毕博《Integrated Business Intelligence Real---time Performance Management》20页
毕博-管理咨询工具方法—HowToDoAReferenceCheck-Chinese
模块：Module: 人力资源管理Human Resource Management流程：Process: 招聘和选拔Recruitment and Selection系统：System: 如何做一个证明人核实How To Do A Reference Check系统执行人：System Champion: 经理Manager目标Objectives:➢获得所有新的候选员工的证明人核实资料To obtain reference checks for all potential new employees➢尽可能多地获得关于申请人的信息Obtain as much information about the applicant as possible程序Procedure:➢给证明人打电话获得一些对候选新员工的证明。
将谈话归档。
Telephone identified referees for reference checking of potential new employees.Document the conversation.➢重要的是，努力获取尽可能多的申请人的信息。
要提出以下几点：It is important to try and obtain as much information about the applicant aspossible. The following points should be addressed:➢申请人的性格类型|Type of personality of the applicant;➢他们是团队协作者/领导者？Are they a team player / leader？➢他们如何应对压力How they handle stress;➢与他们雇主工作关系的特征；The nature of their working relationship with their employer; and➢他们具有的技能水平The level of skill that they possess.➢如果你通过电话无法联系到申请人，备选方案就是写一份正式信函，要求他们写一份对该候选新员工的书面推荐信。
商业伦理学(英)毕博迁移课程Tobacco Industry Uses Trade Agreemti
Tobacco Industry Uses Trade Agreements to Challenge Anti-smoking Measures Posted by admin2 • November 29, 2012by Myron Levin, Fair WarningAndriy Skipalskyi was feeling proud, even triumphant, when he arrived last March at the World Conference on Tobacco or Health in Singapore.Ukraine’s parliament had just voted to approve a public smoking ban, and its president had just signed a bill to outlaw tobacco advertising and promotion. These were revolutionary steps in chain-smoking Eastern Europe.Ukrainian anti-tobacco activist Andriy SkipalskyiBut Skipalskyi, a leading Ukrainian anti-smoking activist, heard little praise for his country from other delegates. As he told FairWarning: “Everyone was talking about Ukraine as the bad actor in the internationa l arena in tobacco control.’’The reason was a bewildering move by Ukraine’s trade ministry. Within hours of the historic moves to curb smoking at home, the ministry, prodded by the tobacco industry, contested a tough anti-smoking law in Australia, half a world away.In a complaint to the World Trade Organization, Ukraine challenged the law, which takes effect December 1, that will ban distinctive logos and colors and require cigarettes to be sold in plain generic packs. Despite Ukraine having no tobacco exports to Australia—and therefore no clear economic interest—the trade ministry branded the law a violation of intellectual property rights under trade agreements Australia had signed.Following Ukraine’s lead, Honduras and the Dominican Republic soon jo ined the attack on Australia, filing similar complaints with the WTO.The case, which will be decided by a three member arbitration panel, signals an emerging pattern in the global tobacco wars. As top cigarette makers lose clout with national governments, countries around the world are adopting more stringent rules to combat the public health burdens of smoking. To strike back, top cigarette makers are increasingly invoking long-standing trade agreements to try to thwart some of the toughest laws.Plain Packaging LawsThe WTO case is only part of a three-pronged legal assault against Australia, aimed both at reversing the plain packaging law and warning countries of what they might face if they follow its lead.Public health advocates fear the legal attacks will deter other countries from passing strong anti-smoking measures. The “cost of defending this case, and the risk of being held liable, would intimidate all but the most wealthy, sophisticated countries into inaction,” said Matthew L. Myers, presid ent of the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids in Washington D.C.Marlboro, the world’s top-selling brand, packaged under labeling laws of (clockwise) the U.S., Egypt, Djibouti, Hungary/Photos of non-U.S. packs, Canadian Cancer SocietyThe dispute underlines broader concerns about trade provisions that enable foreign companies to challenge domestic health, labor and environmental standards. Once a country ratifies a trade agreement, its terms supersede domestic laws. If a country’s regulations are found to impose unreasonable restrictions on trade, it must amend the rules or compensate the nation or foreign corporation that brought the complaint.Advocates say countries should be free to decide how best to protect public health, without being second-guessed by unelected trade panels. Moreover, they argue, tobacco products, which kill when used as intended, should not be afforded the trade protections of other goods and services.Worldwide, nearly 6 million people a year die of smoking-related causes, according to the World Health Organization, which says the toll could top 8 million by 2030. With fewer people lighting up in wealthy nations, nearly 80 percent of the world’s 1 billion smokers live in low and middle-income countries.Countries have been emboldened to pass more stringent measures by the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. In effect since 2005, the treaty has committed about 175 nations to pursue such measures as higher cigarette taxes, public smoking bans, prohibitions on tobacco advertising, and graphic warning labels with grisly images such as diseased lungs and rotting teeth (The U.S. has signed the treaty, but the Senate has not ratified it. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has ordered graphic warnings for cigarette packs, but an industry court challenge on 1st Amendment grounds has stalled the rule. )Cigarette makers say they acknowledge the hazards and the need for regulations. “We actually support the vast majority of them,” said Peter Nixon, vice president of communications for Philip Morris International, which has its headquarters in New York, its operations center in Switzerland, and is the biggest multinational cigarette maker with 16 percent of global sales.But the industry has watched with growing concern as more than 35 countries have adopted total or near-total bans on cigarette advertising. Its big profits depend on consumer recognition of its leading brands. Yet in many countries, the once-ubiquitous logos and imagery are receding, leaving the cigarette pack as a last refuge against invisibility.Now the pack, too, is under attack. Along with plain packaging laws such as Australia’s, countries are weighing retail display bans that keep cigarette packs out of view of consumers; and laws requiring graphic health warnings so large that there is barely any room for trademarks. Tobacco companies contend that countries enforcing