2. 考研
  3. Every day, employees make decisions about whether to act like givers or like takers. When they act like givers, they contribute

Every day, employees make decisions about whether to act like givers or like takers. When they act like givers, they contribute

admin2022-07-26  18
问题     Every day, employees make decisions about whether to act like givers or like takers. When they act like givers, they contribute to others without seeking anything in return. They might offer assistance, share knowledge, or make valuable introductions. When they act like takers, they try to get other people to serve their ends while carefully guarding their own expertise and time.
    Organizations have a strong interest in fostering giving behavior. A willingness to help others achieve their goals lies at the heart of effective collaboration, innovation, quality improvement, and service excellence. In workplaces where such behavior becomes the norm, the benefits multiply quickly.
    But even as leaders recognize the importance of generous behavior and call for more of it, workers receive mixed messages about the advisability of acting in the interests of others. As a matter of fact, various situations put employees against one another, encouraging them to undercut rather than support their colleagues’ efforts. Even without a dog-eat-dog scoring system, strict delineation of responsibilities and a focus on individual performance metrics can cause a "not my job" mentality to take hold.
    As employees look around their organizations for models of success, they encounter further reasons to be wary of generosity. A study by the Stanford professor Frank Flynn highlighted this problem. When he examined patterns of favor exchange among the engineers in one company, he found that the least-productive engineers were givers—workers who had done many more favors for others than they’d received. I made a similar discovery in a study of salespeople: The ones who generated the least revenue reported a particularly strong concern for helping others.
    This creates a challenge for managers. Can they promote generosity without cutting into productivity and undermining fairness? How can they avoid creating situations where already-generous people give away too much of their attention while selfish coworkers feel they have even more license to take? How, in short, can they protect good people from being treated like doormats?
    Part of the solution must involve targeting the takers in the organization—providing incentives for them to collaborate and establishing repercussions for refusing reasonable requests. But even more important, my research suggests, is helping the givers act on their generous impulses more productively. The key is for employees to gain a more subtle understanding of what generosity is and is not. Givers are better positioned to succeed when they distinguish generosity from three other attributes—timidity, availability, and empathy—that tend to travel with it.
Prof. Frank Flynn’s study has found that
选项 A、employees are wary of generosity in the workplace.
B、there are more takers than givers among the engineers.
C、takers are the most productive among the employees.
D、generosity seems to be an obstacle to productivity.
答案D
解析 首先根据该题关键词Prof．Frank Flynn锁定第四段第二、三句。he found后面的宾语从句就是发现的内容。即工作最无成效的是那些付出者，由此可知慷慨的付出行为有可能影响工作效率，故答案选D。第四段首句提到员工谨慎为他人付出，这是公司存在的一个问题，不是Frank Flynn教授研究所发现的，其研究事实上是更加凸显了这一问题(further reasons to…)，故A项可排除。根据第三句可知教授的研究只是发现了这家公司中最无工作效率的工程师是付出者，并非指所有工程师大多是索取者，故排除B项。C项也是对原文的曲解。研究只是发现过分为他人付出会影响自己的工作效率和成绩，并没有提出索取者是员工中最富有工作成效的。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/GJg7FFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)