Indirect Purchases.

This topic has expert replies
Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

Indirect Purchases.

by goelmohit2002 » Fri May 08, 2009 9:36 pm
Corporate Purchasing (From GMAT Set #1)
(Paragraph 1) In corporate purchasing,
competitive scrutiny is typically
limited to suppliers of items that are
directly related to end products.
(5) With “indirect” purchases (such as
computers, advertising, and legal
services), which are not directly
related to production, corporations
often favor “supplier partnerships”
(10) (arrangements in which the
purchaser forgoes the right to
pursue alternative suppliers), which
can inappropriately shelter suppliers
from rigorous competitive scrutiny
(15) that might afford the purchaser
economic leverage. There are two
independent variables—availability
of alternatives and ease of changing
suppliers—that companies should
(20) use to evaluate the feasibility of
subjecting suppliers of indirect
purchases to competitive scrutiny.
This can create four possible
situations.


(25) In Type 1 situations, there are
many alternatives and change is
relatively easy. Open pursuit of
alternatives—by frequent com-
petitive bidding, if possible—will
(30) likely yield the best results. In
Type 2 situations, where there
are many alternatives but change
is difficult—as for providers of
employee health-care benefits—it
(35) is important to continuously test
the market and use the results to
secure concessions from existing
suppliers. Alternatives provide a
credible threat to suppliers, even if
(40) the ability to switch is constrained.
In Type 3 situations, there ate few
alternatives, but the ability to switch
without difficulty creates a threat that
companies can use to negotiate
(45) concessions from existing suppliers.
In Type 4 situations, where there
are few alternatives and change
is difficult, partnerships may be
unavoidable.

Q35:
Which of the following best describes the relation of the second paragraph to the first?

* The second paragraph offers proof of an assertion made in the first paragraph.
* The second paragraph provides an explanation for the occurrence of a situation described in the first paragraph.
* The second paragraph discusses the application of a strategy proposed in the first paragraph.
* The second paragraph examines the scope of a problem presented in the first paragraph.
* The second paragraph discusses the contradictions inherent in a relationship described in the first paragraph.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q36:
Which of the following can be inferred about supplier partnerships, as they are described in the passage?

* They cannot be sustained unless the goods or services provided are available from a large number of suppliers.
* They can result in purchasers paying more for goods and services than they would in a competitive-bidding situation.
* They typically are instituted at the urging of the supplier rather than the purchaser.
* They are not feasible when the goods or services provided are directly related to the purchasers’ end products.
* They are least appropriate when the purchasers’ ability to change suppliers is limited.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q37:
According to the passage, which of the following factors distinguishes an indirect purchase from other purchases?

* The ability of the purchasing company to subject potential suppliers of the purchased item to competitive scrutiny
* The number of suppliers of the purchased item available to the purchasing company
* The methods of negotiation that are available to the purchasing company
* The relationship of the purchased item to the purchasing company’s end product
* The degree of importance of the purchased item in the purchasing company’s business operations

================================================
OA are:
[spoiler]35. C
36. B
37. D
[/spoiler]

Can somebody please help me clarifying

a) why "B" is not the answer for 35 ?Here the situation is that "companies cannot negotiate"...and why is given by second para.

b) Why "A" is not the answer of 37 ? Isn't company's ability hindered by lack of alternatives ?

Please tell what I am missing here.

Thanks
Mohit
Source: — Reading Comprehension |

Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Mon May 11, 2009 1:14 pm
Experts kindly share your opinion !!!!

Thanks
Mohit

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 14
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:40 am
Location: Hyderabad

by preetosh » Tue May 12, 2009 8:11 pm
Mohit

I too agree with you for Q35
To me as well the answer seemed B.

But for Q37 , D is an obvious answer as it is mentioned clearly the relation with end products.

Experts , please comment..

Legendary Member
Posts: 1799
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:03 am
Thanked: 36 times
Followed by:2 members

by goelmohit2002 » Tue May 12, 2009 11:16 pm
But what is wrong with "A" in Q37 ?

User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 575
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 2:58 am
Location: India
Thanked: 18 times
Followed by:4 members
GMAT Score:710

by rahulg83 » Wed May 13, 2009 5:35 am
I got C, B and D...

as for 35
There are two
independent variables—availability
of alternatives and ease of changing
suppliers—that companies should
(20) use to evaluate the feasibility of
subjecting suppliers of indirect
purchases to competitive scrutiny.
This can create four possible
situations.
Author is likely to describe how companies evaluate these variables to encourage competitive scrutiny. This is a strategy which author discusses in second para (4 scenarios)

B says
The second paragraph provides an explanation for the occurrence of a situation described in the first paragraph.
Which situation has occurred in the first paragraph? There is a plan which author suggests (companies should use- line 19) and simply describes it in para 2..

Legendary Member
Posts: 503
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 9:53 pm
Thanked: 31 times
Followed by:2 members

by mmslf75 » Fri Dec 25, 2009 11:53 am
goelmohit2002 wrote:Corporate Purchasing (From GMAT Set #1)
(Paragraph 1) In corporate purchasing,
competitive scrutiny is typically
limited to suppliers of items that are
directly related to end products.
(5) With ?indirect? purchases (such as
computers, advertising, and legal
services), which are not directly
related to production, corporations
often favor ?supplier partnerships?
(10) (arrangements in which the
purchaser forgoes the right to
pursue alternative suppliers), which
can inappropriately shelter suppliers
from rigorous competitive scrutiny
(15) that might afford the purchaser
economic leverage. There are two
independent variables?availability
of alternatives and ease of changing
suppliers?that companies should
(20) use to evaluate the feasibility of
subjecting suppliers of indirect
purchases to competitive scrutiny.
This can create four possible
situations.


