for MBA exam questoin, 1 and 3 also makes sense too cuz if they will take it from overall, they can only score more solving the application based problems, cuz solving formula based question will only lead to half the gain but 2nd and 3rd makes more sesne cuz then you have an accurate cut of system. Comparing both 2nd and 3rd is much safer and secure option still.
In MBA entrance question, II alone should be sufficient in my opinion. Given Q is asking for a proposal or combination of proposals, if we are taking II and III together then having separate cut-off for Application based questions is what is gonna ensure attempts of Application based Qs and if implemented there is no need for changing the marking scheme (anyhow students will have to attempt a certain number of Qs and score minimum cut-off marks)
sir but there is a doubt in set 3 of npp party set. As its no where mentioned about MR loyal in set 3 so how can we assume about mr loyal in the nomination of mr oppurtunist. both the questions are totally different. and in decision making we cannot assume what was the story earlier, what is infront of us is the only reality. if the same story was also mentioned in this question then mr loyal angle wud have come. but here mr loyal is out of context
Hey Vishal, The initial information from 'The Disciplinary Committee....This would benefit the opposition" would remain the constant piece of information in this set. While making the ppt. I sometimes skip that part in every follow-up question. Also, only the additional information in every question does not remain true for every question as you said. I hope that makes it clear?
in set 2 , 2nd question 4th point practice makes one perfect ............. kind of says practice of no use in application based problems so may be it will hamper prep
Forcepoint is correct because the more practice is needed to solve the formula based problems reason nothing mentioned about the application based formulas so we cannot say that it is countering the application based formula so it is also correct answer
I thought the same too initially but the catch is that there is no time constraint mentioned specifically in the question, I think we have that preconceived notion regarding such particular questions. Just my two cents.
See, we can look at the statements from the point of having either a direct impact on the reduction of carbon footprints. 2nd statement, even though could take time to implement (hence comes last in the sequence) will directly reduce the carbon footprints.
Vikram is the Chairman of LM Holdings - a conglomerate with business ventures ranging from real estate to textile to financial services. Since the inception of its first company 50 years ago by Vikram's father, the majority of the key stakeholder positions have been held by either family members or close aides of the family. Consequently, it is common knowledge to outsiders that many critical stakeholder positions within the company are often subject to power tussles among family members. Arjun - a close aide of Vikram - has held a critical position in the company for the past decade. Recently, allegations of a large scale corruption scandal against Arjun has been brought to the notice of the Human Resources department. Some evidence proving the allegations true are subsequently presented to the HR department, which in turn notifies Vikram of the same. Given that there is sufficient evidence to implicate Arjun, what is the best course of action for Vikram? A) He should immediately fire Arjun and deliberate with the key stakeholder about necessary legal actions. B) He should confront Arjun about the issue to understand the reason behind his actions; post this, he can request Arjun's resignation Sir I'm confused in these 2 answer choices which will be best?
Hey, I think so option B would be best option as taking his views is a must and by confronting him other stakeholders too would be aware of the situation
t.me/mba_pathshala
interesting
In Set 1 (order question), wouldn't replacing existing builds lead to an unecessary increas in carbon footprint?
Shukriya 💕
With all due respect sir, replacing the buildings create a bigger instant carbon footprint and will prove sustainable in the long run.
Fantabulous explanation sir😀
this is pure business. First find statents to help Mr Loyal, then find statents to get rid of Mr Loyal 😂
Vijay Sir, please start taking VARC classes as well.
Your DM teaching is helping me in solving RCs with better accuracy.
Please 🙏
replacing the existing building is take too much time
for MBA exam questoin, 1 and 3 also makes sense too cuz if they will take it from overall, they can only score more solving the application based problems, cuz solving formula based question will only lead to half the gain but 2nd and 3rd makes more sesne cuz then you have an accurate cut of system. Comparing both 2nd and 3rd is much safer and secure option still.
Building replace ye to kuch jyada ho gya
sirr...in first question replacing building would be time consuming naa??
In MBA entrance question, II alone should be sufficient in my opinion. Given Q is asking for a proposal or combination of proposals, if we are taking II and III together then having separate cut-off for Application based questions is what is gonna ensure attempts of Application based Qs and if implemented there is no need for changing the marking scheme (anyhow students will have to attempt a certain number of Qs and score minimum cut-off marks)
sir but there is a doubt in set 3 of npp party set. As its no where mentioned about MR loyal in set 3 so how can we assume about mr loyal in the nomination of mr oppurtunist. both the questions are totally different. and in decision making we cannot assume what was the story earlier, what is infront of us is the only reality. if the same story was also mentioned in this question then mr loyal angle wud have come. but here mr loyal is out of context
Hey Vishal, The initial information from 'The Disciplinary Committee....This would benefit the opposition" would remain the constant piece of information in this set. While making the ppt. I sometimes skip that part in every follow-up question. Also, only the additional information in every question does not remain true for every question as you said. I hope that makes it clear?
If same piece of info is mentioned, then this option is correct. Thanks Sir...
in set 2 , 2nd question 4th point practice makes one perfect ............. kind of says practice of no use in application based problems so may be it will hamper prep
Forcepoint is correct because the more practice is needed to solve the formula based problems reason nothing mentioned about the application based formulas so we cannot say that it is countering the application based formula so it is also correct answer
Set 1. 2nd cannot be preferred how come u came to that answer. 4th option has to be the one
I thought the same too initially but the catch is that there is no time constraint mentioned specifically in the question, I think we have that preconceived notion regarding such particular questions. Just my two cents.
See, we can look at the statements from the point of having either a direct impact on the reduction of carbon footprints. 2nd statement, even though could take time to implement (hence comes last in the sequence) will directly reduce the carbon footprints.
brother 2nd cannot be an option. how come we can change buildings.
@@shubhamSingh-ly2kl
bohot accha explain krte ho sir aap maza aa gya
or bhi classes lana sir
thank you for these wonderful sessions sir, I'm learning a lot of new things from this sessions, very beneficial.
Practice sheets kahan milegi sir
2
sir english subtitle plezzzz
Pyqs hai kya?
chup!!
Previous Year Questions
lol?@@_ABHYUDAYABATABYAL
Hi aarti did you remember me??I'm Pawan
Vikram is the Chairman of LM Holdings - a conglomerate with business ventures ranging from real estate to textile to financial services. Since the inception of its first company 50 years ago by Vikram's father, the majority of the key stakeholder positions have been held by either family members or close aides of the family. Consequently, it is common knowledge to outsiders that many critical stakeholder positions within the company are often subject to power tussles among family members.
Arjun - a close aide of Vikram - has held a critical position in the company for the past decade. Recently, allegations of a large scale corruption scandal against Arjun has been brought to the notice of the Human Resources department. Some evidence proving the allegations true are subsequently presented to the HR department, which in turn notifies Vikram of the same. Given that there is sufficient evidence to implicate Arjun, what is the best course of action for Vikram?
A)
He should immediately fire Arjun and deliberate with the key stakeholder about necessary legal actions.
B)
He should confront Arjun about the issue to understand the reason behind his actions; post this, he can request Arjun's resignation
Sir I'm confused in these 2 answer choices which will be best?
Hey, I think so option B would be best option as taking his views is a must and by confronting him other stakeholders too would be aware of the situation
@@naveenkamath5854 my opinion was also the same but given answer is A.
@@Tanya-yw9hv option A is best bcs it is given that there is (sufficient) evidence to implicate arjun.
@@avitandon3439 thanks