To evaluate a plan to save money on office space expenditures by havin

Passage analysis

To evaluate a plan to save money on office space expenditures by having its employees work at home,

A plan was made by XYZ Company.
The aim was to reduce the amount of money spent on office space costs.
The way to accomplish this was to have its employees work from home.

XYZ Company asked volunteers from its staff to try the assignment for six months.

For this the Company got its staff members to volunteer to work from home for six months.

During this period, the productivity of these employees was as high or higher than before.

The productivity of the volunteer-employees who worked from home for six months was high or high than before during the period.

Conclusion
Work from home led to high or higher productivity in the volunteer-employees of XYZ Company.



Prethinking
Weaken Framework
Now per our understanding of the passage, let’s first write down the weaken framework:

What new information will make us believe less in the causality?
Cause: Working from home for 6 months
Effect: High or high than before productivity in workers who volunteered to work from home.


Given that
XYZ Company wants to check out whether their plan to save money on office space expenditures works or not.
It asked volunteers from its staff to work from home for 6 months.
The productivity of these volunteers was high or higher during this period.


Thought process

This is a classic case of improper/insufficient representation of the whole.

The conclusion is based on the performance of certain volunteer employees – representing the entire office staff.
But the implementation of the plan will be done on all the office staff.

So, what if what worked for these volunteers does not work for the rest of the staff?
In that case, the plan will fall apart or at least the plan will be less reliable.

Often, causality is weakened by showing that the effect actually preceded the cause.

In this case, it would mean showing that the volunteers were already highly productive employees. This suggests that the work-from-home could not have been the cause. They would be highly productive from wherever they worked.

Weakener
So, if an option suggests that the employees who volunteered for the assignment were already highly productive and on their way to higher productivity, regardless of where they worked from, then it will weaken the effectiveness of the plan.

Answer Choice Analysis

Option A

This suggests that these representative employees were the kind who would be productive regardless of where they work from.
If these volunteers were the most self-motivated, then by definition the others were less so. Therefore, whether the plan would work on them as much as it did for the volunteers is doubtful.
It is not exactly worded as our weakener, but it is along those lines.
Thus, this is the correct choice.

Option B

The basis of the trial was the productivity of the employees. And we have to weaken that basis. This option does not even address that basis. It justifies the cost-saving aspect of the plan.
Thus, this is not the correct choice.

Option C

Since the workforce numbers aren’t equal then the comparison serves no purpose to weaken the basis of the plan. It is irrelevant.
Thus, this is not the correct choice.

Option D

This supports the plan in a way since it suggests working at home presented no problem in the required employee communication.
Thus, this is not the correct option.

Option E

This Does suggest that employees do not need to be shifted from office to work-from-home, in order to improve their productivity.
But then the aim of the plan was not to improve the productivity of the employees but to save office space costs. Hence, this option does not weaken the basis for the trial – the employee productivity when working from home is high.
Thus, this is not the correct option.