Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 06:13 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 06:13
Home
GMAT
Messages
Tests
Schools
Events
Rewards
Chat
My Profile
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.
Go to My Error Log Learn more
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
Back to Forum
Create Topic
   1   2   3   
555-605 Level|   Business|   Short Passage|                                             
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,080
 [1]
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,080
 [1]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 27 Jul 2019, 03:03
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
bawatwr
In question no. 6 the OA says - emphasize the relatively low value of the investment in service improvement. As passage no where quantify the amount of the investment that is done by banks. So the wording relatively low value of the investment makes little sense, it would be good if it would have stated as low value of return from investment,that makes more sense. Moreover no options in this question suffice for answer other than this, but it it also flawed. So what we are guessing we should mark best of the worst ??
Show more
Hi bawatwr,

As mentioned in this post, we're not really looking to quantify the investment. Value is used here more in a "how useful was it?" sense. In other words, this is another way of saying that the investment in service improvement was not very ~"useful".
User avatar
ArtVandaley
User avatar
Joined: 10 Sep 2013
Last visit: 05 Feb 2022
Posts: 286
Own Kudos:
423
Given Kudos: 120
Location: India
Schools: Darden '23 Sloan '22
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
GPA: 4
Schools: Darden '23 Sloan '22
GMAT 1: 720 Q50 V38
Posts: 286
Kudos: 423
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 02 Aug 2019, 12:07
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Hi GMATNinja

In question 4,

the bank did NOT determine whether it would attract new customers either 1) by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or 2) by proving difficult for competitors to copy.

I seriously dont understand what this statement is trying to convey. By proving is parallel to by producing and hence, what I am inferring here is that, bank failed to determine whether it would attract new customers --> by producing new standard of service. And bank also failed to determine whether it would attract new customers by proving difficult for competitors to copy. Bank isnt proving difficult. The new standards should be difficult. I couldnt even grasp what the sentence is trying to convey and ended up eliminating all 5 options. Scary. Is that bad parallelism here? Or am I supposed to infer such meanings in RC?

Further, If bank failed to considered whether new standards will bring more customers by having standards difficult to copy, what i infer here is that bank failed to consider whether it will have new customers or not. Not the failure of considering how difficult it is for others to copy. WE really dont care how difficult it is for other banks to copy those standards. And we have no reason to believe that even in the case of no difficult, whether banks will invest some amount to keep up. Its a leap of faith.

I am an avid reader and yet, I got stuck in here without any direction. PLease help.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
 [3]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
 [3]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 10 Aug 2019, 09:02
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
darshak1
Hi [url=https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&un=GMATNinja]GMATNinja

In question 4,

the bank did NOT determine whether it would attract new customers either 1) by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or 2) by proving difficult for competitors to copy.

I seriously dont understand what this statement is trying to convey. By proving is parallel to by producing and hence, what I am inferring here is that, bank failed to determine whether it would attract new customers --> by producing new standard of service. And bank also failed to determine whether it would attract new customers by proving difficult for competitors to copy. Bank isnt proving difficult. The new standards should be difficult. I couldnt even grasp what the sentence is trying to convey and ended up eliminating all 5 options. Scary. Is that bad parallelism here? Or am I supposed to infer such meanings in RC?

Further, If bank failed to considered whether new standards will bring more customers by having standards difficult to copy, what i infer here is that bank failed to consider whether it will have new customers or not. Not the failure of considering how difficult it is for others to copy. WE really dont care how difficult it is for other banks to copy those standards. And we have no reason to believe that even in the case of no difficult, whether banks will invest some amount to keep up. Its a leap of faith.

I am an avid reader and yet, I got stuck in here without any direction. PLease help.
Show more
Take another look at the full sentence:
Quote:
Nor did [the bank managers] analyze their service improvement to determine whether it would attract new customers by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy.
Show more
Here, "it" refers to "service improvement," NOT to banks or bank managers (you can tell because "it" needs to refer back to something singular, and "service improvement" is the only singular noun available).

