Given that employees of the XYZ Company could, in theory, do their work at home, the company developed a radical plan to increase efficiency: eliminate office-space expenditures by having employees work at home. To evaluate this plan, XYZ's managers asked volunteers from the company's staff to try the arrangement for six months. There were several volunteers; significantly, their productivity during this period was as high as or higher than before.

Which of the following, if true, would argue most strongly against deciding, on the basis of the trial results, to implement the company's plan?


The employees who agreed to participate in the test of the plan were among the company's most self-motivated and independent workers.

The savings that would accrue from reduced office-space expenditures alone would be sufficient to justify implementation of the plan apart from any productivity increases.

Other companies that have achieved successful results from work-at-home plans have work forces that are substantially larger than that of XYZ.

The volunteers who worked at home were able to communicate with other employees as necessary for performing the work.

Recent changes in the way work is organized at XYZ's company offices have not brought about any productivity increases.

加入错题本 分享
纠错
考题讲解

情景：让员工在家里办公吧！XYZ公司认为员工在家里办公并不会影响工作效率，并且还能省下一些办公室的租赁成本。XYZ找了一些志愿者，研究发现这些志愿者表现的非常好。

推理：

我们需要注意本题的问题。虽然题目中有一个方案，但是，问题并没有让我们评估这个方案，而是要我们削弱这个“the basis of the trial results ”而做出方案的过程。
前提：XYZ找了一些志愿者，研究发现这些志愿者在家办公的表现的非常好。
结论：让XYZ公司的全体员工在家办公，他们也会表现的很好。


答案预估：

“全体员工在家办公都会表现的非常好”的其它必要条件（常理上能保真推理出的一切结果）不存在。

选项分析：

A选项：Correct. 同意参加方案试验的员工都是公司中最独立和最自律的员工。任何员工都能表现很好的一个必要条件是，前提中选取的员工不是那些最自律的，而是正常的员工。因此，本选项可以质疑推理文段。

B选项：从办公室支出的减少而积攒下来的钱是足够可以去判断是否要用这个方案了，不需要参考生产率的增加情况。本选项不是全体员工在家办公都会表现的非常好的其它必要条件。


C选项：其他应用在家办公这个方案而成功的企业在工作人数上都多于XYZ公司的工作人数。人数多少并非在家办公的表现的必要条件。

D选项：如果工作中需要，在家办公的员工是有能力和其他员工交流的。本选项讲的是能否交流，交流不一定和表现相关。

E选项：现在的XYZ工作方式的变化并没有带来任何的产量增加。结论只讲员工表现，不涉及产量问题。

展开显示

登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论

DaQuan-CR
考点