IELTS Reading: Thúc Đẩy Đa Dạng Và Hòa Nhập Tại Nơi Làm Việc - Đề Thi Mẫu Có Đáp Án Chi Tiết » IELTS.NET

Mở Bài

Chủ đề đa dạng và hòa nhập trong môi trường làm việc (workplace diversity and inclusion) đang trở thành một trong những đề tài được quan tâm hàng đầu trong các kỳ thi IELTS Reading hiện nay. Với xu hướng toàn cầu hóa và sự phát triển của văn hóa doanh nghiệp hiện đại, chủ đề này xuất hiện với tần suất ngày càng cao, đặc biệt trong các đề thi Academic từ năm 2020 trở lại đây.

Bài viết này cung cấp cho bạn một bộ đề thi IELTS Reading hoàn chỉnh gồm 3 passages với độ khó tăng dần từ Easy đến Hard, phù hợp cho học viên từ band 5.0 trở lên. Bạn sẽ được thực hành với 40 câu hỏi đa dạng theo đúng format thi thật, bao gồm Multiple Choice, True/False/Not Given, Matching Headings, Summary Completion và nhiều dạng khác. Đặc biệt, mỗi câu hỏi đều có đáp án chi tiết kèm giải thích rõ ràng về vị trí thông tin và cách paraphrase, giúp bạn hiểu sâu về kỹ thuật làm bài.

Ngoài ra, bộ đề còn cung cấp kho từ vựng phong phú về chủ đề kinh doanh, quản lý nhân sự và văn hóa doanh nghiệp – những từ vựng thiết yếu không chỉ cho IELTS mà còn cho công việc và học tập sau này.

1. Hướng Dẫn Làm Bài IELTS Reading

Tổng Quan Về IELTS Reading Test

IELTS Reading Test kéo dài 60 phút với 3 passages và tổng cộng 40 câu hỏi. Điểm số của bạn được tính dựa trên số câu trả lời đúng, không bị trừ điểm khi sai.

Phân bổ thời gian khuyến nghị:

Passage 1: 15-17 phút (độ khó Easy)
Passage 2: 18-20 phút (độ khó Medium)
Passage 3: 23-25 phút (độ khó Hard)

Lưu ý quan trọng: Không có thời gian phụ để chép đáp án vào answer sheet, vì vậy bạn cần ghi đáp án trực tiếp trong quá trình làm bài.

Các Dạng Câu Hỏi Trong Đề Này

Bộ đề thi mẫu này bao gồm đầy đủ các dạng câu hỏi phổ biến nhất trong IELTS Reading:

Multiple Choice – Câu hỏi trắc nghiệm nhiều lựa chọn
True/False/Not Given – Xác định thông tin đúng/sai/không có
Matching Headings – Nối tiêu đề với đoạn văn
Summary Completion – Hoàn thành đoạn tóm tắt
Sentence Completion – Hoàn thành câu
Matching Features – Nối đặc điểm với danh mục
Short-answer Questions – Câu hỏi trả lời ngắn

2. IELTS Reading Practice Test

PASSAGE 1 – Building a Foundation for Workplace Diversity

Độ khó: Easy (Band 5.0-6.5)

Thời gian đề xuất: 15-17 phút

In today’s globalised business environment, workplace diversity has become more than just a buzzword—it is a fundamental component of successful organisations. Diversity refers to the presence of differences within a given setting, encompassing various dimensions such as race, ethnicity, gender, age, religion, disability, and sexual orientation. However, simply having a diverse workforce is not enough; companies must also foster inclusion, which means creating an environment where all employees feel valued, respected, and able to contribute fully to the organisation’s success.

The business case for diversity and inclusion is compelling. Research conducted by McKinsey & Company has consistently shown that companies in the top quartile for ethnic and cultural diversity are 36% more likely to outperform their peers in terms of profitability. Similarly, organisations with gender-diverse executive teams demonstrate 25% higher likelihood of experiencing above-average profits. These statistics underscore the tangible benefits that diversity brings to the bottom line, not merely as a matter of social responsibility but as a strategic advantage.

Implementing diversity initiatives begins with leadership commitment. Senior executives must champion diversity efforts and allocate adequate resources to support these programmes. This includes establishing a diversity and inclusion officer or team responsible for developing and executing strategies. Many successful companies have created diversity councils—groups of employees from various levels and departments who collaborate to identify challenges and recommend solutions. For instance, technology giant Google has invested millions of dollars in its diversity programmes, recognising that innovation thrives in environments where different perspectives are encouraged and valued.

Recruitment practices play a crucial role in building a diverse workforce. Traditional hiring methods often perpetuate existing imbalances by relying on narrow talent pools or subjective criteria. To counter this, progressive companies are adopting blind recruitment techniques, where identifying information such as names, ages, and educational institutions are removed from applications during initial screening. This approach helps reduce unconscious bias—the automatic, mental shortcuts used to process information and make decisions quickly. Additionally, organisations are expanding their recruitment efforts to include historically underrepresented groups by partnering with diverse professional associations, attending minority career fairs, and establishing relationships with universities that serve diverse student populations.

Employee training is another essential pillar of diversity and inclusion efforts. Cultural competence workshops help staff members understand and appreciate differences, while bias awareness training teaches employees to recognise and mitigate their own prejudices. Accenture, a global professional services company, has implemented mandatory diversity training for all employees, covering topics such as inclusive leadership, microaggressions, and allyship. These educational programmes create a shared understanding of diversity goals and equip employees with the skills needed to work effectively in multicultural teams.

