劍橋雅思14Test2Passage3閱讀原文翻譯 why companies should welcome disorder

劍橋雅思14Test2Passage3閱讀原文翻譯 why companies should welcome disorder

劍橋雅思14 Test2 Passage3閱讀原文翻譯

A部分

Organisation is big business. Whether it is of our lives – all those inboxes and calendars – or how companies are structured, a multi-billion dollar industry helps to meet this need.

組織規(guī)劃是一門大生意。無論是我們自己的生活中 – 所有那些收件箱與日歷 – 還是公司的架構(gòu)中，都有一項數(shù)十億美元的產(chǎn)業(yè)幫助滿足這一需求。

We have more strategies for time management, project management and self-organisation than at any other time in human history. We are told that we ought to organise our company, our home life, our week, our day and even our sleep, all as a means to becoming more productive. Every week, countless seminars and workshops take place around the world to tell a paying public that they ought to structure their lives in order to achieve this.

相比于人類歷史上的任何其他時期，我們在時間管理、項目管理和自我組織管理方面都有更多的策略。我們被告知應(yīng)該安排好我們的公司、我們的家庭生活、我們的每一周，每一天，甚至是我們的睡眠。所有這些都是變得更加高產(chǎn)的方法。每一周，世界各地都舉辦無數(shù)的研討會和講習(xí)班，告訴付費而來的公眾，他們應(yīng)該精心安排自己的生活以達成這一目標。

This rhetoric has also crept into the thinking of business leaders and entrepreneurs, much to the delight of self-proclaimed perfectionists with the need to get everything right. The number of business schools and graduates has massively increased over the past 50 years, essentially teaching people how to organise well.

這種說法也悄然進入商業(yè)領(lǐng)袖和創(chuàng)業(yè)者的頭腦中。這讓那些自封的完美主義者十分愉悅。他們文章來自老烤鴨雅思需要將每件事情都弄得井井有條。在過去50年里，商學(xué)院和商科專業(yè)的畢業(yè)生大量增加。他們本質(zhì)上是在教授人們?nèi)绾伟才藕酶黜検聞?wù)。

B部分

Ironically, however, the number of businesses that fail has also steadily increased. Work-related stress has increased. A large proportion of workers from all demographics claim to be dissatisfied with the way their work is structured and the way they are managed.

然而，諷刺的是，失敗企業(yè)的數(shù)量也在穩(wěn)定增加。與工作相關(guān)的壓力同樣在上升。從所有的人口統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)來看，大量的員工表示對他們工作的組織方式和自己被管理的方式感到不滿。

This begs the question: what has gone wrong? Why is it that on paper the drive for organisation seems a sure shot for increasing productivity, but in reality falls well short of what is expected?

這就催生出以下問題：究竟是哪里出錯了？為什么從紙面上來看，對組織安排的追求是提升生產(chǎn)力的捷徑，但現(xiàn)實中卻遠遠達不到預(yù)期呢？

C部分

This has been a problem for a while now. Frederick Taylor was one of the forefathers of scientific management. Writing in the first half of the 20th century, he designed a number of principles to improve the efficiency of the work process, which have since become widespread in modern companies. So the approach has been around for a while.

這個問題已經(jīng)存在了一段時間。Frederick Taylor是科學(xué)管理的創(chuàng)始人之一。在20世紀前半葉的著作中，他設(shè)計出一系列提升工作流程效率的原則。這些原則后來在現(xiàn)代企業(yè)中廣泛傳播。所以這種方法已經(jīng)存在了不少時日。

D部分

New research suggests that this obsession with efficiency is misguided. The problem is not necessarily the management theories or strategies we use to organise our work; it’s the basic assumptions we hold in approaching how we work. Here it’s the assumption that order is a necessary condition for productivity. This assumption has also fostered the idea that disorder must be detrimental to organisational productivity. The result is that businesses and people spend time and money organising themselves for the sake of organising, rather than actually looking at the end goal and usefulness of such an effort.

新的研究表明，對效率的癡迷存在誤導(dǎo)性。問題并不一定在于我們用來組織安排工作的管理理論或者策略，而是在于我們在分析工作方式時所秉持的基本假設(shè)。這種假設(shè)是，秩序是生產(chǎn)效率的必要條件。該假設(shè)同時也助長了以下觀念：無序一定對組織的生產(chǎn)力有害。這就造成企業(yè)和人們花費時間和金錢為了組織安排而進行組織安排，而不是關(guān)注最終目標以及這種努力是否有用。

E部分

What’s more, recent studies show that order actually has diminishing returns. Order does increase productivity to a certain extent, but eventually the usefulness of the process of organisation, and the benefit it yields, reduce until the point where any further increase in order reduces productivity. Some argue that in a business, if the cost of formally structuring something outweighs the benefit of doing it, then that thing ought not to be formally structured. Instead, the resources involved can be better used elsewhere.

