Previously, Autoco designed all of its cars itself and then contracted

There are two workflows described in the passage:

• The old workflow: "Autoco designed all of its cars itself and then contracted with specialized parts suppliers to build parts according to its specifications."
• The new, proposed workflow: Autoco will "include its suppliers in designing the parts they are to build."

So, in the past, suppliers were NOT providing any input into the designs -- Autoco was doing the design work on its own.

Under the new plan, suppliers are INCLUDED IN the design process. This is not quite the same as "providing their own designs," but under the new plan, suppliers will certainly be MORE involved in the design process than they used to be.

(A) gives us a reason to believe that having suppliers provide their own design is a bad idea. If anything, this weakens the argument -- perhaps it would be better for Autoco to just design parts itself, just like it did under the old workflow! At the very least, it doesn't support the idea that including suppliers in the process will reduce the time/cost of designing a new car.

You can eliminate (A).

I hope that helps!

Previously, Autoco designed all of its cars itself and then contracted with specialized parts suppliers to build parts according to its specifications. Now it plans to include its suppliers in designing the parts they are to build. Since many parts suppliers have more designers with specialized experience than Autoco has, Autoco expects this shift to reduce the overall time and cost of the design of its next new car.


The assumption that Autoco makes is that currently the time and cost of designing new car is high because Autoco is contracting specialized parts supplier and not including these suppliers from the initial stage of designing the parts itself. By including these specialized parts supplier in designing the parts from the initial stages itself, Autoco would save time and money. How is that possible, is the question!

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports Autoco’s expectation?

(A) When suppliers provide their own designs, Autoco often needs to modify its overall design - Autoco needs to do double work. This increases time. Thus is a weakener! Reject


(B) In order to provide designs for Autoco, several of the parts suppliers will have to add to their existing staffs of designers. - The suppliers already have more designers with specialized experience than Autoco has, adding to it this existing staff would mean increased cost. Again a weakener! Reject

(C) Parts and services provided by outside suppliers account for more than 50 percent of Autoco’s total costs. - This does not tell us how Autoco would save time and cost by in-housing the suppliers. Reject

(D) When suppliers built parts according to specifications provided by Autoco, the suppliers competed to win contracts - Thus Autoco would make the selection of suppliers as per bidding, selecting the one that would fit the budget and do the job. By including the suppliers in the design process itself, the suppliers still might have to compete and Autoco could still make a selection based on the same criteria - fits the budget and does the job. No discussion around why would Autoco save time and cost by including the suppliers in house. Reject

(E) Most of the Autoco’s suppliers have on hand a wide range of previously prepared parts designs that can readily be modified for a new car. - This calls for less efforts on Autoco's part. Designs that can 'readily' be modified means the time factor is also taken care of. Thus, by including the suppliers in Autoco's design process of new car, Autoco would save time on designing parts from scratch. How would Autoco save cost of design of its new car? Earlier, Autoco used to pay its own designers to create the designs from scratch. With available designs to choose from and which could be 'readily modified', not much work is left on part of the designers of Autoco or of suppliers for that matter. Thus Autoco would save cost. Bingo!

Some kudos would do no harm
Analysis of my post would help me cross 700 mark!

If Autoco outsource its parts design to its suppliers then its cost and time will reduce. To support the conclusion, the right answer will provide evidence that Autoco’s plan will reduce the overall time and cost of the design of its next car.

(A) The modification process will to increase time and cost than to decrease them.

(B) This answer suggests that the collaboration will increase the cost of the next car for adding new designers, rather than decreasing.

(c) This answer suggests that outside suppliers are an important component of costs, but does not confirm whether the plan will reduce costs.

(D) Under Autoco’s new plan, suppliers might still compete for contracts. It’s also possible that suppliers will no longer compete for contracts, which could actually increase costs (if bidding is no longer competitive). Since the answer choice doesn’t specify which of these is correct, it isn’t clear how it affects the conclusion, which deals only with what will change after the new plan is instated.

(E) This answer choice suggests that suppliers will not be starting from scratch when designing new parts; they may be able to save time and/or cost by modifying existing designs. When combined with the fact that many parts suppliers have more designers with specialized experience than Autoco has, and the fact that Autoco was previously designing all of its cars itself, this suggests that collaborating with suppliers will make the design process faster and/or cheaper. CORRECT

Isnt it already mentioned in the passage that -'' suppliers have more designers with specialized experience than Autoco has''. Option E seems just an extension of this. We already know that the costs will be lower but the question is will it really affect the Autoco's overall budget, that is explained well in Option C. I still can't eliminate option C.

Can someone please guide

I would for option E , since the main agenda of autoco was to have new designs since its suppliers are experienced in previous designs

For Choice E, I do not see how modifying the previously prepared parts designs would necessarily be cheaper. "Readily" could just address it from a time perspective and not necessarily from a cost perspective.

I also have a general CR question based on this argument. For strengthen questions, do you need to strengthen all parts of the conclusion? For instance, this argument says that Autoco expects this shift to 1.) reduce the overall time and 2.) cost of the design of its next new car. Could a correct strengthening answer choice just address the 1.) reduce overall time component or the 2.) cost of the design of its next new car component?

Thank you!

(E) Most of Autoco’s suppliers have on hand a wide range of previously prepared parts designs that can readily be modified for a new car.

This statement supports Autoco's expectation as it suggests that suppliers already have experience and designs available, which can be modified easily for a new car. This will likely reduce the overall time and cost of the design process.

Explanation for other options:

(A) If Autoco often needs to modify its overall design when suppliers provide their own designs, it may actually increase the time and cost of the design process instead of reducing it.

(B) If parts suppliers need to add to their existing staffs of designers, it may increase the costs for the suppliers, and there's no guarantee that it will reduce Autoco's design time and cost.

(C) The percentage of Autoco's total costs attributed to parts and services provided by outside suppliers does not directly address whether involving suppliers in the design process will reduce time and cost for Autoco.

(D) Competition among suppliers when building parts according to Autoco's specifications does not indicate how involving suppliers in the design process will impact the overall time and cost of designing a new car.

The traps in these options include providing information that may be relevant to Autoco's relationship with suppliers but do not directly support the expectation of reduced time and cost (A, B, C, D). The focus should be on finding a statement that demonstrates how including suppliers in the design process will help Autoco achieve its goal, which is statement E.

Posted from my mobile device

Strengthener for expectation of Autoco?

Expectation is to reduce time and cost.

By Rule of Elimination, exclude A,B,C and D since these mention irrelevant factors and do not reduce time and cost for Company.

Option E is left. This option mentions that "the designers have wide range of previously prepared parts designs that can readily be modified for a new car". This point saves time and cost. Therefore, correct option.