BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem
TTP OnDemand GMAT Video Course
Featured Course

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.

  • 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
  • 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
  • 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
  • 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
  • 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
  • TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
  • 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
  • OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
  • Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
  • MBA Admissions Consulting now available
  • 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
  • 200,000+ students served
  • 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★ 5.0 (559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start then $127/mo
Start Free 5-Day Trial Read 559 Reviews →

In order to reduce the number of items

Expert replies
Post new topic Post Reply
Previous Topic Next Topic
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pmFollowed by: 7 members
Thanked: 215 times
by kvcpk » Sat Jun 19, 2010 1:59 am

Timer

00:00

Answers

A

B

C

D

E

Stats

Difficulty—

In order to reduce the number of items damaged while in transit to customers, packaging consultants recommended that the TrueSave mail-order company increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. Accordingly, TrueSave offi cials instructed the company's packers to use more packing material than before, and the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could. Nevertheless, customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why acting on the consultants' recommendation failed to achieve its goal?

(A) The change in packing policy led to an increase in expenditure on packing material and labor.

(B) When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock.

(C) The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package.

(D) Most of the goods that TrueSave ships are electronic products that are highly vulnerable to being damaged in transit.

(E) TrueSave has lost some of its regular customers as a result of the high number of damaged items they received.


[spoiler]There is no mention of "compression of package material" in the Passage. In that case how can we chose B. What is wrong with option C ?[/spoiler]
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Source: — Critical Reasoning |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:12 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 87 times
GMAT Score:730

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:37 am
IMO B.

I think "fill any empty spaces in its cartons." implies that packing material is compressed too densely.

I think C is not the answer because we are trying to address the problem of reducing the number of items damaged while in transit to customers. So the customers damaging the product while opening it is out of scope.

Hope that helps..
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1460
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 1:28 amFollowed by: 7 members
Thanked: 135 times

by selango » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:39 am
The question ask you the assume which of the options if true explain the consultant rec failure.That means we need to assume the other reason for failure.

Option B tell us that losing capacity to absorb shock which leads to damage of items.

The argument tell us the items damaged while passing or in transport to customers.
So items damaged while unpacking is not valid.
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Jul 17, 2009 8:39 amFollowed by: 1 member
Thanked: 6 times

by pnk » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:43 am
kvcpk wrote:In order to reduce the number of items damaged while in transit to customers, packaging consultants recommended that the TrueSave mail-order company increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. Accordingly, TrueSave offi cials instructed the company's packers to use more packing material than before, and the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could. Nevertheless, customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat.

Argu only abt 'damaged items'

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why acting on the consultants' recommendation failed to achieve its goal?

(A) The change in packing policy led to an increase in expenditure on packing material and labor. (expenditure not in scope)

(B) When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. (possible...using synonym of 'used as much material as they cud')
(C) The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. (unpacking not in scope. customer's concerned with only damaged items')

(D) Most of the goods that TrueSave ships are electronic products that are highly vulnerable to being damaged in transit. (obvious from agru...no additional info why recommendation failed)

(E) TrueSave has lost some of its regular customers as a result of the high number of damaged items they received. (no info why recommendation failed...or why damaged items rose)
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 318
Joined: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:55 am
Thanked: 12 times

by nikhilkatira » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:48 am
kvcpk wrote:In order to reduce the number of items damaged while in transit to customers, packaging consultants recommended that the TrueSave mail-order company increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. Accordingly, TrueSave offi cials instructed the company's packers to use more packing material than before, and the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could. Nevertheless, customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why acting on the consultants' recommendation failed to achieve its goal?

(A) The change in packing policy led to an increase in expenditure on packing material and labor.

(B) When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock.

(C) The amount of packing material used in a carton does not significantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package.

(D) Most of the goods that TrueSave ships are electronic products that are highly vulnerable to being damaged in transit.

(E) TrueSave has lost some of its regular customers as a result of the high number of damaged items they received.


[spoiler]There is no mention of "compression of package material" in the Passage. In that case how can we chose B. What is wrong with option C ?[/spoiler]
The argument is regarding reducing the number of items being damaged in transit.
Best,
Nikhil H. Katira
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pmFollowed by: 7 members
Thanked: 215 times

by kvcpk » Sat Jun 19, 2010 2:50 am
"customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat." - This is the conclusion.
All we need to do is to find a statement that supports this.

Why I did not choose Option B:

"When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. " - We have no mentioning of compression of package material.. All we know is "increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. "

Why I chose C:

Passage also says ".. to use more packing material than before". and option C says:
"The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. " Which is relating to the premise in Passage.

Let me know what is wrong in my approach.. Thank you!!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 535
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 2:12 amFollowed by: 5 members
Thanked: 87 times
GMAT Score:730

by hardik.jadeja » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:08 am
kvcpk wrote:"customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat." - This is the conclusion.
All we need to do is to find a statement that supports this.

Why I did not choose Option B:

"When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. " - We have no mentioning of compression of package material.. All we know is "increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. "

Why I chose C:

Passage also says ".. to use more packing material than before". and option C says:
"The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. " Which is relating to the premise in Passage.

Let me know what is wrong in my approach.. Thank you!!
"fill any empty spaces in its cartons" and "the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could." imply that packing material is compressed too densely. Sometimes we have to infer certain things that are not mentioned in the passage explicitly.

C is certainly out of scope. We are concerned about products getting damaged while in transit to customers. Unpacking not in scope. Plus, option C doesn't say that customers are damaging the goods while opening it. It just says that it's not easy for them to unpack the product. Whereas B provides reasoning(loss of capacity to absorb shock) why more products could get damaged in transit.

Hope that helps..
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 1893
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 11:48 pmFollowed by: 7 members
Thanked: 215 times

by kvcpk » Sat Jun 19, 2010 3:37 am
hardik.jadeja wrote:
kvcpk wrote:"customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat." - This is the conclusion.
All we need to do is to find a statement that supports this.

Why I did not choose Option B:

"When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. " - We have no mentioning of compression of package material.. All we know is "increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. "

Why I chose C:

Passage also says ".. to use more packing material than before". and option C says:
"The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. " Which is relating to the premise in Passage.

Let me know what is wrong in my approach.. Thank you!!
"fill any empty spaces in its cartons" and "the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could." imply that packing material is compressed too densely. Sometimes we have to infer certain things that are not mentioned in the passage explicitly.

C is certainly out of scope. We are concerned about products getting damaged while in transit to customers. Unpacking not in scope. Plus, option C doesn't say that customers are damaging the goods while opening it. It just says that it's not easy for them to unpack the product. Whereas B provides reasoning(loss of capacity to absorb shock) why more products could get damaged in transit.

Hope that helps..
Yeah.. I am convinced.. Thank you!!
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Jun 20, 2009 10:59 am
Thanked: 4 times

by missionGMAT007 » Sun Jun 20, 2010 5:01 am
IMO B
C is out of scope
Top
Join the discussion
Log in to postLogin with Googleuse password
QUOTE IN REPLY
Post new topic Post Reply
• Page 1 of 1