BXB47.—个项目团队成功实现了一个关键里程碑。为此，团队满足了一个新工艺的关键技术需求，然后使用该工艺开发了几个类似可交付成果的第一个。项目经理下一步应该怎么做？___

BXB48.项目经理与一个由15人组成的团队召开会议，会议不断发生中断，会议目标几乎没有完成。若要解决这个问题，项目经理应该利用以下哪一项？___

BXB49.项目经理识别到一个基于项目例外事项报告的项目基准主要偏差，项目经理下一步应该怎么做？___

BXB50.项目经理识别到本地和虚拟团队成员之间的进度优先级存在冲突，项目经理安排了一次电话会议来管理这个冲突。项目经理使用的是哪种冲突解决技巧?___

BXB51.项目经理担心团队成员会花费大多的时间去帮助最近委托的一个项目组件的运营和维护人员，项目经理应该查阅哪一份文件来确认该组件是否已签署并转让所有权？___

BXB52.项目经理确信承包商正在请求项目范围之外的工作。项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB53.项目经理正在制定一份高层级的成本估算，以便纳入项目章程。由于项目经理以前完成过类似的项目，应该使用哪一项成本估算技术？___

BXB54.项目经理正在制定相关方参与计划，并识别到一位权力等级较高但在项目中兴趣较低的相关方，项目经理应该如何对待该相关方？___

BXB55.项目经理正在实施一个预算紧张的项目。为确保项目成功，项目经理在制定项目章程时应使用什么?___

BXB56.项目经理新加入一家公司，之前没有管理过具有国际团队成员的项目。项目经理应该如何培养文化敏感性？___

BXB57.项目经理已经准备好结束一个项目，项目经理下一步应该怎么做？___

BXB58.项目经理正在管理一个全球性项目，该项目的资源位于不同地区。若要使用正确的渠道来处理正确的信息，项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB59.项目经理正在执行一个新的项目，以解决之前完成的一个项目中的差距。项目经理首先应该做什么？___

BXB60.项目经理正在开展与IT系统开发相关的项目。负责安装服务器的一位团队成员询问项目经理是否可以订购具有比原计划更快处理的服务器。这款服务器来自同一制造商，成本大致相同。主题专家(SME)分析并确定已遵循纠正措施和变更管理程序。项目经理下一步应该怎么做？___

BXB61.项目经理加入一个备受瞩目的项目，该项目将为公司带来重大效益，项目发起人告诉项目经理，一些关键相关方不赞同项目的效益，并且可能抵制该项目的工作。项目经理该怎么做？___

BXB62.项目经理加入一个新的价值数百万美元的项目，要求成功实施来自个部门的可交付成果。若要成功实施该项目，项目经理首先应该怎么做？___

BXB63.项目经理作为项目团队的一位替代项目经理人选加入一个项目。在最初的会议中，项目经理发现关于如何解决技术决策存在不同的意见。团队成员不尊重彼此的意见，这种环境起到反效果。该团队处于团队建设的哪个阶段？___

BXB64.项目经理加入一个刚刚开始的项目，项目发起人和项目团队向新项目经理保证有足够的预算和符合实际的进度计划，项目经理担心可能威胁到项目成功的意外事件。项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB65.项目经理加入一个己经在进行当中的项目。质量审计报告显示，由一个供应商提供的一些材料在材料检查员没有出具批准文件的情况下，获得付款批准。项目经理得知检查员口头表达了批准意见，然后再提供批准文件。哪一份计划可以帮助项目经理评估这种批准方式是否符合项目管理计划？___

BXB66.项目经理加入一个设计阶段接近完成的项目。虽然客户已经批准所有设计图纸，但项目经理发现包含在最终设计中的多项客户变更，这些变更尚未经过审核和批准。项目经理下一步应该怎么做？___

