《世紀(jì)大學(xué)商務(wù)英語(yǔ)綜合教程第三冊(cè)課文英漢對(duì)照翻譯ByMJX.doc》由會(huì)員分享，可在線閱讀，更多相關(guān)《世紀(jì)大學(xué)商務(wù)英語(yǔ)綜合教程第三冊(cè)課文英漢對(duì)照翻譯ByMJX.doc（22頁(yè)珍藏版）》請(qǐng)?jiān)谘b配圖網(wǎng)上搜索。

UNIT1 Free Trade Has Enriched the World with More than Diverse Goods 自由貿(mào)易給世界帶來(lái)的不僅是豐富多彩的商品 By Daniel Griswold Tune in to cable TV, talk radio, or the blogosphere and you will soon be hit over the head with the message that free trade is destroying America. According to the economic populists on the left and right, the wages, jobs, and futures of Main Street Americans are being sacrificed daily to the gods of globalization.只要打開有線電視、收音機(jī)或博客網(wǎng)，你很快就會(huì)驚訝地獲悉： 自由貿(mào)易正在摧毀美國(guó)。據(jù)左右兩派經(jīng)濟(jì)民粹主義者所說(shuō)，美國(guó)普通老百姓的工資、工作和未來(lái)天天都在被當(dāng)作供品獻(xiàn)祭給全球化的神明們。 On trade, as on so much else, the populists have it wrong again. Free trade and globalization are great blessings to American families. Trade is delivering lower prices and more variety to consumers, especially the poor, while creating better paying jobs for the middle class. Beyond the US shores, the spread of economic openness is building a more peaceful, democratic and humane world for our children.就像在其他許多事情上一樣，這些民粹主義者們?cè)谫Q(mào)易問(wèn)題上又搞錯(cuò)了。自由貿(mào)易與全球化對(duì)美國(guó)家庭來(lái)說(shuō)是種種福音。貿(mào)易在為中產(chǎn)階級(jí)創(chuàng)造了許多薪酬豐厚的工作崗位的同時(shí)，也為消費(fèi)者（尤其是窮人）帶來(lái)了價(jià)格低廉、品種多樣的商品。席卷美國(guó)內(nèi)外的經(jīng)濟(jì)開放浪潮正在為我們的孩子們創(chuàng)建一個(gè)更為和諧、民主和人性化的世界。 Now it may seem an odd moment to tout the benefits of trade for Main Street America. After all, unemployment is nearing 10 percent, manufacturing is in a slump, and global poverty is rising. But those are all the result of the current recession, a downturn that was not caused by trade but by misguided monetary and housing policies that were “Made in the USA”.看起來(lái)，現(xiàn)在吹噓貿(mào)易給美國(guó)百姓帶來(lái)好處似乎并不合時(shí)宜。畢竟，目前的失業(yè)率幾乎高達(dá)10%，制造業(yè)也處于蕭條之中，而全球范圍的貧困在不斷加劇。但是，那些問(wèn)題都是眼前的經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退所帶來(lái)的后果，這是一種經(jīng)濟(jì)下滑現(xiàn)象，它不是由貿(mào)易、而是由“美國(guó)制造”的錯(cuò)誤的貨幣政策和房地產(chǎn)政策造成的。 During difficult economic times, import competition allows American families to keep their heads above water by delivering lower prices on staples such as food, clothing, and shoes. The prices we pay for goods exposed to global trade tend to rise more slowly than inflation, or even fall. The expansion of product variety alone from trade delivers an estimated 400 billion a year in benefits to American families because of increased consumer satisfaction, according to a 2004 study by Christian Broda and David E. Weinstein for the National Bureau of Economic Research.在經(jīng)濟(jì)困難時(shí)期，進(jìn)口競(jìng)爭(zhēng)給美國(guó)家庭帶來(lái)了大量諸如食品、服裝和鞋類等物美價(jià)廉的日常必需品，才使得他們不致于陷入滅頂之災(zāi)。我們?yōu)槭苋蚧Q(mào)易影響的物品所支付價(jià)格的上漲速度往往比通貨膨脹的漲幅更慢，或者說(shuō)，價(jià)格甚至反而下降。根據(jù)“（美國(guó)）國(guó)家經(jīng)濟(jì)研究局”克里斯汀布洛達(dá)和大衛(wèi).E.威恩斯特于2004年所做的一項(xiàng)研究，由于消費(fèi)者滿意度的提升，僅產(chǎn)品的品種擴(kuò)展這一項(xiàng)每年就給美國(guó)家庭帶來(lái)約四千億美元的實(shí)惠。 