SBI Clerk Prelims Mock Test - 12 - Banking Exams MCQ

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q.  A criticism that management education did not face was that:

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q. US business schools faced criticism in the 1980s because:

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q. The absence of business schools in Japan

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q. The Japanese were initially able to do without business schools as a result of:

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q. The Japanese modified their views on management education because of:

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q. Training programmes in Japanese corporations have

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q. The author argues that

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q. The main difference between U.S. and Japanese corporations is:

Directions : Read the following passage carefully and choose the best answer to each question out of the five given alternatives.

Management education gained new academic stature within US Universities and greater respect from outside during the 1960s and 1970s. Some observers attribute the competitive superiority of US corporations to the quality of business education. In 1978, a management professor, Herbert A. Simon of Carnegie Mellon University, won the Nobel Prize in economics for his work in decision theory. And the popularity of business education continued to grow since 1960’s and the MBA has become known as the passport to the good life.

By the 1980s, however, US business schools faced critics who charged that learning had little relevance to real business problems. Some went so far as to blame business schools for the decline in US competitiveness.

Amidst the criticisms, four distinct arguments may be discerned. The first is that business schools must be either unnecessary or deleterious because Japan does so well without them. Underlying these arguments is the idea that management ability cannot be taught-one is either born with it or must acquire it over years of practical experience. A second argument is that business schools are overly academic and theoretical. They teach quantitative models that have little application to real world problems. Third, they give inadequate attention to shop floor issues, to production processes and to management resources. Finally, it is argued that they encourage undesirable attitudes in students, such as placing value in the short term, on bottom line targets, while neglecting longer term developmental criteria. In summary, some business executives complain that MBA’s are incapable of making day-to-day peritoneal decisions, unable to communicate and to motivate people, and unwilling to accept responsibility for following through implementation plans. We shall analyze these criticisms after having reviewed experiences in other countries.

In contrast to be the expansion and development of business education in the United States and more recently in Europe, Japanese business schools graduate no more than two hundred MBA’s each year. The Keio Business School (KBS) was the only graduate school of management in the entire country until the mid 1970s and it still boasts the only two-year masters programme. The absence of business schools in Japan would appear in contradiction with the high priority placed upon learning by its Confucian culture. Confucian colleges taught administrative skills as early as 1630 and Japan wholeheartedly accepted Western learning following the Meiji restoration of 1868 when hundreds of students were dispatched to universities in the U.S.A., Germany, England and France, to learn the secrets of western technology and modernization. Moreover, the Japanese educational system is highly developed and intensely competitive and can be credited for raising the literary and mathematical abilities of the Japanese to the highest level in the world.

Until recently, Japanese corporations have not been interested in using either local or foreign business schools for the development of their future executives. Their in-company-training programmers have sought the socialization of newcomers, the younger the better. The training is highly specific and those who receive it. Have neither the capacity nor the incentive to quit. The prevailing belief says Imai, is that management should be borne out of experience and many years of effort and not learnt from educational institutions. A 1960 survey of Japanese senior executives confirmed that a majority (54%) believed that managerial capabilities can be attained only on the job and not in universities.

However, this view seems to be changing, the same survey revealed that even as early as 1960, 37% of senior executives felt that the universities should teach integrate professional management. In the 1980s, a combination of increased competitive pressures and greater multi-nationalisation of Japanese business are making the Japanese take a fresh look at Management Education.

Q. The author argues that the Japanese system

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : In the following passages, some of the words have been left out. First read the passage over and try to understand what it is about. Then fill in the blanks with the help of the alternatives given. Mark your answer in the Answer-Sheet.

India is basically (13) of rural masses. Seventy-four percent of the people live in villages. When one talks of a village it is not just a (14) of a few hundred people living together. A village in India used to be an independent socio-economic (15) based on a decentralised socio-economic system, built not on a (16) but a complementary structure. If one studies India’s history of the past two hundred (17) years, especially when the British first came, one finds the truth of the statement. The new rulers undid the very (18) of rural society because they knew that India could not be (19) unless the village (20) was completely destroyed. Thus it is that the East India Company introduced (21) production into village life and consequently smashed its system of co-operation and (22).

Directions : Read each sentence to find out whether there is any grammatical error or idiomatic error in it. The error, if any, will he in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is 'No error', the answer is '5'. (Ignore errors of punctuation, if any).

She insists (1)/ you stay (2)/ until her husband (3)/ comes home (4)/ no error

Directions : Read each sentence to find out whether there is any grammatical error or idiomatic error in it. The error, if any, will he in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is 'No error', the answer is '5'. (Ignore errors of punctuation, if any).

It is more better (1)/ if one of the parents (2)/ stays at home (3)/ to look after the children (4)/ No error

Directions : Read each sentence to find out whether there is any grammatical error or idiomatic error in it. The error, if any, will he in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is 'No error', the answer is '5'. (Ignore errors of punctuation, if any).

There will be several (1)/ new visa  application centres opened (2)/ in metros across the country (3)/ to easy the pressure on embassies. (5)/ No error.

Directions : Read each sentence to find out whether there is any grammatical error or idiomatic error in it. The error, if any, will he in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is 'No error', the answer is '5'. (Ignore errors of punctuation, if any).

The third session of (1)/ the popular television show will ends (2)/ on a grand note with (3)/ celebrities dancing and having fun .(4)/ No error (5)

Directions : Read each sentence to find out whether there is any grammatical error or idiomatic error in it. The error, if any, will he in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is 'No error', the answer is '5'. (Ignore errors of punctuation, if any).

Rose growers in (1)/ the city are waking up (2)/ to the benefits (3)/ of collective action (4)/ No error (5)

Directions : Read each sentence to find out whether there is any grammatical error or idiomatic error in it. The error, if any, will he in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is 'No error', the answer is '5'. (Ignore errors of punctuation, if any).

As mentioned on the application form 1)/ please write 2)/ your name 3)/ only with ink. 4)/ No error 5)

Directions : Read each sentence to find out whether there is any grammatical error or idiomatic error in it. The error, if any, will he in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is 'No error', the answer is '5'. (Ignore errors of punctuation, if any).

Small industrialist 1)/ could not get 2)/ the require support 3)/ from share holders. 4) /No error 5)

Directions : Read each sentence to find out whether there is any grammatical error or idiomatic error in it. The error, if any, will he in one part of the sentence. The number of that part is the answer. If there is 'No error', the answer is '5'. (Ignore errors of punctuation, if any).

She who knows 1)/ all pros and cons 2)/ of this crisis 3)/ can wield a lot of power. 4)/No error 5)