這種文章的風(fēng)格不屬于論文范疇，沒(méi)有字號(hào)，字體，字間距，行距，排版之類的要求。除了引用，文獻(xiàn)綜述，文獻(xiàn)列表需要遵循哈佛文獻(xiàn)格式外，沒(méi)有格外的硬性要求。不過(guò)，有幾個(gè)地方可以注意一下，修改這些地方可以得到更加整潔的文章。

A cover page這種文章的排版，一般而言，第一頁(yè)是封面，報(bào)告的title，學(xué)號(hào)，姓名，導(dǎo)師名稱，項(xiàng)目組組長(zhǎng)名稱，學(xué)科名稱，文章總字?jǐn)?shù)，提交日期都在這一頁(yè)。有些學(xué)校會(huì)要求在頁(yè)腳或者頁(yè)眉制作頁(yè)碼。

content page

一般而言，第二頁(yè)是目錄頁(yè)。我對(duì)于制作目錄啥的不太擅長(zhǎng)。目錄內(nèi)容和高中課本上、小人書中平常見(jiàn)到的實(shí)體書目錄是一樣的。一般包含大標(biāo)題、小標(biāo)題和頁(yè)碼

An introduction section

有些學(xué)校不要求非得在report里寫這個(gè)。沒(méi)要求可以不寫。不過(guò)寫了也不算違規(guī)。而且我個(gè)人認(rèn)為還是寫比較好。這部分要求準(zhǔn)確清晰的描述整篇文章所用到的研究?jī)?nèi)容，研究方向，研究方法，研究工具。充字?jǐn)?shù)的廢話不要在這部分里寫。很多老師都是從Introduction里了解學(xué)生到底寫了什么的，這部分要是寫的不清楚，會(huì)直接失去老師的好感。introduction是全文精華中的精華，會(huì)將文章的核心內(nèi)容直接反應(yīng)出來(lái)。想要寫出優(yōu)秀的introduction，可以多看幾篇英文論文，看多了自然會(huì)寫了。那些學(xué)術(shù)領(lǐng)域的大佬們都是寫introduction的高人。在這里放一個(gè)示例，注意看綠色的部分：

Change management has been defifined as ‘the process of continually renewing an organization’s direction, structure, and capabilities to serve the ever-changing needs of external and internal customers’ (Moran and Brightman, 2001: 111). According to Burnes (2004) change is an ever-present feature of organisational life, both at an operational and strategic level. Therefore, there should be no doubt regarding the importance to any organisation of its ability to identify where it needs to be in the future, and how to manage the changes required getting there. Consequently, organisational change cannot be separated from organisational strategy, or vice versa (Burnes, 2004; Rieley and Clarkson, 2001). Due to the importance of organisational change, its management is becoming a highly required managerial skill (Senior, 2002). Graetz (2000: 550) goes as far as suggesting ‘Against a backdrop of increasing globalisation,deregulation, the rapid pace of technological innovation, a growing knowledge workforce, and shifting social and demographic trends, few would dispute that the primary task for management today is the leadership of organisational change.’?

Since the need for change often is unpredictable, it tends to be reactive, discontinuous, ad hoc and often triggered by a situation of organisational crisis (Burnes, 2004; De Wit and Meyer, 2005; Luecke, 2003; Nelson, 2003). Although the successful management of change is accepted as a necessity in order to survive and succeed in today’s highly competitive and continuously evolving environment (Luecke, 2003; Okumus and Hemmington, 1998), Balogun and Hope Hailey (2004) report a failure rate of around 70 per cent of all change programmes initiated. It may be suggested that this poor success rate indicates a fundamental lack of a valid framework of how to implement and manage organisational change as what is currently available to academics and practitioners is a wide range of contradictory and confusing theories and approaches (Burnes, 2004). Guimaraes and Armstrong (1998) argue that mostly personal and superfificial analyses have been published in the area of change management, and according to Doyle (2002) there is even evidence to suggest that with only a few exceptions existing practice and theory are mostly supported by unchallenged assumptions about the nature of contemporary organisational change management. Edmonstone (1995: 16) supports this observation when stating ‘many of the change processes over the last 25 years have been subject to fundamental flflaws, preventing the successful management of change’.

Even though it is diffificult to identify any consensus regarding a framework for organisational change management, there seems to be an agreement on two important issues. Firstly, it is agreed that the pace of change has never been greater then in the current business environment (Balogun and Hope Hailey, 2004; Burnes, 2004; Carnall, 2003; Kotter, 1996; Luecke, 2003; Moran and Brightman, 2001; Okumus and Hemmington, 1998; Paton and McCalman, 2000; Senior, 2002). Secondly, there is a consensus that change, being triggered by internal or external factors, comes in all shapes, forms and sizes (Balogun and Hope Hailey, 2004; Burnes, 2004; Carnall, 2003; Kotter, 1996; Luecke, 2003), and, therefore, affects all organisations in all industries.

