题目内容：

    In their book, Nine Lies About Work, Buckingham and Goodall make a surprising claim: they argue that giving people feedback (反馈)－in the sense of telling them what you think they're doing right or wrong, and how to do it better-is never worthwhile. This runs counter to a current corporate trend for "radical candour", for example at Netflix where, according to recent reports, employees' failings are cruelly "sunshined" in front of others. When someone is fired, hundreds of their former colleagues might receive an email, cataloguing their flaws (缺陷). But it also contradicts an assumption most of us bring to our lives as parents and friends-that it's helpful, at least sometimes, and providing you do it nicely, to explain to people where they're making mistakes.

Buckingham and Goodall don't just claim you should keep that knowledge to yourself: they claim that you don't possess it, and that, in fact, you probably don't know how a failing employee could most effectively change. It's an old cliche (陈词滥调) of marital advice that you should use "I-statements"rather than" you-statements", telling the other person how their behaviour makes you feel, rather than attacking them for being selfish and incompetent. The standard theory is that you-statements cause people to respond defensively. But another is that you're a terrible judge of whether someone is selfish or incompetent. As Buckingham writes: "The only area in which humans are an unimpeachable (无懈可击的) source of truth is that of their own feelings and experiences."

Plenty of research shows we're particularly bad at rating people against abstract criteria, which means one common feature of workplace performance reviews- assessing whether an employee is, say, a strategic thinker or team player-is essentially pointless.We should replace this sort of judgment with "reactions". Don't tell others what you think of their skills, or how good you think they are; instead, focus on describing your experience of their work. You're no good at judging how someone else should change their approach to delivering presentations. But you're the authority on whether a given presentation was persuasive or boring to you.

And positive reactions, they show, work better than negative ones: we excel "when people who know us and care about us tell us what they experience and what they feel, and in particular when they see something within us that really works". There's a deep point here- that the best kind of praise focuses on how someone made you feel, not on evaluating their talent. Praise them for inspiring you, persuading you, or helping you grasp a complex issue. You really are the only objective judge of that.

1.The underlined word"it"in Paragraph 1 refers to"_______”.

A.giving people feedback

B.cataloguing colleagues' flaws

C.contradicting parents’ assumption

D.keeping that knowledge to yourself

2.Feedback is never worthwhile in that_________.

A.people tend to defend it

B.it is based on theory and truth

C.it is subjective and lacks uniqueness

D.people will effectively change themselves

3.Which of the following is the most appropriate to comment on others?

A."You have done a good job in the mid-term exams."

B."I am inspired by the creative ideas in your presentation.

C."You just think of yourself,but never care about others."

D."I'm sorry to say you have failed to meet my expectations."