GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 2): HiScience is planning to use 9% of

Question

HiScience is planning to use 9% of its total construction budget to build a new research facility. Although HiScience typically contracts with Build-It Inc on projects of this size, this project will need to be awarded to WeConstruct. A new HiScience policy states that no single company can have simultaneous open contracts with a total value that is more than half of HiScience’s total construction budget. Build-It Inc already holds contracts comprising 44% of HiScience’s construction budget.

Which of the following is an assumption required in order to conclude that WeConstruct will be awarded the contract?

(A) Build-It Inc and WeConstruct are not the only companies who are competing for this contract.

(B) HiScience has a long history with Build-It Inc and WeConstruct and has relied on them extensively for past projects.

(C) Build-It Inc will not complete any currently open contracts worth at least 4% of HiScience’s total construction budget before HiScience awards the contract.

(D) Only those companies with whom HiScience has had a prior relationship were allowed to submit bids for this construction contract.

(E) WeConstruct has done previous work on this scale in the municipality where this new office will be located and is familiar with the legal requirements for construction work in that municipality.

Bunuel · Accepted Answer

Manhattan Prep Official Explanation:

Step 1: Identify the Question  
The words  an assumption required  indicate that this is a Find the Assumption question.

Step 2: Deconstruct the Argument  
The second sentence contains the author’s prediction:  This project will need to be awarded to WeConstruct . However, there is a counterpoint in this same sentence:  HiScience typically contracts with Build-it Inc on projects of this size . So why would HiScience not award this project to Build-It Inc? Build-It Inc already has projects worth 44% of HiScience’s construction budget; adding this project would mean that Build-It Inc would have 53% of the budget. That would conflict with HiScience’s new policy: no single company can have simultaneous projects totaling more than half, or 50%, of HiScience’s construction budget.

Step 3: Pause and State the Goal  
For Assumption questions, the goal is to find an assumption needed for the author’s argument to be valid. This argument has a couple of questionable assumptions. What if there are other companies competing for this construction project besides Build-It Inc. and WeConstruct? What if something changes the percentage of the construction budget currently allocated to Build-It Inc?

Step 4: Work From Wrong to Right 
(A) This choice addresses the assumption that Build-It and WeConstruct are the only two companies competing for this contract. If these two are  not  the only companies, the conclusion is more questionable: HiScience could award the contract to WeConstruct or to a third company. This choice actually weakens the argument.

(B) This choice provides more information about why HiScience has typically chosen BuildIt in the past.This choice does not, however, address either the assumption that these are the only two companies competing for this contract or the assumption that Build-It will not decrease the value of its current contracts in some way.

(C) CORRECT.  If Build-It Inc can complete contracts worth at least 4% of Acme’s budget before the new contract is awarded, then Build-It’s share will drop to 40%. Adding the 9% from the new construction project would no longer put Build-It’s total contracts above 50%.

(D) At first glance, this choice appears to address the assumption that Build-It Inc and WeConstruct are the only two companies competing for this contract. However, this choice only specifies  companies with whom HiScience had a prior relationship . HiScience may have had prior relationships with many companies, not just Build-It and WeConstruct.

(E) Although this choice could arguably strengthen the conclusion, as it makes WeConstruct a more competitive option, this answer choice is not correct. A correct Assumption answer has to reflect something the author must assume in order to draw the conclusion. It is not the case that WeConstruct must have these specific advantages in order to win the contract.

mainbhiankit · Answer

Why is HiScience giving the contract away to a new company instead of just going with its usual vendor?
Because of a new policy.

