Welcome to the Comprehension MCQs Page
Dive deep into the fascinating world of Comprehension with our comprehensive set of Multiple-Choice Questions (MCQs). This page is dedicated to exploring the fundamental concepts and intricacies of Comprehension, a crucial aspect of UGC CBSE NET General Paper. In this section, you will encounter a diverse range of MCQs that cover various aspects of Comprehension, from the basic principles to advanced topics. Each question is thoughtfully crafted to challenge your knowledge and deepen your understanding of this critical subcategory within UGC CBSE NET General Paper.
Check out the MCQs below to embark on an enriching journey through Comprehension. Test your knowledge, expand your horizons, and solidify your grasp on this vital area of UGC CBSE NET General Paper.
Note: Each MCQ comes with multiple answer choices. Select the most appropriate option and test your understanding of Comprehension. You can click on an option to test your knowledge before viewing the solution for a MCQ. Happy learning!
Comprehension MCQs | Page 3 of 16
Explore more Topics under UGC CBSE NET General Paper
Q21.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the below question:
Many aspects of the motion-picture industry and its constituent companies are dissimilar to those observable in advanced-technology industries and firms. For instance, company longevity does not represent a consistent concern across the two organisational contexts. In the advanced-technology company for example, one new-product innovation – which is expected to generate financial returns to the firm – is insufficient for the company to be successful.
Rather, a stream of new product innovations is required. By contrast with the independent production company of this case, each new film – which is expected to generate financial returns to the principals – is sufficient for the company to be successful. Any subsequent new films involving the firm’s participants will be produced by a different independent company.
As another instance, people’s learning is expected to have different contributors and beneficiaries across the two organizational contexts. In the advanced-technology company, for example, each new product innovation provides an opportunity for participants on the project team to learn and acquire experience, and this same company intends to retain such participants, hence, benefit from their increased experience on the next project. By contrast with the independent production company, each new film provides an opportunity for participants on the project team to learn and acquire this experience also, but this same company has little or no expectation of retaining such participants, and hence, benefitting from their increased experience in the next project.
Experience is paramount in the motion-picture industry. Generally, on film projects, budgets are very tight, and schedules are very demanding. People are hired largely based on their experience and are expected to perform well immediately when called to do so. There is negligible slack time or margin for learning through trial and error, but experienced people learn exactly through trial and error. Because experience is valued so highly and film-production houses have such short time horizons, entry into the industry is very difficult for most people. Further, the role played by schools and colleges is minimal in this industry. Some skills and techniques can be learned and refined through formal education (e.g., acting schools, theatre, film degrees), but the majority come through direct experience. Mentoring plays an important role. True, the film business focuses heavily on exploitation over exploration. Yet success of the industry as a whole is critically dependent upon learning and exploration overtime.
Que. Why do film production houses value experience highly ?
Many aspects of the motion-picture industry and its constituent companies are dissimilar to those observable in advanced-technology industries and firms. For instance, company longevity does not represent a consistent concern across the two organisational contexts. In the advanced-technology company for example, one new-product innovation – which is expected to generate financial returns to the firm – is insufficient for the company to be successful.
Rather, a stream of new product innovations is required. By contrast with the independent production company of this case, each new film – which is expected to generate financial returns to the principals – is sufficient for the company to be successful. Any subsequent new films involving the firm’s participants will be produced by a different independent company.
As another instance, people’s learning is expected to have different contributors and beneficiaries across the two organizational contexts. In the advanced-technology company, for example, each new product innovation provides an opportunity for participants on the project team to learn and acquire experience, and this same company intends to retain such participants, hence, benefit from their increased experience on the next project. By contrast with the independent production company, each new film provides an opportunity for participants on the project team to learn and acquire this experience also, but this same company has little or no expectation of retaining such participants, and hence, benefitting from their increased experience in the next project.
Experience is paramount in the motion-picture industry. Generally, on film projects, budgets are very tight, and schedules are very demanding. People are hired largely based on their experience and are expected to perform well immediately when called to do so. There is negligible slack time or margin for learning through trial and error, but experienced people learn exactly through trial and error. Because experience is valued so highly and film-production houses have such short time horizons, entry into the industry is very difficult for most people. Further, the role played by schools and colleges is minimal in this industry. Some skills and techniques can be learned and refined through formal education (e.g., acting schools, theatre, film degrees), but the majority come through direct experience. Mentoring plays an important role. True, the film business focuses heavily on exploitation over exploration. Yet success of the industry as a whole is critically dependent upon learning and exploration overtime.