Creating inclusive policies extends beyond training to encompass the entire employee experience. Flexible work arrangements, such as remote work options and adjustable schedules, can accommodate diverse needs, particularly for working parents, caregivers, and individuals with disabilities. Employee resource groups (ERGs)—voluntary, employee-led groups that foster a diverse, inclusive workplace—provide support networks and advocacy for underrepresented populations. Companies like Microsoft and IBM have established numerous ERGs representing various identity groups, including women in technology, LGBTQ+ employees, veterans, and employees with disabilities. These groups not only offer peer support but also serve as valuable resources for management, providing insights into the experiences and needs of different employee populations.

Measuring progress is critical to ensuring that diversity and inclusion initiatives achieve their intended outcomes. Organisations should establish clear metrics and regularly assess their workforce composition, promotion rates, pay equity, and employee satisfaction across different demographic groups. Transparency in reporting these metrics demonstrates accountability and helps identify areas requiring improvement. Many companies now publish annual diversity reports, sharing their progress and challenges publicly. This openness not only holds organisations accountable but also signals to potential employees that the company takes diversity seriously.

The journey toward a truly diverse and inclusive workplace is ongoing and requires sustained effort, but the benefits—enhanced creativity, better decision-making, improved employee engagement, and stronger financial performance—make it an investment worth pursuing.

Questions 1-5

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Passage 1?

Write:

TRUE if the statement agrees with the information
FALSE if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN if there is no information on this

Companies with diverse leadership teams are guaranteed to achieve higher profits than their competitors.
Google has spent substantial amounts of money on diversity programmes.
Blind recruitment involves removing personal identifying information from job applications.
All major technology companies have implemented mandatory diversity training.
Employee resource groups are managed and led by company executives.

Questions 6-9

Complete the sentences below.

Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.

Unconscious bias refers to the __ that people use to make quick decisions.
Companies are working with universities to reach __ in their recruitment efforts.
Cultural competence workshops help employees understand and appreciate __.
Publishing diversity data publicly shows a company’s __ to its diversity goals.

Questions 10-13

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C, or D.

According to the passage, what is the main difference between diversity and inclusion?
- A. Diversity is more important than inclusion
- B. Diversity relates to differences while inclusion relates to making people feel valued
- C. Inclusion is easier to achieve than diversity
- D. Diversity focuses only on race and gender
The McKinsey research mentioned in the passage shows that:
- A. Diversity has no impact on company performance
- B. Only gender diversity affects profitability
- C. Ethnic diversity leads to better financial outcomes
- D. Diversity reduces company profits
What role do diversity councils play in organisations?
- A. They replace senior management
- B. They only hire new employees
- C. They identify problems and suggest solutions
- D. They manage all company finances
According to the passage, flexible work arrangements are particularly beneficial for:
- A. Only young employees
- B. Working parents and people with disabilities
- C. Senior executives exclusively
- D. Employees without family responsibilities

PASSAGE 2 – The Psychology and Practice of Inclusive Leadership

Độ khó: Medium (Band 6.0-7.5)

Thời gian đề xuất: 18-20 phút

The transformation from a merely diverse workplace to a genuinely inclusive one requires more than demographic representation; it demands a fundamental shift in organisational culture and leadership approach. Inclusive leadership—a management philosophy that actively invites and values the contributions of all team members—has emerged as a critical factor in maximising the benefits of workforce diversity. This leadership style goes beyond tokenism or superficial acceptance, creating environments where psychological safety allows individuals to bring their authentic selves to work without fear of negative consequences.

Research in organisational psychology has identified several key behavioural characteristics that distinguish inclusive leaders from their peers. Juliet Bourke and Andrea Espedido’s study, published in the Harvard Business Review, identified six signature traits: visible commitment to diversity, humility, bias awareness, curiosity about others, cultural intelligence, and effective collaboration. Leaders who demonstrate these qualities create what psychologists call “high-quality connections“—interactions characterised by mutual respect, trust, and engagement that transcend superficial exchanges and build meaningful relationships across differences.

Visible commitment manifests when leaders not only voice support for diversity but also allocate resources, dedicate time, and make personal sacrifices to advance inclusion goals. This might involve attending ERG meetings, mentoring underrepresented employees, or challenging exclusionary practices even when doing so creates discomfort. In contrast, performative allyship—public displays of support without substantive action—can actually undermine trust and exacerbate feelings of marginalisation. Employees quickly discern whether leadership commitment is genuine or merely rhetorical, and this perception significantly influences their engagement and retention.

Humility in leadership involves recognising the limitations of one’s own perspective and acknowledging that others may possess valuable insights that complement or challenge existing viewpoints. Leaders who exhibit epistemic humility—an understanding that their knowledge is inherently incomplete—are more likely to seek diverse perspectives and consider alternative approaches to problem-solving. This stance contrasts sharply with hierarchical leadership models that concentrate decision-making authority at the top and devalue input from lower organisational levels. Research by Amy Edmondson at Harvard Business School has demonstrated that teams led by humble leaders show higher rates of learning behaviour, innovation, and error reporting, all of which contribute to organisational effectiveness.

The concept of psychological safety—a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking—serves as the foundation for inclusive environments. When employees feel psychologically safe, they are more likely to speak up with ideas, questions, concerns, and mistakes without fear of embarrassment or retribution. Creating such an environment requires leaders to actively solicit dissenting opinions, respond constructively to challenges, and frame failures as learning opportunities rather than occasions for blame. Google’s Project Aristotle, which analysed hundreds of teams to identify factors contributing to effectiveness, found that psychological safety was by far the most important element, surpassing factors such as team composition or individual talent.