No consumer benefit proportionally more from trade than the poor, and nobody suffers more from existing trade barriers. The imported fresh fruit and vegetables, T-shirts and discounted sneakers sold at big-box retailers loom especially large in the budgets of poor and middle-class families. Perversely, the highest remaining US trade barriers are aimed at products that are disproportionately made by poor people abroad and consumed by poor people at home. The 25 billion the US government collects each year through import tariffs is the most regressive tax in the federal arsenal. According to a study by the Progressive Policy Institute, a single mother earning 20,000 a year pays a much higher share of her income for import duties than a manager earning 100,000 a year. Labor unions and other groups that oppose tariff-lowering trade agreements are unwittingly serving a status quo that is punishing the poor.沒(méi)有任何消費(fèi)者從貿(mào)易中獲得的好處——按比例計(jì)算——會(huì)比窮人獲得的多；也沒(méi)有任何人遭受現(xiàn)有的貿(mào)易壁壘所帶來(lái)的禍害會(huì)比窮人所遭的多。大型零售超市銷售的進(jìn)口鮮果、蔬菜、T恤衫和折價(jià)運(yùn)動(dòng)鞋在窮人和中產(chǎn)階級(jí)家庭的消費(fèi)預(yù)算中占據(jù)非常高的比例。而不合常理的是，美國(guó)現(xiàn)存最高的貿(mào)易壁壘的目標(biāo)卻是針對(duì)絕大部分由國(guó)外窮人生產(chǎn)、國(guó)內(nèi)窮人消費(fèi)的產(chǎn)品。美國(guó)政府每年通過(guò)進(jìn)口關(guān)稅獲取的250億美元的稅收是聯(lián)邦寶庫(kù)中遞減幅度最大的稅種。一項(xiàng)由“進(jìn)步政策研究所”所做的研究表明，按進(jìn)口關(guān)稅中所占個(gè)人收入比例計(jì)算，一位年收入為兩萬(wàn)美元的單親母親所支付的進(jìn)口關(guān)稅要比年收入為十萬(wàn)美元的經(jīng)理高得多。工會(huì)和其他一些團(tuán)體反對(duì)低關(guān)稅的貿(mào)易協(xié)議，但他們?cè)跓o(wú)意識(shí)地維護(hù)的卻是損害窮人利益的現(xiàn)行貿(mào)易制度。 Despite what the populists tell us, the consumer benefits of trade have not come at the expense of jobs or wages. As a candidate for president in 2007, Barack Obama was echoing CNN’s Lou Dobbs when he told a cheering union crowd in Chicago that importing lower-priced T-shirts from developing countries was not worth the loss of jobs. “People don’t want a cheaper T-shirt if they’re losing a job in the process,” he said. “They would rather have a job and pay a little bit more for a T-shirt.”不管民粹主義者們?cè)趺凑f(shuō)三道四，消費(fèi)者從貿(mào)易中所獲的好處并沒(méi)有損害我們的就業(yè)和薪酬。作為2007年的總統(tǒng)候選人，奧巴馬作為美國(guó)有線新聞網(wǎng)（CNN）的盧道布斯的應(yīng)聲蟲，對(duì)著芝加哥一群興高采烈的工會(huì)會(huì)員們說(shuō)，從發(fā)展中國(guó)家進(jìn)口低價(jià)T恤衫跟失去就業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)相比是不值得的?！叭绻麨榱艘患畠r(jià)的T恤衫而丟失工作的話，大家是決不會(huì)那么做的，”他說(shuō)?！八麄儗幵敢环莨ぷ鳎膊辉诤鯙門恤衫付高點(diǎn)的價(jià)格?！? Like most politicians, candidate Obama chose to represent a small but noisy special interest at the expense of the large majority of Americans. Only one-third of one percent of American workers are engaged in making clothing and textiles of any kind. That comparescompares to the virtually 100 percent of Americans who buy and wear T-shirts and other clothing. If Americans are forced to pay higher prices because of import restrictions, a small number of jobs would be “saved” but at a huge cost to working families. 