BXB67.—个项目的本效指数(CPI)为1.2 ,且关健路径上的一个可交付成果落后于进度。 如果项目经理将项目拉回正轨，项目会发生什么情况？___

BXB68.项目经理与项目团队开会收集需求。团队成员向项目经理询问相关方是否熟悉项目的假设条件，制约因素和可交付成果。哪一份文件将概述这些信息？___

BXB69.由于项目资源的专业水平不同，项目经理注意到进度计划绩效问题，一些经验丰富的资源会检查不必要的细节,而一些初级资源则需要很长时间才能完成任务。项目经理应该怎么做来增强团队缋效？___

BXB70.项目经理从第三方供应商处收到通知说，分配给客户所在地的现场资源在接下来的两周内将不可用。项目经理应该更新哪一份文件？___

BXB71.因为一些团队成员不合作，一个拥有多元化团队的项目经理需要处理冲突，项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB72.项目发起人对项目进行审查并对一些项目风险提出质疑，项目发起人要求项目经理分析这些风险对项目总体目标的影响。项目经理应该执行下列哪一项？___

BXB73.某位项目相关方要求对已批准的产品设计进行变更，程序员仅需少量工作就可进行这项变更。但是存在一个风险，即另一位相关方将不同意这项变更。项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB74.项目团队包括组织内各部门的职能经理，该项目落后于进度计划，因为职能经理将他们的日常责任优先于项目责任。项目经理应该使用下列哪一项来管理团队？___

BXB75.一位项目团队成员就不准确的关键验收标准向其他成员提出质疑，指出不准确性可能会降低关键可交付成果的质量。项目经理应该在哪份文件记录这个问题？___

BXB76.到目前为止本该完成百分之八十的一个项目只完成了百分之七十五，项目总预算为100,000美元，己完成工作实际成本(ACWP)为72,000美元。根据这些信息可以确定什么？___

BXB77.项目的混凝土供应商通知项目经理，材料将比预定时间晚三个星期交付。项目经理更新了进度计划并通知项目团队。在这种情况下，哪种合同类型承担的风险最小？___

BXB78.一位资源的职能经理请求关于一个延迟项目的机密信息。由于职能经理没有适当的授权级别,该资源需要项目经理的许可才能共享信息。项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB79.一个风险在项目现场变成现实，这个风险记录在风险登记册中，调查团队得出结论，如果进行了适当的风险管理，本可以预防这个风险。若要避免这个问题，项目经理应该事先做什么？___

BXB80.一个专业的项目团队正在管理一个大型项目。上个月，工程顾问提交了最初的设计计划给客户审查，项目经理得知该设计因未能满足客户需求而被拒绝。若要确保更有利的结果，项目经理应该事先做什么？___

BXB81.项目合同规定了专业资源。在审查项目范围时，项目经理和承包商确定采购小组应选择工料合同(T&M),而不是固定总价(FFP)合同。项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB82.一个相关方认为最近一个项目的可交付成果没有实现，若要获得该相关方的批准，项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB83.一位相关方要求更频繁，更详细地更新项目状态。该相关方也表示有兴趣协助该项目。项目经理下一步该怎么做？___

BXB84.一名指导委员会成员提交了一项新请求，这项请求似乎没有得到充分考虑，可能会对项目产生负面影响。项目经理下一步应该怎么做？___

BXB85.团队利用最新技术完成了新产品的原型。在测试期间，产品不符合性能规格。项目经理应该怎么做？___

BXB86.一个国际项目的团队由来自不同的背景，年龄和兴趣的个人组成。项目一开始后就发现他们在齐心协力一起合作。项目经理如何才能促进更好的团队合作？___

“任何个别（无论怎样）都是一般”。这句话的正确含义是___

在唯物辩证法看来，水果同苹果、梨、香蕉、桔子等的关系是___

“是就是是，不是就是不是，除此之外都是鬼话。”这是一种___

真象和假象的区别在于___

有的哲学家说，在大风扬起的尘土中，每一粒尘土的运动状况都是纯粹必然的。这是种___

“或然率”是指___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author think of the 2015 report by the Census Bureau?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What does the author say about the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What do Jones and Klenow think of the comparison between France and the U.S. in terms of real consumption per person?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What is an advantage of the Jones-Klenow method?___

