Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Sep 1712:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Thought your job leaves no time for GMAT prep? After multiple GMAT attempts and a demanding consulting job, Kshitij improved to 695 in under 2 months. Learn the mindset shifts, study strategy, and execution changes that made the breakthrough possible.
Sep 1801:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Sep 1808:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Video explanations + diagnosis of 10 weakest areas + 150+ short videos + study plan!
Sep 2107:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included!
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
41% (00:52) correct
59%
(00:49)
wrong
based on 1898
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Does it benefit a company overall to invest in employee training?
(1) Companies that invest in comprehensive employee training programs often observe improved job performance among their workforce.
(2) Well-trained employees are likely to excel in their roles and take the company forward.
(A) Statement 1 alone is sufficient, but statement 2 alone is not.
(B) Statement 2 alone is sufficient, but statement 1 alone is not.
(C) Both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is sufficient.
(D) Each statement alone is sufficient.
(E) Neither statement is sufficient, even when combined.
(1) Companies that invest in comprehensive employee training programs often observe improved job performance among their workforce.
(2) Well-trained employees are likely to excel in their roles and take the company forward.
(A) Statement 1 alone is sufficient, but statement 2 alone is not.
(B) Statement 2 alone is sufficient, but statement 1 alone is not.
(C) Both statements together are sufficient, but neither alone is sufficient.
(D) Each statement alone is sufficient.
(E) Neither statement is sufficient, even when combined.
Every tricky question should trigger a follow up quiz.
Build that habit with
GMAT Club Forum Quiz →.
Statement (1): Companies that invest in comprehensive employee training programs often observe improved job performance among their workforce.This statement suggests a correlation between investment in training and improved job performance. Improved job performance can lead to higher productivity, better quality of work, and potentially increased profits, which benefits the company overall. However, it does not address that explicitly.
Statement (1) alone is not sufficient.
Statement (2): Well-trained employees are likely to excel in their roles and take the company forward.
This statement suggests that well-trained employees are likely (but not guaranteed) to excel and contribute positively to the company's progress. The use of "likely" implies a strong probability but not certainty.
Statement (2) alone is not sufficient.
Combining Statements (1) and (2):
- Statement (1) indicates improved job performance with training investment.
- Statement (2) suggests that this improvement is likely to result in employees excelling and advancing the company.
Together, these statements build a stronger case that investing in employee training leads to improved performance, which is likely to drive the company forward. However, they still do not provide a clear or certain answer about the overall benefits to the company.
=> Even combined, still insufficient
Answer is E
Statement (1) alone is not sufficient.
Statement (2): Well-trained employees are likely to excel in their roles and take the company forward.
This statement suggests that well-trained employees are likely (but not guaranteed) to excel and contribute positively to the company's progress. The use of "likely" implies a strong probability but not certainty.
Statement (2) alone is not sufficient.
Combining Statements (1) and (2):
- Statement (1) indicates improved job performance with training investment.
- Statement (2) suggests that this improvement is likely to result in employees excelling and advancing the company.
Together, these statements build a stronger case that investing in employee training leads to improved performance, which is likely to drive the company forward. However, they still do not provide a clear or certain answer about the overall benefits to the company.
=> Even combined, still insufficient
Answer is E
guddo
The question asks us whether there is an "overall benefit" to the company.
The two statements give two benefits but do not comment on whether overall there is benefit. What if trained employees leave the company very soon because they find higher paying work outside. Then overall, the company may not benefit. We don't know.
Hence answer here is (E).
_________________
-
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
General Discussion
guddo
OE from the guide:
Attachment:
GMAT-Club-Forum-ubz4n2px.png [ 114.46 KiB | Viewed 10331 times ]
Both option A and B are not sufficient is because we dont know for how long the improved job performance will continue to benefit the company overall and how much that benefit will be w.r.t to the cost incurred . Is it correct KarishmaB MartyMurray ?
KarishmaB
sayan640
Yes, overall benefit means that whatever cost was invested in the training, that and more is recovered. But say if people leave immeditaely after training because they become skilled and hence valued by other companies too, overall the company training them may not be recovering their cost even. Or it is even possible that even if people stay, the training is so expensive that it doesn't lead to overall benefit.
_________________
-
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
KarishmaB
Hi KarishmaB thanks for the answer; can you also suggest what can be a potentially correct statement? My doubt is..any statement would have to say explicitly " Over all benefits"; or something like "increased realised profits" to be a correct statement. The correct statement shall contain clear declaration, which makes this a easy question. Or is it possible to imply the same without saying it explicitly?
SirSanguine
The point is what is missing - and whether you were able to identify that. They will not give the exact words because yes, that question would become too easy but for it to be sufficient we certainly need something that implies that overall benefit is there, e.g. something that says that cost to the company is negligible etc.
They will rather miss a word and then see whether you were able to figure out what is missing.
_________________
-
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
How I would go about in such a question is - think a one pro and one con hypothetically
(1) Companies that invest in comprehensive employee training programs often observe improved job performance among their workforce.
Pro - What if the improved job performance will increase companies profits? The investment would be worth, it will possibly benefit the company.
Con - What if the improved job performance was not able to offset the cost the company invested in training
=> no overall benefit to company
We don't have a conclusive answer. INSUFFICIENT
(2) Well-trained employees are likely to excel in their roles and take the company forward.
Pro - What if the taking the company forward meant increase in companies' profits? The investment would be worth, it will possibly benefit the company.
Con - What if the the company did go forward in terms of efficiency but still that was not able to offset the cost the company invested in training => no overall benefit to company
We don't have a conclusive answer. INSUFFICIENT
Both Together
Even if we combine both the statements, we can see that the judgement on whether it was beneficial for company to invest still remains clouded; and we don't have a conclusive answer. INSUFFICIENT
Answer E.