Que. Why do film production houses value experience highly ?
Answer: (c).Because of short time horizons.
Q22.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the below question:
Many aspects of the motion-picture industry and its constituent companies are dissimilar to those observable in advanced-technology industries and firms. For instance, company longevity does not represent a consistent concern across the two organisational contexts. In the advanced-technology company for example, one new-product innovation – which is expected to generate financial returns to the firm – is insufficient for the company to be successful.
Rather, a stream of new product innovations is required. By contrast with the independent production company of this case, each new film – which is expected to generate financial returns to the principals – is sufficient for the company to be successful. Any subsequent new films involving the firm’s participants will be produced by a different independent company.
As another instance, people’s learning is expected to have different contributors and beneficiaries across the two organizational contexts. In the advanced-technology company, for example, each new product innovation provides an opportunity for participants on the project team to learn and acquire experience, and this same company intends to retain such participants, hence, benefit from their increased experience on the next project. By contrast with the independent production company, each new film provides an opportunity for participants on the project team to learn and acquire this experience also, but this same company has little or no expectation of retaining such participants, and hence, benefitting from their increased experience in the next project.
Experience is paramount in the motion-picture industry. Generally, on film projects, budgets are very tight, and schedules are very demanding. People are hired largely based on their experience and are expected to perform well immediately when called to do so. There is negligible slack time or margin for learning through trial and error, but experienced people learn exactly through trial and error. Because experience is valued so highly and film-production houses have such short time horizons, entry into the industry is very difficult for most people. Further, the role played by schools and colleges is minimal in this industry. Some skills and techniques can be learned and refined through formal education (e.g., acting schools, theatre, film degrees), but the majority come through direct experience. Mentoring plays an important role. True, the film business focuses heavily on exploitation over exploration. Yet success of the industry as a whole is critically dependent upon learning and exploration overtime.
Que. According to the author, what has been the focus of film business ?
Many aspects of the motion-picture industry and its constituent companies are dissimilar to those observable in advanced-technology industries and firms. For instance, company longevity does not represent a consistent concern across the two organisational contexts. In the advanced-technology company for example, one new-product innovation – which is expected to generate financial returns to the firm – is insufficient for the company to be successful.
Rather, a stream of new product innovations is required. By contrast with the independent production company of this case, each new film – which is expected to generate financial returns to the principals – is sufficient for the company to be successful. Any subsequent new films involving the firm’s participants will be produced by a different independent company.
As another instance, people’s learning is expected to have different contributors and beneficiaries across the two organizational contexts. In the advanced-technology company, for example, each new product innovation provides an opportunity for participants on the project team to learn and acquire experience, and this same company intends to retain such participants, hence, benefit from their increased experience on the next project. By contrast with the independent production company, each new film provides an opportunity for participants on the project team to learn and acquire this experience also, but this same company has little or no expectation of retaining such participants, and hence, benefitting from their increased experience in the next project.
Experience is paramount in the motion-picture industry. Generally, on film projects, budgets are very tight, and schedules are very demanding. People are hired largely based on their experience and are expected to perform well immediately when called to do so. There is negligible slack time or margin for learning through trial and error, but experienced people learn exactly through trial and error. Because experience is valued so highly and film-production houses have such short time horizons, entry into the industry is very difficult for most people. Further, the role played by schools and colleges is minimal in this industry. Some skills and techniques can be learned and refined through formal education (e.g., acting schools, theatre, film degrees), but the majority come through direct experience. Mentoring plays an important role. True, the film business focuses heavily on exploitation over exploration. Yet success of the industry as a whole is critically dependent upon learning and exploration overtime.
Que. According to the author, what has been the focus of film business ?
Answer: (c).Exploitation
Q23.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the following question:
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. What is required to ensure competitive advantages in specific markets?
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. What is required to ensure competitive advantages in specific markets?
Answer: (c).Superior knowledge
Q24.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the following question:
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. The passage also mentions about the trend of
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. The passage also mentions about the trend of
Answer: (a).Global financial flow
Q25.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the following question:
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. What does the author lay stress on in the passage?
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. What does the author lay stress on in the passage?
Answer: (d).Knowledge-driven competitive advantage
Q26.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the following question:
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. Which country enjoyed competitive advantages in automobile industry for decades?
