"In any large business organization, teamwork is the ultimate key to the organization's success." In your view, how accurate is the foregoing statement? Use reasons and/or examples from your experience, observation, and/or reading to explain your viewpoint.
Now here's a sample response to this question. As you read my response, notice the following: . I’ve used transitional words and phrases to help you see how the ideas flow form one to the next. . I’ve made it clear at the outset( in the introductory paragraph) that I appreciate the complexity of the issue and I have a point of view. . In the final paragraph, I’ve provided a recapitulation (summary), without introducing additional reasons or examples.
Sample Response 1: Whether a particular business ultimately succeeds or fails depends, of course, on a myriad of factors-ranging from economic conditions to the extent of competition, even to the charisma and clout of the CEO. Nevertheless, because teamwork is an essential ingredient for the success of any large business, it is, in my view, the pivotal factor in most cases. First, cooperative interaction is an integral part of nearly all company jobs- including jobs performed in relative isolation and those in which technical knowledge or ability, not the ability to work with others, would seen to be most important. For example, scientists, researchers, and even computer programmers must collaborate to establish common goals and coordinate efforts. Even in business where individual tenacity and ambition of salespeople would seen to be the key for a firm’s success, sales personnel must coordinate efforts with support staff and managers. Secondly, in my experience, the kinds of problems that ultimately undermine an organization are those such as low employee morale, attrition and diminishing productivity. These problems, in turn, almost invariably result from ill-will among co-workers and their unwillingness to communicate, cooperate, and compromise. Thus, problems in working together as a team pose the greatest threat to an organization’s success. Some might argue that the leadership and vision of a company’s key executives is of paramount importance. Yet chief executives of our most successful corporations would no doubt admit that without the cooperative efforts of their subordinates, their personal vision would never become reality. Others might cite the heavy manufacturing and natural-resource industries, where the value of tangible assets-raw materials and capital equipment- are often the most significant determinant of business success. However, such industries are diminishing in significance as we move from an industrial society to an information age. In sum, although leadership, individual ambition, and even the value of tangible assets play crucial roles in the success of many large business organizations, teamwork is the single ingredient common to all such organizations. It is, therefore, the key one.
Here is other essay responds to this question. Notice the response presents a contrary position to response #1. As you read the response, keep in mind: . None of the points asserted in this response are irrefutable, because the issue is far from "black-and-white." It's all a matter of opinion. . This response is relatively simple in style and language and brief enough (about 325 words) to compose and type in 30 minutes. . This response meets all the official criteria for a score of 6 (the highest possible score).
Sample Response #2 (325 Words) Whether a particular business ultimately succeeds or fails depends on a variety of factors. In my view, while teamwork is almost always important, in most instances other factors are more pivotal to a firm's success. The main reason for my view is simply that it accords with observation and common sense. For example, in many instances it is clearly the policy decisions of key executives that determine whether a firm ultimately succeeds. Notable cases include the turnaround success of Coca-Cola after Roberto Goizueta assumed the position of CEO, and-in contrast-the Apple Computer debacle following the departure of its founding visionary Steve Jobs. Also, consider industries such as financial services, where product differentiation is difficult. It seems to me that a creative marketing ploy or the tenacity of a sales force would the key factor here. Finally, in manufacturing and mining the value of raw materials or capital equipment are surely more significant than the cooperative efforts of employees or, for that matter, any other asset. Another reason for my view is that technical knowledge and competence would seem to be more fundamental to most jobs. Specifically, without adequate knowledge of the systems, procedures, and vocabulary used in one's department or division, an employee cannot communicate effectively with peers or contribute meaningfully to organizational goals. Admittedly, nearly all jobs in an organization require some cooperative interaction with coworkers, even jobs performed in relative isolation and those calling for a high level of technical knowledge or ability. For instance, researchers, scientists, and computer programmers must agree on specifications and coordinate efforts to meet timelines. However, some substantive knowledge is necessary to perform virtually any job, whereas the ability to work effectively with others is merely helpful. In sum, I agree that teamwork is an important ingredient for organizational success. However, it is generally not the most important one. On balance, some other factor-such as leadership, ambition, tangible assets, or especially technical knowledge-usually plays a more pivotal role.
