外国新闻开头结尾:请英文高手帮我翻译,急用,谢谢

来源:百度文库 编辑:杭州交通信息网 时间:2024/03/29 06:08:34
Given these presumed linkages between power and effective influence, it is hardly surprising that leadership
theorists have given considerable attention to the study of how leaders use their power and social
influence to achieve their goals. The distinguished presidential scholar Richard Neustadt (1990) characterized
power in terms of “personal influence of an effective sort” (ix). Subsequent studies have reinforced
this view and deepened our understanding of the important relationship between power and
influence (see, e.g., Caro, 2002; Gergen, 2000; Kellerman, 1994). These case studies document, in particular,
the intimate relationship between the skillful use of social influence by leaders and the accomplishment
of difficult institutional goals.
From the standpoint of such accounts, self-defeating influence behavior by leaders—influence behavior that
proves counter-productive or self-destructive—represents a rather provocative and puzzling phenomenon.
“If self-preservation and the pursuit of self-interest are essential features of rational behavior,” as
Baumeister & Scher (1988) proposed, then self-defeating influence behaviors must be counted among
the hallmarks of leader irrationality.
Self-defeating influence behavior by experienced and successful leaders is particularly puzzling because,
on prima facie grounds, one might argue such behavior should be rather unlikely. After all, when political
novices use influence processes ineptly, it is easy to discount their mistakes as reflecting simply lack of sophistication or requisite experience. Their mistakes can be
attributed, for example, to naive misperceptions or miscalculations
that taint their influence attempts. When experienced and
politically savvy leaders make such mistakes, however, there is
often a more perplexing and paradoxical quality to their actions.
Because they are seasoned and proven influence professionals,
we might expect powerful leaders to be adept at sizing up influence
situations and at finding the right (i.e., the most effective)
influence strategies to use in a situation.However, as recent social, corporate, and political scandals have
amply documented, even the most savvy and experienced leaders
are capable of shooting themselves in the proverbial foot (Kramer, 2003a). Indeed, when we examine the
recurrent and persistent self-defeating behavior of a political virtuoso such as President Clinton, to use
just one recent example, many of us have asked, “What was he thinking? How could he have been so stupid?”
(see Maraniss, 1998, for a particularly compelling analysis). What accounts for the stunning ability
of some leaders to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?
不要用翻译软件翻译的,谢谢

在力量和有效的影响力之间给这些被假定的连合, 它是刚刚令人惊讶领导
理论家有把相当的注意给那项领袖如何使用他们的力量研究和社会的
影响达成他们的目标。 卓着的总统学者理查 Neustadt(1990) 的特色
以 "一有效的种类个人的影响力" 的力量.(ix) 后来的研究有加强
视野和加深我们的重要关系的理解在力量之间和
影响力.(举例来说看见 Caro,2002;Gergen,2000;Kellerman,1994) 这些个案研究证明,特别地,
在领袖和成就的社会影响力的熟练使用之间的亲密关系
困难的制度目标。
从如此的帐户立场,领袖—的弄巧成拙的影响力行为影响行为那
证明毁灭性的—表现一种宁可气人和使迷惑的现象柜台- 能生产的或自我。
"如果自我保存和追求利己主义是理性的行为必要的特征," 当做
Baumeister& Scher(1988) 计画, 然后弄巧成拙的影响力行为一定被计算在
领袖不合理的纯度检验证明。
富有经验的和成功的领袖弄巧成拙的影响力行为特别地是使迷惑的因为,
在 prima facie 理由上,一可能争论如此的行为应该相当不太可能。 毕竟, 何时政治上的
新手不适当的使用影响力程序,它是容易当做只是反映诡辩或必需品的缺乏经验打折他们的错误。 他们的错误能是
归于, 举例来说, 到天真的 misperceptions 或 miscalculations
那个污点他们的影响力尝试。 当经历的时候和
政治上的知道领袖犯如此的错误,然而, 在那里是
时常对他们的行动一个比较复杂和更似非而是的质量。
因为他们是经验丰富的和证明影响力专业人士,
我们可能预期有力的领袖在影响力上面在涂上胶水熟练
情形和在发现权利 (也就是,最有效的)
影响策略在 situation.However 中使用, 如最近的社会,公司, 而且政治上的丑闻有
充足地证明, 甚至最大多数的理解能力和富有经验的领袖
能够在谚语的脚中射击他们自己。 (Kramer,2003 一) 的确, 当我们调查的时候那
例如 克林顿总统的一个政治上的美术通的再发生的和固执的弄巧成拙的行为, 到使用
正直的最近例子,我们之中的许多有问,"他正在想什么? 如何他可以有是如此愚蠢吗?"
(看见 Maraniss,1998,为一特别地无法抗拒的分析). 什么解释足以使人晕倒的能力
一些领袖到抢夺从胜利的口击败?