美国农业合作社与农业产业化外文文献翻译中英文最新
（节选重点翻译）
英文
Managing uncertainty and expectations: The strategic response of U.S.
agricultural cooperatives to agricultural industrialization
Julie Hogeland
Abstract
The 20th century industrialization of agriculture confronted U.S. agricultural cooperatives with responding to an event they neither initiated nor drove. Agrarian-influenced cooperatives used two metaphors, “serfdom” and “cooperatives are like a family” to manage uncertainty and influence producer expectations by predicting industrialization's eventual outcome and cooperatives’ producer driven compensation.
The serfdom metaphor alluded to industrialization's potential to either bypass family farmers, the cornerstone of the economy according to agrarian ideology, or to transform them into the equivalent of piece-wage labor as contract growers. The “family” metaphor reflects how cooperatives personalized the connection between cooperative and farmer-member to position themselves as the exact opposite of serfdom. Hypotheses advanced by Roessl (2005) and Goel (2013) suggest that intrinsic characteristics of family businesses such as a resistance to change and operating according to a myth of unlimited choice and
independence reinforced the risk of institutional lock-in posed by agrarian ideology.
To determine whether lock-in occurred, Woerdman's (2004) neo-institutional model of lock-in was examined in the context of late 20th century cooperative grain and livestock marketing. Increasingly ineffective open markets prompted three regional cooperatives to develop their own models of industrialized pork production. Direct experience with producer contracting allowed cooperatives to evade institutional and ideological lock-in.
Keywords：Cooperatives，Agricultural industrialization，Agrarianism，Expectations，Family business，Family farming，Metaphors，Lock-in
Introduction
Recent fluctuation in global financial markets led a panel of cooperative leaders to identify uncertainty as the primary managerial difficulty anticipated by cooperatives in the future (Boland, Hogeland, & McKee, 2011). Likewise, the 20th century industrialization of agriculture confronted cooperatives with the challenge of responding to an event they neither initiated nor drove. When the environment is highly uncertain and unpredictable, Oliver predicts that organizations will increase their efforts to establish the illusion or reality of control and stability over future organizational outcomes (Oliver, 1991: 170). This study argues that
cooperatives used two metaphors, “serfdom” and “cooperatives are like a family” to manage uncertainty by predicting industrialization's eventual outcome and cooperatives’ producer-driven compensation.
These metaphors are agrarian. Recent research highlights the impact of agrarian ideology on cooperatives. Foreman and Whetten (2002: 623)observe, “co-ops have historically sought to reinforce the traditions and values of agrarianism through education and social interventions. Indeed, for many members these normative goals of a co-op have been preeminent.” These authors studied the tension within rural cooperatives produced by a normative system encompassing family and ideology and a utilitarian system defined by economic rationality, profit maximization and self-interest. They argue that this split in values implies that cooperatives are essentially two different organizations trying to be one. To capture the tension between these multiple identities, they focused on a potential family/business divide in cooperatives, basing this on a duality often noted in cooperative community and trade publications.
The authors found that respondents wanted their local co-op to be more business oriented and at the same time, expected co-ops ideally (e.g., as an ideal organizational form) to be more family focused. These conflicting expectations suggested that multiple-identity organizations need to be assessed in terms of the individual components of their identity and the tension (or interaction) between them. Foreman and Whetten
regard dual or multiple identity organizations as hybrids. There are consequences to hybridity: many members of a hybrid organization will identify with both aspects of its dual identity, “and thus find themselves embracing competing goals and concerns associated with distinctly different identity elements” (Foreman and Whetten, 2002). They conclude that competing goals and concerns foster competing expectations with consequences for organizational commitment (and I would add, performance).
The split focus observed by Foreman and Whetten can be regarded as a contemporary expression of a value conflict beginning early in the 20th century over how production agriculture should be organized. Decentralized, autonomous, and typically small, family farmers used their skill at deciding the “what, when, where, how and why” of production and marketing to reduce the risk of being a price taker at open, competitive markets. Farmers also diversified the farm enterprise to spread price risk over several commodities. Corporate-led industrialized agriculture (integrators) by-passed both markets and independent farmers. Integrators coordinated supply and demand internally based on top-down administrative control over production and marketing decisions. They engaged in production contracting with growers who were held to competitive performance standards and paid according to their productivity. In contrast, family farmers were accountable only to
themselves.
Study overview
Foss (2007) observes that the beliefs organizations hold about each other or the competitive environment are a key aspect of strategic management which have been understudied. Beliefs, which include norms and expectations, are important because they can be wrong. Cooperatives are often considered to have an ideological component but how such ideology develops and persists also has been understudied. This study addresses that gap by examining how agrarian language and assumptions shaped cooperatives’ reaction to 20th century agricultural industrialization. During this era, industrial methods transformed the production and marketing of processing vegetables, poultry, beef, and pork and were initiated for dairy and grains. An historical and institutional perspective is used to examine how two contrasting metaphors brought cooperatives to the brink of institutional lock-in. The study spans the entire 20th century from beginning to close.