However, fostering inclusion presents unique challenges that vary across organisational contexts. In some industries, such as technology and finance, women and racial minorities remain severely underrepresented, particularly in leadership positions. This numerical scarcity can lead to tokenism, where diverse employees feel pressure to represent their entire demographic group or face heightened scrutiny of their performance. The “double bind” confronting women leaders illustrates this challenge: behaviours considered appropriate for leaders (such as assertiveness) may violate gender stereotypes, causing women to be perceived as competent but unlikeable, while behaviours conforming to gender expectations may lead to perceptions of being likeable but incompetent.

Lãnh đạo hòa nhập thúc đẩy đa dạng văn hóa tại nơi làm việc hiện đại

Intersectionality—a framework recognising that individuals hold multiple, overlapping identities that shape their experiences—adds further complexity to inclusion efforts. An employee may simultaneously navigate challenges related to race, gender, disability, and socioeconomic background, with these identities interacting in ways that create unique experiences of privilege or marginalisation. Effective inclusion strategies must account for this complexity rather than treating demographic categories as monolithic groups with uniform needs and experiences.

Structural interventions complement individual leadership behaviours in creating inclusive organisations. Sponsorship programmes pair high-potential employees from underrepresented groups with senior leaders who actively advocate for their advancement, helping them access career-defining opportunities and navigate organisational politics. Unlike mentorship, which focuses on advice and skill development, sponsorship involves leveraging one’s influence to open doors and champion protégés for promotions and high-visibility assignments. Research by Catalyst has shown that sponsorship significantly accelerates career progression, particularly for women and people of colour who might otherwise lack access to informal networks where opportunities are often allocated.

Performance evaluation systems also require careful scrutiny to identify and eliminate bias. Studies have consistently shown that subjective assessments can be influenced by stereotypes, with identical performance described differently based on the employee’s demographic characteristics. For example, assertive behaviour might be described as “confident leadership” for a man but “aggressive” or “abrasive” for a woman. Implementing structured evaluation processes with clearly defined criteria, multiple evaluators, and calibration sessions can help mitigate these biases and ensure that merit-based decisions prevail.

The financial technology firm PayPal exemplifies the holistic approach needed for genuine inclusion. Beyond recruitment initiatives, PayPal has implemented pay equity audits to identify and correct wage disparities, established returnship programmes helping professionals re-enter the workforce after career breaks, and created an Inclusion and Diversity Council that reports directly to the CEO. This multi-faceted strategy addresses inclusion at every stage of the employee lifecycle, from recruitment through retention and advancement.

Questions 14-19

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C, or D.

What distinguishes inclusive leadership from basic diversity acceptance?
- A. It focuses only on hiring diverse candidates
- B. It creates psychological safety for authentic expression
- C. It requires less effort from management
- D. It eliminates the need for diversity training
According to the passage, performative allyship:
- A. Strengthens employee trust in leadership
- B. Is the most effective form of diversity support
- C. Can harm trust and increase feelings of exclusion
- D. Is recommended for all senior executives
Epistemic humility refers to:
- A. A leader’s complete lack of knowledge
- B. Recognition that one’s knowledge is incomplete
- C. Avoiding all decision-making responsibilities
- D. Refusing to share opinions with team members
Google’s Project Aristotle found that the most important factor for team effectiveness was:
- A. Individual team member intelligence
- B. Team size and composition
- C. Psychological safety
- D. Financial incentives
The “double bind” described in the passage affects:
- A. Only male leaders in traditional industries
- B. Women leaders facing contradictory expectations
- C. All employees equally regardless of gender
- D. Employees without leadership ambitions
How does sponsorship differ from mentorship?
- A. Sponsorship focuses on giving advice
- B. Mentorship uses influence to create opportunities
- C. Sponsorship actively advocates and opens doors
- D. There is no meaningful difference between them

Questions 20-23

Complete the summary below.

Choose NO MORE THAN TWO WORDS from the passage for each answer.

Inclusive leadership requires several key traits including visible commitment, humility, and cultural intelligence. Leaders must create 20. __, where employees feel safe taking interpersonal risks. The concept of 21. __ recognises that people hold multiple overlapping identities that shape their experiences. To address bias in evaluations, companies should implement 22. __ __ with clearly defined criteria. PayPal demonstrates a comprehensive approach by conducting 23. __ __ to identify wage disparities.

Questions 24-26

Do the following statements agree with the claims of the writer in Passage 2?

Write:

YES if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer
NO if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this

Teams led by humble leaders demonstrate higher rates of innovation and learning.
All technology companies have successfully eliminated gender disparities in leadership positions.
Structured evaluation processes with multiple evaluators can help reduce bias in performance assessments.

PASSAGE 3 – Systemic Barriers and Transformative Approaches to Workplace Inclusion

Độ khó: Hard (Band 7.0-9.0)

Thời gian đề xuất: 23-25 phút

While contemporary discourse on workplace diversity and inclusion often emphasises individual attitudes and interpersonal dynamics, a more penetrating analysis reveals that systemic and structural barriers constitute the primary impediments to genuine inclusion. These institutionalised obstacles—embedded in organisational policies, procedures, cultural norms, and power structures—perpetuate inequitable outcomes even in the absence of intentional discrimination. Understanding and dismantling these systems requires moving beyond anecdotal interventions toward comprehensive transformation grounded in critical examination of how organisations allocate resources, confer status, and distribute opportunities.

