单选题 Through the years, our view of what leadership is and who can exercise it has changed considerably. Leadership competencies have remained constant, but our understanding of what it is, how it works, and the ways in which people learn to apply it has shifted. We do have the beginnings of a general theory of leadership, from history and social research and above all from the thoughts of reflective practitioners such as Moses, Julius Caesar, and James Madison, and in our own time from such disparate sources of wisdom as Gandhi, Winston Churchill, Mao Tse-tung, and Henry Kissinger, who have very little in common except that they have not only been there but tried with some fairness to speculate on paper about it.
But tales and reflective observation are not enough except to convince us that leaders are physically strong and abnormally hard workers. Today we are a little closer to understanding how and who people lead, but it wasn"t easy getting there. Decades of academic analysis have given us more than 350 definitions of leadership. Literally thousands of empirical investigations of leaders have been conducted in the last seventy-five years alone, but no clear understanding exists as to what distinguishes leaders from non-leaders, and perhaps more important, what distinguishes effective leaders from ineffective leaders and effective organizations from ineffective organizations.
Never have so many labored so long to say so little. Multiple interpretations of leadership exist, each providing a fragment of insight but each remaining an incomplete and wholly inadequate explanation. Most of these definitions don"t agree with each other, and many of them would seem quite remote to the leaders whose skills are being examined. Definitions reflect fashions, political tides and academic trends. They don"t always reflect reality and sometimes they just represent nonsense. It"s as if what Braque once said about art is also true of leadership: "The only thing that matters in art is the part that cannot be explained. "
Many theories of leadership have come and gone. Some looked at the leader. Some looked at the situation. None has stood the test of time. With such a track record, it is understandable why leadership research and theory have been so frustrating as to deserve the label " the La Brea Tar Pits " of organizational inquiry. Located in Los Angeles, these asphalt pits house the remains of a long sequence of prehistoric animals that came to investigate but never left the area.
单选题 In regard of leadership competencies, the author suggests that people have ______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】第一段第二句作者说:领袖的才能是一直没有变化的,只是人们对什么是领袖才能、领袖才能如何起作用以及人们如何运用这些才能这些问题的理解都发生了变化。
单选题 Several big names are mentioned in the first paragraph mainly to show their ______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】第一段的第三句作者说:我们确实开始了对领导艺术的总体理论的研究,从历史和社会方面,最主要的是对伟大的领袖人物的思想进行研究,例如摩西(圣经中古代犹太人的领袖——编者注)、恺撒、詹姆斯·麦迪逊(美国历史上的第四任总统,美国的开国元勋之一,他对美国宪法和人权法的制定作出了重大贡献——编者注),以及当代最杰出的智慧天才甘地、丘吉尔和基辛格。他们除了都曾经存在过,都用文章清楚地表达了自己的思想之外,别无共同之处。
单选题 According to the author, people"s opinions of leadership are on the whole quite ______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】全文第一句作者就指出:多少年来我们对于什么是领导艺术以及什么样的人可以成为领袖的看法变化相当大。另参见第2题。
单选题 The author thinks that ______.
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】第三段第二句起作者说:对领导艺术的解释是多种多样的,而每一种都是片面的、不完整的和不充分的。这些定义大部分相互矛盾,而且很多都没有研究领袖的领导技巧。这些定义反映了当时的政治潮流和学术趋向。它们不能反映实际情况,有时一点用都没有。
单选题 "The La Brea Tar Pits" in paragraph 4 probably signifies things that ______.
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】最后一段第一句作者说:许多关于领导艺术的理论流行一段时间就消失了。第四句起作者说:这些理论没有一个能经得住时间的检验。有了这样的记录我们就不难理解为什么关于领导艺术的研究和理论这样令人沮丧,以至于人们把它说成是组织研究的“死亡陷阱”。这里所说的“死亡陷阱”是在位于洛杉矶的一处沥青坑里发现了不同纪的史前动物的遗址,这些动物来到此处是想探个究竟,结果就回不去了。
单选题 This passage is mainly concerned with ______.
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】本文主要说长期以来人类对于领袖艺术的研究一直没有形成统一的理论。