Bunuel
Flexible scheduling allows employees to choose their work hours within certain limits and is widely believed to increase productivity. Some consultants argue that because a company’s goal is to maximize productivity, it should implement flexible schedules whenever possible. However, this recommendation may not always serve that goal. Companies that depend on close coordination among team members often require synchronized work hours to function efficiently. Without that, delays and communication breakdowns can occur, undermining team effectiveness. Therefore, the very goal of maximizing productivity may, in some cases, best be served by maintaining fixed work schedules.In the argument above, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?
A. The first states a recommendation based on a widely accepted goal; the second presents a consideration that qualifies that recommendation.
B. The first expresses a general claim supported by some experts; the second presents the main conclusion of the argument.
C. The first presents a popular approach that the argument seeks to defend; the second provides evidence in support of that approach.
D. The first identifies a goal and a strategy for achieving it; the second challenges the validity of that goal.
E. The first presents a conclusion that the argument later supports with evidence; the second is a prediction based on that conclusion.
Let’s first look at the question stem:
Flexible scheduling allows employees to choose their work hours within certain limits and is widely believed to increase productivity.
This explains a particular strategy of work called as Flexible Scheduling and it’s believed to increase productivity.
Some consultants argue that because a company’s goal is to maximize productivity, it should implement flexible schedules whenever possible.
The first bold face statement BF1: Put-forth the view of consultants who support the earlier statement, recommended (it-should) that implementing flexible schedule will help achieve the company’s goal.
However, this recommendation may not always serve that goal. Companies that depend on close coordination among team members often require synchronized work hours to function efficiently.
The next statement following BF1 is a contradiction- begins with However. This recommendation may not always serve. This means it’s not opposing BF1 entirely, but says this might not yield fruitful results every time. Then explains a scenario where BF1 might fail.
Without that, delays and communication breakdowns can occur, undermining team effectiveness. Therefore, the very goal of maximizing productivity may, in some cases, best be served by maintaining fixed work schedules.
The subsequent statements portrays the outcome of adapting BF1. Thus, BF2: it concludes
( therefore ) to maximise productivity we may
in some cases , best be served by maintaining fixed work schedules.
BF1: recommends a particular approach and BF2 doesn’t contradict entirely, but mentions cases where it might not be efficient and proposes an alternative approach to resolve such situations.
let’s look into the options :
A.
The first states a recommendation based on a widely accepted goal; the second presents a consideration that qualifies that recommendation.The BF1 suggests the common belief or goal. The second BF2 represents a situation that makes the BF1 less suitable in this scenario. This is exactly what is happening in the question stem. Hence, correct answer.
B. The first expresses a general claim supported by some experts; the second presents the main conclusion of the argument.
The First part holds good , the second one is not the main conclusion, hence eliminating it.
C. The first presents a popular approach that the argument seeks to defend; the second provides evidence in support of that approach.
BF1 is a widely accepted method. And BF2 doesn’t provide evidences to support the BF1, but provides a different way to approach a problem. Hence, we eliminate it.
D. The first identifies a goal and a strategy for achieving it; the second challenges the validity of that goal.
The second statement BF2 doesn’t challenge the validity, but proposes an alternative approach to resolve the problem. Hence, eliminated.
E. The first presents a conclusion that the argument later supports with evidence; the second is a prediction based on that conclusion.
BF1 is not a conclusion, and this BF1 is not supported throughout the argument. The second statement BF2, is not a prediction based on BF1. So, eliminating it.
Option A