**Question Q1) 以前的人类学家用culture’s singular form来指代P的文化，必须要justify什么。 【Answer】the nation is in a linguistically diverse group *right* Q2) 人类学家所用的JUSTIFY的方法是什么样子的 【Answer】寻找不变和共同的特征 *right* Q3) 如果文章主题题目：指出人类学家在研究pueblo过程中一个错误的assumption Selection 1: 指出人类学家在研究p民族的过程中一个错误的assumption 正确 Selection 2: 作者反对人类学家的一种APPROACH。 *uncertain*作者: CC要考G 时间: 2012-9-24 15:33
P1：提出了gray market的定义，说游离于产品的分销渠道之外的一种市场。通常会通过另外渠道从制造厂商那里获取商品，然后以极低的价格销售。无论是制造商还是零售商都觉得gray market是一种伤害。制造商认为会搅乱分销渠道，零售商认为会影响商品的价格水平并降低零售商利润；
P2：Under certain market conditions, gray marketing can benefit manufacturers and retailers. The favorable market condition is met when the customer base is distinctively segmented- i.e. the presence of a significant number of both price sensitive and price insensitive customers. 虽然灰色区销售的商品可能价格低，但是正规渠道的销售和灰色区销售吸引的人群不一样，有些人看重价格因素，就会去灰色区购买，而有些人习惯在超市购买，自然也会继续自己的习惯。
P3： In the presence of market segmentation, manufacturers and retailers can increase profits by charging higher prices to price insensitive customers while improving the quality of the service. This measure will most likely offset the loss of revenue from price sensitive customers. gray market将价格敏感性的顾客全部吸引，从而使得零售商可以专心的服务于那些价格非敏感客户，提高服务水平等等。对于制造商，则可以如何如何。
**Question： 1．主旨题 答：To explain how gray market can benefit the profit and margin of manufacturers and retailers 2. 如果gray market不存在，但是满足这两个条件（一个是顾客的区分度很大，还有一个是有庞大的对价格insensitive的顾客群）的公司，哪一项措施可以达到黑市交易存在时给公司带来的益处？ 答：可以开两个chain store, 一个关注于价格敏感客户，一个专注服务质量。 3. 在Grey market中retailers可以怎样？ 答：关注他们该关注的客户群体，放弃低Margin那部分客户群体。 4. 假如没有grey market， 这篇文章 indicate商家会怎么做？ 答：可能要考虑的那些喜欢买便宜东西的顾客。作者: sisu555 时间: 2012-9-24 17:50
关注jj补充中作者: AJ0102 时间: 2012-9-25 06:08
CC要考G： 不是你这个版本的NGO 这个是我考的: 关于美国企业慈善(philanthropy)及企业经营策略。比较长，好像分了四段，但是其实文章不难。第一段讲downsizing导致美国企业很郁闷。在做慈善的同时却不得不lay off员工。后来manager就调整企业策略，把公司慈善事业和business unit紧密结合起来，而非让慈善事业仅仅只是花钱。 P9: 找到原文了，看了一下，基本考了以下部分，题目在后面： P10: http://hbr.org/1994/05/the-new-corporate-philanthropy/ar/1 P11: Downsizing has transformed the management of corporate philanthropy in the United States. Forced to explain why businesses should give away money while laying off workers, contributions managers at hundreds of companies, including AT&T, IBM, and Levi Strauss, have come up with an approach that ties corporate giving directly to strategy. In those and other companies, philanthropic and business units have joined forces to develop giving strategies that increase their name recognition among consumers, boost employee productivity, reduce R&D costs, overcome regulatory obstacles, and foster synergy among business units. In short, the strategic use of philanthropy has begun to give companies a powerful competitive edge. P12: The outcome of this new model is not, as many had feared, an array of programs that benefit only business. True, there is no shortage of self-serving philanthropic initiatives that lend themselves to photo opportunities without effecting real change. But the new paradigm encourages corporations to play a leadership role in social problem solving by funding long-term initiatives, like school reform and AIDS awareness, that incorporate the best thinking of governments and nonprofit institutions. (See the insert “How Corporate Philanthropy Promotes Causes.”) For the first time, businesses are backing philanthropic initiatives with real corporate muscle. In addition to cash, they are providing