Although a substantial body of evidence indicates that flexible and

Question

Although a substantial body of evidence indicates that flexible and participative work arrangements make possible significant performance advantages over more traditional centralized and hierarchical structures, the proportion of businesses that have so transformed themselves remains quite small. Why, then, do firms that purport to be rationally acting organizations appear to resist the very methods that would best equip them to achieve their stated goals?

One line of analysis points toward the phenomenon of structural inertia, suggesting that organizations are "imprinted" with the conditions under which they were born, tending thereafter to cling to long-established routines, production methods, and identities. A second approach fastens on resistance to change among middle managers, who are said to view new work practices as threats to their traditional status and authority. A third approach suggests that because firms have tended to adopt innovations singly, rather than in clusters, the firms often fail to achieve far-reaching organization change.

Although each of these perspectives contains a partial truth, each one is limited. Analysis using the concept of structural inertia tends to emphasize the conservative aspects of organizational culture and to neglect inside factors as sources of change. While theories of managerial resistance have stressed the importance of within-firm political processes, they often endow upper levels of management with an omniscience and openness to egalitarian practices that upper-level managers do not possess. Finally, the last approach often views new practices as if they exist in a vacuum—as if they are unmediated by the manner in which they are introduced.

An alternative approach builds on developments within industrial sociology. The outcome of workplace change initiatives is shaped in large part by the social and organizational processes that unfold during the implementation of new work practices. In other words, workplace change is not akin to a surgical procedure performed under anesthesia. Rather, it constitutes a negotiated phenomenon in which the language and strategies that particular occupational groups employ can either blur or sharpen the boundaries that exist within the firm. Where workplace change fails to transform existing organizational patterns, the reasons may stem less from the nature of the innovations than from the processes that surround and shape their introduction.

1. In criticizing the "second approach" to explaining the supposed lack of rational transformation of the workplace, the author most likely assumes which of the following?

A. Upper management sometimes encourages innovative policies of flexible and participative work arrangements.
B. Versions of the second approach take upper management to have sometimes attempted to transform the workplace to improve performance.
C. The second approach often takes factors within a firm to have less of an impact on its organizational culture than they in fact do.
D. The second approach fails to consider the various ways in which new policies can be mediated by the manner in which they are introduced.
E. The second approach often fails to address the point that middle managers tend to view new work practices as threats to their traditional status and authority.

2. The passage most strongly suggests that most firms aim to

A. adopt flexible and participative work arrangements
B. adopt innovative routines and production methods
C. enhance the centralization and hierarchy of their bureaucratic structures
D. produce more-marketable goods and services
E. achieve improved performance

3. The passage is primarily concerned with discussing

A. how firms have attempted to introduce flexible and participative work arrangements
B. why some firms are attempting to become less centralized and hierarchical
C. why firms should adopt flexible and participative work arrangements
D. why relatively few firms have fully adopted flexible and participative work arrangements
E. the contributions of industrial sociology to understanding innovative work practices

4. The author most strongly suggests that the success of an innovation designed to achieve organizational change depends mostly on

A. whether the innovation is implemented by middle management or upper management
B. whether, in the implementation of the innovation, all employees are made aware of the change
C. whether the innovation is implemented alone or with other innovations
D. the overcoming of resistance of middle management to the innovation
E. the overall favorability of the processes that surround and shape the implementation of the innovation

Show Spoiler

Official Mock 6

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-jxn9gzhx.png [ 349.21 KiB | Viewed 4995 times ]

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-ppf0g620.png [ 127.93 KiB | Viewed 4990 times ]

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-014u6vpg.png [ 53.8 KiB | Viewed 4980 times ]

Show Answer Question #1

Official Answer

B

Show Answer Question #2

Official Answer

E

Show Answer Question #3

Official Answer

D

Show Answer Question #4

Official Answer

E

Pro tip: Combine official questions for familiarity with GMAT Club Tests for analytics and tougher Focus-level practice so the real exam feels manageable. Explore →

sanebeyondone · Answer

For Q.1, it's important to understand that
Third paragraph is the literally direct explanation of second paragraph's 1st 2nd and 3rd approaches.

For Q.4, fourth paragraph didn't even mention the word "innovation" but the answer to Q.4 is in fourth paragraph. 
It can be hard to interpret but these words "change initiatives" and "new work practices" are the representative of "innovation".

