大公司和小公司雅思英语
Ⅰ 哪个帮忙写一篇关于选择大公司还是小公司的英语作文呀!!!!
Yueqing Boussi Trading Co.,Ltd,sits in wenzhou,zhejiang Province,on the southeast coast of China.Our company is a highly technology enterprise,most specilized in all kinds of alt sex procts.The main collection we currently supply include:toys for men,toys for women,sex toys series massage appliance. Our company procts have passed ISO9001,and got the CE approval in succession.Export to Europe,Middle East,Africa and southeast Asia area, got high prestige at home and abroad.Adhere to the policy that "quality first,consumer first".Received a high opinion in the state Bureau of Technical supervision,people administers and so on. We sincerely welcome all customers to contact us and work together with our conpany.
Ⅱ 大公司和小公司有什么区别
大公司学做人，小公司学做事。这句耳熟能详，广为传颂的职场哲学 在大公司大部分的办专公时间用在和内部沟通属上，每做一件事情首先要考虑它可能会触动到的关系，影响到的相关人和事情。还要考虑到和不同人沟通，不同级别沟通，内外部客户沟通各自的侧重点，事情没开始做，计划要写一堆，经过多次校正。然后推行起来又会受到很多客观与突发的因素的影响，感觉做一件事情真累，效率很低。但是学会了全面的考虑事情，就是难免有些繁文缛节要顾及。 在小公司，做事情几乎老板同意就没有大问题。但是因为决议太快，也会有后遗症。老板容易拍脑袋做事情，说过了就忘记了，许诺了但是到时候就不承认了。真的是不讲计划只有变化。事情决议是快了，但是做起来偶尔很有效率，偶尔也是拖拉半死，导致事情最终会效率也未必很高。 大公司小公司都是我们学习和创造的平台。公司本身只是个外部条件，关键看自己的个人目标设定，任何的环境下，都会有自己的能够得到的东西，关键看机会成本。
麻烦采纳，谢谢!
Ⅲ 求一篇英文作文，题目是《有一个大公司和小公司你会选哪个》，100字左右
Which Company would you like to choose?The Big one or The Small One.
If there are two companies I can choose freely, I think I would like to choose the big one. because in the big company, I have more opportunities to get in touch with more people. I think I can learn a lot from them. And big company means you will get more space for your promotion. They need more positions,so you are given to chance to introce yourself to others. But in the small company, there are less people in it and the positions are also rare. It is much more difficult to get promotion.
Ⅳ 求一篇英语写作：大公司比小公司有优势
Company size
Big is back
Aug 27th 20098 Q5 d6 P' @' x1 W% F
From The Economist print edition
Corporate giants were on the defensive for decades. Now they have the advantage again
Illustration by Jon Berkerly
IN 1996, in one of his most celebrated phrases, Bill Clinton declared that “the era of big government is over”. He might have added that the era of big companies was over, too. The organisation that defined capitalism for much of the 20th century was then in retreat, attacked by corporate raiders, harassed by shareholders and outfoxed by entrepreneurs.
Great names such as Pan Am had disappeared. Others had survived only by dint of huge bloodletting: IBM sacked 122,000 people, a quarter of its workforce, between 1990 and 1995. Everyone agreed that the future lay with entrepreneurial start-ups such as Yahoo!—which in late 1998 had the same market capitalisation with 637 employees as Boeing with 230,000. The share of GDP proced by big instrial companies fell by half between 1974 and 1998, from 36% to 17%.
Today the balance of advantage may be shifting again. To a degree, the financial crisis is responsible. It has devastated the venture-capital market, the lifeblood of many young firms. Governments have been rescuing companies they consider too big to fail, such as Citigroup and General Motors. Recession is squeezing out smaller and less well-connected firms. But there are other reasons too, which are giving big companies a self-confidence they have not displayed for decades.
Big can be beautiful…
Of course, big companies never went away. There were still plenty of first-rate ones: Unilever and Toyota continued to innovate through thick and thin. And not all start-ups were models of success: Netscape and Enron promised to revolutionise their instries only to crash and burn. Nevertheless, the balance had shifted in favour of small organisations.
