Last visit was: 04 Nov 2024, 12:47 It is currently 04 Nov 2024, 12:47

Close

GRE Prep Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GRE score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Close

Request Expert Reply

Confirm Cancel
SORT BY:
Date
Verbal Expert
Joined: 18 Apr 2015
Posts: 29887
Own Kudos [?]: 36105 [0]
Given Kudos: 25917
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2021
Posts: 78
Own Kudos [?]: 13 [0]
Given Kudos: 61
Send PM
Manager
Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2021
Posts: 78
Own Kudos [?]: 13 [0]
Given Kudos: 61
Send PM
avatar
Intern
Intern
Joined: 05 Sep 2022
Posts: 4
Own Kudos [?]: 2 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
Send PM
Re: According to P. F. Drucker, the management philosophy known as Total Q [#permalink]
1
kk117 wrote:
In Question 2, how is the answer C?

I inferred it as "Second paragraph weakens the claims in First paragraph."

Quote:
It provides information that qualifies a claim presented in the first paragraph.


Doesn't qualify indicate that it supports the claim?


One definition of qualify is "make (a statement or assertion) less absolute; add reservations to". That is used here apparently.
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2022
Posts: 88
Own Kudos [?]: 42 [2]
Given Kudos: 73
GRE 1: Q158 V156
Send PM
Re: According to P. F. Drucker, the management philosophy known as Total Q [#permalink]
2
kk117 wrote:
In Question 2, how is the answer C?

I inferred it as "Second paragraph weakens the claims in First paragraph."

Quote:
It provides information that qualifies a claim presented in the first paragraph.


Doesn't qualify indicate that it supports the claim?



the GRE commonly uses the word qualify in the manner that the answer choice implies. Below is a definition/explanation from Magoosh:

"This is perhaps the most commonly confused secondary meaning and the one that is most important to learn for the GRE. To qualify is to limit, and is usually used in the context of a statement or an opinion.
I love San Francisco.

I love San Francisco, but it is always windy.

The first statement shows my unqualified love for San Francisco. In the second statement, I qualify, or limit, my love for San Francisco.
"
Manager
Manager
Joined: 17 Aug 2022
Posts: 88
Own Kudos [?]: 42 [1]
Given Kudos: 73
GRE 1: Q158 V156
Send PM
Re: According to P. F. Drucker, the management philosophy known as Total Q [#permalink]
1
kk117 wrote:
I can't understand Q3, can anyone please explain it?



The first part of paragraph 2 states:

"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 "
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Aug 2022
Posts: 45
Own Kudos [?]: 48 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Send PM
According to P. F. Drucker, the management philosophy known as Total Q [#permalink]
1
Expert Reply
Quote:
1. The primary purpose of the passage is to


In preparation for answering this question, let's grab a summary of the ideas in the passage. The two-paragraph structure should serve as a basic organizational aid here.

¶1:
• Describes/defines the management system known as TQM
• TQM works with X system in way M, and with Y system in way N

¶2:
• BUT, you can't just stick TQM onto pre-existing implementations of those other systems.
• All three aim to maximize profits
• The other two are short-term (implying TQM isn't)
• Different stakeholders / different people are invested in the systems.


That's the basic content of the passage. We want the answer choice that...
• CONTAINS IDEAS that ARE supported by the passage text,
• says NOTHING that ISN'T supported.

There's no obligation for the answer to hit every single point.

One by one:


Quote:
(A) point out contradictions in a new management system


"Contradictions in a system" would mean inconsistencies WITHIN ONE system. While the passage notes some points of contrast among three different management systems, it does not mention any internal inconsistencies WITHIN any one of the three.

Another fatal problem with this answer choice is the word "new". Nowhere does the author give any clue as to the relative age or pedigree of any of the three management systems mentioned.


Quote:
(B) compare and contrast the objectives of various management systems


Objectives are mentioned only briefly, at the start of the second paragraph—where the author notes that all three of the mentioned systems have the same ultimate objective (i.e., to maximize profits).

This answer choice thus fails on two counts. First, since it only covers the material in one relatively small part of one paragraph, it's certainly not the main idea/purpose. Second, "compare and contrast" isn't substantiated, since no contrast is drawn between the ultimate objectives of the three systems.


Quote:
(C) identify the organizational features shared by various management systems


There are just two locations where the passage touches on organizational specs.

One of these locations is at the end of the first paragraph, where the author states that "the organizational structure associated with TQM is consistent with the social and psychological emphases of the 'human relations' school of management". Even this part doesn't satisfy choice C, however, because the author doesn't identify that "organizational structure"—in other words, say WHAT IT IS!

That leaves only the "lateral structure of organizations" near the end of the passage, which not only is MUCH too small a fraction of the text to qualify as a main idea, but, moreover, only touches on one of the three management systems.
This choice isn't supported.


