In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers,

At the beginning of the passage, the author introduces a study in which "researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance."

Unmonitored workers identified customer service as the most important measure of their job, while monitored workers and their supervisors identified productivity as the most important element.

Based on these findings the researchers thought that, for monitored workers, there should be a strong correlation between productivity and performance rating -- after all, the supervisors said that productivity was the most important aspect of their employees' jobs! You'd expect that higher productivity would correspond to a higher overall rating.

However, that did not occur -- instead, the ratings showed that supervisors actually cared about a bunch of other factors. The researchers concluded that "supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction," rather than just giving weight to productivity.

In looking through the answer choices, we're looking for a statement that would support this conclusion.

The conclusion contrasts the importance of productivity to that of accuracy, attendance, and customer satisfaction in employees' overall performance rating. Specifically, the researchers determined that supervisors gave considerable weight to factors other than productivity when assigning overall ratings.

(A) tells us that that "ratings of productivity correlated highly with ratings of both accuracy and attendance." This does not support the conclusion because it does not tell us anything about how supervisors weighed these factors when assigning overall performance ratings. We have no idea whether the information in (A) supports the conclusion that supervisors heavily weigh factors other than productivity, so (A) is out.


The conclusion is that supervisors care about several factors other than productivity when assigning performance ratings. Whether electronic monitoring increases productivity does not impact the conclusion at all, so (B) is out.


This is contrary to the conclusion -- we are trying to support the fact that supervisors base performance ratings on additional factors. Eliminate (C).


Again, the conclusion is that supervisors did not base performance ratings solely on productivity, but instead "gave considerable weight" to other factors. (D) is out.


Here we go. Accuracy is one of the factors to which supervisors "gave considerable weight" when rating their employees. (E) tells us that, indeed, supervisors weighed accuracy more heavily than productivity when assigning overall performance ratings.

(E) is the correct answer to question #3.

I hope that helps!

C,D,E,D,B - my explanation below

1. According to the passage, before the final results of the study were known, which of the following seemed likely?
"In an attempt to improve the overall performance of
clerical workers" - The expectation was that the method will increase overall Ratings through monitoring productivity...

C That the highest performance ratings would be achieved by workers with the highest productivity

2. It can be inferred that the author of the passage discusses "unmonitored workers"(line 10) primarily in order to

A compare the ratings of these workerswith the ratings of monitored workers
B provide an example of a case in which monitoring might be effective
C provide evidence of an inappropriateuse of CPMCS
D emphasize the effect that CPMCS may have on workers' perceptions of their jobs "the monitored workers and
their supervisors all responded that productivity was the
critical factor in assigning ratings." - THis was the perception yet it was not really the case later on the discussion...
E illustrate the effect that CPMCS may have on workers' ratings

3. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly have supported the conclusion referred to in lines 19-21?

A Ratings of productivity correlated highly with ratings of both accuracy and attendance. (False! Productivity is just a hygiene factor and it it is inadequate it will pull the ratings down but it's increase will not have that much impact as said in the last paragraph)
B Electronic monitoring greatly increased productivity. (Not the issue in lines 19-21)
C Most supervisors based overall ratings of performance on measures of productivity alone. (This is False! There are other criteria.)
D Overall ratings of performance correlated more highly with measures of productivity than the researchers expected. (The author did not make any contrast with expectations of the extent of the method's effect to his expectations...)
E Overall ratings of performance correlated more highly with measures of accuracy than with measures of productivity this is the inference although not mentioned exactly like this... combination of - "supervisors (20) gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance,
accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction" & "higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating."


4. According to the passage, a "hygiene factor" (lines 22-23) is an aspect of a worker's performance that

A has no effect on the rating of a worker's performance (False! If inadequate, it will have bad effect on rating)
B is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workers (it is not an adequate criteria as other criteria are also considered)
C is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker's performance (what deserves to be considered is not the issue)
D if not likely to affect a worker's rating unless it is judged to be inadequate CORRECT! "that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating"
E is important primarily because of the effect it has on a worker's rating (It is not mentioned as primarily important....)