The concept of “organisational habitus,” adapted from Pierre Bourdieu’s sociological framework, provides a useful lens for understanding how workplace cultures reproduce inequality. Habitus refers to deeply ingrained habits, skills, and dispositions that individuals acquire through their socialisation within particular social contexts. In organisational settings, habitus manifests as taken-for-granted assumptions about what constitutes professional behaviour, credibility, and leadership potential. These tacit expectations often reflect the characteristics of historically dominant groups, thereby creating invisible barriers for those whose backgrounds, communication styles, or appearance deviate from established norms. For instance, expectations regarding professional attire, networking behaviours, or communication directness may inadvertently privilege certain cultural backgrounds while marginalising others, even when these factors bear no intrinsic relationship to job performance.

Cấu trúc phân biệt đẳng cấp và rào cản hệ thống tại môi trường văn phòng

The persistence of occupational segregation—the concentration of demographic groups in particular roles or levels—exemplifies how systemic barriers operate. Despite decades of equal opportunity legislation, certain professions remain markedly stratified by gender, race, and class. Women constitute approximately 57% of the workforce in the United States, yet represent only 29% of senior management positions and 6% of CEOs in Fortune 500 companies. Similarly, African Americans and Hispanics remain disproportionately underrepresented in executive roles relative to their proportion of the working population. This vertical segregation, often termed the “glass ceiling,” results not from a single discriminatory act but from cumulative disadvantages accruing throughout career trajectories.

Recent scholarship has identified “second-generation bias“—subtle, often unconscious patterns of thought and organisational practices that inadvertently benefit members of dominant groups while disadvantaging others—as particularly pernicious because its subtlety renders it difficult to recognise and address. Unlike overt discrimination, which can be identified and remedied through explicit policies, second-generation bias operates through ostensibly neutral practices such as informal networking, subjective performance evaluations, and unstructured succession planning. For example, when organisations prioritise “cultural fit” in hiring decisions without rigorously defining what this means, evaluators may unconsciously favour candidates who share their backgrounds, educational pedigrees, or social styles, thereby perpetuating homogeneity under the guise of maintaining organisational coherence.

The “pipeline myth“—the assumption that underrepresentation at senior levels simply reflects insufficient supply of qualified diverse candidates—deserves particular scrutiny. While this narrative appears plausible and deflects responsibility from organisational practices, empirical evidence suggests it obscures more complex dynamics. Research by the Center for Talent Innovation found that 21% of highly qualified Black professionals with graduate degrees leave their STEM careers, citing workplace climate as the primary reason—a rate significantly higher than their white counterparts. This “brain drain” indicates that the problem lies not in the pipeline’s input but in “leaky” organisational systems that fail to retain diverse talent. Exit interviews and climate surveys consistently reveal that experiences of marginalisation, exclusion from informal networks, microaggressions, and limited advancement opportunities drive talented individuals from organisations that ostensibly value diversity.

Transformative approaches to inclusion, therefore, must address these structural issues through systematic interventions that reconfigure organisational practices rather than merely sensitising individuals to bias. One promising strategy involves “de-biasing” organisational systems by standardising and structuring processes that have traditionally relied on subjective judgment. In hiring, this might include structured interviews with predetermined questions and scoring rubrics, work sample tests that assess actual job-relevant skills, and diverse hiring committees trained to recognise and counteract bias. For promotions, organisations can implement transparent criteria, nomination processes that actively encourage self-promotion (which research shows is particularly important for women and minorities who may be culturally discouraged from advocating for themselves), and systematic talent reviews that examine promotion rates across demographic groups to identify disparities requiring investigation.

The concept of “inclusive excellence” represents a paradigm shift from viewing diversity as separate from organisational quality to recognising it as integral to achieving excellence. This framework, pioneered in higher education but increasingly applied in corporate contexts, posits that organisations cannot achieve their full potential without leveraging diverse perspectives and addressing systemic barriers that prevent full participation. Rather than treating diversity initiatives as ancillary programmes, inclusive excellence embeds inclusion into core organisational processes—strategic planning, resource allocation, performance metrics, and quality assessment. The University of Michigan, an early adopter of this framework, integrated diversity goals into departmental reviews, budget decisions, and leadership evaluations, resulting in significant improvements in both diversity outcomes and overall institutional performance.

Accountability mechanisms constitute another critical component of effective systemic change. Without consequences for failure to progress and rewards for success, diversity initiatives often languish as aspirational statements rather than operational priorities. Progressive organisations have begun tying executive compensation to diversity metrics, conducting regular pay equity analyses with commitments to remediate disparities, and publishing detailed diversity data that allows stakeholders to track progress over time. When Intel announced in 2015 that it would invest $300 million to achieve full representation of women and underrepresented minorities by 2020, the company backed this commitment with transparent reporting and executive accountability, ultimately achieving the goal on schedule.

The role of employee activism in driving organisational change has become increasingly prominent, particularly among younger workers who expect their employers to demonstrate social responsibility. High-profile examples include Google employees’ 2018 walkout protesting the company’s handling of sexual harassment allegations, which resulted in significant policy changes, and Microsoft workers’ 2019 letter demanding the company end contracts with agencies implementing controversial immigration policies. This internal advocacy reflects a growing recognition that employees themselves can serve as powerful agents of change, leveraging collective voice to push organisations toward more equitable practices.