The study opens with a brief discussion of metaphors and norms then presents a theoretical model of lock-in. Discussion of the overarching role of agrarianism follows. Discussion then addresses why the cooperative alternative to corporate-led industrialization –the 1922 model developed by Aaron Sapiro –was not palatable to agrarian-influenced cooperatives (this section also defines
agrarian-influenced cooperatives).
Discussion then turns to considering how the disturbing implications of serfdom paved the way for the agrarian-influenced norm, “cooperatives as a competitive yardstick” and the cooperative metaphorical n orm, “cooperatives are like a family.” Producer expectations triggered by “serfdom” and “cooperatives are like a family” are addressed. Parallels are briefly drawn between neighborhood exchange in late 19th century rural California and behavior implied in “cooperatives are like a family.” Parallels are then drawn between family business traits and cooperative and producer experience in livestock and identity-preserved grain markets. This provides a foundation for examining in greater detail how well cooperative experience in pork and grains corresponded to Woerdman's four part model of lock-in (2004). Study conclusions and suggestions for future research follow.
Importance of ideology, metaphor and norms
Economists have begun studying how cognition and discourse affect cooperative outcomes (Fulton, 1999). This study continues that line of inquiry by considering how a dominant ideology like agrarianism produced words and associations that, for most of the 20th century, arguably had a deterministic effect on farmer and cooperative perceptions of the future. Even today, few guidelines or predictions exist that suggest how organizations can manage ideological conflict (Greenwood, Raynard,
Kodeih, Micelotta, & Lounsbury, 2011). Moreover, the difficulties of escaping a hegemonic ideology have seldom been recognized (Spencer, 1994).
Metaphors are a pithy word or expression meant to evoke a comparison. They are used to understand one thing in terms of another (Lakoff & Johnson, 1980: 5). Understanding what metaphors represent and how they emerge and persist can offer a window into the salient factors influencing farmer and cooperative decision-making. Moreover, as in this text, metaphors “allow for the sorts of story in which overwhelming evidence in favor of one interpretation of the world can be repeatedly ignored, even though this puts the assets of the firm and the position of the decision-makers at extraordinary risk” (Schoenberger, 1997: 136).
Much of what Pfeffer and Salancik (2003) say about norms also applies to how metaphors are used in this study. For example, these authors observe that an important function of norms is to provide predictability in social relationships so that each party can rely on the assurances provided by the other. Consequently, norms stress the meeting of expectations in an exchange relationship. Certainly, the metaphor, cooperatives are like a family, can be understood in the same manner. Defining norms as commonly or widely shared sets of behavioral expectations, Pfeffer et al. also indicate that norms develop under
conditions of social uncertainty to increase the predictability of relationships for the mutual advantage of those involved. Once they cease to serve those interests norms break down.
California's early industrialization
It seems reasonable to assume that agrarianism's belief in the pivotal importance of agriculture was shared to some degree by all U.S. cooperatives. However, unique features of California's agriculture, particularly in the Central Valley, predisposed it to industrialize some decades earlier than the Midwest, Great Plains, and Northeast (McClelland, 1997). The latter continued to rely on patriarchal family farm labor and so, for this paper, are assumed to represent the core domain of agrarian-influenced cooperatives. These areas lacked access to the supply of excess ethnic or minority labor which McClelland indicates prepared California for industrialization by 1910. Added to this advantage was California's legacy of estate or hacienda production which boosted cultural familiarity and acceptance of large scale production (Hogeland, 2010).
In 1922, California attorney and cooperative organizer Aaron Sapiro combined elements of California experience into a model of cooperative organization and marketing popularly kno wn as “orderly marketing.” Sapiro began by extolling industrialization: “The factory system is recognized as the key to all forms of productive industries to-day all over
the world-except in agriculture… The farmer is the only part of modern industry… in which you have individual production” (Sapiro, 1993: 81).
In general, Sapiro offered a cooperative alternative to producers’ tendency to dump excess supply from bumper harvests on the market. Instead, cooperatives should provide a home for the growers’ prod uct and use accumulated inventory to develop new products to stimulate consumer demand. Investing in processing or preservation technologies –canning, refrigeration and drying –would allow cooperatives to release excess production to the market in a prog ressive “orderly” manner.