such rules are effectively confiscating their intellectual property and must pay damages.Louis Camilleri, chairman and CEO of Philip Morris InternationalThe industry also claims that measures like plain packaging are counterproductive. “We see no evidence—none at all—that this will be effective in reducing smoking,” Nixon of Philip Morris International said in an interview. In fact, he said, generic packaging likely will increase sales of cheap, untaxed counterfeit smokes, thus increasing consumption.Louis C. Camilleri, chairman and CEO of Philip Morris International, drew a line in the sand in remarks to Wall Street analysts in November, 2010. The company would use “all necessary resources and…where necessary litigation, to actively challenge unreasonable regulatory proposals,’’ Camilleri said, specifically mentioning plain packaging and display bans.Up to now, tobacco-related trade disputes have mostly involved quotas or tariffs meant to protect domestic producers from foreign competition. In the 1980s and ’90s, for example, the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative successfully challenged such barriers in Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and Thailand, boosting sales for U.S. cigarette makers R.J. Reynolds and Philip Morris.The U.S. got a taste of its own medicine when a WTO panel in April upheld a ruling that the U.S. had discriminated against Indonesia by enforcing a ban on flavored cigarettes that exempted menthol but included Indonesian clove cigarettes. The U.S. has until next July to amend the law by treating all flavorings the same or to reach an agreement with Indonesia on compensation.The key issue now, though, isn’t traditional barriers b ut whether health regulations unduly restrict the movement of goods. In challenging anti-smoking rules, the industry has drawn on global treaties, such as the 1994 pact known as TRIPS (the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of International Property Rights), that include broad protections for intellectual property and foreign investment.Multiple Legal BattlesIn the hands of aggressive corporations, such provisions have become ‘’the ticking time bomb for this century as governments tackle problems like tobacco, the environment, obesity, access to essential medicines,” said Myers of the Campaign for Tobacco Free Kids.Events in the southern African nation of Namibia reflect the debate. In November, 2011, Namibian officials proposed to require graphic warnings on at least 60 percent of cigarette packs. The tobacco industry argued in written comments that such large warnings weren’t justified and, in the words of British American Tobacco, would “impose a very significant barrier to trade.” Namibia should pur sue public health goals “in a manner that is respectful of its international obligations,” the company said.The proposal is still pending, but Stanley Mungambwa, a senior health official in Namibia, sounded a defiant note in an email to FairWarning.“Namibia is a country that loves its people,” he said. “Money obtained from coffins is not what Namibia’s trade obligations is all about.”Canada provided an early example of the possible chilling effects of industry threats. Though considered a leader in tobacco control, Canada in the mid-1990s withdrew a proposed plain packaging rule under legal pressure from the industry, which raised the issue of Canada’s trade obligations.That happened even though internal documents produced years later in tobacco litigation showed that industry officials, despite their public stance, feared their legal position was weak. As a 1994 memo from British American put it, “current conventions and treaties offer little protection” against plain packaging rules.Two recent legal decisions confirmed that such cases are no slam dunk for the industry. In September, a court in Oslo, Norway, rejected a lawsuit by Philip Morris Norway AS that challenged the country’s retail display ban. The company had claimed that in enforcing the ban, Norway had violated the European Economic Agreement because it had failed to rely on the least trade-restrictive measures to achieve its public health goals.The court, siding with Norway’s government, found that other measures would not be as effecti ve in insuring that “as few as possible youngsters begin to smoke, to prevent them from developing tobacco dependency.’’Pack of Marlboro Menthol in Australia. As of December 1, all cigarettes must be sold in plain packaging with graphic warnings covering 75 percent of the front and 90 percent of the back of the pack.The second example was Australia’s victory in the first round of one of its legal defense of plain packaging. Rejecting a lawsuit by the four top global companies--Japan Tobacco Inc. and Imperial Tobacco, along with British American and Philip Morris International—Australia’s High Court upheld the law as legal and constitutional.The law requires cigarettes to be sold in drab olive-brown packs, with pictorial warnings covering 75 percent of the front and 90 percent of the back.The goal is to reduce “the attractiveness and appeal of tobacco products to consumers, particularly young people,” a spokeswoman for Australia’s Department of Health and Ageing said in an email to FairWarning.But two major challenges remain.In one, Philip Morris Asia has accused Australia of violating a 1993 bilateral trade pact between Hong Kong and Australia. Such agreements, known as investor-state treaties, allow a foreign investor by itself to bring damage claims against a country.Lawyers for Australia contend the claim should be tossed out, citing a nimble asset-shuffling move by Philip Morris. To create grounds for the claim, they say, the company transferred its Australian operations to Hong Kong-based Philip Morris Asia after the plain packaging plan was announced.The shares were transferred “for the very purpose of claiming a loss,” said Benn McGrady, an adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University and expert on global trade and health. This, he sa id, should be “virtually terminal in terms of the merits of their claim.”Nixon of Philip Morris said the transfer should have no impact on the outcome. The case is before an arbitration panel of the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law.Industry Pays Government Legal FeesAnd the WTO cases remain alive. Cigarette makers are paying for heavyweight lawyers to represent Ukraine, Honduras and the Dominican Republic and press ahead with the challenges.As company representatives have told FairWarning, Philip Morris International is paying the firm of Sidley Austin to represent the Dominican Republic, while British American is picking up legal expenses for Ukraine and Honduras.