Question

As anyone who has tried to lose weight knows, realistic goal-setting generally produces the best results. That’s partly because most people who set realistic goals actually work more efficiently, and put more effort, to achieve those goals.

What’s far less understood by scientists, however, are the potentially harmful effects of goal-setting. Newspapers convey daily accounts of goal-setting widespread in industries and businesses up and down both Wall Street and Main Street, yet there has been surprisingly little research on how the long-advocated practice of setting goals may have contributed to the current economic crisis, and immoral behavior in general.

“Goals are widely used and promoted as having really beneficial effects. And yet, the same motivation that can push people to put more effort in a constructive way could also motivate people to be more likely to engage in immoral behaviors,” says Maurice Schweitzer, an associate professor at Penn’s Wharton School. His paper, titled “Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Over-Praised Goal Setting,” appears in the February issue of the Academy of Management Perspectives.

“It turns out there’s no financial benefit to just having a goal---you just get a psychological benefit” Schweitzer says. “But in many cases, goals have financial rewards that make them more powerful.”

A major example Schweitzer and his colleagues give is the 2004 breakdown of energy-trading giant Enron( 德国安然公司), where managers used financial rewards to motivate salesmen to meet specific goals. The problem, Schweitzer says, is that the actual trades were not profitable. 

Other studies have shown that burdening employees with unrealistic goals can force them to lie, cheat or steal. Such was the case in the early 1990s when Sears（西尔斯公司）placed a sales quota (销售限额) on its auto repair staff. It inspired employees to overcharge for work and to complete unnecessary repairs on a companywide basis.

Schweitzer admits his research runs counter to a very large body of literature that praises the many benefits of goal-setting. Advocates of the practice have argued with his team’s use of such evidence as news accounts to support his conclusion that goal-setting is widely over-praised.

In a rebuttal (反驳) paper, Dr. Edwin Locke writes: “Goal-setting is not going away. Organizations cannot grow without being focused on their desired end results any more than an individual can grow without goals to provide a sense of purpose.”

But Schweitzer argues the “evidence” linking goal-setting and harmful behavior should be studied to help draw attention to issues that deserve attention and further investigation. “Even a few negative effects could be so large that they outweigh many positive effects,” he says.

The debate is likely to get heated on in future papers, and the practice of setting goals no doubt will continue. For now, though, the lesson seems to be to put more thought into setting goals.

“Goal-setting does help motivate people. My idea would be to combine that with careful management, a strong organizational culture, and make sure the goals that you use are going to be constructive and not significantly harmful to the organization,” Schweitzer says.

1.What does Maurice Schweitzer want to show by mentioning the example of Enron?

A．Setting realistic goals can turn a failing business into success.

B．Businesses are likely to succeed without realistic goals.

C．Companies are certain to meet specific goals with financial rewards.

D．Goals with financial rewards have strong motivational power.

2.How did Sears’ goal-setting affect its employees?

A．They had to work more hours to increase their sales.

B．They competed with one another to attract more customers.

C．They turned to immoral practice to reach their goals.

D．They improved their customer service on a companywide basis.

3.The underlined words “runs counter to” (Paragraph 7) can be replaced by ________.

A．agrees with        B．goes against        C．fits in with         D．applies to

4.What is Edwin Locke’s argument against Schweitzer?

A．The practice of setting goals only helps people to develop.

B．Goal-setting is of no use motivating people to accomplish their tasks.

C．The positive effects of goal-setting outweigh its negative effects.

D．Studying goal-setting can contribute to successful business practices.

5.According to the passage, the author tries to convey ___________.

A．the goals that most people set are unrealistic.

B．all people can improve their work quality by setting goals.

C．setting goals can provide people with a sense of purpose.

D．people should not ignore the negative effects of goal-setting.

 

Answer 1

【答案】

1. D

2. C

3. B

4.D

5.D

【解析】

试题分析：本文讲述了不同的人对于设立目标对人生的影响持有不同的观点，有人认为这样做很好，有很好的作用。也有人持有反对的观点。

1.D 推理题。根据文章第四段“It turns out there’s no financial benefit to just having a goal---you just get a psychological benefit” Schweitzer says. “But in many cases, goals have financial rewards that make them more powerful.”说明带有经济奖励的目标会有很好的驱动作用。故D正确。

2.C 细节题。根据第6段1,2行Other studies have shown that burdening employees with unrealistic goals can force them to lie, cheat or steal.说明为了实现目标有些人采用了说谎，欺骗，盗窃等不好的手段，故C正确。

3.B 推理题。根据Schweitzer admits his research runs counter to a very large body of literature that praises the many benefits of goal-setting.说明他认为他的研究和很多人的看法可能是不一样的，故B项正确。

4.D 推理题。根据文章第7段Advocates of the practice have argued with his team’s use of such evidence as news accounts to support his conclusion that goal-setting is widely over-praised.In a rebuttal (反驳) paper, Dr. Edwin Locke writes: “Goal-setting is not going away.说明他们争论的焦点就是D项内容设立目标是否能够有利于成功的商业行为。

5.D 推理题。根据文章最后一段说明我们不能忽视goal-setting的负面作用。故D正确。

考点：考查社会现象类短文阅读

点评：本文讲述了不同的人对于设立目标对人生的影响持有不同的观点。要求考生读懂文章中的每个句子的意思还要推理它们之间的关系，结合自己的生活常识和经验，再通过逻辑推理和判断，理解文章的言外之意，从而揭示文章的深层涵义。任何一篇文章都有其特定的写作目的，读者应当知道如何去做或按照某种方式传递思考问题。推理判断题的答案不可能在文章中直接找到，因此推理时我们务必要忠于原文，在文章中寻找并确定可推论的依据，即：已知部分－推论的前提，从中推测出未知部分－推理的结论，切忌妄加评论，把自己的观点当成作者的观点。