For example, by 1925 Sunkist growers had increased fruit utilization by transforming oranges from a single hand-held breakfast fruit to a glass of juice made from multiple oranges. The Sunkist extractor was specifically designed to use off-size fruit and wind-damaged fruit that would not sell as fancy Sunkist table fruit because all produced the same quality juice (Nourse, 1925). In 1922, Sun Maid scored a consumer success by packaging raisins in convenient snack-sized boxes called “Little Sun Maids” (Gary Marshburn, telephone conversation, July 24, 2008; Cotterill, 1984).
The far-sighted orderly marketing norm anticipated the values of industrialized agriculture, urging cooperatives to guarantee supply through marketing contracts with some 85–95 percent of producer-members (Sapiro's recommended target). This commitment
could propel the cooperative into being sole supplier of a particular specialty crop. (Such specialization was facilitated by California's geographically compact micro-climates).
Sapiro's model provided a template for important 20th century specialty crop cooperatives outside of California, notably, Ocean Spray Cooperative (cranberries) and Welch's (Concord grapes). However, Sapiro's model represented a highly specialized, marketing-intensive cooperative that was conceptually and financially out of reach of the small family farmers in the Midwest, Great Plains, and the Northeast who produced fungible commodities like milk, meat and grains.6Cooperative philosopher and economist Edwin Nourse commented on cooperatives performing agricultural rationing such as orderly marketing:
To be sure, a few cooperatives which stand in a class by themselves have already attained a degree of success comparable with the best achievements in industrial lines. But these are in comparatively small branches of specialized agriculture where economic organization was already on a high level. Before anything like the same result could be achieved in the great staple lines of production, where the demand for [price] stabilization is most acute, there would have to be a fair degree of concentration of executive responsibility in their operating organization (Nourse, 1930: 132).
Serfdom's implications
During the 1920s and 1930s –considered a “golden age” of agriculture – collective action surged. Rudimentary markets and chaotic distribution channels for basic commodities like milk, grain, and fruit provided new opportunities for cooperative marketing. Moreover, new antitrust legislation curbed many of the horizontally-integrated “trusts” dominating 19th century meat packing, oil, railroads and grain markets.
Nevertheless, as early as 1922, Nourse saw emerging within agriculture market power so centralized and hierarchical it seemed feudal (Nourse, 1922: 589). Subsequently, the metaphor of “serfdom” was used throughout the 20th century by agrarian-influenced cooperatives to suggest how industrialization's contract production could reduce entrepreneurial and independent farmers to the equivalent of hired hands – so-called “piece wage labor.”
In 1900, most counties could point to someone who started as a tenant or laborer and through hard work, luck, sharp dealing or intelligent cultivation, retired as a landlord owing several farms (Danbom, 1979: 7). In 1917, Ely introduced the concept of the ‘agricultural ladder’ as a model of occupational progression to farm ownership. The ladder showed how the agrarian virtue of hard work could allow a landless, unpaid family laborer to progress from being a hired hand and tenant farmer to an independent owner-operator (Kloppenburg & Geisler, 1985). Yet, the serfdom metaphor suggested just how tenuous such occupational
progression could be.
Late 19th century farmers formed cooperatives in response to market exploitation or failure. Although such exploitation affected farmer costs and returns, as a rule it did not impinge on farmers’ understanding of themselves as entrepreneurial and independent. Agrarian ideology lauded family farmers for taking on the risks of farming with a frontier attitude of self-reliance. Such farmers answered to no one except themselves. The small farmer was “first of all a self-directing individualist who could be counted on to resist with vigor the encroachments of outside authority” (Robinson, 1953: 69).
Industrialized agriculture brought a new institutional logic to agriculture by putting efficiency and profitability first and using vertical integration to bypass farmers’ decision-making power over agriculture. Industrialization was market driven, seeking growth in identifying and satisfying consumer preferences. Research has indicated that the norms and prescriptions dictated by family logics are often at odds with the prescriptions dictated by markets (Greenwood et al., 2011).
Power, reflected in ownership and governance arrangements, determines which logics will more easily flow into organizations and be well received (Greenwood et al., 2011). Family logics formally embedded into an organization's ownership structure are a very effective conduit for increasing familial influences within the organization. Not surprisingly,
farmer-owned cooperatives believed they had a mandate to protect and foster family farming (Hogeland, 2006).
