The Stars of the Future

A Existing management research does not tell us much about how to find and develop high-flyers, those people who have the potential to reach the top of an organisation. As a result, organisations are left to formulate their own systems. A more effective overall policy for developing future leaders is needed, which is why the London Business School has launched the Tomorrow's Leaders Research Group (TLRG). The group contains representatives from 20 firms, and meets regularly to discuss the leadership development of the organisations' high-flyers.

B TLRG recognises just how significant line managers are in the process of leadership development. Unfortunately, with today's flat organisations, where managers have functional as well as managerial responsibilities, people development all too often falls victim to heavy workloads. One manager in the research group was unconvinced by the logic of sending his best people away on development courses, 'only to see them poached by another department or, worse still, another firm'. This fear of losing high-flyers runs deep in the organisations that make up the research group.

C TLRG argues that the task of management is not necessarily about employee retention, but about creating 'attraction centres'. 'We must help line managers to realise that if their companies are known as ones that develop their people, they will have a greater appeal to high-flyers,' said one advisor. Furthermore, selecting people for, say, a leadership development programme is a sign of commitment from management to an individual. Loyalty can then be more easily demanded in return.

D TLRG has concluded that a company's HR specialists need to take action and engage with line managers individually about their role in the development of high-flyers. Indeed, in order to benefit fully from training high-flyers as the senior managers of the future, firms must actually address the development of all managers who will be supporting the high-flyers. Without this, managers will not be in a position to give appropriate advice. And when eventually the high-flyers do move on, new ones will be needed to replace them. The next challenge will be to find a new generation of high-flyers.

首先得搞明白的是这篇文章到底讲的什么。不用看具体内容，有两个地方直接告诉了。一个是题目说明的第一句话，另一个是正文的标题。从这两个地方就可以看出全文探讨的是公司未来接班人——也就是潜力股——的培养问题。

A段讲了TLRG这个贯穿全文的研究组织诞生的原因：现行的研究满足不了需要，于是大多数公司只能自己探索发掘接班人的模式;(即第五题的答案)

B段讲了直属经理(line managers)对于发掘接班人的重要性(真是干什么都要从基层抓起)，以及经理们的一些疑虑;

C段讲的是接班人问题对公司的重要性，并且应该让院线经理们明白这种重要性;

D段是针对前面列出的问题，提出的解决建议，什么专家协助等等。

整篇文章分为四个部分，层层递进，有很强的逻辑性。拿这样的文章来做阅读材料应该是相对容易把握的图中蓝色的线为答案潜伏的地方。7个题干基本是将原文中的句子用另外的词语和句型表述出来，所以题干中的关键词都能在正文里 找到与之匹配的，比如第四题题干里的expert对应D段的specialists,第六题的too busy to对应于B段里的heavy workloads，第七题的interest对应于C段的appeal。

第一题说“经理们必须采取措施使潜力股们相信他们对公司的价值”，也就是要让潜力股们对公司忠诚，即C段说的creating “attraction centres”和loyalty。

第二题说“组织必须把目光投向正在培养中的潜力股以外的地方”，即D段最后两句话所说的寻找新一代的潜力股。

第三题和B段的最后一句话完全是一个意思：怕培养潜力股的投入收不回成本。

第四题说开发潜力股，经理们需要在公司内部得到专家支持。答案是D段的第一句话：公司的人力资源专家需要采取行动。HR specialists就是expert。

第五题说公司现在没有在指导策略的支持下辨别潜力股。也就是说公司是依靠自己来发掘人才的。答案是A段的第一句：现行的研究满足不了需要，所以公司只能形成自己的一套体系。

第六题，经理们太忙了，无暇顾及潜力股的发展。答案是B段的：Unfortunately, with today's flat organisations, where managers have functional as well as managerial responsibilities, people development all too often falls victim to heavy workloads.。不幸落在了高工作负荷的人的肩上。高工作负荷，也就是too busy。

第七题，看重作为雇主名声的公司可以吸引潜力股。答案是C段的这么一句：if their companies are known as ones that develop their people, they will have a greater appeal to high-flyers。如果公司是以开发员工而着称的话，将会对潜力股产生更大的吸引。以开发员工而着称(known as ones that develop their people)，名声很好，也就是看重自己作为雇主的名声。

疑似生词：

1. line managers 直属经理，业务经理

2. flat organization 扁平化的组织，即企业中的单层管理组织对应的单词hierarchy 等级制的公司

3. poach vt. (侵入他人地界)偷猎(或捕鱼), 水煮，剽窃，挖角

eg: A rival firm poached our best computer programmers.

我公司的竞争对手把我们最好的计算机程序编制员挖走了。

4. runs deep 纯粹是想说一下那句着名的谚语：Still water runs deep静水流深。

5. fall victim to 成为......的受害者

B段中的原话：People development all too often falls victim to heavy workloads.人员发展成为高负荷工作的受害者，也就是说经理们因为太忙而无暇顾及潜力股的培养，即第六题的答案。

6. retention 保留，在文中指留住员工。是风险管理中常见的专业名词。