With that understanding, here is how the parallelism shakes out:

Bank managers failed to analyze whether their service improvement would attract new customers by:
  • producing a new standard of service that would excite customers; OR by
  • proving difficult for competitors to copy.

The second parallel piece does require a small inference to understand: the service improvement could attract new customers IF it proved difficult for competitors to copy, because it would give the bank an advantage over its competitors.

However, the question makes our life easy. We do not need to figure out WHY a certain piece of information is important. We simply need to determine which answer choice is something that bank managers failed to consider when implementing the service improvement.

(D) is the only answer choice that does this. Can you think of a different answer choice (such as "whether [the bank] will have new customers," as you suggested)? Sure. But that is not one of the options in front of us, so it cannot be the correct answer. The managers failed to consider whether the service improvement "was an innovation that competing banks could have imitated," so (D) is the correct answer to question #4.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
shabuzen102
User avatar
Joined: 11 Aug 2019
Last visit: 24 Jul 2020
Posts: 67
Own Kudos:
26
 [1]
Given Kudos: 111
Posts: 67
Kudos: 26
 [1]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 04 Feb 2020, 13:23
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
How come no one talks about Q5 :(! Am I the only one who got it wrong?
"This truth was not apparent to managers of one regional bank, which failed to improve its competitive position despite its investment in reducing the time a customer had to wait for a teller."
=> Doesn't this imply that improving its competitive position is more urgent/ a better choice? (The wordings: Failed, despite). If the author wanted to communicate neutral/ non-urgent tone, he would have said "This regional bank chose to invest in service and not its competitive position." However, the wordings "failed" and "despite" imply that it would have been better for them to focus on its competitive position.

Would someone please explain? GMATNinja?

Thanks!
User avatar
CrackverbalGMAT
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,844
Own Kudos:
8,945
 [2]
Given Kudos: 225
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Location: India
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,844
Kudos: 8,945
 [2]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 05 Feb 2020, 06:01
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
shabuzen102
How come no one talks about Q5 :(! Am I the only one who got it wrong?
"This truth was not apparent to managers of one regional bank, which failed to improve its competitive position despite its investment in reducing the time a customer had to wait for a teller."
=> Doesn't this imply that improving its competitive position is more urgent/ a better choice? (The wordings: Failed, despite). If the author wanted to communicate neutral/ non-urgent tone, he would have said "This regional bank chose to invest in service and not its competitive position." However, the wordings "failed" and "despite" imply that it would have been better for them to focus on its competitive position.

Would someone please explain? GMATNinja?

Thanks!
Show more

Hi

The "improvement in competitive position" is the ultimate objective of all the steps which are considered in this context. Investing in service improvements is also one of these steps aimed at improving the company's (in this case, the regional bank's) competitive position. This is identified very early on in the passage, when it states:

"The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage for a company does not mean that every attempt at improving service will create such an advantage."

Therefore, when option (B) states "...when investment is needed more urgently in another area", it is pointing to investment needed in an area different from customer service, which too is aimed at improving the bank's competitive position, and not investment in "improving the bank's competitive position" as an area distinct from customer service. This option is incorrect because the passage never talks about any areas other than customer service, so we cannot be sure that investment in another area was urgently required.

Hope this helps.
User avatar
davidbeckham
User avatar
Stanford School Moderator
Joined: 11 Jun 2019
Last visit: 11 Oct 2021
Posts: 111
Own Kudos:
68
Given Kudos: 181
Location: India
Products:
My Reviews
Posts: 111
Kudos: 68
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 24 Jun 2020, 04:50
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Can you explain the reason for option A in Question 3? I thought E is more directly mentioned in the passage.
User avatar
CrackverbalGMAT
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,844
Own Kudos:
8,945
 [2]
Given Kudos: 225
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Location: India
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,844
Kudos: 8,945
 [2]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 24 Jun 2020, 05:20
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
davidbeckham
Can you explain the reason for option A in Question 3? I thought E is more directly mentioned in the passage.
Show more

Hi

Let me try to address your query.

