All Courses
Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity Get the App Login Join for Free
Sign in Open App
CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >  Analyse the following caselet and answer the ... Start Learning for Free
SaveJoin the Discussion on the App
Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:
A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiter's salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating company's policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the management's ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.
Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?
  • a)
    The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.
  • b)
    The waitress for violating customer privacy.
  • c)
    The management for not taking action against the pastor.
  • d)
    The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.
  • e)
    The management for removing negative comments from the social media.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
FREE This question is part of
Download PDF Attempt Test
Download PDF Attempt this Test
Verified Answer
Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A p...
Among the options available, the root cause would be that option which if removed will stop the further consequences. Applying this principle D is the root cause because had the management not meted out a disproportionate punishment, the current situation faced by the organization would not have risen. Even if the pastor flouted the norms, and the waitress violated the privacy, the public outcry would not have arisen unless the public perceived the punishment meted by the organization as unfair. It is not a crime to flout a norm; but the waitress might have committed an offence by flouting the rules of the organization. However, the punishment for such an alleged offence is what started the outcry. Hence, Option D is the right answer.
View all questions of this test
Most Upvoted Answer
Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A p...
Analysis of the Situation
The situation spiraled out of control primarily due to the actions and decisions made by the restaurant management. Let's break down the reasons:
Impact of the Pastor's Actions
- The pastor's decision to cross out the tip on the bill was indeed provocative and against social norms.
- However, this action alone did not create the unmanageable situation; it merely sparked a debate about tipping practices.
Waitress's Violation of Privacy
- The waitress's act of posting the receipt was a breach of customer privacy, which the restaurant rightly took action against.
- Nonetheless, her firing seemed disproportionate in comparison to the pastor's behavior, leading to public outrage.
Management's Response
- The management's decision to fire the waitress without addressing the pastor's actions created a perception of inconsistency in handling customer behavior.
- This inconsistency was perceived as unjust and contributed to the backlash against the restaurant.
Disproportionate Punishment
- The firing of the waitress, who was acting in the heat of the moment, was seen as an extreme measure compared to the pastor's actions, which went unpunished.
- This disparity in consequences ignited criticism and accusations of unfair treatment, fueling the public's negative response.
Handling Negative Feedback
- Instead of addressing the public outcry effectively, the management's repetitive posting of a defensive note and alleged deletion of critical comments further alienated customers.
- This strategy failed to quell the discontent and instead amplified the negative sentiment towards the restaurant.
In conclusion, the main cause of the situation becoming unmanageable was the management's disproportionate punishment of the waitress, which led to public outcry and a significant decline in the restaurant's reputation and customer footfall.
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.
< Previous Question Next Question >
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Read the following information and choose the best alternative:A pastor bad eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. II is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these lips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% lip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote “I give God 10% why do you get 18%?” above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media- She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy.This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago & customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, lo which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users.The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?

Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiter’s salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote “I give God 10% why do you get 18%?” above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating company’s policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the management’s ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.The downward spiral continued for the restaurant as the management persisted in defending their actions and argued with those who criticised them. By the following week, the original post had generated over 18,000 negative comments.Q. Which of the following is the best way forward for the restaurant at this juncture?

Read the following information and choose the best alternative:A pastor bad eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. II is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these lips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% lip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote “I give God 10% why do you get 18%?” above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media- She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy.This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago & customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, lo which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users.The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.The downward spiral continued for the restaurant as the management persisted in defending their actions and argued with those who criticised them. By the following week, the original post had generated over 18,000 negative comments.Q. Which of the following is the best way forward for the restaurant at this juncture?

Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The 1980s have come to be regarded as the decade of corporate consolidation in the United States, with the number of mergers and their dollar value both setting records. Many public forums have questioned, on both social and economic grounds, the merits of this takeover frenzy. Even more controversial than the mergers themselves, however, is the reaction of the management of target firms. No longer is management content to be passive or to put up minimal resistance in the face of an unwelcome takeover attempt. Indeed, the responses of target managements have become as imaginative as the methods used by the would–be acquirers. These so–called anti-takeover tactics have received nearly universal condemnation from government regulatory bodies, the financial press, and some academic publications. Why is there so much criticism when management resists takeovers? At the most general level, such criticism is based on studies that find a negative return to shareholders when a negotiated (friendly) merger is unsuccessful. These studies examine the cumulative return from the period just prior to the first public announcement of the proposed merger through the announcement of cancellation. Results range from a total return of –9.02 per cent to + 3.68 per cent, with an average of –2.88 percent. In unsuccessful mergers, therefore, stockholders in target firms lose on average nearly 3 per cent of the shares value.But looking at the returns only through the termination date can be misleading. Other studies examining the period from six months prior to an offer to six months after the offer have found that the total return averages nearly +36 per cent, even though the offer was unsuccessful. Given the typical stock market reaction to unsuccessful negotiated mergers, this is a curious finding. The explanation for this seeming anomaly emerges when firms are divided into two groups: those eventually acquired by some other bidder, and those not acquired. Firms that were not acquired eventually lost the entire 36 per cent return. But firms subsequently acquired, earned an additional 20 per cent return above the initial 36 per cent, earning shareholders a total return of 56 per cent. Those earnings compare favorably to the overall average return of 30 percent earned by shareholders & of all companies successfully acquired. These results suggest that some form of resistance by management may be desirable. Playing "hard to get" may influence the initial suitor to increase the bid, or it may permit time for competing bids to be submitted. It is possible, however, to have too much of a good thing. When management actions are designed solely to eliminate a takeover by a specific bidder, then shareholders may be harmed. Nevertheless, anti-takeover tactics do not deserve the blanket condemnation they receive in the press.Q.Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken the authors conclusion about the benefits of management resistance to takeovers?