“We are happy to support countries who, like us, feel plain packa ging could adverselyaffect trade,” said British American spokesman Jem Maidment.It’s not unusual in trade disputes for corporations to give legal assistance to governments with mutual interests. In this case, however, the three countries appear to have little, if any, direct stake in Australia’s tobacco control policies.Tobacco exports from Ukraine to Australia are nonexistent, according to figures from Australia’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. During the last three years, tobacco exports from Honduras and Dominican Republic have averaged $60,000 (U.S.) and $806,000, respectively.Responding in April to an inquiry from Ukrainian journalists, the country’s Ministry of Economic Development and Trade said it had “a policy of supporting Ukrainia n producers and protecting their interests in the internal and external markets.” In this case, the ministry said, it had “received concerns” about the plain packaging law from the Ukrainian Assn. of Tobacco Producers, made up of the top tobacco multinationals, and from the Union of Wholesalers and Producers of Alcohol and Tobacco Association.Seeking to reverse Ukraine’s action, Andriy Skipalskyi, the 38-year old chairman of a Ukrainian public health group called the Regional Advocacy Center LIFE, collected hundreds of petition signatures at the Singapore conference asking his nation’s authorities to withdraw the challenge. The government ignored the request, and Honduras and Dominican Republic soon followed with complaints of their own.Konstantin Krasov ksy, a tobacco control official in Ukraine’s Ministry of Health, told FairWarning the countries had allowed themselves to be used. “Honduras, Dominican Republic and Ukraine agreed to be a prostitute,” he said.Honduran economic officials, in an April pres s release, said Australia’s law “contravenes several WTO obligations on intellectual property rights.’’ It noted that the tobacco industry “employs several hundred thousand people directly and indirectly throughout the supply chain in Honduras.”The Domin ican Republic, a major cigar exporter, also said plain packaging “will have a significant impact on our economy.” In a written statement to FairWarning, Katrina Naut, director general for foreign trade with the country’s Ministry of Industry and Commerce, said that if other countries join Australia in adopting plain packaging, it will lead to falling prices for name-brand tobacco products and “an increase—rather than a decrease—in consumption and illicit trade.”Among supporters of Australia, none is more vociferous than the government of Uruguay. It recently told the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body that the global trading system “should not force its Members to allow that a product that kills its citizens inunacceptable and alarming proportions continues to be sold wrapped as candy to attract new victims.”Uruguay’s stance reflects its own high-stakes battle with Philip Morris.Dr. Eduardo Bianco, president of Uruguay's Tobacco Epidemic Research CentreThe tobacco giant has challenged Uruguay’s requiremen t of graphic warnings on 80 percent of cigarette packs. Philip Morris is also fighting a rule that limits cigarette marketers to a single style per brand, making it illegal to sell Marlboro Gold and Green along with Marlboro Red.The challenge by Swiss units of Philip Morris cites a 1991 bilateral treaty between Switzerland and Uruguay. Since filing the complaint in 2010, the tobacco company has also closed its only cigarette factory in Uruguay.The regulations “are extreme, have not been proven to be eff ective, have seriously harmed the company’s investments in Uruguay,” according to a statement by Philip Morris International.Uruguay, with a population of less than 3.5 million and an annual gross domestic product of about $50 billion, seems a poor match for the tobacco giant, which recorded $77 billion in sales in 2011.Amid reports that government officials were seeking a face-saving settlement, Bloomberg Philanthropies announced in late 2010 that it would fund the legal defense of Uruguay’s anti-smoking laws. New York Mayor and businessman Michael R. Bloomberg, an ardent tobacco foe, affirmed the support of his namesake charity in a call to Uruguayan president Jose Mujica.Advocates fear other countries may have a harder time standing their ground. “Bloomberg has been very generous, but his resources are not unlimited and he can’t pay to defend every tobacco regulation in every country,” said Chris Bostic, deputy director for policy for the group Action on Smoking and Health.The Uruguay case could be pivotal, said Dr. Eduardo Bianco, president of the Tobacco Epidemic Research Centre in Uruguay. “If they [Philip Morris International] succeed with Uruguay they would send a clear message to the rest of the developing countries: ‘take care about us, you can be next.’ “。
毕博-管理咨询工具方法—6.4TeamMemberInvites(BusinessIndependence).-Chinese
企业系统化Business Independence尊敬的[姓名]作为[企业名称]重要的一员，我们非常重视您的经验和建议。
因此，我们需要在经营业绩改善项目的下个工作―企业系统化中得到您的支持。
As a valued team member of [Business Name] we respect your experience and opinions. Therefore we would like to seek your input in our next Business Performance Improvement initiative, Business Independence.该部份的经营业绩改善项目旨在讨论如何创建一个在企业领导人不在的时候，也能正常运作的企业。
This stage of the Business Performance Improvement Program focuses on creating a business that works independently of us!估计会议将持续两小时，在此期间我们将与您共同商讨如何通过系统化来完善企业的经营管理。
The meeting will take approximately 2 hours, during which time we would like to discuss with you how together we can improve our business even more through systemisation. [姓名],下面是本次会议的详细安排：[Name], please find the session details following:*******************************************************************************************日期 Date: [会议日期]会议地点 Venue: [详细地点]时间 Time: [会议具体时间]** 提供点心饮料－对此您若有特殊饮食要求，请告知我们。
毕博-毕博管理咨询公司简介》23页
n
n
n n n
n
© 2003 BearingPoint, Inc.
High Tech Industry Team
6
我们拥有超过２０００人的优秀ＣＲＭ专业咨询顾问
全球 北美 欧洲 亚洲 拉丁美洲 合计
ＣＲＭ专业咨询顾 问人数２００１年 １，２００ ４０ ７５ ９５ １，４１０
ＣＲＭ专业咨询顾 问人数２００２年 １，５００ ２９０ １５０ １７５ ２，１１５
© 2003 BearingPoint, Inc.
High Tech Industry Team
7
毕博管理咨询在全球曾为许多领先企业提供ＣＲＭ服 务
© 2003 BearingPoint, Inc.
High Tech Industry Team
8
为了能够给客户提供更好的服务，我们与全球ＣＲＭ 解决方案供应商结成紧密的战略联盟
毕博全球开发中心
应用及业务流程管理外包 Application and Transaction Outsourcing
软件及应用 开发
工作流定义及 文档管理
© 2003 BearingPoint, Inc.
