单选题 Each year Universum, a Swedish consulting firm asks American MBA students where they would most like to work. The 2007 survey showed a few surprises in its top 50 companies named: Hewlett-Packard and Cisco Systems had fell, while old reliables such as General Electric, Coca-Cola and General Mills had jumped up the list. But the most-desired industry remains consulting, despite the beating it has taken since the end of the dotcom boom, and the top firm remains McKinsey. Perhaps the reason is: in recent years McKinsey has done as much as any company to provide MBA graduates with increasingly better and more profitable positions.
The reason for this was the firm's popularization of a concept known as "war for talent". It advocated finding the best and brightest and rewarding their innovations (创新) in proportion to "talent" instead of their performance or seniority (资格). But what is talent? And how does a company measure its employees' talent, especially when assigning them to new projects? The "war for talent" recommends a careful assessment of the inner skills and characteristics ready for success but gives few clues as to what those inner skills might be, which might make the war standardless. For a company focused on quick growth, one shortcut could be young hires who had already been rewarded for their talent by receiving MBAs from well-respected schools. Thus as the idea of finding talented employees who could quickly learn the skills took off, so did the asking price of the star MBA graduates.
Unfortunately, now the "war for talent" seems less of a brilliant idea. The economic downturn, bringing with it less competition for the available talent, also did its part to control in indulgent (宽容的) employers.
Similarly, Professor Jeffrey Pfeffer emphasized that cultivating a talent means not just hiring the most effective performers, but being able to deal quickly and firmly with the least effective C performers. But he adds that the C refers not to the person but to the individual's performance in a given job. Some low-performing managers were A or B performers earlier in their careers—and may attain that level of performance again.
MBA programs will remain attractive recruiting areas, but the MBA model itself has come under increasing criticism. Prof. Pfeffer, in a 2007 article found little evidence that an MBA had much effect on future salary or career. Future MBA students might need to provide more evidence of their talent to impress potential employers.

单选题 According to the text, McKinsey is favored by American MBA students in that the company ______.
A) has a world wide reputation for high salary
B) is famous for its consulting business
C) makes very attractive job offers to MBA holders
D) successfully survived the burst of dotcom bubble

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】[定位] 由题干中的McKinsey is favored by American MBA students定位到原文首段第三句But the most-desired industry remains consulting, despite the beating it has taken since the end of the dotcom boom, and the top firm remains McKinsey．
[精析] 推理判断题[考频：66]。原文首段末尾说，可能原因是：近些年来，麦肯锡和其他公司一样竭尽全力给 MBA毕业生提供越来越好、报酬越来越高的职位。由此可以推知，该公司给MBA毕业生提供非常具有吸引力的工作。故C)为正确答案。
[避错] 原文首段末尾并没有明确“该公司以高工：资而世界闻名”，排除A)；原文提及“人们最想去的行业还是咨询业”只是一个行业选样，并不能构成一个公司受欢迎的直接原因，因为该行业不只是这一家公司，排除B)“该公司以其咨询业而闻名”：原文只是提及咨询业经历了网络公司泡沫破裂，并没说麦旨锡遭受与否，故排除D)“该公司成功越过了网络公司泡沫破裂”。

单选题 A weak point of "war of talent" plan is that ______.
A) talents are something invisible and might be shown with time
B) talent is very hard to be defined or measured effectively
C) the talented people do not always have an MBA degree
D) different companies may rank the same person differently

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】[定位] 由题干中的A weak point of“war of talent”plan定位到原文第二段首句The reason for this was the firm's popularization of a concept known as“war for talent”．
[精析] 综合理解题[考频：18]。原文第二段中间说，天才争夺战介绍了一种仔细评估“指向成功的天生技能和性格”的方法，但是却没有说明这些天生技能和素质到底是什么，这就可能让这场天才争夺战失去标准。由此可以推知，没有标准的战争就是该人才争夺计划的弱点所在，那么其原因就在于对“天才”很难定义和测量，同时这又印证了该段but引起的句子所说的：“天才是什么?公司又怎样衡量雇员的天才呢?”故B)“天才很难被有效地定义或衡量”为正确答案。
[避错] A)小后半部分“会随着时间的推移而显现”与原文“却没有说明这些天生技能和素质到底是什么”不符；原文说“那些年轻的刚刚从名校获得MBA学位作为对其‘天才’的回报的学生们”，而C)说“天才并不通常拥有 MBA学位”与义意相悖，排除；原文虽提及“可能让这场战争失去了标准”，但文章和紧接着的例子都并未提及“不同的公司会对同一个人有不同的分级对待”，故排除D)。

