GMAT新黄金80题及范文(五)g
分类: GRE-GMAT英语
111. “The most effective business leaders are those who maintain the highest ethical standards.”
“最有效率的企业领导是保持最高道德标准的人。”
1， 支持者会认为, 高道德会赢得reputation and trust; 第一, 高道德生产高质量的产品以及service,顾客稳定stable share of the market; 第二, 高道德会让员工满意度提高(公平，平等). 从而attract those applicants with high ability and keep the employees loyal to the company---最终导致高的productivity.
例子：Bayer, one of the largest pharmaceutic companies in the world, announced that the company would cease production of one of its major products, because of the hazardous ingredients it contained. By doing so, the company suffers great loss on profitability, but gains strong public support and understanding, which can contribute to the long-term success of the company.
2， 但在更多的情况下, 高道德也许不equal to maximal profit. 比如,a, 如果把道德放在第一位的话,企业的executive很可能无法执行裁员活动complete the normal administration, such as raising the price, reducing the superabundant staff… b, 高道德的话，很可能采用最高标准的环保生产——这样很不是cost-effective. 总之，Following such undue concern about ethics, the company may find it impossible to survive in the radical competitive market, let alone to gain large profit.
View1: the definition of highest standards of ethics vary from person to person and time to time. Therefore, it is impractical to find and then stick to the highest standards of ethics. At some circumstance, violation of ethics may generate immediate efficiency and productivity. Examples: ??
View2: the regulations and laws of authorities are more feasible and suitable standards to follow.
View3: while waiting for government regulations may draw back the processes of eliminating the ill actions, we can count on the authorities to speed up the process of refining the laws and regulations.
The assertion at issue is that business people who uphold the highest ethical standards are the most effective leader. I strongly agree with this statement. For a while (adv. 暂时), unethical behavior might seem effective. But a few examples from the investment banking industry keenly illustrate how dishonesty and corruption in leadership can bring a business to its knees, shattering the trust of its employees and ruining its reputation with clients.
Consider the cases of Michael Milken, former head of junk bond trading at Drexel Burnham Lambert, and Paul Mozer, formerly in charge of Salomon Brothers’ government bonds trading. Each of these men engaged in double-dealing (口是心非，欺骗) and other illegal acts, reaping tremendous profits for their companies, and winning the admiration of subordinates and superiors alike. However, their successes were relatively short-lived (短命的；持续不久的；昙花一现的). Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) investigations in each case revealed massive wrongdoing. As a result, Drexel went out of business. And Salomon Brothers barely recovered, after suffering the forced resignations of its top executives, a financially devastating loss of reputation, and the exodus of many valued employees.
Moreover, Salomon’s survival is probably owing entirely to its subsequent leadership under Warren Buffett. Buffett, who was on the Salomon Brother board of directors at the time of the scandal, was brought in to (bring in to: vt. 把..告诉,让..知道,让..参与) save the beleaguered company. His success in keeping it afloat at all can be directly tied to his sterling (conforming to the highest standard *sterling character*) ethical reputation in the international business community at the time. Buffett’s reputation restored at least some lost confidence among clients and investors, and probably prompted some employees to reconsider their decisions to leave the company.
While not every case of unethical leadership is quite so public or devastating as these, they do illustrate an important point. In any business, once corruption at the top becomes known, the predictable outcome will be damaged reputation, lower worker morale, and, along with them, lost productivity.
In conclusion, unethical conduct at the leadership level in a company might go unnoticed and serve one’s interests in the short-term. However, in the long run it will work against one’s effectiveness and may even prove ruinous.
“最有效率的企业领导是保持最高道德标准的人。”
1， 支持者会认为, 高道德会赢得reputation and trust; 第一, 高道德生产高质量的产品以及service,顾客稳定stable share of the market; 第二, 高道德会让员工满意度提高(公平，平等). 从而attract those applicants with high ability and keep the employees loyal to the company---最终导致高的productivity.
例子：Bayer, one of the largest pharmaceutic companies in the world, announced that the company would cease production of one of its major products, because of the hazardous ingredients it contained. By doing so, the company suffers great loss on profitability, but gains strong public support and understanding, which can contribute to the long-term success of the company.
2， 但在更多的情况下, 高道德也许不equal to maximal profit. 比如,a, 如果把道德放在第一位的话,企业的executive很可能无法执行裁员活动complete the normal administration, such as raising the price, reducing the superabundant staff… b, 高道德的话，很可能采用最高标准的环保生产——这样很不是cost-effective. 总之，Following such undue concern about ethics, the company may find it impossible to survive in the radical competitive market, let alone to gain large profit.
View1: the definition of highest standards of ethics vary from person to person and time to time. Therefore, it is impractical to find and then stick to the highest standards of ethics. At some circumstance, violation of ethics may generate immediate efficiency and productivity. Examples: ??
View2: the regulations and laws of authorities are more feasible and suitable standards to follow.
View3: while waiting for government regulations may draw back the processes of eliminating the ill actions, we can count on the authorities to speed up the process of refining the laws and regulations.
The assertion at issue is that business people who uphold the highest ethical standards are the most effective leader. I strongly agree with this statement. For a while (adv. 暂时), unethical behavior might seem effective. But a few examples from the investment banking industry keenly illustrate how dishonesty and corruption in leadership can bring a business to its knees, shattering the trust of its employees and ruining its reputation with clients.
Consider the cases of Michael Milken, former head of junk bond trading at Drexel Burnham Lambert, and Paul Mozer, formerly in charge of Salomon Brothers’ government bonds trading. Each of these men engaged in double-dealing (口是心非，欺骗) and other illegal acts, reaping tremendous profits for their companies, and winning the admiration of subordinates and superiors alike. However, their successes were relatively short-lived (短命的；持续不久的；昙花一现的). Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) investigations in each case revealed massive wrongdoing. As a result, Drexel went out of business. And Salomon Brothers barely recovered, after suffering the forced resignations of its top executives, a financially devastating loss of reputation, and the exodus of many valued employees.
Moreover, Salomon’s survival is probably owing entirely to its subsequent leadership under Warren Buffett. Buffett, who was on the Salomon Brother board of directors at the time of the scandal, was brought in to (bring in to: vt. 把..告诉,让..知道,让..参与) save the beleaguered company. His success in keeping it afloat at all can be directly tied to his sterling (conforming to the highest standard *sterling character*) ethical reputation in the international business community at the time. Buffett’s reputation restored at least some lost confidence among clients and investors, and probably prompted some employees to reconsider their decisions to leave the company.
While not every case of unethical leadership is quite so public or devastating as these, they do illustrate an important point. In any business, once corruption at the top becomes known, the predictable outcome will be damaged reputation, lower worker morale, and, along with them, lost productivity.
In conclusion, unethical conduct at the leadership level in a company might go unnoticed and serve one’s interests in the short-term. However, in the long run it will work against one’s effectiveness and may even prove ruinous.