CAT Exam  >  CAT Questions  >  Directions: Read the passage and answer the f... Start Learning for Free
Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.

In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities.

However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance.

In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings.

This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received.

However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.

It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.
Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance that
  • a)
    has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performance
  • b)
    is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workers
  • c)
    is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performance
  • d)
    is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequate
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an a...
Hygiene Factor Explanation:
Hygiene factors are aspects of a worker's performance that are not likely to affect a worker's rating unless they are judged to be inadequate. In the context of the passage, productivity is considered a hygiene factor because it is only likely to negatively impact a worker's overall rating if it falls below a certain threshold.

Definition of Hygiene Factor:
- Hygiene factors are basic aspects of performance that are assumed to be adequate for all workers.
- They are necessary for maintaining a minimum level of performance but do not necessarily contribute significantly to higher ratings beyond a certain point.

Application to Worker Ratings:
- In the study mentioned in the passage, productivity was not the most important factor in determining a worker's overall rating.
- Supervisors placed greater emphasis on criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and customer satisfaction when evaluating worker performance.
- This suggests that productivity, while important, may only become a significant factor if it falls below a certain level.

Conclusion:
- Hygiene factors like productivity are essential for maintaining a basic level of performance.
- However, once productivity reaches a certain threshold, it is unlikely to significantly impact a worker's rating unless it is judged to be inadequate.
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

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, before the final results of the study were known, which of the following seemed likely?

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. It can be inferred that the author of the passage discusses “unmonitored workers” primarily in order to

Group QuestionAnalyse the following passage and provide an appropriate answer for the questions that follow.Formation of focal brand expectations is a well-accepted part of the pre-purchase choice process. However, whether these same expectations are the standard for post-choice performance evaluation has been questioned. There is very little theoretical justification for consumers using focal brand expectations to judge performance after purchase. Customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction is more likely to be determined by how well a consumer perceives that focal brand performance fulfils needs, wants, or desires.Importantly, there is no necessary relationship between prepurchase focal brand expectations and the performance required to meet those wants. Thus, consumers are very likely to use other kinds of performance standards in the post-purchase evaluation. Consumers are likely to rely on standards that reflect the performance a consumer believes a focal brand should provide to meet needs/wants. To distinguish these standards from the usual expectations concept, we call them "experience-based norms." These norms have two important characteristics: (1) they reflect desired performance in meeting needs/wants and (2) they are constrained by the performance consumers believe is possible as indicated by the performance of known brands. The second characteristic requires elaboration. Though consumers may imagine some abstract ideal performance that a brand should provide, they also have concrete experiences with various real brands and their performance. Because consumers are more likely to think in concrete rather than abstract terms, experience with real brands should set limits on the performance a consumer believes the focal brand should provide. Consumers may derive a norm from experience with known brandsin at least two different ways. First, the norm might be the typical performance of a particular brand - e.g., a consumers most preferred brand, a popular brand, or last-purchased brand.Importantly, this brand may not be the focal brand. For example, when evaluating the dining experience in a new restaurant, a consumer may apply a norm that is the typical performance of another, favourite restaurant. Interestingly, focal brand expectations may correspond to this norm, but only if the focal brand is also the brand from which the standard is derived, such as when a consumer dines in his or her favourite restaurant. In all other cases, the norm is necessarily different from expectations because the norm is derived from experience with a different brand. A second possibility is that the norm might be an average performance a consumer believes is typical of a group of similar brands — a product-based norm. This kind of norm may be reasonable when no one brand stands out in the consumers mind and the consumer has experience with many brands. In general, the experience-based norms concept is significant because it suggests that past research may have attached unwarranted importance to focal brand expectations as the standard of performance influencing feelings of satisfaction.Q. The statement, “there is no necessary relationship between pre-purchase focal brand expectations and the performance required to meet those wants” implies that

Formation of focal brand expectations is a well-accepted part of the pre-purchase choice process. However, whether these same expectations are the standard for post-choice performance evaluation has been questioned. There is very little theoretical justification for consumers using focal brand expectations to judge performance after purchase. Customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction is more likely to be determined by how well a consumer perceives that focal brand performance fulfils needs, wants, or desires.Importantly, there is no necessary relationship between prepurchase focal brand expectations and the performance required to meet those wants. Thus, consumers are very likely to use other kinds of performance standards in the post-purchase evaluation. Consumers are likely to rely on standards that reflect the performance a consumer believes a focal brand should provide to meet needs/wants. To distinguish these standards from the usual expectations concept, we call them "experience-based norms." These norms have two important characteristics: (1) they reflect desired performance in meeting needs/wants and (2) they are constrained by the performance consumers believe is possible as indicated by the performance of known brands. The second characteristic requires elaboration. Though consumers may imagine some abstract ideal performance that a brand should provide, they also have concrete experiences with various real brands and their performance. Because consumers are more likely to think in concrete rather than abstract terms, experience with real brands should set limits on the performance a consumer believes the focal brand should provide. Consumers may derive a norm from experience with known brandsin at least two different ways. First, the norm might be the typical performance of a particular brand - e.g., a consumers most preferred brand, a popular brand, or last-purchased brand.Importantly, this brand may not be the focal brand. For example, when evaluating the dining experience in a new restaurant, a consumer may apply a norm that is the typical performance of another, favourite restaurant. Interestingly, focal brand expectations may correspond to this norm, but only if the focal brand is also the brand from which the standard is derived, such as when a consumer dines in his or her favourite restaurant. In all other cases, the norm is necessarily different from expectations because the norm is derived from experience with a different brand. A second possibility is that the norm might be an average performance a consumer believes is typical of a group of similar brands — a product-based norm. This kind of norm may be reasonable when no one brand stands out in the consumers mind and the consumer has experience with many brands. In general, the experience-based norms concept is significant because it suggests that past research may have attached unwarranted importance to focal brand expectations as the standard of performance influencing feelings of satisfaction.Q. Given below are statements that attempt to capture the central idea of this passage: 1. Satisfaction pertains to performance and not to expectations. 2. In-order to perform well, a focal brand should fulfil consumer needs rather than match their expectations. 3. Brand performance standards are determined by consumer experiences of products.Which of the following statement(s) best captures the central idea.

Question: Analyse the following passage and provide an appropriate answer for the questions that follow.Formation of focal brand expectations is a well-accepted part of the pre-purchase choice process. However, whether these same expectations are the standard for post-choice performance evaluation has been questioned. There is very little theoretical justification for consumers using focal brand expectations to judge performance after purchase. Customer satisfaction/dissatisfaction is more likely to be determined by how well a consumer perceives that focal brand performance fulfils needs, wants, or desires.Importantly, there is no necessary relationship between prepurchase focal brand expectations and the performance required to meet those wants. Thus, consumers are very likely to use other kinds of performance standards in the post-purchase evaluation. Consumers are likely to rely on standards that reflect the performance a consumer believes a focal brand should provide to meet needs/wants. To distinguish these standards from the usual expectations concept, we call them "experience-based norms." These norms have two important characteristics: (1) they reflect desired performance in meeting needs/wants and (2) they are constrained by the performance consumers believe is possible as indicated by the performance of known brands. The second characteristic requires elaboration. Though consumers may imagine some abstract ideal performance that a brand should provide, they also have concrete experiences with various real brands and their performance. Because consumers are more likely to think in concrete rather than abstract terms, experience with real brands should set limits on the performance a consumer believes the focal brand should provide. Consumers may derive a norm from experience with known brands in at least two different ways. First, the norm might be the typical performance of a particular brand - e.g., a consumer's most preferred brand, a popular brand, or last-purchased brand.Importantly, this brand may not be the focal brand. For example, when evaluating the dining experience in a new restaurant, a consumer may apply a norm that is the typical performance of another, favourite restaurant. Interestingly, focal brand expectations may correspond to this norm, but only if the focal brand is also the brand from which the standard is derived, such as when a consumer dines in his or her favourite restaurant. In all other cases, the norm is necessarily different from expectations because the norm is derived from experience with a different brand. A second possibility is that the norm might be an average performance a consumer believes is typical of a group of similar brands — a product-based norm. This kind of norm may be reasonable when no one brand stands out in the consumer's mind and the consumer has experience with many brands. In general, the experience-based norms concept is significant because it suggests that past research may have attached unwarranted importance to focal brand expectations as the standard of performance influencing feelings of satisfaction.Given below are statements that attempt to capture the central idea of this passage:1. Satisfaction pertains to performance and not to expectations.2. In-order to perform well, a focal brand should fulfil consumer needs rather than match their expectations.3. Brand performance standards are determined by consumer experiences of products.Which of the following statement(s) best captures the central idea.

Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect 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 Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect 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 Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect 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 Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the passage and answer the following question.In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems that record and report a worker’s computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors’ ratings of workers’ performance. In contrast to unmonitored workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker’s productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.It is possible that productivity may be a “hygiene factor,” that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes “good enough,” higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.Q. According to the passage, a “hygiene factor” is an aspect of a worker’s performance thata)has no effect on the rating of a worker’s performanceb)is so basic to performance that it is assumed to be adequate for all workersc)is given less importance than it deserves in rating a worker’s performanced)is not likely to affect a worker’s rating unless it is judged to be inadequateCorrect 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
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