Economically speaking, are we better off than we were ten years ago? Twenty years ago? In their thirst for evidence on this issue, commentators seized on the recent report by the Census Bureau, which found that average household income rose by 5.2% in 2015. Unfortunately, that conclusion puts too much weight on a useful, but flawed and incomplete, statistic. Among the more significant problems with the Census’s measure are that: 1) it excludes taxes, transfers, and compensation like employer-provided health insurance; and 2) it is based on surveys rather than data. Even if precisely measured, income data exclude important determinants of economic well-being, such as the hours of work needed to earn that income. While thinking about the question, we came across a recently published article by Charles Jones and Peter Klenow, which proposes an interesting new measure of economic welfare. While by no means perfect, it is considerably more comprehensive than average income, taking into account not only growth in consumption per person but also changes in working time, life expectancy, and inequality. Moreover, it can be used to assess economic performance both across countries and over time. The Jones-Klenow method can be illustrated by a cross-country example. Suppose we want to compare the economic welfare of citizens of the U.S. and France in 2005. In 2005, as the authors observe, real consumption per person in France was only 60% as high as the U.S., making it appear that Americans were economically much better off than the French on average. However, that comparison omits other relevant factors: leisure time, life expectancy, and economic inequality. The French take longer vacations and retire earlier, so typically work fewer hours; they enjoy a higher life expectancy, presumably reflecting advantages with respect to health care, diet, lifestyle, and the like; and income and consumption are somewhat more equally distributed there than in the U.S. Because of these differences, comparing France’s consumption with the U.S.’s overstates the gap in economic welfare. Similar calculations can be used to compare the U.S. and other countries. For example, this calculation puts economic welfare in the United Kingdom at 97% of U.S. levels, but estimates Mexican well-being at 22%. The Jones-Klenow measure can also assess an economy’s performance over time. According to this measure, as of the early-to-mid-2000s, the U.S. had the highest economic welfare of any large country. Since 2007, economic welfare in the U.S. has continued to improve. However, the pace of improvement has slowed markedly. Methodologically, the lesson from the Jones-Klenow research is that economic welfare is multi-dimensional. Their approach is flexible enough that in principle other important quality-of-life changes could be incorporated—for example, decreases in total emissions of pollutants and declines in crime rates. What can we infer from the passage about American people’s economic well-being?___

大学生的成才目标是___。

现代人才素质的灵魂是___。

___是人才素质的基础.

世界政治格局发展的必然趋势是___。

在全面发展的教育中德、智、体、美是缺一不可，统一存在的，其中处于主导地位的是___。

时代精神的内涵十分丰富，其中___居于核心地位。

民族精神是一个民族赖以生存和发展的精神支撑。中华民族在五千年的发展中所形成的伟大民族精神的核心是___。

下列名言反映中华民族是一个艰苦奋斗的民族的有___。

___是人才素质的基本内容

10。___是我们立党立国的根本指导思想

衡量大学生全面发展的一个重要标准是___

独立生活意识指___

___作为社会主义核心价值体系的精髓，解决的是应当具备什么样的精神状态和精神风貌的问题。

___是人才素质的综合体现.

人们对生活在其中的世界及人与世界的关系的总的看法和根本观点就是___

人生观的核心是___

人的本质属性是___

社会主义社会人生价值标准是___

回答人为什么活着___

表明人应当怎样对待生活___

判别什么样的人生才有意义___

下列人生态度中正确的是___

下列属于正确的人生目的的是___

___认为,金钱可以主宰一切.

___ 认为，社会和他人是达到个人目的的手段。

___认为，人生的全部内容就在于满足感官的需求与快乐。

马克思对于人的本质的论断确立与___

人与自然关系的实质是___

在社会交往和公共生活中公民应该遵守的道德准则是___