與多數(shù)政客一樣，總統(tǒng)候選人奧巴馬也情愿代表那些少數(shù)喧囂的特殊利益團(tuán)體，而犧牲絕大多數(shù)美國(guó)普通百姓的利益。只有百分之一中的三分之一的美國(guó)工人還在從事各類服裝和紡織品的生產(chǎn)。與此相比較的是，差不多百分之百的美國(guó)人都要購(gòu)買和身穿T恤衫和其他服裝。如果因?yàn)檫M(jìn)口的限制而迫使美國(guó)人支付更高的商品價(jià)格，那有可能會(huì)“保住”數(shù)量很少的就業(yè)崗位，但卻是以美國(guó)眾多家庭巨大經(jīng)濟(jì)損失為代價(jià)的。 Across the entire U.S. economy, trade accounts for a small share of job displacement. For every worker displaced by trade or outsourcing, 30 American workers typically lose their jobs because of other factors — most commonly technological change, but also domestic competition and changing consumer tastes. Think of the 30,000 workers at Kodak that have been laid off in the past five years, not because of imports, but because of the popularity of digital cameras and plunging film sales. My former calling, the newspaper business, has been hemorrhaging jobs since 2001, not because of unfair trade, but because of Craigslist and changing reader habits. “Job churn” is a fact of life in a dynamic, open economy.在美國(guó)的整個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)中，由貿(mào)易導(dǎo)致的裁員只占很小的比例。相對(duì)于一位工人因貿(mào)易或外包而遭裁退，通常就會(huì)有30位美國(guó)工人由于其他的因素而喪失工作，這些因素中最常見的有技術(shù)變革及國(guó)內(nèi)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)和消費(fèi)者嗜好的變化。想想過(guò)去五年中柯達(dá)公司解聘了三萬(wàn)名工人，這種解聘并不是因?yàn)檫M(jìn)口，而是由數(shù)字相機(jī)的普及和膠卷銷售價(jià)格暴跌而引起的。我以前從事的行業(yè)——報(bào)業(yè)，2001年以來(lái)一直在大量裁員，并非由于不公平貿(mào)易，而是由于Craigslist網(wǎng)絡(luò)社區(qū)的免費(fèi)分類廣告和讀者閱讀習(xí)慣的改變。在動(dòng)態(tài)、開放的經(jīng)濟(jì)環(huán)境里，“工作不斷變動(dòng)”已成生活的一種客觀事實(shí)。 A big lie of the trade debate is that we have been surrendering middle-class manufacturing jobs for low-paying service jobs. Since the early 1990s, the U.S. economy has lost more than 3 million manufacturing jobs, but during that same period the economy has added 18 million service-sector jobs that are typically better paying. In fact, since 1991, two-thirds of the net new jobs created in the U.S. economy are in sectors such as healthcare, education, and business and professional service where the average pay is higher than in manufacturing. The American middle class today earns its keep from better-paying service sectorjobs. Knock on doors in a typical middle-class American neighborhood and you will meet teachers, managers, architects, engineers, computer specialists, accountants and auditors, police officers and fire fighters, insurance and real estate agents, registered nurses and other healthcare professionals, and self-employed business owners.貿(mào)易辯論中的一大謊言是： 我們一直在為換取低薪的服務(wù)業(yè)工作而丟失中產(chǎn)階級(jí)的制造業(yè)崗位。從20世紀(jì)90年代初以來(lái)，美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)雖失去了300萬(wàn)份制造業(yè)的工作崗位，但在同期卻增加了1800萬(wàn)份服務(wù)業(yè)的工作，而且通常情況下薪金都更高。實(shí)際上，1991年以來(lái)美國(guó)經(jīng)濟(jì)中新創(chuàng)造的凈三分之二的崗位都發(fā)生在平均工資比制造業(yè)要高的服務(wù)業(yè)，如醫(yī)療保健、教育、商業(yè)和專業(yè)服務(wù)等。美國(guó)中產(chǎn)階層現(xiàn)在都在服務(wù)業(yè)謀生，所獲收入更高。