还没有登录哦！
[Critical Reasoning]
试题详情
题目：
To reduce productivity losses from employees calling in sick, Corporation X implemented a new policy requiring employees to come into work unless they were so sick that they had to go to a doctor. But a year after the policy was implemented, a study found that Corporation X’s overall productivity losses due to reported employee illnesses had increased.
Which of the following, if true, would best explain why the policy produced the reverse of its intended effect?
Which of the following, if true, would best explain why the policy produced the reverse of its intended effect?
选项:
A、After the policy was implemented, employees more frequently went to the doctor when they felt sick.
B、Before the policy was implemented, employees who were not sick at all often called in sick.
C、Employees coming into work when sick often infect many of their coworkers.
D、Unusually few employees became genuinely sick during the year after the policy was implemented.
E、There are many other factors besides employee illness that can adversely affect productivity.
答案:
C
提问：
请问A为什么不对
解答：
点赞0
阅读3106
提问：
请问唐瑭老师，题干说为减少声称生病的员工生产力减少这件事，只有当员工生病并且去看医生才能不去上班，A选项不正是导致员工更频繁请假，劳动人数减少，productivity更少嘛？C的逻辑是导致coworker productivity减少，但coworkers没有sick啊…，谢谢老师
解答：
点赞1
阅读2254
提问：
A说生病了更频繁的去医院（更频繁请病假），虽然不让请病假了，但是因为要看医生的人请病假的人多了，所以肯定生产力下降了，逻辑没问题啊。E就算不让请病假了，但是还有其他因素导致生产力下降啊。没毛病。E和C我觉得对结果都是一样的，一个是传染，一个是其他因素 让员工整理工作效率降低了。
解答：
点赞1
阅读3239
提问：
请问A为什么不对
解答：
点赞0
阅读3107
问个问题
注册太麻烦？点这里查看免费答疑吧！
博币不足
加"GMAT小百科"小智微信
直接送200
