2. 职称英语
  3. As anyone who has tried to lose weight knows, realistic goal-setting general

As anyone who has tried to lose weight knows, realistic goal-setting general

游客2024-05-16  13
问题     As anyone who has tried to lose weight knows, realistic goal-setting generally produces the best results. That’s partially because it appears people who set realistic goals actually work more efficiently, and exert more effort, to achieve those goals.
What’s far less understood by scientists, however, are the potentially harmful effects of goal-setting.
    Newspapers relay daily accounts of goal-setting prevalent in industries and businesses up and down both Wall Street and Main Street, yet there has been surprisingly little research on how the long-trumpeted practice of setting goals may have contributed to the current economic crisis, and unethical (不道德的) behavior in general.
    "Goals are widely used and promoted as having really beneficial effects. And yet, the same motivation that can push people to exert more effort in a constructive way could also motivate people to be more likely to engage in unethical behaviors," says Maurice Schweitzer, an associate professor at Perm’s Wharton School.
    "It turns out there’s no economic benefit to just having a goal—you just get a psychological benefit." Schweitzer says. "But in many cases, goals have economic rewards that make them more powerful."
    A prime example Schweitzer and his colleagues cite is the 2004 collapse of energy-trading giant Enron, where managers used financial incentives to motivate salesmen to meet specific revenue goals. The problem, Schweitzer says, is the actual trades were not profitable.
    Other studies have shown that saddling employees with unrealistic goals can compel them to lie, cheat or steal. Such was the case in the early 1990s when Sears imposed a sales quota on its auto repair staff. It prompted employees to overcharge for work and to complete unnecessary repairs on a companywide basis.
    Schweitzer concedes his research runs counter to a very large body of literature that commends the many benefits of goal-setting. Advocates of the practice have taken issue with his team’s use of Such evidence as news accounts to support his conclusion that goal-setting is widely over-prescribed.
    In a rebuttal (反驳) paper, Dr. Edwin Locke writes: "Goal-setting is not going away. Organizations cannot thrive without being focused on their desired end results any more than an individual can thrive without goals to provide a sense of purpose."
    But Schweitzer contends the "mounting causal evidence" linking goal-setting and harmful behavior should be studied to help spotlight issues that merit caution and further investigation. "Even a few negative effects could be so large that they outweigh many positive effects," he says.
    "Goal-setting does help coordinate and motivate people. My idea would be to combine that with careful oversight, a strong organizational culture, and make sure the goals that you use are going to be constructive and not significantly harm the organization," Schweitzer says. [br] What do advocates of goal-setting think of Schweitzer’s research?
选项 A、It runs counter to the existing literature on the subject.
B、Its findings are not of much practical value.
C、It exaggerates the side effects of goal-setting.
D、Its conclusion is not based on solid scientific evidence.
答案 D
解析 根据题干关键词advocates可将本题出处定位于第8段。该段首句指出，Schweitzer承认其研究与多数提倡设定目标的文献观点相反。第2句虽然只含有一个同位语从句，但句子理解起来还是有一定的难度，该句意思可以分三层来理解：1)Schweitzer的研究结论是设定目标的做法受到人们的过度使用；2)Schweitzer团队用新闻报道来佐证其研究结论；3)提倡设定自标的人对Schweitzer团队用来佐证研究结论的依据提出质疑。由此推断，advocates是在质疑新闻报道作为论证依据的科学性和权威性，故本题答案为[D]。[A]为Schweitzer承认的内容，与advocates无关，可排除；[B]在文中无法看出，属于无中生有，故排除。[C]是针对goal-setting is widely over-prescribed“设定目标的做法被滥用了”设的干扰项。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3601542.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)