Critics of intensive diversity initiatives sometimes argue that such programmes constitute “reverse discrimination” or compromise meritocracy. However, this critique rests on the fallacious assumption that existing systems operate meritocratically and that interventions to promote diversity necessarily involve lowering standards. In reality, research consistently demonstrates that bias-laden traditional practices often result in suboptimal hiring and promotion decisions by systematically overlooking qualified candidates from underrepresented groups. Structured, evidence-based approaches to diversity actually enhance meritocratic outcomes by ensuring that talent, rather than demographic characteristics or social connections, drives decisions.

Looking forward, the increasing availability of workforce analytics and artificial intelligence presents both opportunities and challenges for inclusion efforts. Algorithmic decision-making tools can potentially reduce bias by standardising evaluations and eliminating subjective judgment. However, these technologies also risk encoding and amplifying existing biases if the data used to train algorithms reflects historical discrimination. Amazon’s experience with an AI recruiting tool that systematically downgraded female candidates—ultimately leading the company to scrap the system—illustrates these dangers. Ensuring that technological tools advance rather than undermine inclusion requires vigilant auditing for bias, diverse development teams, and ongoing human oversight of algorithmic decisions.

Ultimately, achieving genuine workplace inclusion requires sustained commitment, systemic analysis, and willingness to fundamentally reimagine organisational structures and practices. While the path forward is complex and often challenging, organisations that successfully navigate this transformation stand to benefit not only in terms of equity and justice but also through enhanced innovation, improved decision-making, and stronger organisational performance.

Questions 27-31

Complete the sentences below.

Choose NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS from the passage for each answer.

Organisational habitus refers to deeply ingrained habits and dispositions acquired through __ in specific social contexts.
The concentration of demographic groups in particular organisational roles is known as __.
Second-generation bias is particularly difficult to address because of its __.
The “pipeline myth” suggests that underrepresentation at senior levels is due to insufficient __ of diverse candidates.
The Center for Talent Innovation found that Black professionals often leave STEM careers primarily because of __.

Questions 32-36

Do the following statements agree with the claims of the writer in Passage 3?

Write:

YES if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer
NO if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this

Individual attitudes are more important than systemic barriers in preventing workplace inclusion.
Women represent a significant majority of Fortune 500 CEOs in the United States.
Prioritising “cultural fit” in hiring can inadvertently maintain workplace homogeneity.
The University of Michigan’s inclusive excellence framework led to worse institutional performance.
Artificial intelligence tools always reduce bias in hiring decisions.

Questions 37-40

Choose the correct letter, A, B, C, or D.

According to the passage, what is the main problem with the “pipeline myth”?
- A. It accurately explains underrepresentation in leadership
- B. It shifts blame away from organisational practices
- C. It encourages better recruitment strategies
- D. It helps organisations retain diverse talent
The concept of “inclusive excellence” suggests that:
- A. Diversity initiatives should be kept separate from core operations
- B. Excellence can be achieved without diversity
- C. Diversity is essential to achieving organisational excellence
- D. Only educational institutions can achieve inclusive excellence
What did Intel do to support its diversity commitment?
- A. Published aspirational statements without follow-through
- B. Invested $300 million and tied executive accountability to goals
- C. Reduced diversity targets to make them more achievable
- D. Eliminated all diversity programmes to save money
The passage suggests that criticisms about “reverse discrimination” are based on:
- A. Accurate understanding of how meritocracy works
- B. Strong empirical evidence
- C. False assumptions that existing systems are already fair
- D. Careful analysis of diversity programme outcomes

3. Answer Keys – Đáp Án

PASSAGE 1: Questions 1-13

FALSE
TRUE
TRUE
NOT GIVEN
FALSE
mental shortcuts
underrepresented groups
differences
accountability / transparency
B
C
C
B

PASSAGE 2: Questions 14-26

B
C
B
C
B
C
psychological safety
intersectionality
structured evaluation / structured processes
pay equity audits
YES
NOT GIVEN
YES

PASSAGE 3: Questions 27-40

socialisation / their socialisation
occupational segregation
subtlety
qualified candidates / supply
workplace climate
NO
NO
YES
NO
NO
B
C
B
C

4. Giải Thích Đáp Án Chi Tiết

Passage 1 – Giải Thích

Câu 1: FALSE

Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
Từ khóa: diverse leadership teams, guaranteed, higher profits
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 3-6
Giải thích: Bài đọc nói rằng các công ty có đội ngũ lãnh đạo đa dạng có “36% more likely” và “25% higher likelihood” đạt lợi nhuận cao hơn. Từ “likely” cho thấy đây là xác suất, không phải sự đảm bảo (guaranteed). Câu hỏi sử dụng từ “guaranteed” làm cho câu này sai so với thông tin trong bài.

Câu 2: TRUE

Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
Từ khóa: Google, spent, substantial amounts, diversity programmes
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 5-7
Giải thích: Bài viết nêu rõ “Google has invested millions of dollars in its diversity programmes”. Cụm “millions of dollars” tương đương với “substantial amounts” trong câu hỏi, xác nhận câu này đúng.

Câu 3: TRUE

Dạng câu hỏi: True/False/Not Given
Từ khóa: blind recruitment, removing, personal identifying information
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4, dòng 4-6
Giải thích: Bài đọc giải thích blind recruitment là “identifying information such as names, ages, and educational institutions are removed from applications during initial screening”. Đây chính xác là việc loại bỏ thông tin nhận dạng cá nhân, do đó câu TRUE.

