STAR原则是Situation, Task, Action, and Result的缩写。大家每做一份工作时都应该问自己如下四个问题,并加以回答。如果你能做到,恭喜你,只需把四个问题的答案合在一起就是你PS中一条很重要的单元。
1. What was the Situation you faced?
“In my previous role at the bank we had a client with a significant discrepancy on their monthly statement. Previous attempts to resolve the issue by other departments were unsuccessful.”
2. What was the Task to be accomplished?
“I was tasked with discovering and correcting the error.”
3. What Actions did you take?
“I performed an analysis on the statement.”
4. What Results did you achieve?
“Within 24 hours I provided an accurate, updated statement to the client.” 作者: banana@ 时间: 2015-5-17 09:25:28
John F. Nash Jr., a mathematician who shared a Nobel Prize in 1994 for work that greatly extended the reach and power of modern economic theory and whose decades-long descent into severe mental illness and eventual recovery were the subject of a book and a 2001 film, both titled “A Beautiful Mind,” was killed, along with his wife, in a car crash on Saturday in New Jersey.
If the very purpose of a corporation is to generate profits, and the obligation to adhere to safety expectations established by law cuts into those profits, then to expect corporations to embrace such practices beyond what is required is to presume that they willingly engage in an inherently self- destructive process: the unnecessary lowering of profits.
这个句子很长,一共有56个单词,而且意思的表达相对拗口。现在我来一分为二。
Adherence to safety regulations cuts into profits, which are the very purpose of any company. Therefore, expecting corporations to embrace such practices beyond what is required is to presume that they willingly engage in an inherently self-destructive process: the unnecessary lowering of profits.
Some people expect corporations to implement safety measures stricter than legal requirement. But it would amount to presuming that they willingly engage in an inherently self-destructive process: the unnecessary lowering of profits. This is because adherence to safety regulations cuts into profits, which are the very purpose of any company.
虽然原来的一个句子已经一分为三,但是读起来还是让人不舒服。问题在于它的表述方法不够清晰。比如they willingly engage in an inherently self-destructive process. 这个意思就很模糊。而让文书更易读的第三个秘诀,也最重要的一个秘诀是提炼你的表达,让你的意思更加清楚。这个inherently self-destructive process,说的很吓人,但是仔细一想是经不起推敲的。因为不可能是利润降了,这个企业就立马垮台了。所以更简单也是更贴切的表达方法是defeat their own purpose (违背办企业的初衷)。另外原句另一个地方embrace such practices beyond what is required,也可以解释得更清楚一些,改为implement safety measures stricter than legal requirement。这样一来最后的改动是下面这样。
Some people expect corporations to implement safety measures stricter than legal requirement. But it would amount to asking them to voluntarily defeat their very purpose, the profitability. This is because adherence to safety regulations often undermines profits by driving up the cost.