Example 2
Analysis of an Issue (1 Question--30 Minutes) "The media today place too much emphasis on provocative images, and not enough emphasis on the ideas and events behind those images." To what extent do you agree or disagree with the foregoing statement? Use reasons and/or examples from your experience, observation, and/or reading to explain your viewpoint. Below is a sample response to this question. As you read the response, keep in mind: .This response meets all the official criteria for a score of 6 (the highest possible score). .This response is by no means the correct one. (As the official directions state: "There is no correct response.") So don't worry if, in your response, you adopted an entirely different position on the issue, or if you used entirely different examples and reasons to support that position. .I didn't compose this response under timed conditions, so don't worry if yours isn't as lengthy or as polished. Take comfort: You can attain a top score of 6 with a briefer and less-polished essay. Sample Response (540 Words) Upon first glance at today's media--whether broadcast or print--it would appear that the speaker is correct. However, in my view the media's emphasis on image is largely justifiable. Moreover, the speaker understates the extent to which the media also covers the substance behind those images, as discussed below. I concede that the media today do place considerable emphasis on image. Advertisements are increasingly resorting to fast-moving, sexy, images. In fact, advertisements which provide no product information whatsoever--not even about what the product looks like or how it is to be used--are becoming increasingly common. Also, while tabloid magazines and television programs abound, intelligent discourse can be found sparingly only on public television and a few other arts and education channels, and among the stacks of scholarly journals at our libraries and at obscure websites. And, despite television's tremendous potential for airing the vital political issues of the day, the brief sound bites from our self-conscious politicians today hardly meet that potential. Whether this emphasis on image is justifiable, it is certainly understandable--at least with respect to advertising--for two reasons. First, products are becoming more and more fungible these days; consider automobiles, for instance. Since they vary little from one make to another today, marketers are forced to resort to image for product differentiation. The second reason has to do with the fact that we are becoming an increasingly busy society. In the U.S., for instance, the average work week is now over 65 hours, compared to 40 a generation ago. Meanwhile, the number of goods and services competing for our attention seems to grow exponentially. Thus, how can the growing number of businesses compete for our limited time except by resorting to attention-grabbing images? However understandable this focus on image, is it nevertheless unjustifiable, as the speaker implies? Media critics point out that undue focus on appearances and images amounts to an appeal to our emotions and our baser, prurient instincts--rather than to our intellect and reason. Taken to an extreme, argue the critics, such focus facilitates irrationality, and even sanctions demagoguery. The result is that we dissuade ourselves as a society from engaging in the sort of informed debate needed for any democracy to survive, let alone thrive. I might be convinced by the critics were the media to withhold the substance underlying the images; but they do not. Behind most newspaper headlines, magazine cover stories, and reputable Internet home pages is a wealth of substantive content; we simply need to look for it. In sum, although I wholeheartedly agree that the media should not sacrifice substance merely to get our attention, the speaker overlooks that the substance is in fact there. Besides, without substance the products, services, politicians, artists, authors, and others behind all those provocative images eventual wither. Sexy cars that are proven unsafe are redesigned or discontinued; politicians who don't follow through on promises are soon defeated; musicians who lack artistry and originality fade into oblivion; and authors without important ideas eventually lose an audience. In the final analysis, it is not the media's job to wave ideas and events in front of us; rather, it is up to us to look for them behind the hoopla and the headlines.
Example 3
"Leisure time is becoming an increasingly rare commodity, largely because technology has failed to achieve its goal of improving our efficiency in our daily pursuits." In your view, how accurate is the statement above? Use relevant reasons and/or examples from your experience, observations, or reading to support you viewpoint.
