3. “Employers should have no right to obtain information about their employees’ health or other aspects of their personal lives without the employees’ permission.”
1， 员工的私人生活状况，很可能影响工作效率。productivity and turnover，所以雇主有理由关心。比如，健康问题，良好的健康状况显然是保障正常稳定生产的基础，雇主付出相同的钱，expect to get certain productivity. 而员工隐瞒健康状况，造成的低效率高成本，会使公司suffer。在雇佣时拥有对称的信息，很重要。
2， 同时，员工的私人状况，如果会危害到其他员工，那么应该有权得这知。比如，健康状况，犯罪的历史等等重大事件。健康，会infect other employee/ 暴力 history of crimes violence 很可能会对其他的员工造成伤害。这些都是必须要知道的。
3， 但有一些其他的私人生活，与工作效率无关，而且不是threat to others。employer 没有权力获取。比如，婚姻状况marital status, religion, race…这些都应该是员工自愿提供的with permission，而不能强制获得force。
View1: as human resources is one of the most important fortunes to a company, companies should know the health conditions of their employees. Decide whether a worker is competent for a job, decide cost on medical cares, ensure productivity
View2: other aspects of employees’ personal life, if not directly related to work performance, are not need to expose to employers.
Determining whether employers should have access to personal information about employees requires that the interests of businesses in ensuring productivity and stability be weighed against concerns about equity and privacy interests. On balance (adv. 总而言之), my view is that employers should not have the right to obtain personal information about current employees without their consent.
A business’ interest in maintaining a stable, productive workforce clearly justifies right of access to certain personal information about prospective employees. Job applicants can easily conceal personal information that might adversely affect job performance, thereby damaging the employer in terms of low productivity and high turnover. During employment, however, the employee’s interests are far more compelling than those of the employer, for three reasons.
First, the employer has every opportunity to monitor ongoing job performance and to replace workers who fail to meet standards, regardless of the reason for that failure. Second, allowing free access to personal information about employees might open the floodgates to discriminatory promotions and salary adjustments. Current federal laws—which protect employees from unfair treatment based on gender, race, and marital status, may not adequately guard against an employer’s searching for an excuse to treat certain employees unfairly. Third, access to personal information without consent raises serious privacy concerns, especially where multiple individuals have access to the information. Heightening this concern is the ease of access to information which our burgeoning electronic Intranets make possible.
In sum, ready access to certain personal information about prospective employees is necessary to protect businesses; however, once hired, an employee’s interest in equitable treatment and privacy far outweighs the employer’s interest in ensuring a productive and stable workforce.
4. 团队重要还是strong individual重要
题库36---Businesses and other organizations have overemphasized the importance of working as a team.... 是原题
“Businesses and other organizations have overemphasized the importance of working as a team. Clearly, in any human group, it is the strong individual, the person with the most commitment and energy, who gets things done.”
The author's assert brings in the controversail and complex question that is being discussed a lot now : teamwork or individual energy and commitment, which one is more important to a company or other types of organizaitons? The author claims that teamwork has been overemphasized. To the contrary, I believe that is the author who makes an overemphasis by saying "It is the strong individual, the person with the most commitment and engergy, who gets things done.
regimentation团队精神 each does his or her own duty technology organic organically
View1: efficiency comes from work divisions. In today’s business world, it is unpractical for one person to accomplish an entire program. Actually, only every competent person finishes one part of the mission, entirely whole program get done.
View2: An organization is not simply put competent people together but combine them to form a organic integrity, thus induce higher efficiency an productivity.
The relationship between teamwork and individual strength, energy, and commitment is complex; whether they operate in a complementary or antagonistic manner depends on: (1) the goals toward which the traits are directed, (2) the degree of emphasis on teamwork, and (3) the job of the individual within an organization.
A person’s ability to work effectively in a team is not in consistent per se with personal strength, energy, and commitment. If exercised in a self-serving manner—for example, through pilfering or back stabbing—these traits can operate against the organization. Conversely, if directed toward the firm’s goals, these traits can motivate other team members, thereby advancing common goals. World War II generals Patton and Rommel understood this point and knew how to bring out the best individual qualities in their troops, while at the same time instilling a strong sense of team and common purpose.
Nevertheless, over-emphasizing teamwork can be counterproductive for an organization. A successful team requires both natural leaders and natural followers; otherwise, a team will accomplish little. Undue emphasis on teamwork may quell initiative among natural leaders, thereby thwarting team goals. Also, teamwork can be overemphasized with a commissioned sales force of highly competitive and autonomic individuals. Overemphasis on teamwork here might stifle healthy competition, thereby defeating a firm’s objectives. In other organizational areas, however, teamwork is critical. For example, a product-development team must progress in lock-step (锁步) fashion toward common goals, such as meeting a rollout (: the public introduction of a new aircraft; broadly: the widespread public introduction of a new product) deadline.
In sum, individual strength, commitment, and energy can complement a strong team approach; as long as individual autonomy is not undermined, all can operate in a synergistic manner to achieve an organization’s goals.
Massachusetts Institute of Technology GRE: 1353 GMAT:720 Stanford University (CA) GRE: 1354 GMAT:720 University of California–Berkeley GRE: 1353 GMAT:707 Georgia In
GMAT考试是美国管理专业招收研究生委员会主办和负责指导的考试, 其英文全称是Graduate Management Admission Test。GMAT考试的科目包括会计学、经济学、管理学、普通管理、生产管理、行政管理、