Is this a real GMAT question..??
Experts, please explain..

A


and looking forward for answer to question put forth by Krishnasty.

I am with C.

My son likes most cookies more than us.I gave my son two cookies. He only ate the second one. why?
A) My son has strict diet rules to eat only one
B) 2nd one is a tasty 'goodday' product and the first cookie is a cheap 'tiger' biscuit.
C) He is fealty to his mom's condition to eat only one cookie.

The one i made above is same as below.

Surev wrote:Incorporation A, reluctant to retrench a large section of its employees, offered them "enhanced" perquisites as against "a 3.52% increase" in their Provident Fund, while their leading competitors did both. Yet, few opted for the latter option.

Which of the following explains the inherent paradox?

A. Organisation ethos
B. Better job satisfaction
C. Specious product
D. Fealty
E. Brand image

I am confused between 2 answers. Please share your thoughts on whats your right answer.

I am confused between A & B. Although I have been told that B (Better Job Satisfaction) is the correct answer I strongly believe that the reference to reluctance of Incorporation A to retrench its employees gives some credibility to Organisation ethos.
Experts - Any comments?

Surev wrote:I am confused between A & B. Although I have been told that B (Better Job Satisfaction) is the correct answer I strongly believe that the reference to reluctance of Incorporation A to retrench its employees gives some credibility to Organisation ethos.
Experts - Any comments?

None, other than a general "there's no way in hell that this is a real GMAT question".

People come to B-schools from all walks of life, and many different backgrounds. B-school is not only for business undergrads - the schools themselves actively seek to create a diverse classroom, and set aside places for engineers, liberal arts majors, musicians, you name it. The GMAT reflects this trend: you do not need to be an economics/business major to understand what's going on. Any overly technical / professional jargon term is either explained in an unambiguous manner within the text, or not used in the first place. This problem uses jargon such as retrench, perquisites, provident fund, without explaining what these are, or whether the fact that the competitors did both is good or bad. The answer choices are too short and unrelated to the paradox. This is a problem that tests you knowledge of economics more than it tests your reasoning. There's just no way you'll encounter something like this on the GMAT.

Thanks. That's a relief.