What was taken some years ago as a ticket of certain admission to success is now being exposed to the scrutiny of cost-conscious employers who seek "can-dos" rather than "might-dos", and who feel that academia bas not been sufficiently appreciative of the needs of industry or of the employers' possible contribution.
It is curious, given the name of the degree, that there should be no league table for UK business schools; no unanimity about what the degree should encompass; and no agreed system of accreditation. Su rely there is something wrong. One wonders where all the tutors for this massive infusion of business expertise came from and why all this mushrooming took place.
Perhaps companies that made large investments would have been wiser to invest in already existing managers, perched anxiously on their own internal ladders The Institute of Management's 1992 survey, which revealed that eighty-one per cent of managers thought they personally would be more effective if they received more training, suggests that this might be the case. There is, too, the fact that training alone does not make successful managers. They need the inherent qualifications. Of character; a degree of self-subjugation; and above all, the ability to communicate and lead; more so now, when empowerment is a buzzword that is at least generating genuflexions, if not total conviction.
One can easily think of people, some comparatively unlettered, who are not lauded captains of industry. We may, therefore, not need to be too concerned about the fall in applications for business school places, or even the doubt about MBAs. The proliferation and subsequent questioning may have been an inevitable evolution. If the Management Charter Initiative, now exploring the introduction of a senior management qualification, is successful, there will be a powerful corrective.
We believe now that management is all about change. One hopes there will be some of that in relationship between management and science within industry, currently causing concern and which is overdue for attention. No-one doubts that we need more scientists and innovation to give us an edge in an increasingly competitive world. If scientists feel themselves undervalued and under-used, working in industrial ghettos, that is not a promising augury for the future. It seems we have to resolve these misapprehensions between science and. industry. Above all, we have to make sure that management is not itself smug about its status and that it does not issue mission statements about communication without realizing that the essence of it is a dialogue. More empowerment is required and we should strive to achieve it.
What is the writer's view in the reading passage?
A. He believes that there are too many MBAs
B. He believes that the degree is over-valued
C. He believes that standards are inconsistent
D. He believes that the degree has dubious value
Which of the following statements is true?
A. The long-run increase in income inequality is caused by he wage distribution.
B. fewer goods-producing industrial workers will be employed.
C. Not enough college students are employed by different services.
D. Less educated workers have become more important.
Part A
Directions: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)
Income inequality in the United State remained relatively stable for a period of nearly forty years. Beginning in the 1970's, however, this period of stability ended, as the first signs of widening income inequality became apparent. Over the course of the 1970's and 1980's , an increasingly clear trend toward greater income inequality emerged. By the end of the 1980's, the top 20 percent of workers were receiving the largest share of income ever recorded by government figures, and the bottom three fifths were receiving the lowest shares ever recorded. This trend has continued into the 1990's and currently shows no signs of decline. When the indicators of growing inequality were first observed in the 1970's, some researchers argued that the effects were merely temporary artifacts of short-term labor market disturbances. The new occupational structure appears to be one with an increase of well-paid technical, scientific and professional jobs at the top, a sliding middle class, and a growing poorly-paid service and retail jobs at the bottom. Several important labor-force changes appeared to be contributing to the shifting occupational structure.
As occupational reconstructing and growing income inequality have become increasingly evident, a heated debate as to the causes and magnitude of these changes arose. Two dominant bodies of thought emerged around the issue: the job-skill mismatch thesis and the polarization thesis. Mismatch theorists argue that there is an increasing distance between the high skill requirements of post-industrial jobs and the inadequate training and mediocre qualifications of workers. They see the post-industrial economy leaving behind unskilled workers, especially women and minorities. For the mismatch theorist, the trend toward greater inequality is temporary arid will dissipate once the supply of workers acquires the skills demanded by a post-industrial economy. And they predict that the workers will experience an upgrading in their wages over the long run. Polarization theorists, on the other hand, believe that the rise in inequality is permanent, a result of the shift to a service-based economy. This vision of the postindustrial economy is characteristically polarized. The problem according to these theorists, is the type of jobs being generated in the new economy, not worker attributes. Because they believe the causes are structural and permanent, polarization theorists would deny the efficacy of public policies designed to educate and train unskilled workers. They predict a long-term continuation of the trend towards increasing income inequality.
Studies show that the long-run increase in income inequality is also related to changes in the Nation's labor market and its household composition. The wage distribution has become considerably more unequal with more highly skilled, trained and educated workers at the top experiencing real wage gains and those at the bottom real wage losses. One factor is the shift in employment from those goods-producing industries that have disproportionately provided high-wage opportunities for low-skilled workers, towards services that disproportionately employ college graduates, and towards low-wage sectors such as retail trade. But within industry, shifts in labor demand away from less-educated workers are perhaps a more important explanation of eroding wages than the shift out of manufacturing.
Also cited as putting downward pressure on the wages of less-educated workers are intensifying global competition and immigration, the decline of the proportion of workers belonging to unions, the decline in the real value of the minimum wage, the increasing need for computer skills, and the increasing use of temporary workers.
From the Paragraph 1, we can see that beginning in t
A. income became more unequal
B. income became more equal
C. income became more unstable
D. income became more stable
A.in the momentB.in necessityC.in a junctureD.in an emergency
A. in the moment
B. in necessity
C. in a juncture
D. in an emergency