Proverbial wisdom states that “birds of a feather flock together.”

Question 3

The answer is B.

We can solve using the

Logical

approach - let's just ask ourselves: What is this passage about?

Well, the passage opens by describing a phenomenon (startup founding homogeneity), then goes on to describe its advantages, and then disadvantages. No clear judgement is given on whether the pros or the cons are stronger. So it seems the goal is to simply A. evaluate the benefits and downsides of startups with a particular buildup of founding teams.

Can you please explain why C is wrong for ques 3?

Sure thing vtomar20
answer 3 says "C. describe a thesis by presenting its upsides and downsides."
Well, we definitely have downsides and upsides here, so that part's correct. But what is the thesis? What is being discussed - homogeneity of startup founders - is a phenomenon or maybe a method, not a thesis.

I don't understand how C is not the answer in question 1:



Keeping GMAT preferences in mind I can't see how "flawless execution" can be a valid statement. Its so extreme that it usually can't be a correct answer.
Additionally, we're talking about start-ups. In what world can start-ups have a flawless execution when developing a new product?

You have a point, it is quite strong language to use. However, (A) is simply more wrong - it mentions something which is totally unconnected, whereas C states something which is exaggerated.

Analysis to Q1 -

Q1 is tricky.

A. Finding a suitable PR and advertising person to add skills that the founders lack.
- Correct. This homo group simply means that the founder is trying to find someone similar to him/her to work together. Option A clearly states that the founder is trying to find someone who's not similar to him/her (or who has different skills set) to work together. Thus, Option A is kind out of scope since finding people with different skills is not what homo group is about.

B. Using Six Sigma tools that the founders are familiar with to exchange information.
- Wrong. Finding a similar background is what homo group is about.

C. Evolving from concept to product quickly due to flawless execution.
- Wrong. It's inferred in the paragraph. Check the following sentence from the paragraph:
"When founders share a background, they share a common language that facilitates communication, ensuring that the team begins the work relationship with a mutual understanding and hence can skip over part of the learning curve that would absorb the energies of people with very different backgrounds."
It's clear that working in a homo group, people can skip some steps and jump to production very quickly.

I understand that "flawless" is a strong word. But remember why GMAT rejects strong words. Strong word is usually not supported by the paragraph explicitly. For example, if the paragraph tells you that it's highly likely for Long Island driver to use Manhattan bridge to travel to NYC, it'll be wrong to say that Long Island use "only" Manhattan bridge for a city trip because "only" is not supported by the paragraph. However, if a paragraph tells you that this rock is formed 100% by element A, it's ok to conclude that "only" element A forms the rock.

Simply seeing a strong word is not a good-enough reason to reject an option. If the option that contains strong words is not supported by the paragraph or there is clearly a better option to pick, we should be comfortable to not pick a strong-word option.

Back to Option C. Whether or not the execution is flawless is irrelevant and out of scope. The benefit of homo group is about the skipping several earlier stages of a new team, a situation that may exist in both flaw and flawless execution.

D. Quickly dividing a complex task into subtasks and assigning them to different teams for execution.
-Wrong. Same logic as C.

E. Reduce interpersonal conflict while making key decisions.
-Wrong. This is close but wrong. The paragraph does state a risk that among executive group, there could be interpersonal conflicts. But such situation is a small sample and Option is too general. If you check again the earlier in paragraph 2, Option E, with its general sense, is actually also supported, for example, "it takes less time to develop working relationships xxx". So the answer, though it has a risk, is a good enough answer.

[quote="DavidTutorexamPAL"]

Question 2

The answer is B.

We'll use the

Logical

approach, since we are asked to infer.
The passage lists many advantages of homogenous teams, yet in the end it describes some disadvantages. By telling us that heterogenous teams may build "more valuable" startups, we can directly infer that homogenous teams may build less valuable ones - answer (B).

I find that wording in the answer choice a bit extreme, because the answer "When they comprise of members who are remarkably homogeneous with regard to skills and functional backgrounds, they may not be able to build more valuable ventures." may be interpreted in absolute terms and not in relative terms as argued for in OA