High Tech Industry Team
4
毕博服务的核心行业 我们将１９个主要市场整合为五大全球业务线
© 2003 Bearingstry Team
3
毕博全球开发中心及对中国业务的承诺
§ 全球开发中心是总公司投资的远程开发中心，是毕博全球战略 战略 Strategy 咨询 Consulting IT Strategy and IT战略及 Transformation 业务流程服务 Services Large Scale 大规模基础架构方案系统集 Systems Integration 成、生产系统管理客户关系 Product Launch, Workflow and 管理、供应链管理
商业伦理学(英)毕博迁移课程Apple Expands Supplier Responsibilm
Apple Expands Supplier Responsibility ProgramPosted by admin2 • February 15, 2011by James HyattApple Inc.’s latest Supplier Responsibility report shows a 25% increase in audits of supplier facilities during 2010 to establish compliance with the company’s standards for hiring, training and worker safety.The computer and electronics firm said it has “worked aggressively to prevent the hiring of underage workers” and is “leading the industry by requiring suppliers to return underage workers to sch ool and to finance their education.”Apple said in 2010 it had terminated business with three firms where management failed to show a serious commitment to Apple’s supplier policies.The report also spelled out efforts by Apple and its supplier Foxconn Technology Group to address suicides at a Foxconn facility in Taiwan. Apple said a report by an independent team of suicide prevention experts found that Foxconn had taken quick action, including hiring psychological counselors, establishing a 24-hour care center, and even attached large nets to buildings to prevent impulsive suicides. “The investigation found that Foxconn’s response had definitely saved lives,” Apple said.The report for 2010 tallied 97 first-time audits of supplier facilities, up from 83 in 2009 and 30 repeat audits, up from 19. Since 2007, Apple has audited 288 supplier facilities.Apple said it has spent considerable effort to address exploitation of workers, often involving cases where immigrants who move from their home country to work in factories elsewhere are “charged exorbitant fees that drive them into debt.” Apple classifies such practices as involuntary labor.Apple labels as a “core violation” any practice or situation it considers contrary to the core principles of its Supplier Code of Conduct. Its audits turned up 37 core violations in 2010, up from 17 in 2009. Eighteen of the violations involved excess recruitment fees to labor agencies. Apple said it has required suppliers to reimburse $3.4 million in excessive fees to workers since 2008.Another 10 core violations involved underage labor at facilities in China. At one facility, 42 workers were underage and “we determined management had chosen to overlook the issue and was not committed to addressing the problem.” Ap ple said it dropped that facility as a supplier.At four facilities, audit materials were falsified; at another, a manager offered cash to auditors seeking to reduce the number of audit findings. One core violation。
毕博-管理咨询工具方法—4.5TrainingStrategyActionPlan-Chinese
培训战略行动计划THE TRAINING STRATEGY ACTION PLAN员工的培训及发展对保持企业竞争力是非常重要的。
Training and development of team members is essential in order for a business to remain competitive.以下部分为培训战略诊断的问题，并逐一提供了行动建议。
请参照您的培训战略诊断，找出得分在3.5分或以下的问题。
对得分3.5及其以下的问题，请就每个问题参阅“行动建议”，然后完成本手册最后的“我的培训战略行动计划”。
请注意，有图标的地方表示在经营业绩改善项目中，提供有工具来帮助你完成工作。
The following section goes through each of the Training Strategy Audit questions and provides a suggested action. Please refer back to your Training Strategy Audit and identify those questions that you scores at 3.5 or less. Please review the “Suggested Action” for each of these questions and then complete “My Training Strategy Action Plan” at the back of thisworkbook. Please note that the symbol indicates that a tool is available within the Business Performance Improvement Program to assist in that area.培训需求评估TRAINING NEEDS ASSESSMENT请参照您的培训战略诊断。
毕老师简介(中文)201501
毕老师（Victor）------------------------------------ 学历与职业背景------------------------------------------兰州大学工商管理硕士MBA法国尼斯大学工商管理博士DBA研究生在耐用消费品、快速消费品、机械制造业、IT科技等行业的多家全球500强公司和纳斯达克上市公司拥有丰富的从业经验，并在教育及创意文化产业成功创业。
从一线业务专员开始职业生涯，直至企业经营管理者，职业领域涉及服务、营销和人力资源，管理与支持的范围从中国区延伸至亚洲区。
有着丰富的企业战略规划、执行及各层级管理运营的经验。
-------------------------------------------------- 培训与咨询顾问资质----------------------------------------------- 美国领导力研究中心CLS版权课程《情境领导（Situational Leadership®）》认证讲师国际行动教练协会WIFAC 版权课程《行动教练（Actioncoaching®）》认证讲师英国/日本等多个国家知名咨询机构/商学院高级顾问/讲师上海交大安泰管理学院上海市行为科学协会高级讲师-------------------------------------------------- 研究方向与授课风格------------------------------------------------ 2003年起从事专业的企业管理咨询及培训服务工作，初期以业务技术技能（营销技巧、服务技巧等）为主进行研究和开发，近年来基于自身的人力资源、市场营销以及企业整体经营管理的从业背景和经验，着力于研究领导力、团队建设与发展、企业人力资源培训与发展体系的建设、绩效管理系统与管理者个人专业素养等专业领域。
根据客户的实际需求，大量参与了企业人才培养体系的设计与开发，并主要实施了包括《领导艺术》、《领导者的影响力》、《成功职业经理人的塑造》、《企业内部培训师培训》、《专业商务演说技巧》、《管理沟通》等在内的专业人才实战型项目及培训课程。
毕博-管理咨询工具方法—7.7TechnologyAudit-Chinese
技术诊断THE TECHNOLOGY AUDIT在现今这个瞬息万变的时代，掌握最新的技术以保持竞争力对企业来说是至关重要的。
In today’s environment of rapid changes and increasingly intense competition it is essential that businesses embrace technological developments in order to remain competitive.本工作手册指在帮助你评估企业运用技术的情况，以及在企业中改善技术的可能性。
This workbook has been designed to assist you evaluate the extent to which the business embraces the use of technology and identifies opportunities for improving the business through the use of technology.本工作手册对企业在以下五个方面的技术运用情况进行了评估：The following section goes through a Technology Audit that examines five areas of your business in relation to technology:1. 技术战略Technology Strategy;2. 生产Operations;3. 行政与财会Administration and Accounting;4. 销售与市场Sales and Marketing; and5. 人力资源管理Human Resource Management每个部分包含了12个问题，企业应根据自身的实际情况进行回答并打分。
打分采用5分制的形式，1为从不，5为总是。
毕博的能力素质模型
毕博的能力素质模型毕博（Bibo）是一种综合评价个体能力和素质的模型，它的设计旨在帮助个人全面发展并实现其潜力的最大化。
通过对毕博的能力素质模型的分析，个人可以了解自己在各个方面的表现和发展潜力，并针对性地进行提升。
下面将对毕博的能力素质模型进行详细的介绍和分析。
一、认知能力认知能力是一个人思维、分析和解决问题的能力，它是个人获取和处理信息的关键。
在毕博的能力素质模型中，认知能力包括以下几个方面：1. 分析能力：个人分析问题和信息的能力，包括对事物进行分类、归纳和推理的能力。
2. 创造力：个人从新的角度思考问题，提出新颖观点和解决方案的能力。
3. 逻辑思维：个人按照一定的规则和线索进行推理和判断的能力。
二、社交能力社交能力是个人与他人相处和交流的能力，它是个人与他人建立良好关系的基础。
在毕博的能力素质模型中，社交能力包括以下几个方面：1. 沟通能力：个人有效地表达自己的观点和意见，同时能够理解他人的需求和意图。
2. 团队合作：个人在团队中协调各方利益，发挥自己的优势并帮助团队达成共同目标的能力。
3. 领导能力：个人在组织和指导他人时展现的能力，包括激励、鼓舞和引领团队的能力。
三、情绪智力情绪智力是个人理解和管理自己情绪的能力，以及对他人情绪的感知和应对能力。
在毕博的能力素质模型中，情绪智力包括以下几个方面：1. 情绪认知：个人准确地识别和理解自己以及他人的情绪状态。
2. 情绪调节：个人能够有效地管理和调节自己的情绪，以及对他人情绪作出适当的回应。
3. 社交情商：个人在社交互动中展现的情绪智慧和应对能力。
四、专业知识专业知识是个人在某个领域具备的专业技能和知识。
在毕博的能力素质模型中，专业知识包括以下几个方面：1. 学科知识：个人在自己所学习专业领域的知识和技能。
2. 实践经验：个人在实际工作中积累的经验和能力。
3. 创新思维：个人在专业领域中能够提出新的思路和创新方案的能力。
通过对毕博的能力素质模型的分析，我们可以看出，毕博旨在全面评价个人的能力和素质，帮助个人了解自己的优势和不足，并进行有针对性的发展。
商业伦理学(英)毕博迁移课程Two New Corporate Forms to Advanceia
