CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >  Each of the questions below contains a paragr... Start Learning for Free
Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternative summaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.
In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.
1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.
2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.
3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.
4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.
    Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer?
    Verified Answer
    Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternati...
    The main points in the paragraph are: 1. The functions of for profit and non profit management
    2. Conventional management models
    3. The description of management models in representative democracies like the USA.
    Options 1 and 2 do not cover all the main points of the paragraph. Option 3 is otherwise good, but does not mention the model in which shareholders elect a board of directors.
    Option 4 covers the main points, and is in the right order and tone. Hence, the correct answer is option 4.
    View all questions of this test
    Most Upvoted Answer
    Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternati...
    Overview of For-Profit and Non-Profit Management
    In the text, the essential differences and similarities between for-profit and non-profit management are outlined.
    Key Points of For-Profit Management
    - For-profit management focuses on satisfying three main stakeholders:
    - Shareholders: Generating profits.
    - Customers: Creating valuable products at reasonable costs.
    - Employees: Providing rewarding employment opportunities.
    Unique Aspects of Non-Profit Management
    - Non-profit management includes an additional layer of complexity as it must also consider the interests of donors, who are crucial for funding and support.
    Management and Governance Models
    - Most organizations follow a model where shareholders elect a board of directors, which in turn hires senior management.
    - Alternative models, like employee-voting for managers, are rare.
    Political Appointments in Representative Democracies
    - In representative democracies, voters elect politicians who then appoint managers and administrators.
    - A notable feature is that political appointees may lose their positions with changes in elected officials.
    Conclusion
    Option 4 captures the essence of the text effectively by summarizing the key aspects of both management types, including the stakeholder focus in for-profit versus non-profit management, and the political dynamics in representative democracies. It succinctly integrates these elements and highlights the relationships between various levels of management and governance.
    Attention CAT Students!
    To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CAT.
    Explore Courses for CAT exam

    Similar CAT Doubts

    Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.While sabbaticals are still rare inside of corporate America, their presence is increasing rapidly. According to a survey from the Society for Human Resource Management, the percentage of companies offering sabbaticals (both paid and unpai d) rose to nearly 17% of employers in 2017. That's a significant gain from 1977, when McDonald's instituted what was arguably the first corporate sabbatical program in the United States.Since the concept of sabbaticals is most popular in the academic arena, the majority of research done on their effect on employees has been conducted by studying professors. One notable study compared 129 university professors who took a sabbatical in a given term with 129 equally qualified colleagues who didn't. Both groups were surveyed before, during, and after the term to assess stress levels, psychological resources, and even overall life satisfaction. It's not surprising that the researchers found that those who took sabbaticals experienced, upon return, a decline in stress and an increase in psychological resources and overall well-being. What is surprising, however, is that those positive changes often remained long after the sabbatical takers returned to work.The bigger benefit to organizations, however, comes in unexpected ways. Providing sabbaticals or extended leave time to leaders can actually be a means to stress test the organizational chart and give aspiring leaders a chance to grow. In one study, researchers surveyed 61 leaders at five different non-profit organizations with sabbatical programs. Each organization had slightly different requirements, but all required at least three months off and discouraged executives from visiting the office during the sabbatical period.The researchers found that the majority of leaders surveyed said the time away allowed them the space to generate new ideas for innovating in the organization and helped them gain greater confidence in themselves as leaders. They also reported a better ability to collaborate with their board of directors, most likely because the planning and execution of the sabbatical provided a learning experience for everyone involved.At the very least, having people rotate out for an extended period of time allows organizations to stress test their organizational chart. Ideally, no team should be so dependent on any one person that productivity grinds to a halt during an extended vacation. And while it may look good on paper, the only way to know for sure is to test it. For instance, there are many unique vacation/sabbatical policies out there: The Motley Fool's approach, called "The Fool's Errand." Each month leadership of The Motley Fool draws a random name from the company roster and awards that person two weeks of paid time off with a catch: It must be taken in the next month.Whether it's a long-term sabbatical or a surprise vacation, the success of extended time off - for the organization - is an encouragement and a warning. The warning is that most organizations are probably not giving employees enough time away.Q. Whether it's a long-term sabbatical or a surprise vacation, the success of extended time off - for the organization - is an encouragement and a warning. The warning is that most organizations are probably not giving employees enough time away.It can be inferred that the author could have extended the last paragraph to include how many of the following statements? The encouragement is that extended time pays off. How seriously companies take this warning, is yet to be seen. Rewarding sabbatical to employees increases the productivity of the company. The pros of rewarding sabbatical to employees far outweigh the cons.

    Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.While sabbaticals are still rare inside of corporate America, their presence is increasing rapidly. According to a survey from the Society for Human Resource Management, the percentage of companies offering sabbaticals (both paid and unpai d) rose to nearly 17% of employers in 2017. That's a significant gain from 1977, when McDonald's instituted what was arguably the first corporate sabbatical program in the United States.Since the concept of sabbaticals is most popular in the academic arena, the majority of research done on their effect on employees has been conducted by studying professors. One notable study compared 129 university professors who took a sabbatical in a given term with 129 equally qualified colleagues who didn't. Both groups were surveyed before, during, and after the term to assess stress levels, psychological resources, and even overall life satisfaction. It's not surprising that the researchers found that those who took sabbaticals experienced, upon return, a decline in stress and an increase in psychological resources and overall well-being. What is surprising, however, is that those positive changes often remained long after the sabbatical takers returned to work.The bigger benefit to organizations, however, comes in unexpected ways. Providing sabbaticals or extended leave time to leaders can actually be a means to stress test the organizational chart and give aspiring leaders a chance to grow. In one study, researchers surveyed 61 leaders at five different non-profit organizations with sabbatical programs. Each organization had slightly different requirements, but all required at least three months off and discouraged executives from visiting the office during the sabbatical period.The researchers found that the majority of leaders surveyed said the time away allowed them the space to generate new ideas for innovating in the organization and helped them gain greater confidence in themselves as leaders. They also reported a better ability to collaborate with their board of directors, most likely because the planning and execution of the sabbatical provided a learning experience for everyone involved.At the very least, having people rotate out for an extended period of time allows organizations to stress test their organizational chart. Ideally, no team should be so dependent on any one person that productivity grinds to a halt during an extended vacation. And while it may look good on paper, the only way to know for sure is to test it. For instance, there are many unique vacation/sabbatical policies out there: The Motley Fool's approach, called "The Fool's Errand." Each month leadership of The Motley Fool draws a random name from the company roster and awards that person two weeks of paid time off with a catch: It must be taken in the next month.Whether it's a long-term sabbatical or a surprise vacation, the success of extended time off - for the organization - is an encouragement and a warning. The warning is that most organizations are probably not giving employees enough time away.Q. The tone of the author in the passage can best be described as

    Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow.While sabbaticals are still rare inside of corporate America, their presence is increasing rapidly. According to a survey from the Society for Human Resource Management, the percentage of companies offering sabbaticals (both paid and unpai d) rose to nearly 17% of employers in 2017. That's a significant gain from 1977, when McDonald's instituted what was arguably the first corporate sabbatical program in the United States.Since the concept of sabbaticals is most popular in the academic arena, the majority of research done on their effect on employees has been conducted by studying professors. One notable study compared 129 university professors who took a sabbatical in a given term with 129 equally qualified colleagues who didn't. Both groups were surveyed before, during, and after the term to assess stress levels, psychological resources, and even overall life satisfaction. It's not surprising that the researchers found that those who took sabbaticals experienced, upon return, a decline in stress and an increase in psychological resources and overall well-being. What is surprising, however, is that those positive changes often remained long after the sabbatical takers returned to work.The bigger benefit to organizations, however, comes in unexpected ways. Providing sabbaticals or extended leave time to leaders can actually be a means to stress test the organizational chart and give aspiring leaders a chance to grow. In one study, researchers surveyed 61 leaders at five different non-profit organizations with sabbatical programs. Each organization had slightly different requirements, but all required at least three months off and discouraged executives from visiting the office during the sabbatical period.The researchers found that the majority of leaders surveyed said the time away allowed them the space to generate new ideas for innovating in the organization and helped them gain greater confidence in themselves as leaders. They also reported a better ability to collaborate with their board of directors, most likely because the planning and execution of the sabbatical provided a learning experience for everyone involved.At the very least, having people rotate out for an extended period of time allows organizations to stress test their organizational chart. Ideally, no team should be so dependent on any one person that productivity grinds to a halt during an extended vacation. And while it may look good on paper, the only way to know for sure is to test it. For instance, there are many unique vacation/sabbatical policies out there: The Motley Fool's approach, called "The Fool's Errand." Each month leadership of The Motley Fool draws a random name from the company roster and awards that person two weeks of paid time off with a catch: It must be taken in the next month.Whether it's a long-term sabbatical or a surprise vacation, the success of extended time off - for the organization - is an encouragement and a warning. The warning is that most organizations are probably not giving employees enough time away.Q. Given the author's views, it can be inferred that he/she would most agree with which of the following statements?

