Outsourcing is the practice of obtaining from independent suppliers

Question

Outsourcing is the practice of obtaining from independent suppliers products or services that a company previously provided for itself. Some analysts maintain that a company should outsource a product or service if an independent supplier can provide it at a lower cost, since the goal of any company is to maximize its profit. That goal, however, could require a company to make the opposite decision. Companies that outsource generally dismantle some of their capabilities. In so doing, they might make themselves totally dependent on just a few outside suppliers. Since the outsourcing companies do not control the priorities of those suppliers, the continuity of supply and thus of their own operations could be threatened. Thus, a company’s long-term profitability might be better protected by not outsourcing.

In the argument given, the two boldfaced portions play which of the following roles?

A The first states an objection that has been raised against the position defended in the argument; the second is a point made in defense of that position.
B. The first is a position that the argument opposes; the second is the main conclusion of the argument.
C. The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states that conclusion.
D. The first is a statement of the main conclusion of the argument; the second states the argument’s position regarding a special case to which that conclusion does not apply.
E. The first and the second are each statements of the main conclusion of the argument.

Show Spoiler

Attachment:

GMAT-Club-Forum-87ap1v2r.png [ 131.07 KiB | Viewed 3990 times ]

Show Answer

Official Answer

E

gmatophobia · Accepted Answer

Let's dissect the passage - Outsourcing is the practice of obtaining from independent suppliers products or services that a company previously provided for itself. ⇒ This is a fact. Hence is the premise of the argument. Some analysts maintain that a company should outsource a product or service if an independent supplier can provide it at a lower cost, since the goal of any company is to maximize its profit. ⇒ An opinion of the analysts is provided. That goal, however, could require a company to make the opposite decision . ⇒ The author disagrees with the opinion of the analysts and shares his own opinion. Hence, this is the conclusion of the argument. At this stage, we do not know if the passage has more than one conclusion or if this sentence is the only (main) conclusion of the argument. Companies that outsource generally dismantle some of their capabilities. In so doing, they might make themselves totally dependent on just a few outside suppliers. Since the outsourcing companies do not control the priorities of those suppliers, the continuity of supply and thus of their own operations could be threatened. ⇒ This statement is in support of the conclusion drawn by the author in the previous statement. Thus, a company’s long-term profitability might be better protected by not outsourcing. ⇒ "Thus" is a conclusion marker. This statement represents the conclusion of the argument. Now comparing the two conclusions that the author has presented, we see both statements refer to the same message that the author wants to convey. Both statements indicate that a company should not outsource a product or service if the company wants to maximize its profit. Answer Choice Elimination A. The first states an objection that has been raised against the position defended in the argument ; the second is a point made in defense of that position. The first part of the option is incorrect. The first boldface is not an objection that has been raised against the conclusion of the argument. The first boldface is the conclusion itself. We need not evaluate further. This option is incorrect. B. The first is a position that the argument opposes ; the second is the main conclusion of the argument. The first part of the option is incorrect. The first boldface is a position (conclusion), however the argument doesn't oppose that position. We need not evaluate further. Eliminate B. C. The first provides evidence in support of the main conclusion of the argument ; the second states that conclusion. The first part of the option is incorrect. The first boldface is a statement and not evidence that the author provides to support the main conclusion. The first boldface is the conclusion itself. We need not evaluate further. This option is incorrect. D. The first is a statement of the main conclusion of the argument ; the second states the argument’s position regarding a special case to which that conclusion does not apply. The first part of the option is correct. The first boldface is the main conclusion of the argument. The second part of this option is not correct. The second boldface is not a special case that the conclusion doesn't apply. The author is in favor of companies not outsourcing to increase profits. Hence, the option overall is incorrect. Eliminate D. E. The first and the second are each statements of the main conclusion of the argument. This option is correct. Both the boldfaces refer to the same message. Hence, both the boldface statements are each the main conclusion of the argument. Option E GMAT-Club-Forum-z18dsv8c.png

Akkiiii · Answer

The spoiler has already been given, but still, There’s confusion btw B & E, the answer shows E but if 1st and 2nd are statements, what’s the conclusion of the argument? GMAT-Club-Forum-whiy5y7l.png

sayan640 · Answer

The argument is not in favor of the outsourcing. Both BFs convey the conclusions. Option B is incorrect because the argument does not oppose the first bf.

Posted from my mobile device

Blackcrow1972 · Answer

Why Option E Is Correct:
The first boldfaced portion makes a general conclusion about the potential need to avoid outsourcing to meet the company’s goal of profitability.
The second boldfaced portion reiterates and strengthens this conclusion by explicitly tying it to the protection of long-term profitability.
Both boldfaced portions serve as conclusions within the argument, with the second being an extension of the first.
Why Other Options Are Incorrect:
A. The first boldfaced portion is not an objection but a conclusion about the need to avoid outsourcing in some cases. The second is not just a defense point; it is a conclusion.
B. The first boldfaced portion is not merely a position the argument opposes. It is a conclusion aligned with the argument’s broader point.
C. The first boldfaced portion is not evidence but a conclusion. The second boldfaced portion is also a conclusion, not just the outcome of the first.
D. The first boldfaced portion is not the argument’s main conclusion; it supports the argument’s broader point. The second boldfaced portion is not about a special case but the primary conclusion.

adroitpensador · Answer

GMATNinja   KarishmaB   bb   MartyMurray   souvik101990

How come BF1 isn't the precursor to BF2? BF1 raises an objection and makes room for BF2 to follow as the main conclusion.

Maybe, this is the first time, I am looking at singular conclusion located as 2 separate islands in the ocean.

DmitryFarber · Answer

adroitpensador

When an argument uses abstract or vague terms such as "make the opposite decision," it's important to fill in what those words stand for. In this case, the only decision that has been mentioned prior to BF1 is outsourcing, so "making the opposite decision" would be deciding not to outsource. Similarly, the phrase "that goal" refers to the goal of maximizing profits. So both BF1 and BF2 say that it can be good for a company's profits to avoid outsourcing.

If anything, we could see BF2 as supporting BF1 in part. This is actually a common structure for structure questions. The conclusion is stated in mid-argument and then followed by the support. In this case, the author asserts that it can be good for profits to avoid outsourcing, and then explains the potential negative consequences of outsourcing. They could cut the final sentence and still have a complete argument. However, BF2 ties it together and clarifies: even if outsourcing results in initial savings, it can threaten long-term profitability. That's why it's not always advisable. The only reason the right answer doesn't say that BF2 supports BF1 is that it is still making the same point, just with the added mention of long-term profits.

sinhaashutosh · Answer

What's the main conclusion of the argument?

DmitryFarber · Answer

Well, given the answer to the problem, that's kind of a philosophical question. We know that both are statements of the same main conclusion, so the answer to your question has to be "both bold statements." The author states this conclusion in the first bold, provides support in between, and then restates the conclusion in the second bold.

sinhaashutosh

What's the main conclusion of the argument?

ponderare · Answer

I had this version of the same text in my mock test 5

Outsourcing is the practice of obtaining from independent suppliers

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

Outsourcing is the practice of obtaining from independent suppliers

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