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
47
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 first paragraph, a few years ago companies______.
选项
A、trusted in technology to improve existing products
B、chose to focus heavily on marketing activities
C、expected that growth would increase steadily
D、believed they needed to produce new goods
答案
D
解析
由“But just a few years ago manycompanies were combining a commitment tocreate entirely new product...”可知,但是就在几年前,很多公司都转向成立专门小组来研发新的产品,D与此相近。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/mQ7d777K
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
WhattypeofbusinessisMegan’sThreads?
Inthispartofthetest,youareaskedtogiveashorttalkonabusinesstopic.YouhavetochooseoneofthetopicsfrOmtheth
Inthispartofthetest,youareaskedtogiveashorttalkonabusinesstopic.Youhavetochooseoneofthetopicsfromthe
Task4AttractingNewBusinessClientsYouworkforacompany,whichprovidesmeetingfacilitiesforbusinessclients.Yourdepa
TaskSheetforCandidateATaskSheet1A:Stafftraining:howtomaintainthestaff’sinterestinthecompany’strainingprogra
Answeringreceptionist’squestions回答接待员询问
•Youwillhearfivebusinesspeoplediscussinghowtobecomeatrueleader.•Foreachextracttherearetwotasks.ForTaskOne,
•Youwillheararecruitingmanagertellinghowtofindjobsontheweb.•Asyoulisten,forquestions1-12,completethenotes
•Youwillheararecruitingmanagertellinghowtofindjobsontheweb.•Asyoulisten,forquestions1-12,completethenotes
随机试题
特殊性能钢含合金元素较高。
匙状甲也称反甲,常见于
8月某日,某单位聚餐有80%聚餐者先后因腹痛、腹泻就诊。大部分患者有上腹和脐周阵发性绞痛,继而腹泻,5—20次/天,粪便呈洗肉水样血水便。调查发现聚餐的主要食物为盐水虾及近海贝类等。引起该食物中毒的病原菌可能是
具有简单、直观,便于了解项目投资概貌等优点的投资偏差分析法是()。
下列特性中,属于砌体结构特点的有()。
采购方可以依据80/20规则将供应商划分为重点供应商和普通供应商,以下应当属于重点供应商供应的足()。
民事权利的保护方法有()。
从数据库类型上看,Access的类型是()。
考生文件夹下存在一个数据库文件“samp2.accdb”,里面已经设计好“tStud”、“tCourse”和“tScore”三个关联表对象及表对象“tTemp”。试按以下要求完成设计:创建一个查询,查找并显示学生的“姓名”、“课程名”和“成绩”三个字段
Sportingactivitiesareessentiallymodifiedformsofhuntingbehavior.Viewedbiologically,themodernfootballerisrevealeda
最新回复
(
0
)