Board logo

标题: GWD-1-Q35 [打印本页]

作者: stucashS    时间: 2010-6-1 22:27     标题: GWD-1-Q35

Q35:
Which of the following best describes the relation of the second paragraph to the first?
        
A.    The second paragraph offers proof of an assertion made in the first paragraph.
B.    The second paragraph provides an explanation for the occurrence of a situation described in the first paragraph.
C.    The second paragraph discusses the application of a strategy proposed in the first paragraph.
D.    The second paragraph examines the scope of a problem presented in the first paragraph.
E.    The second paragraph discusses the contradictions inherent in a relationship described in the first paragraph.
为什么不能选B呢?这几个答案有什么区别啊?
作者: LIANGSHAN    时间: 2010-6-2 06:46

先帮贴题目

GWD1-Q35 to Q37:
      In corporate purchasing, competitive scrutiny is typically limited to suppliers of items that are directly related to end products. With “indirect” purchases (such as computers, advertising, and legal services), which are not directly related to production, corporations often favor “supplier partnerships” (arrangements in which the purchaser forgoes the right to pursue alternative suppliers), which can inappropriately shelter suppliers from rigorous competitive scrutiny that might afford the purchaser economic leverage.  There are two independent variables—availability of alternatives and ease of changing suppliers—that companies should use to evaluate the feasibility of subjecting suppliers of indirect purchases to competitive scrutiny. This can create four possible situations.
     In Type 1 situations, there are many alternatives and change is relatively easy.  Open pursuit of alternatives—by frequent competitive bidding, if possible—will 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 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 the ability to switch is constrained. In Type 3 situations, there are few alternatives, but the ability to switch without difficulty creates a threat that companies can use to negotiate concessions from existing suppliers. In Type 4 situations, where there are few alternatives and change is difficult, partnerships may be unavoidable
作者: LIANGSHAN    时间: 2010-6-2 06:49

AE可以首先被排除,因为第一段中既没有assertion也没有contradiction。作者只是客观描述了两种合作方式,然后提出两个影响因素,之后在第二段讨论这两个影响因素下的决策分析过程。

B之后被排除,因为第二段不是针对某个situation进行分析,而是列举了四个situation。

C的意思是如何根据第一段的基本原则进行理解和应用,D则是停留在分析举证阶段。相比之下还是C更合理些。
作者: xiaolingdang    时间: 2010-6-3 06:42

接着问问 36题为什么是选B?/

原文根本推不出啊

我选的D 认为还可以推出呢
作者: mvmv90    时间: 2010-6-3 22:19

36我也选的是D




欢迎光临 国际顶尖MBA申请交流平台--TOPWAY MBA (http://forum.topway.org/) Powered by Discuz! 7.2