返回列表 发帖

GWD-1-36

In corporate purchasing,



            competitive scrutiny is typically


            limited to suppliers of items that are


Line     directly related to end products.


  (5)      With “indirect” purchases (such as


computers, advertising, and legal


services), which are not directly


related to production, corporations


often favor “supplier partnerships”


(10)     (arrangements in which the


purchaser forgoes the right to


pursue alternative suppliers), which


can inappropriately shelter suppliers


from rigorous competitive scrutiny


(15)     that might afford the purchaser


economic leverage.  There are two


independent variables—availability


of alternatives and ease of changing


suppliers—that companies should


(20)     use to evaluate the feasibility of


            subjecting suppliers of indirect


            purchases to competitive scrutiny.


This can create four possible


situations.


(25)           In Type 1 situations, there are


many alternatives and change is


relatively easy.  Open pursuit of


alternatives—by frequent com-


petitive bidding, if possible—will


(30)     likely yield the best results.  In


Type 2 situations, where there


are many alternatives but change


            is difficult—as for providers of


employee health-care benefits—it


(35)    is important to continuously test


the market and use the results to


secure concessions from existing


suppliers.  Alternatives provide a


           credible threat to suppliers, even if


(40)    the ability to switch is constrained.


In Type 3 situations, there ate few


alternatives, but the ability to switch


without difficulty creates a threat that


companies can use to negotiate


(45)     concessions from existing suppliers.


In Type 4 situations, where there


are few alternatives and change


is difficult, partnerships may be


unavoidable.


Q36:


Which of the following can be inferred about supplier partnerships, as they are described in the passage?


              



  1. They cannot be sustained unless the goods or services provided are available from a large number of suppliers.
  2. They can result in purchasers paying more for goods and services than they would in a competitive-bidding situation.
  3. They typically are instituted at the urging of the supplier rather than the purchaser.
  4. They are not feasible when the goods or services provided are directly related to the purchasers’ end products.
  5. They are least appropriate when the purchasers’ ability to change suppliers is limited.

请教NN,看过去的讨论说定位句是“supplier partnerships”


(10)     (arrangements in which the


purchaser forgoes the right to


pursue alternative suppliers), which


can inappropriately shelter suppliers


from rigorous competitive scrutiny


(15)     that might afford the purchaser


economic leverage.


哪位帮忙翻译一下,我实在不能将它与答案联系起来啊!看来是我理解有问题的。


先谢了!

收藏 分享

(这种伙伴关系)将会不恰当地保护供应商免受严苛的竞争,这种竞争为购买方提供经济杠杆。

According to the context, such kind of partnership can be used by theproviders to raise additional profit, and thus puts the purchasers intoless economical situation. That's the right option trying to say...

TOP

In fact, "leverage" also means "advantage", maybe it will help u to understand the sentence better than the more abstract meaning "杠杆作用“

TOP

为什么要选择B呢? 合伙者是对于供应商起保护作用,那么与B有什么关系?请解答~~~~~~

TOP

原文意思为:supplier partnerships可以保护SUPPLIER不受审查,该审查本会为PURCHASER提供经济杠杆的

            所以如果说实施了SP之后,S方不受检查了那么PURCHASER方面就失去了原本被提供的经济杠杆,

            即P无ADVANTAGE了,SO最后P需要PAY MORE才行了。

            不晓得分析的对否

TOP

QUOTE:
以下是引用gmaeeor在2009-12-18 21:02:00的发言:

原文意思为:supplier partnerships可以保护SUPPLIER不受审查,该审查本会为PURCHASER提供经济杠杆的

            所以如果说实施了SP之后,S方不受检查了那么PURCHASER方面就失去了原本被提供的经济杠杆,

            即P无ADVANTAGE了,SO最后P需要PAY MORE才行了。

            不晓得分析的对否

SP可以让供应商逃避审查,而审查会给P带来好处。

那为啥P还favor SP咯。。。

TOP

我也一直对这篇文章很疑惑,为什么购买方要庇护供应商的利益,整篇文章我一点理解的感觉都没有,做题也做得一塌糊涂
期待牛人帮忙理顺逻辑关系

TOP

我觉得,下面就是对应实施 sp 的 四种不同情况嘛, 有时候sp的实施是不可避免的

TOP

返回列表

站长推荐 关闭


美国top10 MBA VIP申请服务

自2003年开始提供 MBA 申请服务以来,保持着90% 以上的成功率,其中Top10 MBA服务成功率更是高达95%


查看