阅读理解 As anyone who has tried to lose weight knows, realistic goal-setting generally produces the best results. That's partially because it appears people who set realistic goals actually work more efficiently, and exert more effort, to achieve those goals. What's far less understood by scientists, however, are the potentially harmful effects of goal-setting.
Newspapers relay daily accounts of goal-setting prevalent in industries and businesses up and down both Wall Street and Main Street, yet there has been surprisingly little research on how the long-trumpeted practice of setting goals may have contributed to the current economic crisis , and unethical behavior in general.
"Goals are widely used and promoted as having really beneficial effects. And yet, the same motivation that can push people to exert more effort in a constructive way could also motivate people to be more likely to engage in unethical behaviors," says Maurice Schweitzer, an associate professor at Penn's Wharton School.
"It turns out there's no economic benefit to just having a goal—you just get a psychological benefit," Schweitzer says. "But in many cases, goals have economic rewards that make them more powerful."
A prime example Schweitzer and his colleagues cite is the 2004 collapse of energy-trading giant Enron, where managers used financial incentives to motivate salesmen to meet specific revenue goals. The problem, Schweitzer says, is the actual trades were not profitable.
Other studies have shown that saddling employees with unrealistic goals can compel them to lie, cheat or steal. Such was the case in the early 1990s when Sears imposed asales quota on its auto repair staff. It prompted employees to overcharge for work and to complete unnecessary repairs on a companywide basis.
Schweitzer concedes his research runs counter to a very large body of literature that commends the many benefits of goal-setting. Advocates of the practice have taken issue with his team's use of such evidence as news accounts to support his conclusion that goal-setting is widely over-prescribed.
In a rebuttal (反驳) paper, Dr. Edwin Locke writes: "Goal-setting is not going away. Organizations cannot thrive without being focused on their desired end results any more than an individual can thrive without goals to provide a sense of purpose."
But Schweitzer contends the "mounting causal evidence" linking goal-setting and harmful behavior should be studied to help spotlight issues that merit caution and further investigation. "Even a few negative effects could be so large that they outweigh many positive effects," he says.
"Goal-setting does help coordinate and motivate people. My idea would be to combine that with careful oversight, a strong organizational culture, and make sure the goals that you use are going to be constructive and not significantly harm the organization," Schweitzer says.

单选题 36.What message does the author try to convey about goal-setting?

【正确答案】 A

【答案解析】不难看出goal-setting是本文的话题，但是针对这个话题，作者想表达的主要观点是第一段的最后一句：What’s far less understood by scientists，however，are the potentially harmful effects of goal-setting．句中的however是非常重要的主要观点提示词，而细读本句意思，不难看出对应的恰好是选项[A]Its negative effects have long been neglected．其他三个选项要么是谈制定目标的好处，非本文重点，要么是谈大多数人的目标不够现实，也不是本文的内容。

单选题 37.What does Maurice Schweitzer want to show by citing the example of Enron?

单选题 38.How did Sears'goal-setting affect its employees?

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】寻找本题的答案依然要秉承上面提到的基本思路，即作者的观点一旦明确，其所有的例子和数据都是为了说明观点服务的。本题提到了另一个例子Sears，发现信息提示词所在句Such was the case in the early 1990s when Sears imposed a sales quota on its auto repair staff．以及后一句It prompted employees to overcharge for work and to complete unnecessary repairs on a companywide basis．明确指出在经济目标驱使下，该公司为了完成目标滥收费，也就是不顾行业道德，即对应选项[C]They resorted to unethical practice to meet their sales quota．

单选题 39.What do advocates of goal-setting think of Schweitzer's research?

【正确答案】 C

【答案解析】本题的题干明确询问赞同目标设立的一派人士(advocates)如何看待Schweitzer的调查。原文第七段第二句提到：Advocates of the practice have taken issue with his team’s use of such evidence as news accounts to support his conclusion that goal-setting is widely over-prescribed．后文又引用对方的话mounting causal evidence，仔细研读这些内容，可以看出赞同设立目标的人士质疑的是Schweitzer提出的evidence，而不是质疑该观点是否有实际价值，即选项[A]，或者夸大了目标设立的副作用，即选项[B]。另外，我们从原文中可以发现：Schweitzer concedes his research runs counter to a very large body ofliterature…其中的concede表示同意，也就是说他本人认可目前的研究发现结果与主流观点不一样，所以选项[D]不攻自破。故答案为选项[C]。

单选题 40.What is Schweitzer's contention against Edwin Locke?

【正确答案】 D

【答案解析】根据题干信息词定位至文章倒数第三段：In a rebuttal(反驳)paper，Dr．Edwin Locke writes： “Goal-setting is not going away．Organizations cannot thrive without being focused on their desired end results any more than an individual can thrive without goals to provide a sense of purpose．”可以看出Edwin的主要观点还是认为企业需要目标，个人也需要目标。选项[B]说制定目标已经在企业文化中根深蒂固，但此内容并不是文中话题。选项[C]则完全曲解了作者观点，认为制定目标的积极意义远超负面效果。选项[A]是最大干扰项，虽然文中提到了需要进一步关注这种由于制定目标带来的有害行为，但是这种继续关注是手段而非目的，而题目是问Schweitzer如何反驳对方，需要我们找的是继续关注带来的好处，所以选项[D]Studying goal-setting can throw more light on successful business practices．更符合题意。本题难度相当大，作者的态度一定要把握好。作者并未全盘否定目标制定，而是说一定要制定切合实际的目标，以保证建设性推进计划，避免不道德行为伤害到计划的实施，因此这方面的研究值得继续推进下去，从而让公司健康运转。