It is currently 17 Oct 2017, 15:54

### GMAT Club Daily Prep

#### Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1500

Kudos [?]: 1445 [1], given: 2

Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2010, 15:27
1
KUDOS
2
This post was
BOOKMARKED
00:00

Difficulty:

(N/A)

Question Stats:

25% (01:07) correct 75% (01:22) wrong based on 130 sessions

### HideShow timer Statistics

Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of the military’s chain of command an individual whose history of excessive drinking is such that that person would be barred from commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets. Leadership must be established from the top down.
The committee member’s argument conforms most closely to which one of the following principles?
(A) No one who would be barred from important jobs in an organization should lead that organization.
(B) Whoever leads an organization must have served at every level in the organization.
(C) Whoever leads an organization must be qualified to hold each important job in the organization.
(D) No one who drinks excessively should hold a leadership position any where along the military’s chain of command.
(E) No one who cannot command a missile wing should be at the top of the military’s chain of command.

OA to come.
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

Kudos [?]: 1445 [1], given: 2

Senior Manager
Status: Upset about the verbal score - SC, CR and RC are going to be my friend
Joined: 30 Jun 2010
Posts: 316

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 6

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2010, 16:47
I would choose C here
_________________

My gmat story
MGMAT1 - 630 Q44V32
MGMAT2 - 650 Q41V38
MGMAT3 - 680 Q44V37
GMATPrep1 - 660 Q49V31
Knewton1 - 550 Q40V27

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 6

Intern
Joined: 15 Sep 2010
Posts: 10

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2010, 17:03
I'm going to go with A on this one, if only through POE.

Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of the military’s chain of command an individual whose history of excessive drinking is such that that person would be barred from commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets. Leadership must be established from the top down.

Committee member's conclusion: A person who would be barred from commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets should not be put at the top of the military organization/chain of command.

The committee member’s argument conforms most closely to which one of the following principles?
(A) No one who would be barred from important jobs in an organization should lead that organization.

- Yup, this is the correct answer. It can be reasonably inferred that commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron or a contingent of fighter jets are important jobs in the military. Someone who is barred from holding these important jobs should not lead the military. This conforms to the committee member's conclusion.

(B) Whoever leads an organization must have served at every level in the organization.

- Nope. Completely out of context.

(C) Whoever leads an organization must be qualified to hold each important job in the organization.

- The argument does not deal at all with qualifications. Someone may possess all the required qualifications, but if they are a drunkard and are barred from holding the important jobs in spite of their qualifications, the committee member argues that such a person should not be put as the leader.

(D) No one who drinks excessively should hold a leadership position any where along the military’s chain of command.

- Too extreme. The argument only pertains to the very top of the chain of command, not anywhere along the chain of command.

(E) No one who cannot command a missile wing should be at the top of the military’s chain of command.

- Nope. Too restrictive - it only talks about 1 of the 3 positions mentioned by the committee member. Also, the issue is not whether the person can or cannot command a missile wing; the issue is rather whether that person is barred from commanding. There's a subtle but significant difference between the 2.

Kudos [?]: 40 [0], given: 0

Current Student
Status: What's your raashee?
Joined: 12 Jun 2009
Posts: 1837

Kudos [?]: 273 [0], given: 52

Location: United States (NC)
Concentration: Strategy, Finance
Schools: UNC (Kenan-Flagler) - Class of 2013
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V39
WE: Programming (Computer Software)
Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2010, 17:39
noboru wrote:
Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of the military’s chain of command an individual whose history of excessive drinking is such that that person would be barred from commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets. Leadership must be established from the top down.
The committee member’s argument conforms most closely to which one of the following principles?
(A) No one who would be barred from important jobs in an organization should lead that organization.
(B) Whoever leads an organization must have served at every level in the organization.
(C) Whoever leads an organization must be qualified to hold each important job in the organization.
(D) No one who drinks excessively should hold a leadership position any where along the military’s chain of command.
(E) No one who cannot command a missile wing should be at the top of the military’s chain of command.

OA to come.

A. I think this is it - talked specially about barred.
B. too much info -irrelevant
C. not in passage
D. Too strong - maybe some sectors but not all
E. Too specific - this is about being barred not can't do the job.

A
_________________

If you like my answers please +1 kudos!

Kudos [?]: 273 [0], given: 52

Manager
Joined: 15 Apr 2010
Posts: 190

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 29

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2010, 18:39
close one between A and D but since A is more generic version, i am inclined to go with that.

