Sample Mock GD - I
Sample Mock GD 2 >>
Candidates are divided in groups of 8 to 10 and each group is tested
by a panel of Judges. Usually topics of general interest are given
by the panel to the group and the group is asked to proceed with
discussion. Every candidate is supposed to express his opinion and
views on the topic given. The time for discussion is approximately
20 minutes. During the discussion, the panel of Judges quietly
observes the performance and behavior of the candidates and makes
his own assessment.
Mock GroupDiscussion :
Most topics are taken from the current political or economic scene
so if one has just kept abreast of current affairs, then he will be
able to make a mark. We give below a group discussion on a common
topic and give some typical responses of students. We then analyze
the discussion so that readers can develop their own strategy for
JUDGE : Good morning. You can choose any topic you like or
take a slip from that box. You are given one minute to think to
start with the discussion. The observers will not interfere in your
discussion. If no conclusion is reached, we may ask each of you to
speak for a minute on the topic at the end of the discussion. The
topic on the slip is "Multinationals: Bane or Boon". I
suggest you should start the discussion.
Mr A : This is a good topic. I am against multinationals. We have
Coke and Pepsi. Do we need them? We can manufacture our own soft
drinks. Multinationals destroy the local industry and sell
Mr B : I agree with you. What is the fun of having Coke and Pepsi?
We have our own Campa Cola.
Mr C : I think water is good enough.
Mr D : We are not here to discuss soft drinks. The topic given to us
is a much larger one. First, let us define multinational companies.
They are merely large companies which operate in a number of
countries. There could be some Indian multinationals also. So there
is nothing wrong with them. The point is whether they have a good or
bad impact on the host countries. We have to discuss their business
practices and find out whether they are desirable or not.
Mr E : That is a very good introduction to the topic. Multinational
companies do serve an important function that they bring new
products and technologies in countries which do not have them. And
it is not just Coke and Pepsi. They set up power plants and build
roads and bridges, which really help in the development of host
Mr F : But are they all that good? We have seen that they destroy
local industry. In India they just took over existing companies.
They came in areas of low technology. Moreover, we have to see why
they come at all. They come for earning profits and often remit more
money abroad than they bring in.
Mr A : I agree with you. I am against multinationals. We can produce
everything ourselves. We should be swadeshi in our approach. Why do
we need multinational companies?
Mr E : We may not need multinational companies but then it also
means that our companies should not do business abroad. Can we live
in an isolated world? The fact is that we are moving towards
becoming a global village. The world is interconnected. Then we have
also seen that foreign companies bring in business practices that we
are impressed with. Look at foreign banks. They are so efficient and
friendly that the nationalized banks look pathetic in comparison. I
think we can learn a lot from multinationals if we keep our eyes and
Mr B : Take a look at McDonald's. They are providing quality meals
at affordable prices. One does not have to wait at their
Mr C : How do you account for the fact that they take out more than
they put in and thus lead to impoverishing the country?
Mr D : The fact is that every poor country needs foreign investment.
Poor countries often lack resources of their own. That is why they
have to invite foreign companies in. There is nothing wrong in this
because then products like cars, air conditioners and so on can be
made in poor countries. Often multinationals source products from
different countries which helps boost their export earnings.
Mr E : We have been talking about Coke and Pepsi. It is well known
that Pepsi is in the foods business also and has helped farmers in
Punjab by setting up modern farms to grow potatoes and tomatoes.
Modern practices have helped the people in that area.
Mr A : I still feel that multinationals are harmful for the country.
Mr D : Well, there could be negative things associated with such
companies. They may not be very good in their practices. But can we
do without them? I think the best way is to invite them but also
impose some controls so that they follow the laws of the country and
do not indulge in unfair practices.
Mr E : I think laws are applicable to everyone. Very often officials
in poor countries take bribes. The fault lies not with the company
which gives a bribe but the person who actually demands one. Why
blame the companies for our own ills?
Mr A : What about the money they take out?
Mr D : We have had a good discussion and I think it is time to sum
up. Multinationals may have good points and some bad ones too, but
competition is never harmful for anyone. We cannot live in a
protected economy any longer. We have been protected for many years
and the results are there for everyone to see. Rather than be close
about multinationals, let us invite them in selected areas so that
we get foreign investment in areas which we are lacking. Laws can be
strictly enforced that companies operate within limits and do not
start meddling in political affairs.
Analysis : Though Mr A started the discussion, he could not
make any good points. Later, he could not give any points about why
multinationals are bad. It is also a bad strategy to say at the
outset whether you are for or against the topic. Remember, it is not
a debate but a discussion. The first step should always be to
introduce the topic without taking sides. See the way in which the
discussion is proceeding and give arguments for or against. The
observer is not interested in your beliefs but in what you are
saying. The participation of Mr B and C is below average. A
candidate must make 3-4 interventions. Their arguments are also not
well thought out and add nothing to the argument. It is important to
say relevant things which make an impact rather than speak for the
sake of speaking. The arguments of Mr D and E are better. They seem
to be aware of the role of multinational companies. Mr E's approach
is better as he intervenes a number of times. He has also taken
initiative in the beginning and brought order to the group. If
selection has to be made from the above six candidates, the obvious
choice would be Mr E and thereafter, Mr D.
Sample Mock GD 2 >>