請問這篇文章的中譯為何

由於上課是用原文書 所以對於英文底子不好的自己 看這篇文章實在有點困難 希望有大大可以幫忙完整的翻譯 謝謝 (有使用翻譯軟體翻過 但是句子完全接不起來>"<) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Introduction to an Information Perspective The world moves on and leaves behind firms which fail to move with it. Wisdom is... show more 由於上課是用原文書

所以對於英文底子不好的自己

看這篇文章實在有點困難

希望有大大可以幫忙完整的翻譯 謝謝

(有使用翻譯軟體翻過 但是句子完全接不起來>"<)

--------------------------------------...

Introduction to an Information Perspective

The world moves on and leaves behind firms which fail to move with it.

Wisdom is unanimous that firms must not ignore developments in their external environment (Harvey-Jones 1986; Stewart 1970)

Yet, it is not a convention among those who study organizational change, or who exhort its importance for their clients, to accord external influences a central place in the process of change.

The external is commonly regarded as little more than a catalyst, stirring into action a process which is essentially internal to the organization.

Understandably, management studies tends to examine organizational change with the organization as the unit of analysis.

Emphasis is on firm capacity, core competence, corporate culture, and so on; the objective being to discover what else, what more, the firm might do with its existing resources.

This organizational focus can make the firm appear vigorously dynamic while the world beyond, having served as primum mobile, becomes as remote as the stars in the firmament. Medieval astronomy also gave a distorted view of what was moving and what was not.
Update: Change in the organization is dependent upon a new use of information, which often means that new information must be acquired from the world outside, Such acquisition is widely acknowledged as a significant challenge, but for small firms rather than large.
Update 2: The large firm is assumed to possess most of the information required of change and emphasis is on its use rather than on its acquisition.
Update 3: This makes a refreshing change from the assumptions of some diffusion studies that wherever information spreads it will somehow be used, and of some studies of technological change that technology itself will determine the use to which it is put.
Update 4: Yet, the capacity to use information cannot be conveniently divorced from the capacity to find and acquire information; they are links in the same chain.
Update 5: This is a learning chain, learning being the process by which information is found and acquired, not simply to display like some trophy or to possess like stolen art treasures, but to use.
Update 6: Much is heard these days about “learning organization” ( Senge 1992, Jones and Hendry 1992), and yet, an organization which is primarily a store of information is really no better equipped than its filing cabinets to acquire external information.
Update 7: The characteristics of information are less appropriate to the organization learning than they are to its employees learning.
Update 8: Individuals learn—sometimes collectively to be sure—and they may apply this learning to bring about change in the activities of an organization, but the organization itself is designed for information use rather than information acquisition .
Update 9: It cannot even do much to encourage individual learning, though discouraging this learning is well within its powers.
Update 10: Essential to learning in the organization is recognition not only that some of the new information required lies without its boundaries, but also that this external information is best sought by individuals rather than by the organization.
Update 11: There is an immense literature on learning and change in the organization (Dodgson 1993a), a foundation of knowledge in organizational studies upon which this paper makes little attempt to build.
Update 12: A discipline is not unlike an organization in that it looks to , and often insists upon, internal information for change,.
Update 13: This paper contrasts an “organizational perspective”—a convenient umbrella term that would not withstand any rigourous analysis—with what it calls an “information perspective“
Update 14: The latter has roots in information economics (Spence 1974, Arrow 1979, Stiglitz 1980, Lamberton 1984) and branches reach to other areas of inquiry, especially technology policy.
Update 15: It would be wrong to pretend that they have not also infiltrated organizational studies, but they occupy little space in its knowledge store.
Update 16: While the paper will draw shamelessly on the literature of organization studies to illustrate the difference between the two perspectives, its methodology is essentially and deliberately, analogous it
Update 17: its hypothesis; that the essence of change in the organization is the external information required for learning, and that understanding of the process of the process of change lies in appreciation not simply
Update 18: of how this external information may be used within the organization, but of how this information is to be found and acquired beyond the confines of the organization or the discipline.
2 answers 2