单选题 What can we learn from the third paragraph?
A) The "war for talent" is totally useless nowadays.
B) The "war for talent" has caused serious economy decrease.
C) The Employers' attitude toward available talent has changed.
D) The economy decrease was caused by the lack of available talent.

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】[定位] 由题干中的the third paragraph定位到原文第三段相关细节处。
[精析] 综合推断题[考频：28]。由原文第三段中“使得对现有的人才的竞争减弱，也使得那些宠着这些雇员的企业收敛厂一些”可以推知，雇主对待人才的态度较之上文“对于一个注重快速增长的公司而言，一条捷径就是雇佣那些年轻的刚刚从名校获得MBA学位作为对其‘天才’的回报的学生们”发生了转变，C)与之相符，为正确答案。
[避错] 原文只是提及“现在‘天才争夺战’好像不再是那么英明的点子了”，而A)则认为“现在，天才争夺战’毫无用处”，与原文不符，排除；原文并未提及经济衰退的原因，而是说由于经济衰退而产生的一些变化，如“使得对现有的人才的竞争减弱，也使得那些宠着这些雇员的企业收敛了一些”，可排除B)和D)。

单选题 Which of the following is true about Professor Pfeffer's attitude?
A) Only the A performers worth to be hired.
B) There is no difference among the A, B and C performers.
C) C performers cannot change into A or B performers.
D) How to do with the C level performers also needs attention.

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】[定位] 由题干中的Professor Pfeifer可以定位到原文第四段第一句Similarly，Professor Jeffrey Pfeifer emphasized that cultivating a talent means not just hiring the most effective performers，but being able to deal quickly and firmly with the least effective C performers．
[精析] 语义理解题[考频：37]。由原文“Jeffrey Pfeffer教授也强调培养这种‘天才雇员思维模式’……还意味着能够迅速而坚定地应付那些表现最差的C型员工的人”推知，应付表现最差的C型员工也不容忽视，故D)“怎样对待表现最差的C型员工也需要重视”为正确答案。
[避错] 由原文“不仅仅意味着雇用那些表现最佳的人，还意味着能够迅速而坚定地应付那些表现最差的C型员工的人”可以排除A)“只有A型员工值得雇用”；原文提及A、B和c三者之间的转变，可推知这三类人肯定有区别，排除B)；由原文“一些表现差的经理人曾经在从业早期是表现为A或B的人，而且他们还可能再次恢复以前的表现水平”可以推知，并不是所有的C类转变不到B或A类，故排除C)。

单选题 What can we learn from the last paragraph?
A) MBA degree has lost all its original function.
B) MBA degree might not be convincing in future.
C) MBA degree will still mean high income in future.
D) MBA degree holders often lack talent evidence now.

【正确答案】 B

【答案解析】[定位] 由题干中的the last paragraph定位到原文末段相关细节部分。
[精析] 批理判断题[考频：66]。文章最后一段说，Pfeffer教授几乎没有发现什么证据可以证明MBA文凭对未来工资和事业有什么重大影响。未来的MBA学生可能要提供更多的证据来证明他们的天赋才能给潜在的雇主留下深刻印象。这说明未来MBA学位本身不够了。而文章第二段又曾提到很多公司找到“天才雇员”的捷径就是雇佣那些名牌大学得到MBA学位的人，这证明以前MBA学位本身就有说服力。那么综合以上分析可知“未来的MBA学位本身不再像以前一样有说服力了”。故选B)。
[避错] 由原文“MBA还是最具有吸引力的雇佣领域”排除A)“MBA已经失去了其所有最初功效”；由最后一段第二句排除C)“MBA在未来仍然意味着高收入”；原文虽提及“未来的MBA学生可能要提供更多的证据”，但并不意味着他们现今通常缺乏相关证据，故排除D)。