你只要在美國(guó)中產(chǎn)階級(jí)聚居的社區(qū)敲開住戶的房門，那你所見到的就會(huì)是教師、管理人員、建筑師、工程師、電腦專家、會(huì)計(jì)和審計(jì)師、警官和消防隊(duì)員、保險(xiǎn)和房地產(chǎn)中介、注冊(cè)護(hù)士和其他醫(yī)療專業(yè)人士，以及自謀職業(yè)的業(yè)主。 Beyond American shores, falling trade barriers and the spread of technology have created a more prosperous, democratic, and peaceful world. Again, this may seem a counter-intuitive argument in the face of daily headlines about a global recession and ongoing violence in the Middle East and Africa, but here too we need to step back and assess long-term trends.在美國(guó)以外的世界，貿(mào)易壁壘的逐漸消除如技術(shù)的普及已使世界變得更為繁榮、民主與和平。當(dāng)每天面對(duì)大量關(guān)于全球危機(jī)和中東與非洲持續(xù)暴力的新聞大標(biāo)題時(shí)，上述觀點(diǎn)可能似乎又與我們的直覺相反。不過(guò)，也正是在這一點(diǎn)上，我們有必要退一步來(lái)評(píng)估一下（自由貿(mào)易的）長(zhǎng)期走向。 The past three decades of expanding trade and globalization have witnessed dramatic global progress. Between 1981 and 2005, the share of the world’s population living on the equivalent of 1.25 a day dropped by half, from 52 to 25 percent, according to the World Bank. In China alone, the number in absolute poverty fell by 600 million. During this same period, real gains have been made in life expectancy, infant survival, nutrition, and literacy. Child labor rates have fallen by more than half. It is not a coincidence that the most dramatic gains against poverty have occurred in those countries that have most aggressively opened themselves to the global economy.過(guò)去三十年不斷擴(kuò)展的國(guó)際貿(mào)易和全球化已經(jīng)見證了巨大的全球性進(jìn)步。根據(jù)世界銀行的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)，1981年至2005年間，日均約1.25美元生活費(fèi)的貧困人口比例下降了一半，即從原來(lái)52%降至25%。僅在中國(guó)，生活在絕對(duì)貧困線以下的人口就下降了六個(gè)億。也是在這期間，人均壽命、嬰兒生存率、營(yíng)養(yǎng)和識(shí)字率方面都取得了實(shí)質(zhì)性的進(jìn)展。童工率也下降了一半多。在消除貧困上取得最大進(jìn)步的都是最積極向世界經(jīng)濟(jì)開放的那些國(guó)家，這并不只是一種巧合。 Meanwhile, as a global middle class has emerged, so too have more democratic forms of government. Trade has spread tools of communication and spurred the growth of civil society as an alternative to centralized government. As a result, the share of the world’s population living in countries that respect civil liberties and the right to vote has climbed from 35 percent in 1973 to 46 percent today, according to Freedom House.全球中產(chǎn)階層形成的同時(shí)，世界上也有了更多更為民主的政府。貿(mào)易使通訊工具在世界各地得到普及，從而推進(jìn)了以文明社會(huì)替代集權(quán)政府的進(jìn)程。因此，據(jù)自由審議會(huì)所說(shuō)，生活在尊重公民自由和選舉權(quán)的國(guó)家的人口比例已從1973年時(shí)的35%提升到現(xiàn)在的46%。 Fewer people are dying in wars today than in past decades, in large part because commerce has replaced military competition. Global commerce has allowed nations to gain access to resources through trade rather than conquest, while deeper economic integration has brought former enemies together and raised the cost of war. Even with the ongoing conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, young American adults living today are far less likely to fight and die in wars than their counterparts in the 1940s, ’50s and ’60s.與過(guò)去幾十年相比，現(xiàn)在死于戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的人數(shù)大大減少，主要原因是商業(yè)交流已經(jīng)取代了軍事競(jìng)爭(zhēng)。