Câu 6: mental shortcuts

Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
Từ khóa: unconscious bias, people use, quick decisions
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4, dòng 8-10
Giải thích: Bài viết định nghĩa unconscious bias là “automatic, mental shortcuts used to process information and make decisions quickly”. Đáp án “mental shortcuts” xuất hiện nguyên văn trong định nghĩa này.

Câu 10: B

Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
Từ khóa: difference between diversity and inclusion
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 1, dòng 3-7
Giải thích: Đoạn văn phân biệt rõ ràng: “Diversity refers to the presence of differences” còn “inclusion…means creating an environment where all employees feel valued, respected, and able to contribute fully”. Lựa chọn B phản ánh chính xác sự khác biệt này.

Câu 12: C

Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
Từ khóa: diversity councils, role, organisations
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 3-5
Giải thích: Bài đọc mô tả diversity councils là “groups of employees from various levels and departments who collaborate to identify challenges and recommend solutions”. Điều này tương ứng trực tiếp với lựa chọn C.

Passage 2 – Giải Thích

Câu 14: B

Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
Từ khóa: distinguishes inclusive leadership, basic diversity acceptance
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 1, dòng 4-7
Giải thích: Đoạn văn nhấn mạnh inclusive leadership “goes beyond tokenism or superficial acceptance, creating environments where psychological safety allows individuals to bring their authentic selves to work”. Lựa chọn B nắm bắt được ý này một cách chính xác.

Câu 15: C

Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
Từ khóa: performative allyship
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 4-7
Giải thích: Bài viết nêu rõ performative allyship “can actually undermine trust and exacerbate feelings of marginalisation”. Đây chính xác là nội dung của lựa chọn C – có thể gây hại cho sự tin tưởng và tăng cảm giác bị loại trừ.

Câu 17: C

Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
Từ khóa: Google’s Project Aristotle, most important factor
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 7-10
Giải thích: Bài đọc chỉ ra rằng Project Aristotle “found that psychological safety was by far the most important element, surpassing factors such as team composition or individual talent”. Đáp án C là chính xác.

Câu 20: psychological safety

Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
Từ khóa: create, employees feel safe, interpersonal risks
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 1-2
Giải thích: Bài viết định nghĩa “psychological safety” là “a shared belief that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking”, khớp hoàn toàn với ngữ cảnh trong câu tóm tắt.

Câu 21: intersectionality

Dạng câu hỏi: Summary Completion
Từ khóa: multiple overlapping identities
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 7, dòng 1-3
Giải thích: Đoạn văn giới thiệu “Intersectionality—a framework recognising that individuals hold multiple, overlapping identities that shape their experiences”. Đây chính xác là từ cần điền.

Câu 24: YES

Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
Từ khóa: humble leaders, higher rates, innovation, learning
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 4, dòng 10-13
Giải thích: Bài viết khẳng định “teams led by humble leaders show higher rates of learning behaviour, innovation, and error reporting”. Câu này đồng ý với quan điểm của tác giả.

Câu 26: YES

Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
Từ khóa: structured evaluation processes, multiple evaluators, reduce bias
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 9, dòng 5-8
Giải thích: Tác giả nêu rõ “Implementing structured evaluation processes with clearly defined criteria, multiple evaluators, and calibration sessions can help mitigate these biases”. Đây là sự đồng ý với quan điểm.

Passage 3 – Giải Thích

Câu 27: socialisation / their socialisation

Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
Từ khóa: organisational habitus, deeply ingrained habits, acquired through
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 2, dòng 2-4
Giải thích: Bài viết định nghĩa habitus là “deeply ingrained habits, skills, and dispositions that individuals acquire through their socialisation within particular social contexts”. Từ “socialisation” là đáp án chính xác.

Câu 28: occupational segregation

Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
Từ khóa: concentration, demographic groups, particular roles
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 1-2
Giải thích: Đoạn văn định nghĩa rõ ràng “The persistence of occupational segregation—the concentration of demographic groups in particular roles or levels”. Đây là paraphrase trực tiếp.

Câu 30: qualified candidates / supply

Dạng câu hỏi: Sentence Completion
Từ khóa: pipeline myth, underrepresentation, insufficient
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 1-3
Giải thích: Bài viết giải thích pipeline myth là “the assumption that underrepresentation at senior levels simply reflects insufficient supply of qualified diverse candidates”. Cả “qualified candidates” hoặc “supply” đều chấp nhận được.

Câu 32: NO

Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
Từ khóa: individual attitudes, more important, systemic barriers
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 1, dòng 1-4
Giải thích: Tác giả khẳng định ngược lại: “systemic and structural barriers constitute the primary impediments to genuine inclusion”, không phải individual attitudes. Do đó câu này mâu thuẫn với quan điểm tác giả.

Câu 33: NO

Dạng câu hỏi: Yes/No/Not Given
Từ khóa: women, significant majority, Fortune 500 CEOs
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 3, dòng 4-5
Giải thích: Bài viết nêu rõ women “represent only…6% of CEOs in Fortune 500 companies”, đây là thiểu số rất nhỏ, không phải đa số đáng kể. Câu này sai so với thông tin.

Câu 37: B

Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
Từ khóa: pipeline myth, main problem
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 5, dòng 2-4
Giải thích: Tác giả chỉ ra rằng pipeline myth “appears plausible and deflects responsibility from organisational practices”. Lựa chọn B – chuyển trách nhiệm khỏi các thực hành tổ chức – là chính xác.

Câu 39: B

Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
Từ khóa: Intel, diversity commitment
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 8, dòng 4-7
Giải thích: Bài viết mô tả Intel “announced…it would invest $300 million” và “backed this commitment with transparent reporting and executive accountability”. Lựa chọn B tóm tắt chính xác các hành động này.