(25) In Type 1 situations, there are
many alternatives and change is
relatively easy. Open pursuit of
alternatives?by frequent com-
petitive bidding, if possible?will
(30) likely yield the best results. In
Type 2 situations, where there
are many alternatives but change
is difficult?as for providers of
employee health-care benefits?it
(35) is important to continuously test
the market and use the results to
secure concessions from existing
suppliers. Alternatives provide a
credible threat to suppliers, even if
(40) the ability to switch is constrained.
In Type 3 situations, there ate few
alternatives, but the ability to switch
without difficulty creates a threat that
companies can use to negotiate
(45) concessions from existing suppliers.
In Type 4 situations, where there
are few alternatives and change
is difficult, partnerships may be
unavoidable.

Q35:
Which of the following best describes the relation of the second paragraph to the first?

* The second paragraph offers proof of an assertion made in the first paragraph.
* The second paragraph provides an explanation for the occurrence of a situation described in the first paragraph.
* The second paragraph discusses the application of a strategy proposed in the first paragraph.
* The second paragraph examines the scope of a problem presented in the first paragraph.
* The second paragraph discusses the contradictions inherent in a relationship described in the first paragraph.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q36:
Which of the following can be inferred about supplier partnerships, as they are described in the passage?

* They cannot be sustained unless the goods or services provided are available from a large number of suppliers.
* They can result in purchasers paying more for goods and services than they would in a competitive-bidding situation.
* They typically are instituted at the urging of the supplier rather than the purchaser.
* They are not feasible when the goods or services provided are directly related to the purchasers? end products.
* They are least appropriate when the purchasers? ability to change suppliers is limited.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q37:
According to the passage, which of the following factors distinguishes an indirect purchase from other purchases?

* The ability of the purchasing company to subject potential suppliers of the purchased item to competitive scrutiny
* The number of suppliers of the purchased item available to the purchasing company
* The methods of negotiation that are available to the purchasing company
* The relationship of the purchased item to the purchasing company?s end product
* The degree of importance of the purchased item in the purchasing company?s business operations

================================================
OA are:
[spoiler]35. C
36. B
37. D
[/spoiler]

Can somebody please help me clarifying

a) why "B" is not the answer for 35 ?Here the situation is that "companies cannot negotiate"...and why is given by second para.

b) Why "A" is not the answer of 37 ? Isn't company's ability hindered by lack of alternatives ?

Please tell what I am missing here.

Thanks
Mohit

Pls explain the anwer choice ANY1 ?!!

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 2
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2006 10:58 am

by jade1 » Sun Dec 27, 2009 9:20 pm
Q 35. In the first passage the author quotes "that companies should use to evaluate the feasibility of subjecting suppliers of indirect purchases to competitive scrutiny". This can create four possible situations" . In the next passage the author explains different ways(applications) of implementing "subjecting suppliers of indirect purchases to competitive scrutiny". Choice B talks of "occurrence of a situation", but "that companies should use to evaluate the feasibility of subjecting suppliers of indirect purchases to competitive scrutiny" is not a situation but the opinion of the author. Hence B is correct.

Q 37. The question ask the difference between an indirect purchase and other purchases. In the first passage "In corporate purchasing, competitive scrutiny is typically limited to suppliers of items that are directly related to end products. With "indirect" purchases (such a computers, advertising, and legal services), which are not directly related to production, corporations often favor "supplier partnerships" clearly explains that end product is the differentiator. "The relationship of the purchased item to the purchasing company's end product" is not at all mentioned while explaining the difference between indirect purchase and other purchases. Hence D is correct

Legendary Member
Posts: 549
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:00 am
Thanked: 16 times
Followed by:3 members

by ssgmatter » Fri Jun 25, 2010 7:53 pm
Can anyone explain 36 for this RC?
Best-
Amit

Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 2:27 pm
Location: San Francisco

by andrewhahn » Thu Feb 21, 2013 5:37 pm
Here's my take, hope this helps.

Q36:
Which of the following can be inferred about supplier partnerships, as they are described in the passage?

* They cannot be sustained unless the goods or services provided are available from a large number of suppliers.
no. not mentioned in the passage.

* They can result in purchasers paying more for goods and services than they would in a competitive-bidding situation.
yes. The author states that the competitive scrutiny might afford the purchaser economic leverage. However, the "supplier partnerships" can inappropriately shelter suppliers from competitive scrutiny, which means that the purchasers are paying more for what they could buy than if the suppliers were under the competitive scrutiny. Then the author explains in Type 1 that "Open pursuit of alternatives-by frequent competitive bidding....will likely yield the best results." The "results" mean the feasibility of subjecting suppliers of indirect purchases to competitive scrutiny.

* They typically are instituted at the urging of the supplier rather than the purchaser.
no. "corporations often favor supplier partnerships..."

* They are not feasible when the goods or services provided are directly related to the purchasers' end products.
no. supplier partnerships -> we're only talking about the "indirect" purchases.

* They are least appropriate when the purchasers' ability to change suppliers is limited.
no. type 4 situations - partnerships may be unavoidable there are few alternatives and change is difficult.