全球化的商業(yè)使世界各國(guó)能通過(guò)貿(mào)易——而不是通過(guò)征服，去獲取資源；與此同時(shí)，更深入發(fā)展的經(jīng)濟(jì)一體化使得以前的敵人走到一起來(lái)了，并使戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的成本更高了。即便是仍在進(jìn)行中的伊拉克和阿富汗戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)，現(xiàn)在年青的美國(guó)成年人，比起（20世紀(jì)）40、50和60年代的同齡人，奔赴戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)甚至戰(zhàn)死的可能性要低得多。 America and the world face daunting tasks today, as in generations past, but expanding trade is part of the solution, not part of the problem. Americans should have the same warm feelings toward free trade and globalization as they do toward iPods, email, online shopping, a well-fed child going off to school, and peace on earth.跟過(guò)去幾代人一樣，現(xiàn)在的美國(guó)和整個(gè)世界都面臨著艱巨的任務(wù)，但貿(mào)易的擴(kuò)大是解決問(wèn)題的途徑之一，而不是問(wèn)題之一。美國(guó)人應(yīng)該對(duì)自由貿(mào)易和全球化懷有一副熱心腸，就像他們熱衷于iPod、電子郵件、在線購(gòu)物、養(yǎng)育得好的兒童出門上學(xué)及地球上的和平等事情那樣。 UNIT2 How Does an Organization Recruit?一個(gè)組織是如何招聘員工的？ By Margaret A. Richardson Introduction引 言 Acquiring and retaining high-quality talent is critical to an organization’s success. As the job market becomes increasingly competitive and the available skills grow more diverse, recruiters need to be more selective in their choices, since poor recruiting decisions can produce long-term negative effects, including high training and development costs to minimize the incidence of poor performance and high turnover which, in turn, impact staff morale, the production of high quality goods and services and the retention of organizational memory. At worst, the organization can fail to achieve its objectives, there by losing Its competitive edge andshare of the market. Traditionally, public service organizations have had little need to worry about market share and increasing competition since they operate in a monopolistic environment. But in recent time, the emphasis on new public management approaches has forced public organizations to pay closer attention to their service delivery as consumers have begun to expect and demand more for their tax dollars. No longer are citizens content to grumble about poorly-produced goods and services and the under-qualified, untrained employees who provide them. As societies become more critical and litigious, public service organizations must seek all possible avenues for improving their output and providing the satisfaction their clients require and deserve.獲得并留住優(yōu)秀人才對(duì)一個(gè)組織的成功至關(guān)重要。隨著就業(yè)市場(chǎng)競(jìng)爭(zhēng)日益激烈，現(xiàn)有技能變得更加多樣化，招聘人員在選擇時(shí)要更加精挑細(xì)選，因?yàn)殄e(cuò)誤的招聘決策能夠造成長(zhǎng)期的負(fù)面影響，包括為了使低效益與高流動(dòng)性發(fā)生率最小化而進(jìn)行的培訓(xùn)與育才的高額成本，低效益與高流動(dòng)性相應(yīng)地會(huì)影響員工的士氣、產(chǎn)品的質(zhì)量、服務(wù)的水平及組織在人們記憶中的形象的保持。甚至組織可能無(wú)法實(shí)現(xiàn)其目標(biāo)，并因而失去其競(jìng)爭(zhēng)優(yōu)勢(shì)和市場(chǎng)份額。傳統(tǒng)上，公共服務(wù)組織沒(méi)有什么必要擔(dān)心它們的市場(chǎng)份額與不斷增加的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)，因?yàn)樗鼈兲幵谝粋€(gè)壟斷的環(huán)境中。