Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer made waves once more when she banned her emplo

Question

Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer made waves once more when she banned her employees from telecommuting and gave them an ultimatum: Work at the office or quit. From one of the few women in a leadership position in an industry where flexibility in the workplace has been common if not required, this was a radical move.

Protesters flocked to point out that Mayer, herself a new mother, had installed at her own expense a nursery next door to her office, something no other working parent could possibly afford to do. Surely this made her new rule for her workers all the more unfair.

On the flip side of the argument were those who pointed out that Mayer was hired to turn around a floundering company, and that company metrics indicated that one cause of that floundering might be the numbers of people who were not logging on to the Yahoo system as often as they should, were not producing as they once had, and were often found to be working on projects outside the Yahoo purview. Shouldn’t Mayer have the right to demand a certain level of commitment from her employees, even if that meant she had to keep an eye on them, physically, within the confines of the Yahoo office complex?

There are a variety of conflicting assumptions contributing to this situation. Mayer, being a young woman, is expected by many to represent the New Woman in industry and thus to embrace the freedoms that her foremothers fought to achieve, one of which is the flexibility to work from home. On the other hand, Mayer’s youth is thought by some to dictate her pulling away from the conventions of the women’s movement and moving back toward a tradition of teamwork and synchronous communication. Meanwhile, those who look at the bottom line and who know Yahoo intimately insist that Mayer had no choice in the matter—that one of the reasons for Yahoo’s demise was its far-flung workforce and lack of cohesion. Perhaps only time will tell whether Mayer’s decision was the right one for Yahoo; we might all check back in a year’s time to see where things stand.    1 
 1. In the first paragraph, why does the author refer to Mayer’s decision as “radical”?

(A) It represented something that had never been tried before.
(B) It defied the traditions of that particular industry.
(C) It was almost militant in its adoption of feminist theory.
(D) It showed a fanatical commitment to company turnaround.
(E) It was extreme in its “all-or-nothing” approach.

2 
 2. According to the passage, people who supported Mayer’s decision did so because of which of the following?

(A) It has been proved that telecommuting leads to a lack of productivity.
(B) Yahoo worked better back when everyone worked in the same office space.
(C) Compared to previous data, Yahoo workers seemed to be slacking off.
(D) She herself was able to balance work and family life without difficulty.
(E) Synchronicity is critical, especially for companies involved in high tech.

3 
 3. The author of the passage would most likely agree with which of the following statements?

(A) Mayer has made a grave error in pulling her employees back into the office.
(B) Working from home has been shown to increase, not decrease productivity.
(C) Yahoo’s history indicates that Mayer’s controlling attitude may backfire.
(D) Mayer is far too young to be held to the standards of the women’s movement.
(E) Mayer’s plan for Yahoo deserves to move forward and be judged later on.

4 
 4. How could the author’s attitude toward Mayer be characterized?

(A) Detached
(B) Derisive
(C) Deferential
(D) Derogatory
(E) Doting

5 
 5. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

(A) explaining the motivation for a decision
(B) showing the negative effects of a decision
(C) revealing the politics behind a decision
(D) presenting the attitudes toward a decision
(E) exploring the possible results of a decision

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

1. In the first paragraph, why does the author refer to Mayer’s decision as “radical”?

Explanation

Option (B)  is correct because it aligns with the information provided in the passage. The passage states that flexibility in the workplace had been common, if not required, in the industry. Marissa Mayer's decision to ban telecommuting and enforce office work went against this prevailing practice and tradition of the industry. By taking such a stance and defying the established norms, Mayer's decision can be considered radical.

The author describes Mayer's decision as radical because it represented a departure from the expected or typical approach in the industry. Telecommuting and flexible work arrangements had become common in many companies, particularly in the technology sector, and were often seen as a way to attract and retain top talent. Mayer's decision to reverse this trend and require employees to work exclusively at the office was seen as a significant deviation from the industry's prevailing practices and expectations.

The passage highlights the contrasting assumptions about Mayer's decision. Some people expected Mayer, as a young woman in a leadership position, to embrace the flexibility in the workplace that previous generations fought for. This expectation is rooted in the idea that women should have the freedom to balance work and personal responsibilities, including the option to work from home. Therefore, Mayer's decision to ban telecommuting can be seen as defying the expectations associated with her position as a female leader and going against the perceived advancements made by the women's movement.

