首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Read the article on the opposite page about innovation in business and the questions below. For each question 15-20, mark one le
Read the article on the opposite page about innovation in business and the questions below. For each question 15-20, mark one le
admin
2012-12-14
102
问题
Read the article on the opposite page about innovation in business and the questions below.
For each question 15-20, mark one letter (A, B, C or D) on your Answer Sheet for the answer you choose.
Not long ago innovation was The Big Idea in marketing circles. Now, however, it’s hard to see the benefits of this rush to innovate. Indeed if anything, companies seem to be drawing back from innovation, not charging ahead. But just a few years ago many companies were combining a commitment to create entirely new product categories through innovative technologies working to hugely ambitious growth targets with a root-and-branch organisational overhaul designed to free up creativity and speed new product roll-outs.
The result was that as resources were shifted away from core businesses, sales and profits faltered, share prices slumped and CEOs were ousted. Now the mantra is a more conservative focus on the top brands, the top retail customers and the top markets. It’s being rewarded in many cases by healthier share prices. This sustained effort to cut long tails of smaller brands and focus marketing resource on existing leaders seems to be paying off.
So were we wrong to pinpoint innovation as key to long-term market success? Surely not. But we might have underestimated the enormous complexity of this beast. The term "innovation" may be simple enough but it spans a vast landscape, including the type and degree of innovation, marketing purpose, management process and market circumstance, not all of which are well understood.
Take "type" of innovation. Are we talking about new products only? Or new processes, new channels, underlying technologies, organisational structures and business models? When should the innovation involve a new brand? Or take "degree". Are we aiming for blue-sky inventions that will transform markets and create new categories? Or marginal tweaks in, say, formulation or packaging that give us an excuse to advertise something "New! Improved!"? Likewise, is the marketing purpose of the project to steal a march on competitors and drive incremental growth, or to update an obsolete product line and play catch-up to competitors? As one business news editorial complained, "innovation" is often just "simple proliferation of similar products". Then there’s process. What is the best way to manage this particular innovation? Is it to employ creative revolutionaries and set them free, or is disciplined risk management, requiring the careful testing and sifting of options to pick winners a better approach? In larger organisations, has senior management really made time spent in cross-functional teams a recognised element of successful career paths? What time frames (eg. payback periods) and degrees of risk is senior management comfortable with? And does the organisation have a culture that fits the chosen approach? Does it "celebrate failure", for example, or is it actually a risk-averse blame culture (despite what the CEO says in the annual report) ?
Successful innovation requires clearing two hurdles. First, it needs the right project with the right degree of innovation to fit with the right marketing purpose, the right innovation process, corporate culture and market circumstance. Second, it needs senior managers that understand the interplay between these different factors, so that rather than coming together simply by chance, they are deliberately brought together in different ways to meet different circumstances.
Clearing Hurdle Two can happen "by accident". Clearing Hurdle One requires real skill. We can all point to admirable, inspiring innovations. But how many companies can we point to and say "these people have mastered the art of innovation"? Brilliant innovation is a wonderful thing. Expert innovation management is even better and much rarer.
What problem is indicated in the second paragraph?
选项
A、Insufficient attention to brand identity damages company profits.
B、A lack of product diversity reduces a company’s appeal.
C、Business leaders are not attracted to slow-performing companies.
D、Slow reactions to business trends reduce investors’ interest.
答案
A
解析
A第二段主要讲由于资源没有合理配置,分散到了许多产品上,而没有抓住核心,所以利润损失了,后来定位于高端商品,利润增加了,所以A符合题意。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/1Q7d777K
本试题收录于:
BEC高级阅读题库BEC商务英语分类
0
BEC高级阅读
BEC商务英语
相关试题推荐
WhattypeofbusinessisFindersBuyers?
Whattypeofbusinessisthemanmostlikelycalling?
Whattypeofservicedoesthecompanymostlikelyprovide?
Whattypeofservicedoesthecompanymostlikelyprovide?
Inthispartofthetest,youareaskedtogiveashorttalkonabusinesstopic.Youhavetochooseoneofthetopicsfromthe
Inthispartofthetest,youareaskedtogiveashorttalkonabusinesstopic.Youhavetochooseoneofthetopicsfromthe
Askingquestions询问
•Youwillheararecruitingmanagertellinghowtofindjobsontheweb.•Asyoulisten,forquestions1-12,completethenotes
A.beingontimeforanyinterviewB.beingnicetoeveryoneyoutalktoC.beinghonestintheinterviewD.become
ALargeseverancepaymentwasmade.BApartnershipabroadwasformed.CNexttime,abetterscheduleneedstobearr
随机试题
病理状态下的纤维蛋白沉积不包括
寻找先导化合物的途径有
患儿腰椎穿刺术后,去枕平卧6小时的目的是防止出现
患者,63岁,排便后肛门处剧烈疼痛,触痛明显,最可能的诊断是
科学发展观的根本方法是()
长江公司在A、B、C三地拥有三家分公司,这三家分公司的经营活动由一个总部负责运作。由于A、B、C三家分公司均能产生独立于其他分公司的现金流入,所以长江公司将这三家分公司确定为A、B、C三个资产组。2017年12月31日,因长江公司经营所处的技术环境发生了重
某市出台了一系列惠民政策,但迟迟未落实到某养老服务机构。机构的老人们认为主要原因是机构工作不到位,工作人员努力不够,并不听机构管理者的反复解释,希望直接与有关部门沟通。为此,机构管理者派社会工作者负责处理这个问题。根据社会工作专业价值和伦理守则,社会工作者
教师将自我的教育观念转变及教学能力提升的过程写成自传,通过积极自我反思,从而明确专业发展方向的教育研究方法是()。
海鸥是最常见的海鸟,被称为海上航行安全的“预报员”。下列对海鸥获得“预报员”称号的解释中不符合事实的是:
假设某计算机系统的内存大小为256K,在某一时刻内存的使用情况如下表所示。此时,若进程顺序请求10K、15K和5K的存储空间,系统采用某种算法为进程分配内存,分配后的内存情况如下表所示。那么系统采用的是什么分配算法?()
最新回复
(
0
)