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.
May 1212:00 PM EDT
-11:59 PM EDT
Make the most of your break with the most realistic GMAT™ prep. Take up to $700 off select products.
May 1207:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Join the Live and learn more about Picking the Right Schools- May 13
08:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
In Episode 4 of our GMAT Ninja CR series, we tackle the most intimidating CR question type: Boldface & "Legalese" questions. If you've ever stared at an answer choice that reads, "The first is a consideration introduced to counter a position that... - May 14
08:30 AM PDT
-09:30 AM PDT
Most GMAT test-takers are intimidated by the hardest GMAT Verbal questions. In this session, Target Test Prep GMAT instructor Erika Tyler-John, a 100th percentile GMAT scorer, will show you how top scorers break down challenging Verbal questions.. - Jun 10
06:00 AM PDT
-06:15 PM PDT
Register for the GMAT Club Virtual MBA Spotlight Fair – the world’s premier event for serious MBA candidates. This is your chance to hear directly from Admissions Directors at nearly every Top 30 MBA program..
14 Oct 2025, 16:41
Kudos
Bookmarks
Despite substantial evidence suggesting that decentralized decision-making can lead to increased innovation and faster response times, most large corporations continue to favor centralized control structures. This raises the question: why do firms that emphasize efficiency and competitiveness shy away from models that could enhance these very attributes?
One explanation highlights risk aversion, large firms, having invested heavily in existing systems, are reluctant to disrupt operations with uncertain outcomes. Another perspective focuses on accountability concerns, suggesting that upper management prefers clear chains of command to minimize errors and ensure uniformity. A third view posits that while firms may experiment with decentralization in certain departments, piecemeal adoption dilutes the potential benefits of full-scale transformation.
While each explanation addresses part of the issue, they share significant limitations. Risk aversion theories emphasize the potential for loss but underestimate the capacity for controlled risk-taking, which many firms exhibit in product development or market expansion. Accountability-based arguments overlook the reality that centralized systems can suffer from bureaucratic delays and reduced employee engagement. Lastly, the fragmented adoption argument tends to treat decentralization as a binary choice, neglecting the nuanced ways in which decision-making can evolve across different levels of the organization.
An alternative framework draws from behavioral economics, suggesting that the success or failure of decentralized initiatives hinges on incentive alignment and cultural readiness. Decentralization is not a matter of policy alone but is embedded in the firm’s ability to cultivate trust and establish clear performance metrics at every level. In effect, decentralization thrives when employees feel empowered but also understand the parameters within which they operate. Rather than being implemented uniformly, successful decentralization often involves targeted shifts, where leadership delegates responsibility progressively, fostering a culture of accountability and innovation simultaneously.
Thus, the resistance to decentralization may stem less from the model itself and more from the absence of structures that facilitate its smooth integration. Where decentralization efforts falter, the fault often lies not in the concept but in the failure to adapt managerial frameworks that can harness its potential.
In criticizing the "accountability concerns" explanation for firms’ reluctance to decentralize, the author most likely assumes which of the following?
A. Some centralized firms experience inefficiencies and bottlenecks despite having clear lines of accountability. The accountability explanation takes for granted that only decentralized firms, not centralized ones, are vulnerable to bureaucratic delays and costly mistakes.
B. The accountability explanation takes for granted that only decentralized firms, not centralized ones, are vulnerable to bureaucratic delays and costly mistakes.
C. Versions of the accountability explanation tend to overlook the adaptability and flexibility that decentralized structures can foster.
D. The accountability explanation underestimates the role of incentive alignment and cultural readiness in facilitating decentralization.
E. Some firms adopt decentralized practices selectively, mitigating the risks of unclear accountability by introducing gradual shifts.
One explanation highlights risk aversion, large firms, having invested heavily in existing systems, are reluctant to disrupt operations with uncertain outcomes. Another perspective focuses on accountability concerns, suggesting that upper management prefers clear chains of command to minimize errors and ensure uniformity. A third view posits that while firms may experiment with decentralization in certain departments, piecemeal adoption dilutes the potential benefits of full-scale transformation.
While each explanation addresses part of the issue, they share significant limitations. Risk aversion theories emphasize the potential for loss but underestimate the capacity for controlled risk-taking, which many firms exhibit in product development or market expansion. Accountability-based arguments overlook the reality that centralized systems can suffer from bureaucratic delays and reduced employee engagement. Lastly, the fragmented adoption argument tends to treat decentralization as a binary choice, neglecting the nuanced ways in which decision-making can evolve across different levels of the organization.
