IELTS Handbook 12 – Test 1

In public discussion of business, we take certain values for granted. Today I’m going to talk about four of them: collaboration, hard work, creativity and excellence. Most people would say they’re all ‘good things’. I’m going to suggest that’s an over-simple view.

The trouble with these values is that they’re theoretical concepts, removed from the reality of day-to-day business. (Q31) Pursue values by all means, but be prepared for what may happen as a result. They can actually cause damage, which is not at all the intention. (Theo đuổi các giá trị bằng mọi cách, nhưng hãy chuẩn bị cho những gì có thể xảy ra. Chúng thực sự có thể gây ra thiệt hại, mà hoàn toàn không phải là chủ ý.)

Business leaders generally try to do the right thing. (Q32) But all too often the right thing backfires, if those leaders(=senior managers) adopt values without understanding and managing the side effects that arise . (Nhưng tất cả những điều đúng đắn thường xuyên phản tác dụng, nếu những nhà lãnh đạo đó chấp nhận các giá trị mà không hiểu và quản lý các tác dụng phụ phát sinh) The values can easily get in the way of what’s actually intended.

OK. So the first value I’m going to discuss is collaboration. Er, let me give you an example. (Q33) On a management training course I once attended, we were put into groups (=teams) and had to construct (=build) a bridge across a stream (Trong một khóa đào tạo về quản lý mà tôi từng tham gia, chúng tôi được xếp thành nhóm và phải xây dựng một cây cầu bắc qua một con suối), using building blocks that we were given. The rule was that everyone in the team had to move at least one building block during the construction. This was intended to encourage teamwork.

But it was really a job best done by one person. (Q34) The other teams tried to collaborate on building the structure, and descended into confusion (Các nhóm khác đã cố gắng hợp  tác để xây dựng cây cầu và rơi vào tình trạng bối rối), with everyone getting in each other’s way. Our team leader solved the challenge brilliantly. She simply asked everyone in the team to move a piece a few centimeters, to comply with the rule, and then let the person in the team with an aptitude for puzzles like this build it alone. We finished before any other team. My point is that the task wasn’t really suited to team working, so why make it one?

Teamwork can also lead to inconsistency – a common cause of poor sales. In the case of a smartphone that a certain company launched, one director wanted to target the business market, and another demanded it was aimed at consumers.  (Q35) The company wanted both directors to be involved, so gave the product a consumer-friendly name, but marketed it to companies. The result was that it met the needs of neither group(=poor).(Công ty muốn cả hai giám đốc tham gia, vì vậy đã đặt cho sản phẩm một cái tên thân thiện với người tiêu dùng, nhưng tiếp thị nó cho các công ty.) It would have been better to let one director or the other have his way, not both.

Now industriousness, or hard work. It’s easy to mock people who say they work hard: after all, a hamster running around in a wheel is working hard – and getting nowhere. (Q36) Of course hard work is valuable, but only when properly targeted. Otherwise it wastes the resources that companies value most – time and energy. And that’s bad for the organization.  (làm việc chăm chỉ là có giá trị, nhưng chỉ khi có mục tiêu đúng. Nếu không, nó sẽ lãng phí nguồn lực mà các công ty coi trọng nhất – thời gian và năng lượng. Và điều đó có hại cho tổ chức.)

There’s a management model that groups people according to four criteria: clever, hard-working, stupid and lazy. (Q37) Here ‘lazy’ means having a rational determination not to carry out unnecessary tasks  (Ở đây ‘lười biếng’ có nghĩa là có một quyết tâm hợp lý để không thực hiện những công việc không cần thiết). It doesn’t mean trying to avoid work altogether. Most people display two of these characteristics, and the most valuable people are those who are both clever and lazy: they possess intellectual clarity, and they don’t rush into making decisions. They come up with solutions to save the time and energy spent by the stupid and hard-working group. Instead of throwing more man-hours at a problem, the clever and lazy group looks for a more effective solution.

Next we come to creativity. This often works well – creating an attention-grabbing TV commercial, for example, might lead to increased sales. But it isn’t always a good thing. Some advertising campaigns are remembered for their creativity, without having any effect on sales. (Q38) This happened a few years ago with the launch of a chocolate bar: subsequent research showed that plenty of consumers remembered (=memorable) the adverts, but had no idea what was being advertised . (Điều này đã xảy ra cách đây vài năm với sự ra mắt của một thanh sô cô la: nghiên cứu sau đó cho thấy rằng nhiều người tiêu dùng nhớ các quảng cáo, nhưng không biết những gì đang được quảng cáo) The trouble is that the creator derives pleasure from coming up with the idea, and wrongly assumes the audience for the campaign will share that feeling.

A company that brings out thousands of new products may seem more creative than a company that only has a few, but it may be too creative, and make smaller profits. (Q39) Creativity needs to be targeted, to solve a problem that the company has identified .(Sự Sáng tạo cần được nhắm tới, để giải quyết một vấn đề mà công ty đã xác định) Just coming up with more and more novel products isn’t necessarily a good thing.

And finally, excellence. We all know companies that claim they ‘strive for excellence’, but it takes a long time to achieve excellence. In business, being first with a product is more profitable than having the best product. A major study of company performance compared pioneers – that is, companies bringing out the first version of a particular product – with followers, the companies that copied and improved on that product. (Q40) The study found that the pioneers commanded an average market share of 29 percent, while the followers achieved less than half that, only 13 percent  (Nghiên cứu cho thấy những người tiên phong chiếm thị phần trung bình là 29%, trong khi những người theo dõi đạt được ít hơn một nửa, chỉ 13%)– even though their product might have been better.

Insisting on excellence in everything we do is time-consuming, wastes energy and leads to losing out on opportunities. Sometimes, second-rate work is more worthwhile than excellence. ‘Make sure it’s excellent’ sounds like a good approach to business, but the ‘just-get-started’ approach is likely to be more successful.