Two New Corporate Forms to Advance Social Benefits in CaliforniaPosted by admin2 • November 21, 2011by David Hernand, Stewart McDowell and Colin RichardGibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLPOn October 9, 2011, California Governor Jerry Brown signed into law competing bills that create two new corporate forms in California —a “flexible purpose corporation” and a “benefit corporation” —intended to allow entrepreneurs and investors the choice of organizing companies that can pursue both economic and social objectives. The new corporate forms differ from traditional for-profit corporations that are organized to pursue profit (and not social purposes) and non-profit corporations that must be used solely to promote social benefits. These laws will take effect on January 1, 2012.The flexible purpose corporation is created by California Senate Bill 201 (“SB 201″), which adds Division 1.5 to Title 1 of the California Corporations Code (the “Code”) and amends other related sections of the Code, and the benefit corporation is created by California Assembly Bill 361 (“AB 361″), which adds Part 13 to Division 3 of Title 1 of the Code. State Senator Mark DeSaulnier authored SB 201, and a full copy is available here. AB 361 was authored by Assemblyman Jared Huffman, and a full copy is available here. Both new laws take effect January 1, 2012.BackgroundThe new laws offer two versions of a solution to an identified gap in the Code and the corporate laws of many states. Existing law in California permits formation of for-profit corporations that operate within a construct that places interests of shareholders, and specifically return to shareholders, as the primary, if not sole, objective of the corporation and its various agents. A corporation might engage in philanthropy, act in an environmentally conscious manner and promote employee- or community-friendly policies, to name a few, but such pursuits ultimately are rationalized in the corporate governance context as being acts taken to promote long-term value growth for shareholders, and directors of a corporation could face exposure if they lean too far in favor of social objectives at the expense of shareholder returns. In contrast, a non-profit corporation in California is mandated to serve public interests and is specifically prohibited from pursuing private gain. A non-profit corporation that strays too far toward profit-producing activities risks action by the State Attorney General and loss of tax-exempt status (if applicable). This has left a gap for some entrepreneurs and investors that desire a business vehicle which can pursue both profits and social objectives.SB 201 and AB 361 are the result of efforts by two groups working over the last two years to introduce a new “hybrid” corporate form in California. SB 201 originally was written by a group of corporate attorneys from major law firms in California,including this firm, who sought to create a new “flexible” form of corporation in California that would allow shareholders to devise their own mix of economic and social corporate objectives, ensure that future investors would have adequate notice of the purposes pursued, and provide protections to ensure that the new corporate form is not easily foisted upon shareholders of traditional corporations. AB 361 resulted from efforts of B Lab, a non-profit organization that offers certification of corporations as “B corporations” (which B Lab describes as “a new type of corporation which uses the power of business to solve social and environmental purposes”) and promotes adoption of benefit corporation legislation in states across the country. Enactment of AB 361 follows the adoption of similar benefit corporation legislation in Hawaii, Maryland, New Jersey, Vermont and Virginia. The fact that both SB 201 and AB 361 were enacted is likely to create confusion going forward among entrepreneurs, investors and lawyers as they try to understand differences among the new entities and traditional for-profit and non-profit corporations (as well as limited liability companies and limited partnerships). Both of the new entities will be taxed the same as for-profit corporations under current tax law.Flexible Purpose CorporationsA flexible purpose corporation will be set up much like a traditional for-profit corporation, with shareholders and a board of directors, but its articles of incorporation and share certificates must state that it is organized as a flexible purpose corporation, and its articles must identify a “special purpose” from the following list:(1) One or more charitable or public purpose activities that a nonprofit public benefit corporation is authorized to carry out; or(2) The purpose of promoting positive short-term or long-term effects of, or minimizing adverse short-term or long-term effects of, the flexible purpose corporatio n’s activities upon any of the following:(a) The flexible purpose corporation’s employees, suppliers, customers, and creditors;(b) The community and society; or(c) The environment.The obvious breadth of potential purposes was intended by the drafters of SB 201 —to allow shareholders to define their desired special purposes without regard to what third parties might deem to be valid or desirable societal objectives.A flexible purpose corporation can amend its “special purpose” by amending its articles of incorporation. If the amendment would materially alter any special purpose stated in the articles, such amendment must be approved by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of each class of the corporation’s stock, or a greater vote if required in the articles, regardless of whether a class is entitled to vote,and a majority of the outstanding shares of all classes entitled to vote. A similar vote is required for a flexible purpose corporation to amend its articles to convert into a traditional California corporation (which can be done by amending the articles to eliminate the special purpose provisions). A unanimous vote of all shareholders, regardless of whether shares are entitled to vote, is required to amend a flexible purpose corporation’s articles to convert it into a non-profit corporation.In discharging his or her duties, a director of a flexible purpose corporation “may consider those factors, and give weight to those factors, as the director deems relevant, including the short-term and long-term prospects of the flexible purpose corporation, the best interests of the flexible purpose corporation and its shareholders, and the purposes of the flexible purpose corporation as set forth in its articles.” SB 201 specifically states that there shall be no private right of action created for members of the public to sue a flexible purpose corporation for failure to pursue or achieve its special purposes, and directors are not responsible to any parties other than the flexible purpose corporation and its shareholders.A flexible purpose corporation’s board of directors is required to send an annual report to shareholders each year that includes a management discussion and analysis (MD&A) concerning the short-term and long-term objectives of the entity relating to its special purpose or purposes, the material actions taken during such year to achieve such objectives, the impact of such actions, and the causal relationships between the actions and outcomes, future material actions expected to be taken in the short-term and long-term to achieve the entity’s special purpose objectives, the measures used to evaluate the entity’s performance in achieving its special