5. The primary purpose of the passage is to

A explain the need for the introduction of an innovative strategy (No such strategy was recommended as needed)
B discuss a study of the use of a particular method (a study of the use of CPMS was discussed... CORRECT!)
C recommend a course of action (No such recommendation was made)
D resolved a difference of opinion (the main purpose is to discuss the anticipated effect of a method and the undesired effect)
E suggest an alternative approach (No recommendation or suggestion was made)

I think that number 2. is "D" and number 3. is "E".

Q2 states: It can be inferred that the author of the passage discusses "unmonitored workers"(line 11) primarily in order to:

A. compare the ratings of these workers with the ratings of monitored workers >>> INCORRECT. Ratings of both workers (monitored and unmonitored) per se are not compared in the passage
B. provide an example of a case in which monitoring might be effective >>> Clearly INCORRECT! If you read a little but further from lines 11-12 you see they are discussing about assigning ratings and employees' and supervisors perceptions about employees' most important elements at their jobs.
C. provide evidence of an inappropriate use of CPMCS >>> INCORRECT! They don't say anything about inappropriate use of CPMCS. They do say that CPMCS may not be having the desired effect at the beginning of the passage, but there's no evidence of inappropriate use of CPMCS.
D. emphasize the effect that CPMCS may have on workers' perceptions of their jobs. >>> CORRECT! In this part there is a contrast ("In contrast to unmonitored workers...") between unmonitored workers and and monitored workers and supervisors' perceptions about the factors or important elements in their jobs: a) Unmonitored workers --> Customer Service (most important element in their jobs); b) Monitored Workers ---> Productivity > Critical factor in assigning ratings.
E. illustrate the effect that CPMCS may have on workers' ratings >>> INCORRECT! In this part of the passage they are talking about supervisors and supervised workers perceptions of the critical factors in their jobs: a) Unmonitored workers --> Customer Service; b) Monitored Workers ---> Productivity > Critical factor in assigning ratings. But here there is no comparison about the ratings themselves in each case.

So D would be the answer for this question for me.

Q3 asks: Which of the following, if true, would most clearly have supported the conclusion referred to in lines 22-25?

A Ratings of productivity correlated highly with ratings of both accuracy and attendance. >>> Incorrect! Productivity is just a hygiene factor... if it is inadequate it will bring down the overall rating but if it is adequate its increase will not have that much impact...
B Electronic monitoring greatly increased productivity>>> Incorrect. Clearly Out of Scope
C Most supervisors based overall ratings of performance on measures of productivity alone. >>> INCORRECT. There are other elements they consider. According to the passage: "Supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction."
D Overall ratings of performance correlated more highly with measures of productivity than the researchers expected. >>> INCORRECT. There is no mention to researchers expectations vs reality.
E Overall ratings of performance correlated more highly with measures of accuracy than with measures of productivity >>> CORRECT. The passage clearly states that: "Supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction". Then, by the end of the passage it is stated the following: "It is possible that productivity may be a hygiene factor; that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating... beyond the point at which productivity becomes 'good enough' higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating". This last part is particularly against correlation.

So the answer to this question would be E for me.

I hope this is clear.

Can someone confirm OA please?

Thank you!

Best,

EISP

Para1 :
What’s target: Improve performance
How to assigning ratings./how to measure performance ?
Companies introduced : CPMCS
Why?- to monitor performance .
But what was found?- It doesn’t improve performance but have negative effect?
How can you say so?
Because of results of study that was conducted.
What was study?
Compare Monitor vs unmonitored workers and check their performance
Case1: Unmonitored workers focus more on customer service
Case2: Supervisors access Performance of monitored clerical workers based on productivity.
So what do we expect?
Performance should be related with productivity, right?
But what was found that supervisors gave preference to attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.--Q3
( note the shifts in the language:
This finding suggested that xxxxx . However, measures of the relationship xxxxxxxx clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to xxxx . Means expectation was based on ABC but results were based on XYZ )

Passage2: explains reasons of finding results. It maybe that it some factor that if productivity is too low then affect rating but if high then doesn’t matter much so supervisors gave preference to other factors that were recorded : attendance, accuracy, and indications

Passage ends.
No conclusion no comparison. Just discussion on some study and results of it. --Q5


Now you can try Q3 and Q5.