Overall,  option (B)  accurately reflects the main reason why the author refers to Mayer's decision as  "radical":  it defied the traditions and prevailing practices of the industry, which considered flexibility in the workplace as common, if not required.

Answer: B

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Explanation

4. How could the author’s attitude toward Mayer be characterized?

Explanation

The passage does not display a deferential tone towards Mayer. Instead, it presents conflicting viewpoints and assumptions about her decision without explicitly favoring one side over the other. The author does not show excessive admiration or a deferential attitude towards Mayer's actions.

Throughout the passage, the author presents different perspectives and allows readers to form their own opinions. The author does not express personal bias or strong emotions towards Mayer's decision. By presenting both sides of the argument and highlighting conflicting assumptions, the author maintains a detached stance, allowing readers to consider the various factors at play and form their own conclusions.

Therefore, option (A) is more accurate in characterizing the author's attitude as detached, as opposed to being derisive, deferential, derogatory, or doting. The author takes a neutral and objective approach by presenting different viewpoints and leaving it open for readers to decide.

Answer: A

sunshineeee · Answer

Can mentor explain Q5 answer? Thank you

guddo · Answer

5. The author of the passage is primarily concerned with

The passage discusses Marissa Mayer’s decision to ban telecommuting at Yahoo and then presents several reactions to that decision. Some people saw it as unfair, others defended it as necessary for business reasons, and still others viewed it through gender and workplace-culture expectations.  The main purpose  is to present different attitudes toward the  same decision .

(A) explaining the motivation for a decision

This is too narrow. The passage does mention possible business reasons behind Mayer’s decision, but it also discusses criticism and broader social reactions.

(B) showing the negative effects of a decision

This is incorrect. The passage does not mainly show the effects of the decision. It says time will tell whether the decision was right.

(C) revealing the politics behind a decision

This is too strong. The passage discusses gender expectations and workplace assumptions, but it does not mainly expose hidden political motives.

(D) presenting the attitudes toward a decision

This is correct.   The passage presents several views of Mayer’s decision: protesters’ criticism, defenders’ business argument, and broader assumptions about women, leadership, flexibility, and workplace culture.

(E) exploring the possible results of a decision

This is not the main focus. The author briefly says the results will become clearer later, but most of the passage is about reactions to the decision.

Answer: (D)

curatelycurious · Answer

Here are the explanations for the passage as per my understanding: 
P1: WFO was a radical move by the CEO in a industry which was so flexible
P2: Protesters found it unfair as she herself had setup a nursery near office which she could afford but other''s couldn't afford to WFO.
P3: Certain people were supporting CEO as the productivity and employee behaviour towards logging in and committing to work had actually reduced.
P4: Author presents contrasting views and leaves the debate unresolved.

Main point: Contrasting views over CEO rule of WFO.

egmat · Answer

Hi sunshineeee,

Great question. For a "primarily concerned with" question, the trick is to find the choice that covers the  whole passage , not just one appealing piece of it. The tempting wrong answers here each grab only a slice.

Walk through what each paragraph actually  does :

-  Paragraph 1:  introduces Mayer's telecommuting ban and calls it "radical."
-  Paragraph 2:  gives the  protesters'  view - the rule is unfair.
-  Paragraph 3:  gives the  supporters'  view - the company was floundering and workers were slacking.
-  Paragraph 4:  names "a variety of  conflicting assumptions " (the New Woman view, the tradition view, the bottom-line view), then reserves judgment: "only time will tell."

So across all  four  paragraphs, the author is doing one consistent thing:  laying out the different attitudes people hold toward Mayer's decision.  That is exactly what  (D) presenting the attitudes toward a decision  describes.

Now see why the close ones fall short:

-  (A) explaining the motivation  - that only fits  part  of paragraph  3 . The author never settles on one motive as  the  reason; they report several competing ones.
-  (E) exploring the possible results  - this shows up in just the last sentence ("check back in a year"). One closing line isn't the  primary  concern.
-  (B) negative effects  and  (C) the politics behind it  - the passage is deliberately balanced (pro and con), so it isn't focused on negatives, and it doesn't dig into political maneuvering.

The habit to build: for purpose questions, test each choice against  every  paragraph. If a choice only describes one paragraph, it's too narrow - the right answer is the umbrella that stretches over all of them. Here only  (D)  does that.

Answer: D

Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer made waves once more when she banned her emplo

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

Yahoo CEO Marissa Mayer made waves once more when she banned her emplo

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