The answer to Q3 can be gleaned from the lines which just precede the paragraph that talks about the regional bank. If we observe, the passage tells us:

If a company is already effectively on a par with its competitors because it provides service that avoids a damaging reputation and keeps customers from leaving at an unacceptable rate, then investment in higher service levels may be wasted, since service is a deciding factor for customers only in extreme situations.

Now, how do we know that this applies to the regional bank? Because of the way the paragraph about the regional bank begins.

This truth was not apparent to managers of one regional bank, which failed to improve its competitive position despite its investment in reducing the time a customer had to wait for a teller....

The above, beginning with "This truth...", tells us that the points mentioned earlier about when investments in improving service do not help in improving a company's competitive position are applicable to whatever situation is going to be described hence, which is about the regional bank. Hence, option (A), which directly presents one of the facets mentioned in the preceding lines, is the correct answer.

As for option (E), once again we refer to the preceding lines, which tell us that the regional bank was "already effectively on a par with its competitors". Therefore, option (E), which states that the regional bank was a laggard, contradicts the information given in the passage and is incorrect.

Hope this helps.
User avatar
mSKR
User avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,290
Own Kudos:
938
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,290
Kudos: 938
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 03 Jul 2020, 19:43
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
TaN1213
Hello GMATNinja ,
I would really appreciate your help in the following questions, in light of the retained options.
Thank You.

Q2. According to the passage, investments in service are comparable to investments in
production and distribution in terms of the

A. tangibility of the benefits that they tend to confer
B. increased revenues that they ultimately produce
C. basis on which they need to be weighed
" Investments in service,
like those in production and distribution, must be
balanced against other types of investments on the
basis of direct, tangible benefits such as cost
reduction and increased revenues."
The passage says that investments in service, production, and distribution "must be balanced against other types of investments on the basis of direct, tangible benefits such as cost reduction and increased revenues." In other words, when compare your investment options, you have to look at the tangible benefits of each option.

However, that does NOT imply that the benefits of service investments are just as tangible as investments in production and distribution. For example, investments in service might confer a greater degree of INTANGIBLE benefits than investments in production and distribution. That's nice, but, according to the author, when deciding between different investment types, you have to look at the tangible benefits.

In other words, each option needs to be weighed on the BASIS of tangible benefits, but the tangibility of the benefits of each option might vary. Hence, (C) is a better choice than (A).

Similarly, revenue is an example of a tangible benefit that SHOULD be compared when weighing your options. However, that does not imply that each option will produce comparable increases in revenue. Eliminate (B).

(C) is the best answer.


Quote:


I hope that helps!
Show more

in C, . basis on which they need to be weighed
it doesn't say that they needs to be weighed with tangible benefits as clear is mentioned in option A. and B gives clear example of tangible benefit. B could be rejected as increased benefits is just one example of tangible benefit.
If service investments need to be weighed against which they need to be weighed then there could be no tangible benefits there.


please help to differentiate between A and C.
still not clear .

thanks
User avatar
CrackverbalGMAT
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 03 Oct 2013
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 4,844
Own Kudos:
8,945
 [1]
Given Kudos: 225
Affiliations: CrackVerbal
Location: India
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 4,844
Kudos: 8,945
 [1]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 16 Jul 2020, 08:16
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
imSKR


in C, . basis on which they need to be weighed
it doesn't say that they needs to be weighed with tangible benefits as clear is mentioned in option A. and B gives clear example of tangible benefit. B could be rejected as increased benefits is just one example of tangible benefit.
If service investments need to be weighed against which they need to be weighed then there could be no tangible benefits there.


please help to differentiate between A and C.
still not clear .

thanks
Show more

Hi

On this topic, the passage states the following:

Investments in service, like those in production and distribution, must be balanced against other types of investments on the basis of direct, tangible benefits such as cost reduction and increased revenues.

In other words, the similarity between service investments and production and distribution investments is that they "must be balanced" against other options "on the basis of direct, tangible benefits" ie; service investments, just like production and distribution investments, must be compared with other potential investments, measuring the direct tangible benefits that each would accrue, before deciding on going ahead.

