Lark Manufacturing Company initiated a voluntary Quality Circles progr

This is tricky. So I will use POE.
Conclusion : QS program decrease the satisfaction of the participants.

Option A:- Weakens the argument

Option B:- Weakens the argument

Option C:- Weakens the argument

Option D:- Weakens the argument

Option E:- Does not affect the argument and hence E is the correct answer choice.

Thanks...
Hope it helps.

This is a toughie. Let's see
Conclusion: W who participate in a QC --> less satisfied with their job.
Premise: W were less satisfied with their work situation after 2 years of the program’s existence than they were at the program’s start.

So basically, we wan't to look for an answer choice that doesn't weaken the claim that QC causes dissatisfaction. Let's see the answer choices.
We want to find the odd one out.

(A) The second survey occurred during a period of recession when rumors of cutbacks and layoffs at Lark Manufacturing were plentiful.--> This could explain the dissatisfaction, so it weakens the argument by providing an alternate cause. Out
(B) The surveys also showed that those Lark machine operators who neither participated in Quality Circles nor knew anyone who did so reported the same degree of lessened satisfaction with their work situations as did the Lark machine operators who participated in Quality Circles--> This one says that the one that did not participate were also dissatisfied. So QC is not really causing dissatisfaction. Out
(C) While participating in Quality Circles at Lark Manufacturing, machine operators exhibited two of the primary indicators of improved job satisfaction: increased productivity and decreased absenteeism.---> This one says that QC is actually good. This could weaken the argument as well
(D) Several workers at Lark Manufacturing who had participated in Quality Circles while employed at other companies reported that, while participating in Quality Circles in their previous companies, their work satisfaction had increased. ---> This one says that QC in other companies have proved good. So this could weaken it too.
(E) The machine operators who participated in Quality Circles reported that, when the program started, they felt that participation might improve their work situations ---> Well they had expected that the program might improve their work situation. Now, this doesn't really tell us much. I don't really see how this could weaken the argument. So I think I will go with this one because it is the odd one out
Hence answer (E)
Hope it helps
Cheers!
J

Gimme Kuddos!!!!!

My reasoning:

Argument: Participation in Quality Circle leads to lower job satisfaction.

A. Provides a reason other than Quality Circle for the decreased satisfaction. Weakens.
B. Workers who didn't participate also had decreased job satisfaction. Weakens.
C. During participation, the workers exhibited indicators of increased satisfaction. This could, however, result from something other than job satisfaction. We see an effect, but we have no idea of the cause. Doesn't really weaken nor strengthen.
D. Reported improvement of job satisfaction while participating in Quality Circle. Weakens.
E. At the beginning of the program, the workers who participated felt that participation could improve their work situation -> their job satisfaction wasn't great to begin with. The program could have caused the decreased job satisfaction after two years, but the reason could simply be that nothing has changed, so while at the beginning of the program they were somewhat more satisfied as they thought the program would improve their work satisfaction, now that the program hasn't worked, their satisfaction has decreased. Doesn't necessarily weaken, doesn't strengthen.

In my mind, since E could weaken the argument but C doesn't, C is the most logical choice.

E strengthens the argument and C doesn't weaken.



Premise 1: Lark Manufacturing Company initiated a voluntary Quality Circles program for machine operators.
Premise 2: Two yrs after the above program, An independent survey was performed on participants of the program and it was found that participants were less satisfied with their job as before the start of the program.

Conclusion: The program is the reason that people are less satisfied.

(A) The second survey occurred during a period of recession when rumors of cutbacks and
layoffs at Lark Manufacturing were plentiful .
Incorrect.It weakens the argument.This option states a reason that some external factors rumors of cutbacks and
layoffs which were not present at the start of the program were reason of their less satisfaction
(B) The surveys also showed that those Lark machine operators who neither participated in
Quality Circles nor knew anyone who did so reported the same degree of lessened
satisfaction with their work situations as did the Lark machine operators who participated
in Quality Circles.
Incorrect.It weakens the argument.This option states that other operators who were not a part of program also felt the same.This means there are some other reasons for lesser satisfaction

(C) While participating in Quality Circles at Lark Manufacturing, machine operators exhibited
two of the primary indicators of improved job satisfaction: increased productivity and
decreased absenteeism.
This nowhere connects to the conclusion.
(D) Several workers at Lark Manufacturing who had participated in Quality Circles while
employed at other companies reported that, while participating in Quality Circles in their
previous companies, their work satisfaction had increased.
Incorrect.It weakens the argument.This option states that some worker's satisfaction has increased which is against the conclusion
(E) The machine operators who participated in Quality Circles reported that, when the program
started, they felt that participation might improve their work situations.
Correct.it strengthens the argument as operators had high expectation because of the program only.Hence, Less satisfaction as the program was not upto the mark.

