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 reliable ones such as General Electronic, 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 (网络泡沫), 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 in proportion to 'talent' instead of their performance or seniority. 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 (捷径) 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 (纵容的) 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
McKinsey is favoured by American MBA students in that it ______.
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】本文围绕人才话题展开讨论，首先通过一个对美国MBA学生的调查结论引出“人才战争”这一概念，指出MBA学生受欢迎的原因；而后谈到经济局势对引进人才的影响，最后说明培养人才的内涵以及未来MBA学生应该如何做。 根据题干中的McKinsey可将本题出处定位于第1段倒数第二句。文章第1段最后两句提到，最受青睐的行业仍然是咨询业，最受欢迎的公司仍然是麦肯锡，原因或许是近几年麦肯锡为MBA毕业生提供了越来越好、越来越赚钱的职位，这一点不逊于其他任何一家公司。B项“为MBA学位持有者提供极具吸引力的工作机会”与原文意思相符，其中的attractive job offers与increasingly better and more profitable positions对应，故答案为B。其他选项内容在文中均未提及，故排除。
单选题
What is a weak point of 'war of talent' plan? ______
【正确答案】
A
【答案解析】根据题干中的“war for talent”可将本题出处定位于第2段第5句。该句提到，“人才战争”推荐一套细致的体系来评估具有成功潜力的内在能力和性格，但“人才战争”没有提示这些内在能力可能是什么，这使得人们无据可依，A项“很难定义并有效判别人才”正是对此的同义转述，故为答案。其他三项未在文中提及。
单选题
From the third paragraph, we learn that ______.
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】题干将本题出处直接定位于第3段。该段提到，不幸的是，现在“人才战争”似乎不再当道，经济低迷减弱了对可用人才的竞争，也使得原来宠爱MBA人才的雇主们不那么宠爱这些人才了，由此可知，雇主对可用人才的态度改变了，故答案为D。文中提到“war for talent”现在是less of a brilliant idea，并非totally useless，A项的内容过于极端，故排除。B和C是针对“war for talent”和economic downturn设的干扰项，文中并未提及经济衰退是“人才战争”或“可用人才缺乏”造成的，故排除B和C。
单选题
What is Professor Pfeffer's attitude towards cultivating a talent? ______
【正确答案】
B
【答案解析】根据题干中的Professor Pfeffer可将本题出处定位于第4段。该段提到，杰弗里·普费弗教授强调，培养人才不仅仅是雇佣最高效的雇员，还要能够迅速坚定地与表现不佳的雇员打交道。B项“如何与表现不佳的雇员打交道也需要注意”与原文意思相符，其中的to do with与文中的to deal...with对应，故答案为B。根据文中提到的“培养人才不仅仅是雇佣最高效的雇员”可排除A。第4段最后一句提到，一些工作低效的经理曾经是高效的优秀员工，并且能够再次恢复到原先的状态，C项与之矛盾，故排除。D项在文中未提及，故排除。
单选题
What is said about the MBA degree in the last paragraph? ______