On top of it, this article has a handful of difficult vocabulary.

Adarsh_24 · Answer

My attempt.
Honestly I selected wrong answer first for Q1.

1--> Even with evidence why are businesses resisting flexible/particpative(that would help their goal) for centralized/hierarchical ?
2-->Three explanations.
a--firms to stick to what they're born/know
b--middle managers consider the flexible/participative as threat to their authority
c--Innovation are singular rather than clusters. So they dont bring change in entire company

3--> above are partially true. Some drawbacks for each are as
a--they neglect inside as source of change. So even if they stick to what they know they can still do innovation
b--Upper level is put on a pedestal about being open and receptive while upper level managers really arent.
c--Even singular changes doesnt exist in vacuum and they are introduced after some mediation. So cause some change.

4-- > This has lot of confusing stuff imo.
But, I got the main point that the innovations are only as good as they environment that allows their development and existence.

Answers:

1: In criticizing the "second approach" to explaining the supposed lack of rational transformation of the workplace, the author most likely assumes which of the following?

2nd para b opinion: middle managers are not flex/receptive to new ideas
criticism by author: upper managers are thought to be open to innovative ideas while they arent.

imo most of us finalize A and B.

A. Upper management sometimes encourages innovative policies of flexible and participative work arrangements.
-> This is not an assumption that author has to assume to criticize. This is part of the point that author tries to criticize.
B. Versions of the second approach take upper management to have sometimes attempted to transform the workplace to improve performance.
-> So this may be pretty hard to understand in first attempt.
Authors criticism works if the b opinion people thinks upper managers do attempt for innovation and are hindered by middle managers.

B seems more apt in context.

2: There was talk of goal in Ist paragraph.
Two points from Ist para.
methods that would best equip them to achieve their stated goals
flexible and participative work arrangements make possible significant performance advantages

So answer must be significant performance advantage.
E. achieve improved performance

3.From paragraph1.
D. why relatively few firms have fully adopted flexible and participative work arrangements

4.From para4.
E. the overall favorability of the processes that surround and shape the implementation of the innovation

sachi-in · Answer

Q1.

While theories of managerial resistance have stressed the importance of within-firm political processes, they often endow upper levels of management with an omniscience and openness to egalitarian practices that upper-level managers do not possess.

The author says the that management thoery endow upper management with charecteristics of being open to the process of equal involvement / participation which the upper management actually doesn't process. If upper management doesn't possess this openess we can never expect middle management to execute them.

Hence the auther assumes that Upper Management isn't open to the changes.

I marked this wrong; I failed to understand what omniscience and openness to egalitarian process meant !

Q2.

The passage most strongly suggests that most firms aim to ?
E. achieve improved performance

Para 1 says:  Although a substantial body of evidence indicates that flexible and participative work arrangements make possible significant performance advantages over more traditional centralized and hierarchical structures, the proportion of businesses that have so transformed themselves remains quite small.

This means everyone wants the results (significant performance advantages ) but only a few managed to achieve the process.

ZIX · Answer

Question 1:
 
Now, to quote from the passage:
>they often endow upper levels of management with an  omniscience  and  openness to  egalitarian practices that upper-level managers do not possess.

IMO both the words in the passage (omniscience and openness to)  suggest encouragement rather than them taking action themselves  ('attempted to').

mbaprepavi · Answer

A brilliang passage, i must say

Many folks have confusion regarding certain terms and the authors opinion on the 3 reasons
I will try and simplify it

The line about "egalitarian openness" is a critique of the theory that attributes resistance to middle managers alone. 
This theory tends to idealize upper-level managers, assuming that they are always open to more egalitarian work structures (i.e., democratic, participative management practices) and that resistance only comes from middle managers who feel threatened.

The author argues that this view is flawed because it  overestimates the openness of upper management  to these changes. In reality, upper management may not be as willing to embrace egalitarian practices as this theory assumes, meaning that resistance to change may exist at all levels of the organization, not just among middle managers

What the author is finally saying is :
While each of these theories offers some insight, they all have limitations.
Structural inertia overlooks internal sources of change, middle management resistance overestimates the willingness of upper management to embrace egalitarian practices, and the third theory fails to consider how the innovations are introduced.