Option (A) says: tangibility of the benefits that they tend to confer

This assumes that service, distribution and production investments all provide tangible benefits, whereas the passage only tells us that any tangible benefits must be evaluated. We do not know if all such investments will provide benefits or not. Hence, this cannot be common to these investments.

Option (C) says: basis on which they need to be weighed

This is clearly consistent with the passage, as evidenced by the phrase "must be balanced" ie, must be "weighed" against others. Therefore this is the correct answer.

Hope this helps.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
 [3]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
 [3]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 01 Aug 2020, 12:13
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
imSKR
GMATNinja
TaN1213
Hello GMATNinja ,
I would really appreciate your help in the following questions, in light of the retained options.
Thank You.

Q2. According to the passage, investments in service are comparable to investments in
production and distribution in terms of the

A. tangibility of the benefits that they tend to confer
B. increased revenues that they ultimately produce
C. basis on which they need to be weighed
" Investments in service,
like those in production and distribution, must be
balanced against other types of investments on the
basis of direct, tangible benefits such as cost
reduction and increased revenues."
The passage says that investments in service, production, and distribution "must be balanced against other types of investments on the basis of direct, tangible benefits such as cost reduction and increased revenues." In other words, when compare your investment options, you have to look at the tangible benefits of each option.

However, that does NOT imply that the benefits of service investments are just as tangible as investments in production and distribution. For example, investments in service might confer a greater degree of INTANGIBLE benefits than investments in production and distribution. That's nice, but, according to the author, when deciding between different investment types, you have to look at the tangible benefits.

In other words, each option needs to be weighed on the BASIS of tangible benefits, but the tangibility of the benefits of each option might vary. Hence, (C) is a better choice than (A).

Similarly, revenue is an example of a tangible benefit that SHOULD be compared when weighing your options. However, that does not imply that each option will produce comparable increases in revenue. Eliminate (B).

(C) is the best answer.


Quote:


I hope that helps!

in C, . basis on which they need to be weighed
it doesn't say that they needs to be weighed with tangible benefits as clear is mentioned in option A. and B gives clear example of tangible benefit. B could be rejected as increased benefits is just one example of tangible benefit.
If service investments need to be weighed against which they need to be weighed then there could be no tangible benefits there.


please help to differentiate between A and C.
still not clear .

thanks
Show more
The question DOES NOT ask on what basis the investments should be weighed. That comes from (C), but is not part of the prompt. The question asks how investments in service are comparable, or similar, to investments in production and distribution.

So, while the author does suggest that companies should weigh the tangibility of the benefits of each type of investment, he/she does not indicate that the tangibility of these benefits is comparable, or similar, for each type of investment.

Imagine you’re asked to choose the best business plan after weighing the profitability of each. Does this mean that the profitability of each plan is COMPARABLE? Nope, it’s totally possible that one is way more profitable than another. What IS comparable is basis on which you judge each business plan: profitability.

As we said in our previous post, it’s possible that investments in service provide INTANGIBLE benefits, but investments in production and distribution provide HIGHLY TANGIBLE benefits. If that is the case, then investments in these areas are NOT comparable. The author recommends that companies determine tangibility, but DOES NOT suggest that tangibility is comparable for different types of investment.

For that reason, we can eliminate (A).

Likewise, (B) should be eliminated not because it gives just one example of what the author suggests should be weighed, but because it erroneously assumes that the revenues generated from investments in service, production, and distribution are similar. We don’t know whether those revenues are comparable. That’s why the author recommends further investigation. Eliminate (B).

The only thing that the author definitively states is comparable for investments in service and investments in production and distribution is the basis on which they should be weighed. Yes, that basis is the tangibility of their benefits. But we still don’t know whether the “level of tangibility” itself is comparable for the different types of investment. Hence, (C) is correct.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
custodio
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Last visit: 03 Feb 2023
Posts: 39
Own Kudos:
10
Given Kudos: 46
Posts: 39
Kudos: 10
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 02 Dec 2020, 12:26
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Dear beloved GMATNinja,

Quote:
This truth was not apparent to managers of one regional bank, which failed to improve its competitive position despite its investment in reducing the time a customer had to wait for a teller. The bank managers did not recognize the level of customer inertia in the consumer bank ng industry that arises from the inconvenience of switching banks. Nor did they analyze their service improvement to determine whether it would attract new customers by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy.
Show more

What role does this boldface underlined sentence play here? And what does it mean exactly?

