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 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 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.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
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 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.
10 Nov 2013, 11:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
E
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
65%
(hard)
Question Stats:
61% (02:23) correct
39%
(02:28)
wrong
based on 843
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Have fun.
Psychologists have found that the implementation of policies allowing work schedules to be tailored to individuals' needs does not typically increase managers' job satisfaction or their efficiency-although this may be because most managers already have the autonomy to adjust their own schedules. But these flexible schedule policies do increase job satisfaction, productivity, and attendance among nonmanagerial employees. The benefits dissipate somewhat over time, however, and they are reduced even further if schedules are too elastic.
Which one of the following statements is most supported by the information above?
A. Implementing flexible schedules would be an effective means of increasing the job satisfaction and efficiency of managers who do not already have scheduling autonomy.
B. Flexible-schedule policies should be expected to improve the morale of some individual employees but not the overall morale of a company's workforce.
C. Flexible schedules should be expected to substantially improve a company's productivity and employee satisfaction in the long run.
D. There is little correlation between managers' job satisfaction and their ability to set their own work schedules.
E. The typical benefits of flexible-schedule policies cannot be reliably inferred from observations of the effects of such policies on managers.
Psychologists have found that the implementation of policies allowing work schedules to be tailored to individuals' needs does not typically increase managers' job satisfaction or their efficiency-although this may be because most managers already have the autonomy to adjust their own schedules. But these flexible schedule policies do increase job satisfaction, productivity, and attendance among nonmanagerial employees. The benefits dissipate somewhat over time, however, and they are reduced even further if schedules are too elastic.
Which one of the following statements is most supported by the information above?
A. Implementing flexible schedules would be an effective means of increasing the job satisfaction and efficiency of managers who do not already have scheduling autonomy.
B. Flexible-schedule policies should be expected to improve the morale of some individual employees but not the overall morale of a company's workforce.
C. Flexible schedules should be expected to substantially improve a company's productivity and employee satisfaction in the long run.
D. There is little correlation between managers' job satisfaction and their ability to set their own work schedules.
E. The typical benefits of flexible-schedule policies cannot be reliably inferred from observations of the effects of such policies on managers.
14 Nov 2013, 02:50
Kudos
Bookmarks
To answer this Inference question, we need to eliminate all the answer choices that cannot be inferred from the premises.
Answer choice A is not supported by the premises. This choice tries to trap you by using the fallacy called 'denying the antecedent', i/e. "if A then B; not A, therefore not B". This is not a valid inference, as can be seen in the following simple example: "If it snows, the windshield fogs up. It is not snowing, therefore the windshield won't fog up". We know this is not true because the window could become fogged up for another reasons. Translated to the terms of the argument, the argument says that implementing flexible schedules does not increase manager's job satisfaction, when they already enjoy flexibility. In other words, if managers who have flexibility are allowed flexible work schedules (A), then job satisfaction will not increase (B). Answer choice A tries to deny the antecedent and say - If managers who don't have flexibility are offered flexibility (= not A) therefore job satisfaction will increase (not B). As we have seen, this kind of reasoning is not valid. Put more simply, just because we know that giving managers more flexibility doesn't help job satisfaction when they already have flexibility, we cannot conclude that when they don't have flexibility, giving it to them will result in increased job satisfaction. It might, but this is not a necessary result. There may be other factors that are more important for job satisfaction.
Answer choice B should be eliminated because we don't have premises that allow us to assess the overall morale of a company, and we are also told that the increases are time dependent, and don't necessary last.
Answer choice C should be eliminated contradicts the information in the passage, which tells us that the benefits of implementation of flexible schedules dissipates over time.
Answer choice D should be eliminated because it is not supported by the premises. The argument might in fact support the contrary - that there might be some correlation between flexibility and job satisfaction, since we know that those who already enjoy flexibility are not affected by being given more flexibility.
Answer choice E is supported by the premises. We are told in the argument that "the implementation of policies allowing work schedules to be tailored to individuals' needs does not typically increase managers' job satisfaction or their efficiency". We can infer from this that "The typical benefits of flexible-schedule policies cannot be reliably inferred from observations of the effects of such policies on managers." This answer choice is only talking about the ability to infer something: not the content of that inference, and it is therefore fully compatible with the premises of the argument.
Answer choice A is not supported by the premises. This choice tries to trap you by using the fallacy called 'denying the antecedent', i/e. "if A then B; not A, therefore not B". This is not a valid inference, as can be seen in the following simple example: "If it snows, the windshield fogs up. It is not snowing, therefore the windshield won't fog up". We know this is not true because the window could become fogged up for another reasons. Translated to the terms of the argument, the argument says that implementing flexible schedules does not increase manager's job satisfaction, when they already enjoy flexibility. In other words, if managers who have flexibility are allowed flexible work schedules (A), then job satisfaction will not increase (B). Answer choice A tries to deny the antecedent and say - If managers who don't have flexibility are offered flexibility (= not A) therefore job satisfaction will increase (not B). As we have seen, this kind of reasoning is not valid. Put more simply, just because we know that giving managers more flexibility doesn't help job satisfaction when they already have flexibility, we cannot conclude that when they don't have flexibility, giving it to them will result in increased job satisfaction. It might, but this is not a necessary result. There may be other factors that are more important for job satisfaction.
Answer choice B should be eliminated because we don't have premises that allow us to assess the overall morale of a company, and we are also told that the increases are time dependent, and don't necessary last.
Answer choice C should be eliminated contradicts the information in the passage, which tells us that the benefits of implementation of flexible schedules dissipates over time.
Answer choice D should be eliminated because it is not supported by the premises. The argument might in fact support the contrary - that there might be some correlation between flexibility and job satisfaction, since we know that those who already enjoy flexibility are not affected by being given more flexibility.
Answer choice E is supported by the premises. We are told in the argument that "the implementation of policies allowing work schedules to be tailored to individuals' needs does not typically increase managers' job satisfaction or their efficiency". We can infer from this that "The typical benefits of flexible-schedule policies cannot be reliably inferred from observations of the effects of such policies on managers." This answer choice is only talking about the ability to infer something: not the content of that inference, and it is therefore fully compatible with the premises of the argument.
gmat6nplus1
General Discussion
09 Mar 2015, 05:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
IlanaEconomistGMAT
Can someone help me explain this part-( I got the answer right but I feel that this explanation is useful) Please help me understand this bit.
Answer choice A is not supported by the premises. This choice tries to trap you by using the fallacy called 'denying the antecedent', i/e. "if A then B; not A, therefore not B". This is not a valid inference, as can be seen in the following simple example: "If it snows, the windshield fogs up. It is not snowing, therefore the windshield won't fog up". We know this is not true because the window could become fogged up for another reasons. Translated to the terms of the argument, the argument says that implementing flexible schedules does not increase manager's job satisfaction, when they already enjoy flexibility. In other words, if managers who have flexibility are allowed flexible work schedules (A), then job satisfaction will not increase (B). Answer choice A tries to deny the antecedent and say - If managers who don't have flexibility are offered flexibility (= not A) therefore job satisfaction will increase (not B). As we have seen, this kind of reasoning is not valid. Put more simply, just because we know that giving managers more flexibility doesn't help job satisfaction when they already have flexibility, we cannot conclude that when they don't have flexibility, giving it to them will result in increased job satisfaction. It might, but this is not a necessary result. There may be other factors that are more important for job satisfaction.
Thanks