但是，最近，對(duì)新型公共管理方法的強(qiáng)調(diào)迫使公共組織更加重視它們所提供的服務(wù)（的質(zhì)量），因?yàn)橄M(fèi)者已經(jīng)開始期望并要求他們用美元交納的稅收能得到更多的回報(bào)。他們不再滿足于只是抱怨質(zhì)量差的產(chǎn)品或服務(wù)及提供這種服務(wù)或產(chǎn)品的未經(jīng)培訓(xùn)的不合格員工。隨著社會(huì)更加熱衷于批判與訴訟，公共服務(wù)組織必須尋求所有可能的途徑去改善其產(chǎn)品質(zhì)量，提高其顧客所要求并理應(yīng)得到的對(duì)產(chǎn)品和服務(wù)的滿意度。 The provision of high-quality goods and services begins with the recruitment process. Recruitment is described as “the set of activities and processes used to legally obtain a sufficient number of qualified people at the right place and time so that the people and the organization can select each other in their own best short and long term interests”. In other words, the recruitment process provides the organization with a pool of potentially qualified job candidates from which judicious selection can be made to fill vacancies.優(yōu)質(zhì)產(chǎn)品與服務(wù)的提供始于招聘過(guò)程。招聘被描述為“用于在適當(dāng)?shù)臅r(shí)間與適當(dāng)?shù)牡攸c(diǎn)，合法地獲得足夠數(shù)量的合格人員的一系列活動(dòng)與過(guò)程，通過(guò)這些活動(dòng)與過(guò)程，應(yīng)聘人員與組織能夠根據(jù)各自的短期與長(zhǎng)期利益進(jìn)行雙向選擇”。換句話說(shuō)，招聘過(guò)程為組織提供了一批有潛力的、合格的工作候選人，供組織做出明智而審慎的選擇以填補(bǔ)空缺。 Successful recruitment begins with proper employment planning and forecasting. In this phase of the staffing process, an organization formulates plans to fill or eliminate future job openings based on an analysis of future needs, the talent availablewithin and outside of the organization, and the current and anticipated resources that can be expended to attract and retain such talent. 成功的招聘始于適當(dāng)?shù)恼衅敢?guī)劃與預(yù)測(cè)。在人員配給這個(gè)階段，組織根據(jù)未來(lái)的需要、組織內(nèi)外可用的人才與能夠用于吸引與留住這種人才的現(xiàn)有以及預(yù)期的資源，制訂計(jì)劃以添補(bǔ)或者取消未來(lái)的工作空缺。 Also related to the success of a recruitment process are the strategies an organization is prepared to employ in order to identify and select the best candidates for its developing pool of human resources. Organizations seeking recruits for base-level entry positions often require minimum qualifications and experience. These applicants are usually recent university graduates, many of whom have not yet made clear decisions about future careers or are contemplating engaging in advanced academic activity. At the middle levels, senior administrative, technical and junior executive positions are often filled internally. The push for scarce, high-quality talent, often recruited from external sources, has usually been at the senior executive levels. Most organizations utilize both mechanisms to effect recruitment to all levels.同樣與招聘過(guò)程的成功相關(guān)的是一個(gè)組織準(zhǔn)備應(yīng)用的種種策略，目的是為了識(shí)別并選拔最佳候選人，以發(fā)展其人力資源儲(chǔ)備。尋招初級(jí)入門類員工的組織，通常對(duì)應(yīng)聘者的資歷和經(jīng)驗(yàn)的要求最低。這些應(yīng)聘者通常是剛畢業(yè)的大學(xué)生，其中許多人對(duì)于未來(lái)的職業(yè)還沒(méi)有清晰的決定或者正在考慮繼續(xù)學(xué)習(xí)深造。在中層人員層次中，高級(jí)行政主管、技術(shù)與初級(jí)主管等職位通常從內(nèi)部選拔。對(duì)常常從組織外部招聘稀有優(yōu)秀人才——他們通常是從外部招募的——方面所做的努力，通常是在高級(jí)主管層面上進(jìn)行。大多數(shù)組織同時(shí)使用這兩種機(jī)制來(lái)開展不同層次的招聘工作。 