Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-st

Question

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making. However, a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower-level managers. This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Methodical, step-by-step reasoning is inappropriate for making many real-life management decisions.

(B) Top managers have the ability to use either intuitive reasoning or methodical, step-by-step reasoning in making decisions.

(C) The decisions made by middle- and lower-level managers can be made as easily by using methodical reasoning as by using intuitive reasoning.

(D) Top managers use intuitive reasoning in making the majority of their decisions.

(E) Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle- or lower-level managers.

VeritasPrepBrian · Accepted Answer

Hey GMATD11,

I love assumption questions, so thanks for bringing this up. One technique that I think is particularly helpful in these questions is what we call the Assumption Negation Technique. In it, you take the opposite of each answer choice (negating either the primary verb in the sentence, or any particular/universal modifiers that surround that verb...like All--->Not All and Some--->None). Because the correct answer is something on which the argument DEPENDS, the correct answer, when negated, will invalidate the argument.

So for this example:

(A) Methodical, step-by-step reasoning is  NOT  inappropriate for making many real-life management decisions.
(B) Top managers  DO NOT  have the ability to use either intuitive reasoning or methodical, step-by-step reasoning in making decisions.
(C) The decisions made by middle-and lower-level managers can  NOT  be made as easily by using methodical reasoning as by using intuitive reasoning.
(D) Top managers  DO NOT  use intuitive reasoning in making the majority of their decisions.
(E) Top managers are  NOT  more effective at decision-making than middle-or lower-level managers

If you go back to your premises/conclusion, we're trying to say that:

Because top managers use more intuitive reasoning than methodical reasoning, it's a more effective way to make decisions. Let's look at the negations to see which impact that conclusion:

Choice E exposes that gap between the premise and the conclusion - if E were not true, as our negation shows, then it would show that the people who use intuitive reasoning more often are no more effective - and maybe even LESS effective - than others, so we have no basis for drawing the conclusion. E is shown to be necessary because without it the argument is completely invalid.

Even if you don't go to the trouble of negating all of the answer choices, the thought process is still helpful - if an assumption is REQUIRED, we should ask "what if it weren't true?" to then consider whether we need it or not. Without the correct answer, the argument doesn't hold true.

whiplash2411 · Answer

The best way to think about assumptions are as a missing link between what's presented. Think of it as a broken link in a chain of equations if you're good at Quant.

I've broken down the premise and the conclusion for you. The conclusion is also highlighted. An evidence is hard, indisputable fact. And the conclusion is arguable and is an expression of opinion.

Conclusion: Intuition is more  effective  than careful, methodical reasoning.
Premise: Top managers used intuition significantly more than middle and low level managers.

What's the bridge? If you think about it logically, they are connecting the effectiveness in decision making to the hierarchy of being a top manager. Or in other words, one possible assumption is that effectiveness has something to do with being a top manager. Now if you look at the answer choices.

I hope this helps. Powerscore CR is an excellent resource for CR and I don't think you need anything else, really. If you are looking for a concise form of that, you can check out the link in my signature. But I think the thing with assumption questions is approaching the question looking for what is being said, what the missing part is and what would make sense there.

GMATD11 · Answer

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making. However, a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle-or lower-level managers. This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning. The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions? 
 (A) Methodical, step-by-step reasoning is inappropriate for making many real-life management decisions. 
 (B) Top managers have the ability to use either intuitive reasoning or methodical, step-by-step reasoning in making decisions. 
 (C) The decisions made by middle-and lower-level managers can be made as easily by using methodical reasoning as by using intuitive reasoning. 
 (D) Top managers use intuitive reasoning in making the majority of their decisions. 
 (E) Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle-or lower-level managers

Conclusion: intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning
Premise : top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle-or lower-level managers
Premise:decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making.

I want to know about the consistency of the argument given above.
and any good method to find the assumptions as i am not able to think about assumptions taken by author by own so i generally read the options after reading stimulus and stem which some times confuses me.

Pls tell me any good book so that i can learn to make assumptions.

I read Power Score CR bible for solving CR questions.

Thanks in Advance

mbaiseasy · Answer

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making. However, a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower-level managers. This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(E) Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle- or lower-level managers. If the top managers were not more effective in decision making, there'd be no advantage to using intuition.

The author states that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning simply because Top Managers use it more than middle or low-level manager. If you are skeptical, you ought to ask: Top Managers are not necessarily better decision makers than those other managers. So, what sayest thou? Haha! That's the assumption.

