kidchaos wrote:
Companies often re-organize in order to adapt to changes in the world around them but the market place changes much faster than organizations can re-organize. If you choose a simple organization you can then spend your effort on teaching the people in the organization to be flexible and adapt to changes in the market place.
Which of the following conclusions can be most properly inferred from the premises above.
1. Companies should invest in staff training to increase their adaptability.
2. Companies should invest in research to keep abreast of changes in the market place.
3. Companies should choose a simple organizational structure and keep it that way.
4. Companies should continuously re-organize to keep up with changes in the market place.
5. Companies should choose a matrix structure which can be re-organized more rapidly than other organizational structures.
OE:Answer A
Investing in staff is implied by the second premise and so is very tempting to select but remember a conclusion has to tie all the premises together and this answer does does not relate to the first premise at all. This means it should be eliminated.
Answer B
Investing in research may be advantageous for the company but it does not follow from either of the premises and can be eliminated.
Answer C
Stick to on organizational structure. This fits with both premises the first says that companies cannot reorganize fast enough and the second which says effort that would have been spent re-organizing can be reinvested in more effective strategies. This looks like a good candidate.
Answer D
This contradicts the first premise and so should be eliminated as a possible conclusion.
Answer E
Again we have to assume that the premises are true and since the first premise says that companies cannot re-organize at a fast enough rate, this answer should be eliminated.
OA:Adding my process to solve this question:
Understanding the purpose of the argument is must for conclusion questions. Given the two set of premises, we should go in thinking mode and think why these two statements are written and how they could be used to derive at some statement in the option.
One important thing that differentiates conclusions from inference is that the inference could be re-statement or derivation of a subset of statements from the given argument, but conclusion has to touch somewhat everything -> SOURCE : POWERSCORE So, our method of tackling should be to look for option that summarizes the statements as a whole:
Premise 1: Orgs re-organize to adapt to changes and the market changes earlier than that
Mini-inference#1: This simply suggests that the re-organization should be a continuos effortPremise 2: Teachings can be done once simple orgs are selected.
Mini-inference#2 : This statement simply means that once we have simpler orgs, teachings to adapt can be applied. Remember this premise defines the context of the
to-be argument once the conclusion from the options are added.
So, here we know two things, that org's strive for change should be continuos process, and it can be applied in simpler orgs ( a point to note here is that, we don't know in which of the cases, it will be good, but given the context if author mentions simpler, then simpler ones have higher possibility to be better)
A.
This statement is true, but it does not grab the essence of the sentence. It just suggests that training is required to adapt to changes. This can be true for any type of organization and the purpose to indicate the means of using simpler org will seem useless. So, this is incorrect
B. Same reasoning as A. This option just says that they need the research. This option just justifies the premise #1, but not the passage as a whole
C. CORRECT. The essence of both options is carried in this conclusion. The mid-inference #1 says that the strive for change should be continuos and mid-inference #2 suggests that simpler organizations implementation can help achieve the same. This option suggests that the companies should maintain simpler structure. An Important point to note here is the phrase keep it that way . This summarises mid-inference # 1 and 2 as explained above.
D. Again this option will only help us with mid-inference #1 but nothing again about mid-inference #2.
E. This option also suggests something that does not define the context of the passage.
Please let me know, if my understanding faltered at any place.
Regards,
Rishav