An alternative framework draws from behavioral economics, suggesting that the success or failure of decentralized initiatives hinges on incentive alignment and cultural readiness. Decentralization is not a matter of policy alone but is embedded in the firm’s ability to cultivate trust and establish clear performance metrics at every level. In effect, decentralization thrives when employees feel empowered but also understand the parameters within which they operate. Rather than being implemented uniformly, successful decentralization often involves targeted shifts, where leadership delegates responsibility progressively, fostering a culture of accountability and innovation simultaneously.
Thus, the resistance to decentralization may stem less from the model itself and more from the absence of structures that facilitate its smooth integration. Where decentralization efforts falter, the fault often lies not in the concept but in the failure to adapt managerial frameworks that can harness its potential.
In criticizing the "accountability concerns" explanation for firms’ reluctance to decentralize, the author most likely assumes which of the following?
A. Some centralized firms experience inefficiencies and bottlenecks despite having clear lines of accountability. The accountability explanation takes for granted that only decentralized firms, not centralized ones, are vulnerable to bureaucratic delays and costly mistakes.
B. The accountability explanation takes for granted that only decentralized firms, not centralized ones, are vulnerable to bureaucratic delays and costly mistakes.
C. Versions of the accountability explanation tend to overlook the adaptability and flexibility that decentralized structures can foster.
D. The accountability explanation underestimates the role of incentive alignment and cultural readiness in facilitating decentralization.
E. Some firms adopt decentralized practices selectively, mitigating the risks of unclear accountability by introducing gradual shifts.
14 Oct 2025, 16:41
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Despite substantial evidence suggesting that decentralized decision-making can lead to increased innovation and faster response times, most large corporations continue to favor centralized control structures. This raises the question: why do firms that emphasize efficiency and competitiveness shy away from models that could enhance these very attributes?
One explanation highlights risk aversion, large firms, having invested heavily in existing systems, are reluctant to disrupt operations with uncertain outcomes. Another perspective focuses on accountability concerns, suggesting that upper management prefers clear chains of command to minimize errors and ensure uniformity. A third view posits that while firms may experiment with decentralization in certain departments, piecemeal adoption dilutes the potential benefits of full-scale transformation.
While each explanation addresses part of the issue, they share significant limitations. Risk aversion theories emphasize the potential for loss but underestimate the capacity for controlled risk-taking, which many firms exhibit in product development or market expansion. Accountability-based arguments overlook the reality that centralized systems can suffer from bureaucratic delays and reduced employee engagement. Lastly, the fragmented adoption argument tends to treat decentralization as a binary choice, neglecting the nuanced ways in which decision-making can evolve across different levels of the organization.
An alternative framework draws from behavioral economics, suggesting that the success or failure of decentralized initiatives hinges on incentive alignment and cultural readiness. Decentralization is not a matter of policy alone but is embedded in the firm’s ability to cultivate trust and establish clear performance metrics at every level. In effect, decentralization thrives when employees feel empowered but also understand the parameters within which they operate. Rather than being implemented uniformly, successful decentralization often involves targeted shifts, where leadership delegates responsibility progressively, fostering a culture of accountability and innovation simultaneously.
Thus, the resistance to decentralization may stem less from the model itself and more from the absence of structures that facilitate its smooth integration. Where decentralization efforts falter, the fault often lies not in the concept but in the failure to adapt managerial frameworks that can harness its potential.
In criticizing the "accountability concerns" explanation for firms’ reluctance to decentralize, the author most likely assumes which of the following?
A. Some centralized firms experience inefficiencies and bottlenecks despite having clear lines of accountability. The accountability explanation takes for granted that only decentralized firms, not centralized ones, are vulnerable to bureaucratic delays and costly mistakes.
B. The accountability explanation takes for granted that only decentralized firms, not centralized ones, are vulnerable to bureaucratic delays and costly mistakes.
C. Versions of the accountability explanation tend to overlook the adaptability and flexibility that decentralized structures can foster.
D. The accountability explanation underestimates the role of incentive alignment and cultural readiness in facilitating decentralization.
E. Some firms adopt decentralized practices selectively, mitigating the risks of unclear accountability by introducing gradual shifts.
A) Correct Answer. The author writes that accountability arguments “overlook the reality that centralized systems can suffer from bureaucratic delays and reduced employee engagement.” This remark only makes sense if the author believes that some centralized firms, despite clear reporting lines, still run into bottlenecks and other inefficiencies. This is the author's assumption.