purpose objectives, and any expenditures incurred in achieving these objectives. The entity’s board of directors also must make the annual flexible purpose MD&A publicly available by posting it on the entity’s website or providing it through similar electronic means. Flexible purpose corporations also must send to shareholders and make publicly available current reports summarizing (i) any expenditure or group of expenditures that are likely to have a material adverse impact on the entity’s results of operations or financial condition for a quarterly or annual fiscal period or (ii) any decision by the board or action by management to (a) withhold expenditures that were to have been made in furtherance of the entity’s special purpose where the planned expenditures were likely to have a material positive impact on the en tity’s impact in furtherance of its special purpose objectives or (b) determine that the special purpose has been satisfied or should no longer be pursued. The shareholders of a flexible purpose corporation with fewer than 100 shareholders can elect to waive the requirement for the entity to send and publish annual and current reports, and the disclosure requirements are deemed satisfied for any corporation with securities registered under Section 12 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 if the corporation includes the required disclosure in its periodic reports.A flexible purpose corporation can merge with any other California or non-Californiaentity in the same manner as for-profit corporations, except that if the disappearing corporation in a merger is a flexible purpose corporation and the surviving corporation is not, or the surviving corporation in a merger is a flexible purpose corporation with materially different special purposes than a disappearing flexible purpose corporation, then in addition to other approvals typically required the merger must be approved by the affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of each class of stock of the disappearing flexible purpose corporation, or a greater vote if required in the articles, regardless of whether a class is entitled to vote. If the disappearing corporation in a merger is a California for-profit corporation and the surviving corporation is a flexible purpose corporation, the merger must be approved by at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of each class of stock of the disappearing corporation, or a greater vote if required in the articles, and all shareholders of the disappearing corporation not voting in favor of the merger must be afforded the opportunity to sell their shares to the surviving corporation for cash at their fair market value (i.e., exercise dissenters’ rights). Essentially the same requirements apply if a California for-profit corporation chooses to convert to a flexible purpose corporation. If a flexible purpose corporation merges with a non-profit corporation and the surviving entity in the merger is the non-profit corporation, the merger must be approved by all shareholders of the disappearing flexible purpose corporation, regardless of whether shares are entitled to vote.Benefit CorporationsA benefit corporation also will be set up much like a traditional for-profit corporation, but its articles of incorporation must state that it is a “benefit corporation” and it must be organized to pursue a “general public benefit” and, if it chooses, one or more other “specific public benefits.” A general public benefit is defined as a “material positive impact on society and the environment, taken as a whole, as assessed against a third-party standard.” The o ptional specific public benefits can include any of the following:(1) Providing low-income or underserved individuals or communities with beneficial products or services.(2) Promoting economic opportunity for individuals or communities beyond the creation of jobs in the ordinary course of business.(3) Preserving the environment.(4) Improving human health.(5) Promoting the arts, sciences, or advancement of knowledge.(6) Increasing the flow of capital to entities with a public benefit purpose.(7) The accomplishment of any other particular benefit for society or the environment.The “third-party standard” utilized by a benefit corporation refers to a “standard for defining, reporting, and assessing overall corporate social and environmental performance to which all” of a long list of requirements apply. B Lab, the originalproponent of AB 361, reportedly has developed such a standard and offers its certification services at fees ranging up to $25,000 per corporation per year.Any traditional for-profit corporation can become a benefit corporation simply by amending its articles to state that the entity is a benefit corporation, and likewise a benefit corporation can terminate its status as a benefit corporation simply by amending its articles to delete such statement. In either case, the amendment requires approval of at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of each class or series of stock of the corporation, regardless of any limitation stated in the articles or bylaws on the voting rights of any class or series. In addition, the corporation changing its status must provide dissenters’ rights to all shareholders not voting in favor of the proposed change. A benefit corporation may amend, add or delete any additional, specific public benefits identified in its articles by amending its articles with approval of at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of each class or series of its stock (or higher threshold if specified in its articles).In discharging their respective duties, the board of directors, committees of the board and individual directors of a benefit corporation are required to “consider the impacts of any action or proposed action upon all of the following”:(1) The shareholders of the benefit corporation;(2) The employees and workforce of the benefit corporation and its subsidiaries and suppliers;(3) The interests of customers of the benefit corporation as beneficiaries of the general or specific public benefit purposes of the benefit corporation;(4) Community and societal considerations, including those of any community in which offices or facilities of the benefit corporation or its subsidiaries or suppliers are located;(5) The local and global environment;(6) The short-term and long-term interests of the benefit corporation, including benefits that may accrue to the benefit corporation from its long-term plans and the possibility that these interests may be best served by retaining control of the benefit corporation rather than selling or transferring control to another entity; and(7) The ability of the benefit corporation to accomplish its general, and any specific, public benefit purpose.Having to consider all these factors for every issue that comes before a board of directors may be a tall order. AB 361 specifically provides that directors are not required to give particular weight to these specific factors