(This passage was written in 1978.)
Recent years have
brought minority-owned businesses in the United States unprecedented
opportunities—as well as new and significant risks. Civil rights activists have
long argued that one of the principal reasons why Blacks, Hispanics, and other
minority groups have difficulty establishing themselves in business is that
they lack access to the sizable orders and subcontracts that are generated by
large companies. Now Congress, in apparent agreement, has required by law that
businesses awarded federal contracts of more than $500,000 do their best to
find minority subcontractors and record their efforts to do so on forms filed
with the government. Indeed, some federal and local agencies have gone so far
as to set specific percentage goals for apportioning parts of public works
contracts to minority enterprises.
Corporate
response appears to have been substantial. According to figures collected in
1977, the total of corporate contracts with minority businesses rose from $77
million in 1972 to $1.1 billion in 1977. The projected total of corporate
contracts with minority businesses for the early 1980’s is estimated to be over
53 billion per year with no letup anticipated in the next decade. Promising as
it is for minority businesses, this increased patronage poses dangers for them,
too. First, minority firms risk expanding too fast and overextending themselves
financially, since most are small concerns and, unlike large businesses, they
often need to make substantial investments in new plants, staff, equipment, and
the like in order to perform work subcontracted to them. If, thereafter, their
subcontracts are for some reason reduced, such firms can face potentially crippling
fixed expenses. The world of corporate purchasing can be frustrating for small
entrepreneurs who get requests for elaborate formal estimates and bids. Both
consume valuable time and resources, and a small company’s efforts must soon
result in orders, or both the morale and the financial health of the business
will suffer.
A second risk is
that White-owned companies may seek to cash in on the increasing apportionments
through formation of joint ventures with minority-owned concerns. Of course, in
many instances there are legitimate reasons for joint ventures; clearly, White
and minority enterprises can team up to
acquire business that neither could acquire alone. But civil rights groups and
minority business owners have complained to Congress about minorities being set
up as “fronts” with White backing,
rather than being accepted as full partners in legitimate joint ventures.
Third, a minority
enterprise that secures the business of one large corporate customer often runs
the danger of becoming—and remaining—dependent. Even in the best of
circumstances, fierce competition from larger, more established companies makes
it difficult for small concerns to broaden their customer bases: when such
firms have nearly guaranteed orders from a single corporate benefactor, they
may truly have to struggle against complacency arising from their current
success.
Questions:
1. The
primary purpose of the passage is to
(A) present a
commonplace idea and its inaccuracies
(B) describe a
situation and its potential drawbacks
(C) propose a
temporary solution to a problem
(D) analyze a
frequent source of disagreement
(E) explore the
implications of a finding
2. The
passage supplies information that would answer which of the following
questions?
(A) What
federal agencies have set percentage goals for the use of minority-owned
businesses in public works contracts?
(B) To which
government agencies must businesses awarded federal contracts report their
efforts to find minority subcontractors?
(C) How
widespread is the use of minority-owned concerns as “fronts” by White backers
seeking to obtain subcontracts?
(D) How many
more minority-owned businesses were there in 1977 than in 1972?
(E) What is one
set of conditions under which a small business might find itself financially
overextended?
3. According
to the passage, civil rights activists maintain that one disadvantage under
which minority-owned businesses have traditionally had to labor is that they have
(A) been
especially vulnerable to governmental mismanagement of the economy
(B) been denied
bank loans at rates comparable to those afforded larger competitors
(C) not had
sufficient opportunity to secure business created by large corporations
(D) not been
able to advertise in those media that reach large numbers of potential
customers
(E) not had
adequate representation in the centers of government power
4. The
passage suggests that the failure of a large business to have its bids for
subcontracts result quickly in orders might cause it to
(A) experience
frustration but not serious financial harm
(B) face
potentially crippling fixed expenses
(C) have to
record its efforts on forms filed with the government
(D) increase
its spending with minority subcontractors
(E) revise its
procedure for making bids for federal contracts and subcontracts
5. The
author implies that a minority-owned concern that does the greater part of its
business with one large corporate customer should
(A) avoid
competition with larger, more established concerns by not expanding
(B) concentrate
on securing even more business from that corporation
(C) try to
expand its customer base to avoid becoming dependent on the corporation
(D) pass on
some of the work to be done for the corporation to other minority-owned
concerns
(E) use its
influence with the corporation to promote subcontracting with other minority
concerns
6. It
can be inferred from the passage that, compared with the requirements of law,
the percentage goals set by “some federal and local agencies” (lines 14-15) are
(A) more
popular with large corporations
(B) more
specific
(C) less
controversial
(D) less
expensive to enforce
(E) easier to
comply with
7. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the author’s
assertion that, in the 1970’s, corporate response to federal requirements (lines 18-19)
was substantial
(A) Corporate
contracts with minority-owned businesses totaled $2 billion in 1979.
(B) Between
1970 and 1972, corporate contracts with minority-owned businesses declined by
25 percent.
(C) The figures
collected in 1977 underrepresented the extent of corporate contracts with
minority-owned businesses.
(D) The
estimate of corporate spending with minority-owned businesses in 1980 is
approximately $10 million too high.
(E) The $1.1
billion represented the same percentage of total corporate spending in 1977 as
did $77 million in 1972.
8. The
author would most likely agree with which of the following statements about
corporate response to working with minority subcontractors?
(A) Annoyed by
the proliferation of “front” organizations, corporations are likely to reduce
their efforts to work with minority-owned subcontractors in the near future.
(B) Although
corporations showed considerable interest in working with minority businesses
in the 1970’s, their aversion to government paperwork made them reluctant to
pursue many government contracts.
(C) The
significant response of corporations in the 1970’s is likely to be sustained
and conceivably be increased throughout the 1980’s.
(D) Although
corporations are eager to cooperate with minority-owned businesses, a shortage
of capital in the 1970’s made substantial response impossible.
(E) The
enormous corporate response has all but eliminated the dangers of over-expansion
that used to plague small minority-owned businesses.
Answers:
1.
B
|
2.
E
|
3.
C
|
4.
A
|
5.
C
|
6.
B
|
7.
E
|
8.
C
|
No comments:
Post a Comment