33. “People are likely to accept as a leader only someone who has demonstrated an ability to perform the same tasks that he or she expects others to perform.”
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
“人們只愿意接受這樣的領導：他能完成他要求其他人完成的任務?！?BR> 1. 人們不會尊重一個不能完成他要求別人完成的任務自己卻不能完成的領導。這是人之常情，人們通常都只會欣賞和尊敬比自己優(yōu)秀的人，而不喜歡被一個不能完成任務卻命令自己去做的人心存敬意。例如克林頓總統(tǒng)當commander-in-chief 的時候，由于眾所周知他曾經(jīng)逃避兵役，很自然的下級軍官和士兵都不是很尊重他。
2. 人們不信任一個自己完不成任務卻要求別人去完成的人。仍然舉克林頓總統(tǒng)的例子。由于他逃兵役被視為沒有能力，下級都對他的決策心存懷疑，這也就潛在的導致了執(zhí)行上的不盡心不盡力。
3. 誠然是否能完成自己交給別人的任務并不是衡量一個leader重要指標。可能領導能力、,組織能力、運籌能力更為重要，但是我們不能忽視人們心理上的看法，盡管它可能并不合理但它確實是存在的。
normal human feelings admire adore respect superior to evade escape military service subordinate soldier be doubtful of be suspicious of execution implement admittedly true potentially evaluate index leadership psychological psychology psychologic psychologist exist subsist ...in ... serves as a fitting and public example
1. 誠然，如果在其領導的領域內(nèi)幾乎一竅不通，一個領導很難得到下屬的信任和支持，會被看作layperson. 比如，人們無法想象一個不具備任何電腦知識的人，該如何領導一個龐大的IT企業(yè)，比如MICROSOFT在激烈的市場中競爭。
2. 但是，這是否意味著作為領導，必須要有能力完成每一項他要求下屬做的事呢？這個問題，與領導和員工的真正作用有很大關系！首先，領導的職責是制定長期的發(fā)展方針，并且保證這個方針的貫徹執(zhí)行，adhere to their strategic plans不被偏離。組織員工共同合作完成任務。on the other hand, 員工的作用是各司其職，更加具體的specific task.
3. 從以上兩種職責不難看出，領導與員工起到significantly different functions，讓領導完成每一個subordinate要做的工作，unfair的。比如，不能blame a CEO for lacking the skills of typing。要對下屬做的事有很好的了解，但不一定都要做。否則，領導就失去了意義，成為了一個全能的工人。omnipotent worker with all kinds of skills.
View1: It is human nature to admire then follow someone who is more competent than themselves.
View2: But a feature of a good leader is to organize people with different specialities together and let them perform as a whole. It is too ideal to expect the leaders to have all the specialities of his subordinates.
People are more likely to accept the leadership of those who have shown they can perform the same tasks they require of others. My reasons for this view involve the notions of respect and trust.
It is difficult for people to fully respect a leader who cannot, or will not, do what he or she asks of others. President Clinton’s difficulty in his role as Commander-in-Chief (n. 總司令) serves as a fitting and very public example. When Clinton assumed this leadership position, it was well known that he had evaded military service during the Vietnam conflict. Military leaders and lower-level personnel alike made it clear that they did not respect his leadership as a result. Contrast the Clinton case with that of a business leader such as John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, who by way of his training and experience as a computer engineer earned the respect of his employees.
It is likewise difficult to trust leaders who do not have experience in the areas under their leadership. The Clinton example illustrates this point as well. Because President Clinton lacked military experience, people in the armed forces found it difficult to trust that his policies would reflect any understanding of their interests or needs. And when put to the test, he undermined their trust to an even greater extent with his naive and largely bungled attempt to solve the problem of gays (<美俚> 同性戀者, 尤指男性同性者) in the military. In stark contrast, President Dwight Eisenhower inspired nearly devotional trust as well as respect because of his role as a military hero in World War II.
