Employees who understand their fit into the organization are motivated to do well.
To improve workers morale, corporate leaders should consider participatory style of management.

We have to establish a link between the above two statements.

A) Workers with responsibilities are more motivated than those without. - Incorrect. Out of scope. Argument does not provide any info to compare between workers with responsibilities and workers without responsibilities.

B) Few employees are inclined to participate in any phase of a project without being granted express rights and responsibilities. - Incorrect. If only few employees support the initiative then it weakens the argument.

C) Managers using less interactive leadership methods are not as effective as those who do use such methods. - Incorrect. Out of context. No info is given about managers or interactive leadership methods.

D) Having responsibility for a segment of an enterprise helps employees grasp where they fit within an organizational structure. - Correct.

E) Corporate managers should involve subordinates in all levels of decision making. - Incorrect. Out of context. This option speaks about decision making whereas argument is concerned about improving workers morale.

Answer: D

I don't understand why option A is wrong in this question. Option A and option D both seem like assumptions of this question to me.

How is option A out of scope? Option A says workers that have responsibilities are more motivated - this is well within the scope of the argument. If you negate this - Workers that have responsibilities are NOT more motivated than those without - the argument falls apart. If workers with responsibilities are NOT more motivated than those without, how can you still say a participatory style of management(which involves giving responsibility to employees) will improve workers morale? Seeing as giving them responsibility is not motivating them.

To be honest, option A and option D both seem like valid assumptions of this question to me. Can someone please help me understand why option A is wrong?

According to the argument: participatory style of management --> more motivation to do well in the organization.
If you negate any of the options the conclusion (increased motivation to do well) must fall apart.

Negate A: Workers who have responsibilities are NOT more motivated than those without --> This does not destroy the conclusion. Moreover, the option compares workers with responsibilities with those without and does not help bridge the premise with the conclusion.

I also put A, but after some reflection I think D works better. Here's my reasoning (hope it helps).

Bear in mind this is an assumption based question, with these types of questions you should always attempt to make the littlest jumps possible.

A) Workers with responsibilities are more motivated than those without. The prompt only tells you explicitly that those who feel that they are part of a process are more motivated. The next sentence then talks about the "participatory style of management" in which workers are given responsibilities, but it doesn't give any premise that the workers are more motivated.

I disagree with the poster before, who said that this statement is "out of scope". It plays exactly to the logical flow of the argument, but forces you to make the jump in logic that the employees given work in the participatory management understand their role in the overall business process. You shouldn't make this jump so it's incorrect.

D) Having responsibility for a segment of an enterprise helps employees grasp where they fit within an organizational structure. This addresses the conclusion (and kind of the problem we have with A). It correctly addresses the gap in logic in the argument by stating that workers under the part. style of mgmt are more motivated BECAUSE they better understand their place in the work product.

I think A is not out of scope. In fact, A cannot link the argument with the conclusion.

Employees who understand how their roles fit into the "big picture" of a business or organization are more motivated to do their jobs well.

The logic here is: Employees are more motivated to do their jobs well <= they understand how their roles fit into the org.

In choice A, if workers with responsibilities are more motivated than those without, then the premise: "they understand how their roles fit into the org" plays no role in this link.

In choice D, the logic is: having responsibilities => know how to fit into org => are more motivated

Hence, the correct answer is D, not A.
_________________

Your explanation is very logical - thank you. As you have correctly explained,

The premise: understanding role ----> motivation (the first line is the premise)
The conclusion: responsibility---> motivation (the second line is the conclusion)


Therefore the correct answer should link: responsibility ---> understanding role

Option A does not help bridge the gap between responsibility and understanding role - rather it is in a way repetition of the conclusion with an additional information about the relation between responsibility and motivation.

Option D bridges: responsibility ---> understanding role

Thanks for the replies guys. Much appreciated

Wrongly selected A instead of my runner up E. Ignored the last few comparison making words of choice A, faulty ones. Anyhow, good lesson for next attempts.
Good answer to post. Thanks.
Regards

Posted from my mobile device

Sorry, my runner up was E not D
Regards

Posted from my mobile device

premise- Employees who understand how their roles fit into the "big picture" of a business or organization are more motivated to do their jobs well
-
conclusion- corporate leaders wishing to improve worker morale should assign them with projects with its own explicit goals and responsibilities.
-
TO FIND THE ASSUMPTION I'LL ASK THIS QUESTION-
UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES <GIVEN THE FACTS> WILL THE CONCLUSION BREAK DOWN ?
-
UNDER WHAT CIRCUMSTANCES GIVING EXLICIT ROLES TO THE EMPLOYEES DOSEN'T IMPROVE THEIR MORALE?
-
The answer lies in the premise- it states that the employees will only be motivated if they understand how their roles fit into the big picture.
-
So, the conclusion will break down if we say that even after the workers are assigned projects with own explicit goals and responsibilities. they didn't get the understanding of how their roles fit into the big picure, resulting in low motivation.
-
OUR ASSUMPTION IS- The workers will get an understanding how their roles fit into the big picture after they are assigned project with its own explicit goals and responsibility.
-
option D is the closest to our assumption,Hence it is the correct answer.

In such a case imo we should align the option with the stem,which links b\w motivation and big picture.

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.
_________________