A light bulb company produces 2,000 light bulbs per week. The manager

Since this specific answer hasn't been touched on much, can someone help me find out where I have gone wrong in my reasoning?

When I answered this question I chose answer D. I chose it because the criticism I made of the manager's decision before looking at the answers was that '500 is an arbitrary number. Why can't we just test each light bulb on its own merit?'.

Answer D: The managers plan assumes that 'it is difficult to judge the quality of the light bulb' matches that criticism because if it were easy to judge the quality of the light bulbs there would be no problem in testing all of them and not arbitrarily getting rid of 500 light bulbs. That is to say, if it were easy to judge the quality of the light bulb then maintaining standards of quality week to week wouldn't be an issue.

Answer E correctly criticises the manager's assumption that quality would stay the same on a week to week basis just because only 1,500 light bulbs were selected, but doesn't answer the question 'why arbitrarily select 500 light bulbs instead of just testing each one on its own?' The best way to maintain consistency in quality would be to make sure that each light bulb is up to the company's quality standards. And once again, if it were easy to judge the quality of the light bulbs then this would be the best solution to the problem so D is a more encompassing answer than E.

To summarize. If a manager approached me with this plan I wouldn't ask him 'but how will you know that the 1500 you do select will be of the same quality from week to week?' but rather I would ask him 'Why can't we judge each light bulb we produce on its own merit and ensure through those standards that the quality is the same from week to week?'


I hope I've been clear in sharing my thoughts and I definitely appreciate the feedback. Apologies if this turns out to be convuluted.

A light bulb company produces 2,000 light bulbs per week. The manager wants to ensure that standards of quality remain constant from week to week. The manager, therefore, suggests that the company reject 500 of the 2,000 light bulbs it produces each week.

Of the following, the best criticism of the manager’s plan is that the plan assumes that

(A) light bulb manufacturers cannot market every light bulb that they produce -
nothing related to market is talked about
(B) the overall quality of the light bulbs would not be improved if the total number of light bulbs produced were reduced
this goes against the managers assumption
(C) each light bulb that is reviewed is worthy of being reviewed
nothing talkied about being reviewed
(D) it is difficult to judge the quality of a light bulb
this goes against the managers assumption
(E) the 1,500 light bulbs that are accepted will be of the same quality from week to week
Correct

Only E gives a reason which manager would have assumed and which we can criticize, hence E

(A) light bulb manufacturers cannot market every light bulb that they produce - This is irrelevant because the argument doesn't focus on marketing of light bulb.

(B) the overall quality of the light bulbs would not be improved if the total number of light bulbs produced were reduced - The argument does not talk about improvement of the quality of the bulb but talks about retaining the quality standard of bulb week after week.

(C) each light bulb that is reviewed is worthy of being reviewed - Irrelevant

(D) it is difficult to judge the quality of a light bulb - It should not be true because it says "difficult to judge the quality of A light bulb" ,its applicable to each and every light bulb. Manufacturing company should have to test it's product in order to insure its quality , it can not give excuse that " it is difficult to judge the quality".

(E) the 1,500 light bulbs that are accepted will be of the same quality from week to week - It is the Correct answer choice because the manager wants to ensure that standards of quality remain constant from week to week.


Answer is E.

A. This is irrelevant. The argument doesn't talk about marketing of light bulb.
B. The argument is not about improvement of the quality of the bulb. This argument is about constant quality of bulb week after week.
C. Choice C is some kind of rhetoric statement, not related with the argument.
D. If it is true then It is also difficult to judge all 2000 bulb then reject all 2000 bulb.
E. This is the right answer, as the argument is about same quality. Hence, E is the answer.

Official Answer

Conclusion: The manager, therefore, suggests that the company reject 500 of the 2,000 light bulbs it produces each week.

Premise: A light bulb company produces 2,000 light bulbs per week. The manager wants to ensure that standards of quality remain constant from week to week.

Assumption: There’s no problem with the plan. There’s no problem with the manager’s plan to ensure that standards of quality remain constant from week to week by rejecting 500 of the 2,000 light bulbs the company produces each week.

The word assume in this question stem indicates that it is an assumption question. The argument contains a planning pattern, recognizable by the reference to a plan. The plan is to ensure that standards of quality remain constant from week to week, and the manager plans to achieve this by rejecting 500 light bulbs each week.

The standard assumption in a planning pattern is that there’s no problem with the plan. Since the question stem refers to a criticism, the correct answer will point out a problem with an assumption in the plan to ensure that standards of quality remain constant from week to week by rejecting 500 of the 2,000 light bulbs the company produces each week. Evaluate the answer choices.

Choice A: No. The choice is out of scope. The ability to market every light bulb is unrelated to the decision to ensure standards of quality.

Choice B: No. This choice is out of scope. A plan does not need to assume that other methods to achieve the same goal would not work.

Choice C: No. The choice is out of scope. Whether each light bulb that is reviewed is worthy of being reviewed is irrelevant to whether the plan will ensure standards of quality, as the argument does not present how the 500 rejected bulbs will be selected

Choice D: No. The choice is out of scope. If the manager’s plan assumes that it is difficult to judge the quality of a light bulb, then the manager has already taken such criticisms into account.

Choice E: Correct. This choice presents a problem with the plan. The plan assumes that by removing 500 bulbs, the quality of the other 1500 light bulbs will be consistent. This is not necessarily true, as it could be that more than five hundred light bulbs each week vary in quality.

The correct answer is choice E.

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.