or interests unless the corporation’s articles of incorporation state a preference for particular factors or interests. While this approach provides much flexibility, the new law does not make clear what standards directors should follow in making decisions, resulting in some commentators expressing concern that directors of benefit corporations may have too much discretion and lack accountability to shareholders.AB 361 limits directors’ liability for monetary damages for failure of a benefit corporation to create a general or specific public benefit and states that directors shall owe no fiduciary duties to beneficiaries of the benefit corporation’s general or specifi c public benefit purposes. Nevertheless, AB 361 expressly contemplates that a “benefit enforcement proceeding” may be brought against a benefit corporation or its directors or officers by the corporation itself or derivatively by shareholders, directors, persons who hold more than 5% of the equity of a parent entity or other persons specified in the articles or bylaws of the corporation. AB 361 also specifically requires an officer of a benefit corporation to consider the same interests and factors that board members must consider (as described above) whenever an officer has discretion to act and an action may materially impact such interests or factors, and the officer shall be deemed not to have violated his duties when he or she so acts.Similar to the reporting regime required for flexible purpose corporations, a benefit corporation is required to deliver to each shareholder and make publicly available on its website (if it has one) an annual benefit report that (i) details for the applicable year the process and rationale for selecting a third-party standard used to prepare the report, the ways in which it pursued a general public benefit and any specific public benefits and any circumstances that have hindered the creation of such public benefit purposes, (ii) assesses the social and environmental performance of the benefit corporation according to the third-party standard, (iii) identifies any person that owns five percent or more of the corporation, (iv) includes a statement of the corporation’s board of directors regarding whether the corporation failed to pursue its public benefit purposes in all material respects during such year, and (v) identifies any connections between the corporation (or its directors, officers or material owners) and the entity (or its directors, officers or material owners) that created the third-party standard used by the corporation to assess its pursuit of its benefit purposes, in any case that might “materially affect the credibility of the objective assessment of the third-party standard.” There is no mechanism for a benefit corporation or its shareholders to opt out of these annual reporting and disclosure requirements.Anticipated UsageIt remains to be seen whether entrepreneurs and investors will embrace these new forms of corporate entity in California. Organizing a flexible purpose corporation or benefit corporation will require more initial thought and work than forming a traditional for-profit corporation, particularly in 2012 as practitioners come up to speed on the requirements for the new entities. As between the two forms, the flexible purpose corporation offers greater flexibility in terms of defining the special purposes to be pursued by the corporation and less onerous governance requirements, while the benefit corporation offers the advantage of being used and recognized in a handful of other states.。
毕博岗位说明书英文版
Dr. Birte Schmitzvip. 海量免费资料尽在此Date of birth 5 January 1965Nationality GermanCurrent position at BearingPoint ManagerLine of business Infrastructure ServicesYear of entry 1998Address Kurfürstendamm 207-208Berlin D-10719e-mail birteschmitz@Phone (office) +49 30 88004-7490Phone (mobil) +49 173 5764715Partner Christian PetschkePhone partner +49 30 88004-5250Education Dr.-Ing. (1997)Computer Science, LinguisticsMain topics: natural language processing,computational linguistics, artificial intelligence,knowledge representationYears of professional experience 11 yearsEmployment history Technische Universität BerlinBerlin, GermanyResearchResearch position in the field of "NaturalLanguage Processing": Working in and leadingvarious government funded research projectswith the subjects Knowledge Representationand Machine Translation1990-1998Professional qualificationCurrent role and responsibilities Birte Schmitz is an expert in the field of KnowledgeManagement. She has developed several productsand methodologies and she has been managing andleading various Knowledge Management projectsfor different customers.Engagement experience Plastics Manufacturer01/2000 - 09/2000Project leaderAnalysis of requirements and development of aconceptual solution for a KnowledgeManagement programme, including a technicalspecification and an implementation timeline.Globally operating mail order business11/2000 - 01/2002Project leaderDevelopment of an overall strategy for theintroduction of knowledge management for thesales department; development of indicators tomeasure the success of the programme.Car Part Maker09/2000 - 03/2001Project leaderDevelopment of a KM strategy; requirementsanalysis; development of a taxonomy; changemanagement; software selection.Membrane Manufacturer07/2000 - 02/2002Project leaderAnalysis of requirements, development of aconceptual solution, knowledge mapping,modelling of workflows, customizing of a KMprogramme (used software: Opentext’sLivelink).Global logistics company08/1998 - 02/2002Project leaderThe computer programme running on 20.000point-of-sale terminals had to be adjusted to theEuro. It was our task to coordinate theprogramme specification, to coach theprogrammers and to overview and manage thewhole process of adjustment.Bank12/2000 - 11/2001Project leaderDevelopment of a conceptual solution for theintroduction of an enterprise information portal,development of a knowledge map, contentscreening, definition of roles andresponsibilities and the publishing workflows Lectureship Master of Knowledge Management, TechnischeUniversität Chemnitz, teaching “Identificationand structuri ng of knowledge” (Taxonomies) Key areas of experienceIntercultural experience Languages⏹English⏹German⏹SpanishBusiness functions General⏹Change Management⏹Document Management⏹Project Management⏹Research and DevelopmentMarkets Consumer & Industrial Markets⏹Automotive-Automotive⏹Chemicals and Pharmaceutical-Chemicals and PlasticsFinancial Services⏹Banking and Finance-BankingInfrastructure Services⏹Transport-Courier, Postal and Express Services Solution Knowledge Management⏹Document Management-Imaging and Document Management⏹Management of Knowledge-Enterprise IQ-Enterprise Knowledge Centre-KM AssessmentSelected publications -Anaphora resolution in Machine Translation/ S.Preuss, B.Schmitz, C. Hauenschild -In: Studies in Machine Translation andNatural Language Processing (1994)Volume 5, European Commission,Luxembourg p. 