Lark Manufacturing Company initiated a voluntary Quality Circles program for machine operators. Independent surveys of employee attitudes indicated that the machine operators participating in the program were less satisfied with their work situations after two years of the program's start. Obviously, any workers who participate in a Quality Circles program will, as a result, become less satisfied with their job.

All weaken EXCEPT:
*To weaken the conclusion the statement has to somehow point away from Quality Circles as a cause of decreased employee satisfaction.
A. The second survey occurred during a period of recession when rumors of cutbacks and layoffs at Lark Manufacturing were plentiful *Rumors of cutbacks and layoffs, rather than the program decreased employee satisfaction.
B. The surveys also showed that those Lark machine operators who neither participated in Quality Circles nor knew anyone who did so reported the same degree of lessened satisfaction with their work situations as did the Lark machine operators who participated in Quality Circles *People with no affiliation to the program have equally decreased employee satisfaction.
C. While participating in Quality Circles at Lark Manufacturing, machine operators exhibited two of the primary indicators of improved job satisfaction: increased productivity and decreased absenteeism *The program has actually increased job satisfaction.
D. Several workers at Lark Manufacturing who had participated in Quality Circles while employed at other companies reported that while participating in Quality Circles in previous companies, their work satisfaction has increased *The program can increase job satisfaction at Lark.
E. The machine operators who participate in Quality Circles reported that when the program started, the felt that participation might improve their work situation *This would point to QC as the source of decreased satisfaction if they had expectations when beginning the program that were not met over the course of it.

Lark Manufacturing Company initiated a voluntary Quality Circles program for machine operators.

Independent surveys indicated that the machine operators participating in the program were less satisfied with their work situations after two years of the program's start..........This is a specific example which has been generalized to conclusion.

Conclusion: Obviously, any workers who participate in a Quality Circles program will, as a result, become less satisfied with their job.

All weaken EXCEPT:

A. The second survey occurred during a period of recession when rumors of cutbacks and layoffs at Lark Manufacturing were plentiful............so the cause of recession is the reason not program. Weakener

B. The surveys also showed that those Lark machine operators who neither participated in Quality Circles nor knew anyone who did so reported the same degree of lessened satisfaction with their work situations as did the Lark machine operators who participated in Quality Circles.............dissatisfaction is in general not because of program. Weakener.

C. While participating in Quality Circles at Lark Manufacturing, machine operators exhibited two of the primary indicators of improved job satisfaction: increased productivity and decreased absenteeism................So there is some positive aspect as well. Weakener.

D. Several workers at Lark Manufacturing who had participated in Quality Circles while employed at other companies reported that while participating in Quality Circles in previous companies, their work satisfaction has increased.............some thing wrong with company atmosphere not program. Weakener

E. The machine operators who participate in Quality Circles reported that when the program started, they felt that participation might improve their work situation..........what they felt does not decide the program affect on employees. This does not weaken the argument.

The premise is about X: participation in the Quality Circles program.
The conclusion is about Y: a decrease in job satisfaction.
The argument assumes that X caused Y.



Four of the answer choices will BREAK THE LINK between X and Y.

(A) The second survey occurred during a period of recession when rumors of cutbacks and layoffs at Lark Manufacturing were plentiful. WEAKENS by offering an ALTERNATE CAUSE, implying that it wasn't X (the QC program) but the RECESSION that caused Y (the decrease in job satisfaction). Eliminate A.

(B) The surveys also showed that those Lark machine operators who neither participated in Quality Circles nor knew anyone who did so reported the same degree of lessened satisfaction with their work situations as did the Lark machine operators who participated in Quality Circles. WEAKENS by giving us Y (decreased job satisfaction) WITHOUT X (participation in the QC program), thus BREAKING THE LINK between X and Y. Eliminate B.

(C) While participating in Quality Circles at Lark Manufacturing, machine operators exhibited two of the primary indicators of improved job satisfaction: increased productivity and decreased absenteeism. WEAKENS by giving us X (participation in the QC program) WITHOUT Y (a decrease in job satisfaction), thus BREAKING THE LINK between X and Y. Eliminate C.

(D) Several workers at Lark Manufacturing who had participated in Quality Circles while employed at other companies reported that, while participating in Quality Circles in their previous companies, their work satisfaction had increased. WEAKENS by giving us X (participation in the QC program) WITHOUT Y (a decrease in job satisfaction), thus BREAKING THE LINK between X and Y. Eliminate D.

(E) The machine operators who participated in Quality Circles reported that, when the program started, they felt that participation might improve their work situations. Potentially STRENGTHENS the link between X and Y, implying that the workers were disappointed by their participation in the QC program.

hi, how does C weaken the argument ? I fail to understand..
according to my reasoning, more production and decreased absenteeism are good signs, and then the QC turns out to be a good thing..
then how does it weaken "Obviously, any workers who participate in a Quality Circles program will, as a result, become less satisfied with their jobs."

if they were less satisfied, why would these 2 things happen ?

