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.
Mar 2709:30 AM PDT
-10:30 AM PDT
Preparing for the GMAT? Avoid these 5 major mistakes that can lower your score and hurt your MBA dreams. In this expert panel discussion, 4 top GMAT coaches - GMAT Ninja, Jeff Miller from TTP, Rida Shafiq from eGMAT, and Chris Gentry from Manhattan Prep- Mar 27
10:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
What happens after getting an MBA? Is it worth the investment? To find out, I interviewed 10 GMAT Club professionals who have completed their MBAs and built careers in consulting, finance, tech, and entrepreneurship. Their answers might surprise you! 
Mar 2911:30 AM EDT
-12:30 PM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Mar 3005:30 AM PDT
-07:30 AM PDT
We know Strengthen and Weaken questions account for more than 50% of the CR questions on the GMAT. With CR becoming even more important on GMAT Focus, it's time you strengthen your weaknesses with an approach that improves your solving time and accuracy!
Mar 3011:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to evaluate your current skill level, learn process skills, and solve through tough Arithmetic questions.
Mar 3110:00 AM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
The Target Test Prep team has recently introduced TTP OnDemand GMAT, a 400-hour live masterclass video course created by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder and CEO of Target Test Prep.
Apr 0308:00 PM PDT
-09:00 PM PDT
Full-length FE mock with insightful analytics, weakness diagnosis, and video explanations!
10 Mar 2024, 04:55
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
95%
(hard)
Question Stats:
47% (02:11) correct
53%
(02:41)
wrong
based on 575
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Researchers have found that, allowing for variations attributable to the size of a company’s workforce and to the company’s business sector, companies that have low staff turnover tend to have greater labor productivity than companies with higher turnover. Since high staff turnover negatively affects workers’ sense of community and identification with company goals, clearly these adverse effects on staff attitudes are the cause of the decline in productivity as turnover increases.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. Laying off workers and, especially, hiring new ones both require continuing staff to spend time on activities that do not immediately contribute to output.
B. The introduction of technology intended to increase labor productivity can, by changing the skills needed to accomplish a task, entail an increase in staff turnover.
C. In proportion to the size of the workforce, staff turnover tends to be somewhat higher in large companies than in relatively small companies.
D. Even when staff turnover has been low, staff morale can suffer when changes in the business environment adversely affect the company’s financial prospects.
E. Workers’ sense of community and degree of identification with company goals both tend to be stronger in relatively small companies than in large companies.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
A. Laying off workers and, especially, hiring new ones both require continuing staff to spend time on activities that do not immediately contribute to output.
B. The introduction of technology intended to increase labor productivity can, by changing the skills needed to accomplish a task, entail an increase in staff turnover.
C. In proportion to the size of the workforce, staff turnover tends to be somewhat higher in large companies than in relatively small companies.
D. Even when staff turnover has been low, staff morale can suffer when changes in the business environment adversely affect the company’s financial prospects.
E. Workers’ sense of community and degree of identification with company goals both tend to be stronger in relatively small companies than in large companies.
Updated on: 27 Aug 2024, 10:49
Originally posted by MartyMurray on 10 Mar 2024, 05:59.
Last edited by MartyMurray on 27 Aug 2024, 10:49, edited 3 times in total.
Last edited by MartyMurray on 27 Aug 2024, 10:49, edited 3 times in total.
Kudos
Bookmarks
Researchers have found that, allowing for variations attributable to the size of a company’s workforce and to the company’s business sector, companies that have low staff turnover tend to have greater labor productivity than companies with higher turnover. Since high staff turnover negatively affects workers’ sense of community and identification with company goals, clearly these adverse effects on staff attitudes are the cause of the decline in productivity as turnover increases.
The conclusion of the argument is the following:
these adverse effects on staff attitudes are the cause of the decline in productivity as turnover increases
The support for the conclusion is the following:
high staff turnover negatively affects workers’ sense of community and identification with company goals
So, the author has gone from the fact that high turnover has adverse effects on staff attitudes to the conclusion that the cause of "the decline in productivity as turnover increases" is "adverse effects on staff attitudes."
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
This is a Weaken question, and the correct answer will somehow weaken the support for or cast doubt on the conclusion.
A. Laying off workers and, especially, hiring new ones both require continuing staff to spend time on activities that do not immediately contribute to output.
This choice casts doubt on the conclusion.
After all, if this choice is true, then we have an alternative cause for the decline in productivity as turnover increases.
If this choice is true, then it may not be that adverse effects on staff attitudes cause the decline, and it may instead be that the decline occurs because laying off workers and hiring new ones require staff to spend time on activities that do not immediately contribute to output.
Keep.
B. The introduction of technology intended to increase labor productivity can, by changing the skills needed to accomplish a task, entail an increase in staff turnover.
We can often weaken an argument by presenting an alternative cause for an effect. So, this choice could seem to weaken the argument because it presents a cause for the effect "an increase in staff turnover."
At the same time, this choice doesn't weaken this argument in that way because the effect the conclusion is about is not "an increase in staff turnover." It's "the decline in productivity as turnover increases."
Since this choice doesn't present an alternative cause for the decline in productivity, it doesn't weaken the argument by presenting an alternative cause.
Alternatively, this choice could seem to weaken the argument because this choice describes a situation that contrasts with the pattern that the argument is about.
The argument is about a general pattern: higher turnover is associated with lower productivity.
In contrast, this choice describes a situation in which higher turnover is associated with higher productivity, or at least with the process of achieving higher productivity.
At the same time, this choice does not weaken the argument because all this choice is saying is that there can be an exception to the general pattern when a certain type of process, "introduction of technology intended to increase labor productivity," occurs.
