|
“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。 | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2008-5-4 09:51:00
楼主