My understanding:
The company did not gain competitive position (despite an improved service, i.e. less waiting time) because
(1) The bank managers did not recognize the level of customer inertia in the consumer banking industry that arises from the inconvenience of switching banks
(2) Nor did they analyze their service improvement to determine whether it would attract new customers by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy

Does (1) mean: the existing customers stayed BECAUSE it was inconvenient for them to change to another bank, NOT BECAUSE the improved service made them stay?
avatar
dortinator1234923
avatar
Joined: 08 Sep 2020
Last visit: 21 Jan 2021
Posts: 21
Own Kudos:
6
Given Kudos: 23
Location: Netherlands
Schools:  (S)
GMAT 1: 580 Q45 V25
GPA: 3.4
Schools:  (S)
GMAT 1: 580 Q45 V25
Posts: 21
Kudos: 6
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 04 Dec 2020, 02:08
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja or d3thknell

Hi there,

Could you please explain why Q6 cannot be '(C) distinguish the primary attribute of the service improvement from secondary attributes'?
I understand that the only is used to explain that the one merit is miniscule. But isn't it therefore a secondary attribute, as it is not as relevant as the other advantages (which would be primary attributes)? Thanks a lot in advance!
User avatar
svasan05
User avatar
CrackVerbal Representative
Joined: 02 Mar 2019
Last visit: 24 Feb 2023
Posts: 269
Own Kudos:
302
 [1]
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 269
Kudos: 302
 [1]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage Updated on: 11 Dec 2020, 12:07
Originally posted by svasan05 on 11 Dec 2020, 03:27.
Last edited by svasan05 on 11 Dec 2020, 12:07, edited 1 time in total.
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
dortinator1234923
GMATNinja or d3thknell

Hi there,

Could you please explain why Q6 cannot be '(C) distinguish the primary attribute of the service improvement from secondary attributes'?
I understand that the only is used to explain that the one merit is miniscule. But isn't it therefore a secondary attribute, as it is not as relevant as the other advantages (which would be primary attributes)? Thanks a lot in advance!
Show more

Hi

You have confused the word "advantage" with "attribute". An advantage is something that is good or better than others. In this case, the fact that it could be described easily definitely counts as an advantage.

However, the answer option is not talking about advantages but about "attributes", or, characteristics. From the passage, we do not know whether the fact that it can be described easily counts as a primary or secondary attribute. Additionally, we do not know enough from the passage to clearly state what should, in fact, count as the primary attribute. Therefore, the word "only" cannot be used for the purpose stated in this option.

Hope this helps.
User avatar
svasan05
User avatar
CrackVerbal Representative
Joined: 02 Mar 2019
Last visit: 24 Feb 2023
Posts: 269
Own Kudos:
302
 [1]
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 269
Kudos: 302
 [1]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 11 Dec 2020, 03:30
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
custodio
Dear beloved GMATNinja,

Quote:
This truth was not apparent to managers of one regional bank, which failed to improve its competitive position despite its investment in reducing the time a customer had to wait for a teller. The bank managers did not recognize the level of customer inertia in the consumer bank ng industry that arises from the inconvenience of switching banks. Nor did they analyze their service improvement to determine whether it would attract new customers by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy.

What role does this boldface underlined sentence play here? And what does it mean exactly?

My understanding:
The company did not gain competitive position (despite an improved service, i.e. less waiting time) because
(1) The bank managers did not recognize the level of customer inertia in the consumer banking industry that arises from the inconvenience of switching banks
(2) Nor did they analyze their service improvement to determine whether it would attract new customers by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy

Does (1) mean: the existing customers stayed BECAUSE it was inconvenient for them to change to another bank, NOT BECAUSE the improved service made them stay?
Show more

Hi

The highlighted sentence brings out a negative aspect of the service improvement. Since the service improvement was brought in with the aim (one of) of attracting new customers, this sentence tells us that it failed to do so because customers have great inertia in switching banks. They would have opted to remain with their current banks rather than switch to this regional bank just have a lower teller waiting time.