The argument's conclusion is that the reason for the general pattern is that adverse effects on staff attitudes cause of a decline in productivity as turnover increases.
The fact that there can be an exception to the general pattern does not mean that the argument's conclusion about the cause of that general pattern is not correct.
Eliminate.
C. In proportion to the size of the workforce, staff turnover tends to be somewhat higher in large companies than in relatively small companies.
This choice is an irrelevant comparison choice.
After all, the fact that staff turnover tends to be somewhat higher in large companies than in relatively small companies doesn't clearly indicate anything about the cause of the decline in productivity as turnover increases.
Eliminate.
D. Even when staff turnover has been low, staff morale can suffer when changes in the business environment adversely affect the company’s financial prospects.
This choice masquerades as a weakener by weakening the case for a conclusion other than the conclusion of this argument.
It weakens the case for the conclusion that staff morale declines only because of turnover issues.
That's not the conclusion we need to cast doubt on.
Eliminate.
E. Workers’ sense of community and degree of identification with company goals both tend to be stronger in relatively small companies than in large companies.
This choice is an irrelevant comparison choice.
After all, the fact that workers’ sense of community and degree of identification with company goals both tend to be stronger in relatively small companies than in large companies doesn't clearly indicate anything about the cause of the decline in productivity as turnover increases.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: A
The conclusion of the argument is the following:
these adverse effects on staff attitudes are the cause of the decline in productivity as turnover increases
The support for the conclusion is the following:
high staff turnover negatively affects workers’ sense of community and identification with company goals
So, the author has gone from the fact that high turnover has adverse effects on staff attitudes to the conclusion that the cause of "the decline in productivity as turnover increases" is "adverse effects on staff attitudes."
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?
This is a Weaken question, and the correct answer will somehow weaken the support for or cast doubt on the conclusion.
A. Laying off workers and, especially, hiring new ones both require continuing staff to spend time on activities that do not immediately contribute to output.
This choice casts doubt on the conclusion.
After all, if this choice is true, then we have an alternative cause for the decline in productivity as turnover increases.
If this choice is true, then it may not be that adverse effects on staff attitudes cause the decline, and it may instead be that the decline occurs because laying off workers and hiring new ones require staff to spend time on activities that do not immediately contribute to output.
Keep.
B. The introduction of technology intended to increase labor productivity can, by changing the skills needed to accomplish a task, entail an increase in staff turnover.
We can often weaken an argument by presenting an alternative cause for an effect. So, this choice could seem to weaken the argument because it presents a cause for the effect "an increase in staff turnover."
At the same time, this choice doesn't weaken this argument in that way because the effect the conclusion is about is not "an increase in staff turnover." It's "the decline in productivity as turnover increases."
Since this choice doesn't present an alternative cause for the decline in productivity, it doesn't weaken the argument by presenting an alternative cause.
Alternatively, this choice could seem to weaken the argument because this choice describes a situation that contrasts with the pattern that the argument is about.
The argument is about a general pattern: higher turnover is associated with lower productivity.
In contrast, this choice describes a situation in which higher turnover is associated with higher productivity, or at least with the process of achieving higher productivity.
At the same time, this choice does not weaken the argument because all this choice is saying is that there can be an exception to the general pattern when a certain type of process, "introduction of technology intended to increase labor productivity," occurs.
The argument's conclusion is that the reason for the general pattern is that adverse effects on staff attitudes cause of a decline in productivity as turnover increases.
The fact that there can be an exception to the general pattern does not mean that the argument's conclusion about the cause of that general pattern is not correct.
Eliminate.
C. In proportion to the size of the workforce, staff turnover tends to be somewhat higher in large companies than in relatively small companies.
This choice is an irrelevant comparison choice.
After all, the fact that staff turnover tends to be somewhat higher in large companies than in relatively small companies doesn't clearly indicate anything about the cause of the decline in productivity as turnover increases.
Eliminate.
D. Even when staff turnover has been low, staff morale can suffer when changes in the business environment adversely affect the company’s financial prospects.
This choice masquerades as a weakener by weakening the case for a conclusion other than the conclusion of this argument.
It weakens the case for the conclusion that staff morale declines only because of turnover issues.
That's not the conclusion we need to cast doubt on.
Eliminate.
E. Workers’ sense of community and degree of identification with company goals both tend to be stronger in relatively small companies than in large companies.
This choice is an irrelevant comparison choice.
After all, the fact that workers’ sense of community and degree of identification with company goals both tend to be stronger in relatively small companies than in large companies doesn't clearly indicate anything about the cause of the decline in productivity as turnover increases.
Eliminate.
Correct answer: A
General Discussion
18 Apr 2024, 18:35
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi MartyMurray ,
I am having some confusion understanding the options mentioned in the question.
Option A definitely provides an alternate reason for decrease in labor productivity. But does not favor one company ( small ) over the other ( large ).
The process of hiring, retraining etc will consume similar efforts in both large and smaller companies and will equally affect both, this would definitely make more sense if it ( option ) says that this process affects larger companies more than it affects smaller companies.
How can we assume that this will work against a Company if it is larger, when it's not mentioned in the option explicitly. ( it does the same for option B too, the reason mentioned in option B can benifit both large and small companies equally for example ).
I am having some confusion understanding the options mentioned in the question.
Option A definitely provides an alternate reason for decrease in labor productivity. But does not favor one company ( small ) over the other ( large ).
The process of hiring, retraining etc will consume similar efforts in both large and smaller companies and will equally affect both, this would definitely make more sense if it ( option ) says that this process affects larger companies more than it affects smaller companies.
How can we assume that this will work against a Company if it is larger, when it's not mentioned in the option explicitly. ( it does the same for option B too, the reason mentioned in option B can benifit both large and small companies equally for example ).