While there is an ever-growing generic literature emphasising the importance of change and suggesting ways to approach it, very little empirical evidence has been provided in support of the different theories and approaches suggested (Guimaraes and Armstrong, 1998). The purpose of this article is, therefore, to provide a critical review of theories and approaches currently available in a bid to encourage further research into the nature of organisational change with the aim of constructing a new and pragmatic framework for the management of it. In order to do so the article has adopted Senior’s (2002) three categories of change as a structure with which to link other main theories and approaches. These three categories have been identifified as change characterised by the rate of occurrence, by how it comes about, and by scale. Although total quality management (TQM), business process re-engineering (BPR) and other change initiatives embrace several of these characteristics (Balogun and Hope Hailey, 2004; Pettinger, 2004) this article will concentrate on the main characteristics?of change and not on individual change initiatives. Finally, the article identififies some areas for further research.

本文的目的是，提供一個(gè)批判性的理論和方法，一個(gè)目前可用的，以鼓勵(lì)對(duì)組織變革的性質(zhì)的進(jìn)一步研究，目的是構(gòu)建一個(gè)新的和實(shí)用的管理框架。為了做到這一點(diǎn)，本文采用了高級(jí)(2002)的三個(gè)類別的變化作為結(jié)構(gòu)，與其他主要理論和方法相聯(lián)系。這三種類型的變化以發(fā)生的速度、發(fā)生的方式和規(guī)模為特征。盡管全面質(zhì)量管理(TQM)、業(yè)務(wù)流程再造(BPR)和其他變革舉措包含了這些特征中的幾個(gè)(Balogun和Hope Hailey, 2004;Pettinger, 2004)這篇文章將集中在變化的主要特征，而不是個(gè)人的變化倡議。最后，本文提出了一些有待進(jìn)一步研究的領(lǐng)域。

正文部分需要一些小標(biāo)題，這些小標(biāo)題的格式不固定，但整篇文章風(fēng)格需要統(tǒng)一。小標(biāo)題不需要太多，一個(gè)標(biāo)題下面可以寫兩到三段即可。

Recommendations

示例：

Drawing on the reported poor success rate of change programmes in general, the lack of empirical research on change management within organisations, and an arguably fundamental lack of a valid framework for organisational change management, it is recommended that further research into the nature of change management is conducted. The fifirst step in this process should be to carry out exploratory studies in order to increase the knowledge of organisational change management. Such studies should enable an identifification of critical success factors for the management of change. Furthermore, in order to construct a valid framework for change management it is arguably necessary to enable measurement of the success rate of change initiatives. Methods of measurements fore, be designed.

conclusion

示例：

It is evident from this article that change is an ever-present element that affects all organisations. There is a clear consensus that the pace of change has never been greater than in the current continuously evolving business environment. Therefore, the successful management of change is a highly required skill. However, the management of organisational change currently tends to be reactive, discontinuous and ad hoc with a reported failure rate of around 70 per cent of all change programmes initiated (Balogun and Hope Hailey, 2004). This may indicate a basic lack of a valid framework of how to successfully implement and manage organisational change since what is currently available is a wide range of contradictory and confusing theories and approaches, which are mostly lacking empirical evidence and often based on unchallenged hypotheses regarding the nature of contemporary organisational change management.

By providing a critical review of current change management theories and approaches, applying Senior’s (2002) three categories of change as the focal structure, this article has made an attempt to highlight the need for a new and pragmatic framework for change management. In order to construct such a framework it is recommended that further exploratory studies of the nature of change and how it is being managed should be conducted. Such studies would arguably identify critical success factors for the management of change. The article also suggests that methods of measuring the success of organisational change management should be designed in order to evaluate the value of any new frameworks suggested.

從本文中可以明顯看出，變化是影響所有組織的一個(gè)永遠(yuǎn)存在的因素。人們明確地一致認(rèn)為，在當(dāng)前不斷變化的商業(yè)環(huán)境中，變化的步伐從未超過(guò)現(xiàn)在。因此，成功地管理變革是一項(xiàng)高度需要的技能。然而，目前對(duì)組織變革的管理往往是反應(yīng)性的、不連續(xù)的和臨時(shí)性的，報(bào)告的失敗率約為所有發(fā)起的變革計(jì)劃的70%（巴洛根和霍普Hailey，2004年）。這可能表明一個(gè)基本缺乏一個(gè)有效的框架如何成功地實(shí)現(xiàn)和管理組織變革，因?yàn)槟壳翱捎玫氖且粋€(gè)廣泛的矛盾和混亂的理論和方法，大多是缺乏經(jīng)驗(yàn)證據(jù)，往往基于無(wú)挑戰(zhàn)的假設(shè)關(guān)于當(dāng)代組織變革管理的本質(zhì)。本文通過(guò)對(duì)當(dāng)前的變革管理理論和方法進(jìn)行批判性的回顧，將高級(jí)變革管理理（2002）的三類變革作為重點(diǎn)結(jié)構(gòu)，試圖強(qiáng)調(diào)建立一個(gè)新的和實(shí)用的ch框架的必要性

按照哈佛學(xué)術(shù)指南的要求，這部分應(yīng)該放在正文的末尾。我經(jīng)常把這個(gè)和conclusion搞混。summary更偏重于全文中心思想的總結(jié)，但是要求十分簡(jiǎn)短，在report文體中，這部分內(nèi)容一般不超過(guò)150字。這部分不要求明了光看summary一般是無(wú)法了解全文的，這只是言。

然后是