Essay: (composed under a 45-minute time limit) Score (on the 0-6 scale): 6 In a society where most households have clocks, phones, and televisions in almost every room, and daily schedules are demarcated by minutes instead of hours, many Americans suffer from stress and constantly complain that they don't have enough time to do everything they want to do. This complaint appears paradoxical because we know there has been an almost exponential development in technology. Our computers are faster and more powerful, we have more machines to do our tasks for us, and even our transportation gets us where we need to be much more quickly. Still, we have less time than ever to spend leisurely, and I will argue that this problem is not because technology has failed to achieve its goal of improving efficiency, but rather, because technology has created more pursuits and Americans are subject to a basic ethical drive for "More". Many Americans complain they don't have enough time. As a society, most of us get caught up in a schedule of going to work each day, coming home late, then taking care of mundane details before finally falling into bed only to get up early the next day to continue the routine. In most households, both parents work full-time, so are busy working throughout the week, which leaves them only the weekends to take care of household duties like cleaning and doing the bills. As a result, many parents feel ostracized from their children because they don't have the time or energy to spend with their kids. Many people suffer from chronic stress because they don't take the time out from their busy lives to just relax. What little free time people do have, they spend on the phone, in front of the TV, or on the computer so that they are still not relaxing, but actively engaged in a cognitive process. People can wile away hours in front of a TV, and not come away feeling relaxed because they've spent that entire time keeping up with the constant flash of images, storing information about characters, plots, themes, products and other aspects of the media and all without realizing that they're doing so. The influx of media is just one element of the reason why people don't have enough time. While technology has made many things better and faster, it has also created more pursuits with which the public can engage itself. We now have televisions, computers, palm pilots, stereos, DVDs, play stations, and cell phones to occupy our time with, just to name a few. Furthermore, all these things are within easy access to the average American. Meanwhile, pursuits that are traditionally considered relaxing are becoming more expensive and less accessible. For example, for most Americans $100 massages are an unaffordable luxury and as cities grow larger, nature walks are becoming harder to find. It is sometimes easier to just sit down in front of the TV than it is to take the time out to do something special. So people fill their time with mediated technologies and get so caught up in their favorite shows or games that they don't take the time to do other things they've been "meaning to do". This whirlwind of activity is a product of another reason why our society pines for more leisure time. This country was founded on the conservative Protestant ethic that dictates people should work hard now so they may reap the rewards later. While this ethic is essential for effective productivity and pushes us to want more, it has become detrimental to the American psyche. People push themselves to become more efficient so they can accomplish more. However, then they've started adding more goals so that in effect, the job never gets done. For example, people will also want to buy more things to achieve higher social status, so instead of saving for early retirement, they end up having to work just as long to pay off all their debts. Furthermore, people are so busy pushing themselves daily with the vague promise of retirement at the end, hoping to retire sooner in life, that they forget to stop and enjoy life as it is happening. Instead of working when they are older, but enjoying each day of their lives, people forgo daily enjoyments for the promise of later rewards. So while technology has given the means of more efficient production, it has also given us more things to deal with and accomplish. As a result, people find themselves running around endlessly, sometimes forgetting what it is they are running after. The key to more leisure time has become not more technology, but a refusal to let technology run our lives. We must learn to stop once in awhile, breathe, and enjoy life as it comes. We must learn to achieve a balance between looking ahead to tomorrow and learning to enjoy today. Commentary on Essay No. 1 (Score: 6) This outstanding essay provides an insightful analysis of the issue at hand, although it deserves what might be termed a "weak 6" (rather than a "strong 6"). The opening paragraph is particularly effective, providing a clear statement of premise (the writer's position or perspective on the issue). In Paragraph 2 the writer first establishes that our leisure time is in fact diminishing, then provides the first of three reasons for this phenomenon. (Paragraphs 3 and 4 provide two more reasons.) The supporting examples given for each reason are ample and relevant. While the reasons and examples given in Paragraphs 2 and 3 are not especially insightful, Paragraph 4 makes up for it with highly incisive discussion, contributing greatly to the essay's score of 6. The discussion throughout the three middle paragraphs is not entirely unflawed. Notably, the three reasons (see above) could have been more clearly identified and delineated, and Paragraph 2 is a bit long-winded and rambling. Also, the writer should have made more explicit the important point that technology is not the culprit for our diminishing leisure time. The essay demonstrates a mature, sophisticated writing style virtually free from grammatical, syntax, and language problems. (In the final paragraph the writer exhibits a particularly distinctive, and effective, style and voice.) These strengths contribute greatly to elevating this essay from the 5 to the 6 category.
欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/)
