This answer is clearly and absolutely wrong, based on its own explanation:

"If each Big Four firm breaks into two – one performing audit services, and one performing non-audit services – then the field will have gained the variety sought by CEOs."

But the answer states exactly the opposite - that the accounting firms WON'T be breaking up into separate audit and non-audit firms. The explanation explains why the answer is WRONG!

Read the question stem: Which of the following stipulations would be most helpful in assuring the success of the CEOs’ plan?
A Plan/Strategy question. We need to support/strengthen/assure the success of the plan.
What is the plan? - To provide more variety in accounting services, break up the Big Four firms.
We are looking for more variety.
I think most of you are fine with A, B and D not being the answer.
C says that the corporation should keep the same firm for audit but choose a new firm for non-audit. It has no relevance to the plan. The plan is to create variety. How the corporations will choose to use that variety is absolutely up to them.

Now, why is E the answer?
The Big Four firms should divide so that the audit and non-audit sections are not broken up.
This says that if one firm A, breaks up into two firms B and C, both B and C should have audit and non-audit sections. You should not split the audit and non audit sections. Now, if this happens, the corporations get even more variety.
Today corporations have 4 options for audit functions and 3 (after one firm is chosen) for non- audit functions.
Lets say if each of the 4 firms breaks into 2 firms, with audit going to one firm and non audit going to the other firm then options for audit services - 4, options for non audit services - 4
But if each of the 4 firms breaks into 2 such that each firm has both audit n non audit functions, then options for audit functions - 8, options for non audit functions - 7 (after a firm is chosen for audit).
Hence (E) assures the success of the plan of creating variety.
_________________

Karishma
Veritas Prep | GMAT Instructor
My Blog

Save 10% on Veritas Prep GMAT Courses And Admissions Consulting
Enroll now. Pay later. Take advantage of Veritas Prep's flexible payment plan options.

Veritas Prep Reviews

Looks Clear E.

E. This explains the CEO's intention is to satisfy federal regulation which is to have separate audit and non-audit firms. Division within the audit or non-audit does not satisfy this purpose whereas dividing a firm into audit and non-audit do.

E assures Variety.

The CEO is suggesting a plan to address the problem of options not available for accounting needs and not the services such as audit and non-audit.

Option C – they may retain the same firm and hire new firm for non-audit services, but this does not address the problem of availability of options

Option E - The Big Four firms should divide so that the audit and non-audit sections are not broken up – this does address the problem, more options are available irrespective of the services they render and thus helps assuring the success of the CEOs’ plan

Option E

E.

Above reasons pretty much cover it.

I think this is a strenghthen a conculsion question, and I go with E
_________________

Sky is the limit

Its E
_________________

+1 Kudos If found helpful..

for me E is the only one that makes sense, others are all irrelevant.