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. Which country enjoyed competitive advantages in automobile industry for decades?
Answer: (b).Japan
Q27.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the following question:
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. Why labour-based competitive advantages of India and Singapore cannot be sustained in IT and service sectors?
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. Why labour-based competitive advantages of India and Singapore cannot be sustained in IT and service sectors?
Answer: (c).Because of new competitors.
Q28.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the following question:
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. How can an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime?
In terms of labour, for decades the relatively low cost and high quality of Japanese workers conferred considerable competitive advantage across numerous durable goods and consumer-electronics industries (eg. Machinery, automobiles, televisions, radios). Then labour-based advantages shifted to South Korea, then to Malaysia, Mexico and other nations. Today, China appears to be capitalizing best on the basic of labour, Japanese firms still remain competitive in markets for such durable goods, electronics and other products, but the labour force is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over manufacturers in other industrializing nations. Such shifting of labour-based advantage is clearly not limited to manufacturing industries. Today a huge number of IT and service jobs are moving from Europe and North America to India, Singapore, and like countries with relatively well-educated, low-cost workforces possessing technical skills. However, as educational levels and technical skills continue to rise in other countries, India, Singapore and like nations enjoying labour-based competitive advantage today are likely to find such advantage cannot be sustained through emergence of new competitors.
In terms of capital, for centuries the days of gold coin and later even paper money restricted financial flows. Subsequently regional concentrations were formed where large banks, industries and markets coalesced. But today capital flows internationally at rapid speed. Global commerce no longer requires regional interactions among business players. Regional capital concentrations in places such as New York, London and Tokyo still persist, of course, but the capital concentrated there is no longer sufficient for competitive advantage over other capitalists distributed worldwide. Only if an organization is able to combine, integrate and apply its resources (eg. Land, labour, capital, IT) in an effective manner that is not readily imitable by competitors can such an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime.
In a knowledge-based theory of the firm, this idea is extended to view organizational knowledge as resource with atleast the same level of power and importance as the traditional economic inputs. An organization with superior knowledge can achieve competitive advantage in markets that appreciate the application of such knowledge. Semiconductors, genetic engineering, pharmaceuticals, software, military warfare, and like knowledge-intensive competitive arenas provide both time-proven and current examples. Consider semiconductors (e. g. computer chips), which are made principally of sand and common metals, these ubiquitous and powerful electronics devices are designed within common office buildings, using commercially available tools, and fabricated within factories in many industrialized nations. Hence, land is not the key competitive recourse in the semiconductor industry.
Que. How can an organization enjoy competitive advantage sustainable overtime?
Answer: (d).By effective use of various instrumentalities.
Q29.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the question that follow.
I did that thing recently where you have to sign a big card - which is a horror unto itself, especially as the keeper of the Big Card was leaning over me at the time. Suddenly I was on the spot, a rabbit in the headlights, torn between doing a fun message or some sort of in-joke or a drawing. Instead overwhelmed by the myriad options available to me, I decided to just write “Good luck, best, Joel”.
It was then that I realised, to my horror, that I had forgotten how to write. My entire existence is “tap letters into computer”. My shopping lists are hidden in the notes function of my phone. If I need to remember something I send an e-mail to myself. A pen is something I chew when I’m struggling to think. Paper is something I pile beneath my laptop to make it a more comfortable height for me to type on.
A poll of 1,000 teens by the stationers, Bic found that one in 10 don’t own a pen, a third have never written a letter, and half of 13 to 19 years - old have never been forced to sit down and write a thank you letter. More than 80% have never written a love letter, 56% don’t have letter paper at home. And a quarter have never known the unique torture of writing a birthday card. The most a teen ever has to use a pen is on an exam paper.
Bic, have you heard of mobile phones ? Have you heard of e-mail, facebook and
snap chatting? This is the future. Pens are dead. Paper is dead. Handwriting is a relic.
“Handwriting is one of the most creative outlets we have and should be given the same importance as other art forms such as sketching, painting or photography.”
Que. When confronted with signing a big card, the author felt like “a rabbit in the headlight”. What does this phrase mean ?
I did that thing recently where you have to sign a big card - which is a horror unto itself, especially as the keeper of the Big Card was leaning over me at the time. Suddenly I was on the spot, a rabbit in the headlights, torn between doing a fun message or some sort of in-joke or a drawing. Instead overwhelmed by the myriad options available to me, I decided to just write “Good luck, best, Joel”.
