GMAT Question of the Day - Daily to your Mailbox; hard ones only

 It is currently 19 Aug 2019, 23:37

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

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

Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of

Author Message
TAGS:

Hide Tags

Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 198
Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

Updated on: 26 Dec 2018, 10:10
1
Question 1
00:00

based on 75 sessions

79% (03:09) correct 21% (02:56) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 2
00:00

based on 80 sessions

90% (00:44) correct 10% (00:50) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 3
00:00

based on 87 sessions

69% (00:54) correct 31% (00:51) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 4
00:00

based on 80 sessions

28% (01:12) correct 72% (01:48) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 5
00:00

based on 82 sessions

68% (00:43) correct 33% (00:53) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 6
00:00

based on 77 sessions

64% (00:46) correct 36% (00:57) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Question 7
00:00

based on 74 sessions

26% (00:59) correct 74% (00:46) wrong

HideShow timer Statistics

Since the late 1970’s, in the face of a severe loss of market share in dozens of industries, manufacturers in the United States have been trying to improve productivity—and therefore enhance their international competitiveness—through cost-cutting programs. (Cost-cutting here is defined as raising labor output while holding the amount of labor constant.) However, from 1978 through 1982, productivity—the value of goods manufactured divided by the amount of labor input—did not improve; and while the results were better in the business upturn of the three years following, they ran 25 percent lower than productivity improvements during earlier, post-1945 upturns. At the same time, it became clear that the harder manufactures worked to implement cost-cutting, the more they lost their competitive edge.

With this paradox in mind, I recently visited 25 companies; it became clear to me that the cost-cutting approach to increasing productivity is fundamentally flawed. Manufacturing regularly observes a “40, 40, 20” rule. Roughly 40 percent of any manufacturing-based competitive advantage derives from long-term changes in manufacturing structure (decisions about the number, size, location, and capacity of facilities) and in approaches to materials. Another 40 percent comes from major changes in equipment and process technology. The final 20 percent rests on implementing conventional cost-cutting. This rule does not imply that cost-cutting should not be tried. The well-known tools of this approach—including simplifying jobs and retraining employees to work smarter, not harder—do produce results. But the tools quickly reach the limits of what they can contribute.

Another problem is that the cost-cutting approach hinders innovation and discourages creative people. As Abernathy’s study of automobile manufacturers has shown, an industry can easily become prisoner of its own investments in cost-cutting techniques, reducing its ability to develop new products. And managers under pressure to maximize cost-cutting will resist innovation because they know that more fundamental changes in processes or systems will wreak havoc with the results on which they are measured. Production managers have always seen their job as one of minimizing costs and maximizing output. This dimension of performance has until recently sufficed as a basis of evaluation, but it has created a penny-pinching, mechanistic culture in most factories that has kept away creative managers.

Every company I know that has freed itself from the paradox has done so, in part, by developing and implementing a manufacturing strategy. Such a strategy focuses on the manufacturing structure and on equipment and process technology. In one company a manufacturing strategy that allowed different areas of the factory to specialize in different markets replaced the conventional cost-cutting approach; within three years the company regained its competitive advantage. Together with such strategies, successful companies are also encouraging managers to focus on a wider set of objectives besides cutting costs. There is hope for manufacturing, but it clearly rests on a different way of managing.

The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

(A) summarizing a thesis
(B) recommending a different approach
(C) comparing points of view
(D) making a series of predictions
(E) describing a number of paradoxes

2. It can be inferred from the passage that the manufacturers mentioned in line 2 expected that the measures they implemented would

(A) encourage innovation
(B) keep labor output constant
(D) permit business upturns to be more easily predicted
(E) cause managers to focus on a wider set of objectives

3. The primary function of the first paragraph of the passage is to

(A) outline in brief the author’s argument
(B) anticipate challenges to the prescriptions that follow
(C) clarify some disputed definitions of economic terms
(D) summarize a number of long-accepted explanations
(E) present a historical context for the author’s observations

4. The author refers to Abernathy’s study (line 36) most probably in order to

(A) qualify an observation about one rule governing manufacturing
(C) support an earlier assertion about one method of increasing productivity
(D) suggest the centrality in the United States economy of a particular manufacturing industry
(E) given an example of research that has questioned the wisdom of revising a manufacturing strategy