此外，最近的研究表明秩序的效用實際上是邊際遞減的。秩序確實可以將生產(chǎn)力提升到一定的程度，但組織過程的效用以及它產(chǎn)生的收益會逐步減弱到某個臨界點。過了這個臨界點之后，秩序方面任何進一步的提升反而會降低生產(chǎn)力。一些人認為，在企業(yè)中，如果正式組織架構(gòu)某件事情的成本超過了這樣做的收益，那么這件事就不應(yīng)該被正式地組織架構(gòu)。相反，其中所牽扯到的資源可以被更好地用在其他地方。

F部分

In fact, research shows that, when innovating, the best approach is to create an environment devoid of structure and hierarchy and enable everyone involved to engage as one organic group. These environments can lead to new solutions that, under conventionally structured environments (filled with bottlenecks in terms of information flow, power structures, rules, and routines) would never be reached.

事實上，研究顯示，在進行創(chuàng)新的時候，最好的方法是創(chuàng)造一個沒有組織結(jié)構(gòu)和層級的環(huán)境，從而讓每個人都能參與進來形成有機的團體。這種環(huán)境能夠催生出傳統(tǒng)井井有條的環(huán)境下（在信息流動，權(quán)利結(jié)構(gòu)，規(guī)章制度與常規(guī)操作方面充滿各種障礙）無法實現(xiàn)的新的解決方案。

G部分

In recent times companies have slowly started to embrace this disorganisation. Many of them embrace it in terms of perception (embracing the idea of disorder, as opposed to fearing it) and in terms of process (putting mechanisms in place to reduce structure).

最近一段時間，企業(yè)已經(jīng)開始慢慢接受這種去組織化的趨勢。許多企業(yè)不僅在觀念上接納它（擁抱無序的概念，而不是畏懼它），而且在流程上也采用它（設(shè)立一些機制來削弱固有機構(gòu)）。

For example, Oticon, a large Danish manufacturer of hearing aids, used what it called a ‘ spaghetti ’ structure in order to reduce the organisation’s rigid hierarchies. This involved scrapping formal job titles and giving staff huge amounts of ownership over their own time and projects. This approach proved to be highly successful initially, with clear improvements in worker productivity in all facets of the business.

例如，Octicon，一家生產(chǎn)助聽器的丹麥企業(yè)，使用了一種它稱為“spaghetti”的結(jié)構(gòu)來削弱組織機構(gòu)內(nèi)部僵化的層級。這包括去除正式的工作頭銜，賦予員工大量的自主權(quán)來安排自己的時間和項目。這種方法從一開始就大獲成功。在企業(yè)各個方面，工人的生產(chǎn)力都有大幅提升。

In similar fashion, the former chairman of General Electric embraced disorganisation, putting forward the idea of the ‘boundaryless’ organisation. Again, it involves breaking down the barriers between different parts of a company and encouraging virtual collaboration and flexible working. Google and a number of other tech companies have embraced (at least in part) these kinds of flexible structures, facilitated by technology and strong company values which glue people together.

通用電氣前任主席也以類似的方式接納去組織化，提出“無界”組織的理念。它同樣涉及打破公司內(nèi)部不同部分之間的壁壘，鼓勵具有實質(zhì)意義的合作，以及靈活的工作方式。谷歌和其他一些科技公司也已接受（至少部分如此）這種靈活的結(jié)構(gòu)，由技術(shù)和能把人們團結(jié)在一起的強大的企業(yè)價值觀來推動。

H部分

A word of warning to others thinking of jumping on this bandwagon: the evidence so far suggests disorder, much like order, also seems to have diminishing utility, and can also have detrimental effects on performance if overused. Like order, disorder should be embraced only so far as it is useful. But we should not fear it – nor venerate one over the other. This research also shows that we should continually question whether or not our existing assumptions work.

總給那些想要追隨這一潮流的其他人一句警告：到目前為止的證據(jù)表明，無序與秩序一樣，似乎同樣存在邊際效用遞減的問題，如果過度使用的話，還可能對各方面表現(xiàn)產(chǎn)生不利影響。與秩序相同，無序只應(yīng)該在有用的時候被采納。但我們不應(yīng)該畏懼它，也不應(yīng)該重此輕彼。這一研究同樣表明，我們應(yīng)該持續(xù)追問現(xiàn)存的假設(shè)是否有用。

>> 雅思 托福 免費測試、量身規(guī)劃、讓英語學(xué)習(xí)不再困難<<