    When people react to their experiences with particular authorities, those authorities and the organizations or institutions that they represent often benefit if the people involved begin with high levels of commitment to the organization or institution represented by the authorities. First, in his studies of people's attitudes toward political and legal institutions, Tyler found that attitudes after an experience with the institution were strongly affected by prior attitudes. Single experiences influence post experience loyalty but certainly do not overwhelm the relationship between pre-experience and post experience loyalty. Thus, the best predictor of loyalty after an experience is usually loyalty before that experience. Second, people with prior loyalty to the organization or institution judge their dealings with the organization's or institution's authorities to be fairer than do those with less prior loyalty, either because they are more fairly treated or because they interpret equivalent treatment as fairer.Although high levels of prior organizational or institutional commitment are generally beneficial to the organization or institution, under certain conditions high levels of prior commitment may actually sow the seeds of reduced commitment. When previously committed individuals feel that they were treated unfavourably or unfairly during some experience with the organization or institution, they may show an especially sharp decline in commitment. Two studies were designed to test this hypothesis, which, if confirmed, would suggest that organizational or institutional commitment has risks, as well as benefits. At least three psychological models offer predictions of how individuals' reactions may vary as a function of (1) their prior level of commitment and (2) the favorability of the encounter with the organization or institution. Favorability of the encounter is determined by the outcome of the encounter and the fairness or appropriateness of the procedures used to allocate outcomes during the encounter. First, the instrumental prediction is that because people are mainly concerned with receiving desired outcomes from their encounters with organizations, changes in their level of commitment will depend primarily on the favorability of the encounter. Second, the assimilation prediction is that individuals' prior attitudes predispose them to react in a way that is consistent with their prior attitudes.The third prediction, derived from the group-value model of justice, pertains to how people with high prior commitment will react when they feel that they have been treated unfavorably or unfairly during some encounter with the organization or institution. Fair treatment by the other party symbolizes to people that they are being dealt with in a dignified and respectful way, thereby bolstering their sense of self-identity and self-worth. However, people will become quite distressed and react quite negatively if they feel that they have been treated unfairly by the other party to the relationship. The group-value model suggests that people value the information they receive that helps them to define themselves and to view themselves favorably. According to the instrumental viewpoint, people are primarily concerned with the more material or tangible resources received from the relationship. Empirical support for the group-value model has implications for a variety of important issues, including the determinants of commitment, satisfaction, organizational citizenship, and rule following. Determinants of procedural fairness include structural or interpersonal factors. For example, structural determinants refer to such things as whether decisions were made by neutral, fact-finding authorities who used legitimate decision-making criteria. The primary purpose of the study was to examine the interactive effect of individuals (1) commitment to an organization or institution prior to some encounter and (2) perceptions of how fairly they were treated during the encounter, on the change in their level of commitment. A basic assumption of the group-value model is that people generally value their relationships with people, groups, organizations, and institutions and therefore value fair treatment from the other party to the relationship. Specifically, highly committed members should have especially negative reactions to feeling that they were treated unfairly, more so than (1) less-committed group members or (2) highly committed members who felt that they were fairly treated.The prediction that people will react especially negatively when they previously felt highly committed but felt that they were treated unfairly also is consistent with the literature on psychological contracts. Rousseau suggested that, over time, the members of work organizations develop feelings of entitlement, i.e., perceived obligations that their employers have toward them. Those who are highly committed to the organization believe that they are fulfilling their contract obligations. However, if the organization acted unfairly, then highly committed individuals are likely to believe that the organization did not live up to its end of the bargain.For summarizing the passage, which of the following is most appropriate