5. The author’s attitude toward the culture in most factories is best described as

(A) cautious
(B) critical
(C) disinterested
(D) respectful

6. In the passage, the author includes all of the following EXCEPT

(A) personal observation
(C) a definition of productivity
(D) an example of a successful company
(E) an illustration of a process technology

7. The author suggests that implementing conventional cost-cutting as a way of increasing manufacturing competitiveness is a strategy that is

(A) flawed and ruinous
(B) shortsighted and difficult to sustain
(C) popular and easily accomplished
(E) misunderstood but promising

Originally posted by gmatcrook on 27 Jun 2008, 11:40.
Last edited by Skywalker18 on 26 Dec 2018, 10:10, edited 1 time in total.
formatted
Director
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 817
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Jun 2008, 17:29
1
Notes:
Para 1: Historical context. Cost cutting.
Para 2: Paradox of historical cost cutting.
Para 3: Specific example. Abernayth’s study. Tie innovation to cost cutting.
Para 4: Author’s point. Manufacturing strategy.

1. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
(A) summarizing a thesis
(B) recommending a different approach
Correct. Passage says in para 4 “There is hope for manufacturing, but it clearly rests on a different way of managing”
(C) comparing points of view
(D) making a series of predictions
(E) describing a number of paradoxes

2. It can be inferred from the passage that the manufacturers mentioned in line 2 expected that the measures they implemented would
(A) encourage innovation
(B) keep labor output constant
Correct. Passage says “been trying to improve productivity—and therefore enhance their international competitiveness—through cost-cutting programs”
(D) permit business upturns to be more easily predicted
(E) cause managers to focus on a wider set of objectives

3. The primary function of the first paragraph of the passage is to
(A) outline in brief the author’s argument
(B) anticipate challenges to the prescriptions that follow
(C) clarify some disputed definitions of economic terms
(D) summarize a number of long-accepted explanations
(E) present a historical context for the author’s observations
Correct. Author is emphasing “cost cutting” in 1970s.

4. The author refers to Abernathy’s study most probably in order to
(A) qualify an observation about one rule governing manufacturing
(C) support an earlier assertion about one method of increasing productivity
(D) suggest the centrality in the United States economy of a particular manufacturing industry
(E) given an example of research that has questioned the wisdom of revising a manufacturing strategy
Correct. Study questions “cost cutting”.

5. The author’s attitude toward the culture in most factories is best described as
(A) cautious
(B) critical
Correct. Author says we need alternative approach.
(C) disinterested
(D) respectful

6. In the passage, the author includes all of the following EXCEPT
(A) personal observation
(C) a definition of productivity
Correct. Rest all are discussed in different paragraphs.
(D) an example of a successful company
(E) an illustration of a process technology

7. The author suggests that implementing conventional cost-cutting as a way of increasing manufacturing competitiveness is a strategy that is
(A) flawed and ruinous
Correct. Para 2 says “cost-cutting approach to increasing productivity is fundamentally flawed”
(B) shortsighted and difficult to sustain
(C) popular and easily accomplished
(E) misunderstood but promising

Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3006
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Jun 2008, 17:37
gmatcrook wrote:
Since the late 1970’s, in the face of a severe loss of market
share in dozens of industries, manufacturers in the United
States have been trying to improve productivity—and therefore
enhance their international competitiveness—through cost-
cutting programs. (Cost-cutting here is defined as raising labor
output while holding the amount of labor constant.) However,
from 1978 through 1982, productivity—the value of goods
manufactured divided by the amount of labor input—did not
improve; and while the results were better in the business upturn
of the three years following, they ran 25 percent lower than
productivity improvements during earlier, post-1945 upturns.
At the same time, it became clear that the harder manufactures
worked to implement cost-cutting, the more they lost their
competitive edge.

With this paradox in mind, I recently visited 25 companies; it became
clear to me that the cost-cutting approach to increasing productivity
is fundamentally flawed. Manufacturing regularly observes a “40, 40, 20”
rule. Roughly 40 percent of any manufacturing-based competitive
advantage derives from long-term changes in manufacturing structure
(decisions about the number, size, location, and capacity of facilities)
and in approaches to materials. Another 40 percent comes from major
changes in equipment and process technology. The final 20 percent
rests on implementing conventional cost-cutting. This rule does not
imply that cost-cutting should not be tried. The well-known tools of
this approach—including simplifying jobs and retraining employees to
work smarter, not harder—do produce results. But the tools quickly reach
the limits of what they can contribute.

