The modern multinational corporation is described as having originated when the owner-managers of nineteenth-century British firms carrying on international trade were replaced by teams of salaried managers organized into hierarchies. Increases in the volume of transactions in such firms are commonly believed to have necessitated this structural change. Nineteenth-century inventions like the steamship and the telegraph, by facilitating coordination of managerial activities, are described as key factors. Sixteenth- and seventeenth-century chartered trading companies, despite the international scope of their activities, are usually considered irrelevant to this discussion: the volume of their transactions is assumed to have been too low and the communications and transport of their day too primitive to make comparisons with modern multinationals interesting.
In reality, however, early trading companies successfully purchased and outfitted ships, built and operated offices and warehouses, manufactured trade goods for use abroad, maintained trading posts and production facilities overseas, procured goods for import, and sold those goods both at home and in other countries. The large volume of transactions associated with these activities seems to have necessitated hierarchical management structures well before the advent of modern communications and transportation. For example, in the Hudson's Bay Company, each far-flung trading outpost was managed by a salaried agent, who carried out the trade with the Native Americans, managed day-to-day operations, and oversaw the post's workers and servants. One chief agent, answerable to the Court of Directors in London through the correspondence committee, was appointed with control over all of the agents on the bay.
The early trading companies did differ strikingly from modern multinationals in many respects. They depended heavily on the national governments of their home countries and thus characteristically acted abroad to promote national interests. Their top managers were typically owners with a substantial minority share, whereas senior managers' holdings in modern multinationals are usually insignificant. They operated in a preindustrial world, grafting a system of capitalist international trade onto a premodern system of artisan and peasant production. Despite these differences, however, early trading companies organized effectively in remarkably modern ways and merit further study as analogues of more modern structures.
According to the passage, early chartered trading companies are usually described as
irrelevant to a discussion of the origins of the modern multinational corporation
interesting but ultimately too unusual to be good subjects for economic study
analogues of nineteenth-century British trading firms
rudimentary and very early forms of the modern multinational corporation
important national institutions because they existed to further the political aims of the governments of their home countries
题目分析:
题目释义:
细节题目
考点:
支持主题(Supporting ideas)
旨在考察我们对文章细节的认知
这个题目定位在第一段的最后部分“Sixteenth- and seventeenth-century chartered trading companies, despite the international scope of their activities, are usually considered irrelevant to this discussion: the volume of their transactions is assumed to have been too low and the communications and transport of their day too primitive to make comparisons with modern multinationals interesting.”
选项分析:
A选项:Correct. 与讨论现代多国公司无关。该选项只要找准了定位句,几乎是直译。较容易选择正确。
B选项:有趣但是最终对于做一个好的经济研究主题来说太独特了。文中没有提到把早期受特许的贸易公司作为经济研究的主题。这个选项属于无中生有。
C选项:是19世纪英国贸易公司的类似物。文中最后部分提到了这一点,但是说的是早期贸易公司是现代的贸易公司的类似物。
D选项:是基本的且非常早期的多国公司的形式。这个选项较易误选。作者在文中说的是,早期的贸易公司与现代贸易公司相类似。并没有说明其是一个初等的形式。不能将自己的理解强加给作者。
E选项:重要的国家公共机构因为它们可以存在于它们国家的政治目的中。文中在最后一段提到过这一点。但是作者没有说这是大家通常用来描述早期贸易公司的。
are usually described as
问的是大众的错误观点,不是文章最后作者的观点
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论