Senior management is assembling a committee to evaluate proposals for

Question

Senior management is assembling a committee to evaluate proposals for new product lines, which are necessary for the continued growth of the company. Although Humphries, one candidate for the committee, has extensive experience with the launch of new products, his past behavior shows that he strongly favors risky ventures, which offer the potential for spectacular growth but also have a higher chance of failure than do more conservative ventures. The committee must be able to objectively consider the merits of each proposal and provide an unbiased recommendation.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest basis to counter a conclusion based on the argument above that Humphries would not be an appropriate selection for the committee?

a. A person with a strong preference derived from past experience usually has encountered success from following that preference or failure from not following it.

b. The decisions made by a committee composed of one person with a strong preference and other people with weak preferences usually will be dominated by the opinions of the person possessing the strong preference.

c. Risky ventures are objectively preferable to conservative ventures if and only if the magnitude of the potential reward is great enough to offset the greater probability of failure.

d. A committee composed of experienced people with strong but conflicting preferences is more likely to make an unbiased recommendation than is a committee composed of people with unknown or weak preferences.
 
e. The most successful products are generally those that were considered risky by objective evaluators at the time they were initially proposed.

surendrasaini1 · Answer

Senior management is assembling a committee to evaluate proposals for new product lines, which are necessary for the continued growth of the company. Although Humphries, one candidate for the committee, has extensive experience with the launch of new products, his past behavior shows that he strongly favors risky ventures, which offer the potential for spectacular growth but also have a higher chance of failure than do more conservative ventures. The committee must be able to objectively consider the merits of each proposal and provide an unbiased recommendation.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest basis to counter a conclusion based on the argument above that Humphries would not be an appropriate selection for the committee?

a. A person with a strong preference derived from past experience usually has encountered success from following that preference or failure from not following it.(doesn't address the issue to consider the merits of each proposal objectively)

b. The decisions made by a committee composed of one person with a strong preference and other people with weak preferences usually will be dominated by the opinions of the person possessing the strong preference.(it will support the conclusion)

c. Risky ventures are objectively preferable to conservative ventures if and only if the magnitude of the potential reward is great enough to offset the greater probability of failure.(doesn't counter the conclusion)

d. A committee composed of experienced people with strong but conflicting preferences is more likely to make an unbiased recommendation than is a committee composed of people with unknown or weak preferences.(contender)
 
e. The most successful products are generally those that were considered risky by objective evaluators at the time they were initially proposed.(don't address the conclusion)

I will go with choice D

Sent from my Lenovo K33a42 using  GMAT Club Forum mobile app

vivapopo · Answer

Senior management is assembling a committee to evaluate proposals for new product lines, which are necessary for the continued growth of the company. Although Humphries, one candidate for the committee, has extensive experience with the launch of new products, his past behavior shows that he strongly favors risky ventures, which offer the potential for spectacular growth but also have a higher chance of failure than do more conservative ventures. The committee must be able to objectively consider the merits of each proposal and provide an unbiased recommendation.

Which of the following, if true, provides the strongest basis to counter a conclusion based on the argument above that Humphries would not be an appropriate selection for the committee?

a. A person with a strong preference derived from past experience usually has encountered success from following that preference or failure from not following it.

b. The decisions made by a committee composed of one person with a strong preference and other people with weak preferences usually will be dominated by the opinions of the person possessing the strong preference.

c. Risky ventures are objectively preferable to conservative ventures if and only if the magnitude of the potential reward is great enough to offset the greater probability of failure.

d. A committee composed of experienced people with strong but conflicting preferences is more likely to make an unbiased recommendation than is a committee composed of people with unknown or weak preferences.

e. The most successful products are generally those that were considered risky by objective evaluators at the time they were initially proposed.

utkarshg97 · Answer

A. A person with a strong preference derived from past experience usually has encountered success from following that preference or failure from not following it. (doesn't address the issue to consider the merits of each proposal objectively)
 
B. The decisions made by a committee composed of one person with a strong preference and other people with weak preferences usually will be dominated by the opinions of the person possessing the strong preference.  (it will support the conclusion)

C. Risky ventures are objectively preferable to conservative ventures if and only if the magnitude of the potential reward is great enough to offset the greater probability of failure. (doesn't counter the conclusion)

D. A committee composed of experienced people with strong but conflicting preferences is more likely to make an unbiased recommendation than is a committee composed of people with unknown or weak preferences. (contender)

E. The most successful products are generally those that were considered risky by objective evaluators at the time they were initially proposed. (doesn't address the conclusion)

Hence, the answer should be D.
___________________________________
 Please give kudos if you liked the answer.

Bunuel · Answer

Merging topics. Please search before posting. Thank you.

sunny91 · Answer

I dont understand how OA is D. We dont know anything about the other people in the committee. These people may be experienced with strong preference or experienced with weak preferences. Kindly clarify.

ruchik · Answer

Hi Sunny,
The conclusion is "Humphries would not be an appropriate selection for the committee". Now to counter this conclusion we need something which tells us that he is appropriate selection. Option D says people with strong preferences are more likely to make an unbiased recommendation than a committee composed of people with unknown or weak preferences.

So other members of the committee is beyond the scope of the argument here.

hope it helps.

sunny91 · Answer

hi Ruchik,
Option D states -A committee composed of experienced people with strong but conflicting preferences is more likely to make an unbiased recommendation than is a committee composed of people with unknown or weak preferences.

As the option mentions committee, so other people are in consideration

bovi · Answer

Option D doesn't say anything about people with strong preferences; instead, it talks about  a committee composed of people with strong  but conflicting   preferences.  In short, it implies that assertive people, irrespective of their lines of opinion, would form a better committee than would indifferent or weakly-opinionated people.

The word "conflicting" doesn't make sense if the option is talking only about the preference of only one member of the committee. So, I highly doubt whether other members of the committee are really beyond the scope of the argument if this is the correct option.

Option A, on the other hand, seems more correct as - 
i. it keeps the scope of the discussion limited to one person (as Humphries' appointment is being tested)
ii. is at least not a weakener (if not is a strengthener) of the decision to select Humphries

Thoughts?

P.S. this doesn't sound like one of the best-worded questions, honestly.

vyascd · Answer

This is the correct way of answering. It helps people understand why the answer is correct. Thank you

miag · Answer

Option A) doesnt address the unbiased part of the conclusion

xyz12345678 · Answer

How is D countering the conclusion that Humphries is not the appropriate choice for the committee.A seems to be directly addressing it

Senior management is assembling a committee to evaluate proposals for

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

Senior management is assembling a committee to evaluate proposals for

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