The entrepreneurial boom was supercharged by two developments. Deregulation opened protected markets. Some national champions, such as AT&T, were broken up. Others saw their markets eaten up by swift-footed newcomers. The arrival of the personal computer in the 1970s and the internet in the 1990s created an army of successful start-ups. Steve Jobs and Steve Wozniak founded Apple Computer in 1976 in the Jobs family’ garage. Microsoft and Dell Computer were both founded by teenagers (in 1975 and 1984 respectively). Larry Page and Sergey Brin started Google in Stanford dorm rooms.4 x9 U) y7 s' [- x4 {9 i; B
But deregulation had already begun to go out of fashion before the financial crisis. The Sarbanes-Oxley act, introced after Enron collapsed in disgrace, increased the regulatory burden on companies of all sizes, but what could be borne by the big could cripple the small. Many of today’s most dynamic instries are much more friendly to big companies than the IT instry. Research in biotechnology is costly and often does not bear fruit for years. Natural-resource companies, whose importance grows as competition for resources intensifies, need to be big—hence the mining instry’s consolidation.
: z( K! G- X) a8 y- V( S" z s5 FTwo further developments are shifting the balance of advantage in favour of size. One is a heightened awareness of the risks of subcontracting. Toy companies and pet-food firms alike have found that their brands can be tainted if their suppliers (notably, from China) turn out shoddy goods. Big instrial companies have learned that their proction cycles can be disrupted if contractors are not up to the mark. Boeing, once a champion of outsourcing, has been forced to take over faltering suppliers.: a+ d8 z% p0 O
A second is the emergence of companies that have discovered how to be entrepreneurial as well as big. These giants are getting better at minimising the costs of size (such as longer, more complex chains of managerial command) while exploiting its advantages (such as presence in several markets and access to a large talent pool). Cisco Systems is pioneering the use of its own video technology to improve communications between its employees. IBM has carried out several company-wide brainstorming exercises, recently involving more than 150,000 people, that have encouraged it to put more emphasis, for example, on green computing. Disney has successfully ingested Pixar’s creative magic.
, {$ e3 Q2 T$ D2 N- F# gYou might suppose that the return of the mighty, now better equipped to crush the competition, is something to worry about. Not necessarily. Big is not always ugly just as small is not always beautiful. Most entrepreneurs dream of turning their start-ups into giants (or at least of selling them to giants for a fortune). There is a symbiosis between large and small. “Cloud computing” would not provide young firms with access to huge amounts of computer power if big companies had not created giant servers. Biotech start-ups would go bust were they not given work by giants with deep pockets. ) j h0 v+ ^8 |: Z
The most successful economic ecosystems contain a variety of big and small companies: Silicon Valley boasts long-established names as well as an ever-changing array of start-ups. America’s economy has been more dynamic than Europe’s in recent decades not just because it is better at giving birth to companies but also because it is better at letting them grow. Only 5% of European Union companies born since 1980 have made it into the list of the 1,000 biggest in the EU by market capitalisation. In America, the figure is 22%.. }( ` S- K* g0 h$ M6 M
…but size isn’t really what mattersThe return of the giants could well be a boon for the world economy—but only if business people and policymakers avoid certain pitfalls. Businesses should not make a fetish of size, particularly if this means diversifying into a lot of unrelated areas. The conglomerate model may be tempting when cash is hard to find. But the moment will not last. By and large, the most successful big firms focus on their core businesses.
, B! k. O6 D, n+ r2 [: G- hPolicymakers should both resist an instinctive suspicion of big companies (see article) and avoid the old error of embracing national champions. It is bad enough that governments have diverted resources into propping up failing companies such as General Motors. It would be even more regrettable if they were to return to picking winners. The best use of their energies is to remove the burdens and barriers which prevent entrepreneurs from starting businesses and turning small companies into big ones.