Another problem is that the cost-cutting approach hinders innovation and
discourages creative people. As Abernathy’s study of automobile manufacturers
has shown, an industry can easily become prisoner of its own investments
in cost-cutting techniques, reducing its ability to develop new products.
And managers under pressure to maximize cost-cutting will resist innovation
because they know that more fundamental changes in processes or systems
will wreakhavoc with the results on which they are measured. Production
managers have always seen their job as one of minimizing costs and maximizing
output. This dimension of performance has until recently sufficed as a basis
of evaluation, but it has created a penny-pinching mechanistic culture in most
factories that has kept away creative managers.

Every company I know that has freed itself from the paradox has done so,
in part, by developing and implementing a manufacturing strategy. Such a
strategy focuses on the manufacturing structure and on equipment and
process technology. In one company a manufacturing strategy that allowed
different areas of the factory to specialize in different markets replaced the
conventional cost-cutting approach; within three years the company regained
its competitive advantage. Together with such strategies, successful
companies are also encouraging managers to focus on a wider set of
objectives besides cutting costs. There is hope for manufacturing, but
it clearly rests on a different way of managing.

1. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
(A) summarizing a thesis
(B) recommending a different approach
(C) comparing points of view
(D) making a series of predictions
(E) describing a number of paradoxes

B--

2. It can be inferred from the passage that the manufacturers mentioned in line 2 expected that the measures they implemented would
(A) encourage innovation
(B) keep labor output constant
(D) permit business upturns to be more easily predicted
(E) cause managers to focus on a wider set of objectives

C

3. The primary function of the first paragraph of the passage is to
(A) outline in brief the author’s argument
(B) anticipate challenges to the prescriptions that follow
(C) clarify some disputed definitions of economic terms
(D) summarize a number of long-accepted explanations
(E) present a historical context for the author’s observations

tough one btw A and E..will pick E

4. The author refers to Abernathy’s study most probably in order to
(A) qualify an observation about one rule governing manufacturing
(C) support an earlier assertion about one method of increasing productivity
(D) suggest the centrality in the United States economy of a particular manufacturing industry
(E) given an example of research that has questioned the wisdom of revising a manufacturing strategy

C...

5. The author’s attitude toward the culture in most factories is best described as
(A) cautious
(B) critical
(C) disinterested
(D) respectful

B is best

6. In the passage, the author includes all of the following EXCEPT
(A) personal observation
(C) a definition of productivity
(D) an example of a successful company
(E) an illustration of a process technology

Simple one E..

7. The author suggests that implementing conventional cost-cutting as a way of increasing manufacturing competitiveness is a strategy that is
(A) flawed and ruinous
(B) shortsighted and difficult to sustain
(C) popular and easily accomplished
(E) misunderstood but promising

Senior Manager
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 262
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Jun 2008, 18:19
1.B
2. C
3. E
4. A
5. A
6. E
7. B
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1521
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Jun 2008, 19:08
gmatcrook wrote:
Since the late 1970’s, in the face of a severe loss of market
share in dozens of industries, manufacturers in the United
States have been trying to improve productivity—and therefore
enhance their international competitiveness—through cost-
cutting programs. (Cost-cutting here is defined as raising labor
output while holding the amount of labor constant.) However,
from 1978 through 1982, productivity—the value of goods
manufactured divided by the amount of labor input—did not
improve; and while the results were better in the business upturn
of the three years following, they ran 25 percent lower than
productivity improvements during earlier, post-1945 upturns.
At the same time, it became clear that the harder manufactures
worked to implement cost-cutting, the more they lost their
competitive edge.

With this paradox in mind, I recently visited 25 companies; it became
clear to me that the cost-cutting approach to increasing productivity
is fundamentally flawed. Manufacturing regularly observes a “40, 40, 20”
rule. Roughly 40 percent of any manufacturing-based competitive
advantage derives from long-term changes in manufacturing structure
(decisions about the number, size, location, and capacity of facilities)
and in approaches to materials. Another 40 percent comes from major
changes in equipment and process technology. The final 20 percent
rests on implementing conventional cost-cutting. This rule does not
imply that cost-cutting should not be tried. The well-known tools of
this approach—including simplifying jobs and retraining employees to
work smarter, not harder—do produce results. But the tools quickly reach
the limits of what they can contribute.