Recruiting from Internal Sources從內(nèi)部人才資源中招聘 There are sound reasons for recruiting from sources within the organization: 從組織內(nèi)部的人力資源中進(jìn)行招聘是有充分理由的： 1) The ability of the recruit is known so it is easy to assess potential for the next level. By contrast, assessments of external recruits are based on less reliable sources, such as references, and relatively brief encounters, such as interviews.1) 了解對(duì)受聘者的能力，所以就容易評(píng)估其從事高一層次工作的潛質(zhì)；相反，對(duì)從外部招募進(jìn)來(lái)的員工的評(píng)估往往基于諸如推薦人及像面試之類的較為簡(jiǎn)短的面對(duì)面接觸等可信度不高的資信來(lái)源。 2) “Insiders know the organization, its strengths and weaknesses, its culture and, most of all, its people.individuals above the entry level. This may result in people being promoted before they are ready, or not being allowed to stay in a position long enough to learn how to do the job well.2)“內(nèi)部受聘人員”了解該組織，了解其優(yōu)勢(shì)和劣勢(shì)，了解其文化；而且，最重要的是，了解該組織中的大部分成員。 3) Infighting, inbreeding, and a shortage of varied perspectives and interests may reduce organizational flexibility and growth, and resistance to change by those who have an interest in maintaining the status quo may present long-term problems.3) 公司內(nèi)部升遷會(huì)激發(fā)員工的動(dòng)力，并培養(yǎng)了員工對(duì)組織的使命感。有技能、有抱負(fù)的員工更可能參與到開發(fā)性的活動(dòng)中去，如果他們相信這些活動(dòng)能夠?qū)е律毜脑挕? 4) In times of rapid growth and during transitions, the organization may promote from within into managerial positions, regardless of the qualifications of incumbents. Transition activities and rapid organizational growth often mask managerial deficiencies; it is not until the growth rate slows that the deficiencies become apparent and, then, the organization finds it difficult, if not impossible, to undo the damage. The resulting cost of remedial training can prove prohibitive.4) 比起在各種各樣的媒體上打廣告招聘和面試“外部人員”，內(nèi)部招聘的成本更低，速度更快；用于培訓(xùn)受聘者并使他們?nèi)谌朐摻M織群體所花的時(shí)間也更短。 At the same time, several disadvantages exist： 不過(guò)，內(nèi)部招聘也存在著幾方面的不利因素： 1) Sometimes it is difficult to find the “right” candidate within and the organization may settle for an employee who possesses a less than ideal mix of competencies.1） 有時(shí)很難在組織內(nèi)部找到一個(gè)合適的人選，這樣該組織就可能退而求其次地滿足于綜合能力較不理想的人選。 2) If the vacancies are being caused by rapid expansion of the organization, there may be an insufficient supply of qualified2） 如果職位的空缺是由于組織的快速發(fā)展而形成的，那就可能存在著能跨過(guò)招聘門檻的合格人選供不應(yīng)求的情況。這就可能導(dǎo)致這么一種結(jié)果，即得以提升者要么并沒(méi)有做好這方面的準(zhǔn)備，要么沒(méi)能讓他在一個(gè)崗位上呆上足夠長(zhǎng)的時(shí)間去學(xué)會(huì)如何做好這項(xiàng)工作。 3) Promotions from within build motivation and a sense of commitment to the organization. Skilled and ambitious employees are more likely to become involved in developmental activities if they believe that these activities will lead to promotion.3） 內(nèi)部紛爭(zhēng)、近親繁衍及多元的想法與興趣的缺乏，可能降低組織的靈活性和發(fā)展速度；同時(shí)，那些維持現(xiàn)狀的既得利益者們對(duì)變革的抵制可能引發(fā)種種長(zhǎng)期性的問(wèn)題。 4) Internal recruitment is cheaper and quicker than advertising in various media and interviewing “outsiders”. Time spent in training and socialization is also reduced.4） 在迅速發(fā)展時(shí)期和過(guò)渡時(shí)期中，組織可能不問(wèn)現(xiàn)任人員的條件如何就從內(nèi)部推薦人員擔(dān)任管理職位。