http://bbs.gter.net/bbs/thread-977510-9-1.html
摘自寄托天下
Ⅳ 英语面试问题，大公司，小公司你会怎么选择，为什么用英语回答我的问题，谢谢
不好意思复，本人英文表达能力不好！制！要我选择，我会选择小公司！！麻雀虽小，五脏俱全，学到的东西会更多！！当然你得看这家公司是大公司还是小公司，投其所好就OK！！要不然，人家是大公司，你说喜欢小公司，那就不合格了。面试当中每一道题，都是想了解你适合不适合他们公司，你自己职业的一个规化，你对于他们公司来讲，有没有利用价值。
Ⅵ 大公司与小公司的利弊
大公司
优点来：环境好源，体系健全，有五险、工资是固定的，做到什么程度就会升职也是有规定的，工作8个小时（加班有加班工资），工作稳定。
缺点：工作灵活小、只能做自己分内的事，想学经验很难，不利于个人的全面发展。
小公司
优点：工作灵活，有个人发展的空间，工资苦的多拿的也多，能开发个人潜力，升职的快。
缺点：经常加班（没有加班费），个人压力大，工作环境并不是很好（要看你老板对环境的要求），工作不是很稳定。
1、小公司相对来说比较简单，重点在于把事情做好；大公司相对来说比较复杂，重点是把人际关系处好
2、小公司到处能闻到馅饼的香，大公司到处能感觉到水的深——小公司一般发展的速度都比较快，所以小公司给大家带来的机会更大一些。在大公司里面，他们的业务相对成熟发展的空间本身就不大，整个组织和业务运转比较平稳，所以就形成了很多的潜规则，里面水很深。
3、小公司能够历练你的综合能力，大公司能够历练你的专业能力
4、小公司跳到大公司难度比较大；而大公司跳到小公司相对较容易
Ⅶ 大公司和小公司各有什么优缺点
大公司
优点：环境好，体系健全，有五险、工资是固定的，做到什么程度就会升职也内是有规定的，工作8个小时（加班容有加班工资），工作稳定。
缺点：工作灵活小、只能做自己分内的事，想学经验很难，不利于个人的全面发展。
小公司
优点：工作灵活，有个人发展的空间，工资苦的多拿的也多，能开发个人潜力，升职的快。
缺点：经常加班（没有加班费），个人压力大，工作环境并不是很好（要看你老板对环境的要求），工作不是很稳定。
(7)大公司和小公司雅思英语扩展阅读：
1、小公司相对来说比较简单，重点在于把事情做好；大公司相对来说比较复杂，重点是把人际关系处好
2、小公司到处能闻到馅饼的香，大公司到处能感觉到水的深——小公司一般发展的速度都比较快，所以小公司给大家带来的机会更大一些。在大公司里面，他们的业务相对成熟发展的空间本身就不大，整个组织和业务运转比较平稳，所以就形成了很多的潜规则，里面水很深。
3、小公司能够历练你的综合能力，大公司能够历练你的专业能力
4、小公司跳到大公司难度比较大；而大公司跳到小公司相对较容易
Ⅷ 英语作文:大公司和小公司的区别是什么 400字
在网上找到的 希望对你有帮助
Some people prefer to work for a large company. Others prefer to work for a small company. Which would you prefer?
Use specific reasons and details to support your choice.
I would prefer to work in a large company rather than a small one. A large company has more to offer in terms of advancement, training, and prestige.
In a large company, I can start at an entry-level position and work myself up to the top. I could start in the mailroom and, once I know the company, can apply for a managerial position. In a small company, there is not as much room to grow.
In a large company, there are a variety of jobs. I could work in sales, in marketing, in distribution, in shopping, or in any department I applied for. I could be trained in a variety of positions and would have valuable experience. In a small company, there would not be the same opportunity.
In a large company, there would be more prestige. I could brag to my friends that I worked for one of the biggest companies in the world. I would always have something to talk about when I met strangers. If I worked in a small company, I would always have to explain what the company did.
Working for a small company would not give me the same opportunities for advancement or on-the-job training as working for a larger company would. Nor would I be as proud to work for a small company---unless the small company was my own.
Ⅸ 英语专四作文满分范文（37）：去大公司还是小公司
专四题目：为大公司还是小公司工作？
Some people prefer to work for a large company while others prefer to work
for a small company. What is your view?
专四范文：
Choose a Big Company
Whether a small or a big company is better should be judged on a case-to-case
basis. Generally speaking, I would like to take up a job in a big company.
To begin with, big corporations are more reputable and prestigious than small
ones. Therefore, it is easier to acquire a credible recommendation letter if one
ever decides to seek other employment and get on the career ladder. In addition,
big companies often provide satisfactory welfare benefits along with other perks
whereas small enterprises may not always ly value their employees.
Furthermore, the in-house training operated by big corporations benefits
students not for the current job but also has a longlasting impact on their
future career. In addition, renowned companies, especially international ones,
are more likely to offer employees the opportunity to work in different places.
Also, the options presented by small enterprises are often quite limited. Last
but not least, small companies usually lack an efficient infrastructure and this
may create many obstacles for new graates who are not well experienced. Also,
their brand value can hardly compete with well-known big companies.
In summary, albeit that the competition is irrefutably fiercer for the
positions offered by big companies, the aforementioned merits render a big
company a better choice.(208 words)