Hi GMATNinja, Could you help with Q2 by explaining in detail? Why is A incorrect?

In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings.

Even though I got 5/5 right I felt really insecure on that passage.
What caught me a bit off guard was that the passage started off with introducing a computerized performance system (CPMCS) then threw in a strong signal word with however but from there the passage barely focussed on the CPMCS, if I understood that right?

Questions were still answerable for me, but if you would ask me what the main point of comparison in this passage is I could not really tell you it.

I. Attempt to improve overall performance -> CPMPCS -> however, might not be so good as it seemed to be (see study)
II. Talk's about human measurement, not computerized measurement, there is a flaw in reasoning about what workers and supervisors say is important for them and what is actually important for them
III. another group of workers has again a different perception of what is important to them

Where is the link between the computerized system, it's flaws and the rating system of it?!

Hey jarbit,

Which of the following, if true, would most clearly have supported the conclusion referred to in lines 22-25? - If you understand the question clearly, it said we need to pick an answer among the lot that provides support. It doesn't mean that the conclusion should base entirely on the choice.

So, we need to pick the one which gives most support to the choice. Think of it like a CR question rite


Hope it helped.

Thanks
Harsh

There's a lot going on in this passage! One thought is that there might not be a super-clean "contrast" here at all, and so trying to find that can make it tough to see what's really there.

To understand the overall point, first think about the purpose of each chunk of the passage. Because the first paragraph is so long, it's better to break it up into several chunks:

First, the author tells us about a goal: "to improve the overall performance of clerical workers." Then the author gives us a plan to accomplish this goal: "computerized performance monitoring and control systems (CPMCS) that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities."

Next, the author dives into a study. This is probably the most confusing piece of the passage -- but before diving into the weeds, it's best to understand WHY the author has brought up the study in the first place. In the second sentence, the author tells us that the plan mentioned above "may not be having the desired effect." In other words, monitoring workers does NOT improve overall performance.

So, how exactly does the study show that monitoring doesn't improve performance? Well, it has to do with what people say they care about, versus what they actually think about when they rate their people. Monitored people and supervisors say that they care most about productivity, but at the end of the day they actually give ratings on a whole bunch of other factors. So, just monitoring productivity doesn't impact performance ratings as much as you'd expect. This is the overall point of including the study.

Then, in the last paragraph, the author explains why monitoring might not be that impactful.

I hope that helps!

In the passage the author mentions that the supervisors and the workers thought that productivity is essential for ratings.
After that, he mentions that the supervisors rated workers on accuracy, attendance and indication of customer satisfaction.

My doubt is if the supervisors themselves thought productivity is essential why would they rate on basis of accuracy and other stuff???

In 2nd D & E are very close . Didn't get why D is preffered over E . As per the passage :

However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be
having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity ..........

Since , it is not desired effect and it happened , please explain .

Para summary - CPMCS > not effective > non-monitor - customer > monitored - productivity > factors such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction. with wt. p is important to good enough level.

Main point - finding flaws in a system.
tone - critical.

1. According to the passage, before the final results of the study were known, which of the following seemed likely?
pre-think - productivity is the main factor for high rating.
(C) That the highest performance ratings would be achieved by workers with the highest productivity - yes

---------------------------------------
2. It can be inferred that the author of the passage discusses " unmonitored workers"(line 11) primarily in order to
(D) emphasize the effect that CPMCS may have on workers' perceptions of their jobs - yes; straight correct answer.

---------------------------------------

3. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly have supported the conclusion referred to in lines 22-25?
the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.

(A) Ratings of productivity correlated highly with ratings of both accuracy and attendance. - no
(B) Electronic monitoring greatly increased productivity. - no
(C) Most supervisors based overall ratings of performance on measures of productivity alone. - no
(D) Overall ratings of performance correlated more highly with measures of productivity than the researchers expected. - no
(E) Overall ratings of performance correlated more highly with measures of accuracy than with measures of productivity. - has to be this one.

