“所有的团体和组织都应该作为一个每个人都参与决定、分享责任和义务的团队来运作。给予一个人关于一个项目和行动的集中的权威和责任不是完成工作的有效方式。”
The question at hand is whether the most productive method of performing a group task is allowing all group members to make decisions and share responsibilities and duties or giving one person central authority and responsibility for the whole project. Admittedly, as the speaker claims here, the negotiation among group members may produce beneficial results in some cases. However, because the speaker unnecessarily extend this broad assertion and overlook the disadvantage of the method and certain compelling factors impacting efficiency, my point of contention with the author is that in many other occasions, appointing one as a leader and giving him or her the highest authority may be more efficient and result benefit.
Undeniable, although it suffers some obvious drawbacks, the claim of the author is partially indisputable in some special cases. In fact, in most of the democratic nations, people aspect and pursuit the equality, and thereby take it nature that every group member should have the authority to put forward his or her own view and negotiation is inevitable. In this aspect, the sharing of decision making and efficiently avoid the possible mistake and damage to the end product. Also, the participation of all members can bring
together different thoughts and provide more and better alternatives to perform the task. In addition, the members taking part in the negotiation would feel more accountable for how the work turns out. That's why almost every big enterprise, jury in criminal trials and chamber have negotiation so frequently, thereby spending a lot of time in make any decision which is often the most choice of all.
However, negotiation can achieve the desired result in the result expected only if the disadvantage can be avoided. Often, negotiation may turn out to be a worthless quarrel and delay the efficiency once can be made. Moreover, when members with little or no knowledge of the project take part in the decision making, the final consequence may be even worse. You can think that why a trauma unit never allow nurses or the assistants to share in the decision making although they are obvious a group. And sometimes, because the possible corruption in every field, the sharing may have no significancy. We can take negotiation in company as an example. The board may not put forward their advise from the benefit of the company but from their own benefit instead, resulting a plan only damage the development of the organization.
Instead, offering a individual may have some advantage in some cases. Suppose that when a group meet a serious snowslide, the best and probable the only way is to obey the one who have the most experience, and a negotiation among all the members may lead to the death of all people. It's clear that in some situations, especially those where quick decision are necessary or where individual experience is critical, the most experience should be appoint as a leader and make the final decision. What's more, a person with most power can also allow other members to put forward their thoughts and then put them together to make a decision, a method that is more efficient, useful, and practical in the world today full of competition and need quick decision making.
From these and such considerations, it may be concluded that the sharing of decision making is only the best way to accomplish a take in some special cases. However, in order to ensure the success of the project, making one individual to serve as a leader and assume ultimate responsibility for completing the job is also a efficient and necessary way which can avoid the disadvantage of the first method and result better in many other cases.
还有不到一个月就考试了，才刚准备作文，现在一些就好长，要写一个小时，有点控制不住，怎么办啊，而且个人底子差，以前都是中学作文水平了，不知道现在水平怎么样啊，这是第五篇左右吧。
不是NN，路过，仅“假言村语”，说说意见。
文题是关于民主决策和个人乾纲独断的争论，属老生常谈之八股话题。写法可“破”可“立”，亦可“周圆”二者，点出其优劣，说明要实际情况实际分析。鄙人观lz文章首末，开头摆出“反对”姿态，认为乾纲独断是更有效之法，但结尾观点却有些弱化，说独断也是一项有效手段，但并未指出独断较之集体决策更优。这样处理，无疑给人虎头蛇尾之感，建议改改。个人认为写academic writing, consistence 至关重要。能变换不同的说法表明同一个意思可是必不可少的技法。
其次说说细节处理，同意ls的意见，首句是有些拖沓,本人试改如下：
Concerned with the operation procedure in an organization or a team task, the intractable question at hand focuses on the approach in decision-making where now two apparently excusive alternatives are striking: authority and responsibility to a person or to a group. Admittedly…
其实个人并不是太喜欢这样摆问题然后说观点的直接议论的写法，太过平淡，人人如是，缺乏特色。文章要取高分需有亮点，让rater觉得你的文章和其它4分5分的不一样，于是便给你个5.5，6分的。而开头就是一个常能出亮点的地方，可下些心思作个好模板，到临场再加以发挥。本人喜欢在描述中议论，拙笔试写一段如下：
Modern society selflessly grants “democracy” the supreme throne, thereby widely applying it from the political field to the business workplace. Gradually the demand of democracy has evolved to be a natural force for people to pursue their voices heard and to participate into the decision process they think they suppose to be involved. Such selflessness earns praise; nevertheless, its abuse may also cause a project crash, even a nation. The “over-democracy” resulting in fruitless quarrel exhausted the wise and ruined Ancient Greece in the history. On my point of view, in certain scenario, appointing one as a leader and conferring him or her dominating authority is necessary and may bring about better consequence.
以本人经验，e-rater偏好一些难词，lz不妨对一些词作些升级，相信对文章定能增色不少。
最后说说字数，明显楼主写得太多。在考场上能写上500字是相当不错了。lz该文洋洋洒洒六七百言，要注意节制才是。
还有就是拼写也要小心。
太感谢了阿
我也知道有这些问题，但时间是不是够了阿，以前底子太差了…………
| 欢迎光临 ChaseDream (https://forum.chasedream.com/) | Powered by Discuz! X3.3 |