中文
管理不确定性和期望：美国农业合作社与农业产业化
朱莉·霍格兰
摘要
20世纪的农业产业化使美国农业合作社面对很大的不确定性。受农业影响的合作社使用两种方式“农奴制”和“合作社”来管理不确定性，并通过预测产业化的最终结果和合作社的生产者驱动的报酬来影响生产者的期望。
农奴制的隐喻暗示了产业化的潜力，要么绕过家庭农民-根据农业意识形态的经济基石，要么将他们转变成像合同种植者一样的零工劳动。“合作社”的隐喻反映了合作社如何个性化合作社与农民成员之间的联系，从而将自己定位为农奴制的完全对立面。Roessl （2005）和Goel（2013）提出的假设表明，家族企业的内在特征，例如对变革的抵制和根据无限选择和独立的神话进行经营，加剧了耕种意识形态造成的体制锁定的风险。
为了确定是否发生锁定，在20世纪后期合作的谷物和牲畜销售的背景下，研究了Woerdman（2004）的锁定新制度模型。日益无效的公开市场促使三个区域合作社发展自己的产业化猪肉生产模式。生产者承包的直接经验使合作社可以逃避体制和意识形态上的束缚。
关键词：合作社，农业产业化，农业主义，期望，家族企业，家庭农业，隐喻，锁定
引言
全球金融市场的近期波动促使合作社领导人小组将不确定性确定为合作社未来所预期的主要管理难题（Boland，Hogeland和McKee，2011年）。同样，20世纪的农业产业化使合作社面临着应对他们既不发起也不开车的事件的挑战。当环境高度不确定且不可预测时，Oliver 预测组织将加大努力，以建立对未来组织成果的控制和稳定性的幻想或现实（Oliver，1991：170）。这项研究认为，合作社使用两个隐喻“农奴制”和“合作社”就像一个家庭，通过预测产业化的最终结果和合作社的生产者驱动的报酬来管理不确定性。
这些隐喻是农业的。最近的研究强调了农业意识形态对合作社的影响。Foreman和Whetten（2002：623）观察到，“合作社历来试图通过教育和社会干预来加强农业主义的传统和价值观。确实，对于许多成员而言，合作社的这些规范目标是卓越的。”这些作者研究了农村合作社内部的张力，这种张力是由包括家庭和意识形态的规范体系以及由经济合理性，利润最大化和自身利益所定义的功利主义体系所产生的。他们认为，这种价值分歧意味着合作社本质上是试图成为一个的两个不同的组织。为了抓住这些多重身份之间的紧张关系，他们将注意力集中在合作社中潜在的家庭/企业鸿沟上，这是基于合作社社区和贸易出版物中经常提到的双重性。
作者发现，受访者希望他们的本地合作社更注重业务，同时希望
毕业设计（论文）外文参考文献及译文 英文题目Component-based Safety Computer of Railway Signal Interlocking System 中文题目模块化安全铁路信号计算机联锁系统 学院自动化与电气工程学院 专业自动控制 姓名葛彦宁 学号 200808746 指导教师贺清 2012年5月30日
Component-based Safety Computer of Railway Signal Interlocking System 1 Introduction Signal Interlocking System is the critical equipment which can guarantee traffic safety and enhance operational efficiency in railway transportation. For a long time, the core control computer adopts in interlocking system is the special customized high-grade safety computer, for example, the SIMIS of Siemens, the EI32 of Nippon Signal, and so on. Along with the rapid development of electronic technology, the customized safety computer is facing severe challenges, for instance, the high development costs, poor usability, weak expansibility and slow technology update. To overcome the flaws of the high-grade special customized computer, the U.S. Department of Defense has put forward the concept：we should adopt commercial standards to replace military norms and standards for meeting consumers’demand [1]. In the meantime, there are several explorations and practices about adopting open system architecture in avionics. The United Stated and Europe have do much research about utilizing cost-effective fault-tolerant computer to replace the dedicated computer in aerospace and other safety-critical fields. In recent years, it is gradually becoming a new trend that the utilization of standardized components in aerospace, industry, transportation and other safety-critical fields. 2 Railways signal interlocking system 2.1 Functions of signal interlocking system The basic function of signal interlocking system is to protect train safety by controlling signal equipments, such as switch points, signals and track units in a station, and it handles routes via a certain interlocking regulation. Since the birth of the railway transportation, signal interlocking system has gone through manual signal, mechanical signal, relay-based interlocking, and the modern computer-based Interlocking System. 2.2 Architecture of signal interlocking system Generally, the Interlocking System has a hierarchical structure. According to the function of equipments, the system can be divided to the function of equipments; the system
数据库管理系统的介绍 Raghu Ramakrishnan1 数据库（database,有时拼作data base）又称为电子数据库，是专门组织起来的一组数据或信息，其目的是为了便于计算机快速查询及检索。数据库的结构是专门设计的，在各种数据处理操作命令的支持下，可以简化数据的存储，检索，修改和删除。数据库可以存储在磁盘，磁带，光盘或其他辅助存储设备上。 数据库由一个或一套文件组成，其中的信息可以分解为记录，每一记录又包含一个或多个字段（或称为域）。字段是数据存取的基本单位。数据库用于描述实体，其中的一个字段通常表示与实体的某一属性相关的信息。通过关键字以及各种分类（排序）命令，用户可以对多条记录的字段进行查询，重新整理，分组或选择，以实体对某一类数据的检索，也可以生成报表。 所有数据库（最简单的除外）中都有复杂的数据关系及其链接。处理与创建，访问以及维护数据库记录有关的复杂任务的系统软件包叫做数据库管理系统（DBMS）。DBMS软件包中的程序在数据库与其用户间建立接口。（这些用户可以是应用程序员，管理员及其他需要信息的人员和各种操作系统程序）。 DBMS可组织，处理和表示从数据库中选出的数据元。该功能使决策者能搜索，探查和查询数据库的内容，从而对在正规报告中没有的，不再出现的且无法预料的问题做出回答。这些问题最初可能是模糊的并且（或者）是定义不恰当的，但是人们可以浏览数据库直到获得所需的信息。简言之，DBMS将“管理”存储的数据项，并从公共数据库中汇集所需的数据项以回答非程序员的询问。 DBMS由3个主要部分组成：（1）存储子系统，用来存储和检索文件中的数据；（2）建模和操作子系统，提供组织数据以及添加，删除，维护，更新数据的方法；（3）用户和DBMS之间的接口。在提高数据库管理系统的价值和有效性方面正在展现以下一些重要发展趋势； 1.管理人员需要最新的信息以做出有效的决策。 2.客户需要越来越复杂的信息服务以及更多的有关其订单，发票和账号的当前信息。 3.用户发现他们可以使用传统的程序设计语言，在很短的一段时间内用数据1Database Management Systems( 3th Edition ),Wiley ,2004, 5-12
