PrepTest 123, Section 2, Question 1
Economist: Every business strives to increase its productivity,(57 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(10 more words not shown)
- AIf an action(28 more words not shown)
- BSome measures taken(16 more words not shown)
- COnly if the(29 more words not shown)
- DThere is no(10 more words not shown)
- EDecreasing the number(13 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Getting more coffee out of the same baristas sounds good for a coffee shop. I can see why the owner wants to increase productivity: more output from the same resources can mean more profit and a better chance of staying open.
Could the attempt go badly? Sure. Imagine pushing the baristas so hard that they quit. Now nobody is there to make the coffee. In that example, the effort to get more work done has created a problem for the business. So I'm willing to consider the economist's claim that some productivity efforts don't benefit the business as a whole.
But look at the example the economist actually gives. Some employees lose their jobs, and the remaining employees worry that they'll be next. That's bad for the employees. How does it show that the business hasn't benefited?
The worry might hurt the business if it distracts the remaining workers and they do less work. But what if they're worried and still do their jobs perfectly well? What if the savings from the layoffs help the company stay open? The economist hasn't connected the harm to employees with the claim about the business. My coffee-shop example made that connection; the layoffs example leaves it unstated.
What we’re looking for
Now we're asked for the main conclusion. What were we just questioning? The claim that some attempts to increase productivity fail to benefit the business. The layoffs example is supposed to get us to believe that claim. We can see what the economist is trying to establish even though we aren't convinced by the support. That's the statement I want to find in the answers.
Working the answers
- A
This supplies a rule connecting employee welfare with the welfare of the business. That's close to the missing connection we wanted the economist to explain. But we're identifying the stated conclusion, not supplying a rule to support it. The economist concludes that some productivity efforts don't benefit the business; A makes a broader claim about any action taken to keep the business alive.
- BCorrect
Some measures to increase productivity fail to benefit the business as a whole. That's the claim we were challenging, and it's what the layoffs example is meant to support. Notice that we don't have to agree with an argument to identify its conclusion.
- C
Employees owning the business is a new idea. The economist never says employee ownership is required for the two groups' interests to line up. An answer that adds that requirement cannot be a restatement of the point made here.
- D
The economist does say that every business tries to increase productivity. But that's the starting observation, followed by the point that those efforts don't always benefit the business. D gives us the setup and leaves out the claim the example supports.
- E
The remaining employees' insecurity is part of the layoffs example. The economist uses it as a reason to believe that a productivity effort might not benefit the business. It supports the main point; it isn't the main point itself.
More Role/Main Point questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Role/Main Point questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.