The author then proposes an alternative view, inspired by industrial sociology (another alternative)

This approach emphasizes that organizational change is not a straightforward, top-down process but is shaped by social and organizational dynamics. 
Change is a "negotiated phenomenon," meaning that the process of implementing new practices—how different groups within the organization respond and negotiate—determines whether the change is successful. Failures often occur not because of the innovations themselves but due to the way they are introduced and managed within the organization

Since Q1 seems the most difficult one, i will try to explain why  B  is the answer

The second approach focuses on middle managers resisting changes that threaten their authority. 
The  author criticizes  this by saying it (the 2nd reason) wrongly assumes upper management is always open to more flexible, participative practices. In reality, upper management may also resist these changes. So, the author implies that some versions of the second approach believe upper management has tried to improve performance, but middle managers resist.

In short,  Option B  says the second approach assumes upper management has sometimes tried to transform the workplace, even though middle managers resist.

Hope this helps answer the questions

Nipunh · Answer

Question 1) 
The question asks us to determine an assumption that the author makes when criticizing the second approach, which attributes resistance to workplace transformation primarily to middle managers who fear losing status and authority. The author states that while theories of managerial resistance focus on political processes within firms, they overestimate the openness of upper-level management to egalitarian practices. This implies that upper management is not always open to change and does not always push for participative work arrangements. For the author's criticism to hold ,  it must be true that some versions of the second approach assume that upper management actually tries to implement workplace transformations but is blocked by middle managers . Otherwise, the author's point that upper management is not as open or omniscient would be irrelevant.

This aligns with option B: Versions of the second approach take upper management to have sometimes attempted to transform the workplace to improve performance. This must be assumed for the author's critique (that upper management is not as open as the second approach assumes) to make sense.

Evaluating the other options:

A. Upper management sometimes encourages innovative policies. This is too general and does not directly address the second approach's assumptions.

C. The second approach underestimates the impact of internal factors on organizational culture. The author does not claim this; rather, this is a criticism of the first approach—structural inertia.

D. The second approach fails to consider how policies are introduced. This is a criticism of the third approach, not the second one.

E. The second approach fails to address that middle managers resist change. This is incorrect because the second approach explicitly states this as its main point. 
In more detail : 
Option A is incorrect because it is too general and does not directly address the author's criticism of the second approach. The author argues that the second approach assumes upper management is more open to workplace transformation than it actually is. Option A only states that upper management sometimes supports innovation, which does not contradict the author’s point. The issue is not whether upper management ever encourages change, but whether it is consistently open to it, as the second approach assumes.

Option B is correct because it directly captures the assumption the author is challenging. The author criticizes the second approach for assuming that upper management has tried to implement workplace changes but has been blocked. If this assumption were false, the author's argument—that upper management is not always open to change—would not hold.

In short, Option A is too vague, while Option B directly supports the author's reasoning. 
Final answer: B.

KarishmaB · Answer

Here is a video discussing the passage and all the questions of this passage:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXHU5oUq804

ShubhadeepB · Answer

Understanding the organization of an RC passage is more important than getting into the details. This passage asks a very important question: Though research has indicated that structure X (flexible) enables significant performance advantages than structure Y (hierarchical), a small proportion of businesses have switched to adopting structure X. Why is that the case? Well, there are three lines of analysis and the first talks about structural inertia, or the tendency to tightly hold on to conditions in which businesses were born. The second talks about middle managers' resistance to change, while the third mentions firms' tendency of adoption of innovations singly, rather than in groups. To simplify, had firms shown an inclination to adopt innovation 1 + innovation 2 + innovation 3 together instead of only innovation 1, the would've realized earth-shattering

