GMAT考试写作指导：Issue写作范文五五
分类: GRE-GMAT英语
55. I agree that supervisors should under most circumstances merely tell subordinates
what to do, but not necessarily how to do it. Of course, employees need adequate
training in order to do a job. But beyond that, trusting employees to discover and
develop their own methods for meeting a supervisor's expectations can produce
surprising rewards that outweigh any pitfalls of such an approach.
First of all, restraint in directing the how-to aspect of a project signals the
supervisor's confidence in an employee's intelligence and abilities. Sensing this
confidence, the subordinate will often respond with his or her best work. This
phenomenon lends truth to the adage that people rise to the level of what others expect
from them.
Secondly, by allowing a subordinate to decide how best to attain an objective, a
supervisor imparts a larger share of responsibility for the project to the subordinate. This
alleviates some of the burden from the supervisor, who may have more time for other
tasks as a result. At the same time, when the subordinate shares in the responsibility, he
or she will probably feel more accountable for how the job turns out. The result is likely
to be better job performance.
Thirdly, directing every step of a project often blocks a worker's own creativity, as
well as creating animosity. Except in the training of a new worker with little or no
experience, it would be naive and arrogant for any supervisor to assume there is one and
only one best way--the supervisor's own way--to get a job done. A bright, competent
subordinate is likely to resent being led by the hand like a child. Allowing employees to
choose their own means and methods will spark their ingenuity in ways that enhance
productivity now and in the future, and will foster goodwill and mutual respect in the
workplace.
In sum, telling a subordinate how to do a job is rarely the best management
approach. Instead, supervisors should assign tasks without directing each step. When
employees are left to choose methods for completing work, they will be bolstered by the
supervisor's trust, motivated to greater creativity and inclined to feel accountable for
outcomes.
what to do, but not necessarily how to do it. Of course, employees need adequate
training in order to do a job. But beyond that, trusting employees to discover and
develop their own methods for meeting a supervisor's expectations can produce
surprising rewards that outweigh any pitfalls of such an approach.
First of all, restraint in directing the how-to aspect of a project signals the
supervisor's confidence in an employee's intelligence and abilities. Sensing this
confidence, the subordinate will often respond with his or her best work. This
phenomenon lends truth to the adage that people rise to the level of what others expect
from them.
Secondly, by allowing a subordinate to decide how best to attain an objective, a
supervisor imparts a larger share of responsibility for the project to the subordinate. This
alleviates some of the burden from the supervisor, who may have more time for other
tasks as a result. At the same time, when the subordinate shares in the responsibility, he
or she will probably feel more accountable for how the job turns out. The result is likely
to be better job performance.
Thirdly, directing every step of a project often blocks a worker's own creativity, as
well as creating animosity. Except in the training of a new worker with little or no
experience, it would be naive and arrogant for any supervisor to assume there is one and
only one best way--the supervisor's own way--to get a job done. A bright, competent
subordinate is likely to resent being led by the hand like a child. Allowing employees to
choose their own means and methods will spark their ingenuity in ways that enhance
productivity now and in the future, and will foster goodwill and mutual respect in the
workplace.
In sum, telling a subordinate how to do a job is rarely the best management
approach. Instead, supervisors should assign tasks without directing each step. When
employees are left to choose methods for completing work, they will be bolstered by the
supervisor's trust, motivated to greater creativity and inclined to feel accountable for
outcomes.