2. 考研
  3. It is a universal dilemma. What to do with the jerks at work, the persons who are so disliked by their colleagues that no one wa

It is a universal dilemma. What to do with the jerks at work, the persons who are so disliked by their colleagues that no one wa

admin2020-03-31  0
问题     It is a universal dilemma. What to do with the jerks at work, the persons who are so disliked by their colleagues that no one wants to work with them? The traditional answer is to tolerate them if they are at least half-competent—on the grounds that competent jerks can be trained to be otherwise, while much-loved bunglers cannot.
    A recent study suggests that such an approach seriously underestimates the value of being liked. In a study of over 10,000 work relationships at five very different organisations, Tiziana Casciaro and Miguel Sousa Lobo, academics at Harvard Business School and the Fuqua School of Business respectively, found that(given the choice)people consistently and overwhelmingly prefer to work with a "lovable fool" than with a competent jerk.
    The authors suggest that as well as training jerks to be more charming—although "sadly there are people who are disliked because they are socially incompetent, and probably never will be truly charming"—companies should also "leverage the likeable". Amiable folk should be turned into "affective hubs", people who can bridge gaps "between diverse groups that might not otherwise interact".
    Re-evaluating jolly types who spend long hours hanging round water-coolers is currently fashionable. Ronald Burt, a sociologist at the University of Chicago and a leading proponent of "social capital"—an explanation of "how people do better because they are somehow better connected with other people"—has written a book(Brokerage and Closure)in which he describes the "clusters" and "bridges" that are typical of organisations’ informal networks. Mr Burt calls the people who form bridges between clusters "brokers"; they resemble Ms Casciaro’s and Mr Sousa Lobo’s affective hubs. In practice, Mr Burt has found that brokers do better than people without the social skills to cross the spaces between clusters.
    A book published in English this week, but already a cause celebre in France, portrays most employees as fools—lovable or otherwise. Corinne Maier’s Bonjour Laziness is a worm’s-eye view of a corporate world where only three creatures exist: sheep("weak and inoffensive"); pests("poisoning the general atmosphere"); and loafers("their only aim is to do as little as possible"). In the view of Ms Maier, a practising psychoanalyst, pests(i.e., jerks)rule the corporate world.(So does being a jerk give you the skills needed to get to the top? And only in France?)The rest can only hope to lie low and await their pension. But, assuming you are lovable, far better, surely, to follow the Burt route: head straight for the water-cooler.
Corinne Maier’s book mentions sheep, pests, and loafers because______.
选项 A、they each represent a kind of fool in the business world
B、they look like different body types
C、they can be used to categorize employees
D、they are the same as Burt’s brokers, clusters, and bridges
答案C
解析 属细节题。文章在最后一段指出：Corinne Maier从公司最下层的视角把职员分成三类：sheep(“weak and inoffensive”)；pests(“poisoning the general atmosphere”)；and loafers(“theironly aim is to do as little as possible”)，然后加以解释。所以答案为C。A选项与原文不符。B项虽为事实，但答非所问。Burt所说的brokers是指有良好人际关系的人，而他所提出的brokers、clusters、bridges与Maier的sheep、pests、loafers意义并不相同，所以D项不对。
转载请注明原文地址:https://jikaoti.com/ti/i5q7FFFM
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)