Kudos [?]: 18 [0], given: 29

Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 218

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 5

Location: Boston
Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2010, 18:55
Easy (A).

noboru wrote:
Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of the military’s chain of command an individual whose history of excessive drinking is such that that person would be barred from commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets. Leadership must be established from the top down.

The committee member’s argument conforms most closely to which one of the following principles?
(A) No one who would be barred from important jobs in an organization should lead that organization. Pretty much a perfect restatement.
(B) Whoever leads an organization must have served at every level in the organization. Never makes this claim.
(C) Whoever leads an organization must be qualified to hold each important job in the organization. Never speaks to the qualifications of the leader. The individual in question could very well be someone who used to run a missile wing or a bomber squadron and is now an alcoholic.
(D) No one who drinks excessively should hold a leadership position any where along the military’s chain of command. This claim isn't made - only that this person shouldn't be at the TOP of the chain.
(E) No one who cannot command a missile wing should be at the top of the military’s chain of command. This again speaks to the qualifications of the individual. The argument is only that they would be barred from commanding a missile wing due to excessive drinking.

OA to come.

Kudos [?]: 225 [0], given: 5

Manager
Status: Prepping for a Re-take?
Affiliations: U.S. Navy
Joined: 06 Jul 2010
Posts: 84

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 3

Location: United States (MD)
Concentration: Healthcare, Finance
GMAT 1: 600 Q41 V32
GPA: 3.33
WE: Underwriter (Health Care)
Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

21 Sep 2010, 20:05
I chose A.

I thought about C for a few seconds, but C says that anyone who drinks excessively shouldn't hold any leadership position. The passage gives specific examples of the positions that someone who drinks excessively shouldn't hold. I chose A because anyone who could be banned from any of the positions the passage points would probably be banned for excessive drinking.

Kudos [?]: 4 [0], given: 3

Senior Manager
Joined: 16 Apr 2006
Posts: 271

Kudos [?]: 240 [0], given: 2

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2010, 03:55
A for me.
_________________

Trying hard to achieve something unachievable now....

Kudos [?]: 240 [0], given: 2

Intern
Joined: 21 Sep 2010
Posts: 15

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2010, 10:30
Xmarksthespot wrote:
I'm going to go with A on this one, if only through POE.

Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of the military’s chain of command an individual whose history of excessive drinking is such that that person would be barred from commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets. Leadership must be established from the top down.

Committee member's conclusion: A person who would be barred from commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets should not be put at the top of the military organization/chain of command.

The committee member’s argument conforms most closely to which one of the following principles?
(A) No one who would be barred from important jobs in an organization should lead that organization.

- Yup, this is the correct answer. It can be reasonably inferred that commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron or a contingent of fighter jets are important jobs in the military. Someone who is barred from holding these important jobs should not lead the military. This conforms to the committee member's conclusion.

(B) Whoever leads an organization must have served at every level in the organization.

- Nope. Completely out of context.

(C) Whoever leads an organization must be qualified to hold each important job in the organization.

- The argument does not deal at all with qualifications. Someone may possess all the required qualifications, but if they are a drunkard and are barred from holding the important jobs in spite of their qualifications, the committee member argues that such a person should not be put as the leader.

(D) No one who drinks excessively should hold a leadership position any where along the military’s chain of command.

- Too extreme. The argument only pertains to the very top of the chain of command, not anywhere along the chain of command.

(E) No one who cannot command a missile wing should be at the top of the military’s chain of command.

- Nope. Too restrictive - it only talks about 1 of the 3 positions mentioned by the committee member. Also, the issue is not whether the person can or cannot command a missile wing; the issue is rather whether that person is barred from commanding. There's a subtle but significant difference between the 2.

I think the conclusion is the last statement here. "Leadership must be established from the top down." which means that leadership must be displayed at all levels starting from the top management being exemplary. So that is what we should looking to match.

If we look at a different conclusion C is the option which looks best to me.

Any comments? Opinions welcome.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 450

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 10

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2010, 12:31
I'll be going with C as compared to A.
_________________

GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 10

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 327

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 0

Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2010, 12:39
I used POE to reach to A.

Must say that going around the choices once with POE, I was left with A & C. The reason to choose A was because C says that the person should be "QUALIFIED" to hold each imp job. The statement says nothing about qualification.

(A) No one who would be barred from important jobs in an organization should lead that organization.