Hope this clarifies.
User avatar
custodio
User avatar
Joined: 25 Jun 2018
Last visit: 03 Feb 2023
Posts: 39
Own Kudos:
10
Given Kudos: 46
Posts: 39
Kudos: 10
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 12 Dec 2020, 02:12
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Quote:
Hi

The highlighted sentence brings out a negative aspect of the service improvement. Since the service improvement was brought in with the aim (one of) of attracting new customers, this sentence tells us that it failed to do so because customers have great inertia in switching banks. They would have opted to remain with their current banks rather than switch to this regional bank just have a lower teller waiting time.

Hope this clarifies.
Show more

Thanks for your answer. Can you elaborate a little bit more? I am not sure I totally understood it.
User avatar
svasan05
User avatar
CrackVerbal Representative
Joined: 02 Mar 2019
Last visit: 24 Feb 2023
Posts: 269
Own Kudos:
302
 [1]
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 269
Kudos: 302
 [1]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 12 Dec 2020, 04:52
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
custodio
Quote:
Hi

The highlighted sentence brings out a negative aspect of the service improvement. Since the service improvement was brought in with the aim (one of) of attracting new customers, this sentence tells us that it failed to do so because customers have great inertia in switching banks. They would have opted to remain with their current banks rather than switch to this regional bank just have a lower teller waiting time.

Hope this clarifies.

Thanks for your answer. Can you elaborate a little bit more? I am not sure I totally understood it.
Show more

You have asked:

"Does (1) mean: the existing customers stayed BECAUSE it was inconvenient for them to change to another bank, NOT BECAUSE the improved service made them stay?"

(1) is not talking about the existing customers of the bank which implemented the service improvement (let's call it bank X), but about customers of other banks that bank X had hoped to attract to itself due to this service improvement. The highlighted text states that such customers would not have shifted from other banks to bank X despite the service improvement at bank X due to the high inertia in changing banks.

Hope this helps.
User avatar
GMATNinja
User avatar
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
Joined: 13 Aug 2009
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 7,443
Own Kudos:
69,783
 [4]
Given Kudos: 2,060
Status: GMAT/GRE/LSAT tutors
Location: United States (CO)
GMAT 1: 780 Q51 V46
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Products:
GMAT Club Tests Forum Quiz
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT 2: 800 Q51 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V170
GRE 2: Q170 V170
Posts: 7,443
Kudos: 69,783
 [4]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 13 Dec 2020, 08:57
3
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
custodio
Dear beloved GMATNinja,

Quote:
This truth was not apparent to managers of one regional bank, which failed to improve its competitive position despite its investment in reducing the time a customer had to wait for a teller. The bank managers did not recognize the level of customer inertia in the consumer bank ng industry that arises from the inconvenience of switching banks. Nor did they analyze their service improvement to determine whether it would attract new customers by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy.

What role does this boldface underlined sentence play here? And what does it mean exactly?

My understanding:
The company did not gain competitive position (despite an improved service, i.e. less waiting time) because
(1) The bank managers did not recognize the level of customer inertia in the consumer banking industry that arises from the inconvenience of switching banks
(2) Nor did they analyze their service improvement to determine whether it would attract new customers by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy

Does (1) mean: the existing customers stayed BECAUSE it was inconvenient for them to change to another bank, NOT BECAUSE the improved service made them stay?
Show more
The sentence you've underlined explains why the bank did NOT manage to attract as many new customers as it hoped, even though it invested in improved customer service.

We're told that it is inconvenient to switch banks -- customers don't want to deal with that inconvenience, so they stay at their current bank. This inertia was more powerful than the attraction of lower waiting times to see a teller, so the bank could not attract as many new customers as it hoped and it failed to improve its competitive position.

