Companies often re-organize in order to adapt to changes in

Thanks for nice question and also for providing explanation along with it. It helps! +1

straight C.....keep it simple.

I agree with C.

But I have got few remarks: first of all, in the first premise it is left undefined what does mean the word "Companies" and should assume that that this word should be comprehended as companies with complex structure. On the other hand, what should one assume under the words "simple organization", again it is undefined whether it is a small company or it can include any kind of company.

This is why the ans choice C can be called into question.

I too agree with feruzz77, and that is the reason I eleminated C

C
I took some time to decide between A and C. A is tempting but incorrect because it does not address the first part of the stimulus.

Its a C here tracking the simple keyword in the argument mentioned.

C it is.

'A' is indeed a tough contender, but as others have already pointed out, A does not address the first premise and hence, C is a winner. C addresses both the premises and stays within the scope of the argument.

ohh a good one .. had to read many time to figure out what it means

'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.' It never says the organization has to be kept simple. Once they're trained they'e flexible, and the organization no longer has to be simple. The premise just says that you can spend effort IF you choose a simple organization!

And a hearty request to all those who flooded the page one of this question, it'd be really helpful if you posted the reasoning as well.

i think i will sound a bit foolish but anyway i will write what i felt

option A has "their" in the end which means its talking about a the employees' adaptability whereas C has an 'it' which obviously refers to the organization.

thank you

Can some experts share their views on "choose a simple organization" Vs "choose a simple organizational structure"? I don't think they mean the same.

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 effort
Premise 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

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.