overcentralised

简明释义

英[əʊvəˈsɛntrəlaɪzd]美[oʊvərˈsɛntrəlaɪzd]

nThis is a bad idea for an overcentralised country like Turkey, and no other party is likely to accept it. n nnECONOMIST: Turkey's electionn

nBut the vast overcentralised scheme has fallen four years behind schedule, and the government is edging its way towards a scaled-down version. n nnECONOMIST: National Health Servicen

英英释义

单词用法

同义词

反义词

例句

1.The company's decision-making process has become too overcentralised, leading to frustration among employees.

公司的决策过程变得过于集中化，导致员工感到沮丧。

2.In an overcentralised government, local authorities may struggle to respond effectively to community needs.

在一个过于集中化的政府中，当地当局可能难以有效应对社区需求。

3.The overcentralised structure of the organization stifles innovation and creativity.

该组织的过于集中化结构扼杀了创新和创造力。

4.Critics argue that the overcentralised educational system does not cater to the diverse needs of students.

批评者认为，这个过于集中化的教育系统无法满足学生的多样化需求。

5.An overcentralised approach can lead to bottlenecks in project management.

一种过于集中化的方法可能导致项目管理中的瓶颈。

作文

In today's rapidly changing world, the concept of governance and organizational structure is more important than ever. Many organizations, whether they are governmental or corporate, face the challenge of balancing authority and autonomy. One significant issue that arises in this context is the risk of being overcentralised, which refers to a situation where decision-making power is concentrated at the top levels of an organization, leaving little room for input from lower levels. This can lead to several negative consequences that hinder the effectiveness and adaptability of the organization. Firstly, when an organization is overcentralised, it often stifles creativity and innovation. Employees at lower levels may have valuable insights and ideas that could contribute to the organization's success, but if they feel that their voices are not heard, they may become disengaged. For instance, in a tech company that relies heavily on centralized decision-making, the engineers and designers might have groundbreaking ideas for product improvements. However, if all decisions are made by a few executives, these ideas may never see the light of day. This lack of diverse input can result in missed opportunities and a stagnant organizational culture. Secondly, overcentralised structures can lead to inefficiencies. When all decisions must pass through a small group of leaders, it can create bottlenecks that slow down processes. This is particularly detrimental in fast-paced industries where quick responses are crucial. For example, consider a retail company that requires approval from headquarters for every store-level decision. During peak seasons, this delay can frustrate store managers who are trying to meet customer needs swiftly. Moreover, an overcentralised approach can result in a disconnect between leadership and employees. Leaders may become isolated from the realities faced by their teams, leading to decisions that do not reflect the actual needs of the organization. This disconnect can foster resentment and lower morale among employees, as they may feel that their leaders are out of touch with the challenges they encounter daily. In contrast, organizations that adopt a more decentralized approach tend to be more responsive and adaptable. By empowering employees at various levels to make decisions, these organizations can harness the collective intelligence of their workforce. For example, a decentralized non-profit organization may allow local branches to tailor their programs to meet the specific needs of their communities. This flexibility not only enhances the effectiveness of their initiatives but also boosts employee satisfaction as they feel valued and trusted. Ultimately, while some degree of centralization is necessary for strategic alignment and coherence, organizations must be cautious of becoming overcentralised. Striking the right balance between central authority and local autonomy can lead to a more dynamic, innovative, and engaged workforce. In conclusion, moving away from an overcentralised model can empower employees, improve efficiency, and enhance overall organizational performance. Leaders should actively seek to involve their teams in the decision-making process, thereby fostering a culture of collaboration and trust. This will not only mitigate the risks associated with overcentralised structures but also pave the way for sustainable growth and success.

在当今快速变化的世界中，治理和组织结构的概念比以往任何时候都更为重要。许多组织，无论是政府机构还是企业，都面临着平衡权威和自主权的挑战。在这种背景下，一个显著的问题是过于集中（overcentralised）的风险，这指的是决策权集中在组织的高层，几乎没有来自低层的输入。这可能导致一些负面后果，从而阻碍组织的有效性和适应性。 首先，当一个组织过于集中（overcentralised）时，往往会扼杀创造力和创新。低层员工可能拥有宝贵的见解和想法，这些都可以促进组织的成功，但如果他们觉得自己的声音没有被听到，他们可能会变得无动于衷。例如，在一个高度依赖集中决策的科技公司，工程师和设计师可能会有开创性的产品改进想法。然而，如果所有决策都由少数高管做出，这些想法可能永远不会被采纳。这种缺乏多样化输入的情况可能导致错失机会和停滞不前的组织文化。 其次，过于集中（overcentralised）的结构可能导致低效率。当所有决策都必须经过一小部分领导者时，可能会造成瓶颈，从而拖慢流程。这在快速发展的行业中尤其有害，因为快速反应至关重要。例如，考虑一家零售公司，该公司要求每个门店的决策都必须经过总部批准。在高峰季节，这种延迟可能会让试图迅速满足客户需求的店长感到沮丧。 此外，过于集中（overcentralised）的方法可能导致领导层与员工之间的脱节。领导者可能与其团队面临的现实相隔甚远，导致做出的决策无法反映组织的实际需求。这种脱节可能会引发员工的不满，降低士气，因为他们可能会觉得领导者与他们每天面临的挑战脱节。 相比之下，采用更分散方法的组织往往更具响应能力和适应性。通过赋予各级员工决策权，这些组织能够利用其劳动力的集体智慧。例如，一个去中心化的非营利组织可能允许地方分支根据社区的具体需求量身定制其项目。这种灵活性不仅提高了他们倡议的有效性，还提升了员工的满意度，因为他们感到被重视和信任。 最终，虽然某种程度的集中化对于战略一致性和连贯性是必要的，但组织必须谨慎避免过于集中（overcentralised）。在中央权威与地方自主之间找到正确的平衡，可以带来更具活力、创新和参与感的劳动力。总之，摆脱过于集中（overcentralised）的模式可以赋予员工权力，提高效率，增强整体组织绩效。领导者应该积极寻求让他们的团队参与决策过程，从而培养合作与信任的文化。这不仅将减轻与过于集中（overcentralised）结构相关的风险，还将为可持续增长和成功铺平道路。