(A)  there is no claim for any method or approach being inappropriate... Out... 
(B)  if this is the assumption that top use a possible combo of intuitive and the other approach, then why claim that intuition is better.. hence, this is not the assumption 
(C)  whether it is rendered easier with one approach over the other... is irrelevant to which is effective... out... 
(D)  we still need to find out what is with top managers that the author concludes that their approach is more effective... how often they use it is irrelevant...

(E) Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle-or lower-level managers

If top managers are worse decision makers (just to exaggerate) then the conclusion is not valid. hence, E needs to be assumed

OptimusPrepJanielle · Answer

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making. However, a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower-level managers. This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(E) Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle- or lower-level managers.  If the top managers were not more effective in decision making, there'd be no advantage to using intuition.

OptimusPrepJanielle · Answer

B) Top managers have the ability to use either intuitive reasoning or methodical, step-by-step reasoning in making decisions.

The conclusion is that intuition is better for decision making and the premise is that more top managers use intuition. Top managers could be rotten decision makers and still use intuition, so we have to assume that they are good decision makers if we are using their status as proof that intuition works better. B doesn't work because it only says they have a choice. Whether or not they choose to use intuition doesn't speak for how effective they are at decision making in the end. That is, they can choose intuitive reasoning or be forced to use it and still not be effective decision makers.

TeamGMATIFY · Answer

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making. However, a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower-level managers. This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

Conclusion : This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more  effective  than careful, methodical reasoning.

If we understand the bold part. Top Managers than Middle or Lower Managers -> "Effective". This is the conclusion and the argument is negating the established view with "However".
What is the assumption ? -> Something that should connect "Top Managers" to "Effective" Decision Making and if not, the whole conclusion falls apart.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Methodical, step-by-step reasoning is inappropriate for making many real-life management decisions.
 That is out of scope as we are not discussing about what is appropriate

(B) Top managers have the ability to use either intuitive reasoning or methodical, step-by-step reasoning in making decisions.
 If they use both, how can I conclude that "Intuitive based reasoning " is effective

(C) The decisions made by middle- and lower-level managers can be made as easily by using methodical reasoning as by using intuitive reasoning.
 Cannot be the assumption as we are not connecting Top Managers at all

(D) Top managers use intuitive reasoning in making the majority of their decisions 
 We are not talking about the majority of the decisions

(E) Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle- or lower-level managers. ->  Correct

BillyZ · Answer

OFFICIAL SOLUTION

Situation 
Intuition, used significantly more by top managers than by middle- or lower-level managers, is found to be more effective than step-by-step reasoning in making decisions.

Reasoning 
What assumption does the argument make? The study shows that top managers use intuition more in decision making than the other managers do. The conclusion is then drawn that intuition is more effective. But the stated premises on their own provide inadequate support for the conclusion, so it is reasonable to think that the argument must be based on an unstated assumption, such as the assumption that top managers, when employing intuitive decision making, make more effective decisions than middle- and lower-level managers. Without some such assumption, the argument fails.

A While the argument is consistent with this idea, the inappropriateness of step-by-step reasoning is not assumed.
B Top managers’ ability to switch decision methods does not help to show that one method is better than the other.
C The effectiveness of decision-making methods, not the ease with which the methods are applied, is the subject of the argument.
D The argument would not necessarily fail if something incompatible with this statement were assumed—for example, if it were assumed that top managers use intuition only in half of their decisions. Thus this statement does not have to be assumed. Moreover, even if this statement were to be added as an assumption to the stated premises, the support for the conclusion would still be inadequate unless some additional assumption were made.
E Correct. This is the best choice for the missing assumption. Without some such assumption, the argument would fail.

zoezhuyan · Answer

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making. However, a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower-level managers. This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(A) Methodical, step-by-step reasoning is inappropriate for making many real-life management decisions.
(B) Top managers have the ability to use either intuitive reasoning or methodical, step-by-step reasoning in making decisions.
(C) The decisions made by middle- and lower-level managers can be made as easily by using methodical reasoning as by using intuitive reasoning.
(D) Top managers use intuitive reasoning in making the majority of their decisions.
(E) Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle- or lower-level managers.

Hi  mikemcgarry ,
I swithced answer choice B from choice E.

When I read this prompt especially the sentence,
 Top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower- level managers.
 
 Using intuition more  does not necessarily indicate  more effectively , except top managers compared different methods.
then 
I asked myself why top managers used intuition? why they did not use other methods? if they can choose both, but they chose intuition at the end, then it can indicate "intuition" is more effective.

So I picked up B eventually.

I have no idea why B is incorrect.
Please help

Thanks in advance

Zoe

mikemcgarry · Answer

Dear zoezhuyan , My friend, it's good to hear from you. How have you been? I'm happy to respond.