Câu 40: C

Dạng câu hỏi: Multiple Choice
Từ khóa: criticisms, reverse discrimination, based on
Vị trí trong bài: Đoạn 10, dòng 2-4
Giải thích: Tác giả viết rằng “this critique rests on the fallacious assumption that existing systems operate meritocratically”. Lựa chọn C – các giả định sai lầm rằng hệ thống hiện tại đã công bằng – là chính xác.

5. Từ Vựng Quan Trọng Theo Passage

Passage 1 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
diversity	n	/daɪˈvɜːsəti/	sự đa dạng	workplace diversity has become a fundamental component	cultural diversity, ethnic diversity
inclusion	n	/ɪnˈkluːʒən/	sự hòa nhập, bao gồm	foster inclusion means creating an environment	workplace inclusion, social inclusion
compelling	adj	/kəmˈpelɪŋ/	thuyết phục, hấp dẫn	the business case is compelling	compelling evidence, compelling argument
underscore	v	/ˌʌndəˈskɔː/	nhấn mạnh, gạch dưới	these statistics underscore the benefits	underscore the importance
allocate	v	/ˈæləkeɪt/	phân bổ, phân chia	allocate adequate resources	allocate funds, allocate time
perpetuate	v	/pəˈpetʃueɪt/	duy trì, làm kéo dài	traditional methods perpetuate existing imbalances	perpetuate inequality, perpetuate stereotypes
unconscious bias	n	/ʌnˈkɒnʃəs ˈbaɪəs/	định kiến vô thức	helps reduce unconscious bias	combat unconscious bias
microaggression	n	/ˈmaɪkrəʊəˌɡreʃən/	hành vi phân biệt nhỏ	training covers topics such as microaggressions	experience microaggressions
accommodate	v	/əˈkɒmədeɪt/	đáp ứng, chứa	flexible arrangements can accommodate diverse needs	accommodate requirements
transparency	n	/trænsˈpærənsi/	tính minh bạch	transparency in reporting demonstrates accountability	promote transparency
metrics	n	/ˈmetrɪks/	thước đo, chỉ số	establish clear metrics to assess progress	diversity metrics, performance metrics
tangible	adj	/ˈtændʒəbl/	hữu hình, rõ ràng	the tangible benefits to the bottom line	tangible results, tangible evidence

Passage 2 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
fundamental shift	n	/ˌfʌndəˈmentl ʃɪft/	sự thay đổi căn bản	requires a fundamental shift in culture	undergo a fundamental shift
tokenism	n	/ˈtəʊkənɪzəm/	hình thức chiếu lệ	goes beyond tokenism or superficial acceptance	avoid tokenism
psychological safety	n	/ˌsaɪkəˈlɒdʒɪkl ˈseɪfti/	an toàn tâm lý	creating psychological safety allows authentic expression	build psychological safety
humility	n	/hjuːˈmɪləti/	sự khiêm tốn	humility involves recognising limitations	demonstrate humility, cultivate humility
performative	adj	/pəˈfɔːmətɪv/	mang tính biểu diễn	performative allyship can undermine trust	performative activism
substantive	adj	/səbˈstæntɪv/	thực chất, có nội dung	public displays without substantive action	substantive change, substantive progress
exacerbate	v	/ɪɡˈzæsəbeɪt/	làm trầm trọng thêm	can exacerbate feelings of marginalisation	exacerbate problems, exacerbate tensions
epistemic	adj	/ˌepɪˈstiːmɪk/	thuộc nhận thức luận	leaders who exhibit epistemic humility	epistemic uncertainty
interpersonal	adj	/ˌɪntəˈpɜːsənl/	giữa các cá nhân	safe for interpersonal risk-taking	interpersonal relationships, interpersonal skills
intersectionality	n	/ˌɪntəˌsekʃəˈnæləti/	tính giao thoa	intersectionality recognises multiple identities	concept of intersectionality
sponsorship	n	/ˈspɒnsəʃɪp/	sự bảo trợ, đỡ đầu	sponsorship programmes pair employees with leaders	corporate sponsorship
leverage	v	/ˈliːvərɪdʒ/	tận dụng, khai thác	leveraging one’s influence to open doors	leverage resources, leverage expertise
calibration	n	/ˌkælɪˈbreɪʃən/	sự hiệu chỉnh	calibration sessions can help mitigate bias	require calibration
holistic	adj	/həʊˈlɪstɪk/	toàn diện	PayPal exemplifies the holistic approach	holistic perspective, holistic strategy
returnship	n	/rɪˈtɜːnʃɪp/	chương trình tái hòa nhập	established returnship programmes	participate in returnships

