Since the late 1970’s in the face of a severe loss of market share in dozens of industries, manufacturers in the United States have been trying to improve productivity—and therefore enhance their international competitiveness—through cost-cutting programs. (Cost-cutting here is defined as raising labor output while holding the amount of labor constant.) However, from 1978 through 1982, productivity—the value of goods manufactured divided by the amount of labor input—did not improve; and while the results were better in the business upturn of the three years following, they ran 25percent lower than productivity improvements during earlier, post-1945 upturns. At the same time, it became clear that the harder manufactures worked to implement cost-cutting, the more they lost their competitive edge.
With this paradox in mind, I recently visited 25 companies; it became clear to me that the cost-cutting approach to increasing productivity is fundamentally flawed. Manufacturing regularly observes a “40, 40, 20” rule. Roughly 40 percent of any manufacturing-based competitive advantage derives from long-term changes in manufacturing structure (decisions about the number, size, location, and capacity of facilities) and in approaches to materials. Another 40 percent comes from major changes in equipment and process technology. The final 20 percent rests on implementing conventional cost-cutting. This rule does not imply that cost-cutting should not be tried. The well-known tools of this approach—including simplifying jobs and retraining employees to work smarter, not harder—do produce results. But the tools quickly reach the limits of what they can contribute.
Another problem is that the cost-cutting approach hinders innovation and discourages creative people. As Abernathy’s study of automobile manufacturers has shown, an industry can easily become prisoner of its own investments in cost-cutting techniques, reducing its ability to develop new products. And ma
根据文章倒数第二段最后一句“This dimension of performance has until recently sufficed as a basis of evaluation, but it has created a penny-pinching, mechanistic culture in most factories that has kept away creative managers.”这里作者指出迫于降低成本的压力，大多数工厂文化缺少创新。接着在最后一段中继续说到只有摆脱这种为了最大程度减少成本的方法才能使得企业成功，因此可知作者对大多数工厂的文化是持批判态度的。
我国当前教育最薄弱的环节是（ ）
运用奖励和惩罚，是德育工作的（ ）
晏阳初三大教育方式中，学校式教育不包括（ ）
首先从理论上对班级授课制进行了论证的是（ ）
学校的出现意味着人类（ ）
现实主义与跨国主义对国家利益的阐释认为，在当代，对任何主权国家来说，其利益应包括（）
“可持续发展”成为世界各国共同奋斗的目标。
最为经济且最为便利的直观教学手段是（ ）
我国是（）进入社会主义初级阶段的
以下重要事件中直接导致雅尔塔体系瓦解的有（）
