问题 多项选择题

A公司为了解决公司发展中出现的很多人力资源问题,决定实施工作分析,并且以人力资源部的王经理为首,加上几个主管,成立了工作分析小组。
首先,在阅读了国内目前流行的基本工作分析书籍之后,他们从中选取了一份工作分析问卷并发放。一个星期之后,人力资源部收回了问卷。但问卷填写的效果不太理想,一部分问卷填写不全,一部分答非所问,还有一部分根本没收上来。与此同时,人力资源部也着手选取一些职位进行访谈。但谈了几个职位后,发现访谈的效果并不好。访谈结束后,信息的收集情况很不理想,访谈人都反映对该职位的认识还是停留在模糊的阶段。这样持续了两个星期,访谈了大概1/3的职位。王经理认为时间不能拖延下去了,决定开始进人项目的下一阶段——撰写职位说明书。尽管参照了许多其他企业的职位说明书,但由于信息收集的不完整和不准确,以及缺乏撰写经验,最终的成稿质量并不高。很多部门指责其完全不符合实际情况,人力资源部门遭到了一致批评。最终工作分析项目不了了之。
人力资源部的员工在经历了这次失败的项目后,对工作分析彻底丧失了信心。他们开始认为,工作分析只不过是“雾里看花,水中望月”的东西。真的是这样的么

A公司的工作分析主体选择的是公司自身的人力资源部门,这种主体选择方法的缺点是( ),这也是A公司工作分析工作失败的原因之一。

A.实施人员缺乏经验

B.耗费大量人力、物力

C.耗费资金

D.不易处理公司内人际关系

答案

参考答案:A,B

解析: 由题意可知,A公司工作分析工作失败的原因包括:实施人员缺乏经验;工作分析耗费了大量人力、物力。

单项选择题
单项选择题

On the first Earth Day, the U.S. was a poisoned nation. Dense air pollution blanketed cities like Los Angeles, where smog alerts were a fact of life. Dangerous pesticides like DDT were still in use, and water pollution was rampant—symbolized by raging fires on Cleveland’s Cuyahoga River. But the green movement that was energized by Earth Day— and the landmark federal actions that followed it—changed much of that. Today air pollution is down significantly in most urban areas, the water is cleaner, and even the Cuyahoga is home to fish again.

But if the land is healing, Americans may be sickening. Since World War Ⅱ, production of industrial chemicals has risen rapidly, and the U.S. generates or imports some 19 billion kg of them per day. These aren’t the sorts of chemicals that come to mind when we picture pollution—huge plants spilling contaminated wastewater into rivers. Rather, they’re the molecules that make good on the old "better living through chemistry" promise, appearing in items like unbreakable baby bottles and big-screen TVs. Those chemicals have a, habit of finding their way out of everyday products and into the environment—and ultimately into living organisms. A recent biomonitoring survey found traces of 212 environmental chemicals in Americans—including toxic metals, pesticides, etc. "It’s not the environment that’s contaminated so much," says the director of the Cincinnati Children’s Environmental Health Center. "It’s us."

As scientists get better at detecting the chemicals in our bodies, they’re discovering that even tiny quantities of toxins can have a potentially serious impact on our health—and our children’s future. Chemicals like bisphenol A (BPA) and phthalates—key ingredients in modern plastics—may disrupt the delicate endocrine system. A host of modern ills that have been rising unchecked for a generation—obesity, diabetes, attention-deficit disorder —could have chemical connections. "We don’t give environmental exposure the attention it deserves," says Dr. Philip Landrigan. "But there’s an emerging understanding that kids are uniquely susceptible to environmental hazards."

Washington has been slow to arrive at that conclusion. The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the 34-year-old vehicle for federal chemical regulation, has generally been a failure. The burden of proving chemicals dangerous falls almost entirely on the government. And the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has been able to issue restrictions on only a handful of chemicals and has lacked the power to ban even some dangerous cancer-causing substances.

But change is coming. The Obama Administration is taking a closer look at chemicals. More important, Congress may finally be ready to act. "We can’t permit this assault on our children’s health—and our own health—to continue," says Senator Frank Lautenberg.

As to the chemical problem, the author holds in Paragraph 4 that()

A. Washington has successfully made some federal chemical regulations

B. the EPA has issued restrictions on various chemicals

C. Washington was slow to realize the problem and take measures

D. the government should take all the responsibility for proving dangerous chemicals