nonprofits with managerial advice, technological and communications support, and teams of employee volunteers. And they are funding those initiatives not only from philanthropy budgets but also from business units, such as marketing and human resources. In the process, companies are forming strategic alliances with nonprofits and emerging as important partners in movements for social change while advancing their business goals. P13: How Corporate Philanthropy Promotes Causes P14: In other words, these companies have become corporate citizens. Like citizens in the classical sense, corporate citizens cultivate a broad view of their own self-interest while instinctively searching for ways to align self-interest with the larger good. That is, they hunt for a reconciliation of their companies’ profit-making strategies with the welfare of society, and they search for ways to steer all parts of the company on a socially engaged course. So far, philanthropy programs have been overhauled along these lines in many large corporations, such as Eastman Kodak, Allstate, Chrysler, Whirlpool, Citicorp, Reebok, Johnson & Johnson, Philip Morris, Merck, DuPont, and Coca-Cola, to name just a few. P15: Already powerful in the United States, corporate citizenship promises to bring even more success to U.S. companies internationally, particularly in emerging markets like Taiwan, Brazil, and Hungary. In such countries, which are still uncluttered by social initiatives, even small well-conceived grant programs can have a large impact. Given their experience with strategic philanthropy at home, U.S. companies are in the best position to reap the rewards abroad. But they may be sabotaging their own position. Noting that U.S. businesses donate more than their foreign rivals, many CEOs are cutting their philanthropy budgets and downgrading their staffs just as their companies are about to export philanthropy to overseas subsidiaries. Thus, non-U.S. companies may ultimately gain the competitive edge. Japan is already studying the new paradigm of corporate philanthropy, and Korea and Taiwan are taking good notes. U.S. companies must act now or risk missing out on the benefits of the model they developed. Q1：美国公司为什么要把慈善工作和公司的business unit合并。 选的是公司要面对一方面要做慈善，一方面还要裁员的情况。这题不是很确定。
P16: Q2：根据corporate citizen的定义，以下哪一个是corporate citizen。 P17: 两个选项不确定： P18: A： a company leads the nation to expand the abroad market P19: B: a company improves its image in a way that contributes to a charitable cause P20: 我选的B。 P21: P22: Q3：美国公司对None-Profit的有哪些变化 P23: 确定应该选provide more varied supports to none-profit as they did before P24: P25: O4: 划黄线部分，作者意味着什么 P26: 确定选 some American CEOs are shortsighted…balala 29. Publos民族 很多人类学家在谈到peublo的文化的时候，都用一种peublo culture（singular form，单数）来指代，因此他们必须justify 这个有400000 something 人的部落，说着6 different languages，但是他们却用单数的culture而不是用cultures来指代他们的文化。这些人类学者所提供的justification是一种概念化的东西：研究一个团体，他们就只去寻找这个团体中的共同，而且不变的特征。而实际上这个p根本就不是一成不变的，他们文化的特征常常在不同的部落中间转变的。他们在一个相对confined的地方生活，在英国使美国大部分地区变成殖民地的时候，他们也逃脱了英国的控制，使他们更有自己的空间survive他们的文化不同性。一个更加重要的例子就是，在文化发展之前，他们就开始在小部落之间交换货物，技术，文化，虽然他们语言不一样，但是这样的交流无疑促进了他们的文化不同性。 题目： Q1：以前的人类学家用culture的单数形式 (singular form)来指代P的文化，必须要justify什么 ? the nation is in a linguistically diversed group Q2：人类学家所用的JUSTIFY的方法是怎么样子的 ? 寻找不变和共同的特征 Q3：主旨 ? 指出人类学家在研究p民族的过程中一个错误的assumption Q4：人类学者在成长过程中一直收到什么教育 ? 其他都是对的 至于题目我真的记不得了 都不难找。。。