Question

跪求英译汉高手！急用！拒绝在线翻译！

Additionally, stakeholder management theory suggests that top executives behave in either instrumental or normative ways in organizing the firm (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). The distinction between instrumental and normative values can best be described in terms of economic choice and moral responsibility.2 Under the instrumental perspective, CEOs are concerned with the achievement of corporate objectives, and in doing so may pursue socially desirable activities, such as managing diversity, to achieve market place success.
On the other hand, the normative perspective is concerned with the identification of moral or philosophical guidelines for the operation and management of firms (Donaldson & Preston, 1995). CEOs recognize the importance of corporate social responsibility, are committed to non-financial causes, and may simply doing what is right even in situations where this runs counter to corporate objectives (e.g., such as，providing employment) (Singer, 1994). Research has shown that issues of diversity have frequently been linked to ethical issues and stakeholder management (e.g., Berman, Wicks, Kotha, & Jones, 1999; Burns & Schapper, 2007; Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Hillman & Keim, 2001; Wiegand, 2007). In sum, the normative perspective essentially argues that diversity initiatives are not focused on the business case or achieving corporate objectives, but instead because it is “the right thing to do.”
5.3. Affective commitment
A third motivation behind top executive motivation for managing diversity has to do with personal identification and “patriotism of benevolence.” This concept is borrowed from public service motivation literature (Perry &Wise, 1990), which states that individuals may be motivated to public service because of a genuine conviction about its social importance. Frederickson and Hart suggest that “patriotism of benevolence” represents a moral position but it is also an emotional state (cf. Perry &Wise, 1990).Under the identification approach, an individual becomes committed for its own sake rather than for instrumental reasons (Wiener, 1982). Consequently, top executives may be devoted to issues of diversity because of personal identification or have a desire to be associated with and become involved because of personal convictions.

Answer 1

Additionally, stakeholder management theory suggests that top executives behave in either instrumental or normative ways in organizing the firm (Donaldson & Preston, 1995).
此外,利益相关者管理理论表明,高管的行为规范的方法或手段或组织公司(唐纳森和普雷斯顿,1995)。

The distinction between instrumental and normative values can best be described in terms of economic choice and moral responsibility.
仪器和规范的区别的特征值可以从经济的选择和道德上的责任。

2 Under the instrumental perspective, CEOs are concerned with the achievement of corporate objectives, and in doing so may pursue socially desirable activities, such as managing diversity, to achieve market place success.
2在仪器的角度来看,ceo们所关心的公司目标,取得的成就,并在这样做可能追求社会所期望的活动,如管理多样性,实现市场地方成功。

On the other hand, the normative perspective is concerned with the identification of moral or philosophical guidelines for the operation and management of firms (Donaldson & Preston, 1995).
另一方面,规范的视角关注的是道德的识别和哲学指南的运营和管理公司(唐纳森和普雷斯顿,1995)。

CEOs recognize the importance of corporate social responsibility, are committed to non-financial causes, and may simply doing what is right even in situations where this runs counter to corporate objectives (e.g., such as，providing employment) (Singer, 1994).
首席执行官承认企业社会责任的重要性,致力于非金融原因,可能做什么是正确的甚至在这种情况下,这违反公司目标(例如,例如,提供就业)(歌手,1994)。

Research has shown that issues of diversity have frequently been linked to ethical issues and stakeholder management (e.g., Berman, Wicks, Kotha, & Jones, 1999; Burns & Schapper, 2007; Donaldson & Preston, 1995; Hillman & Keim, 2001; Wiegand, 2007).
研究表明,经常成为问题的多样性与伦理问题和利益相关者管理(如>,收录Kotha威克斯、和琼斯,1999分;烧伤和Schapper唐纳森和普雷斯顿,2007分;,1995分;耳曼和Keim,2001分;Wiegand,2007)。

In sum, the normative perspective essentially argues that diversity initiatives are not focused on the business case or achieving corporate objectives, but instead because it is “the right thing to do.”
总之,这个规范的观点认为多样性自主本质上没有集中在企业案例,或实现企业的发展目标,而是因为它是“正确的事情要做。”

5.3.
5.3。

Affective commitment
归属感

A third motivation behind top executive motivation for managing diversity has to do with personal identification and “patriotism of benevolence.
三分之一的动机背后的动力高级管理人员管理多样化与个人身份和“爱国主义的善举。

” This concept is borrowed from public service motivation literature (Perry &Wise, 1990), which states that individuals may be motivated to public service because of a genuine conviction about its social importance.
“这个概念是借用了公共服务的动机文学(佩里&Wise,1990),它表明个体可能激发公众服务,因为真正的信仰是其社会的重要性。

Frederickson and Hart suggest that “patriotism of benevolence” represents a moral position but it is also an emotional state (cf. Perry &Wise, 1990).
Frederickson和Hart,建议将“爱国主义的仁”代表了一种道德立场也是一种情绪状态(cf。佩里&Wise,1990)。

Under the identification approach, an individual becomes committed for its own sake rather than for instrumental reasons (Wiener, 1982).
在识别的方法,一个人变成了承诺本身而不是仪器原因(维纳,1982)。

Consequently, top executives may be devoted to issues of diversity because of personal identification or have a desire to be associated with and become involved because of personal convictions.
因此,高层的问题可能是致力于多样性由于个人的识别或有一个愿意联系和参与由于个人的信念。