    When people react to their experiences with particular authorities, those authorities and the organizations or institutions that they represent often benefit if the people involved begin with high levels of commitment to the organization or institution represented by the authorities. First, in his studies of people's attitudes toward political and legal institutions, Tyler found that attitudes after an experience with the institution were strongly affected by prior attitudes. Single experiences influence post experience loyalty but certainly do not overwhelm the relationship between pre-experience and post experience loyalty. Thus, the best predictor of loyalty after an experience is usually loyalty before that experience.Second, people with prior loyalty to the organization or institution judge their dealings with the organization's or institution's authorities to be fairer than do those with less prior loyalty, either because they are more fairly treated or because they interpret equivalent treatment as fairer.Although high levels of prior organizational or institutional commitment are generally beneficial to the organization or institution, under certain conditions high levels of prior commitment may actually sow the seeds of reduced commitment. When previously committed individuals feel that they were treated unfavourably or unfairly during some experience with the organization or institution, they may show an especially sharp decline in commitment. Two studies were designed to test this hypothesis, which, if confirmed, would suggest that organizational or institutional commitment has risks, as well as benefits. At least three psychological models offer predictions of how individuals' reactions may vary as a function of (1) their prior level of commitment and (2) the favorability of the encounter with the organization or institution. Favorability of the encounter is determined by the outcome of the encounter and the fairness or appropriateness of the procedures used to allocate outcomes during the encounter. First, the instrumental prediction is that because people are mainly concerned with receiving desired outcomes from their encounters with organizations, changes in their level of commitment will depend primarily on the favorability of the encounter. Second, the assimilation prediction is that individuals' prior attitudes predispose them to react in a way that is consistent with their prior attitudes.The third prediction, derived from the group-value model of justice, pertains to how people with high prior commitment will react when they feel that they have been treated unfavorably or unfairly during some encounter with the organization or institution. Fair treatment by the other party symbolizes to people that they are being dealt with in a dignified and respectful way, thereby bolstering their sense of self-identity and self worth. However, people will become quite distressed and react quite negatively if they feel that they have been treated unfairly by the other party to the relationship. The group-value model suggests that people value the information they receive that helps them to define themselves and to view themselves favorably. According to the instrumental viewpoint, people are primarily concerned with the more material or tangible resources received from the relationship. Empirical support for the group-value model has implications for a variety of important issues, including the determinants of commitment, satisfaction, organizational citizenship, and rule following. Determinants of procedural fairness include structural or interpersonal factors. For example, structural determinants refer to such things as whether decisions were made by neutral, fact finding authorities who used legitimate decision making criteria. The primary purpose of the study was to examine the interactive effect of individuals (1) commitment to an organization or institution prior to some encounter and (2) perceptions of how fairly they were treated during the encounter, on the change in their level of commitment. A basic assumption of the group-value model is that people generally value their relationships with people, groups, organizations, and institutions and therefore value fair treatment from the other party to the relationship. Specifically, highly committed members should have especially negative reactions to feeling that they were treated unfairly, more so than (1) less-committed group members or (2) highly committed members who felt that they were fairly treated.The prediction that people will react especially negatively when they previously felt highly committed but felt that they were treated unfairly also is consistent with the literature on psychological contracts. Rousseau suggested that, over time, the members of work organizations develop feelings of entitlement, i.e., perceived obligations that their employers have toward them. Those who are highly committed to the organization believe that they are fulfilling their contract obligations. However, if the organization acted unfairly, then highly committed individuals are likely to believe that the organization did not live up to its end of the bargain.For summarizing the passage, which of the following is most appropriate

    Top Courses for CAT

    Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer?
    Question Description
    Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer?.
    Solutions for Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.
    Here you can find the meaning of Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Each of the questions below contains a paragraph followed by alternativesummaries. Choose the option that best captures the essence of the text.In for-profit work, management has as its primary function the satisfaction of a range of stakeholders. This typically involves making a profit (for the shareholders), creating valued products at a reasonable cost (for customers), and providing rewarding employment opportunities (for employees). In nonprofit management, add the importance of keeping the faith of donors. In most models of management/governance, shareholders vote for the board of directors, and the board then hires senior management. Some organizations have experimented with other methods (such as employee-voting models) of selecting or reviewing managers; but this occurs only very rarely. In countries constituted as representative democracies, voters elect politicians to public office. Such politicians hire many managers and administrators, and in some countries like the United States political appointees lose their jobs on the election of a new President/Governor/Mayor. Some 2500 people serve at the pleasure of the United States Chief Executive, including all of the top US government executives.1. The United States is a perfect example of a representative democracy in which people vote for politicians to enter public office. They then hire managers who may lose their jobs after the next election if someone else is elected to power.2. Non-profit management is considerably tougher than for-profit management since it also has to consider donors along with other stakeholders. In public office however senior management is bound to change as it is appointed by elected politicians.3. For-profit management has to generate a profit for shareholders, create valuable products and services for customers and develop opportunities for employees. Politicians in public office however can appoint or dismiss any government executive after they are elected. This is the case in several representative democracies like the USA.4. Management in for-profit work has to satisfy shareholders, customers and employees. Non-profit management has to consider donors too. In most models, shareholders vote for directors who hire senior management. In representative democracies people elect politicians, who then hire managers who may be dependent on elections.Correct answer is '4'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
    Explore Courses for CAT exam

    Top Courses for CAT

    Explore Courses
    Signup for Free!
    Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
    10M+ students study on EduRev