Directions: The passage below is followed by a question based on its content. Answer the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.The 1980s have come to be regarded as the decade of corporate consolidation in the United States, with the number of mergers and their dollar value both setting records. Many public forums have questioned, on both social and economic grounds, the merits of this takeover frenzy. Even more controversial than the mergers themselves, however, is the reaction of the management of target firms. No longer is management content to be passive or to put up minimal resistance in the face of an unwelcome takeover attempt. Indeed, the responses of target managements have become as imaginative as the methods used by the would–be acquirers. These so–called anti-takeover tactics have received nearly universal condemnation from government regulatory bodies, the financial press, and some academic publications. Why is there so much criticism when management resists takeovers? At the most general level, such criticism is based on studies that find a negative return to shareholders when a negotiated (friendly) merger is unsuccessful. These studies examine the cumulative return from the period just prior to the first public announcement of the proposed merger through the announcement of cancellation. Results range from a total return of –9.02 per cent to + 3.68 per cent, with an average of –2.88 percent. In unsuccessful mergers, therefore, stockholders in target firms lose on average nearly 3 per cent of the shares value.But looking at the returns only through the termination date can be misleading. Other studies examining the period from six months prior to an offer to six months after the offer have found that the total return averages nearly +36 per cent, even though the offer was unsuccessful. Given the typical stock market reaction to unsuccessful negotiated mergers, this is a curious finding. The explanation for this seeming anomaly emerges when firms are divided into two groups: those eventually acquired by some other bidder, and those not acquired. Firms that were not acquired eventually lost the entire 36 per cent return. But firms subsequently acquired, earned an additional 20 per cent return above the initial 36 per cent, earning shareholders a total return of 56 per cent. Those earnings compare favorably to the overall average return of 30 percent earned by shareholders & of all companies successfully acquired. These results suggest that some form of resistance by management may be desirable. Playing "hard to get" may influence the initial suitor to increase the bid, or it may permit time for competing bids to be submitted. It is possible, however, to have too much of a good thing. When management actions are designed solely to eliminate a takeover by a specific bidder, then shareholders may be harmed. Nevertheless, anti-takeover tactics do not deserve the blanket condemnation they receive in the press.Q.According to the passage, under which of the following conditions do firms, on the average, yield the greatest return to their shareholders?

Top Courses for CATView all

Top Courses for CAT

Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. 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 Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. 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 Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Analyse the following caselet and answer the questions that follow:A pastor had eaten at a restaurant with his troupe of ten and his family. It is a norm to tip the waiter and about 20% of a waiters salary comes from these tips. However, while paying the bill, the pastor crossed out the automatic 18% tip charged for parties of more than eight and wrote "I give God 10% why do you get 18%?" above his signature. The chagrined waitress at the restaurant posted a photo of this on the social media. She was subsequently fired for violating companys policy on customer privacy. This would have been understandable if the restaurant had not posted just 2 weeks ago a customer receipt that was complimenting them. Social media and social activists came heavily upon the managements ambivalent stand and the firing of the waitress. In response, the company posted a note on their social media page defending their actions. This quickly drew over 10,000 comments, mostly negative, to which the management started responding by posting the same note over and over again. There were also accusations of the company deleting negative comments and blocking users. The restaurant also experienced a sizable drop in their footfall.Q. Who/what is the main cause for the situation becoming unmanageable?a)The pastor for flouting the norm of restaurant.b)The waitress for violating customer privacy.c)The management for not taking action against the pastor.d)The management for giving out disproportionate punishment to waitress.e)The management for removing negative comments from the social media.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.
Explore Courses for CAT exam

Top Courses for CAT

Explore Courses

Suggested Free Tests

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
Get App
© EduRev
Education Revolution
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days!
Access 1000+ FREE Docs, Videos and Tests
Takes less than 10 seconds to signup