Passage 3 – Essential Vocabulary

Từ vựng	Loại từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa tiếng Việt	Ví dụ từ bài	Collocation
systemic	adj	/sɪˈstemɪk/	thuộc hệ thống	systemic barriers constitute primary impediments	systemic issues, systemic change
institutionalised	adj	/ˌɪnstɪˈtjuːʃənəlaɪzd/	được thể chế hóa	institutionalised obstacles embedded in policies	institutionalised discrimination
perpetuate	v	/pəˈpetʃueɪt/	làm tồn tại lâu dài	perpetuate inequitable outcomes	perpetuate stereotypes
habitus	n	/ˈhæbɪtəs/	thói quen xã hội	organisational habitus provides a useful lens	cultural habitus
tacit	adj	/ˈtæsɪt/	ngầm hiểu, không nói ra	tacit expectations reflect dominant groups	tacit knowledge, tacit agreement
inadvertently	adv	/ˌɪnədˈvɜːtntli/	vô tình, không chủ ý	expectations may inadvertently privilege certain backgrounds	inadvertently cause harm
stratified	adj	/ˈstrætɪfaɪd/	phân tầng	professions remain markedly stratified by gender	stratified society
disproportionately	adv	/ˌdɪsprəˈpɔːʃənətli/	không cân đối	disproportionately underrepresented in roles	disproportionately affected
pernicious	adj	/pəˈnɪʃəs/	tai hại, nguy hiểm	second-generation bias is particularly pernicious	pernicious influence, pernicious effects
ostensibly	adv	/ɒˈstensəbli/	có vẻ, bề ngoài	operates through ostensibly neutral practices	ostensibly objective
homogeneity	n	/ˌhɒmədʒəˈniːəti/	tính đồng nhất	perpetuating homogeneity under the guise	cultural homogeneity
obscure	v	/əbˈskjʊə/	che giấu, làm mờ	this narrative obscures more complex dynamics	obscure the truth
marginalisation	n	/ˌmɑːdʒɪnəlaɪˈzeɪʃən/	sự gạt ra lề	experiences of marginalisation drive individuals away	social marginalisation
de-bias	v	/diː ˈbaɪəs/	loại bỏ thành kiến	de-biasing organisational systems	de-bias algorithms
paradigm shift	n	/ˈpærədaɪm ʃɪft/	sự thay đổi mô hình	represents a paradigm shift in thinking	undergo a paradigm shift
ancillary	adj	/ænˈsɪləri/	phụ trợ, thứ yếu	rather than treating initiatives as ancillary programmes	ancillary services
remediate	v	/rɪˈmiːdieɪt/	khắc phục, sửa chữa	commitments to remediate disparities	remediate problems
fallacious	adj	/fəˈleɪʃəs/	sai lầm, ngụy biện	critique rests on fallacious assumptions	fallacious reasoning, fallacious argument
encode	v	/ɪnˈkəʊd/	mã hóa, nhúng vào	risk encoding and amplifying existing biases	encode information

Kết Bài

Chủ đề thúc đẩy đa dạng và hòa nhập tại nơi làm việc không chỉ là một xu hướng quản lý nhân sự hiện đại mà còn phản ánh sự thay đổi căn bản trong cách các tổ chức hiểu về hiệu suất và trách nhiệm xã hội. Qua bộ đề thi IELTS Reading này, bạn đã được tiếp cận với ba passages có độ khó tăng dần, từ những khái niệm cơ bản về diversity và inclusion, đến phân tích sâu về tâm lý lãnh đạo hòa nhập, và cuối cùng là những rào cản hệ thống cùng cách tiếp cận chuyển đổi.

Ba passages này không chỉ cung cấp kiến thức về một chủ đề xã hội quan trọng mà còn giúp bạn làm quen với các dạng câu hỏi đa dạng trong IELTS Reading thực tế. Bạn đã thực hành với 40 câu hỏi bao gồm True/False/Not Given, Multiple Choice, Matching Headings, Summary Completion và nhiều dạng khác – tất cả đều được thiết kế theo đúng format Cambridge IELTS.

Phần đáp án chi tiết kèm giải thích rõ ràng về vị trí thông tin, cách paraphrase và lý do tại sao các đáp án khác sai sẽ giúp bạn tự đánh giá năng lực và hiểu sâu hơn về kỹ thuật làm bài. Đặc biệt, kho từ vựng phong phú với hơn 40 từ và cụm từ quan trọng về chủ đề kinh doanh, quản lý và văn hóa doanh nghiệp sẽ là tài sản quý giá không chỉ cho kỳ thi IELTS mà còn cho sự nghiệp tương lai của bạn.

Để đạt kết quả tốt nhất, hãy thực hành bộ đề này trong điều kiện giống thi thật – 60 phút không bị gián đoạn. Sau đó, dành thời gian phân tích kỹ những câu sai để hiểu rõ nguyên nhân và cải thiện chiến lược làm bài. Hãy nhớ rằng, IELTS Reading không chỉ kiểm tra khả năng đọc hiểu mà còn kiểm tra kỹ năng quản lý thời gian, nhận diện paraphrase và tư duy phản biện.

Chúc bạn ôn tập hiệu quả và đạt band điểm cao trong kỳ thi IELTS sắp tới. Điều quan trọng là sự kiên trì luyện tập và không ngừng cải thiện kỹ năng. Mỗi lần làm bài đều là một cơ hội để bạn tiến gần hơn đến mục tiêu của mình. Để hiểu rõ hơn về cách áp dụng các nguyên tắc đa dạng và hòa nhập trong môi trường giáo dục, bạn có thể tìm hiểu thêm về cách thúc đẩy tính hòa nhập trong trường học, một chủ đề có nhiều điểm tương đồng với nội dung bài thi này. Tương tự như vấn đề bất bình đẳng trong môi trường làm việc, khoảng cách số hóa ảnh hưởng đến công bằng giáo dục cũng cho thấy tầm quan trọng của việc tạo cơ hội bình đẳng cho mọi người, dù trong giáo dục hay trong công việc.

What are You Looking For?

IELTS Reading: Thúc Đẩy Đa Dạng và Hòa Nhập Tại Nơi Làm Việc – Đề Thi Mẫu Có Đáp Án Chi Tiết

Mở Bài