快速发展中的快速消费品市场——AC尼尔森《放眼中国市场》报告

据AC尼尔森近期发布的2005年《放眼中国市场》报告显示:2004年中国快速消费品市场整体增长了7个百分点,30 个主要品类当中有20个呈正增长,其中10个品类的增长率达到了两位数。每年一度的《放眼中国市场》报告结合了AC尼尔森的零     

期权套期保值的统计分析

研究期权套期保值策略,以方差作为套期保值的风险,建立保值风险最小模型和收益最大风险最小模型,求出最优套期比,并且用统计指标进行评价。把结果应用于企业实际,使投资者更好地规避现货价格风险。     

论高等教育主客体评价观的对立与统一

评价主客体的价值观是影响高等教育评价效果的重要因素,评价主客体之间的价值差异是＂工具理性＂与＂价值理性＂的差异。但是,这种差异能在共同利益的基础上实现统一。当高等教育评价主客体间达成价值认同时,在评价过程中,主客体将会在价值理性的引领下,重新审视自己的评价观,不断地在利益博弈中调整、取舍,在保证价值理性的基础上实现自身利益的最大化。于是,减少以至消弭了评价过程中主客体间的价值冲突和利益对立与行为相左,形成了一个健康、公正、有序、有效的高等教育评价环境。     

零售商：选择消费者，还是被消费者选择？

中国现代零售业态数量的增长,远远超过了销售量的增长速度。因此,零售商要给消费者一个充分的理由,才能让消费者在某一个特定的门店购物。     

Facing ambiguous threats

On February 1, 2003, the world watched in horror as the Columbia space shuttle broke apart while reentering the earth's atmosphere, killing all seven astronauts. Some have argued that NASA's failure to respond with appropriate intensity to the so-called foam strike that led to the accident was evidence of irresponsible or incompetent management. The authors' research, however, suggests that NASA was exhibiting a natural, albeit unfortunate, pattern of behavior common in many organizations. The foam strike is a prime example of what the authors call an ambiguous threat-a signal that may or may not portend future harm. Ambiguous threats differ from threats with obvious causes-say, a fire in the building-for which the response is clear. They also differ from unmistakable threats that may lack straightforward response paths (such as the frightening oxygen-tank explosion aboard Apollo 13). However, when the warning sign is ambiguous and the threat's potential effect is unclear, managers may choose to ignore or discount the risk. Such an approach can be catastrophic. Firms that do a good job of dealing with ambiguous threats do not improvise during a crisis; rather, they apply a rigorous set of detection and response capabilities that they have developed and practiced beforehand. In this article, the authors outline how to put such capabilities in place long before a crisis strikes. First, companies need to hone their teamwork and rapid problem-solving skills through practice. Second, they must learn to recognize weak signals, amplify the threat, and encourage employees to ask disconcerting "what if" questions in a safe environment. Finally, they should explore possible responses to threats through quick, low-cost experimentation.