_________________
(1) Companies that invest in comprehensive employee training programs often observe improved job performance among their workforce.
Pro - What if the improved job performance will increase companies profits? The investment would be worth, it will possibly benefit the company.
Con - What if the improved job performance was not able to offset the cost the company invested in training
=> no overall benefit to companyWe don't have a conclusive answer. INSUFFICIENT
(2) Well-trained employees are likely to excel in their roles and take the company forward.
Pro - What if the taking the company forward meant increase in companies' profits? The investment would be worth, it will possibly benefit the company.
Con - What if the the company did go forward in terms of efficiency but still that was not able to offset the cost the company invested in training
=> no overall benefit to companyWe don't have a conclusive answer. INSUFFICIENT
Both Together
Even if we combine both the statements, we can see that the judgement on whether it was beneficial for company to invest still remains clouded; and we don't have a conclusive answer. INSUFFICIENT
Answer E.
_________________
Starting out with GMAT Quant? All You Need for the GMAT Quantitative (Math) Section!
Filters for Targeted Practice
Advanced stage of your Quant Prep? Collection of Toughest Quant Questions
Filters for Targeted Practice
Advanced stage of your Quant Prep? Collection of Toughest Quant Questions
Quote:
Company - employee trg - overall benefit (Overall benefit means monetary, can be evaluate. For example, $1 mn for employee trg , overall benefit - more than overall investment)
A. Incr job performance - maybe sufficient/ not adequate to cross the profit margin. Maybe beneficial but extra expenditure can be reduced or dveloped in-house. THE TERM OFTEN(*) BUT NOT ALWAYS
B. Selected only excel, balance we don't. ONLY WELL TRAINED(*) BUT NOT ALL
A&B. Again selected excel with adequate imrovement but not sufficient. Maybe the trg was abroad/outside, sufficient absence of employee affected budget planning.
I Wasn't expecting CR questions on the DS part of the GMAT.
lol
lol
trick in the question is "often" and "likely" mentioned that create doubt in both statements taken individually or together that there will be an overall profit for the company.
Posts: 40
The OG explanation for this question is directly contradictory to this question. https://gmatclub.com/forum/it-has-been- ... l#p3537057
Tip for non math related DS questions: terms like "Likely" and "may" are indicators that whatever it is, it doesn't apply to the current situation.
Hi experts MartyMurray KarishmaB GMATNinja,
(2) Well-trained employees are likely to excel in their roles and take the company forward.
I need some clarification on statement (2), is the word "likely" meant for both excel in their roles and take the company forward OR only for excel in their roles.
If yes, then can we say that (2) is not sufficient because it is likely, not a certainty?
If no, then (2) should be sufficient right? Because take the company forward becomes a certainty and it means that company is progressing, hence, an overall benefit.
Please help me with these two questions.
_________________
(2) Well-trained employees are likely to excel in their roles and take the company forward.
I need some clarification on statement (2), is the word "likely" meant for both excel in their roles and take the company forward OR only for excel in their roles.
If yes, then can we say that (2) is not sufficient because it is likely, not a certainty?
If no, then (2) should be sufficient right? Because take the company forward becomes a certainty and it means that company is progressing, hence, an overall benefit.
Please help me with these two questions.
guddo
_________________
Nothing is impossible when you have a self-belief
Even without 'likely,' 2 is not sufficient. We want to know whether OVERALL the company benefits.
If the company must invest $10 million in employee training and makes only $5 million because of well trained employees, does the company benefit overall?
If the company invests $1 million to train 500 employees and 400 of them leave the company immediately after training, does the company benefit overall?
There are many ifs and buts to reach the 'overall benefit' conclusion.
_________________
If the company must invest $10 million in employee training and makes only $5 million because of well trained employees, does the company benefit overall?
If the company invests $1 million to train 500 employees and 400 of them leave the company immediately after training, does the company benefit overall?
There are many ifs and buts to reach the 'overall benefit' conclusion.
agrasan
_________________
-
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
Start FREE with selected GMAT/EA Content upon registration at anaprep.com
YouTube Channel: karishma.anaprep
my 2 cents on this one - overall benefit would also include finances, right? what if the cost they put to train them is way too high compared to the goodness it brings. Hence, there are caveats that the company needs to take care of.
Is this on the same line as Correlation is not Causality!
Posts: 1
I have to disagree with all of the expert justifications here. Those justification all come from knowing the right answer and trying to fit the justification within the box set by the official answer. Taken on its own merit however, the official answer is simply wrong, or the wording of the question is poor. What about "moving the company forward" does not imply that there iss overall benefit? if the negatives were more than the benefits the company would move backwards or at most stay in place. How do you move forward if you haven't benefited overall?
i thought in the same lines but then the word 'likely' in the second statement bothered me and hence I went ahead with E. The question asks a certain 'whether investing benefit or not?'. Now can you say a certain 'yes, investing in training benefits.' given statement 2 presents a likelihood however strong it might be.
nullatempora
Moderators:
Announcements
Monday, Sep 14, 2026
11:30am NY / 3:30pm London / 9pm Mumbai
Subscribe to GMAT Club for New Podcast Episodes, Debriefs, & Insightful Sessions on GMAT Preparation
Tuck at Dartmouth
AI at Dartmouth Tuck: How the School Is Preparing Leaders for the Age of Artificial Intelligence
Inside the courses, research, and hands-on learning defining wise, decisive leadership in an AI-driven world.
Read More
Inside the courses, research, and hands-on learning defining wise, decisive leadership in an AI-driven world.
Read More
Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos
Success stories and strategies from high-scoring candidates.