[讨论]OG 36-226

barmecide

Passage 36

The fact that superior service can generate a competitive

advantage for a company does not mean that every attempt

at improving service will create such an advantage. Invest-

ments in service, like those in production and distribution,

(5) must be balanced against other types of investments on the

basis of direct, tangible benefits such as cost reduction and

increased revenues. If a company is already effectively on a

par with its competitors because it provides service that

avoids a damaging reputation and keeps customers from

(10) leaving at an unacceptable rate, then investment in higher

service levels may be wasted, since service is a deciding

factor for customers only in extreme situations.

This truth was not apparent to managers of one regional

bank, which failed to improve its competitive position

(15) despite its investment in reducing the time a customer had

to wait for a teller. The bank managers did not recognize

the level of customer inertia in the consumer banking

industry that arises from the inconvenience of switching

banks. Nor did they analyze their service improvement to

(20) determine whether it would attract new customers by pro-

ducing a new standard of service that would excite cus-

tomers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy. The

only merit of the improvement was that it could easily be

described to customers.

226. According to the passage, investments in service are comparable to investments in production

and distribution in terms of the

(A)  tangibility of the benefits that they tend to confer

(B)   increased revenues that they ultimately produce

(C)   basis on which they need to be weighed

(D)  insufficient analysis that managers devote to them (C)

(E)   degree of competitive advantage that they are likely to provide

226.

This question asks you to identify a similarity between investments in service and investments in

production and distribution that is explicitly noted by the author in the passage. The best answer is

C. In liens 3-7, the author observes that investments in service are comparable to investments in

production and distribution in that both types of investments need to be evaluated on the same

basis; specifically the author states that both “must be balanced against other types of investments

on the basis of direct, tangible benefits such as cost reduction and increased revenues.” Choice A

is not correct: lines 3-7 suggest that the author believes that both investments in service and

investments in production and distribution may be worthwhile if they result in tangible benefits,

but the author neither states nor suggests that the tangibility of investments in production and

distribution. Choice B can be eliminated because there is no indication in the passage that when, I

fact, investments in service do raise revenues, these revenues are comparable to the revenues

raised by investments in production and distribution. Choice D is incorrect because although the

passage does suggest that managers’ analysis of investments in service is insufficient, there is no

indication in the passage that managers’ analysis of investments in production and distribution is

also insufficient. Choice E can be eliminated because there is no discussion in the passage of the

extent to which either investments in service or investments in production and distribution are

likely to enhance competitive advantage.

这个题一直不是很明白，我已经Search过论坛里相关的讨论，无论怎么仔细看也理解不上来，请达人们详细指点。多谢！！！！

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-7 8:41:17编辑过]

wangyu73cn

我也觉得这道题难，所以曾将解释看了很多遍。总体的感觉是两者的比较是依据一些基础标准，而具体的标准内容则并不是比较依据。
请指正。

barmecide

觉得OG的答案是错的，解释也没有说服力。个人认为正确答案应该是B

Invest-

ments in service, like those in production and distribution,

(5) must be balanced against other types of investments on the

basis of direct, tangible benefits such as cost reduction and

increased revenues.

我对这句话的理解是，服务投资，与生产与分销投资一样，必须在直接，切实的盈利上例如降低成本，增加收入等，保持相对的平衡。

而226题问的是，服务投资与生产与分销投资在下面哪个方面有可比性

如果说A不对，是因为段落中提到的是切实的盈利，而选项中提到是盈利的切实性，两者不是一个概念勉强可以接受话，选项B的最终实现的收入增加与题目中则完全一致，为什么不能做为正确答案？OG的解释说，文中虽然提到服务投资可以增加收入，但没有明确说明服务投资增加的收入与生产与分销投资增加的收入有可比性。

前面那句话的意思不正是说，服务投资与其它的投资在减少成本，增加收入等切实盈利方面必须有保持平衡吗（可比性)吗？

而选项C，按照ETS的原则应该是纯粹的无关答案才对啊。在这儿怎么就成了正确答案了呢？

把C代入题目，原句应该说的意思是，根据段落，服务投资与生产与分销投资在需要衡量的所有方面都具有可必性。我在原文中找不到任何对应此意思的内容。我也不知道服务投资与生产分销投资在哪些方面需要衡量？总之，我怎么看也看不出来这是正确答案。

