Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
Apr 3001:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
29 Sep 2024, 16:28
Kudos
Bookmarks
New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (NUMMI) was an American automobile manufacturer based in Fremont, California. Jointly owned by General Motors and Toyota, the plant opened in 1984 and closed in April 2010. Before NUMMI, the site was the former Fremont Assembly that General Motors operated between 1962 and 1982.
Before its transformation, the relationship between workers and supervisors was adversarial. Management prioritized production quantity over quality and disregarded employee input. Like other American car plants at the time, production lines rarely stopped, and defective cars were allowed to proceed, with the expectation they would be fixed later. By the early 1980s, this environment led to widespread issues, including absenteeism, substance use during work hours, and an inability to reliably start production due to missing workers. Attempts to discipline workers were often met with grievances or even strikes, putting the plant into near-continuous chaos.
General Motors viewed the joint venture as a way to access high-quality small cars and learn from Toyota’s renowned Production System, a lean manufacturing philosophy. For Toyota, NUMMI provided a foothold in North America, helping it avoid import tariffs while gaining insights into the American labor environment, particularly in dealing with the United Auto Workers union.
Prior to reopening, Toyota sent many NUMMI workers to its Takaoka plant in Japan, where they worked on the assembly line and learned the Toyota Production System. Workers noted that Toyota's focus on quality and teamwork inspired a shift in their work ethic. Cultural changes included equal uniforms, parking, and cafeteria access for all employees, promoting a team environment. Toyota also introduced a no-layoff policy, built-in quality control processes, and employee suggestion programs for continuous improvement. Decision-making became consensus-based, a stark contrast to the previous top-down management approach.
Why does the author describe the relationship between workers and supervisors as "adversarial" (click here to highlight) before the NUMMI transformation?
A. To highlight the combative and uncooperative nature of the labor-management dynamics in American car plants at the time.
B. To suggest that the workers were primarily responsible for the poor production quality prior to Toyota’s involvement.
C. To emphasize the lack of communication and teamwork between workers and supervisors, which led to widespread inefficiency.
D. To show that General Motors deliberately fostered conflict between workers and management as part of its production strategy.
E. To suggest that the workers’ attitudes towards management were inherently negative, unrelated to the production issues.
Before its transformation, the relationship between workers and supervisors was adversarial. Management prioritized production quantity over quality and disregarded employee input. Like other American car plants at the time, production lines rarely stopped, and defective cars were allowed to proceed, with the expectation they would be fixed later. By the early 1980s, this environment led to widespread issues, including absenteeism, substance use during work hours, and an inability to reliably start production due to missing workers. Attempts to discipline workers were often met with grievances or even strikes, putting the plant into near-continuous chaos.
General Motors viewed the joint venture as a way to access high-quality small cars and learn from Toyota’s renowned Production System, a lean manufacturing philosophy. For Toyota, NUMMI provided a foothold in North America, helping it avoid import tariffs while gaining insights into the American labor environment, particularly in dealing with the United Auto Workers union.
Prior to reopening, Toyota sent many NUMMI workers to its Takaoka plant in Japan, where they worked on the assembly line and learned the Toyota Production System. Workers noted that Toyota's focus on quality and teamwork inspired a shift in their work ethic. Cultural changes included equal uniforms, parking, and cafeteria access for all employees, promoting a team environment. Toyota also introduced a no-layoff policy, built-in quality control processes, and employee suggestion programs for continuous improvement. Decision-making became consensus-based, a stark contrast to the previous top-down management approach.
Why does the author describe the relationship between workers and supervisors as "adversarial" (click here to highlight) before the NUMMI transformation?
A. To highlight the combative and uncooperative nature of the labor-management dynamics in American car plants at the time.
B. To suggest that the workers were primarily responsible for the poor production quality prior to Toyota’s involvement.
C. To emphasize the lack of communication and teamwork between workers and supervisors, which led to widespread inefficiency.
D. To show that General Motors deliberately fostered conflict between workers and management as part of its production strategy.
E. To suggest that the workers’ attitudes towards management were inherently negative, unrelated to the production issues.
29 Sep 2024, 16:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (NUMMI) was an American automobile manufacturer based in Fremont, California. Jointly owned by General Motors and Toyota, the plant opened in 1984 and closed in April 2010. Before NUMMI, the site was the former Fremont Assembly that General Motors operated between 1962 and 1982.
Before its transformation, the relationship between workers and supervisors was adversarial. Management prioritized production quantity over quality and disregarded employee input. Like other American car plants at the time, production lines rarely stopped, and defective cars were allowed to proceed, with the expectation they would be fixed later. By the early 1980s, this environment led to widespread issues, including absenteeism, substance use during work hours, and an inability to reliably start production due to missing workers. Attempts to discipline workers were often met with grievances or even strikes, putting the plant into near-continuous chaos.
General Motors viewed the joint venture as a way to access high-quality small cars and learn from Toyota’s renowned Production System, a lean manufacturing philosophy. For Toyota, NUMMI provided a foothold in North America, helping it avoid import tariffs while gaining insights into the American labor environment, particularly in dealing with the United Auto Workers union.
