A reason Larson cannot do the assignment is that she has an unavoidable scheduling conflict. On the other
hand, a reason Franks cannot do the assignment is that he does not quite have the assertiveness the task
requires. So, the task must be assigned to Parker, the only supervisor in the shipping department other than
Larson and Franks.
The argument depends on assuming which one of the following?
(A) Larson has the assertiveness the task requires.
(B) The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department.
(C) Franks would be assigned the task if Franks had the assertiveness the task requires.
(D) The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict.
(E) No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires.
Assumption Question
This topic has expert replies
-
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 21
- Joined: Sun Jun 05, 2011 10:39 pm
- Thanked: 2 times
- Followed by:1 members
- tpr-becky
- GMAT Instructor
- Posts: 509
- Joined: Wed Apr 21, 2010 1:08 pm
- Location: Irvine, CA
- Thanked: 199 times
- Followed by:85 members
- GMAT Score:750
Conclusion is that the task must be assigned to Parker becuase he is the only supervisor in the department other than Larson and Franks. The information about why Larson and Franks cannot do the task is only tangentially relevant.
Our job is to find an answer that proves that the task must be assigned to Parker (and not to another, unnamed, person.
a) not necessary because the conclusion is to give the task to Parker.
B - if the task has to be assigned to a supervisor and Parker is the only one who has not been eliminated then the conclusion that we must assign the task to Parker is valid.(this is the right answer)
c) not necessary to know who would have gotten it under different circumstances.
D) we are only worried about Parker and the words "any kind .. of conflict" puts this out of scope of even the reason given for Larson being eliminated.
E) We still need a reason why Parker must be assigned, saying that no one else has what it takes does not automatically mean Parker.
Our job is to find an answer that proves that the task must be assigned to Parker (and not to another, unnamed, person.
a) not necessary because the conclusion is to give the task to Parker.
B - if the task has to be assigned to a supervisor and Parker is the only one who has not been eliminated then the conclusion that we must assign the task to Parker is valid.(this is the right answer)
c) not necessary to know who would have gotten it under different circumstances.
D) we are only worried about Parker and the words "any kind .. of conflict" puts this out of scope of even the reason given for Larson being eliminated.
E) We still need a reason why Parker must be assigned, saying that no one else has what it takes does not automatically mean Parker.
Becky
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA
Master GMAT Instructor
The Princeton Review
Irvine, CA
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 7:52 pm
- Location: Bangalore, India
- Thanked: 2 times
- Followed by:2 members
-
- Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
- Posts: 418
- Joined: Sun Jul 04, 2010 12:48 pm
- Thanked: 6 times
- Followed by:3 members
Somewhat tricky question that requires proper concentration.
The argument says: "So, THE TASK MUST BE ASSIGNED
to Parker, THE ONLY SUPERVISOR OTHER THAN LARSON & FRANKS..."
Since the other 2 supervisors are not qualified at the moment,
Parker will automatically be given the consideration, and this
is what option B says.
The argument says: "So, THE TASK MUST BE ASSIGNED
to Parker, THE ONLY SUPERVISOR OTHER THAN LARSON & FRANKS..."
Since the other 2 supervisors are not qualified at the moment,
Parker will automatically be given the consideration, and this
is what option B says.
-
- Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
- Posts: 35
- Joined: Mon May 23, 2011 8:05 pm
- Thanked: 1 times
Conclusion: the task must be assigned to Parker.
Key words to watch: '..Larson cannot.......an UNAVOIDABLE scheduling conflict.'
'..Franks cannot.......does not QUITE have the assertivness...'
'..Parker, the ONLY supervisor....'
Prephrase your answer: 1.Parker has no UNAVOIDABLE scheduling conflicts
2.Parker is OPTIMALLY assertive for the task. Not LESS assertive nor OVER assertive.
3.Task is meant to be done ONLY by a supervisor.
None of the above prephrases are stated explicitly in the stimulus and hence could be an assumption. Lets now look at the answer choices.
A. Larson has the assertiveness the task requires.--> This does not support the conclustion that Parker should be assigned the task.(Looser)
B. The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department.--> Using key word 'ONLY' above, this clearly is one of our prephrases. (Contender)
C. Franks would be assigned the task if Franks had the assertiveness the task requires.--> Like A, this answer choice does not support the conclusion that Parker should be assigned the task(Looser)
D. The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict.--> This is a very close answer choice. The trick is that it does not identify with the key word 'UNAVOIDABLE'. There could be certain scheduling conflicts which could be avoided. Also, the answer choice mentions 'ANYONE' which contradicts key words 'ONLY supervisors'. We will still keep it as a (CONTENDER)just to be absolutely sure.
E. No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires.--> This answer choice says the 'SOME' supervisors and not body else has the assertiveness for the task. This is again a close answer choice. We will keep it as CONTENDER
Revisit answer choices B,D and E.
Answer choice D and E have ambiguity. B in the clear choice.
NOTE: Designating D and E as contenders was not required. The reason I chose to use this approach in this post was to draw your attention a particular point. When we prephrased the answer, we came up with 3 assumptions that could fit the bill. It was possible two of the three or all the prephrased answers would be an answer choice. The approach that we followed would give us a chance to weigh the options and pick the 'STRONGEST' assumption of the three.
Key words to watch: '..Larson cannot.......an UNAVOIDABLE scheduling conflict.'
'..Franks cannot.......does not QUITE have the assertivness...'
'..Parker, the ONLY supervisor....'
Prephrase your answer: 1.Parker has no UNAVOIDABLE scheduling conflicts
2.Parker is OPTIMALLY assertive for the task. Not LESS assertive nor OVER assertive.
3.Task is meant to be done ONLY by a supervisor.
None of the above prephrases are stated explicitly in the stimulus and hence could be an assumption. Lets now look at the answer choices.
A. Larson has the assertiveness the task requires.--> This does not support the conclustion that Parker should be assigned the task.(Looser)
B. The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department.--> Using key word 'ONLY' above, this clearly is one of our prephrases. (Contender)
C. Franks would be assigned the task if Franks had the assertiveness the task requires.--> Like A, this answer choice does not support the conclusion that Parker should be assigned the task(Looser)
D. The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict.--> This is a very close answer choice. The trick is that it does not identify with the key word 'UNAVOIDABLE'. There could be certain scheduling conflicts which could be avoided. Also, the answer choice mentions 'ANYONE' which contradicts key words 'ONLY supervisors'. We will still keep it as a (CONTENDER)just to be absolutely sure.
E. No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires.--> This answer choice says the 'SOME' supervisors and not body else has the assertiveness for the task. This is again a close answer choice. We will keep it as CONTENDER
Revisit answer choices B,D and E.
Answer choice D and E have ambiguity. B in the clear choice.
NOTE: Designating D and E as contenders was not required. The reason I chose to use this approach in this post was to draw your attention a particular point. When we prephrased the answer, we came up with 3 assumptions that could fit the bill. It was possible two of the three or all the prephrased answers would be an answer choice. The approach that we followed would give us a chance to weigh the options and pick the 'STRONGEST' assumption of the three.