Quote:
(D) explain the relationship of a particular management system to certain other management systems


Looking back at the bullet points... ¶1 starts out with a detailed definition of TQM, which makes TQM the "particular management system" out of the three. The rest of ¶1 consists of two specific identifications of points of consistency between TQM and other systems, one specific similarity for each of the other two systems. These consistencies are definitely relationships with those other systems.

¶2 starts out with a treatment of shared objectives (another relationship), and then dives into some points of distinction (still another relationship).

This choice is thus fully supported.


Quote:
(E) explain the advantages of a particular management system over certain other management systems


Nowhere in this passage is there any language to suggest that any one of the three systems is better or worse than any other, or that the author has any sort of personal preference for or against any of them. There are only objective comparisons of different specs.


It's D.
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Aug 2022
Posts: 45
Own Kudos [?]: 48 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Send PM
Re: According to P. F. Drucker, the management philosophy known as Total Q [#permalink]
1
Expert Reply
Carcass wrote:
2. Which of the following best describes the relationship of the second paragraph to the first paragraph?


The first paragraph, after defining TQM (which is necessary as groundwork, but won't figure into relationships), goes on to state that TQM is consistent with each of two systems in one specifically cited way apiece. This paragraph mentions only consistencies. No limitations of any kind are stated. Using only the statements in ¶1, it might seem that TQM could just be tossed together with either of the other two systems, since, after all, the only thing mentioned so far is that it's consistent with both of them.

That's where ¶2 comes in with, "Well, you can't just throw them together willy-nilly" and goes on to explain exactly why not. So, ¶2 places some limitations / boundaries on the compatibility introduced in ¶1.


Let's look in the choices for this:


Quote:
(A) It presents contrasting explanations for a phenomenon presented in the first paragraph.


The first paragraph doesn't even contain a "phenomenon"! The first paragraph is about three different business-management systems—which could be described as "systems", "methodologies", "protocols", "plans", etc., but not events/occurrences/phenomena—and a couple of points of consistency across them.


Quote:
(B) It discusses an exception to a general principle outlined in the first paragraph.


The two consistencies near the end of ¶1 could plausibly be called principles.
Exceptions to "these two systems are consistent in this way", however, would have to be specific instances in which the two systems are INCONSISTENT in that very same way.

In other words, the two kinds of 'exceptions' that would satisfy this choice are...
—Contradictions between TQM and the statistical sampling techniques of the rationalist school,
or
—Contradictions between TQM and the organizational structural emphases of the human-relations school.

The passage contains neither of these anywhere.


Quote:
(C) It provides information that qualifies a claim presented in the first paragraph.


The "claim" from ¶1 is that TQM is consistent with each of two other systems. The limitations explicitly placed on that compatibility in ¶2 are, indeed, "qualifications", so this answer choice is fully supported.


Quote:
(D) It presents an example that strengthens a claim presented in the first paragraph.


The claim in ¶1 is that TQM is consistent with each of two other schools of management on one count apiece. The only way to strengthen either half would be to cite additional specific points of consistency between TQM and either/both of those schools—something that the passage does not do.


Quote:
(E) It presents an alternative approach to solving a problem discussed in the first paragraph.


The first paragraph contains nothing that could remotely be called a "problem" to be "solved". (Please see the summary of why ¶1 doesn't contain a "phenomenon", under choice A; the same explanation works here.)
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 24 Aug 2022
Posts: 45
Own Kudos [?]: 48 [1]
Given Kudos: 0
GRE 1: Q170 V170
Send PM
Re: According to P. F. Drucker, the management philosophy known as Total Q [#permalink]
1
Expert Reply
Quote:
3.According to the passage, the rationalist and human relations schools of management are alike in that they


This one gives us some very nice specs to look for:
rationalist and human relations schools ... alike

So we need to go find where the author says THOSE two—i.e., the two that aren't TQM—have something explicitly in common. (They may or may not share that thing with TQM as well.)

¶1 comes up empty here. Consistencies are mentioned between each of these two schools and TQM, but not between these two non-TQM schools explicitly.

So, look in ¶2—where there's really just one thing, a commonality among all 3 schools:
TQM shares with such systems the ultimate objective of increasing profitability
The rest of ¶2 is only about the specs of TQM, in ways that are declared to be different from the other two schools—but, again, we don't have any specific contrasting elements that the other two have in common.

The correct answer to this question therefore MUST be "both have the ultimate objective of increasing profitability". Max profits.

That's choice A, pretty much verbatim.
Prep Club for GRE Bot
Re: According to P. F. Drucker, the management philosophy known as Total Q [#permalink]
Moderators:
GRE Forum Moderator
37 posts
GRE Instructor
228 posts
GRE Instructor
1063 posts

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne