PrepLattice
Sign in
Data InsightsMulti-Source Reasoning

Free GMAT Multi-Source Reasoning Practice Question

PrepLattice is an independent test-preparation service and is not affiliated with or endorsed by GMAC, the organization that administers the GMAT. GMAT and GMAT Focus are trademarks of GMAC, used here only to name the exam this question is designed to prepare you for.

From: Priya Anand, Recruiting Lead To: Dan Voss, Engineering Hiring Manager Subject: Q2 backend-engineer funnel, where we're losing people

Dan,

Here's the Q2 picture for the backend-engineer req. We received 600 applications. Of those, 240 passed the resume screen. We invited all 240 to the online coding assessment, but only 150 actually completed it, a big drop we should talk about. Of the 150 who completed the assessment, 60 passed our cutoff and went to the technical phone screen. 36 passed the phone screen and went to the on-site loop. We extended 12 offers and 9 were accepted.

Two policy notes that may bear on the drop-off: (1) since April we require the coding assessment to be completed within 48 hours of the invitation, with no extensions; (2) we raised the assessment passing cutoff in April from the 50th to the 70th percentile.

Priya

Dan's email distinguishes drops he attributes to a recoverable cause, candidates lost to policy rather than to weakness, from drops that reflect a filter working as intended. For the one stage Dan attributes to a recoverable cause, count only the candidates Dan's email actually treats as recoverable, that is, the candidates his coordinator estimates would have completed under a longer window. How many candidates is that?

Five fresh questions every day, your progress tracked, every miss explained. Free with an account.

Start Today's Free Set

Answer & Explanation

Correct answer

B

This question requires fusing the emails with the table. First, decide which stage is recoverable. Dan's email identifies the invite-to-completion drop as a policy loss, since the 48-hour window "is costing us completed assessments, not weak candidates," so that drop is recoverable. The completion-to-cutoff drop he explicitly calls the higher cutoff "doing what we intended," and he does not want to lower it, so that is an intended filter, not recoverable. Second, count how many are recoverable. The table gives the invite-to-completion stage loss as 240 − 150 = 90 candidates. But Dan's email narrows the count, because his coordinator estimates that "one-third of those we lost at that stage would have completed." So the recoverable count = (1/3) × 90 = 30.

12 is the offers-extended figure from an unrelated part of the funnel. 60 is the number who met the cutoff at the completion-to-cutoff stage, but Dan explicitly treats that stage as the cutoff working as intended, so it is not recoverable. 90 is the full stage loss at the invite-to-completion stage, but it treats every lost invitee as recoverable when Dan's email says only a third would have completed. 360 is the application-screen loss, which Dan's email says nothing recoverable about.