Q18 - Psychologists have found that

[smiller]

Question Type:
Inference

Stimulus Breakdown:
The stimulus compares two groups, managers and non-manager employees, and describes the effects of flexible-scheduling policies on each group.

Answer Anticipation:
When evaluating each answer choice we need to note which group it describes, what was stated about that group in the stimulus, and whether those statements support the statements in the answer choice.

Correct Answer:
(E)

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) "Effective" makes this answer choice too strong. We don't know if flexible schedules can be considered an effective way to improve satisfaction and efficiency. Even among non-manager employees, the benefits dissipate over time. Also, we can't infer that any managers will benefit from flexible-scheduling policies. The fact that most can already adjust their schedules "may" be the reason why they don't benefit, but there could also be a different reason that affects all managers.

(B) This is an unsupported generalization. We don't know what effect flexible scheduling will have on the overall morale of a company's workforce. Maybe overall morale will improve, even if the benefits dissipate "somewhat" over time.

(C) This is too strong. We know that flexible schedules improve some employees' productivity and satisfaction, but we don't know if this improves the company's productivity, or improves anything "substantially."

(D) This contains a detail creep. We know that flexible-scheduling policies don't tend to increase managers' satisfaction, but there could already be a correlation between their satisfaction and their existing ability to adjust their schedules.

(E) This is correct. If companies are likely to have more non-manager employees than managers—which is a reasonable expectation based on common knowledge, and not something that the LSAT would explicitly need to state—then the "typical" benefits are the ones experienced by non-manager employees. We can't infer what the typical benefits will be based on how the policy affects managers.

Takeaway/Pattern: When an Inference question describes two related groups, keep track of how they are similar and how they are different. Incorrect answers might make an inference about one group based on statements that only apply to the other, or about both groups as a whole based on statements that only apply to one.

#officialexplanation

[hyewonkim89]

What makes (E) better than (D)?

Will someone also explain the wording of (E)?

Thanks in advance!

[T.J.]

Here is my two cents

E says that after the implementation of flexible scheduling the increase in job satisfaction, productivity, and attendance of non-managerial ("the typical benefits") is not reflected on those managers, as the managers already have the autonomy of adjusting their own schedules.
In other words, after a favorable change in company policy, managers and non-managerial employees reacted differently. That is the reason why the benefits "cannot be reliably inferred from observations of managers.

D seems to be true at first sight. However, the stimulus also points out the reason that managers are typically indifferent to the change - flexible schedule - is because they already have the autonomy to do so, which is a condition that we cannot overlook. Suppose we remove their ability of adjusting schedules to their needs. It stands to reason that there is actually correlation between the two factors.

I'll go on and tackle the other answer choices.

For A, we cannot tell what will happen after the managers lose their scheduling autonomy, because this information is not given in the stimulus.

B was very tempting to me. I was attracted to the word "morale". My mistake is that I equivocated morale with job satisfaction, productivity, and attendance. And this equivocation is not really that persuasive or legitimate. Also, we really do not have a clue about "the overall morale of a company's workforce". Maybe the non-managerial employees, who supposedly respond well to a flexible schedule, will spread their happiness, thereby boosting the overall morale of the workforce, regardless of the indifference from the managers.

Hope this responds to your concerns

[christine.defenbaugh]

Thanks for posting hyewonkim89!

Excellent analysis, T.J.! (E) takes two elements from the stimulus:

1) flex-time policies do not typically increase managers' job satisfaction or efficiency and
2) flex-time policies do increase job satisfaction, productivity, and attendance among non-managers

and combines them to state that the typical benefits (#2) cannot be inferred from the how the managers react (#1).

(D) is super tempting. But the stimulus actually tells us there's little correlation between managers job satisfaction and a general policy for flex-time. Since it also tells us that managers can often set their own schedules even without such policies, we don't have any information on the difference in job satisfaction between managers that can set their own schedule and managers that can't.


T.J. has great elimination strategies for (A) and (B), but let's not forget (C)!

(C) predicts productivity improvement "in the long run", while the stimulus specifically pointed out that the benefits "dissipate somewhat over time."

Great work T.J.! hyewonkim89, please let me know if you have any further questions!

[Yangyi.vita]

Hi, I've got a quick question about the wording "typical". Since part of the people(non-manager) benefit from it while part of people(manager) don't, how can we say which one should be the "typical"?

Thanks in advance!

[.]

Hi, I've got a quick question about the wording "typical". Since part of the people(non-manager) benefit from it while part of people(manager) don't, how can we say which one should be the "typical"?

I also have this question. It seems that it is hard to say what is "typical." I assumed that the effect as a whole was typical. For example, it is normal that it will affect one group but not another.

If I do 200 bench presses today, I would be super sore tomorrow. If a body builder does it, he will be totally fine. How can I say my experience is the typical one? I would say both results taken together are typical.

[jrkovals]

I didn't chose this E b/c of typical too. I guess in the world there is more managers than non-managers... but still..

[exccomm2]

Hi Guys,

It's my understanding that the typical benefits referred to in AC (E) are those listed in the stimulus:
"...But these flexible-scheduling policies do increase job satisfaction, productivity, and attendance..."

Hope this helps!

[contropositive]

I initially picked D but I think this is what's wrong with it:

D is sort of weakening the reasoning the author gives for why flexible-schedule policies did not help managers job satisfaction. The author says it's because currently managers are able to set their own schedules. D says there is little correlation between job satisfaction and manager's ability to set their own schedule.

[BharathL67]

I just wanted to clarify: is the reason why B is wrong that "morale" is not synonymous with "job satisfaction"? We're talking very nuanced differentiation here. And if so, where we do we draw the line in the future: should there be a 100% match between wording in answers and stimuli (I don't recall this being the case in other questions).

Thanks,

[ohthatpatrick]

I think we could accept the first half of (B) as being pretty well supported. Sure, "morale" isn't identical to "job satisfaction", but it's close enough to count on a "most supported" question.

I just don't know how we'd support the second half of (B). How did the information lead us to the idea that flexible schedules won't improve the overall morale of a workforce?

You know how lots of offices have a bagel day (or donut day), one day each week? Bagel Day is supposed to improve overall morale, and it probably does, even if there are some employees who don't eat the bagels since they're too high in carbs.

If most people benefit (and the leftover people aren't harmed), then it probably improves overall morale.

Since most employees are non-managerial, and they're the type that benefit from flexible schedules, we probably have more reason to think that flexible schedules WOULD improve overall morale.

Managers' satisfaction isn't improved (neutral). Non-managers' satisfaction is improved (positive). So flexible schedules seem like a net gain overall.