【考研真題】1998年閱讀2(2/3)
來(lái)源:滬江聽(tīng)寫(xiě)酷
2014-05-13 04:00
Hints:
這是一篇討論美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)復(fù)蘇的文章
文中7s,9s有破折號(hào),36s有冒號(hào)。Some of this can be easily explained. New ways of organizing the workplace -- all that re-engineering and downsizing -- are only one contribution to the overall productivity of an economy, which is driven by many other factors such as joint investment in equipment and machinery, new technology, and investment in education and training. Moreover, most of the changes that companies make are intended to keep them profitable, and this need not always mean increasing productivity: switching to new markets or improving quality can matter just as much.
Two other explanations are more speculative. First, some of the business restructuring of recent years may have been ineptly done. Second, even if it was well done, it may have spread much less widely than people suppose.
這其中的一些原因很容易解釋。企業(yè)重組的新方法--所有那些重新規(guī)劃和縮小規(guī)模的做法--只能對(duì)一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)的整體生產(chǎn)力做出一方面的貢獻(xiàn),而生產(chǎn)力的發(fā)展還受到許多其它因素的驅(qū)動(dòng),如設(shè)備機(jī)械上的聯(lián)合投資、新技術(shù)、以及教育和培訓(xùn)上的投資。另外,公司大部分的改革是為了贏利,而達(dá)到贏利的目的不一定非要提高生產(chǎn)力:轉(zhuǎn)入新的市場(chǎng)或改善產(chǎn)品質(zhì)量也會(huì)有同樣的功效。
其他兩種解釋帶有很大的猜測(cè)性。一種解釋認(rèn)為,近年來(lái)的一些企業(yè)重組也許進(jìn)行得并不恰當(dāng)。另一種解釋則認(rèn)為,即使有成效,效果也沒(méi)能像人們所設(shè)想的那樣廣泛。