Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 09:10 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 09:10
Close
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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
Sajjad1994
User avatar
GRE Forum Moderator
Joined: 02 Nov 2016
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 17,290
Own Kudos:
49,305
 [8]
Given Kudos: 6,179
GPA: 3.62
Products:
Posts: 17,290
Kudos: 49,305
 [8]
4
Kudos
Add Kudos
4
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
road740
Joined: 02 Feb 2021
Last visit: 14 Dec 2022
Posts: 36
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 21
Posts: 36
Kudos: 39
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Anki2609
Joined: 17 Jul 2017
Last visit: 19 Jun 2024
Posts: 62
Own Kudos:
75
 [1]
Given Kudos: 180
Location: India
GMAT 1: 600 Q47 V27
GMAT 2: 650 Q47 V33
GMAT 2: 650 Q47 V33
Posts: 62
Kudos: 75
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
road740
Joined: 02 Feb 2021
Last visit: 14 Dec 2022
Posts: 36
Own Kudos:
39
 [3]
Given Kudos: 21
Posts: 36
Kudos: 39
 [3]
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Anki2609
road740
Based on the % of people who had the first question right, the majority (including myself) had problems with it. Anybody out here who´d like to help? :)

Let me add my 2 cents for question 1

The question asks about what can be inferred from the passage about th eproductivity level of the engineers.

Let's start by elimination

A. Prior to the 1980's, the productivity levels of the top Indian software firms were exceeded by those of Chinese software firms.

Refer to second para in the passage - It says in mid-80's two Indian firm joined and doubled the output. Nothing is known about priotr to 1980

B. The official language of a country has a large effect on the productivity levels of its software developers

Incorrect as in Para 1 they talked about English benefit for India but the Hong Kong that has more english speaking population but no benefit.

C. During the late 1980's and early 1990's, productivity levels were comparable in China and India.

Based on para 2. let's hold onto this.

D. The greater the number of engineers that a software firm has, the higher a firm's productivity level.

The number of Engineers in a firm is not a discussion or comparision point for author.

E. The amount of human resource investment made by software developers in their firms determines the level of productivity.

We can't say this. Refer to Last line of Para 2. They say that Human resource investment was equal in India an d China. So, this statement is incorrect.

Finally, C is the only otion we can narrow down to.


Thanks a lot! Now it makes sense. I didn´t really read "late" 1908s and "early" 1990´s - in my mind I tought "between the 1980s and the 1990s" and this, in my view, was too large of a timespan.

Next time I will read more carefully.

Thanks again and I wish you success with your studies!
User avatar
kabirgandhi
Joined: 11 Oct 2024
Last visit: 17 Nov 2025
Posts: 72
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 81
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q85 V84 DI77
Products:
GMAT Focus 1: 645 Q85 V84 DI77
Posts: 72
Kudos: 9
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
7:10, 2 incorrect.

Can anyone help explain Q1?

It seems to me that choice C should not be the correct one, since we do not know that the productivity levels of Chinese and Indian software firms were comparable in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

We only know that the two top indian firms had matched and doubled the productivity levels of the Chinese by the mid-1980s. This does not seem like sufficient information to conclude that they were comparable. They could have been 1) Much higher, 2) Comparable or 3) Lower on an overall level (since we are only given information about the top 2 firms).

The only point where the word "comparable" comes in, is when talking about human resource investment, AND NOT PRODUCTIVITY LEVELS. Seems like a "matches but incorrect" trap"
User avatar
dhruva09
Joined: 02 Sep 2024
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 66
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 58
Concentration: Strategy, General Management
Products:
Posts: 66
Kudos: 9
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Let me try explaining how I looked at this question. The question is asking Which of the following statements concerning the productivity levels of engineers can be inferred from the passage?

Let's check each option

(A) Prior to the 1980's, the productivity levels of the top Indian software firms were exceeded by those of Chinese software firms.
- There is no mention of prior to 1980s productivity levels of Indians and Chinese. Hence eliminated.

(B) The official language of a country has a large effect on the productivity levels of its software developers.
- Simply not, since para 1 explicitly mentions that Hong Kong would have been comparable if this had been true, since most English speakers are present there. Hence, eliminated.

(C) During the late 1980's and early 1990's, productivity levels were comparable in China and India.
- The passage states "...by the late eighties, the amount of fixed assets required to develop one software package was roughly equivalent in India and in China." This gives us the understanding that resources were equivalent for developing one software package. Hence, this can be kept. It is simply asking productivity level, so, considering the productivity impact could have been higher or lower would be just over analyzing of competition, which is not required.

(D) The greater the number of engineers that a software firm has, the higher a firm's productivity level.
- If this statement had to be true, then by the late eighties, the amount of fixed assets required to develop one software package would NOT BE roughly equivalent in India and in China. This is not mentioned and is clearly not the case. Hence, eliminated.

(E) The amount of human resource investment made by software developers in their firms determines the level of productivity.
- Last sentence of second para, clearly states " Since human resource investment was not higher in India, it had to be other factors that led to higher productivity." Hence, eliminated.


Hope this helps.
kabirgandhi
7:10, 2 incorrect.

Can anyone help explain Q1?

It seems to me that choice C should not be the correct one, since we do not know that the productivity levels of Chinese and Indian software firms were comparable in the late 1980s and early 1990s.

We only know that the two top indian firms had matched and doubled the productivity levels of the Chinese by the mid-1980s. This does not seem like sufficient information to conclude that they were comparable. They could have been 1) Much higher, 2) Comparable or 3) Lower on an overall level (since we are only given information about the top 2 firms).

The only point where the word "comparable" comes in, is when talking about human resource investment, AND NOT PRODUCTIVITY LEVELS. Seems like a "matches but incorrect" trap"
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
GRE Forum Moderator
17290 posts
189 posts