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
131
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.
According to the third paragraph, it would be a mistake to______.
选项
A、rely on future benefits in business planning
B、deny the benefits of pursuing innovation
C、neglect the importance of strategic issues
D、predict the outcomes of innovations
答案
B
解析
第三段第1句问:So were we wrong topinpoint innovation as key to long-term mar-ket success?(难道我们把创新做为长期市场成功的钥匙是错的吗?)回答为“surelynot”,所以说否定创新的作用是个错误选B。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/2Q7d777K
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
Whattypeofbusinessdothespeakersmostlikelyworkfor?
A、 B、 C、 C是问去超市的路的HowcanIgetto疑问句。(A)是使用由问句中的supermarket可能联想到的groceries、含联想词错误的错误选项;对疑问词疑问句不能用YES/NO回答,(B)
Lookatthegraphic.Whichcellphoneplanwillthemanmostlikelychoose?
1.(Thecandidatechoosesonetopicandspeaksaboutitforoneminute.)A.StaffManagement:howtoachieveandmaintainhighm
TaskSheetforCandidateATaskSheet1A:Stafftraining:howtomaintainthestaff’sinterestinthe–company’strainingpr
Inthispartofthetest,youareaskedtogiveashorttalkonabusinesstopic.YouhavetochooseoneofthetopicsfrOmtheth
FinancialManagement:theimportanceofmaintainingfinancialcontrolacrossalldepartments
Answer回答
Theinterlocutorasksyouquestionsonanumberofwork-relatedandnonwork-relatedsubjects.
TaskSheetforCandidateATaskSheet1A:Stafftraining:howtomaintainthestaff’sinterestinthecompany’strainingprogra
随机试题
下列有关硝普钠的叙述中,错误的是
A.出血时间延长B.凝血时间延长C.凝血酶原时间缩短D.活化部分凝血活酶时间延长过敏性紫癜的特点是
富含单不饱和脂肪酸的油脂是
A.支持尖相对的中央窝B.支持尖上的干扰点C.非支持尖成的干扰点D.上尖牙的舌斜面E.以调磨下尖牙的唇斜面为主全口义齿选磨侧方袷的干扰时.应选磨
山西五台山佛光寺大殿采用的是何种平面形式?()
资本市场开放包括()。Ⅰ.服务性开放Ⅱ.投资性开放Ⅲ.投机性开放Ⅳ.机构投资者开放
如何理解基本养老金由统筹养老金和个人账户养老金组成?
科学共产主义诞生的标志是()。
朋友的儿子小冲是做家电维修保养的个体户。一次,他冒着火辣辣的太阳,去开发区内的一家日资企业,为总经理办公室修理空调。日本总经理见他手脚麻利,很快就让一台别人修了几次的空调正常运转了,忍不住夸奖了两句。小冲笑笑,用日语对答。总经理十分惊讶:这小伙子
Themostrecognizableliterarymovementthatgaverisetothetwentieth-centuryAmericanliterature,orwemaysay,thesecondA
最新回复
(
0
)