It was then that I realised, to my horror, that I had forgotten how to write. My entire existence is “tap letters into computer”. My shopping lists are hidden in the notes function of my phone. If I need to remember something I send an e-mail to myself. A pen is something I chew when I’m struggling to think. Paper is something I pile beneath my laptop to make it a more comfortable height for me to type on.
A poll of 1,000 teens by the stationers, Bic found that one in 10 don’t own a pen, a third have never written a letter, and half of 13 to 19 years - old have never been forced to sit down and write a thank you letter. More than 80% have never written a love letter, 56% don’t have letter paper at home. And a quarter have never known the unique torture of writing a birthday card. The most a teen ever has to use a pen is on an exam paper.
Bic, have you heard of mobile phones ? Have you heard of e-mail, facebook and
snap chatting? This is the future. Pens are dead. Paper is dead. Handwriting is a relic.
“Handwriting is one of the most creative outlets we have and should be given the same importance as other art forms such as sketching, painting or photography.”
Que. When confronted with signing a big card, the author felt like “a rabbit in the headlight”. What does this phrase mean ?
Answer: (a).A state of confusion
Q30.
Read the following passage carefully and answer the question that follow.
I did that thing recently where you have to sign a big card - which is a horror unto itself, especially as the keeper of the Big Card was leaning over me at the time. Suddenly I was on the spot, a rabbit in the headlights, torn between doing a fun message or some sort of in-joke or a drawing. Instead overwhelmed by the myriad options available to me, I decided to just write “Good luck, best, Joel”.
It was then that I realised, to my horror, that I had forgotten how to write. My entire existence is “tap letters into computer”. My shopping lists are hidden in the notes function of my phone. If I need to remember something I send an e-mail to myself. A pen is something I chew when I’m struggling to think. Paper is something I pile beneath my laptop to make it a more comfortable height for me to type on.
A poll of 1,000 teens by the stationers, Bic found that one in 10 don’t own a pen, a third have never written a letter, and half of 13 to 19 years - old have never been forced to sit down and write a thank you letter. More than 80% have never written a love letter, 56% don’t have letter paper at home. And a quarter have never known the unique torture of writing a birthday card. The most a teen ever has to use a pen is on an exam paper.
Bic, have you heard of mobile phones ? Have you heard of e-mail, facebook and
snap chatting? This is the future. Pens are dead. Paper is dead. Handwriting is a relic.
“Handwriting is one of the most creative outlets we have and should be given the same importance as other art forms such as sketching, painting or photography.”
Que. According to the author, which one is not the most creative outlet of pursuit?
I did that thing recently where you have to sign a big card - which is a horror unto itself, especially as the keeper of the Big Card was leaning over me at the time. Suddenly I was on the spot, a rabbit in the headlights, torn between doing a fun message or some sort of in-joke or a drawing. Instead overwhelmed by the myriad options available to me, I decided to just write “Good luck, best, Joel”.
It was then that I realised, to my horror, that I had forgotten how to write. My entire existence is “tap letters into computer”. My shopping lists are hidden in the notes function of my phone. If I need to remember something I send an e-mail to myself. A pen is something I chew when I’m struggling to think. Paper is something I pile beneath my laptop to make it a more comfortable height for me to type on.
A poll of 1,000 teens by the stationers, Bic found that one in 10 don’t own a pen, a third have never written a letter, and half of 13 to 19 years - old have never been forced to sit down and write a thank you letter. More than 80% have never written a love letter, 56% don’t have letter paper at home. And a quarter have never known the unique torture of writing a birthday card. The most a teen ever has to use a pen is on an exam paper.
Bic, have you heard of mobile phones ? Have you heard of e-mail, facebook and
snap chatting? This is the future. Pens are dead. Paper is dead. Handwriting is a relic.
“Handwriting is one of the most creative outlets we have and should be given the same importance as other art forms such as sketching, painting or photography.”
Que. According to the author, which one is not the most creative outlet of pursuit?
Answer: (d).Reading
Suggested Topics
Are you eager to expand your knowledge beyond Comprehension? We've curated a selection of related categories that you might find intriguing.
Click on the categories below to discover a wealth of MCQs and enrich your understanding of Computer Science. Happy exploring!
