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 following article about merge and the questions on the opposite page. •For each question 15-20, mark one letter (A, B,
•Read the following article about merge and the questions on the opposite page. •For each question 15-20, mark one letter (A, B,
admin
2010-01-28
66
问题
•Read the following article about merge 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.
A school of behavioral economists has long argued that when it comes to money, people are incapable of acting in their own best interest -- that decisions result from impulse and overconfidence as much as from reason. Smart folks, in other words, are just as likely to soon part with their money as all those fools.
The truly bad news is that smart companies are just as prone to make terrible decisions for the same reason. Take one of the biggest business decisions of all— merger. Research consistently shows that most mergers fail in every sense of the word, from falling stock prices to lower profitability after the merger. Yet, even with suffering capital markets, a recent Hewitt Associates study found that more than half of the 70 senior executives and board members surveyed planned to step up merger activity during the next three years.
Why? Call it executive hubris. CEOs are not different from the rest of us in that they fall prey to the self-enhancement bias: we all like to think we are intelligent and efficacious. So we overestimate our abilities. That’s why studies show that significantly more than half of all people believe they are above average -- in negotiating ability, even in income, This overly optimistic view is, of course, worse for CEOs- afar all, they generally are way above average. Btu the result is the same: bad decisions. One study, by business school professors Matthew Hayward and Donald Hambrick, showed that the greater the hubris of the chief executive, the more a company tends to overpay for acquisitions.
The aphorism "Pride goeth before a fall" seems to hold true in business too. When executives are confronted with the appalling statistics, their first response goes something like this: "That may happen to other companies, but not ours. This acquisition will be more successful. We have learned."
The next CEO challenge is persuading a possibly recalcitrant board of directors to let you pursue your urge to merge. Hubris, again, returns to center stage. You paint a picture of doom and gloom that will result if you don’t merge. Take a look at one of the rationales given for the merger of Hewlett-Packard and Compaq, two companies with poor operating track records. The argument was that PCs were becoming a commodity industry, consolidation was inevitable, and if HP didn’t do the consolidating, it would soon be one of the consolidated. Here’s another variant of the same rationale: If you don’t buy the target company, your competitor will -- and you’ll lose out. This gambit uses the influence strategy of scarcity -- we want what we can’t have, and we find particularly desirable anything that we may lose to someone else.
Here’s how to avoid hubris-fueled merger mania. First, follow the adage from medicine: Forgive and remember. Go back and evaluate past merger decisions, admit when you were wrong, figure out why, and learn from it.
Second, beware of too much agreement in the board room. When Alfred Sloan ran General Motors, if he couldn’t find opposition to a decision, he’d postpone it. He interpreted a lack of dissent as a lack of analysis. Find, even encourage, people to disagree with you, so that all sides of the decision are examined. Mostly, we like those who agree with us. But as one of my colleagues likes to point out, if two people agree all the time, one of them is redundant.
The urge to merge is still like an addiction in many companies: Doing deals is much more fun and interesting than fixing fundamental problems. So, as in dealing with any other addiction or temptation, maybe it is best to just say no.
What is said about CEOs in the third paragraph?
选项
A、They are above the average people in intelligence.
B、They look down upon the ordinary people.
C、They are overly confident about their abilities as the others are.
D、They can do more mergers with their greater hubris.
答案
C
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/jCKd777K
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
A、 B、 C、 AYes,yourwifecalledanswerstheyes/noquestiondoIhaveanymessages.Choice(B)confusesthesim
A、 B、 C、 ATakethenumber14busadvisesthequestionercorrectly.Choice(B)usesthepasttense.Choice(C)confus
A、 B、 C、 BWedidn’thavetimetotypeitanswerswhytheletterwasnottyped.Choice(A)confusesthewordstype
A、 B、 C、 CBecauseusuallystatesareasonthatanswersawhyquestion.Choice(A)usesshirtbutdoesnotanswerw
A、 B、 C、 A因为是由Do开头的疑问句,所以答案就要以Yes/No开头。所以正确答案是(A)。在把article错误地理解成“物品”而不是“文章”时,容易误将(B)和(C)当做答案。
Askingquestions询问
Askingquestions征询
Tellingyouraudiencethattheycanaskquestions请听众提问
随机试题
以下关于滑坡地段路基施工的叙述,错误的是()。
作为一名工作认真负责的员工,应该是()。
下列有关主动脉瓣狭窄特点的叙述,不正确的是
下列各项,关于肺结核病理变化叙述,错误的是()
给病人输液时,责任护士误将甲床患者的青霉素注射给乙床患者。发现错误后,该护士心里十分矛盾和紧张,对乙床患者进行了严密观察,没有出现青霉素过敏反应。对此,以下说法符合伦理的是
2004年9月,上海金发房地产有限公司取得了上海市人民政府的行政许可,被批准在浦东某地区建一栋大型写字楼。为此,金发房地产有限公司先期投人开发成本达30万元。11月,上海市人民政府接到群众反映。经调查确实,该写字楼位置选取不尽合理,如果建成会大大影响当地居
下列关于对妨害民事诉讼的强制措施的说法中,不符合我国法律规定的是哪一项?()
()是防止施工现场火灾相互蔓延的关键。
细菌对抗生素的耐药性问题日益严重,超级细菌已经造成每年十万人的死亡。新的研究发现,附着在昆虫身上的微小的土壤颗粒中的微生物可能是新的抗生素“源头”,这些小虫子身上的微生物能有效阻止我们所知道的一些最危险、最有耐药性的病原体。因此,研究者认为,人们可以从昆虫
把实体一联系模型转换为关系模型时,实体之间的多联系在关系模型中是通过______。
最新回复
(
0
)