CPE Reading and Use of English Part 7
You are going to read four extracts in which experts discuss difficulties of running a small business. For questions 44–53, choose from the experts (A–D). The experts may be chosen more than once.
Which expert believes that …
44 recognises a potential advantage but ultimately presents it as insufficient in the face of broader forces?
45 holds that certain limitations can force people in charge to optimise their business practices?
46 recognises demand-side forces influencing business behaviour?
47 suggests survival through niche positioning rather than scale competition?
48 implies that regulatory frameworks may unintentionally favour large corporations?
49 concedes that being unable to delegate can hurt productivity?
50 questions the assumption that widely praised developments benefit all participants equally?
51 suggests that collaboration between small businesses could be a viable strategy?
52 points out how smaller businesses can have lower exposure to risks?
53 believes that established ways of categorising businesses may become less clear-cut?
A. Marta Klein, independent retailer
People often describe lower scale enterprises as inherently vulnerable, but that overlooks how constraints can actually facilitate choice. Without the option to spread risk across multiple ventures, every change has to be deliberate. In that sense, it can lead to a kind of operational clarity that larger organisations with more diffuse priorities don’t always achieve.
That said, the ability to pivot shouldn’t be confused with long-term security. I’ve adapted the way I operate — like many others — but those adjustments don’t fundamentally alter the scale at which I’m working. External pressures still apply, and they can shift quickly. Being responsive doesn’t eliminate underlying exposure; it just makes it more manageable in the short term. Frustratingly, having to react and adapt inevitably detracts you from the bigger picture, as you simply won’t have time and energy for everything, since you usually have to attend to all matters personally.
B. Daniel Wu, tech consultant
There’s a tendency to frame small businesses as somehow more authentic, as if they operate outside the logic and limitations that govern larger corporations. In reality, both are shaped by the same forces, including the whims of their clientele. If they prioritise speed, convenience or affordability, businesses of all sizes will have to adjust in response. That dynamic limits how differently small firms can realistically behave.
Where things become less straightforward is in relation to technology. It’s often presented as an equaliser, but in practice it can reinforce existing imbalances. Platforms may expand reach, but they also mediate access, often in ways that favour scale. A small business can participate, but rarely on terms it can define.
C. Leila Haddad, policy analyst
Regulation is frequently discussed in terms of fairness, but equal application does not necessarily produce equal outcomes. Requirements that appear neutral can impose uneven burdens, particularly when compliance demands time, expertise and administrative capacity. Larger organisations tend to absorb these demands more easily, whereas smaller firms often have to reallocate what little resources they have to meet them.
It is also worth noting that scale affects responsiveness. Smaller firms can often implement changes more quickly, as decision-making is less dispersed. There are no executives to greenlight every single major change, so progress is not hampered by bureaucracy. Finally, having a smaller operation means reduced opportunity costs, so there is less at stake, making it easier to try different approaches. All of this allows altering business practices around emerging regulations with little to no downside.
D. Tomasz Nowak, cooperative founder
The assumption that small businesses must compete directly with large corporations is, I think, part of the problem. In many cases, the more effective strategy is to avoid that comparison altogether. Specialisation allows smaller firms to operate in areas where scale offers little advantage, fostering expertise that is hard to replicate.
There’s also increasing interest in joint effort approaches. Independent businesses can share resources or coordinate activities while retaining autonomy, creating forms of resilience that wouldn’t be possible individually. These arrangements don’t necessarily remove existing pressures, but they can change how those pressures are experienced.
What’s interesting is how this begins to blur established distinctions. A network of small firms can, in certain respects, function like a larger entity, which undermines the practice pigeonholing businesses based on their size.
For this task: Answers with explanations :: Vocabulary