Open for an explanation from anyone who thinks, he/she can answer my query.

Hey Shrey9
Conclusion: Obviously, any workers who participate in a Quality Circles program will, as a result, become less satisfied with their jobs. According to the author quality circle program is a bad thing

Quality Circle program -----> less satisfaction

Option c: While participating in Quality Circles at Lark Manufacturing, machine operators exhibited two of the primary indicators of improved job satisfaction: increased productivity and decreased absenteeism.

It is going against the conclusion it is showing that Quality Circle program -------> job satisfaction hence it weakens the conclusion. Here it is showing that quality program is a good thing

oh so you mean to say E is confirming that, they hoped for good, and It didn't happen (inferred it myself)
That makes E kinda of a strengthener ?

Hey Shrey9

Each of the following, if true, would weaken the conclusion drawn above EXCEPT:

In this type of question, the correct answer can either be a strengthener or have no effect on the argument. It does not necessarily have to strengthen the argument.

In option E: What the operators think neither strengthens the argument nor weakens the argument. It has no effect on the argument. Therefore, it is the correct answer.

"they felt that participation might improve their work situations." by this line i concluded they were already less satisfied, that's why they are looking to improve their work situations. so this can be weakener. expert help please???

In the second attempt i cleared this i chose E because it didn't weaken it rather it didn't have any effect on the argument stated therefore IMO E

The conclusion drawn in the passage is "any workers who participate in a Quality Circles program will, as a result, become less satisfied with their jobs.

Choice E says:



So this choice tells us that machine operators felt participation might improve their work situations. From this statement, we can't assume workers didn't become less satisfied with their jobs at the end of the program. This statement actually doesn't strengthen or weaken the conclusion -- it has no impact.

The other four choices clearly weaken the conclusion.

I think E) also weakens. Correct me where I'm going wrong but here is my thought process:

E) states that "The machine operators who participated in Quality Circles reported that, when the program started, they felt that participation might improve their work situations"

So, even if the Quality Circles programme did not improve their work situation and kept it exactly the same, they would feel less satisfied.
Whereas, a new employee joining the programme would not feel so if they didn't expect improved work situation to begin with.
Doesn't this weaken the conclusion?

GMATNinja KarishmaB AndrewN

Say at the beginning of 2020, a survey was conducted to find out work satisfaction levels among operators.
After that quality circles program was initiated.
In the beginning of 2022, another survey found that program participants were less happy now than in 2020.

Conclusion: Any workers who participate in a Quality Circles program will, as a result, become less satisfied with their jobs.

Our conclusion is that the program is responsible for lowering satisfaction. It is a weaken except question so we need four options that weaken the claim. That tell us that the program may not be responsible for the lower satisfaction.

(A) The second survey occurred during a period of recession when rumors of cutbacks and layoffs at Lark Manufacturing were plentiful.

Weakens. In recession, people would be feeling down irrespective of the program.

(B) The surveys also showed that those Lark machine operators who neither participated in Quality Circles nor knew anyone who did so reported the same degree of lessened satisfaction with their work situations as did the Lark machine operators who participated in Quality Circles.

Weakens. Those who did not participate also reported less satisfaction. This means, the program may have had nothing to do with decreasing satisfaction levels.

(C) While participating in Quality Circles at Lark Manufacturing, machine operators exhibited two of the primary indicators of improved job satisfaction: increased productivity and decreased absenteeism.

Weakens. While they were participating, the operators showed increase productivity and decreased absenteeism, indicators of better satisfaction. So the program may not have led to the decreased satisfaction of 2022.

(D) Several workers at Lark Manufacturing who had participated in Quality Circles while employed at other companies reported that, while participating in Quality Circles in their previous companies, their work satisfaction had increased.

Weakens. Looks like the programs usually causes increased satisfaction. So it may not be responsible for this decrease.

(E) The machine operators who participated in Quality Circles reported that, when the program started, they felt that participation might improve their work situations.

Our first survey happened before the initiation of the program. When the program got initiated, operators thought that their participation might improve their work situation and hence, perhaps many of them participated. But this has no impact on the 2020 survey.
We are not given what the operators felt in 2022. Did they think that the program led to an improvement in work situation or worsening of it, we do not know.
Note that the survey found that operators were less satisfied in 2022. It does not discuss why the operators thought they were less satisfied. It may have had nothing to do with the program. For example, the covid situation may have led to decrease in satisfaction over the two years. Perhaps the operators felt that the program enabled them to handle the unfortunate circumstances, we don't know. So they may be better off than what they would have been without the program.
The point here is that their expectation at the time of the start of the program does not tell us whether the program was actually responsible for the worsening of the situation or not.

Hence, answer (E)