth the confusion they cause If so, give them what they want, allow plenty of space, but set clear limits. Give them extremely demanding targets. If they fail to meet them, then the game is up. But if they succeed, your organisation stands only to gain."A traditional organisation wishing to employ original thinkers needs to______.

A.provide them with projects they are interested in
B.assess whether their contribution makes up for any problems
C.have a flexible approach if goals are not always achieved
D.be prepared to handle any negative feedback from colleagues
单项选择题

In politics, in the courts, even on the ubiquitous TV talkshow, it is good form to pick an intellectual fight. People attack each other- hurl insults, even- and it counts as logical argument. I cannot understand it.
It seems that our society favours a kind of ritualized aggression. Everywhere you look, in newspapers and on television, issues are presented using the terminology of war and conflict. We hear of battles, duels and disputes. We see things in terms of winners and losers, victors and victims.
The problem is society"s unquestioning belief in the advantages of the debate as a way of solving disagreements, even proving right from wrong. Our brainwashing begins early at school, when the brightest pupils are co-opted onto the debating system. They get there because they can think up a good argument to support their case. Once on the debate team, they learn that they earn bonus points for the skill with which they verbally attack, or insult, the opposing team. They win if they can successfully convince the audience that they are right, even if the case they are arguing is clearly nonsensual. They do this by proving themselves to be stronger, brighter, more outrageous, even.
The training in this adversarial approach continues at our tertiary institutions. The standard way to present an academic paper, for instance, is to take up an opposing argument to something expressed by another academic. The paper must set out to prove the other person wrong. This is not at all the same thing as reading the original paper with an open mind and discovering that you disagree with it.
The reverence for the adversarial approach spills over into all areas of life. Instead of answering their critics, politicians learn to sidestep negative comments and turn the point around to an attack on accusers. Defense lawyers argue the case for their clients even when they suspect they may be guilty. And ordinary people use the same tactics—just listen to your teenager next time you pull him up for coming home late. You can be sure a stream of abuse will flow about your own time—keeping, your irritating habits, your history of bad parenting.
Unfortunately, the smarter your kid, the better his or her argument against you will be. You"ll be upset, but you"ll comfort yourself that those teenage monsters of yours will one day turn into mature, though adults who can look after themselves—by which you mean, of course, they will be able to argue their way out of sticky situations.
It"s not that you should never use angry words, or take up a position in opposition to someone or something. There are certainly times when one should take a stand, and in such cases strong words are quite appropriate: if you witness injustice, for instance, or feel passionately about another"s folly. Mockery—so cruel when practised on the innocent—can be very useful in such situations. There is no better way to bring down a tyrant than to mock him mercilessly.
What I dislike is the automatic assumption most people have when it comes to disagreements: they should attack, abuse, preferably overpower their opponent, at whatever the cost. The approach is so ingrained that "compromise" has become a dirty word. We feel guilty if we are conciliatory rather than confrontational. We have trained ourselves, or been brainwashed into believing, that to be pleasant is a sign of weakness.
But just think how easy it can be to persuade a "difficult" person to be considerate of you or your wished when you are pleasant to them, and unthreatening. Give them a way out of a potentially aggressive situation without losing face, and they will oblige you willingly.
Discuss a subject without taking an adversarial position and you will find the other person happy to explore the possibilities with you. I"m prepared to bet on it. You"ll get closer to the truth of the matter than you would by going to each other hammer and tongs.At the end of the passage "going at each other hammer and tongs" means______.

A.attacking or abusing stealthily
B.mocking or scoffing with tongs
C.compromising or consulting with a hammer
D.quarrelling or fighting noisily
单项选择题

In politics, in the courts, even on the ubiquitous TV talkshow, it is good form to pick an intellectual fight. People attack each other- hurl insults, even- and it counts as logical argument. I cannot understand it.
It seems that our society favours a kind of ritualized aggression. Everywhere you look, in newspapers and on television, issues are presented using the terminology of war and conflict. We hear of battles, duels and disputes. We see things in terms of winners and losers, victors and victims.
The problem is society"s unquestioning belief in the advantages of the debate as a way of solving disagreements, even proving right from wrong. Our brainwashing begins early at school, when the brightest pupils are co-opted onto the debating system. They get there because they can think up a good argument to support their case. Once on the debate team, they learn that they earn bonus points for the skill with which they verbally attack, or insult, the opposing team. They win if they can successfully convince the audience that they are right, even if the case they are arguing is clearly nonsensual. They do this by proving themselves to be stronger, brighter, more outrageous, even.
The training in this adversarial approach continues at our tertiary institutions. The standard way to present an academic paper, for instance, is to take up an opposing argument to something expressed by another academic. The paper must set out to prove the other person wrong. This is not at all the same thing as reading the original paper with an open mind and discovering that you disagree with it.
The reverence for the adversarial approach spills over into all areas of life. Instead of answering their critics, politicians learn to sidestep negative comments and turn the point around to an attack on accusers. Defense lawyers argue the case for their clients even when they suspect they may be guilty. And ordinary people use the same tactics—just listen to your teenager next time you pull him up for coming home late. You can be sure a stream of abuse will flow about your own time—keeping, your irritating habits, your history of bad parenting.
Unfortunately, the smarter your kid, the better his or her argument against you will be. You"ll be upset, but you"ll comfort yourself that those teenage monsters of yours will one day turn into mature, though adults who can look after themselves—by which you mean, of course, they will be able to argue their way out of sticky situations.
It"s not that you should never use angry words, or take up a position in opposition to someone or something. There are certainly times when one should take a stand, and in such cases strong words are quite appropriate: if you witness injustice, for instance, or feel passionately about another"s folly. Mockery—so cruel when practised on the innocent—can be very useful in such situations. There is no better way to bring down a tyrant than to mock him mercilessly.
What I dislike is the automatic assumption most people have when it comes to disagreements: they should attack, abuse, preferably overpower their opponent, at whatever the cost. The approach is so ingrained that "compromise" has become a dirty word. We feel guilty if we are conciliatory rather than confrontational. We have trained ourselves, or been brainwashed into believing, that to be pleasant is a sign of weakness.
But just think how easy it can be to persuade a "difficult" person to be considerate of you or your wished when you are pleasant to them, and unthreatening. Give them a way out of a potentially aggressive situation without losing face, and they will oblige you willingly.
Discuss a subject without taking an adversarial position and you will find the other person happy to explore the possibilities with you. I"m prepared to bet on it. You"ll get closer to the truth of the matter than you would by going to each other hammer and tongs.The writer"s main point is______.

A.compromising
B.no debating
C.discussing
D.no fighting
微信扫码免费搜题