Another problem is that the cost-cutting approach hinders innovation and
discourages creative people. As Abernathy’s study of automobile manufacturers
has shown, an industry can easily become prisoner of its own investments
in cost-cutting techniques, reducing its ability to develop new products.
And managers under pressure to maximize cost-cutting will resist innovation
because they know that more fundamental changes in processes or systems
will wreakhavoc with the results on which they are measured. Production
managers have always seen their job as one of minimizing costs and maximizing
output. This dimension of performance has until recently sufficed as a basis
of evaluation, but it has created a penny-pinching mechanistic culture in most
factories that has kept away creative managers.

Every company I know that has freed itself from the paradox has done so,
in part, by developing and implementing a manufacturing strategy. Such a
strategy focuses on the manufacturing structure and on equipment and
process technology. In one company a manufacturing strategy that allowed
different areas of the factory to specialize in different markets replaced the
conventional cost-cutting approach; within three years the company regained
its competitive advantage. Together with such strategies, successful
companies are also encouraging managers to focus on a wider set of
objectives besides cutting costs. There is hope for manufacturing, but
it clearly rests on a different way of managing.

1. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
(A) summarizing a thesis
(B) recommending a different approach
(C) comparing points of view
(D) making a series of predictions
(E) describing a number of paradoxes

2. It can be inferred from the passage that the manufacturers mentioned in line 2 expected that the measures they implemented would
(A) encourage innovation
(B) keep labor output constant
(D) permit business upturns to be more easily predicted
(E) cause managers to focus on a wider set of objectives

3. The primary function of the first paragraph of the passage is to
(A) outline in brief the author’s argument
(B) anticipate challenges to the prescriptions that follow
(C) clarify some disputed definitions of economic terms
(D) summarize a number of long-accepted explanations
(E) present a historical context for the author’s observations

4. The author refers to Abernathy’s study most probably in order to
(A) qualify an observation about one rule governing manufacturing
(C) support an earlier assertion about one method of increasing productivity
(D) suggest the centrality in the United States economy of a particular manufacturing industry
(E) given an example of research that has questioned the wisdom of revising a manufacturing strategy

5. The author’s attitude toward the culture in most factories is best described as
(A) cautious
(B) critical
(C) disinterested
(D) respectful

6. In the passage, the author includes all of the following EXCEPT
(A) personal observation
(C) a definition of productivity
(D) an example of a successful company
(E) an illustration of a process technology

7. The author suggests that implementing conventional cost-cutting as a way of increasing manufacturing competitiveness is a strategy that is
(A) flawed and ruinous
(B) shortsighted and difficult to sustain
(C) popular and easily accomplished
(E) misunderstood but promising

1.B
2.C
3A.
4 C
5 a or b
6E
7B
_________________
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 198
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

27 Jun 2008, 23:23
This time we got quite a few responses.
Thanks guys! Below are the OAs:

1.B
2.C
3.E
4.C
5.B
6.E
7.D

The 4th one was a pretty difficult one to find out.
Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3006
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Jun 2008, 07:49
**** got number 7 wrong..any OE???

gmatcrook wrote:
This time we got quite a few responses.
Thanks guys! Below are the OAs:

1.B
2.C
3.E
4.C
5.B
6.E
7.D

The 4th one was a pretty difficult one to find out.
Manager
Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 194
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Jun 2008, 08:33
gmatcrook wrote:
This time we got quite a few responses.
Thanks guys! Below are the OAs:

1.B
2.C
3.E
4.C
5.B
6.E
7.D

The 4th one was a pretty difficult one to find out.

what was your reasoning behind 4?
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 198
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Jun 2008, 10:57
I got this one wrong.

My reasoning behind 4 would be the immediate earlier statement made by the author:
(I know! I myself was thinking later on - How did I miss this one?)

"the cost-cutting approach hinders innovation and discourages creative people" - Assertion made by the author.

This cost-cutting approach is the method adopted to improve productivity.

Option C states this clearly.

Am I right fresinha12.
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 198
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Jun 2008, 11:07
The 7th one.

B states that the cost-cutting as a strategy is short-sighted and difficult to sustain.

Is it Short-sighted? Yes
Is it difficult to sustain? No.