What does the policy state?
No single company can have simultaneous  open contracts  with a total value that is more than half of HiScience’s total construction budget

What's the value of contracts held by Built-In Inc at the moment?
44% of HiScience’s construction budget

How many of them are open?
 We don't know

So, why is HiScience not awarding the new contract, i.e., 9% of it's research budget to Built-In?
Probably because (x+9)% would be greater than half of its construction budget and that would violate the policy.
x = % of construction budget allocated to number of open contracts Built-In Inc currently has

Only option C talks about this. If we negate C, the conclusion falls apart. Hence, C is the right answer

LeopardLiu · Answer

Answer is C 
(A) Build-It Inc and WeConstruct are not the only companies who are competing for this contract.  Out of scope

(B) HiScience has a long history with Build-It Inc and WeConstruct and has relied on them extensively for past projects.
 Irrelevant 
(C) Build-It Inc will not complete any currently open contracts worth at least 4% of HiScience’s total construction budget before HiScience awards the contract.  Build-It cannot finish at least 4% to make it under 50%. Correct

(D) Only those companies with whom HiScience has had a prior relationship were allowed to submit bids for this construction contract.  No mentioning of this

(E) WeConstruct has done previous work on this scale in the municipality where this new office will be located and is familiar with the legal requirements for construction work in that municipality.  Irrelevant

Iotaa · Answer

This is a very interesting question. Also thinking critically, we have to do a few mathematical calculations.

Let's start with the calculation first: "  no single company can have simultaneous open contracts with a total value that is more than half of HiScience’s total construction budget. Build-It Inc already holds contracts comprising 44% of HiScience’s construction budget  ",

and the new project is of 9% valuation. It means if Build-It Inc gets this project, it will have open projects worth 53% of the total project value. As per the question, we have to ensure till the project is allocated to someone else, Build-It Inc should not complete the previous project worth 4% or more. If Build-It Inc completes any project of more than 4% valuation, they can apply for this 9%.

(A)  Build-It Inc and WeConstruct are not the only companies who are competing for this contract : Ok but is this information help us to clarify whether Build-It Inc can complete any open contract before HiScience awards the contract? No. Eliminate this option.

(B)  HiScience has a long history with Build-It Inc and WeConstruct and has relied on them extensively for past projects : Ok but again same issue as option A. Eliminate

(C)  Build-It Inc will not complete any currently open contracts worth at least 4% of HiScience’s total construction budget before HiScience awards the contract : Is this option answers our question? Bingo. If Build-It Inc completes any currently open contracts worth at least 4%, they will be eligible to reapply as per the company policy because they will have less than 50% even if they receive a 9% contract. Hold this option and check for other.

(D)  Only those companies with whom HiScience has had a prior relationship were allowed to submit bids for this construction contract : Out of context. Eliminate

(E)  WeConstruct has done previous work on this scale in the municipality where this new office will be located and is familiar with the legal requirements for construction work in that municipality : Out of context. Eliminate

Option C is a clear winner.

gmatophobia · Answer

The conclusion of the argument is "this project will need to be awarded to WeConstruct"

(A) Build-It Inc and WeConstruct are not the only companies who are competing for this contract.

This need not be the assumption, there is a possibility that there are other competitors, however the HiScience can favor WeConstruct

(B) HiScience has a long history with Build-It Inc and WeConstruct and has relied on them extensively for past projects.

This could be a strengthener as the option tells us why HiScience may favor WeConstruct, however this is not an assumption.

(C) Build-It Inc will not complete any currently open contracts worth at least 4% of HiScience’s total construction budget before HiScience awards the contract.

This option is a pretty strong contender given the argument in the passage. We know as per the new policy " no single company can have simultaneous open contracts with a total value that is more than half of HiScience’s total construction budget. ", hence if Build-It will not complete any any currently open contracts worth at least 4% then WeConstruct is the only option as per the argument. Will keep this.

(D) Only those companies with whom HiScience has had a prior relationship were allowed to submit bids for this construction contract.

Again, pretty irrelevant option. First we dont know if WeConstruct has any prior relationship with HiScience. This is out of scope

(E) WeConstruct has done previous work on this scale in the municipality where this new office will be located and is familiar with the legal requirements for construction work in that municipality.

The argument is centered around which company will get the project. Irrelevant to our argument.

IMO C

rxb266 · Answer

Premise/General fact :  HiScience is planning to use 9% of its total construction budget to build a new research facility.

Conclusion:  Although HiScience typically contracts with Build-It Inc on projects of this size,  this project will need to be awarded to WeConstruct.

