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

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

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


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