過(guò)渡性活動(dòng)和快速的組織增長(zhǎng)，常常掩蓋了管理上的缺失；只有到了增長(zhǎng)速度變慢時(shí)這種缺失才能明顯地顯現(xiàn)出來(lái)，那時(shí)組織就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)很難——如果還不是完全不可能的話——彌補(bǔ)損失了。結(jié)果是，補(bǔ)救性培訓(xùn)的成本可能就會(huì)高得令人望而卻步了。 Recruiting From External Sources從外部人才資源中招聘 External recruiting methods can be grouped into two classes: informal and formal. Informal recruiting methods tap a smaller market than formal methods. These methods may include rehiring former employees and choosing from among those “walk-in” applicants whose unsolicited rsums had been retained on file. The use of referrals also constitutes an informal hiring method. Because they are relatively inexpensive to use and can be implemented quickly, informal recruiting methods are commonly used for hiring clerical and other base-level recruits who are more likely than other groups to have submitted unsolicited applications. Former students who participated in internship programs may also be easily and cheaply accessed.外部招聘的方法可以分成非正式和正式兩個(gè)級(jí)別。與正式招聘相比，非正式招聘所利用的市場(chǎng)較小，這些方法可能包括再次雇用以前的雇員以及從那些“主動(dòng)上門”求職者中——他們主動(dòng)提供的個(gè)人簡(jiǎn)歷還存在公司的檔案里——選拔。 推薦的方式也是一種非正式的雇用方法，因?yàn)檫@些方法使用起來(lái)花費(fèi)相對(duì)較低，而且可以迅速實(shí)施。非正式的招聘方法通常用于招聘文職員工或者其他初級(jí)層次的員工，這些人比其他群體更可能主動(dòng)提供簡(jiǎn)歷。原來(lái)參加實(shí)習(xí)項(xiàng)目的學(xué)生也可以輕松而廉價(jià)地得以雇用。 Formal methods of external entail searching the labor market more widely for candidates with no previous connection to the organization. These methods have traditionally included newspaper/magazine/journal advertising, the use of employment agencies and executive search firms, and college recruitment. More often, now, job/career fairs and e-recruiting are reaching the job seeker market. 正式的外部招聘方法需要在更大的勞動(dòng)市場(chǎng)中去尋找此前與組織沒(méi)有任何關(guān)系的候選人。傳統(tǒng)上，這些方法包括在報(bào)紙雜志上打廣告、使用職業(yè)中介和獵頭公司及校園招聘等?，F(xiàn)在更為常見的是，舉辦招聘會(huì)和網(wǎng)上招聘的方式正在打入求職者市場(chǎng)。 Posting vacancies externally through the various arms of the media or via employment agencies reaches a wider audience and may turn up a greater number of potential candidates from which the organization can choose. At the same time, this method is relatively expensive and time-consuming as the organization works through initial advertisements in newspapers, periodicals and journals will continue to be an important way to reach potential candidates.通過(guò)媒體的各種手段，或者通過(guò)職業(yè)中介機(jī)構(gòu)在組織外部張榜招賢補(bǔ)缺，可以使受眾面更加廣泛，并且可能出現(xiàn)數(shù)量更大的潛在候選人，而組織就可以從這些候選人當(dāng)中選拔合適的人才。不過(guò)，這種方法的費(fèi)用較高，且比較耗時(shí)，因?yàn)檫@個(gè)組織要始終參與在報(bào)紙雜志上打首期廣告的工作，而這種期刊（廣告）將繼續(xù)成為該組織聯(lián)系潛在候選人的一種重要方式。 There is no guarantee that the results will be satisfactory to the organization, since the cost of advertising often limits the frequency and duration of job postingas well as the amount of information made available, thus making it difficult for a job seeker to accurately judge the worth of the position being offered. In additio