Argument:
Larson cannot do the assignment.
Franks cannot do the assignment.
Parker is the only other supervisor in the shipping department.

Conclusion: Parker must do it.

(B) is the correct assumption - The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department. We are certainly assuming that since Parker is the only other supervisor, he must do the assignment. Only a supervisor in shipping dept can do the assignment.

(D) The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict.
This is not correct. Anyway, it says 'any kind of scheduling conflict' while the premises mentioned that Larson has 'unavoidable scheduling conflicts'. This implies there might be some scheduling conflicts which can be readjusted/avoided etc.
Even if the option had said "The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has an unavoidable scheduling conflict.", it would still not be an assumption because it is already given in the argument. So it is not a missing premise and hence not an assumption.

Answer (B)
_________________

I went with E, I am shocked with the OA. My reasoning is as below:


Conclusion: So, the task must be assigned to Parker, the only supervisor in the shipping department other than Larson and Franks.

Premise 1: Someone with unavoidable scheduling conflict cannot be assigned this task.
Premise 2: The assignee must be assertive.

Conclusion: The only remaining supervisor must be assigned the task.

So what is the underlying assumption?

Only the supervisors are assertive and no one else is... which is stated in E. Where as the OA talks about ANY scheduling conflict, whereas the argument is clearly saying Larson has UNAVOIDABLE scheduling conflict. so how come OA is D??


(A) Larson has the assertiveness the task requires.
While this can be inferred from the argument, this is not an assumption.
(B) The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department.
This also seems an inference than an assumption, hence eliminate.
(C) Franks would be assigned the task if Franks had the assertiveness the task requires.
This is obvious and not an assumption,
(D) The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict.
ANY kind of scheduling conflict is stretching the info given in the argument. hence incorrect
(E) No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires.
The only remaining choice and also a good assumption that only supervisors have the assertiveness for the task. Correct

To be honest, none of the choices look good to be an assumption in this case.
Conclusion: The task must be assigned to Parker, the only supervisor in the shipping department other than
Larson and Franks
For me, the possible assumption : Task could be assigned to a supervisor with no unavoidable scheduling conflict and assertiveness required for the tsk

I selected B as only best among worst options. Negate B, we get The task can be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department., the conclusion falls part.

But none of the options look satisfying. Would like experts' inputs here.

What's the source?

I googled this question and OA is B while another doc says D. Confused

Here are the links:

http://www.efflux.us/LAPTOPBACKUP%2011- ... 0%2345.pdf

http://student.kaptest.com/secure/pdf/T ... on-23b.pdf


Would like experts to comment.

Chose B.
Was shocked to see D as the OA.
D is attacking only one part of the premise,ie assertiveness,while B is attacking the conclusion ie only Patrick,the supervisor,other that the two,in the shipping deptt.,can be selected.

Posted from my mobile device

There are some issues here:

(A) Larson has the assertiveness the task requires.
While this can be inferred from the argument, this is not an assumption.
This cannot be inferred from the argument. The argument says 'A reason Larson cannot is unavoidable scheduling conflict...' There could be other reasons she cannot do the assignment and one of them could be that she doesn't have the assertiveness.

(B) The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department.
This also seems an inference than an assumption, hence eliminate.
We are assuming this.

From:
Larson cannot do the assignment.
Franks cannot do the assignment.
Parker is the only other supervisor in the shipping department.

You jumped to: Parker must do it.
This means we are assuming that only a supervisor from shipping dept must do it.

(C) Franks would be assigned the task if Franks had the assertiveness the task requires.
This is obvious and not an assumption,
Again, the argument says 'A reason Franks cannot do is lack of assertiveness'. There could be other reasons too. Also, even if Frank had the assertiveness, the assignment could still be given to Parker.

(D) The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict.
ANY kind of scheduling conflict is stretching the info given in the argument. hence incorrect

(E) No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires.
The only remaining choice and also a good assumption that only supervisors have the assertiveness for the task. Correct
Not true. It is possible that people who are not supervisors in shipping dept are not allowed to do this assignment/don't have the required skills/have scheduling problems etc. The reason others are not allowed could be anything. We cannot assume that no one else has the required assertiveness.
_________________

Thanks a lot for your input. Really helped. Honestly, I considered B best among worst looking at the premises and conclusion. Finally only when I applied negation,I got the correct answer.

In case of assumption questions, we can have so many assumptions but is it like the correct assumption need only attack the assumption or say fill the gap between premises, though not completely?

Because, for me, one of the the possible assumptions : Task could be assigned to a supervisor with no unavoidable scheduling conflict and assertiveness required for the task.

