商務(wù)英語BEC高級(jí)閱讀題知識(shí)點(diǎn)分析整理

時(shí)間：2024-02-02 11:36:44 楚薇20由分享

　　下面給大家整理了一些商務(wù)英語BEC高級(jí)閱讀題知識(shí)點(diǎn)分析，希望大家喜歡。

商務(wù)英語BEC高級(jí)閱讀題知識(shí)點(diǎn)分析(1)

　　Look at the statements below and the article about the development of future business leaders on the opposite page.

　　Which section of the article (A, B, C or D) does each statement (1-7) refer to?

　　For each statement (1-7), mark one letter (A, B, C or D) on your Answer Sheet.

　　You will need to use some of these letters more than once.

　　1 Managers need to take action to convince high-flyers of their value to the firm.

　　2 Organisations need to look beyond the high-flyers they are currently developing.

　　3 There is a concern that firms investing in training for high-flyers may not gain the benefits themselves.

　　4 Managers need expert assistance from within their own firms in developing high-flyers.

　　5 Firms currently identify high-flyers without the support of a guidance strategy.

　　6 Managers are frequently too busy to deal with the development of high-flyers.

　　7 Firms who work hard on their reputation as an employer will interest high-flyers.

　　The Stars of the Future

　　A Existing management research does not tell us much about how to find and develop high-flyers, those people who have the potential to reach the top of an organisation. As a result, organisations are left to formulate their own systems. A more effective overall policy for developing future leaders is needed, which is why the London Business School has launched the Tomorrow’s Leaders Research Group (TLRG). The group contains representatives from 20 firms, and meets regularly to discuss the leadership development of the organisations’ high-flyers.

　　B TLRG recognises just how significant line managers are in the process of leadership development. Unfortunately, with today’s flat organisations, where managers have functional as well as managerial responsibilities, people development all too often falls victim to heavy workloads. One manager in the research group was unconvinced by the logic of sending his best people away on development courses, ’only to see them poached by another department or, worse still, another firm’. This fear of losing high-flyers runs deep in the organisations that make up the research group.

　　C TLRG argues that the task of management is not necessarily about employee retention, but about creating ’attraction centres’. ’We must help line managers to realise that if their companies are known as ones that develop their people, they will have a greater appeal to high-flyers,’ said one advisor. Furthermore, selecting people for, say, a leadership development programme is a sign of commitment from management to an individual. Loyalty can then be more easily demanded in return.

　　D TLRG has concluded that a company’s HR specialists need to take action and engage with line managers individually about their role in the development of high-flyers. Indeed, in order to benefit fully from training high-flyers as the senior managers of the future, firms must actually address the development of all managers who will be supporting the high-flyers. Without this, managers will not be in a position to give appropriate advice. And when eventually the high-flyers do move on, new ones will be needed to replace them. The next challenge will be to find a new generation of high-flyers.

　　首先得搞明白的是這篇文章到底講的什么。不用看具體內(nèi)容，有兩個(gè)地方直接告訴了。一個(gè)是題目說明的第一句話，另一個(gè)是正文的標(biāo)題。從這兩個(gè)地方就可以看出全文探討的是公司未來接班人——也就是潛力股——的培養(yǎng)問題。

　　A段講了TLRG這個(gè)貫穿全文的研究組織誕生的原因：現(xiàn)行的研究滿足不了需要，于是大多數(shù)公司只能自己探索發(fā)掘接班人的模式;(即第五題的答案)

　　B段講了直屬經(jīng)理(line managers)對(duì)于發(fā)掘接班人的重要性(真是干什么都要從基層抓起)，以及經(jīng)理們的一些疑慮;

　　C段講的是接班人問題對(duì)公司的重要性，并且應(yīng)該讓院線經(jīng)理們明白這種重要性;

　　D段是針對(duì)前面列出的問題，提出的解決建議，什么專家協(xié)助等等。

　　整篇文章分為四個(gè)部分，層層遞進(jìn)，有很強(qiáng)的邏輯性。拿這樣的文章來做閱讀材料應(yīng)該是相對(duì)容易把握的。

　　商務(wù)英語BEC高級(jí)閱讀題知識(shí)點(diǎn)分析(2)

　　There is a commonly held view that the only way to get (0) decent pay increase is to move on: to go out into the job market and find someone (31) is prepared to pay you a figure more in line (32) the talents you can offer. Whilst changing employers from time (33) time is something we probably all need to do to advance our careers in the directions we want them to take, it is nevertheless an activity that carries quite definite risks. Irrespective of (34) well we research prospective employers, a new job is still largely a step into the unknown . It may turn (35) to be a good move or it could prove to be a complete disaster : most of us (36) had experience of both. The point here, though, is that changing employers is not something we want to be doing all the time and certainly not (37) time we feel the urge for better pay . We’d (38) taking more risks than we needed to just to achieve a pay rise. Getting a pay rise should always be viewed (39) a serious business. There are no quick fixes or gold methods with “ guaranteed “ results. Quick fixes only serve to trivialize the issues and could (40) some circumstances get you into very serous trouble indeed.

