Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Explore Courses UPSC Exam UPSC Test Series Free Notes EduRev Infinity

Open App

CAT Exam > CAT Questions > Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha,...

Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.

Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?

a)
Movie
b)
Long Drive
c)
Art Exhibition
d)
Cafe

Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?

Join for Free

Join for Free

Most Upvoted Answer

Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and N...

Based on the given information we can directly construct the table as follows:-

Now, Wasif and Naba are both against going out together to a Pub or for a Movie. Also Long Drive and Cafe are out of the question for them, as seen in the table, no two rows or columns can have a repetition, since each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Hence Wasif and Naba must have decided to go to an Art Exhibition. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for Pub. Hence Pamela and Naba must have gone for Movie, as Cafe, Long Drive and Art Exhibition are not possible. Hence completing the Pamela row/column, we get; Pamela must have decided to go with Wasif for a Long Drive, and must have decided to go with Anwesha to an Art Exhibition.

Filling up the remaining table, we get that Anwesha and Naba decide to go to a Pub, Anwesha and Sid to a Movie and Wasif and Sid to a Pub.

Anwesha did not go on a Long Drive outing with any of the other four.

Answered by Wizius Careers · View profile

View all answers Start learning for free

Explore Courses for CAT exam

Similar CAT Doubts

Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Which of the following statements is TRUE?

View answer

Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. For how many pairs, can we say where they intend to plan their outing?

View answer

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. It can be inferred from the passage that sabbatical policies, such as the Motley Fool's approach, ensure that

View answer

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?

View answer

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.

View answer

Top Courses for CATView all

Quantitative Aptitude (Quant)

CAT Mock Test Series 2025

Crash Course for CAT

Mock Test Series for SNAP

Mock Test Series for XAT

Top Courses for CAT

View all

Share with a Friend

Answer this doubt

Question Description
Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2025 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. 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 Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Five office colleagues, Anwesha, Sid, Wasif, Pamela and Naba, were instructed by their common supervisor to bond better between themselves, as they all were new to the organization and each other. Hence each of them decided to take some personal time out with every other colleague and choose a common place where the two of them would go on an outing. Each of them were given five choices - Long Drive, Movie, Cafe, Art Exhibition and Pub. Also, each of them had to ensure that the place mutually chosen by him and the other four, were all distinct. Pamela and Sid decide to go to 'Barista', which is a Café on Park Row, while Wasif and Anwesha decide to go to 'CCD', which too is a Cafe. Wasif and Naba decided to go out together neither to a Pub, nor to a Movie, even though they had no such restriction with anybody else. Pamela got into an agreement with the other four into going to all the places except for a Pub. Naba and Sid had always longed to go for a Long Drive, and it was their obvious choice as well.Q. Anwesha did not go on an outing to which of these places?a)Movieb)Long Drivec)Art Exhibitiond)CafeCorrect answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.

Explore Courses for CAT exam