Summary
A manager can’t make employees perform their best by threatening to fire them or offering them money for being productive. Instead, employees must want to do a good job for the sake of doing a good job. One way to achieve this is by giving employees responsibility, especially for decisions that the manager used to make.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
In some situations, some external motivators are less effective than some internal motivators.
In some situations, a manager can give up some of her own responsibilities and control in order to more effectively motivate her employees.
Delegating responsibility to employees can lead them to develop a desire to do a good job, which can lead them to perform better at work.
In some situations, a manager can give up some of her own responsibilities and control in order to more effectively motivate her employees.
Delegating responsibility to employees can lead them to develop a desire to do a good job, which can lead them to perform better at work.
A
Increased responsibility can improve a person’s sense of how power should be used.
Unsupported. Increased responsibility may cause employees to want to do a good job for the sake of doing a good job, but we have no information as to how this might relate to a person’s “sense of how power should be used.”
B
It is often the case that the desire for prestige is more powerful than the desire for job security.
Unsupported. The stimulus says that threatening employees with termination is not an effective way of making them perform well. But it does not compare this to an employee’s desire for prestige or discuss whether the desire for job security or prestige is more powerful.
C
In some cases one’s effectiveness in a particular role can be enhanced by a partial relinquishing of control.
Strongly supported. This is illustrated by the situation in the passage: In this case, the manager’s effectiveness in making employees want to do a good job is enhanced by giving those employees responsibility that used to belong to the manager (i.e. relinquishing some control).
D
People who carry out decisions are in the best position to determine what those decisions should be.
Unsupported. We do not know who is being referred to as the “people who carry out decisions” here or which decisions are being referenced. This is too vague to be an example of something that is illustrated by the passage.
E
Business works best by harnessing the self-interest of individuals to benefit the company as a whole.
Unsupported. The stimulus doesn’t discuss which methods make business “work best.” It only talks about one of the best methods to get employees to want to do a good job for its own sake. Also, we don’t know that anyone is motivated by self-interest in the situation described.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that eating fish can lower one’s cholesterol. This is based on a study comparing a group that ate fish and a group that didn’t eat fish. The fish-eating group ended up with lower cholesterol levels than the other group, even though the two groups started off with similar cholesterol levels.
Identify Argument Part
The referenced text is part of the support for the author’s conclusion. It helps to eliminate the possibility that the fish-group’s lower cholesterol is just a function of that group starting with lower cholesterol.
A
It is offered as an objection to the main conclusion of the argument.
The referenced text supports the conclusion.
B
It expresses the main conclusion of the argument.
The referenced text supports the conclusion, but it’s not the conclusion itself.
C
It rules out an alternative explanation of the data collected in the study.
This accurately describes the role of the referenced text. The fact the groups started with similar cholesterol levels eliminates the explanation that the fish-group just started out with lower cholesterol levels.
D
It provides background information on the purpose of the study.
The referenced text supports the conclusion. It’s not just background information.
E
It introduces an alternative explanation of the phenomenon described in the main conclusion.
The referenced text supports the author’s conclusion. It does not introduce an alternate explanation.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author concludes that any religion that updates the language of their traditional texts and replaces traditional rituals with modern ones will have an increase in the number of worshipers. This is based on the fact that certain religions have made these changes and experienced greater attendance after those chancges.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that the modernization that some religions have undertaken caused the increases in attendance after those changes. This overlooks the possibility that the increases in attendance might have nothing to do with the modernization changes those religions made.
A
not every religion can update its texts and replace its traditional rituals
The author doesn’t assume that every religion can modernize. The conclusion concerns what will happen IF a religion modernizes; this doesn’t imply every religion will be able to do so.
B
modernization of religious texts and rituals will not involve an alteration of their messages
The author doesn’t assume that modernization won’t change a religion’s message. The argument simply concerns whether modernization will increase attendance. Changes in messaging may or may not happen.
C
the modernization of the texts and rituals of some religions was the cause of their increases in attendance
The author assumes that the modernization that some religions did caused their increases in attendance. This is flawed because the increase in attendance could have been due to other things, in which case, we have no reason to think modernization will lead to attendance increase.
D
making texts and rituals more modern is the only way in which a religion could bring about an increase in attendance at places of worship
The conclusion doesn’t assert that modernization is necessary to increase attendance. It asserts that modernization is sufficient to increase attendance.
E
the growth in attendance at places of worship affiliated with religions that made their texts and rituals more modern is irreversible
The author doesn’t assert that grow in attendance is irreversible. Maybe in the future the attendance will not increase and will decline; this doesn’t impact the reasoning of the argument