(C) Whoever leads an organization must be qualified to hold each important job in the organization.
_________________

All things are possible to those who believe.

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 6

Location: United Kingdom
Schools: Cornell
Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2010, 16:56
I don't know but somehow I thought D is the answer. A is making it too generic and C is talking about qualification which don't go with the premise. OA?

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 6

Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 258

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 9

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2010, 17:36
Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of the military’s chain of command an individual whose history of excessive drinking is such that that person would be barred from commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets. Leadership must be established from the top down.
The committee member’s argument conforms most closely to which one of the following principles?
(A) No one who would be barred from important jobs in an organization should lead that organization.
criteria of barring is generic
(B) Whoever leads an organization must have served at every level in the organization.
Argument is not based on the fact that he should serve at all level
(C) Whoever leads an organization must be qualified to hold each important job in the organization.
Argument is not talking of qualification. Its talking abt qualities
(D) No one who drinks excessively should hold a leadership position any where along the military’s chain of command.
This is what I feel is good. He says set an example and no drinker in chain should hold poisition
(E) No one who cannot command a missile wing should be at the top of the military’s chain of command.
command a missile is cited as a effect of drinking

Between A and D IMO D
_________________

If you like my post, consider giving me some KUDOS !!!!! Like you I need them

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 9

Intern
Joined: 04 Nov 2009
Posts: 40

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 1

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

22 Sep 2010, 23:42
A for me what is OA?

Kudos [?]: 5 [0], given: 1

Manager
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Posts: 223

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 20

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2010, 04:27
i dont think we can say what is an "important job"?

commanding a missile wing, a bomber squadron, or a contingent of fighter jets -- are these "imp jobs"? we don't know from the stimulus --- these could be totally menial jobs as well... i don't know...

though i dont like it i'll go with E

Last edited by gmat1011 on 23 Sep 2010, 05:17, edited 1 time in total.

Kudos [?]: 105 [0], given: 20

Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Feb 2010
Posts: 450

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 10

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2010, 05:10
Can you please share the OA?
_________________

GGG (Gym / GMAT / Girl) -- Be Serious

Its your duty to post OA afterwards; some one must be waiting for that...

Kudos [?]: 109 [0], given: 10

Senior Manager
Joined: 20 Jul 2010
Posts: 258

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 9

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2010, 08:32
Can we have the OA? Can moderators or our helping instructors chime in and explain the answer
_________________

If you like my post, consider giving me some KUDOS !!!!! Like you I need them

Kudos [?]: 101 [0], given: 9

Senior Manager
Joined: 06 Jun 2009
Posts: 327

Kudos [?]: 81 [1], given: 0

Location: USA
WE 1: Engineering
Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2010, 08:57
1
KUDOS
zuperman wrote:
I don't know but somehow I thought D is the answer. A is making it too generic and C is talking about qualification which don't go with the premise. OA?

The question is asking about the principle ........... (D) is too specific/extreme in stating that no one who drinks can hold an office. Who says that a drunkard can not hold an office ? It is usually assumed that someone who drinks will not be made the head. But try selecting an answer with only the information given in the statement. No outside principles are allowed.
_________________

All things are possible to those who believe.

Kudos [?]: 81 [1], given: 0

Intern
Joined: 21 Sep 2010
Posts: 15

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2010, 09:11
noburu.....OA please??? I have been waiting eagerly for it.

Kudos [?]: 1 [0], given: 0

Manager
Joined: 04 Apr 2009
Posts: 67

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 6

Location: United Kingdom
Schools: Cornell
Re: Committee member [#permalink]

### Show Tags

23 Sep 2010, 10:58
zuperman wrote:
I don't know but somehow I thought D is the answer. A is making it too generic and C is talking about qualification which don't go with the premise. OA?

The question is asking about the principle ........... (D) is too specific/extreme in stating that no one who drinks can hold an office. Who says that a drunkard can not hold an office ? It is usually assumed that someone who drinks will not be made the head. But try selecting an answer with only the information given in the statement. No outside principles are allowed.

I see your point. You somehow read my mistake correctly and I had not taken into consideration (missed ) the fact that the argument is asking for an analogous principle. Still don't know the right answer but this makes me incline towards A. +1

Kudos [?]: 39 [0], given: 6

Re: Committee member   [#permalink] 23 Sep 2010, 10:58

Go to page    1   2   3    Next  [ 50 posts ]

Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Committee member: We should not vote to put at the top of

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group | Emoji artwork provided by EmojiOne Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.