Question 6


dortinator1234923
GMATNinja or d3thknell

Hi there,

Could you please explain why Q6 cannot be '(C) distinguish the primary attribute of the service improvement from secondary attributes'?
I understand that the only is used to explain that the one merit is miniscule. But isn't it therefore a secondary attribute, as it is not as relevant as the other advantages (which would be primary attributes)? Thanks a lot in advance!
Show more
This question asks us which answer choice most likely describes why the author uses the word "only" in line 23 of the passage:

    "The only merit of the improvement was that it could easily be described to customers."

The "improvement" mentioned in this sentence is the reduction in waiting time to see a teller. From the sentence quoted above, we know that there is only one upside of this improvement -- and it's a pretty weak upside, at that.

So, does the author use the word "only" to "distinguish the primary attribute of the service improvement from secondary attributes?"

To distinguish between different attributes of the service improvement, there would need to be more than one attribute mentioned in the passage. That's simply not the case here. Instead, the author makes it clear that there is ONLY one advantage of the improvement. So it's not possible that the author includes the word "only" to distinguish between advantages.

Compare this to (B):
Quote:
(B) emphasize the relatively low value of the investment in service improvement
Show more
The bank has spent money on improving its customer service, and the best the author can say about the improvement is that it "could easily be described to customers." This gives the impression the author thinks the investment has been a poor one and has not been very valuable to the bank.

Indeed, the author goes further -- they say that the only merit that can be said about the service improvement is that it can be described easily. This emphasizes the poor value this investment has provided to the bank.

From this, we can tell that the word "only" was used by the author to emphasize their point that the bank's investment in their service improvement was a poor one. This means (B) is the answer to this question.

I hope that helps!
User avatar
mSKR
User avatar
Joined: 14 Aug 2019
Last visit: 10 Mar 2024
Posts: 1,290
Own Kudos:
938
Given Kudos: 381
Location: Hong Kong
Concentration: Strategy, Marketing
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
GPA: 3.81
Schools: IE (A) IIML-IPMX '22 (A) HKUST '22
GMAT 1: 650 Q49 V29
Posts: 1,290
Kudos: 938
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 09 Mar 2021, 07:28
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
GMATNinja
darshak1
Hi GMATNinja

In question 4,

the bank did NOT determine whether it would attract new customers either 1) by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or 2) by proving difficult for competitors to copy.

I seriously dont understand what this statement is trying to convey. By proving is parallel to by producing and hence, what I am inferring here is that, bank failed to determine whether it would attract new customers --> by producing new standard of service. And bank also failed to determine whether it would attract new customers by proving difficult for competitors to copy. Bank isnt proving difficult. The new standards should be difficult. I couldnt even grasp what the sentence is trying to convey and ended up eliminating all 5 options. Scary. Is that bad parallelism here? Or am I supposed to infer such meanings in RC?

Further, If bank failed to considered whether new standards will bring more customers by having standards difficult to copy, what i infer here is that bank failed to consider whether it will have new customers or not. Not the failure of considering how difficult it is for others to copy. WE really dont care how difficult it is for other banks to copy those standards. And we have no reason to believe that even in the case of no difficult, whether banks will invest some amount to keep up. Its a leap of faith.

I am an avid reader and yet, I got stuck in here without any direction. PLease help.
Take another look at the full sentence:
Quote:
Nor did [the bank managers] analyze their service improvement to determine whether it would attract new customers by producing a new standard of service that would excite customers or by proving difficult for competitors to copy.
Here, "it" refers to "service improvement," NOT to banks or bank managers (you can tell because "it" needs to refer back to something singular, and "service improvement" is the only singular noun available).

With that understanding, here is how the parallelism shakes out:

Bank managers failed to analyze whether their service improvement would attract new customers by:
  • producing a new standard of service that would excite customers; OR by
  • proving difficult for competitors to copy.

The second parallel piece does require a small inference to understand: the service improvement could attract new customers IF it proved difficult for competitors to copy, because it would give the bank an advantage over its competitors.

However, the question makes our life easy. We do not need to figure out WHY a certain piece of information is important. We simply need to determine which answer choice is something that bank managers failed to consider when implementing the service improvement.