Prior to reopening, Toyota sent many NUMMI workers to its Takaoka plant in Japan, where they worked on the assembly line and learned the Toyota Production System. Workers noted that Toyota's focus on quality and teamwork inspired a shift in their work ethic. Cultural changes included equal uniforms, parking, and cafeteria access for all employees, promoting a team environment. Toyota also introduced a no-layoff policy, built-in quality control processes, and employee suggestion programs for continuous improvement. Decision-making became consensus-based, a stark contrast to the previous top-down management approach.
Why does the author describe the relationship between workers and supervisors as "adversarial" (click here to highlight) before the NUMMI transformation?
A. To highlight the combative and uncooperative nature of the labor-management dynamics in American car plants at the time.
B. To suggest that the workers were primarily responsible for the poor production quality prior to Toyota’s involvement.
C. To emphasize the lack of communication and teamwork between workers and supervisors, which led to widespread inefficiency.
D. To show that General Motors deliberately fostered conflict between workers and management as part of its production strategy.
E. To suggest that the workers’ attitudes towards management were inherently negative, unrelated to the production issues.
A. Incorrect. This option generalizes to all American car plants, while the passage focuses specifically on the conditions at NUMMI before Toyota's involvement.
B. Incorrect. The passage does not place sole responsibility on the workers. The inefficiencies were a result of systemic management failures, not just worker behavior.
[color=#008000;]C. Correct Answer. [/color]The passage emphasizes that the adversarial relationship stemmed from a lack of communication and teamwork, causing inefficiencies and poor production quality.
D. Incorrect. There’s no evidence in the passage suggesting that General Motors intentionally fostered conflict as part of its strategy.
E. Incorrect. The workers' negative attitudes were a result of management practices, not inherent behavior, according to the passage.
Answer: C
New United Motor Manufacturing, Inc. (NUMMI) was an American automobile manufacturer based in Fremont, California. Jointly owned by General Motors and Toyota, the plant opened in 1984 and closed in April 2010. Before NUMMI, the site was the former Fremont Assembly that General Motors operated between 1962 and 1982.
Before its transformation, the relationship between workers and supervisors was adversarial. Management prioritized production quantity over quality and disregarded employee input. Like other American car plants at the time, production lines rarely stopped, and defective cars were allowed to proceed, with the expectation they would be fixed later. By the early 1980s, this environment led to widespread issues, including absenteeism, substance use during work hours, and an inability to reliably start production due to missing workers. Attempts to discipline workers were often met with grievances or even strikes, putting the plant into near-continuous chaos.
General Motors viewed the joint venture as a way to access high-quality small cars and learn from Toyota’s renowned Production System, a lean manufacturing philosophy. For Toyota, NUMMI provided a foothold in North America, helping it avoid import tariffs while gaining insights into the American labor environment, particularly in dealing with the United Auto Workers union.
Prior to reopening, Toyota sent many NUMMI workers to its Takaoka plant in Japan, where they worked on the assembly line and learned the Toyota Production System. Workers noted that Toyota's focus on quality and teamwork inspired a shift in their work ethic. Cultural changes included equal uniforms, parking, and cafeteria access for all employees, promoting a team environment. Toyota also introduced a no-layoff policy, built-in quality control processes, and employee suggestion programs for continuous improvement. Decision-making became consensus-based, a stark contrast to the previous top-down management approach.
Why does the author describe the relationship between workers and supervisors as "adversarial" (click here to highlight) before the NUMMI transformation?
A. To highlight the combative and uncooperative nature of the labor-management dynamics in American car plants at the time.
B. To suggest that the workers were primarily responsible for the poor production quality prior to Toyota’s involvement.
C. To emphasize the lack of communication and teamwork between workers and supervisors, which led to widespread inefficiency.
D. To show that General Motors deliberately fostered conflict between workers and management as part of its production strategy.
E. To suggest that the workers’ attitudes towards management were inherently negative, unrelated to the production issues.
A. Incorrect. This option generalizes to all American car plants, while the passage focuses specifically on the conditions at NUMMI before Toyota's involvement.
B. Incorrect. The passage does not place sole responsibility on the workers. The inefficiencies were a result of systemic management failures, not just worker behavior.
[color=#008000;]C. Correct Answer. [/color]The passage emphasizes that the adversarial relationship stemmed from a lack of communication and teamwork, causing inefficiencies and poor production quality.
D. Incorrect. There’s no evidence in the passage suggesting that General Motors intentionally fostered conflict as part of its strategy.
E. Incorrect. The workers' negative attitudes were a result of management practices, not inherent behavior, according to the passage.
Answer: C
25 Jan 2025, 03:23
Kudos
Bookmarks
I don’t quite agree with the solution. I think it should be A!
The word "adversial" is strong and doesnt just talk about communication gap/missing teamwork environment.
Also- the American car plant generalization in A is supported by the sentence "Like other American car plants at the time" from the paragraph.
Also the combative word can be coming from the strikes/grievances part. It was not just a communication gap but a combat between the management and employee group.
The word "adversial" is strong and doesnt just talk about communication gap/missing teamwork environment.
Also- the American car plant generalization in A is supported by the sentence "Like other American car plants at the time" from the paragraph.
Also the combative word can be coming from the strikes/grievances part. It was not just a communication gap but a combat between the management and employee group.
