12月GMAT阅读新题-Business & Economics(十二).

　　21. 一篇是大公司和小公司的创新*

　　围绕公司规模与公司创新是否有关。就是人名很多，每一个观点都两个人，回答问题的时候看清是问谁就好了

　　第一段：某某说大公司创新多，因为有钱有势有人。然后xx和xx反驳说不对，随着公司规模的增大，会更官僚，而小公司运作灵活，有利于创新。然后又有xx和xx跳出来，唉，你们都错了，应该是中型公司有利于创新，又灵活又不官僚。

　　第二段：作者出场了，说，上面的都是胡扯嘛，讨论重点都不对，光focus在company size上有毛用啊?我们要看这个公司的员工有没有这个意愿去创新，这个地方有个关键词不认识，cen什么的，不过还好，下面有个解释，就是说愿不愿意淘汰现有技术

　　题目：

　　1. 有道加强题问 哪个可以加强文章的观点 我选的小公司有些员工以前在大公司任职

　　2. 创新会从大公司转移到小公司，为什么科研成果会转移?

　　小公司的人曾经在大公司工作过

　　3. 如果一个公司不愿意创新，那么他在研发新产品上会怎么样?

　　会沿用以前的旧产品。定位第二段。

　　4.问第一段支持小公司的人的观点，Infer题

　　应该说是Innovation与size成反比(innovation inverse related tocompany size)

　　5、主旨题，大意就是描述了一些观点，然后纠错。

　　有purpose题我印象中我选的是 总结大家的观点然后指出mispoint还是啥的

　　(这是两个人关于文章主旨的答案，大体意思是一样的)

　　读的时候记得把 支持大中小size的人名记下来，答题时很给力

　　最后一段，JJ说的是“公司是否愿意INNOVATION是跟员工的素质有关”，而我看到的是“公司是否愿意cannibalize自己现有产品(的生存/销售/成长空间?)来换取new technology的创新”，第一道题就是考这个，正确选项里有cannibilize这个单词

　　6.问根据最后的人的说法，公司不愿意cannibalize会怎样，就是做出与红体字相反的举动，stick to old technology去开发新产品。

　　题目出的不难，对派别一的观点问了个问题，定位容易。对派别四的观点问个个问题。然后问了个primary purpose of the passageis....

　　考古

　　There is widespread beli that the emergence of giant industries has been accompanied by an equivalent surge in industrial research. A recent study of important inventions made since the turn of the century reveals that more than half were the product of individual inventors working alone, independent of organized industrial research. While industrial laboratories contributed such important products as nylon and transistors, independent inventors developed air conditioning, the automatic transmission, the jet engine, the helicopter, insulin, and streptomycin. Still other inventions, such as stainless steel, television, silicones, and Plexiglas were developed through the combined forts of individuals and laboratory teams.

　　Despite these finding, we are urged to support monopolistic power on the grounds that such power creates an environment supportive of innovation. We are told that the independent inventor, along with the small firm, cannot afford to undertake the important research needed to improve our standard of living while protecting our diminishing resources; that only the giant corporation or conglomerate, with its prodigious assets, can afford the kind of expenditures that produce the technological advances vital to economic progress. But when we examine expenditures for research, we find that of the more than $35 billion spent each year in this country, almost two-thirds is spent by the federal government. More than half of this government expenditure is funneled into military research and product development, accounting for the enormous increase in spending in such industries as nuclear energy, aircraft, missiles, and electronics. There are those who consider it questionable that these dense-linked research projects will either improve our standard of living or do much to protect our diminishing resources.

　　Recent history has demonstrated that we may have to alter our longstanding conception of the process actuated by competition. The price variable, once perceived as the dominant aspect of the process, is now subordinate to the competition of the new product, the new business structure, and the new technology. While it can be assumed that in a highly competitive industry not dominated by single corporation, investment in innovation—a risky and expensive budget item—might meet resistance from management and stockholders concerned about cost-cutting, ficient organization, and large advertising budgets, it would be an egregious error to equate the monopolistic producer with bountiful expenditures on research. Large-scale enterprises tend to operate more comfortably in stable and secure circumstances, and their managerial bureaucracies tend to promote the status quo and resist the threat implicit in change. Moreover, in some cases, industrial giants faced with little or no competition seek to avoid the capital loss resulting from obsolescence by deliberately obstructing technological progress. By contrast, small firms undeterred by large investments in plant and capital equipment often aggressively pursue new techniques and new products, investing in innovation in order to expand their market shares.

　　The conglomerates(联合大企业) are not, however, (注意作者态度大负小正，千万别犯晕!!)completely except from strong competitive pressures. There are instances in which they too must compete with another industrial Goliath, and then their weapons may include large expenditures for innovation.

　　Q11.The primary purpose of the passage is to

　　(A) advocate an increase in government support of organized industrial research

　　(B) point out a common misconception about the relationship between the extent of industrial research and the growth of monopolistic power in industry

　　(C) describe the inadequacies of small firms in dealing with the important matter of research and innovation

　　(D) show that America’s strength depends upon individual ingenuity and resourculness

　　(E) encourage free-market competition among industrial giants

　　------------------------------------------------------------------------

　　Q12

　　According to the passage, important inventions of the twentieth century

　　(A) were produced largely as a result of governmental support for military weapons research and development

　　(B) came primarily from the huge laboratories of monopolistic industries

　　(C) were produced at least as frequently by independent inventors as by research teams

　　(D) have greater impact on smaller firms than on conglomerates

　　(E) sometimes adversely affect our standard of living and diminish our natural resources

　　--------------------------------------------------------------------

　　Q13: It can be inferred from the passage that the author

　　(A)! has little confidence in the ability of monopolistic industry to produce the important inventions of the future

　　(B) would rather see the federal government spend money on social services than on the dense establishment

　　(C) favors a conservative approach to innovation and places trust in conglomerates to provide ficient production

　　(D) feels that price should still be the dominant variable in the competitive process

　　(E) believes that excessive competition is a deterrent to innovation

　　Q14

　　The passage contains information that answers which of the following questions?

　　I. What portion of the research dollar in this country is spent each year by the federal government?

　　II. Under what circumstances is an industrial giant likely to invest heavily in innovation?

　　III. Why might a monopolistic producer want to suppress an innovation?

　　(A) I only

　　(B) II only

　　(C) I and II only

　　(D) II and III only

　　(E) I, II, and III

　　 B C A E

　　21. 一篇是大公司和小公司的创新*

　　围绕公司规模与公司创新是否有关。就是人名很多，每一个观点都两个人，回答问题的时候看清是问谁就好了

　　第一段：某某说大公司创新多，因为有钱有势有人。然后xx和xx反驳说不对，随着公司规模的增大，会更官僚，而小公司运作灵活，有利于创新。然后又有xx和xx跳出来，唉，你们都错了，应该是中型公司有利于创新，又灵活又不官僚。

　　第二段：作者出场了，说，上面的都是胡扯嘛，讨论重点都不对，光focus在company size上有毛用啊?我们要看这个公司的员工有没有这个意愿去创新，这个地方有个关键词不认识，cen什么的，不过还好，下面有个解释，就是说愿不愿意淘汰现有技术

　　题目：

　　1. 有道加强题问 哪个可以加强文章的观点 我选的小公司有些员工以前在大公司任职

　　2. 创新会从大公司转移到小公司，为什么科研成果会转移?

　　小公司的人曾经在大公司工作过

　　3. 如果一个公司不愿意创新，那么他在研发新产品上会怎么样?

　　会沿用以前的旧产品。定位第二段。

　　4.问第一段支持小公司的人的观点，Infer题

　　应该说是Innovation与size成反比(innovation inverse related tocompany size)

　　5、主旨题，大意就是描述了一些观点，然后纠错。

　　有purpose题我印象中我选的是 总结大家的观点然后指出mispoint还是啥的

　　(这是两个人关于文章主旨的答案，大体意思是一样的)

　　读的时候记得把 支持大中小size的人名记下来，答题时很给力

　　最后一段，JJ说的是“公司是否愿意INNOVATION是跟员工的素质有关”，而我看到的是“公司是否愿意cannibalize自己现有产品(的生存/销售/成长空间?)来换取new technology的创新”，第一道题就是考这个，正确选项里有cannibilize这个单词

　　6.问根据最后的人的说法，公司不愿意cannibalize会怎样，就是做出与红体字相反的举动，stick to old technology去开发新产品。

　　题目出的不难，对派别一的观点问了个问题，定位容易。对派别四的观点问个个问题。然后问了个primary purpose of the passageis....

　　考古

　　There is widespread beli that the emergence of giant industries has been accompanied by an equivalent surge in industrial research. A recent study of important inventions made since the turn of the century reveals that more than half were the product of individual inventors working alone, independent of organized industrial research. While industrial laboratories contributed such important products as nylon and transistors, independent inventors developed air conditioning, the automatic transmission, the jet engine, the helicopter, insulin, and streptomycin. Still other inventions, such as stainless steel, television, silicones, and Plexiglas were developed through the combined forts of individuals and laboratory teams.

　　Despite these finding, we are urged to support monopolistic power on the grounds that such power creates an environment supportive of innovation. We are told that the independent inventor, along with the small firm, cannot afford to undertake the important research needed to improve our standard of living while protecting our diminishing resources; that only the giant corporation or conglomerate, with its prodigious assets, can afford the kind of expenditures that produce the technological advances vital to economic progress. But when we examine expenditures for research, we find that of the more than $35 billion spent each year in this country, almost two-thirds is spent by the federal government. More than half of this government expenditure is funneled into military research and product development, accounting for the enormous increase in spending in such industries as nuclear energy, aircraft, missiles, and electronics. There are those who consider it questionable that these dense-linked research projects will either improve our standard of living or do much to protect our diminishing resources.

　　Recent history has demonstrated that we may have to alter our longstanding conception of the process actuated by competition. The price variable, once perceived as the dominant aspect of the process, is now subordinate to the competition of the new product, the new business structure, and the new technology. While it can be assumed that in a highly competitive industry not dominated by single corporation, investment in innovation—a risky and expensive budget item—might meet resistance from management and stockholders concerned about cost-cutting, ficient organization, and large advertising budgets, it would be an egregious error to equate the monopolistic producer with bountiful expenditures on research. Large-scale enterprises tend to operate more comfortably in stable and secure circumstances, and their managerial bureaucracies tend to promote the status quo and resist the threat implicit in change. Moreover, in some cases, industrial giants faced with little or no competition seek to avoid the capital loss resulting from obsolescence by deliberately obstructing technological progress. By contrast, small firms undeterred by large investments in plant and capital equipment often aggressively pursue new techniques and new products, investing in innovation in order to expand their market shares.

　　The conglomerates(联合大企业) are not, however, (注意作者态度大负小正，千万别犯晕!!)completely except from strong competitive pressures. There are instances in which they too must compete with another industrial Goliath, and then their weapons may include large expenditures for innovation.

上12下

共2页