Support for conclusion:  A new HiScience policy states that no single company can have simultaneous open contracts with a total value that is more than half of HiScience’s total construction budget. Build-It Inc already holds contracts comprising 44% of HiScience’s construction budget.

Which of the following is an assumption required in order to conclude that WeConstruct will be awarded the contract?

Here is the crux of the argument -

The project   will go to We construct and not to Build-It Inc.

Reason: A policy states that no single company can have simultaneous open contracts with a total value that is more than half of HiScience’s total construction budget. Build-It Inc. already has 44% of open contract and by giving this new project to Build-It Inc. the policy will be violated.

So how can this project go to we construct ??

possibility 1:  The open projects (of at least 4% of the total budget) of Build-It Inc. do not complete before the new project is awarded.
 possibility 2:  The new policy is not scraped before the project is awarded.
 possibility 3:  Before the project is awarded, no changes in the policy is made that is in favour of Build-It Inc. getting this new project.

Now we can look at the options !!

(A) Build-It Inc and WeConstruct are not the only companies who are competing for this contract.  (does not make it likely that we construct will have the project)

(B) HiScience has a long history with Build-It Inc and WeConstruct and has relied on them extensively for past projects.  (tangential to the argument)

(C) Build-It Inc will not complete any currently open contracts worth at least 4% of HiScience’s total construction budget before HiScience awards the contract.  (Voila. If Build-It Inc completes these projects then it makes it doubtful that WeConstruct will get the project)

(D) Only those companies with whom HiScience has had a prior relationship were allowed to submit bids for this construction contract.   (does not make it more likely that we construct will have the project)

(E) WeConstruct has done previous work on this scale in the municipality where this new office will be located and is familiar with the legal requirements for construction work in that municipality.  (does nothing to make it likely that weconstruct will get the project)

IMO Option C

JonShukhrat · Answer

Conclusion: Although HiScience (A) typically contracts with Build-It Inc on projects of this size, this project will NEED TO BE AWARDED TO WeConstruct (B).

Reason: no single company can have SIMULTANEOUS open contracts with a total value that is more than half of HiScience’s total construction budget.

The author comes to the conclusion that a company other than A should be awarded with the contract. The main word in his argument is SIMULTANEOUS; he assumes that if company A gets the new project, it will SIMULTANEOUSLY hold more than 50% of the construction budget. However, what if A completes more than 3% of the contract before the new project is awarded and thus will not hold more than 50% of the budget? Only C choice tackles this issue.

(A) Build-It Inc and WeConstruct are not the only companies who are competing for this contract.

The negation technique shows that even if the opposite of this choice is true, the conclusion of the author holds.

(B) HiScience has a long history with Build-It Inc and WeConstruct and has relied on them extensively for past projects.

The negation technique shows that even if the opposite of this choice is true, the conclusion of the author holds.

(C) Build-It Inc will not complete any currently open contracts worth at least 4% of HiScience’s total construction budget before HiScience awards the contract.

Correct answer because the negation of this choice undermines the conclusion.

(D) Only those companies with whom HiScience has had a prior relationship were allowed to submit bids for this construction contract.

The negation technique shows that even if the opposite of this choice is true, the conclusion of the author holds.

(E) WeConstruct has done previous work on this scale in the municipality where this new office will be located and is familiar with the legal requirements for construction work in that municipality.

The negation technique shows that even if the opposite of this choice is true, the conclusion of the author holds.

So C

Bunuel · Answer

Official Explanation is pinned as BEST Reply  HERE .

VerbalBot · Answer

Hello from the GMAT Club VerbalBot!

Thanks to another GMAT Club member, I have just discovered this valuable topic, yet it had no discussion for over a year. I am now bumping it up - doing my job. I think you may find it valuable (esp those replies with Kudos).

Want to see all other topics I dig out? Follow me (click follow button on profile). You will receive a summary of all topics I bump in your profile area as well as via email.

GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 2): HiScience is planning to use 9% of

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

GMAT Club World Cup 2022 (DAY 2): HiScience is planning to use 9% of

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