B) Incorrect. This choice describes what advocates of the accountability view themselves assume: that only decentralized firms face delays and errors. The author’s critique does not rest on accepting this claim; instead, the author rejects it by pointing out that centralized structures can share the same problems.
C) Incorrect. Flexibility is mentioned earlier in the passage, but the specific criticism of the accountability view is that it ignores inefficiencies inside centralized firms, not that it downplays adaptability in decentralized ones.
D) Incorrect. Incentive alignment and cultural readiness enter later as part of an alternative framework. They are not part of the author’s stated objection to the accountability explanation.
E) Incorrect. Gradual or selective decentralization is discussed as a separate idea. The author does not rely on that practice when challenging the accountability argument.
Answer: A
Despite substantial evidence suggesting that decentralized decision-making can lead to increased innovation and faster response times, most large corporations continue to favor centralized control structures. This raises the question: why do firms that emphasize efficiency and competitiveness shy away from models that could enhance these very attributes?
One explanation highlights risk aversion, large firms, having invested heavily in existing systems, are reluctant to disrupt operations with uncertain outcomes. Another perspective focuses on accountability concerns, suggesting that upper management prefers clear chains of command to minimize errors and ensure uniformity. A third view posits that while firms may experiment with decentralization in certain departments, piecemeal adoption dilutes the potential benefits of full-scale transformation.
While each explanation addresses part of the issue, they share significant limitations. Risk aversion theories emphasize the potential for loss but underestimate the capacity for controlled risk-taking, which many firms exhibit in product development or market expansion. Accountability-based arguments overlook the reality that centralized systems can suffer from bureaucratic delays and reduced employee engagement. Lastly, the fragmented adoption argument tends to treat decentralization as a binary choice, neglecting the nuanced ways in which decision-making can evolve across different levels of the organization.
An alternative framework draws from behavioral economics, suggesting that the success or failure of decentralized initiatives hinges on incentive alignment and cultural readiness. Decentralization is not a matter of policy alone but is embedded in the firm’s ability to cultivate trust and establish clear performance metrics at every level. In effect, decentralization thrives when employees feel empowered but also understand the parameters within which they operate. Rather than being implemented uniformly, successful decentralization often involves targeted shifts, where leadership delegates responsibility progressively, fostering a culture of accountability and innovation simultaneously.
Thus, the resistance to decentralization may stem less from the model itself and more from the absence of structures that facilitate its smooth integration. Where decentralization efforts falter, the fault often lies not in the concept but in the failure to adapt managerial frameworks that can harness its potential.
In criticizing the "accountability concerns" explanation for firms’ reluctance to decentralize, the author most likely assumes which of the following?
A. Some centralized firms experience inefficiencies and bottlenecks despite having clear lines of accountability. The accountability explanation takes for granted that only decentralized firms, not centralized ones, are vulnerable to bureaucratic delays and costly mistakes.
B. The accountability explanation takes for granted that only decentralized firms, not centralized ones, are vulnerable to bureaucratic delays and costly mistakes.
C. Versions of the accountability explanation tend to overlook the adaptability and flexibility that decentralized structures can foster.
D. The accountability explanation underestimates the role of incentive alignment and cultural readiness in facilitating decentralization.
E. Some firms adopt decentralized practices selectively, mitigating the risks of unclear accountability by introducing gradual shifts.
A) Correct Answer. The author writes that accountability arguments “overlook the reality that centralized systems can suffer from bureaucratic delays and reduced employee engagement.” This remark only makes sense if the author believes that some centralized firms, despite clear reporting lines, still run into bottlenecks and other inefficiencies. This is the author's assumption.
B) Incorrect. This choice describes what advocates of the accountability view themselves assume: that only decentralized firms face delays and errors. The author’s critique does not rest on accepting this claim; instead, the author rejects it by pointing out that centralized structures can share the same problems.
C) Incorrect. Flexibility is mentioned earlier in the passage, but the specific criticism of the accountability view is that it ignores inefficiencies inside centralized firms, not that it downplays adaptability in decentralized ones.
D) Incorrect. Incentive alignment and cultural readiness enter later as part of an alternative framework. They are not part of the author’s stated objection to the accountability explanation.
E) Incorrect. Gradual or selective decentralization is discussed as a separate idea. The author does not rely on that practice when challenging the accountability argument.
Answer: A
09 Feb 2026, 11:16
Kudos
Bookmarks
bb option B has been clubed with option A. Please rectify it.