(D) is the only answer choice that does this. Can you think of a different answer choice (such as "whether [the bank] will have new customers," as you suggested)? Sure. But that is not one of the options in front of us, so it cannot be the correct answer. The managers failed to consider whether the service improvement "was an innovation that competing banks could have imitated," so (D) is the correct answer to question #4.

I hope that helps!
Show more


Hello [url=https://gmatclub.com:443/forum/memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&un=GMATNinja]GMATNinja AjiteshArun

Quote:
(D) was an innovation that competing banks could have imitated
Show more

Should not the option be: (D) was an innovation that competing banks could NOT have imitated

They failed to realize that service improvement should have competitive edge that can not be copied by competitors.
So What they fail to realize that Service Improvement was an Innovative that competitors could not be Imitated.


Please clarify GMATNinja GMATNinjaTWO AjiteshArun
User avatar
AjiteshArun
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 15 Jul 2015
Last visit: 18 Nov 2025
Posts: 5,949
Own Kudos:
5,080
 [2]
Given Kudos: 732
Location: India
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 715 Q83 V90 DI83
GMAT 1: 780 Q50 V51
GRE 1: Q170 V169
Posts: 5,949
Kudos: 5,080
 [2]
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 09 Mar 2021, 20:50
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
mSKR
Should not the option be: (D) was an innovation that competing banks could NOT have imitated
Show more
Hi mSKR,

Interesting question, but both statements lead to very similar outcomes.

1. They failed to consider whether or not the service improvement was an innovation that competing banks could have imitated.

2. They failed to consider whether or not the service improvement was an innovation that competing banks could not have imitated.

Whether or not, as it is used here, points to both possibilities. In (1), it means that they failed to check whether (a) the improvement was something that competing banks could have imitated or (b) it was not something that competing banks could have imitated. In (2), it means that they failed to check whether (a) the improvement was something that competing banks could not have imitated or (b) it was not something that competing banks could not have imitated.
User avatar
DmitryFarber
User avatar
Manhattan Prep Instructor
Joined: 22 Mar 2011
Last visit: 08 Nov 2025
Posts: 3,020
Own Kudos:
8,563
Given Kudos: 57
Expert
Expert reply
GMAT Focus 1: 745 Q86 V90 DI85
Posts: 3,020
Kudos: 8,563
The fact that superior service can generate a competitive advantage 01 Mar 2024, 00:13
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
For the bank to be an "exceptional case," it would have to be an exception to what the passage is telling us about. On the contrary, it is an example of exactly what the passage is warning us about: that investing in customer service does not always provide a competitive benefit. This is not an exception. A is basically saying that the author thinks MOST investments in customer service work out well, and OCCASIONALLY they go wrong, but there's really no mention of relative frequency. We're just told that improving service CAN help, but it doesn't always do so. We don't know from that what to expect in a typical case. 

Even if we use "exceptional" in the every day meaning of "special" or "extreme" or "more than usual," we have no idea how the bank's case differs from others. Perhaps most firms that invest unwisely in customer service come out even worse than the bank did. 
zoezhuyan

Quote:
Q5. The discussion of the regional bank (line 13-24) serves which of the following functions within the passage as a whole?

(A) It describes an exceptional case in which investment in service actually failed to produce a competitive advantage.
(B) It illustrates the pitfalls of choosing to invest in service at a time when investment is needed more urgently in another area.
(C) It demonstrates the kind of analysis that managers apply when they choose one kind of service investment over another
(D) It supports the argument that investments in certain aspects of service are more advantageous than investments in other aspects of service.
(E) It provides an example of the point about investment in service made in the first paragraph.

hi experts, any one can help this question?
I was confused coz I can't figure out what's wrong with A
yes it is an exceptional case.
yes , the case shows the investment in service failed to produce a competitive advantage .

A seems to match with passage.

thanks in advance

have a nice day
Show more
­
   1   2   3   
Moderators:
GMATNinja
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7443 posts
GMATNinjaTwo
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
231 posts
Sajjad1994
GRE Forum Moderator
17289 posts
miag
188 posts