A significant number of Unitron Corporation’s department heads are due

To answer this question, we're looking for the answer choice that explains why "some departments will be without department heads next year." What could cause these positions to be unfilled?

With that in mind, take another look at (A):

(A) talks about raising the qualifications to get promoted to department head. Raising the qualifications would make it harder to fill the position -- which looks like a good fit!

There's one major problem, though -- when you add in the rest of the sentence, you learn that "Unitron will NOT raise the minimum qualifications" for the position. In other words, the info in (A) does NOT make it harder to fill the department head slots. The company is keeping the bar as low as it is currently.

That "not" is the reason we can get rid of (A).

Compare that to (D):

(D) tells us that Unitron will NOT pull department heads from another pool of employees -- specifically, from the group that currently outranks the department heads.

This provides a reason that the slots will go unfilled. (D) is the correct answer.

I hope that helps!

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

A significant number of Unitron Corporation’s department heads are due to retire this year. The number of employees other than current department heads who could take on the position of department head is equal to only about half of the expected vacancies. Unitron is not going to hire department heads from outside the company or have current department heads take over more than one department, so some departments will be without department heads next year since Unitron will not ______.

Solution:

(A) raise the minimum qualifications an employee must have to be promoted to department head: If Unitron will not raise the minimum qualifications, then it will not become difficult to become a department head. This option doesn't explain why then there will still be a shortage of department heads. We need another explanation or another thing that Unitron can do but won't do to rectify the shortage problem.

(B) promote any current department heads to higher managerial positions: This will again not explain the shortage, as Unitron won't promote any current department head.

(C) reduce the responsibilities of each department: This is irrelevant. Whether Unitron reduces the responsibility of each department or not has no bearing on the number of department heads.

(D) have any manager who are currently senior to the department heads appointed as department heads: This explains a thing that Unitron can do but won't to rectify the situation and hence becomes our answer.

(E) reduces the average number of employees per department: Irrelevant. This has no bearing on the number of department heads.

I guess you (& others who have chosen A) have misinterpreted the word 'raise' as 'lower'. I did the same the mistake. Had the word been 'lower/ reduce', A would have been a good answer choice too.

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

A significant number of Unitron Corporation’s department heads are due to retire this year. The number of employees other than current department heads who could take on the position of department head is equal to only about half of the expected vacancies. Unitron is not going to hire department heads from outside the company or have current department heads take over more than one department, so some departments will be without department heads next year since Unitron will not ______.

We are looking for an option that will strengthen the conclusion.

(A) raise the minimum qualifications an employee must have to be promoted to department head - This is a weakener. Negation of this statement will further bolster the conclusion.

(B) promote any current department heads to higher managerial positions - This is a weakener. Negation of this statement will further bolster the conclusion.

(C) reduce the responsibilities of each department - out of scope.

(D) have any manager who are currently senior to the department heads appointed as department heads - This is an assumption as the negation of this statement will shatter the conclusion. And all assumptions are strengthener (But not all strengtheners are assumptions, as an assumption is a must-be true condition)

(E) reduces the average number of employees per department - doesn't impact the conclusion. Distortion.