请指教！！！

wangyu73cn

http://forum.chasedream.com/dispbbs.asp?BoardID=25&ID=90912&replyID=&skin=0供参考。

基本上，我同意你的翻译，有小的调整：服务业的投资，类似于生产和分销行业的投资，必须在(如降低成本、增加收入等)直接、切实的盈利方面，同其他类的投资进行比较权衡。
由文章和题目解释中强调的意思来看，在这里，这种不同行业的投资之间的关系所依据的，不是不同行业的“盈利切实与否”、“收入多少”、“盈利分析是否充分”、“竞争优势是否存在”等具体内容，而是对他们进行权衡的基础标准。
不可否认，基础标准和具体内容是紧密相关的。但是，他们两者的层次有些不同，ETS就是考察这种层次的细微差异吧。

barmecide

多谢版主指点，不过还是不能说服我。你说的基础标准什么文没有任何地方提到，也没有什么地方可以推断出来。属于过度推断。

版主能不能告诉我为什么B答案不正确？

你给的连接我原来也看过了，正是因为觉得解释比较勉强才又发一个新帖子，希望能找到比较有说服力的答案。

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-7 21:37:42编辑过]

tania

根据朗文对balance something against something的解释

longman:banlance

[transitive] to consider the importance of one thing in relation to something else when you are making a decision
balance something against something
The courts must balance our liberty against the security of the nation.

我对这句话理解如下：与在生产和分销方面的投资相似，【在做投资决策时，】（省略）必须要根据直接和切实的利益（比如说降低成本和增加收入）来考虑是应该投资于服务还是其他方面。

这句话的意思表明，投资于服务与投资于生产和分销之所以具有可比性是因为他们两者衡量的基础一样，都是要根据直接和切实的利益来衡量是否要投资。所以选c。

不知理解的对不对，请大家多指教！

wangyu73cn

我非常同意楼上的表达：“投资于服务与投资于生产和分销之所以具有可比性是因为他们两者衡量的基础一样，都是要根据直接和切实的利益来衡量是否要投资。”而这种可比性不是根据直接和切实的利益(近似于选项B所表达的内容)。

chinayeanson

以下是引用tania在2005-6-15 17:26:00的发言：

根据朗文对balance something against something的解释

longman:banlance

[transitive] to consider the importance of one thing in relation to something else when you are making a decision
balance something against something
The courts must balance our liberty against the security of the nation.

我对这句话理解如下：与在生产和分销方面的投资相似，【在做投资决策时，】（省略）必须要根据直接和切实的利益（比如说降低成本和增加收入）来考虑是应该投资于服务还是其他方面。

这句话的意思表明，投资于服务与投资于生产和分销之所以具有可比性是因为他们两者衡量的基础一样，都是要根据直接和切实的利益来衡量是否要投资。所以选c。

不知理解的对不对，请大家多指教！

我同意。

这里basis是指“direct, tangible benefits”，其中例如“cost reduction”和“increased revenues”。而A 则改变了意思，强调“tangibility of benefits ”；B则只包含了一部分——“increased revenues”。

swlfx

赞同楼上的补充。

sandy_zxj

我认为，首先，这句话的意思是 “在服务上的投资，像在生产和分销上的投资一样，必须在一个直接的，可明确的利益的基础之上同其他类型投资进行比较"

生产和分销渠道的投资回报可能是立竿见影的（比如说节约了多少成本，提高了工人的生产效率等等），因此它们可以说是有tangible benifit，但是在服务上面的投资回报很可能一时难以衡量，就比如文中这个bank对于缩短排队等候的时间的这种做法究竟为自身带来了多少效益一样,因此，the benifit of invesment in service实际上不是很tangible的。 所以，上面这句话的主要目的是说这些投资都必须量化到一个基础后(the basis of direct and tangible benifit）再跟其他投资进行比较。

A是错的，因为他认为investment in service 和investment in production and distribution 在tangibility of benifit 上是可比的，而明显这两者的benifit在tangibility不能比的。

C为什么对，是因为他把这两者量化后的结果(basis on which they need to be weighted) 作为比较的对象

[此贴子已经被作者于2005-6-21 18:03:05编辑过]