We want an assumption of the argument. Choice (B) is funny. It's almost undeniably true, but it's not really an assumption. You may be familiar with the Negation Test for Assumptions . Suppose we negate (B). Suppose, quite unrealistically, most top managers do NOT have the ability to use either intuitive reasoning or methodical, step-by-step reasoning in making decisions. Suppose, for what genetic difference, most of these people can only reason intuitively. The argument could still work under these conditions. The top managers are still using intuition most of the time, and these people would stay at the top only if their decisions were successful. Thus, regardless of whether they have any choice in it, they are still demonstrating the success of this approach. Thus, we can negate (B) and the argument still works. This means that (B) is not an assumption. Meanwhile, (E) definitely is an assumption. In that same linked blog, I discuss something I informally call the "bridge approach" to finding an assumption. In this argument, we get the premise: " a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower-level managers ." Then there's a huge leap to the conclusion, " This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning ." What bridges that gap? The only way that top managers using intuition would be seen as more effective is if the top managers are more effective. This is exactly what (E) says: Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle- or lower-level managers . That's the assumption. Does all this make sense? Mike

dcummins · Answer

Reviewing this from my EL.

Writing this one down helped a lot more.

The author concludes that intuitive decision making =  more effective  than methodical decision making.
This is based on the evidence of a recent study that top managers used intuition more than methodical decision making.

What's the rogue piece of information in the conclusion? "more effective"
Therefore the author's assumption must clearly tie the evidence to the conclusion. We can slot the info in between also.

POE first:
A - is incorrect because the argument is not concerned with 'real-life management decisions' nor is it substantiated to assume that it is inappropriate to apply methodical reasoning to 'many' decisions
B - is incorrect because whether or not top managers have the ability to use both we still don't know how intuitive decision making ties into someone being an 'effective' decision maker
C - is incorrect because even if lower level managers can't make decisions as easy with methodical reasoning as intuition it does not really have affect the argument 
D - is a sucker answer and one i fell for initially. D is incorrect because it is not conducive to concluding that 'top managers are effective since they use intuitive decision making'; they may use intuitive decision making for some or all of their decisions, but how do we arrive at "effective". It's the "effective" component of the conclusion that tripped me up initially.
E - is correct as it ties the evidence to the conclusion.

Imagine a statement by the CEO:
 We know that Top managers are more effective at decision making than other managers, and based on a recent study we found that they are more effective because they use intuition significantly more than did most other (middle/lower) managers (who presumably used the other form of reasoning (methodical)); therefore intuition is more effective than careful, methodical reasoning.

gcantre3 · Answer

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making. However, a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower-level managers. This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

(C) The decisions made by middle- and lower-level managers can be made as easily by using methodical reasoning as by using intuitive reasoning.
 Why is C the wrong answer? If middle- and lower-level managers cannot use methodical reasoning. How could you say that study is conclusive that intuition> reasoning?

(E) Top managers are more effective at decision-making than middle- or lower-level managers.
I understand why E is a good choice.

GMATNinja · Answer

The conclusion of this passage is that the recent study confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually  more effective  than careful, methodical reasoning.

Concluding that a certain method is effective says nothing about whether that method is easy or hard for one group or another to use. It's entirely about whether the method yields better results (i.e., effects).

We can eliminate (C) because intuition could be more effective, while still being very difficult for middle- and lower-level managers. Nothing in the argument requires ease of use, so the argument doesn't depend on this choice to be true.

I hope this helps!

Hoozan · Answer

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-step has been considered preferable to intuitive decision-making. However, a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle- or lower-level managers. This confirms the alternative view that intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning.

The conclusion above is based on which of the following assumptions?

Argument 
- Traditionally, step-by-step decision-making was preferred over intuitive decision-making
- BUT, now we see top managers use intuition more often than middle- or lower-level managers
- Conclusion: Intuitive decision making is more effective than the step-by-step approach

My thoughts:  So top managers use intuition. But how is it that by simply knowing that these top managers use this approach it IS more effective? I mean just because they are "top managers" doesn't mean what they say or do is just flawless. Or is it? So we are assuming that practice adopted by top managers (intuitive decision making) actually gives better results. After all, if the decisions didn't work out then why would we endorse it?! Scanning through the choices I see (E) which works on the similar lines of what I was thinking.

EducationAisle   GMATNinja  please could you help me understand (B) ibetter. If top managers do not have the ability, i.e., They can only use intuition then we can't really conclude that this method is better right? I mean, if they don't have the opportunity to use the other method of decision making then how can we say that the method they use is more effective? I mean, they didn't have any other option so they had to simply use intuition!