https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html,/finance/company/consumer.html Consumer finance company The consumer finance division of the SG group of France has become highly active within India. They plan to offer finance for vehicles and two-wheelers to consumers, aiming to provide close to Rs. 400 billion in India in the next few years of its operations. The SG group is also dealing in stock broking, asset management, investment banking, private banking, information technology and business processing. SG group has ventured into the rapidly growing consumer credit market in India, and have plans to construct a headquarters at Kolkata. The AIG Group has been approved by the RBI to set up a non-banking finance company (NBFC). AIG seeks to introduce its consumer finance and asset management businesses in India. AIG Capital India plans to emphasize credit cards, mortgage financing, consumer durable financing and personal loans. Leading Indian and international concerns like the HSBC, Deutsche Bank, Goldman Sachs, Barclays and HDFC Bank are also waiting to be approved by the Reserve Bank of India to initiate similar operations. AIG is presently involved in insurance and financial services in more than one hundred countries. The affiliates of the AIG Group also provide retirement and asset management services all over the world. Many international companies have been looking at NBFC business because of the growing consumer finance market. Unlike foreign banks, there are no strictures on branch openings for the NBFCs. GE Consumer Finance is a section of General Electric. It is responsible for looking after the retail finance operations. GE Consumer Finance also governs the GE Capital Asia. Outside the United States, GE Consumer Finance performs its operations under the GE Money brand. GE Consumer Finance currently offers financial services in more than fifty countries. The company deals in credit cards, personal finance, mortgages and automobile solutions. It has a client base of more than 118 million customers throughout the world
农业产业化外文翻译文献(文档含中英文对照即英文原文和中文翻译)
农业产业化：从农场到交易市场 Mark R. Edwards and Clifford. J. Shultz 摘要 农业产业化就是农业以市场需求为导向，有效的满足客户以及市场要求的一系列的链条。这种变革需要一个更广泛的概念化和更准确的定义，传达一个致力于创造价值和可持续利用食物，纤维，可再生资源的更有活力，系统性，综合性和纪律性的系统。我们讨论的力量，推动这一转移到市场，提供了新的和更具有代表性农业产业化的定义，提供模型以说明一些最引人注目的趋势，并阐明这些模型关键因素和影响。 关键词：农业产业化的定义，概念模型，市场为中心，市场体系
1 绪论 农业产业化在1955年开始作为一个独特的研究领域，当时约翰.戴维斯将它定义为：农业产业化是以农场生产为中心，然后商品化。这个定义当时是最适当的，那是农业行动的重点是最大限度地生产食物和纤维。戴维斯和高德博格用新鲜的见解，将农业产业化定义为:制造和分销农场用品：在该农场生产经营、储存、加工、分销所有的农产品的商品和物品所涉及的所有业务的总和。类似的定义也有其他的人提出，如唐尼和埃里克森：农业产业化，包括所有这些业务和管理活动由公司提供投入到农业部门，生产农产品，运输，金融，处理农产品的全部过程。 这些传统的定义，随着时间的推移，对农场或生产的单位所反映农业产业化的焦点，如农业交易中心已数十年之久。今天，一个就业散点图显示，虽然超过百分之三十的就业机会农业产业化提供的，少于百分之一的人直接参与农场生产。农业产业化已不再是以农场为中心。二十一世纪农业产业化包含了更广泛的一系列行动，主要是外围行动，包括以市场为导向的可持续利用食物，纤维，和可再生资源。
文献信息： 文献标题：Challenges and opportunities affecting the future of human resource management（影响人力资源管理未来的挑战和机遇） 国外作者：Dianna L. Stone，Diana L. Deadrick 文献出处：《Human Resource Management Review》, 2015, 25(2):139-145 字数统计：英文3725单词，21193字符；中文6933汉字 外文文献： Challenges and opportunities affecting the future of human resource management Abstract Today, the field of Human Resource Management (HR) is experiencing numerous pressures for change. Shifts in the economy, globalization, domestic diversity, and technology have created new demands for organizations, and propelled the field in some completely new directions. However, we believe that these challenges also create numerous opportunities for HR and organizations as a whole. Thus, the primary purposes of this article are to examine some of the challenges and opportunities that should influence the future of HR. We also consider implications for future research and practice in the field. Keywords: Future of human resource management, Globalization, Knowledge economy Diversity, Technology 1.Change from a manufacturing to a service or knowledge economy One of the major challenges influencing the future of HR processes is the change from a manufacturing to a service or knowledgebased economy. This new economy is characterized by a decline in manufacturing and a growth in service or knowledge as the core of the economic base. A service economy can be defined as a system based on buying and selling of services or providing something for others (Oxford
中等分辨率制备分离的 快速色谱技术 W. Clark Still,* Michael K a h n , and Abhijit Mitra Departm(7nt o/ Chemistry, Columbia Uniuersity,1Veu York, Neu; York 10027 ReceiLied January 26, 1978 我们希望找到一种简单的吸附色谱技术用于有机化合物的常规净化。这种技术是适于传统的有机物大规模制备分离，该技术需使用长柱色谱法。尽管这种技术得到的效果非常好，但是其需要消耗大量的时间，并且由于频带拖尾经常出现低复原率。当分离的样本剂量大于1或者2g时，这些问题显得更加突出。近年来，几种制备系统已经进行了改进，能将分离时间减少到1-3h，并允许各成分的分辨率ΔR f≥（使用薄层色谱分析进行分析）。在这些方法中，在我们的实验室中，媒介压力色谱法1和短柱色谱法2是最成功的。最近，我们发现一种可以将分离速度大幅度提升的技术，可用于反应产物的常规提纯，我们将这种技术称为急骤色谱法。虽然这种技术的分辨率只是中等（ΔR f≥），而且构建这个系统花费非常低，并且能在10-15min内分离重量在的样本。4 急骤色谱法是以空气压力驱动的混合介质压力以及短柱色谱法为基础，专门针对快速分离，介质压力以及短柱色谱已经进行了优化。优化实验是在一组标准条件5下进行的，优化实验使用苯甲醇作为样本，放在一个20mm*5in.的硅胶柱60内，使用Tracor 970紫外检测器监测圆柱的输出。分辨率通过持续时间（r）和峰宽（w,w/2）的比率进行测定的（Figure 1），结果如图2-4所示，图2-4分别放映分辨率随着硅胶颗粒大小、洗脱液流速和样本大小的变化。
管理信息系统外文翻译-标准化文件发布号：（9456-EUATWK-MWUB-WUNN-INNUL-DDQTY-KII
英文文献翻译 二〇年月日
科技文章摘译 Definition of a Management Information System There is no consensus of the definition of the term "management information system". Some writers prefer alternative terminology such as "information processing system", "information and decision system", "organizational information system", or simply "information system" to refer to the computer-based information processing system which supports the operations, management, and decision-making functions of an organization. This text uses “MIS” because it is descriptive and generally understood; it also frequently uses “information system” instead of “MIS” to refer to an organizational information system. A definition of a management information system, as the term is generally understood, is an integrated, user-machine system for providing information to support operations, management, and decision-making functions in an organization. The system utilizes computer hardware and software; manual procedures; models for analysis planning, control and decision making; and a database. The fact that it is an integrated system does not mean that it is a single, monolithic structure; rather, it means that the parts fit into an overall design. The elements of the definition are highlighted below. 1 Computer-based user-machine system Conceptually, management information can exist without computer, but it is the power of the computer which makes MIS feasible. The question is not whether computers should be used in management information system, but the extent to which information use should be computerized. The concept of a user-machine system implies that some tasks are best performed by humans, while others are best done by machine. The user of an MIS is any person responsible for entering input data, instructing the system, or utilizing the information output of the system. For many problems, the user and the computer form a combined system with results obtained through a set of interactions between the computer and the user. User-machine interaction is facilitated by operation in which the user’s input-output device (usually a visual display terminal) is connected to the computer. The computer can be a personal computer serving only one user or a large computer that
外文翻译 原文 Title:Agricultural Industrialization Organization of Marketing Strategy Analysis Material source:2010 International Conference on Industry Engineering and Management Author:Zhao Yanhong, Ren Aihua Abstraet:Agricultural industrialization is the development direction of world agriculture, it is also the main form of the agricultural operation in developed countries. Vigorously develop the industrialization of agriculture is to enhance the competitiveness of China’s agricultu re is an effective means of marketing innovation in agriculture. It is related to the industrialization of agriculture an important factor in business success. In this paper, product, place, promotion, three organizations, the face of the industrialization of agriculture marketing innovation of the corresponding development proposals. Keywords:Product;Channel Innovation;Promotion 1 Introduction Although China has already established a number of agricultural industrialization organization, but very few successful cases, reason, the product can not sell that influence their development, an important factor. At present the industrialization of agriculture organizations in product development, sales channels and marketing methods. There are many ways to solve urgent problems, we can say, marketing has become a bottleneck restricting development of the organization. In this Paper, the development of marketing concept, mainly based on the content of the theory of 4P, from development to meet consumer demand for products. Innovation in the channel, flexible use of marketing mix and so the organization seeking to promote the industrialization of agriculture marketing of innovative measures. 