Question

Most firms consider expert individuals to be too elitist, temperamental, egocentric, and difficult to work with. Force such people to collaborate on a high-stakes project and they might just come to fisticuffs. Even the very notion of managing such a group seems unimaginable. So most organizations fall into default mode, setting up project teams of people who get along nicely.

• A. The result, however, is disastrous.
• B. The result is mediocrity.
• C. The result is creation of experts who then become elitist.
• D. Naturally, they drive innovations.

Hint:

Look for logical cause-and-effect relationships in paragraph completion questions.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is B

The premise of the given passage suggests that firms often avoid assembling teams of experts due to their perceived difficult nature and potential for conflict. Instead, firms prefer to create teams of individuals who are more compatible and harmonious. The question requires us to determine the outcome of such a decision.

Now, analyze the provided options:

1. The result, however, is disastrous.
2. The result is mediocrity.
3. The result is creation of experts who then become elitist.
4. Naturally, they drive innovations.

Options 1 and 4 describe extremes not directly supported by the passage. Option 3 discusses the creation of new experts, which is not mentioned. According to the passage, choosing teams based on compatibility rather than expertise typically leads to average or mediocre results, fitting option 2: The result is mediocrity.