CameraIcon
CameraIcon
SearchIcon
MyQuestionIcon


Question

Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions that follow:
The evolution of Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) trend has been as profound as it has been rapid. It represents the more visible sign that the boundaries between personal life and work life are blurring. The 9 am – 5 pm model of working solely from office has become archaic and increasingly people are working extended hours from a range of locations. At the very heart of this evolution is the ability to access enterprise networks from anywhere and anytime. The concept of cloud computing serves effectively to extend the office out of office. The much heralded benefit of BYOD is greater productivity. However, recent research has suggested that this is the greatest myth of BYOD and the reality is that BYOD in practice poses new challenges that may outweigh the benefits. A worldwide survey commissioned by Fortinet chose to look at attitude towards BYOD and security from the users point of view instead of the IT managers. Specifically the survey was conducted in 15 territories on a group of graduate employees in their early twenties because they represent the first generation to enter the workplace with an expectation of own device use. Moreover, they also represent tomorrow’s influences and decision makers. The survey findings reveal that for financial organizations, the decision to embrace BYOD is extremely dangerous. Larger organizations will have mature IT strategies and policies in place. But what about smaller financial businesses? They might not have such well developed strategies to protect confidential data.
Crucially, within younger employee group, 55% of the people share an expectation that they should be allowed to use their own devices in the workplace or for work purposes. With this expectation comes the very real risk that employees may consider contravening company policy, banning the use of own devices. The threats posed by this level of subversion cannot be overstated. The survey casts doubt on the idea of BYOD leading to greater productivity by revealing the real reason why people want to use their own devices. Only 26% of people in this age group cite efficiency as the reason they want to use their own devices, while 63% admit that the main reason is so they have access to their favourite applications. But with personal applications so close to hand, the risks to the business must surely include distraction and time wasting. To support this assumption 46% of people polled acknowledged time wasting as the greatest exposure to theft or loss of confidential data. Clearly, from a user perspective there is great deal of contradiction surrounding BYOD and there exists an undercurrent of selfishness where users expect to use their own devices, but mostly for personal interests. They recognize the risks to the organization but are adamant that those risks are worth taking.

According to the passage, for which of the following reasons did Fortinet conduct the survey on a group of group of graduate employees in their early twenties?
  1. As this group represents the future decision makers.
  2. As this group represents the first generation who entered the workforce with a better understanding of sophisticated gadgets.
  3. As this group represents the first generation to enter the workplace expecting that they can use their own devices for work purpose.

  1. Only (3)
  2. All (1), (2) and (3)
  3. Both (1) and (3)
  4. Only (1)
  5. Only (2)


Solution

The correct option is C Both (1) and (3)
According to the 1st paragraph of the passage, Fortinet conducted the survey on a group of graduate employees in their earlier twenties as this group represents the future of decision makers and as this group represents the first generation to enter the workplace expecting that they can use their own devices for work purpose. Both have been mentioned in the statement (1) and (3).

flag
 Suggest corrections
thumbs-up
 
0 Upvotes


Similar questions
English Comprehension
Q1.
Immigrants’ adoption of English as their primary language is one measure of assimilation into the larger United States society. Generally languages define social groups and provide justification for social structures. Hence, a distinctive language sets a cultural group off from the dominant language group. Throughout United States history this pattern has resulted in one consistent, unhappy consequence, discrimination against members of the cultural minority. Language differences provide both a way to rationalize subordination and a ready means for achieving it. Traditionally, English has replaced the native language of immigrant groups by the second or third generation. Some characteristics of today’s Spanish-speaking population, however, suggest the possibility of a departure from this historical pattern. Many families retain ties in Latin America and move back and forth between their present and former communities. This “revolving door” phenomenon, along with the high probability of additional immigrants from the south, means that large Spanish-speaking communities are likely to exist in the United States for the indefinite future. This expectation underlies the call for national support for bilingual education in Spanish-speaking communities’ public schools. Bilingual education can serve different purposes, however. In the 1960s, such programs were established to facilitate the learning of English so as to avoid disadvantaging children in their other subjects because of their limited English. More recently, many advocates have viewed bilingual education as a means to maintain children’s native languages and cultures. The issue is important for people with different political agendas, from absorption at one pole to separatism at the other. To date, the evaluations of bilingual education’s impact on learning have been inconclusive. The issue of bilingual education has, nevertheless, served to unite the leadership of the nation’s Hispanic communities. Grounded in concerns about status that are directly traceable to the United States history of discrimination against Hispanics, the demand for maintenance of the Spanish language in the schools is an assertion of the worth of a people and their culture. If the United States is truly a multicultural nation—that is, if it is one culture reflecting the contributions of many—this demand should be seen as a demand not for separation but for inclusion. More direct efforts to force inclusion can be misguided. For example, movements to declare English the official language do not truly advance the cohesion of a multicultural nation. They alienate the twenty million people who do not speak English as their mother tongue. They are unnecessary since the public’s business is already conducted largely in English. Further, given the present state of understanding about the effects of bilingual education on learning, it would be unwise to require the universal use of English. Finally, it is for parents and local communities to choose the path they will follow, including how much of their culture they want to maintain for their children.
Q. It can be inferred from the passage that one of the characteristics of immigrant groups to the United States has traditionally been that, after immigration, relatively few members of the group 
English Comprehension
Q2.
At the end of the nineteenth century, a rising interest in Native American customs and an increasing desire to understand Native American culture prompted ethnologists to begin recording the life stories of Native American. Ethnologists had a distinct reason for wanting to hear the stories: they were after linguistic or anthropological data that would supplement their own field observations, and they believed that the personal stories, even of a single individual, could increase their understanding of the cultures that they had been observing from without. In addition, many ethnologists at the turn of the century believed that Native American manners and customs were rapidly disappearing, and that it was important to preserve for posterity as much information as could be adequately recorded before the cultures disappeared forever.
There were, however, arguments against this method as a way of acquiring accurate and complete information. Franz Boas, for example, described autobiographies as being “of limited value, and useful chiefly for the study of the perversion of truth by memory,” while Paul Radin contended that investigators rarely spent enough time with the tribes they were observing, and inevitably derived results too tinged by the investigator’s own emotional tone to be reliable.
Even more importantly, as these life stories moved from the traditional oral mode to recorded written form, much was inevitably lost. Editors often decided what elements were significant to the field research on a given tribe. Native Americans recognized that the essence of their lives could not be communicated in English and that events that they thought significant were often deemed unimportant by their interviewers. Indeed, the very act of telling their stories could force Native American narrators to distort their cultures, as taboos had to be broken to speak the names of dead relatives crucial to their family stories. Despite all of this, autobiography remains a useful tool for ethnological research: such personal reminiscences and impressions, incomplete as they may be, are likely to throw more light on the working of the mind and emotions than any amount of speculation from an ethnologist or ethnological theorist from another culture.
Q. Information in the passage suggests that which of the following may be a possible way to eliminate bias in the editing of life stories? 
View More...



footer-image