changes. Now, the author points out that these three approaches are not completely true and goes on to emphasize the shortcomings of all three approaches. After this criticizm, the author talks about an approach that borrows from developments within industrial psych. Finally, the author's viewpoint is that the nature of innovations may be the secondary culprit, but the primary culprit are the processes that surround and influence the introduction of those innovations. Q1. Let's focus on how the author has criticized the second approach. Focus on "...... they often endow ....... that upper-level managers do not possess." Well, according to the author, the theories often consider upper management imbibing omniscience and openness to egalitarian which these managers actually do not possess. Let's start evaluating the answers. A is completely opposite of the author's viewpoint and can be eliminated. B is tricky, let's keep it on hold for now. Nowhere does the author imply that the second approach considers internal factor to have less influence on org culture than they actually do. Eliminate C. Mediation of new policies is not the implied argument of the author, so eliminate D. E is a stated viewpoint of those theories, and not assumed by the author. So, eliminate E. Now, if you look at B, the "resistance to change" theory actually sees upper management receptive to change, and the author may have assumed that those theories consider upper management to be reason behind a few attempts at transforming the workplace to improve performance. It may not be necessarily the case because those theories simply may have endowed those qualities to upper management without suggesting that "they actually attempted to do something as a result of those qualities." Q2. A can be eliminated as it is nowhere mentioned in the passage. Similar is the case with B, C, and D. E should be the answer. The words " significant performance advantages" reflects that companies strive to improve performance. This question was straightforward. Q3. The passage is primarily concerned with pointing flaws in three approaches to explain a strange occurrence while suggesting an alternative approach that may offer a better explanation. A, B, and C are out. E is also out because nowhere does the passage talk about "contributions of industrial psych," and E is the correct answer. Q4. The author's viewpoint is that as per the approach built on top of industrial psych, the process that surround and influence the introduction of a particular innovation explains more why workplace change fails to transform existing patterns rather than the nature of innovations. A, B, and D are not mentioned in the passage, and can be eliminated. C is mentioned in the passage as a part of the third approach which is not the relevant portion we need to look up. E completely matches our summary. -Shubhadeep Basak GMAT/GRE coach Let's talk regarding your tutoring needs!

Dream009 · Answer

I still don't get why b/w A & B - A was eliminated and B was selected.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

I assume you are asking about question #1.

Here is what the second approach is:

“A second approach fastens on resistance to change among middle managers, who are said to view new work practices as threats to their traditional status and authority.”

In the  third paragraph , the author criticize the second approch.

“While theories of managerial resistance have stressed the importance of within-firm political processes, they often endow upper levels of management with an omniscience and openness to egalitarian practices that upper-level managers do not possess.”

Summarize it in points

-The second approach sees middle managers as resisting change.
-It assumes upper management is all-knowing and fully open to egalitarian practices.
-The author says this is false, upper-level managers do not actually possess such omniscience or openness.

Now compare A and B

A.  Upper management sometimes encourages innovative policies of flexible and participative work arrangements.
 A  is too weak to hold on; the author’s point is not about whether they sometimes do, but that the second approach assumes they are omniscient and open, which is false.

B.  Versions of the second approach take upper management to have sometimes attempted to transform the workplace to improve performance.
The  second approach  assumes upper management is trying to implement change rationally (hence they blame middle managers for resisting), but the author says upper management isn’t as open/omniscient as the theory assumes. So the author’s criticism assumes the second approach does depict upper management as attempting such transformation. This is correct.

Answer: B

KarishmaB · Answer

(A) and (B) are not similar options AT ALL. Think hard about this distinction:

A. Upper management sometimes encourages innovative policies of flexible and participative work arrangements. 
 B.  Versions of the second approach take  upper management to have sometimes attempted to transform the workplace to improve performance.

Does the author assume that upper management encourages innovative policies? No. He thinks upper management is fickle too, just like middle management. So (A) is not the author's assumption at all.

But the author does assume that versions of the second approach take upper management to have attempted workplace transformation. That is why (B) is correct.

Tucky · Answer

Hi  KarishmaB  Would request your attention for Q2, Option E:

Only place i could find support for E was:  (Para 1, last lines)  Why, then, do firms that  purport to be rationally acting organizations  appear to resist the very methods that would best equip them to achieve their stated goals?

I googled what Purport literally means: to give the  impression  of being something or of having done something, when  this may not be true

In this light, how (E) can be correct, which says: most firms  (ACTUALLY NOT PURPORTEDLY ) aim to achieve improved performance.

KarishmaB · Answer

The support is present in the first paragraph. When simplified a bit, it tells us this:

Evidence shows that flexible work makes  significant performance advantages  over traditional setups possible, but few businesses use it. 
Why, then, do firms that purport (appear to be) to be rational appear to resist flexible work that would best equip them to achieve their stated goals (the stated goal being performance improvement highlighted above)

That is why the author uses "purport" - appear to be rational though in fact they may not be because they are not adopting flexible work even though it gives performance advantages.

Although a substantial body of evidence indicates that flexible and

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

Although a substantial body of evidence indicates that flexible and

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards