Bold faced CR - Executive shun the use of corporate titles

This topic has expert replies
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 121
Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2009 1:16 am
Thanked: 4 times
GMAT Score:720
annakool1009 wrote:Business Consultant: Some corporations shun the use of executive titles because they fear that the use of titles indicating position in the corporation tends to inhibit communication up and down the corporate hierarchy. Since an executive who uses a title is treated with more respect by outsiders, however, use of a title can facilitate an executive’s dealings with external businesses. Clearly, corporations should adopt the
compromise of encouraging their executives to use their corporate titles externally but not internally, since even if it is widely known that the corporation’s executives use titles outside their organization, this knowledge does not by itself inhibit communication within the corporation.
In the consultant’s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second presents a drawback to that strategy.

B. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second is a consideration raised to call into question the effectiveness of that strategy as a means of achieving that goal.

C. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second is a consideration the consultant raises in questioning the significance of that problem.

D. The first is part of an explanation that the consultant offers for a certain
phenomenon; the second is that phenomenon.

E. The first describes a policy for which the consultant seeks to provide a
justification; the second is a consideration the consultant raises as part of that justification.
IMO B

Well by elimination I narrowed the choices to A,B,C and among them here are my reasons to choose B
The first part is common to all,
In A: The second part doesn't exactly states a drawback, it infact states an advantageous situation.

In C: In the second part the consultant is not questioning the importance of the problem i.e internal hierarchy, infact he agrees with it in the conclusion

In B: In the second part, the consultant does call into question the decision of shunning the title, since keeping the title has a benefit too. B suits most appropriately, after POE

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 122
Joined: Fri May 22, 2009 10:38 pm
Thanked: 8 times
GMAT Score:700

by rah_pandey » Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:37 am
Can some body please explain what does this sentence mean in simple english.

The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second is a consideration raised to call into question the effectiveness of that strategy as a means of achieving that goal.

The first part is easy to grasp but the second part uses a lot of circular(elliptical) english.

Please help

Rahul

Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 63
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2009 2:22 am
Location: hyderabad

by rahulsaroha » Sat Jul 04, 2009 5:31 am
IMO: E

the first bold face is not a strategy..it's a policy..
that's why i had rejected "A"...

also second bold face..i a consideration by the same person of which he had taken care of in rest of the argument
rahul

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Wed Jul 29, 2009 1:50 pm
Received a PM asking me to respond. I didn't see an author cited for this question. Can you please either cite the author (if you haven't already) or tell me again, if I overlooked it in all of the preceding posts?

We experts aren't supposed to respond unless / until the author has been given proper credit. :(
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me

Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 175
Joined: Mon Feb 09, 2009 3:57 pm
Thanked: 4 times

by tom4lax » Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:22 pm
Another vote for B. Between A and B, but the second part is not a disadvantage IMO.

Legendary Member
Posts: 882
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 2:57 pm
Thanked: 15 times
Followed by:1 members
GMAT Score:690

by crackgmat007 » Thu Aug 13, 2009 7:56 am
what is the final verdict? A or B?

Legendary Member
Posts: 1161
Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 am
Location: Sydney
Thanked: 23 times
Followed by:1 members

by mehravikas » Mon Sep 14, 2009 11:42 am
Hi Stacey,

This question is from GMAT Paper Test.

Cheers,
Vikas
Stacey Koprince wrote:Received a PM asking me to respond. I didn't see an author cited for this question. Can you please either cite the author (if you haven't already) or tell me again, if I overlooked it in all of the preceding posts?

We experts aren't supposed to respond unless / until the author has been given proper credit. :(

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Wed Sep 16, 2009 11:14 am
First bold: Some corporations shun the use of executive titles

This is something the consultant accepts as established fact. We don't yet know whether he agrees or disagrees with the approach.

next we have: because they fear that <titles inhibit communication in the company>.

So that's why some corporations don't use titles. Still don't know author's opinion about this.

then: Since <blah blah blah>, however

Bingo. Author doesn't agree.

2nd bold: use of a title can facilitate an executive's dealings with external businesses.

How does this relate to the opening stuff? We had:
1) don't use titles
2) because there's a drawback to using titles

But now the author is saying
3) there's also a benefit to using titles
4) but that benefit has nothing to do with the drawback described above (the drawback is about internal usage of titles; the benefit is about external usage)

Answers.

A) The first is a strategy (don't use titles) used to avoid a particular problem (inhibiting internal communication. Yep - good so far. The second presents a drawback (titles good for external stuff) to THAT strategy <already mentioned earlier: don't use titles>. Again, good so far. Keep this one in.

B) The first is a strategy (don't use titles) used to avoid a particular problem (inhibiting internal communication. Yep - good so far. The second is a consideration (titles good for external stuff) that calls into question how well the strategy (don't use titles) achieves the desired goal (don't inhibit internal communication).

No. The 2nd statement doesn't address how well or poorly the strategy (don't use titles) achieves the stated goal (don't inhibit internal communication. Eliminate.

C) The first is a strategy (don't use titles) used to avoid a particular problem (inhibiting internal communication. Yep - good so far. The second is a consideration (titles good for external stuff) raised in questioing the significance of the problem (inhibit internal communication).

No again. The 2nd bold does not address the internal communication problem. Eliminate.

D) The first is part of an explanation (don't use titles - is that an explanation?) for a phenomenon (? what's the phenomenon?). No.

E) The first descirbes a policy (don't use titles) that the author wants to justify. No. The author doesn't agree with this policy.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 15539
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 12:04 pm
Location: New York, NY
Thanked: 13060 times
Followed by:1906 members
GMAT Score:790

by GMATGuruNY » Fri Jan 24, 2014 6:58 am
annakool1009 wrote:Business Consultant: Some corporations shun the use of executive titles because they fear that the use of titles indicating position in the corporation tends to inhibit communication up and down the corporate hierarchy. Since an executive who uses a title is treated with more respect by outsiders, however, use of a title can facilitate an executive�s dealings with external businesses. Clearly, corporations should adopt the compromise of encouraging their executives to use their corporate titles externally but not internally, since even if it is widely known that the corporation�s executives use titles outside their organization, this knowledge does not by itself inhibit communication within the corporation.
In the consultant�s reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?

A. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second presents a drawback to that strategy.

B. The first describes a strategy that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem; the second is a consideration raised to call into question the effectiveness of that strategy as a means of achieving that goal.
I received a PM requesting that I explain why A is better than B.

Many BF CRs involve TWO OPPOSING CONCLUSIONS.
Here, the debate is between SOME CORPORATIONS and the PASSAGE.

Some corporations:
Premise: The use of titles indicating position in the corporation tends to inhibit communication up and down the corporate hierarchy.
Conclusion: Shun the use of executive titles. (BF1)

Passage:
Premise: The use of a title can facilitate an executive's dealings with external businesses. (BF2)
Conclusion: Adopt the compromise of encouraging executives to use their corporate titles externally but not internally

A and B indicate the same role for BF1:
The first describes a strategy (shunning the use of executive titles) that has been adopted to avoid a certain problem (internal communication up and down the corporate hierarchy will be inhibited).

Where A and B differ is in their descriptions of BF2.

B: The second is a consideration raised to call into question the effectiveness of that strategy as a means of achieving that goal.
No.
BF2 serves to support the conclusion of the passage.
The passage AGREES that executive titles should NOT be used internally.
Thus, BF2 does not break the link between the strategy of some corporations (shunning the use titles) and the goal of this strategy (better internal communication).

A: The second presents a drawback to that strategy.
Yes.
The drawback of the strategy (shunning titles) is that a title can facilitate an executive's dealings with external businesses.

The correct answer is A.
Private tutor exclusively for the GMAT and GRE, with over 20 years of experience.
Followed here and elsewhere by over 1900 test-takers.
I have worked with students based in the US, Australia, Taiwan, China, Tajikistan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia -- a long list of countries.
My students have been admitted to HBS, CBS, Tuck, Yale, Stern, Fuqua -- a long list of top programs.

As a tutor, I don't simply teach you how I would approach problems.
I unlock the best way for YOU to solve problems.

For more information, please email me (Mitch Hunt) at [email protected].
Student Review #1
Student Review #2
Student Review #3