Money's beyond tight, so I'm having to do what I can with YouTube, my GMAT book and the free resources I can find on the internet. I just took the Veritas
practice test and got a 620 (stumbled on to it last night and was falling asleep at the keyboard before I made a 550, so I retook it). 39 Verbal, 38 Quantitative, 5 Analysis of Issue, 3.5 Analysis of Argument. I went back and realized a few problems I ran into on the quantitative section I just flat marked wrong or, for whatever reason, hit a wall and didn't do what I know I should have. I'm usually a deadeye with regard to anything literary or grammatical, so I'll have to see where I did wrong there.
Basically, what I would like to know is how a 620 is for a first try and how reliable the Veritas
practice is? I'm sure most 750s don't earn a 750 their first time out and certainly not on their first practice test, so I'm not too discouraged. I'd like to get this up to at least a 700.
I'll post my Analysis of an Issue below and would appreciate if anyone feels like commenting, critiquing or dissecting it.
"All groups and organizations should function as teams in which everyone makes decisions and shares responibilities and duties. Giving one person central authority and responsibility for aproject or task is not an effective way to get work done."
To what extent do you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above? Support your views with resons and/or specific examples drawn from your own work or school experiences, your observations, or your reading.
I greatly disagree with the opinion expressed above. While team work and respect should remain strong in any organization, companies are very much capable of thriving under one person who is given central authority. For example, Sam Walton, Bill Gates and Andrew Carnegie were only able to achieve the extreme success experienced by their companies because they were unrestrained with respect to co-managers or other powers from whom they would have had to attain agreement. In fact, the three above-mentioned individuals were severely discouraged, warned and ridiculed by peers and colleagues. Had it been necessary to secure agreement with any of these peers or colleagues, Carnegie may have never established the steel company that practically consumed all demand for steel at the time. Likewise, if walton would have been just one of many managers he may have never had the opportunity to turn a small variety store in east Arkansas - a shop that was realizing deeper and deeper debt due to the multiple other variety stores in the vacinity - and eventually turn it into the massive corporation we know today as Walmart.
Furthermore, in reading biographical content regarding the life or business ventures of Warren Buffett, the financial magnate, one could easily deduce that his creative waters were allowed to flow far and wide only because of the lack of outside counsel or opinion that would have otherwise dammed up its cureent. Robert Hagstrom, in his book, "The Warren Buffett Way," explains that Buffett, by far the world's most successful financier of all time, is a pioneer in his philosophies and alone in his principles. Though people have studied Buffett and Buffett has been more than generous with his knowledge, financial managers, professors and businessmen the world over continue to preach and practice finance and business in a way that directly contradicts Buffetts beliefs. If any of them had been co-managers with Buffett, they would have done nothing more than water down his success.
This response provides competent analysis of ideas; develops and supports main points with relevant reasons and/or examples; is adequately organized; conveys meaning with reasonable clarity; demonstrates satisfactory control of sentence structure and language usage, but may have some errors that affect clarity.