Please help me understand. Thanks.

Great! thanks for the reply karishma! I am glad to see D is not correct. And thanks for the analysis of my answer. I have a follow up question...

Regarding A, Since Larson was mentioned first, I assumed she had the assertiveness. Is it possible that given little more info such as "The only reason Larson was not assigned the task is she had unavoidable scheduling conflict..." A would then become an inference?

Also, inline with mba1382 query above, how best to differentiate between what to assume and what not to assume? I probably assumed way too much in E?

Assumption - A missing necessary premise. This post discusses each one of these words in detail - missing - necessary - premise: http://www.veritasprep.com/blog/2013/03 ... sumptions/

Check it out. An assumption must fill a gap that is required but it may not fill it completely.

Look at the breakdown of the argument:

Argument:
Larson cannot do the assignment.
Franks cannot do the assignment.
Parker is the only other supervisor in the shipping department.

Conclusion: Parker must do it.

Does the conclusion follow from the given premises? No. A number of issues have not been dealt with.

What about now?

Argument:
Larson cannot do the assignment.
Franks cannot do the assignment.
Parker is the only other supervisor in the shipping department.
Only a supervisor from the shipping department can do the assignment.
Parker has no scheduling conflict and has all the required skills.

Conclusion: Parker must do it.

Now is it a much tighter argument (though it may not be perfect)? Does your conclusion follow more naturally from the premises now? There could be many assumptions for a conclusion to be true. We need to find one of them (the given options will have only one assumption). It must be an assumption i.e. it must be true for the conclusion to hold.
If we find that a supervisor from another department can do the assignment, then 'Parker must do it' becomes false. It's not necessary that he MUST do it. Someone else can also do it.
_________________

I chose 'B'. D can not be the correct answer as Franks did not have schedule conflict, however, did not get the assignment, not because of scheduling conflict but because of not having assertiveness.

i believe that the answer is B not D.
the assumption is a new piece of info that supports the conclusion. answer D is not a new info. it is a restatement of one of the premises "A reason Larson cannot do the assignment is that she has an unavoidable scheduling conflict". answer D is an inference not assumption.

Question said Parker is the only supervisor in the shipping department not only other
So if Parker is only supervisor then B is not correct

I can See both B and E are contenders and Can't Eliminate both.
D is definitely wrong because it is saying ANY kind of scheduling conflict.
Tried using Negating technique Both B and E destroy the conclusion .
please need help regarding this question.
If the post solves my dilemma +kudos guarantee . thank you.

For anyone who has the same doubt, the argument says: So, the task must be assigned to Parker, the only supervisor in the shipping department other than Larson and Franks

So Parker is the only other supervisor (other than Larson and Franks).
_________________

(E) is not correct.

(E) No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires.

We don't need to assume anything about the capabilities of people who are not supervisors in the shipping department. The argument says that the task must be assigned to Parker, the only other supervisor in shipping dept. So we are assuming that the person who does this job must be a supervisor in the shipping dept. The reasons a supervisor of shipping dept is needed could be many others too such as the designation, experience etc. It may not be only because of the requirement of assertiveness. It doesn't mean that anyone who has assertiveness is fit for the task. Assertiveness is not the only requirement. So we don't need to assume that no non-supervisor is fit for the task because he/she doesn't have the required assertiveness.
_________________

Conclusion at end of argument : the task must be assigned to Parker, the only supervisor in the shipping department other than Larson and Franks.

(A) Larson has the assertiveness the task requires - no mention of assertiveness for Larson. OUT

(B) The task cannot be assigned to anyone other than a supervisor in the shipping department-->Task must only be assigned to Supervisor as other supervisor cannot do the task.HOLD

(C) Franks would be assigned the task if Franks had the assertiveness the task requires. - NO mention of this .OUT

(D) The task cannot be assigned to anyone who has any kind of scheduling conflict. -- Cant say for sure

(E) No one who is not a supervisor in the shipping department has the assertiveness this task requires-Irrelevant

B seems to be best option

Give kudos if it helps

Premise 1 - Unavoidable scheduling conflict -----> Larson cannot do the task
Premise 2 - No assertiveness -----> Franks cannot do the task

Conclusion - Parker is the only supervisor other than Larson & Frank's -----> Parker must do the task.

Analysis - The pre requisites that can assumed that are required for the task are, non conflicting schedule, assertiveness & being a supervisor. Whether either all or one of them is required, we cannot say from information given in the argument.


Answer B is best. Since it can be inferred that all three are supervisors.


Thanks,
GyM
_________________