2 Development of Products to Meet Consumer Demand 4C theory holds that companies should give top priority to the pursuit of customer satisfaction, then theagricultural industry of the organization must first develop a customer satisfaction products. Marketing believes that demand for the
XXX学院 毕业设计(论文)外文资料翻译 学院：计算机与软件工程学院 专业：计算机科学技术(软件工程方向) 姓名： 学号： 外文出处：GoyKakus.THE RESEARCH OFCUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP MANAGEMENT STRATEGY [J]. International Journal of Management Research & Review, 2017, 1(9): 624-635. 附件： 1.外文资料翻译译文；2.外文原文。 注：请将该封面与附件装订成册。
附件1：外文资料翻译译文 客户关系管理战略研究 Goy Kakus 摘要 客户关系管理解决方案，通过为你提供客户业务数据来帮助你提供客户想要的服务或产品,提供更好的客户服务、交叉销售和更有效的销售,达成交易,保留现有客户并更好地理解你的客户是谁。本文探讨了客户关系管理模型在获得、保持与发展策略方面的优势。然而,我们对其定义和意义还存在一些困惑。本文通过考察关系营销和其他学科方面的相关文献，解释了客户关系管理的概念基础,从而对客户关系管理的知识作出了贡献。 关键词:客户关系管理模型, 客户关系管理的博弈改变者与关键策略 引言 CRM 是客户关系管理的简称。它的特征在于公司与客户的沟通,无论是销售还是服务相关的。客户关系管理这一术语经常用来解释企业客户关系,客户关系管理系统也以同样的方式被用来处理商业联系, 赢得客户,达成合同和赢得销售。 客户关系管理通常被考虑作为一个业务策略，从而使企业能够: *了解客户 *通过更好的客户体验留住客户 *吸引新客户 *赢得新客户和达成合同 *提高盈利 *减少客户管理成本 *通过服务台等工具软件,电子邮件组织者和不同类型的企业应用程序，企业业务经常寻求个性化的在线体验。 设计精良的客户关系管理包括以下特征: 1．客户关系管理是一种以顾客为中心并以客户投入为基础的服务响应，一对一的解决客户的必需品, 买家和卖家服务中心直接在线互动,帮助客户解决他
毕业设计说明书 英文文献及中文翻译 学院：专 2011年6月 电子与计算机科学技术软件工程
https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Overview https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, is a unified Web development model that includes the services necessary for you to build enterprise-class Web applications with a minimum of https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, is part of https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Framework,and when coding https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, applications you have access to classes in https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Framework.You can code your applications in any language compatible with the common language runtime(CLR), including Microsoft Visual Basic and C#.These languages enable you to develop https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, applications that benefit from the common language runtime,type safety, inheritance,and so on. If you want to try https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html,,you can install Visual Web Developer Express using the Microsoft Web Platform Installer,which is a free tool that makes it simple to download,install,and service components of the Microsoft Web Platform.These components include Visual Web Developer Express,Internet Information Services (IIS),SQL Server Express,and https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Framework.All of these are tools that you use to create https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Web applications.You can also use the Microsoft Web Platform Installer to install open-source https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, and PHP Web applications. Visual Web Developer Visual Web Developer is a full-featured development environment for creating https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Web applications.Visual Web Developer provides an ideal environment in which to build Web sites and then publish them to a hosting https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html,ing the development tools in Visual Web Developer,you can develop https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Web pages on your own computer.Visual Web Developer includes a local Web server that provides all the features you need to test and debug https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Web pages,without requiring Internet Information Services(IIS)to be installed. Visual Web Developer provides an ideal environment in which to build Web sites and then publish them to a hosting https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html,ing the development tools in Visual Web Developer,you can develop https://www.doczj.com/doc/308412489.html, Web pages on your own computer.