29-52-Knowledge-Based Disambiguation forMachine Translation / J.J. Quantz,B.Schmitz - In: Minds and Machines(1994) 4 p. 39-57-Dialogue Acts in Automatic DialogueInterpreting / B.Schmitz, J.J. Quantz - In:Proceedings of the Sixth InternationalConference on Theoretical andMethodological Issues in MachineTranslation, Leuven (1995) p. 35-47-Eliminating Traces of Spoken LanguageProduction in Automatic DialogueInterpreting / B.Schmitz - In: Proceedingsof the 7th International Conference onTheoretical and Methodological Issues inMachine Translation, Santa Fe, NewMexico (1997) p. 184-191-The Translation Objective in AutomaticDialogue Interpreting / B.Schmitz - In:Machine Translation and TranslationTheory, Mouton de Gruyter (1997)-Pragmatikbasiertes MaschinellesDolmetschen / Birte Schmitz -Heidelberg: Julius Groos Verlag, 1998-Discourse Particles and Functions /M.Stede, B.Schmitz – In: MachineSelected presentations -German-Japanese Workshop on SpeechTranslation and Translation Dictionary inKyoto : Preference-Based Disambiguation(1994)-6th International Conference on Theoreticaland Methodological Issues in MachineTranslation, TMI-95, Leuven: DialogueActs in Automatic Dialogue Interpreting(1995), Topical Paper-International Translation Conference “Unityin Diversity”, Dublin City University: ARelevance-Based Approach to AutomaticInterpreting (1996)-7th International Conference on Theoreticaland Methodological Issues in MachineTranslation, TMI-97, Santa Fe, NM:Eliminating Traces of Spoken LanguageProduction in Automatic DialogueInterpreting (1997)-Workshop on Collaboration, Cooperationand Conflict in Dialogue Systems, Nagoya,Japan: Collaboration in Automatic DialogueInterpreting (1997)-CeBIT 2000: Dokumentenmanagement alstechnologische Basis fürWissensmanagement (2000)。
国际经济法(双语)毕博迁移课程ITL-introduction to Internationalaw
III. Enhance through reading relevant articles.
REQUIREMENTS
I. Preview the relevant part of the reading material,especially the relevant cases, preparing for discussion in the classroom.[group work]
<international business law> conducted in English will not only judge how well you can use your long-learned English, but will also improve your use of English.
B. THE MAKING OF TERNATIONAL LAW
1. No Formal Law-making Machinery 2. Basic Mechanism for Creating
International Law: Consensus of the international community. General consent of the international community Particular consent of a state
Be confident in yourself! You will make it! Don’t grudge your time after you have spent almost ten years in learning English!
- 1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
- 2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
- 3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。
THE HORIZON / TRENDS The shift from “stove-piped” to collaborative way of doing business The need for standards and infrastructure for creating, capturing, sharing and applying best practices or lessons learned Globalization– need for one common view and language
$ Improved asset management $ Cost and expense improvements
INTEGRATED BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE
5
Integrated Business Intelligence Real-Time Enterprise Architecture
Business “silos” across organizational or departmental boundaries
Islands of Automation
Historic point-to-point (I.e. Document Management, or Data Warehouses/Marts) Disparate, heterogeneous systems and application landscape CRM, SCM, ERP implementations, each considered the “center of the universe” by their process owners
Enterprise Information Management
COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE Pressure to perform from customers, management and stockholders The lack of information where and when its needed
Extensive manual business and reporting processes that are inefficient and costly Lack of common culture and language
INTEGRATED BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE
2
Communication and Collaboration
Support performance management Support sharing of best practices
Business Process Enablement
Monitor business activities Cross-silo event driven business process automation
Executive Leadership is facing increasing pressure to perform more effectively and improve services for business growth and profitability
RETURN ON INVESTMENT “Doing more with less” Pressures on project budgets The need to better leverage business efficiencies and cycle times
Business Intelligence
$ Opportunity revenue improvements $ Loss prevention
Global KPI consistency
One Source Operational Efficiency Reporting and analysis automation
Customer Profitability
What if” Modeling Profitability Algorithms
Marketing Program Mgmt.
Segment sizing Target list generation Relationship mgmt. programs Campaign mgmt Program evaluation
Dashboards
Risk Mgmt.
Usage balancing Churn analysis Fraud identification
Cost/Revenue Management
Sensitivity analysis Channel analysis Retention and attrition analysis Trending analysis
Integrated Business Intelligence
Business Process Optimization is an emerging solution, formed through the bringing-together of traditional BI, IBI and real-time technologies (e.g., application integration). IBI – Our Enterprise Performance Management Solution is an umbrella program that includes the methodologies, metrics, processes, and systems we bring to clients to monitor and manage the business performance of their enterprise.
Agent
Selling ODS
Branch
Provision
Seibel Campaign Management Data Mining & Analysis
Payment Customer Service
INTEGRATED BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE
6
Evolution of Real-Time Enterprise
Central Access to Corporate Information
Common store and access to information
Integration
Improved integrity of information
Timely Decision Making
Improved decision support and processing Seamless access to disparate data stores
DYNAMIC OPERATING ENVIRONMENT Merger, Acquisitions, and Downsizing organizations Breaking down the business unit silos to gain synergy Integrating and consolidating enterprise application and business process management across functions
Customer Touch Points
Internet Call Center
Customer Alerts interaction
Revenue Functions
Product Development Marketing
Business rules
Personalization Fraud Alert
Events
Events
Crossing a Barrier
Primarily Batch
Increase in Ad Hoc Queries
Analytical Modeling Grows
Continuous Update & Time Sensitive Queries Become Important
Business Process Optimization
ERP
Solutions integrator
SCM
Enterprise Performance Management
CRM
ODS
Customer Relationship Optimization
CRO enables CRM to be effective by leveraging customer analysis into the realtime context of an interaction.
STAGE 1
REPORTING
STAGE 2
ANALYZING
STAGE 3
PREDICTING
STNG ACTIVE WAREHOUSING WHAT IS Happening? MAKING it happen!
WHAT happened? WHY did it happen? WHY will it happen?
INTEGRATED BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE 4
Quantifying Value
Broad categories of improvement Real-time warning indicators Categories of measures applied to quantify dollar improvements
INTEGRATED BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE