anceer wrote:
A factory manager at Artitus Industries suggested that tools be assigned to individual employees rather than shared within each workshop. Employees with their own tools would have more incentive to maintain the tools properly, as each employee would suffer all of the costs of improperly maintaining his or her tools. However, several months after Artitus began assigning tools to individual employees in one of its two workshops, it was found that the shared tools in the other workshop had been better maintained.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the Artitus's finding?
A If one user of shared tools fails to keep them in perfect condition, others are likely to begin to neglect the tools even more, with the result that the tools soon become unusable.
B When tools are shared, the condition of any individual tool affects all users at least somewhat.
C An employee using shared tools might be able to increase productivity by neglecting to maintain them.
D More companies assign tools individually than share them among employees.
E The damage from any individual user's failure to properly maintain tools is more difficult to determine with shared tools than with individual tools.
I answered (A) with following LOR:
Conclusion: despite so many positive points-->>
However, several months after Artitus began assigning tools to individual employees in one of its two workshops, it was found that the shared tools in the other workshop had been better maintained. ---->>> how how how???????
A)
If one user of shared tools fails to keep them in perfect condition, others are likely to begin to neglect the tools even more, with the result that the tools soon become unusable.
What if the same is negated---->>> If one user of shared tools
fails ensures to keep them in perfect condition, others are likely to begin to
neglect take care of the tools even more, with the result that the tools soon become
unusable usable.
It addresses the How how how....