标题: 问道题！！！lr [打印本页] 作者: lihaolan 时间: 2012-10-21 22:59 标题: 问道题！！！lr Company president: Our consultants report that, in general, the most efficient managers have excellent time management skills. Thus, to improve productivity I recommend that we make available to our middle-level managers a seminar to train them in techniques of time management. Each of the following, if true, would weaken the support for the company president’s recommendation EXCEPT: (A) The consultants use the same criteria to evaluate managers’ efficiency as they do to evaluate their time management skills. (B) Successful time management is more dependent on motivation than on good technique. (C) Most managers at other companies who have attended time management seminars are still unproductive. (D) Most managers who are already efficient do not need to improve their productivity. (E) Most managers who are efficient have never attended a time management seminar. 答案是D,我想知道A为什么weaken the argument 如果用一致的标准提高 time management也就提高了EFFICIENCY。如果说technique 的提高对于 time management 没有意义那不就是B么。我觉得A没有weaken。 但是换一种解释就是time management 和efficiency 之间没有causal 关系。求解释下A谢谢啦！！！作者: brenda1306 时间: 2012-10-22 15:44
LZ是把 evaluate看成了elevate吗？。。。。。作者: lihaolan 时间: 2012-10-22 17:50
没有。。是用同样的标准判定效率和利用时间 的意思吧。。。我想知道。如果用同样的标准。提高一个的技巧另一个不是也提高了么作者: xins2008 时间: 2012-10-31 06:17
In my opinion, The president uses the consultant's report as a premise such that , management skills leads to efficiency, to support his conclusion. However, if (A) is true, it means due to the same criteria, management skills and efficiency will always receive the same evaluation, which means their relation is not necessarily causality.作者: dphxmg 时间: 2012-11-19 07:50
A) 说的绕来绕去，就一个意思：公司总裁在管理者的时间管理技能的高低和他们的效率之间划等号。实际上，是在指责这个总裁在偷换概念。作者: PeytonS 时间: 2012-12-10 22:37
我觉得，问题中总裁把经理的效率和他们的time management的能力划了等号，所以，所有那些能证明time management和效率这个等式关系不成立的，都能weaken总裁的观点，重点是否定time management能力。