Reading Comprehension

According to P. F. Drucker, the management philosophy known as Total Quality Management (TQM), which is designed to be adopted consistently throughout an organization and to improve customer service by using sampling theory to reduce the variability of a product's quality, can work successfully in conjunction with two older management systems. As Drucker notes, TQM's scientific approach is consistent with the statistical sampling techniques of the "rationalist" school of scientific management, and the organizational structure associated with TQM is consistent with the social and psychological emphases of the "human relations" school of management.

However, TQM cannot simply be grafted onto these systems or onto certain other non-TQM management systems. Although, as Drucker contends, TQM shares with such systems the ultimate objective of increasing profitability, TQM requires fundamentally different strategies. While the other management systems referred to use upper management decision-making and employee specialization to maximize shareholder profits over the short term, TQM envisions the interests of employees, shareholders, and customers as convergent. For example, lower prices not only benefit consumers but also enhance an organization's competitive edge and ensure its continuance, thus benefiting employees and owners. TQM's emphasis on shared interests is reflected in the decentralized decision-making, integrated production activity, and lateral structure of organizations that achieve the benefits of TQM.

Question#01:
The primary purpose of the passage is to

(A) point out contradictions in a new management system
(B) compare and contrast the objectives of various management systems
(C) identify the organizational features shared by various management systems
(D) explain the relationship of a particular management system to certain other management systems
(E) explain the advantages of a particular management system over certain other management systems

Question#02:
Which of the following best describes the relationship of the second paragraph to the first paragraph?

(A) It presents contrasting explanations for a phenomenon presented in the first paragraph.
(B) It discusses an exception to a general principle outlined in the first paragraph.
(C) It provides information that qualifies a claim presented in the first paragraph.
(D) It presents an example that strengthens a claim presented in the first paragraph.
(E) It presents an alternative approach to solving a problem discussed in the first paragraph.

Question#03:
According to the passage, the rationalist and human relations schools of management are alike in that they

(A) are primarily interested in increasing profits
(B) place little emphasis on issues of organizational structure
(C) use statistical sampling techniques to increase profitability
(D) are unlikely to lower prices in order to increase profitability
(E) focus chiefly on setting and attaining long-term objectives

I picked EAA

[spoiler]For Q-1 my doubt is, first paragraph discussed the relationship and seconds paragraph starts with this word "However" indicating contrast, second paragraph i believe shows the edge of TQM over other theories, then why Op E is a=exactly wrong??? I was between Op D and Op E and finally picked Op E, what if the question ask main point rather than the primary purpose, in that case, the ans gonna be still the same????

For Q-2 please explain why not Op A [/spoiler]

I will go with BAA
I took 5 mints for this RC

IMO DBA

Atul,

My pick: DCA

1.) Primary purpose of the passage is to comapare and explain the relationship that TQM has with other 2 management systems.The paragraph does not intent to show that one management sysytem is superior to the other, or TQM is superior to the other two. It just intends to show a relationship between the three.

2.)The first paragraph says that TQM shares some aspects with the other two management systems. The same is restated in the secong para. The objective is the same i.e achieving high level profits, only ways of achieving it are different. So this is not a contrasting explaination of the first para. Infact it is qualifying the claim in the first para.

3.)Third is really evident.