The Evidence behind a Workplace Redesign
About this practice test
A workplace redesign is evaluated through staff complaints, observation, a small trial and later evidence, leading to a layout adapted to the company’s own working habits.
What you’ll practice
Finding detail
Locate specific information and evidence.
Interpreting ideas
Connect main points and inferences.
Evaluating arguments
Assess claims, evidence, and limitations.
What to expect:
2 questions with explanations to review after submission.
Study the questions and tasks
Work through the material below, or start the interactive practice above to complete an attempt. Try the exercises before opening any answer or transcript sections, then use them to review your work.
- Practice level
- B2. Try this level if you can follow the instructions and understand most of the language; choose an earlier level if you need more support.
- Question formats
- Cloze (text)
How to approach this practice
Read the passage for its main idea, then return to the relevant sentence or paragraph for each question. Base answers on the passage.
The Evidence behind a Workplace Redesign
When Northbank Design moved into a new building, the management expected the open-plan office to make people feel energetic and cooperative. For a while the idea sounded modern. Yet within months the mood changed. Designers said they lost concentration when phone calls broke out beside them. Accounts staff complained that flickering lamps made their eyes ache by late afternoon. Others felt that the room looked impressive to visitors but did not support real work. Lina Morris, the operations lead, began to suspect that the problem was not the number of desks, but the way the space was being used. Instead of ordering a full refit, Lina asked for evidence. She set up a short survey and spent two weeks walking the floor at different times of day. She noted where interruptions happened, which desks stayed empty, and where people naturally gathered to talk. The most useful pattern was that teams who needed quiet tried to sit near the windows, while those handling quick questions drifted toward the centre. The review group included an accountant, a technician, and two designers, because Lina wanted critics as well as supporters. The first change was a small trial. The team moved the printers to the edge of the room, removed one row of high shelving, and marked a small zone for video calls. They also tried flexible desks that could be booked in the morning and released in the afternoon. During the pilot, staff filled in a simple log whenever they were interrupted. The log showed fewer interrupted tasks, but it also showed that silence was not always the goal. People wanted control over noise, not a silent library. Some results surprised the group. The quiet zone worked best when it was close to the windows and away from the coffee machine. However, it was often used for video calls rather than for reading or deep concentration, which meant the label on the door mattered less than the behaviour it encouraged. The consultants who had pushed for a fashionable “collaboration hub” had assumed that shared space would automatically improve teamwork. Lina found the opposite lesson: a space can invite contact without forcing it. After six weeks, the group compared the new layout with the old one. Staff reported fewer interruptions and shorter waits for equipment, but they also asked for a better place to take breaks. So the final plan kept most desks near the windows, added a separate break area, and reserved only part of the floor for open discussion. The company did not copy a trend from another office; it chose features that matched its own habits. That was important, because not every team worked in the same way. Lina wrote a note for the directors explaining why the change had been made in stages. She argued that evidence was more useful than slogans, but also that evidence has limits: it shows what happens in one place, at one time, under particular conditions. A layout that helps one group can hinder another, and a layout that suits every team is unlikely to exist. For that reason, the redesign was treated as a living decision rather than a finished answer. In the end, the office became calmer, but the larger lesson was about how to decide before money is spent.
-
Question 1 · Cloze (text)
Complete each blank with the missing word or phrase.
Write NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER from the passage for each gap. Complete the summary below. At Northbank Design, the management first believed that the 1___ would encourage teamwork, but designers lost concentration when 2___ broke out beside them, and accounts staff complained that 3___ made their eyes ache. Lina responded by organising a 4___ and then a 5___. One early adjustment was to move the 6___ to the edge of the room.
Return to the passage, recording or visualCheck answers and explanations
- Blank 1
- open-plan office
- Blank 2
- phone calls
- Blank 3
- flickering lamps
- Blank 4
- short survey
- Blank 5
- small trial
- Blank 6
- printers
Gap 1: The original design was expected to make people feel energetic and cooperative, so the answer is “open-plan office”. Gap 2: Designers lost concentration when “phone calls” broke out beside them. Gap 3: Accounts staff said “flickering lamps” made their eyes ache. Gap 4: Lina first organised a “short survey”. Gap 5: She then conducted a “small trial”. Gap 6: The first adjustment moved the “printers” to the edge of the room.
expected the open-plan office to make people feel energetic and cooperative
Designers said they lost concentration when phone calls broke out beside them
The first change was a small trial. The team moved the printers to the edge of the room
-
Question 2 · Cloze (text)
Complete each blank with the missing word or phrase.
Write NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS AND/OR A NUMBER from the passage for each gap. Complete the summary below. The pilot produced fewer 1___, yet the quiet zone was also used for 2___. In the final plan, desks stayed near 3___ and a separate 4___ was added. Lina later explained that no layout suits 5___, and the floor was reserved partly for 6___.
Return to the passage, recording or visualCheck answers and explanations
- Blank 1
- interrupted tasks
- Blank 2
- video calls
- Blank 3
- the windows
- Blank 4
- break area
- Blank 5
- every team
- Blank 6
- open discussion
Gap 1: The staff logs showed fewer “interrupted tasks”. Gap 2: The quiet zone was often used for “video calls”. Gap 3: The final plan kept most desks near “the windows”. Gap 4: The company added a separate “break area”. Gap 5: Lina argued that a layout cannot suit “every team”. Gap 6: Only part of the floor was reserved for “open discussion”.
The log showed fewer interrupted tasks, but it also showed that silence was not always the goal
it was often used for video calls rather than for reading or deep concentration
a layout that suits every team is unlikely to exist
What to review next
Find the words that support each answer. For a mistake, compare the question with the evidence and identify the detail or inference you missed.
A focused practice result shows how you did on these tasks. Use several activities across skills to decide what to study next; one practice score does not certify an overall CEFR level.
Before you practise: a worked example
Look for evidence in the text. Separate what the writer says from what you already know about the topic.
The library normally closes at six, but on Fridays it stays open until eight. When does it close on Friday?
The answer is eight. But introduces an exception to the normal closing time, so the first time mentioned is not the answer.
This teaching example is separate from the scored questions. After your test, compare any mistakes with the explanation and revisit the topic before trying again.