Thinking in this, I don't think the conclusion BUT I yet feel we should have a situation such that the managers are able to choose between the two methods inorder for the conclusion to hold.

GMATNinja · Answer

The conclusion here is that intuition is more effective than methodical reasoning. And the author supports her stance by pointing to a study showing that top-managers use intuition significantly more often than middle-managers do. Cool.

(B) doesn't have to be true for this argument to hold. Imagine a world in which top managers  didn't  have the ability to use methodical reasoning, for instance. Okay, so then maybe they'd all use intuition, which would be entirely consistent with the argument, because all we know for sure is that these top managers use intuition more often than the lower-level managers use intuition.

Or maybe some small subset of top managers, say, 2%, can't do either one. They can't use intuition and they can't reason methodically. Instead they use Tarot cards to make their decisions. Weird approach, but again, that wouldn't impact the argument, which is just that the top managers use intuition more often than the lower-level managers do.

Because it doesn't  have  to be true that top managers can use either intuition or methodical reasoning, (B) can't be our answer.

Contrast this with (E), which has to be true for the argument to make any sense. The whole point here is that intuition is more effective than methodical thinking because top managers use intuition more often. But if the top managers are incompetent buffoons, why on earth would anyone think that intuition was effective?

Because (E) has to be true for the logic of the argument to hold, it's our winner.

I hope that helps!

rk0510 · Answer

GMATNinja  - please help me explain where i am going wrong here - D says Top managers use Intuitive decision making in majority of their decisions - our premise was Top Managers use intuitive decision making more than what middle or lower level managers use (note its talking about absolute number of decisions being made by top managers vs absolute number of decisions being made by middle/lower manager) - from here to conclude that intuitive is a more effective decision making tool - a possible assumption could be that they are using intuitive based decision making in majority of their decision - unable to eliminate this answer choice - of course can understand why e is correct but cant understand why d can not be correct? please help

GMATNinja · Answer

When a conclusion is based on an assumption, that assumption should do two things:

1) It should strengthen the argument, or at least fill in a hole in the argument somewhere. 
2) It should be absolutely necessary for the argument to hold.

So if an answer choice fails to meet either one of these criteria, it's not an assumption.

Let's apply this test to (D):

The argument concludes that "intuition is actually more effective than careful, methodical reasoning." The support is that "a recent study found that top managers used intuition significantly more than did most middle or lower-level managers." How does (D) impact this argument?

Well, if top managers use intuitive reasoning in the majority of their decisions, does that mean intuition is  more effective  than methodical reasoning? Not necessarily. It just means it's the most popular style of decision-making with top managers. Put another way: maybe top managers don't prefer intuitive decision-making because it's more  effective , but for some other reason? For instance, maybe it's quicker? Or maybe methodical reasoning isn't possible in most cases?

Either way, the fact that top managers use intuition more than methodical reasoning doesn't strengthen the idea that it's more effective.

Based on that fact alone, we can reject (D), since assumptions have to strengthen an argument. But just for fun, let's also consider whether (D) is necessary for the argument to hold: does it  need  to be true that top managers use intuitive reasoning in the majority of their decisions to conclude that it's more effective?

Definitely not. Even if they don't use it in the majority of their decisions, it might still be more effective. For example, it's possible that top managers don't use intuitive reasoning more frequently because it isn't always possible to use it. Or maybe top managers sometimes use a  less effective  method just because they're idiots? After all, just because they're top managers doesn't mean they  always  pick the best decision-making method.

So since (D) doesn't strengthen the argument, and since it isn't necessary for the argument to hold, it isn't an assumption, and we can reject it.

I hope that helps!

rohitrajishu · Answer

Can't (B) be my assumption considering that  the people who are top managers  were once at low and middle-level positions. At that time they would have learnt methodical reasoning--->So,  the people who are top managers  have the ability of methodical reasoning

Any thoughts/clarifications?

DmitryFarber · Answer

rohitrajishu

You may be confusing assumption with inference. We aren't trying to prove the answers true; we are looking for an answer that is REQUIRED in order for the argument to work. We don't need to know that top managers have the option to use different kinds of reasoning. If they use intuition the most, it could still be the best way to solve problems, even if they use intuition because they have no other choice. B seems very likely to be true (even though we can't actually prove it), but the argument doesn't fail without it, so it's not an assumption.

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-st

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Critical Reasoning (CR) Questions

Traditionally, decision-making by managers that is reasoned step-by-st

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards