阅读理解
"There is one and only one social responsibility of business," wrote Milton Friedman, a Nobel prize-winning economist, "That is, to use its resources and engage in activities designed to increase its profits." But even if you accept Friedman's premise and regard corporate social responsibility (CSR) policies as a waste of shareholders' money, things may not be absolutely clear-cut. New research suggests that CSR may create monetary value for companies—at least when they are prosecuted for corruption. The largest firms in America and Britain together spend more than $15 billion a year on CSR, according to an estimate by EPG, a consulting firm. This could add value to their businesses in three ways. First, consumers may take CSR spending as a "signal" that a company' s products are of high quality. Second, customers may be willing to buy a company' s products as an indirect way to donate to the good causes it helps. And third, through a more diffuse "halo effect," whereby its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others. Previous studies on CSR have had trouble differentiating these effects because consumers can be affected by all three. A recent study attempts to separate them by looking at bribery prosecutions under America's Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA). It argues that since prosecutors do not consume a company's products as part of their investigations, they could be influenced only by the halo effect. The study found that, among prosecuted firms, those with the most comprehensive CSR programmes tended to get more lenient penalties. Their analysis ruled out the possibility that it was firms' political influence, rather than their CSR stand, that accounted for the leniency: Companies that contributed more to political campaigns did not receive lower fines. In all, the study concludes that whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits, they do seem to be influenced by a company's record in CSR. "We estimate that either eliminating a substantial labour-rights concern, such as child labour, or increasing corporate giving by about 20% results in fines that generally are 40% lower than the typical punishment for bribing foreign officials," says one researcher. Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question of how much businesses ought to spend on CSR. Nor does it reveal how much companies are banking on the halo effect, rather than the other possible benefits, when they decide their do-gooding policies. But at least they have demonstrated that when companies get into trouble with the law, evidence of good character can win them a less costly punishment.
单选题
The author views Milton Friedman' s statement about CSR with______.
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】态度题。tolerance“包容”,skepticism“怀疑”,uncertainty“不确定”,approval“赞同”。文章开头讲密尔顿-弗里德曼曾经写道:“There is one and only one social responsibility of business”,紧接着文章转折并提出“things may not be absolutely clear-cut”。由此推知,作者对此的态度是uncertainty。
单选题
According to Paragraph 2, CSR helps a company by______.
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】细节题。根据第二段中的“First…And third,through a more diffuse‘halo effect,’whereby its good deeds earn it greater consideration from consumers and others”可知,CSR对企业的三个好处中包括赢得消费者的信任,A项符合文意。B项和C项原文没有提及;D项与原文不符。
单选题
The expression "more lenient" is closest in meaning to______.
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】词义题。根据题干关键词more lenient定位到第四段中的“The study found that,among prosecuted firms,those with the most comprehensive CSR programmes tended to get more lenient penalties”。根据上下文可知,拥有最全面的企业社会责任项目的公司往往会得到更宽松的处罚,所以more lenient与减少惩罚有关,故C项“不太严厉的”符合题意。
单选题
When prosecutors evaluate a case, a company' s CSR record______.
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】细节题。根据第五段中的“whereas prosecutors should only evaluate a case based on its merits,they do seem to be influenced by a company’s record in CSR”和第六段中的“when companies get into trouble with the law,evidence of good character can win them a less costly punishment”可知,在法律案件中,企业社会责任会对审判产生影响,A项符合文意。B、C、D三项在原文中没有体现。
单选题
Which of the following is true of CSR, according to the last paragraph?
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】细节题。根据最后一段中的“Researchers admit that their study does not answer the question of how much businesses ought to spend on CSR”可知,B项与原文相符。A、C、D三项原文没有提及。