　　答案及解析：

　　關(guān)于加薪的文章，教你怎么樣實(shí)現(xiàn)加薪。這道題目不難，但是拋開題目，單說文章里談的加薪的方法，各位還是要辯證的看。要想人生第一份工作就找到自己滿意的，是挺難，可是以加薪為目的跳槽，也未必是什么明智的好辦法。

　　31題，太明顯的定語從句，前面是someone，那么當(dāng)然填入表示人的關(guān)系代詞who。

　　32題，in line with，和什么一致，固定搭配，在中級(jí)的選詞版完型里?？嫉竭@個(gè)詞組。這句的意思是，找個(gè)一個(gè)愿意給你提供和你才能更加一致的薪水的人。

　　33題，from time to time，時(shí)不時(shí)的。changing employers from time to time，時(shí)不時(shí)的換老板。

　　34題，Irrespective of，同regardless of一樣，后面接讓步狀語從句，不管我們對(duì)可能的雇主研究的多么好，新的工作都是一個(gè)未知數(shù)。用how well。

　　35題，turn out to be，固定用法。

　　36題，換工作，要么是個(gè)好的舉措，要么將成為災(zāi)難。而我們大多數(shù)人這兩種經(jīng)歷都有。有這種經(jīng)歷，是過去完成時(shí)，用have+done。

　　37題，理解前后文意思。換老板不是件我們經(jīng)常愿意做的事情，并且也不是一想要加薪就要換老板。用every time，表示每次要加薪就準(zhǔn)備換老板。

　　38題，這題有點(diǎn)難度，考驗(yàn)人的語法功底。首先這個(gè)句子是虛擬語氣，We’d是we would的縮寫，而不是we had。是表示對(duì)將來的假設(shè)，我們要承擔(dān)更多的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。所以用would be。

　　39題，比較明顯的，view as，將什么視作什么。

　　40題，和circumstance相關(guān)的詞組，很容易想到under/on some circumstance，在某種情況下。

　　商務(wù)英語BEC高級(jí)閱讀題知識(shí)點(diǎn)分析(3)

　　Read the following article about business schools and the questions on the opposite page .

　　For each question 15 – 20 , mark one letter (A, B, C or D ) on your Answer Sheet for the answer you choose.

　　In terms of pure quantity of research and debate, business schools have performed amazingly in promoting management as a distinctive activity. No other discipline has produced as much in such a short period. It is unclear yet how much of it will stand the test of time, but for sheer industry, the business school deserve credit. Not a day goes by without another wave of research papers, books, articles, and journals.

　　In these terms, schools have produced a generally accepted theoretical basis for management. When it comes to knowledge creation, however, they find themselves in difficulties. They are caught between the need for academic rigour and for real-world business relevance, which tend to pull in opposite directions. The desire to establish management as a credible discipline leads to research that panders to traditional academic criteria. The problem for business school researchers is that they seek the approval of their academic peers rather than the business community. In the United States this has led to the sort of grand ‘paper clip counting’ exercises that meet demands for academic rigour but fail to add one iota to the real sum of human knowledge.

　　Business schools have too often allowed the constraints of the academic world to cloud their view of the real world. Business school researchers seek provable theories – rather than helpful theories. They have championed a prescriptive approach to management based on analysis and, more recently, on fashionable ideas that soon disappear into the ether. The ‘one best way’ approach encourages researchers to mould the idiosyncrasies of managerial reality into their tightly defined models of behaviour. Figures and statistics are fitted into linear equations and tidy models. Economists and other social scientists label this cure smoothing. Meanwhile, reality continually refuses to co-operate.

　　Central to this is the tension between relevance and rigour. In a perfect world, there would be no need to choose between the two. But in the business school world, the need to satisfy academic criteria and be published in journals often tilts the balance away from relevance. In other words, it is often easier to pursue quantifiable objectives than it is to add anything useful to the debate about management. To a large extent, the entire business school system works against useful, knowledge-creating research. Academics have five years in which to prove themselves if they are to make the academic grade. It seems long enough. But it can take two or even three years to get into a suitable journal. They therefore have around three years, probably less, to come up with an area of interest and carry out meaningful and original research. This is a demanding timescale. The temptation must be to slice up old data in new ways rather than pursue genuinely groundbreaking, innovative research.

　　It is a criticism also made by some business school insiders. “Academic journals tend to find more and more techniques for testing more and more obscure theories. They are asking trivial questions and answering them exactly. There has to be a backlash,” says Julian Birkinshaw of London Business School. In large part, the problem goes back to a time when business schools were trying to establish themselves. Up until the 1960s, American business schools were dismissed as pseudo-academic institutions, including the universities of which they often formed a part, regarded them as a little more than vocational colleges. Since then, most of the leading schools have undergone major reassessments and introduced sweeping changes. However, it is questionable whether those changes have gone far enough.

　　15.What does the first paragraph suggest about the research generated by business schools?

　　A Its quality is variable.

　　B Its lasting value is uncertain.

　　C It has always been produced too quickly.

　　D It has had no influence on management.

　　16.In paragraph two, the writer argues that business school research

　　A takes a negative view of the business community.

　　B has failed to give credibility to management as a discipline.

　　C is directed at the wrong audience.

　　D does not stand up to academic scrutiny.

　　17.In the third paragraph, the writer criticizes the theories of management produced by business schools for being

　　A incomprehensible.