上海新航道雅思小編給考生們帶來了劍14Test2雅思閱讀Passage3原文翻譯：公司為何應接受無組織性。希望幫助考生對照文本更好的研究真題，充分備考，爭取理想成績，實現留學夢想。相應的原文答案解析，請點擊：劍橋雅思14Test2閱讀Passage3答案解析 。

  劍14Test2雅思閱讀Passage3原文

  A 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.

  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.

  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.

  B 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.

  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?

  C 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.

  D 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.

  E 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.

  F 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.

  G 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).

  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.

  In similar fashion, the former chairman of General Electric embraced disorganisation, putting forward the idea of the 'boundary less' 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.

  H 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.

  劍14Test2雅思閱讀Passage3翻譯

  A 保持織性是筆大生意。無論是保持生活有條理—一整理所有收件箱和日程表—一還是保持公司結構的組織性,都需要一筆很大的開支。

  現在、我們擁有有史以來最多的時間管理、項目管理和自我管理的策略。我們被告知應該組織好自己的公司、家庭生活,組織好每一周、每一天,甚至還要組織好睡眠學只有這樣才能變得更高效。每周都有無數個研討會和講習班在世界各地展開,告訴付費參加的公眾要安排好自己的生活,以取得成效。

  令那些自稱完美主義者、力求做妤每件事的人高興的是,這些說辭也傳到了商業領袖中和企業家的耳朵里。在過去的50年間,商學院及共畢業生的數量大幅增長,而從本質上來說,它們主要教人們如何高效地組織安排。

  B 然而,諷刺的是,破產企業的數量也在穩步增長。工作壓力越來越大。在各類人群中有很大一部分員工聲稱不滿工作的組織方式和人員管理方式。

  這就引發了問題:哪里出錯了?為什么從理論上看組織性肯定可以提高生產效率,但實際上卻與預期相差甚遠?

  C 這個問題已經出現一段時間了。 Frederick Taylor是提出科學管理的先驅之一。20世紀上豐葉,他制定了一些可以提高工作效率的行為準則,從那時起,這些準則便在現代公司中廣泛使用。因此,這種(科學管理)方法已經存在一段時間了。

  D 新的研究表明,癡迷于高效會適得其反。問題不一定在于我們用來組織工作的管理理論或策略;而在于我們對如何處理工作問題時所持的基本設想。我們的設想是:有組織性是提高生產效率的必要條件。這一假設又衍生出一種觀念,即無組織性一定不科于提高組織機構的生產效率。結果就是,企業和個人都耗費了時間和金錢為了管理而管理,而不是切實關注這一努力的最終目標及其是否有用。

  E 此外,最近的研究表明,有組織性帶來的回報實際上是遞減的。它在一定程度上確實可以提高生產效率,但組織過程的有效性及共產生的效益最終都會減少,直到最后,組織性與生產效率背道而馳。有人說,在一家企業里,如果按照一定形式組織某件事的成本高于這么做所帶來的好處,那么這件事就不應該這么組織。相反,其中所用的資源可以另作它用。

  F 實際上,研究表明,在進行創新時,最好的方法是創造一個沒有結構和等級之分的環境,讓毎個人都能參與其中,形成一個有機的群體。這樣的環境可以帶來解決問題的新方法,而在有傳統結構的環境中(在信息交流、權力結構、規章條例、例行程序上充滿了障礙),是永遠達不成的。

  G 最近,有些公司已經慢慢開始接受無組織性。其中很多公司不僅從認知上接受了官(接受無組織性這個概念,而不是害怕它,還將其應用到實際流程中(制定一些機制來減少結構)。

  例如,丹麥的大型助聽器制造商奧迪康使用其所謂的“意大利面條式”結構來減少死板的企業等級制度。其中包括取消形式化的職稱,并給予員工更多掌控自己時間和項目的權利。事實證明,這種方法起初取得了很大成功,公司各部門員工的生產效率都有明顯提高。

  同樣,通用電氣公司的前任董事長也接受了無組織性,提出了“無邊界組織”這一概念。它也包括打破公司不同部門之間的障礙,鼓勵虛擬協作和彈性工作。谷歌以及一些其他科技公司也已經(至少部分地)接受了這些彈性的企業結構,再輔以科技和強大的公司價值觀將員工凝聚在一起。

  H 給想要跟隨這種潮流的人們一條警告:目前的證據表明,和有組織性一樣,無組織性的實用性也是遞減的,而且如果使用過度,也會產生不利影響。同樣和有組織性一樣我們應該以有用性為標準去接受無組織性。但我們不應該畏懼它—一也不應該厚此遵彼。研究還表明,我們應該不斷質疑現有的設想是否正確。

  以上就是劍14雅思閱讀原文及譯文，更多雅思資料，請點擊：雅思資料頻道

  新航道上海學校專注雅思教育15年，每120分鐘就有一位高分學員來自新航道，加入新航道，實現高分夢!