外文文献及其翻译电子政务信息 1.政府信息化的含义？ 政府信息化是指：政府有效利用现代信息和通信技术，通过不同的信息服务设施，对政府的业务流程、组织结构、人员素质等诸方面进行优化、改造的过程。 2.广义和狭义的电子政务的定义？ 广义的电子政务是指：运用信息技术和通信技术实现党委、人大、政协、政府、司法机关、军队系统和企事业单位的行政管理活动。（电子党务、电子人大、电子政协） 狭义的电子政务是指：政府在其管理和服务职能中运用现代信息和通信技术，实现政府组织结构和工作流程的重组优化，超越时间、空间和部门分隔的制约，全方位的向社会提供优质规范、透明的服务，是政府管理手段的变革。 3.电子政务的组成部分？ ①：政府部门内部办公职能的电子化和网络化； ②：政府职能部门之间通过计算机网络实现有权限的实时互通的信息共享； ③：政府部门通过网络与公众和企业间开展双向的信息交流与策； 4．理解电子政务的发展动力？ ①：信息技术的快速发展； ②：政府自身改革与发展的需要； ③：信息化、民主化的社会需求的推动； 5.电子政务的应用模式？
模式有：1.政府对公务员的电子政务（G2E）； 2.政府间的电子政务（G2G）； 3.政府对企业的电子政务（G2B）； 4.政府对公众的电子政务（G2C）； 6.电子政务的功能？ ①：提高工作效率，降低办公成本； ②：加快部门整合，堵塞监管漏洞； ③：提高服务水平，便于公众的监督； ④：带动社会信息化发展； 7.我国电子政务发展存在的主要问题？ ①：政府公务员与社会公众对电子政务的认识不足； ②：电子政务发展缺乏整体规划和统一性标准； ③：电子政务管理体制改革远未到位； ④：电子政务整体应用水平还较低； ⑤：政府公务员的素质有待提高； ⑥：电子政务立法滞后； ⑦：对电子政务安全问题缺乏正确认识； 8.政府创新的含义和内容？ 含义：是指各级政府为适应公共管理与行政环境的需要，与时俱进的转变观念与职能，探索新的行政方法与途径，形成新的组织结
Dashboard From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This article is about a control panel placed in the front of the car. For other uses, see Dashboard (disambiguation). The dashboard of a Bentley Continental GTC car A dashboard (also called dash, instrument panel (IP), or fascia) is a control panel located directly ahead of a vehicle's driver, displaying instrumentation and controls for the vehicle's operation. Contents 1.Etymology 2.Dashboard features 3.Padding and safety 4.Fashion in instrumentation 5.See also 6.References Etymology Horse-drawn carriage dashboard Originally, the word dashboard applied to a barrier of wood or leather fixed at the front of a horse-drawn carriage or sleigh to protect the driver from mud or other debris "dashed up" (thrown up) by the horses' hooves.[1] Commonly these boards did not perform any additional function other than providing a convenient handhold for ascending into the driver's seat, or a small clip with which to secure the reins when not in use. When the first "horseless carriages" were constructed in the late 19th century, with engines mounted beneath the driver such as the Daimler Stahlradwagen, the simple dashboard was retained to protect occupants from debris thrown up by the cars' front wheels. However, as car design evolved to position the motor in front of the driver, the dashboard became a panel that protected vehicle occupants from the heat and oil of the engine. With gradually increasing mechanical complexity, this panel formed a convenient location for the placement of gauges and minor controls, and from this evolved the modern instrument panel,
美国农业合作社与农业产业化外文文献翻译中英文最新 （节选重点翻译） 英文 Managing uncertainty and expectations: The strategic response of U.S. agricultural cooperatives to agricultural industrialization Julie Hogeland Abstract The 20th century industrialization of agriculture confronted U.S. agricultural cooperatives with responding to an event they neither initiated nor drove. Agrarian-influenced cooperatives used two metaphors, “serfdom” and “cooperatives are like a family” to manage uncertainty and influence producer expectations by predicting industrialization's eventual outcome and cooperatives’ producer driven compensation. The serfdom metaphor alluded to industrialization's potential to either bypass family farmers, the cornerstone of the economy according to agrarian ideology, or to transform them into the equivalent of piece-wage labor as contract growers. The “family” metaphor reflects how cooperatives personalized the connection between cooperative and farmer-member to position themselves as the exact opposite of serfdom. Hypotheses advanced by Roessl (2005) and Goel (2013) suggest that intrinsic characteristics of family businesses such as a resistance to change and operating according to a myth of unlimited choice and