English and more

NEW TOEFL Listening 2+ — Meeting Discussion DND

Katja’s team are discussing the menu for a formal dinner at a large company event. Complete their conversation with the phrases a–i.

Katja: I’d like to start with the menus. Torsten, ?

Torsten: Yes. We’ve prepared the text for the menu and we’ve decided to use a company called Theta.

Wolfgang: the printers we’re going to use for the menus?

Torsten: Yes, that’s right. A couple of printers sent us some sample menus and I think Theta is the best. They’ve...

Elke: Theta can offer the same level of quality as Schmidt’s? .

Katja: Sorry, Elke. ?

Torsten: Yes, well, as I was saying, I chose Theta because they have the best prices and their design was great.

Wolfgang: By the way, has anyone seen the new design of the company magazine? I think it looks terrible.

Katja: .

Elke: I totally agree with you, Wolfgang. I really don’t understand why they changed it.

Katja: If I could just . Wolfgang, .

Wolfgang: Yes, well, I agree with Torsten. Theta is offering the best deal, and although the quality is not quite as good as Schmidt’s, it’s still good enough.

Katja: OK, well, .

a. could you let Torsten finish, please

b. I'd be really interested to hear what you think about the printer issue

c. I'm not fully convinced as yet

d. we seem to have some sort of consensus

e. could you talk us through this

f. you're saying that

g. bring the conversation back to the agenda

h. can I just check - we are now talking about

i. maybe we're digressing a little

Total Questions: 0

Correct Answers: 0

Incorrect Answers: 0

To ask him to summarize the final decision
To invite him to explain the proposal in detail
To ask him to prepare a written report
To encourage him to defend himself from criticism

12. What is Katja trying to accomplish when she says, "maybe we're digressing a little"?

To criticize the company magazine
To ask for a short break
To redirect attention to the main topic
To end the discussion completely

13. What can be inferred about Wolfgang's position by the end of the discussion?

He wants to postpone the decision
He strongly prefers Schmidt's services
He supports the recommended supplier despite minor drawbacks
He believes both suppliers should be rejected

Everyone agrees that the magazine should be redesigned
Most participants now favor the same option for the menus
The team decides to gather more information
Nobody objects to changing the meeting agenda

Listen to the talk and answer the questions.

Show/Hide the Tepascript with a vocab exercise. Do the Exercise if you don't understand the lecture well. The do the test on it again.

Corporate Crisis Management — Matching DND

A corporate crisis does not merely test operational systems; it exposes the quality of leadership, judgment, and institutional culture. In many cases, the most effective responses begin long before any public failure occurs. organizations tend to invest in , simulation exercises, and internal auditing procedures designed to identify before they escalate into reputational disasters.

One widely used strategy involves crisis simulations in which executives responses to hypothetical events such as cyberattacks, product contamination, or supply-chain disruption. These exercises are valuable because they reduce the of impulsive decision-making under pressure. When an actual crisis , hesitation or contradictory messaging can rapidly .

The contrast between resilient and corporations often becomes most visible during periods of . A cautious, risk- response may sometimes appear slow, yet imprudent attempts to minimize responsibility frequently intensify . BP’s response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill illustrates how environmental catastrophe can trigger long-term reputational when the public perceives a lack of . Similarly, Volkswagen’s emissions scandal severely undermined consumer trust because the company’s environmentally responsible image was later associated with deliberate .

Another recurring problem is the temptation to pursue what executives imagine to be a rapid solution. In practice, many quick fixes prove to be little more than because they fail to address structural weaknesses inside the organization. Some firms, for instance, implement aggressive -cutting measures during crises, only to discover later that declining service quality further damages their reputation.

Sustainability claims create additional complexity. Carbon offsetting may contribute to a credible environmental strategy, but only when it accompanies measurable reform rather than serving as a superficial public-relations device. Increasingly, regulators and consumers expect evidence, transparency, and long-term accountability instead of gestures.

Ultimately, crisis management depends on whether a company can when institutional credibility is . Even renowned brands may collapse under scrutiny if they ignore stakeholders or public expectations. By contrast, organizations that acknowledge failures openly, correct technical problems efficiently, and demonstrate disciplined reform often recover more rapidly than competitors. In the long , trust is rarely restored through slogans alone; it is rebuilt through consistent actions that audiences find believable.

pipe dreams — несбыточные мечты

accountability — ответственность / подотчётность

Resilient — устойчивые

backlash — негативная реакция

under threat — под угрозой

likelihood — вероятность

deception — обман

contingency planning — планирование на случай ЧП

scrutiny — пристальное внимание / проверка

symbolic — символический

rehearse — отрабатывать / репетировать

vulnerabilities — уязвимые места

cost — затраты

fragile — хрупкий / неустойчивый

step up to the plate — взять ответственность на себя

averse — избегающий / не склонный к

repercussions — последствия

emerges — возникает

supposed — предполагаемый / якобы

underestimate — недооценивать

erode public confidence — подрывать общественное доверие

run — перспектива / период

Total Questions: 0

Correct Answers: 0

Incorrect Answers: 0

They mainly result from unpredictable economic conditions
Their outcomes often depend on preparation and institutional behavior
They usually damage small companies more than global corporations
Their financial impact matters more than their reputational consequences

To suggest that hypothetical events are often more dangerous than real ones
To illustrate how organizations reduce irrational reactions under pressure
To argue that executives should personally manage technical failures
To demonstrate why communication strategies are less important than logistics

21. What point does the lecturer make through the examples of BP and Volkswagen?

Public criticism tends to disappear once companies compensate consumers
Environmental controversies are more difficult to contain than financial ones
A mismatch between corporate claims and actual conduct can destroy credibility
Consumers generally forgive companies that respond rapidly to accusations

They are effective only in industries with strong regulation
They may create the illusion of recovery while leaving core problems unresolved
They are preferable to long-term institutional reforms during emergencies
They mainly fail because investors expect immediate financial returns

23. According to the lecture, how do organizations most successfully regain credibility?

By limiting communication until negative publicity disappears
By replacing visible leadership figures after a scandal
By demonstrating observable reform through sustained conduct
By prioritizing operational efficiency over transparency

To reading on change and corporate issues To writing on change and corporate issues

TOEFL Listening 1 — Mini-dialogues

Listen to a conversation

To reading on change and corporate issues To writing on change and corporate issues