ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1298|回复: 2
打印 上一主题 下一主题

求助1道逻辑题。。想不通~

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2012-9-10 13:21:47 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |正序浏览 |阅读模式
1.S university's fund-raisers succeeded in getting donation from 85 percent of the potential donors they contacted. this successful rate ,exceptionally high for university fund-raisers, does not indicate that they were doing a good job . On the contray ,becasue the people most likely ti donate are those who have donated in the past,good fund-raisers continually try less-likely prospect in an effort to expand the donation base .The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort .

which of the following ,if ture ,provides more support for the argument ?
答案为:S university fund-raisers were successful in their contact with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities in their contact with such people.

哪位大侠能清楚的解释下。。谢谢啦 我晕了已经。。
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2012-9-10 20:54:17 | 只看该作者
3q very much!~
沙发
发表于 2012-9-10 16:42:17 | 只看该作者
S大学 fund-raisers成功的从 85%的potential donors获得捐赠,这个成功的rate对于大学的fund-raisers来说是非常高的,但是并不意味这是S大学的 fund-raisers工作有效,能力强。相反,因为很多捐赠的人是之前就曾经捐赠过的, 好的fund-raisers应该努力是在less-likely prospect的情况下扩大捐赠的基础,所以这个rate 不足以显示S大学 fund-raisers工作有效,能力强。

这题主要是在说S大学的高rate不能说明 fund-raisers工作有效,能力强
答案,S大学 fund-raisers需要用和其他大学一样的次数才能说服从来没有联系过的potential donors 说明S大学 fund-raisers和其他大学的fund-raisers的工作效率一样,能力相同,支持这点!

不是完全按照原文翻译,觉得这样更容易理解一点~!
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-10 16:15
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部