Statement 1 is clearly Insufficient as 1^3, 2^3, 3^3 all are less then 60.

Statement 2 tells that no official is supervised bt more than one person. x=1. Sufficient.
Answer is B.

There are x high-level officials (where x is a positive integer). Each high-level official supervises x^2 mid-level officials, each of whom, in turn, supervises x^3 low-level officials. How many high-level officials are there?

(1) There are fewer than 60 low-level officials.
(2) No official is supervised by more than one person.

x----x^2(each of whom)----x^3

1) 2----4----8 (8*4= 32) 32<60 yes
3----9----27 (27*9= 243) 243<60 no

thus 4 high level officials

2) insufficient

thus A.

OA please.
_________________

Kudos please!

Bunuel When will the OA be updated for these questions??

The key is EACH OF which means if there are 2 high level there are 8 mid level and 8*8=64 low level.

So A looks sufficient- BUT, the stem does not say the low level cannot report to more than one mid level managers. Say that 5 low level report to 2 mid level managers, then there can be 1 or 2 high level managers - so not sufficient.

B resolves this- if no one has more than one manager the only solution is to have 1 high level, 1 mid level and 1 low level.

C- combined sufficient.

Posted from GMAT ToolKit

Let H,M and L represent High,Medium and Low level officers resp.
By given condition:
if H=1 then M=1 and L=1
if H=2 then M=2*(2^2)=8 and L=8*(2^3)=64

(1) It tells us that L<60, thus only first of the above two situations satisfies. i.e H=1, it won't be true if H>1-->Sufficient
(2) In each of the above two situations, No official is supervised by more than one person as it is given in the question statement itself that each of relatively higher level officers supervise a set of lower level officers--> insufficient

Hence, the correct answer is choice(A)

I also marked A, not sure how statement 1 contributes to the answer... My reasoning:

Statement 1: tells us that x^3<60

Statement 2: no official is supervised by more than one person: insinuates that x = x^2 = x^3 ... I thought this could only be true for x=1

Please clear up

Hello aimtoteach and sabineodf

Let's imagine that we have firm with 10 low level workers and 2 managers.
But we know nothing about hierarchy of this firm. Maybe each manager has 5 dedicated subordinates or maybe it's mix hierarchy and each manager has 10 subordinates: each from this employees has two managers and report to each managers for different tasks.

Second statement clarify situation about hierarchy of firm from the task.
_________________

Simple way to always control time during the quant part.
How to solve main idea questions without full understanding of RC.
660 (Q48, V33) - unpleasant surprise
740 (Q50, V40, IR3) - anti-debrief

Merging topics. Please search before posting.
_________________

New to the Math Forum?
Please read this: Ultimate GMAT Quantitative Megathread | All You Need for Quant | PLEASE READ AND FOLLOW: 12 Rules for Posting!!!

Resources:
GMAT Math Book | Triangles | Polygons | Coordinate Geometry | Factorials | Circles | Number Theory | Remainders; 8. Overlapping Sets | PDF of Math Book; 10. Remainders | GMAT Prep Software Analysis | SEVEN SAMURAI OF 2012 (BEST DISCUSSIONS) | Tricky questions from previous years.

Collection of Questions:
PS: 1. Tough and Tricky questions; 2. Hard questions; 3. Hard questions part 2; 4. Standard deviation; 5. Tough Problem Solving Questions With Solutions; 6. Probability and Combinations Questions With Solutions; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 12 Easy Pieces (or not?); 9 Bakers' Dozen; 10 Algebra set. ,11 Mixed Questions, 12 Fresh Meat

DS: 1. DS tough questions; 2. DS tough questions part 2; 3. DS tough questions part 3; 4. DS Standard deviation; 5. Inequalities; 6. 700+ GMAT Data Sufficiency Questions With Explanations; 7 Tough and tricky exponents and roots questions; 8 The Discreet Charm of the DS; 9 Devil's Dozen!!!; 10 Number Properties set., 11 New DS set.


What are GMAT Club Tests?
Extra-hard Quant Tests with Brilliant Analytics

Let's assume that there are 2 high level officials. This means that each of these 2 high level officials supervises 4 (or x^2) mid-level officials, and that each of these 4 mid-level officials supervises 8 (or x^3) low-level officials.

It is possible that the supervisors do not share any subordinates. If this is the case, then, given 2 high level officials, there must be 2(4) = 8 mid-level officials, and 8(8) = 64 low-level officials.

Alternatively, it is possible that the supervisors share all or some subordinates. In other words, given 2 high level officials, it is possible that there are as few as 4 mid-level officials (as each of the 2 high-level officials supervise the same 4 mid-level officials) and as few as 8 low-level officials (as each of the 4 mid-level officials supervise the same 8 low-level officials).

Statement (1) tells us that there are fewer than 60 low-level officials. This alone does not allow us to determine how many high-level officials there are. For example, there might be 2 high level officials, who each supervise the same 4 mid-level officials, who, in turn, each supervise the same 8 low-level officials. Alternatively, there might be 3 high-level officials, who each supervise the same 9 mid-level officials, who, in turn, each supervise the same 27 low-level officials.

Statement (2) tells us that no official is supervised by more than one person, which means that supervisors do not share any subordinates. Alone, this does not tell us anything about the number of high-level officials.

Combining statements 1 and 2, we can test out different possibilities.

If x = 1, there is 1 high-level official, who supervises 1 mid-level official (12 = 1), who, in turn, supervises 1 low-level official (13 = 1).

If x = 2, there are 2 high-level officials, who each supervise a unique group of 4 mid-level officials, yielding 8 mid-level officials in total. Each of these 8 mid-level officials supervise a unique group of 8 low-level officials, yielding 64 low-level officials in total. However, this cannot be the case since we are told that there are fewer than 60 low-level officials.

Therefore, based on both statements taken together, there must be only 1 high-level official. The correct answer is C: BOTH statements TOGETHER are sufficient, but NEITHER statement ALONE is sufficient.
_________________

Thanks & Regards,
Anaira Mitch