In conclusion, it will always be difficult for people to accept leaders who lack demonstrated ability in the areas under their leadership. Initially, such leaders will be regarded as outsiders, and treated accordingly. Moreover, some may never achieve the insider status that inspires respect and trust from those they hope to lead.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
“人們只愿意接受這樣的領導：他能完成他要求其他人完成的任務?！?BR> 1. 人們不會尊重一個不能完成他要求別人完成的任務自己卻不能完成的領導。這是人之常情，人們通常都只會欣賞和尊敬比自己優(yōu)秀的人，而不喜歡被一個不能完成任務卻命令自己去做的人心存敬意。例如克林頓總統(tǒng)當commander-in-chief 的時候，由于眾所周知他曾經(jīng)逃避兵役，很自然的下級軍官和士兵都不是很尊重他。
2. 人們不信任一個自己完不成任務卻要求別人去完成的人。仍然舉克林頓總統(tǒng)的例子。由于他逃兵役被視為沒有能力，下級都對他的決策心存懷疑，這也就潛在的導致了執(zhí)行上的不盡心不盡力。
3. 誠然是否能完成自己交給別人的任務并不是衡量一個leader重要指標。可能領導能力、,組織能力、運籌能力更為重要，但是我們不能忽視人們心理上的看法，盡管它可能并不合理但它確實是存在的。
normal human feelings admire adore respect superior to evade escape military service subordinate soldier be doubtful of be suspicious of execution implement admittedly true potentially evaluate index leadership psychological psychology psychologic psychologist exist subsist ...in ... serves as a fitting and public example
1. 誠然，如果在其領導的領域內(nèi)幾乎一竅不通，一個領導很難得到下屬的信任和支持，會被看作layperson. 比如，人們無法想象一個不具備任何電腦知識的人，該如何領導一個龐大的IT企業(yè)，比如MICROSOFT在激烈的市場中競爭。
2. 但是，這是否意味著作為領導，必須要有能力完成每一項他要求下屬做的事呢？這個問題，與領導和員工的真正作用有很大關系！首先，領導的職責是制定長期的發(fā)展方針，并且保證這個方針的貫徹執(zhí)行，adhere to their strategic plans不被偏離。組織員工共同合作完成任務。on the other hand, 員工的作用是各司其職，更加具體的specific task.
3. 從以上兩種職責不難看出，領導與員工起到significantly different functions，讓領導完成每一個subordinate要做的工作，unfair的。比如，不能blame a CEO for lacking the skills of typing。要對下屬做的事有很好的了解，但不一定都要做。否則，領導就失去了意義，成為了一個全能的工人。omnipotent worker with all kinds of skills.
View1: It is human nature to admire then follow someone who is more competent than themselves.
View2: But a feature of a good leader is to organize people with different specialities together and let them perform as a whole. It is too ideal to expect the leaders to have all the specialities of his subordinates.
People are more likely to accept the leadership of those who have shown they can perform the same tasks they require of others. My reasons for this view involve the notions of respect and trust.
It is difficult for people to fully respect a leader who cannot, or will not, do what he or she asks of others. President Clinton’s difficulty in his role as Commander-in-Chief (n. 總司令) serves as a fitting and very public example. When Clinton assumed this leadership position, it was well known that he had evaded military service during the Vietnam conflict. Military leaders and lower-level personnel alike made it clear that they did not respect his leadership as a result. Contrast the Clinton case with that of a business leader such as John Chambers, CEO of Cisco Systems, who by way of his training and experience as a computer engineer earned the respect of his employees.
It is likewise difficult to trust leaders who do not have experience in the areas under their leadership. The Clinton example illustrates this point as well. Because President Clinton lacked military experience, people in the armed forces found it difficult to trust that his policies would reflect any understanding of their interests or needs. And when put to the test, he undermined their trust to an even greater extent with his naive and largely bungled attempt to solve the problem of gays (<美俚> 同性戀者, 尤指男性同性者) in the military. In stark contrast, President Dwight Eisenhower inspired nearly devotional trust as well as respect because of his role as a military hero in World War II.
In conclusion, it will always be difficult for people to accept leaders who lack demonstrated ability in the areas under their leadership. Initially, such leaders will be regarded as outsiders, and treated accordingly. Moreover, some may never achieve the insider status that inspires respect and trust from those they hope to lead.