Quote:
Neither extensive experience in a field nor access to exhaustive industry data, by itself, establishes an executive's ability to make appropriate decisions. Both are required simultaneously since experience can blind one to logical conclusions drawn from data, and exhaustive data is almost always, by definition, a way of measuring past trends that may or may not continue.
So my inference, a test for executive's ability to make appropriate decisions should be a test covering two parts: making decision from experience and data.
And data = a way of measuring past trends that may or may not continue
(A) use knowledge gained from
experience to determine
which trends are likely to continue.
-> Correct as it states about making decision from experience and data insights
(B) use knowledge gained from experience to direct data-collection efforts.
-> irrelevant. The argument is about takeaways from data, not how you will collect it
(C) amass data that competitors are not collecting so that knowledge gained from experience can be set aside.
-> incorrect, why set experience aside?
(D) establish technical infrastructure to collect data that supports the conclusions drawn from extensive experience.
-> incorrect, one should make decision from both source of information, not let one thing influence the other
(E) hire middle managers who can maintain the appropriate balance between experience-based and data-based decision-making.
-> irrelevant, the ability to make decision of executive is not from hiring good people