The author states at the end of the 2nd paragraph -"...The final 20 percent
rests on implementing conventional cost-cutting. This rule does not imply that cost-cutting should not be tried.
"
Also at the end of the last paragraph the author states, "Together with such strategies, successful
companies are also encouraging managers to focus on a wider set of objectives besides cutting costs.
"

Thus, D sums it up correctly. Cost-cutting as a strategy that is useful and inadequate which means that in addition to cost-cutting we would require something else as well.
Manager
Joined: 31 Jul 2006
Posts: 198
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Jun 2008, 11:11
Once again, Thanks abhijitsen, for taking the pains to type in the notes and explain the answers.
It sure helps us.

+1 kudos to you.
Current Student
Joined: 28 Dec 2004
Posts: 3006
Location: New York City
Schools: Wharton'11 HBS'12
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

28 Jun 2008, 12:39
you got it..
i re-read 7..and i can agree with D..but also at the sametime i feel B is also correct..isnt the whole point of bringing up the detroit example..they are focused on cost cutting and now cannot sustain that since it has become a vicious circle..

gmatcrook wrote:
I got this one wrong.

My reasoning behind 4 would be the immediate earlier statement made by the author:
(I know! I myself was thinking later on - How did I miss this one?)

"the cost-cutting approach hinders innovation and discourages creative people" - Assertion made by the author.

This cost-cutting approach is the method adopted to improve productivity.

Option C states this clearly.

Am I right fresinha12.
VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1026
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

29 Jun 2008, 09:16
abhijit_sen wrote:
Notes:
Para 1: Historical context. Cost cutting.
Para 2: Paradox of historical cost cutting.
Para 3: Specific example. Abernayth’s study. Tie innovation to cost cutting.
Para 4: Author’s point. Manufacturing strategy.

1. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with
(A) summarizing a thesis
(B) recommending a different approach
Correct. Passage says in para 4 “There is hope for manufacturing, but it clearly rests on a different way of managing”
(C) comparing points of view
(D) making a series of predictions
(E) describing a number of paradoxes

2. It can be inferred from the passage that the manufacturers mentioned in line 2 expected that the measures they implemented would
(A) encourage innovation
(B) keep labor output constant
Correct. Passage says “been trying to improve productivity—and therefore enhance their international competitiveness—through cost-cutting programs”
(D) permit business upturns to be more easily predicted
(E) cause managers to focus on a wider set of objectives

3. The primary function of the first paragraph of the passage is to
(A) outline in brief the author’s argument
(B) anticipate challenges to the prescriptions that follow
(C) clarify some disputed definitions of economic terms
(D) summarize a number of long-accepted explanations
(E) present a historical context for the author’s observations
Correct. Author is emphasing “cost cutting” in 1970s.

4. The author refers to Abernathy’s study most probably in order to
(A) qualify an observation about one rule governing manufacturing
(C) support an earlier assertion about one method of increasing productivity
(D) suggest the centrality in the United States economy of a particular manufacturing industry
(E) given an example of research that has questioned the wisdom of revising a manufacturing strategy
Correct. Study questions “cost cutting”.

5. The author’s attitude toward the culture in most factories is best described as
(A) cautious
(B) critical
Correct. Author says we need alternative approach.
(C) disinterested
(D) respectful

6. In the passage, the author includes all of the following EXCEPT
(A) personal observation
(C) a definition of productivity
Correct. Rest all are discussed in different paragraphs.
(D) an example of a successful company
(E) an illustration of a process technology

7. The author suggests that implementing conventional cost-cutting as a way of increasing manufacturing competitiveness is a strategy that is
(A) flawed and ruinous
Correct. Para 2 says “cost-cutting approach to increasing productivity is fundamentally flawed”
(B) shortsighted and difficult to sustain
(C) popular and easily accomplished
(E) misunderstood but promising

Abhijit, One question. WHat is your approach to solve RCs?Do you read the passage thoroughly or ready only the first para/first lines of subsequent paras+skim+jot key words?

Thanks.
Director
Joined: 04 Jan 2008
Posts: 685
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

Updated on: 27 Jul 2018, 12:20
13 mins and My choices are
1 B 05:46
2 C 01:51
3 E 00:50
4 B 03:37
5 A 00:19
6 D 00:47
7 D 00:23
(Its 1 50 AM )

I need OEs of 4,5,6
_________________
http://gmatclub.com/forum/math-polygons-87336.html
http://gmatclub.com/forum/competition-for-the-best-gmat-error-log-template-86232.html

Originally posted by nitya34 on 09 Apr 2009, 13:15.
Last edited by workout on 27 Jul 2018, 12:20, edited 2 times in total.
Removed the OA from the post and updated them in the Question
Current Student
Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 300
Location: India
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

09 Apr 2009, 17:46
Quote:
(Its 1 50 AM )

This thing motivated me ...I was feeling sleepy at 8:48 PM Hope I can continue till 2 tonight
Manager
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 203
Location: Kolkata
Schools: La Martiniere for Boys
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

13 Apr 2009, 23:00
I am getting BCEBBEA

5. This dimension of performance has until recently sufficed as a basis of evaluation, but it has created a penny-pinching, mechanistic culture in most factories that has kept away creative managers.--------> suggests author is critical of the culture prevalent in most factories. Is he cautioning anybody? No. I think he is merely criticizing.

6.
(A) personal observation ---> Every company I know that has freed itself from the paradox has done so, in part, by developing and implementing a manufacturing strategy
(B) a business principle-----> 20 20 40 rule
(C) a definition of productivity ------> given in 1st para
(D) an example of a successful company-------> cited in last para
(E) an illustration of a process technology--------> could not fine one

7. ------> is supported by 2nd para ------> it became clear to me that the cost-cutting approach to increasing productivity is fundamentally flawed
_________________
Thanks
rampuria
SVP
Joined: 04 May 2006
Posts: 1521
Schools: CBS, Kellogg
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Apr 2009, 00:22
1 B 07:52
2 C 01:03
3 E 01:08
4 B 01:32
5 C 01:29
6 B 00:49
7 B 01:05

rampuria wrote:
5. This dimension of performance has until recently sufficed as a basis of evaluation, but it has created a penny-pinching, mechanistic culture in most factories that has kept away creative managers.--------> suggests author is critical of the culture prevalent in most factories. Is he cautioning anybody? No. I think he is merely criticizing.

6.
(A) personal observation ---> Every company I know that has freed itself from the paradox has done so, in part, by developing and implementing a manufacturing strategy
(B) a business principle-----> 20 20 40 rule
(C) a definition of productivity ------> given in 1st para
(D) an example of a successful company-------> cited in last para
(E) an illustration of a process technology--------> could not fine one

Good job

I plan to object the OA of question 4, but I suddently find this:
"..But the tools quickly reach the limits of what they can contribute."

the cost-cutting approach hinders innovation and discourages creative people. As Abernathy’s study of automobile manufacturers has shown, an industry can easily become prisoner of its own investments in cost-cutting techniques, reducing its ability to develop new products.

4. The author refers to Abernathy’s study (line 36) most probably in order to

(A) qualify an observation about one rule governing manufacturing
(C) support an earlier assertion about one method of increasing productivity
(D) suggest the centrality in the United States economy of a particular manufacturing industry
(E) given an example of research that has questioned the wisdom of revising a manufacturing strategy

4 makes sense now
_________________
Manager
Joined: 04 Sep 2008
Posts: 203
Location: Kolkata
Schools: La Martiniere for Boys
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

14 Apr 2009, 00:31
sondenso , do you agree with my answers of 5 and 6
_________________
Thanks
rampuria
Intern
Joined: 21 May 2015
Posts: 1
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

05 Feb 2016, 13:59
How can answer for Q7 is D it should be A as it is flawed in second Paragraph. Kindly help
Intern
Joined: 07 Feb 2016
Posts: 20
GMAT 1: 650 Q47 V34
GMAT 2: 710 Q48 V39
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of  [#permalink]

Show Tags

20 Apr 2017, 21:25
vketaraju wrote:
How can answer for Q7 is D it should be A as it is flawed in second Paragraph. Kindly help

I struggled on Q7 between A and D as well.

The argument states that cost-cutting is definitely flawed and in the very first paragraph it additionally mentions "the harder manufactures worked to implement cost-cutting, the more they lost their competitive edge.", which indicates that the approach will be ruinous, although I know that this word is quite extreme.
Re: Since the late 1970's, in the face of a severe loss of   [#permalink] 20 Apr 2017, 21:25

Go to page    1   2    Next  [ 25 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by