Board of ABC Company: Owing to the excellent performance of the

A) This seems like a decent choice. If the sales were falling each year, then having a year of growth really is exceptional - the CEO managed to reverse the trend. This weakens the Shareholders argument that the low growth rate means a bad performance.

B) This is not logical. Even if the CEO is not the sole reason why the sales growth was low, it implies that the CEO played at least some part in why the low sales growth happened. If that is the case, why should the board give the CEO a bonus? This supports the shareholders argument. Out.

C) This is tricky. Although it may seem like a good counter, compared to A, it is quite weak. Why should the board have to give an extra bonus for the CEO to do the bare minimum of increasing sales? It is not really a good counter-argument to the shareholder compared to A. Out.

D) Trap. This twists the meaning - the focus of the shareholders argument is not profitability, which is what D is talking about. Even if new managers were hired at a high cost, this would impact the profits of the company, not the sales. This does not address the shareholders argument. Out.

E) This clearly supports the shareholders position. If the CEO has not made any special changes, why should the CEO be rewarded with a big bonus? Out.

A is the correct answer.