---------------------------------------
4. According to the passage, a "hygiene factor" (line 27) is an aspect of a worker's performance that
It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor”; that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.
pre-think - it is needed till a limit.
(D) if not likely to affect a worker's rating unless it is judged to be inadequate - yes; mind the use of double negatives. Gmat put traps this way too.

---------------------------------------

5. The primary purpose of the passage is to

(A) explain the need for the introduction of an innovative strategy - no
(B) discuss a study of the use of a particular method - Closest of all. though i dont like this one.
(C) recommend a course of action - no recommend
(D) resolved a difference of opinion - nothing resolved.
(E) suggest an alternative approach - no

Passage map:
p1: describes a recent experiment undertaken
p2. Derives an interpretation from the findings


Question 3
3. Which of the following, if true, would most clearly have supported the conclusion referred to in lines 22-25?

The conclusion is that Supervisors gave considerable more weight to attendance, accuracy and indications of customer success than they did productivity.

A is incorrect because it states that productivity and accuracy/ attendance have the same weighting.
B is incorrect because it doesn't explain the difference in weighting given by managers
C is incorrect as it doesn't explain the shifting in weighting described in the conclusion
D is incorrect for the same reason
E is correct because it underpins why supervisors gave considerable more weight to attendance, accuracy and indications of customer success than they did productivity.

any experts can help how to approach Q 3?
I have no idea how to attack this question.
I actually don't understand the logic of the following sentences

I agree chrtpmdr. This passage is so subtle. When I first read it, because of its suggestive wording, I was already anticipating that it would go one way. But then it ended up taking a totally different direction, which is very subtle. Also I incorrectly assumed productivity = attendance + accuracy (suggestive wording!). It is a short passage but I had to re-read it a few times to finally get what it was trying to say. Urgh.

Can anyone fill me in with a bit of guidance for question number 3?

The answer (E) says that overall ratings of performance correlated more highly with measures of accuracy than with measures of productivity whereas the highlighted line from the passage is telling us "However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction."

But the answer has not included the other components - attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction - in the answer.

What am I missing here? Thanks in advance!

Hi AndrewN GMATNinja sir



The statement seems to say that productivity is something core/basic then it may affect a lot if perform low but can not contribute much after a certain limit.
With this thought,
First I choose E because it is something basic. Basic is important
After I was wrong in 2nd attempt, I choose C as basic/core thing is not given enough importance.
In my 3rd attempt, I choose B as basic is mentioned and I was lost in thinking by now.

In all my attempts, I rejected D because judging is not mentioned. If you really perform low and judging is accurate, so the rting would really be low. Judging accurate or inaccurate should be out of scope , that's why I rejected D .

After seeing D as correct answer, I don't know where shall I keep my feet on ground (means couldn't find reasoning behind it. )

Could you please give your opinion on Q4 and help me to reach at correct answer.

Hello, imSKR. We have talked before about how you should not latch onto every word in your assessment of an answer choice. You are looking for what is reasonable versus unreasonable, based on what the passage says. Because you were so kind as to provide the passage excerpt needed to evaluate the question, I worked on it on the spot and chose (D) right away, without having read your assessment. Why? Because the "hygiene factor" in question is mentioned only in the first line, whereupon the comparison (between poor hygiene and poor productivity) terminates and the focus shifts back to the broader discussion on productivity. And what does that first line tell us about the "hygiene factor"? That if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. Who is judging whether anything is too low? Someone has to make that call. Thus, judged in (D) is fitting, and since unless... inadequate aligns perfectly with the too low part I quoted just above, in addition to the idea of the entire second sentence from the excerpt. To draw from the hygiene analogy, someone who looks homeless might be sneered at or looked down on, but someone a step up from that, say, who wears clothes that simply look clean, might not be treated any differently than someone who dresses even better.

Never fish for answers based on missing with your first choice. If you need to reevaluate, take the time to find compelling reasons to choose or argue against each option. That is what review is for, to better prepare yourself for the next similar challenge.

I hope that helps. Thank you for thinking to ask me.

- Andrew