Events & Promotions
|
|
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
05 Oct 2021, 01:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
A
Be sure to select an answer first to save it in the Error Log before revealing the correct answer (OA)!
Difficulty:
35%
(medium)
Question Stats:
75% (01:59) correct
25%
(02:09)
wrong
based on 186
sessions
History
Date
Time
Result
Not Attempted Yet
Cassie: In order to improve the quality of customer service provided by our real estate agency, we should reduce client loads—the number of clients each agent is expected to serve at one time.
Melvin: Although smaller client loads are desirable, reducing client loads at our agency is simply not feasible. We already find it very difficult to recruit enough qualified agents; recruiting even more agents, which would be necessary in order to reduce client loads, is out of the question.
Of the following, which one, if true, is the logically strongest counter that Cassie can make to Melvin’s argument?
(A) Since reducing client loads would improve working conditions for agents, reducing client loads would help recruit additional qualified agents to the real estate agency.
(B) Many of the real estate agency’s current clients have expressed strong support for efforts to reduce client loads.
(C) Several recently conducted studies of real estate agencies have shown that small client loads are strongly correlated with high customer satisfaction ratings.
(D) Hiring extra support staff for the real estate agency’s main office would have many of the same beneficial effects as reducing client loads.
(E) Over the last several years, it has become increasingly challenging for the real estate agency to recruit enough qualified agents just to maintain current client loads.
Melvin: Although smaller client loads are desirable, reducing client loads at our agency is simply not feasible. We already find it very difficult to recruit enough qualified agents; recruiting even more agents, which would be necessary in order to reduce client loads, is out of the question.
Of the following, which one, if true, is the logically strongest counter that Cassie can make to Melvin’s argument?
(A) Since reducing client loads would improve working conditions for agents, reducing client loads would help recruit additional qualified agents to the real estate agency.
(B) Many of the real estate agency’s current clients have expressed strong support for efforts to reduce client loads.
(C) Several recently conducted studies of real estate agencies have shown that small client loads are strongly correlated with high customer satisfaction ratings.
(D) Hiring extra support staff for the real estate agency’s main office would have many of the same beneficial effects as reducing client loads.
(E) Over the last several years, it has become increasingly challenging for the real estate agency to recruit enough qualified agents just to maintain current client loads.
06 Oct 2021, 01:15
Kudos
Bookmarks
Bunuel
EXPLANATION FROM Fox LSAT
Cassie says, “We need to improve customer service by reducing the number of clients per agent.” Melvin says, “Sure, that’s desirable, but it’s impossible because we can’t hire more agents.”
What would you say back to Melvin if you were Cassie? I know what I’d say. I’d say, “Melvin? Did I say that hiring agents was involved? What if we just fired our **** clients? Wouldn’t that reduce the number of clients per agent? Let’s kill off all our bad business, so we can provide better service to our better clients.”
That might not be the answer, but it would be a great answer. Let’s see.
A) At first I didn’t think this could be it, because if Cassie said this then Melvin would say, “That’s a nice fantasy, but how are you going to reduce the client loads in the first place?” But after reading the horrible answers that followed, I had to return to A. I suppose you could read A to mean, “I know it’s hard to recruit, but that’s sorta my point. Let’s recruit an agent today by telling him ‘you’re going to have one-fourth our normal client load.’ If we do that, then we’ll have shifted some of our existing clients to the new agent, thereby reducing our client load overall. And if we continue to do this, then it will get easier and easier to recruit.” I don’t think this is a perfect answer, but it’s better than B-E, as it turns out.
B) No way. The point isn’t whether clients want the change or not. Melvin has said it’s impossible—Cassie needs to show Melvin why it’s not impossible.
C) Same explanation as B. This just isn’t a “counter” to Melvin’s argument. If Cassie rolled up with this argument, Melvin would say, “Hey Cassie, did you even listen to what I just said? I just **** said that it’s impossible. Hello?”
D) No, this is a different issue altogether. Cassie needs to show Melvin why it’s not impossible to reduce the number of clients per agent. If Cassie said, “Well, we could provide better service in other ways,” then that’s not a counter to Melvin’s argument, that’s actually admitting that Melvin is right.
E) No. This isn’t a “counter” either. This is basically agreeing with Melvin.
Our answer is A, because it’s the only one that counters Melvin’s argument in any way.
General Discussion
05 Oct 2021, 06:19
Kudos
Bookmarks
Cassie: In order to improve the quality of customer service provided by our real estate agency, we should reduce client loads—the number of clients each agent is expected to serve at one time.
Melvin: Although smaller client loads are desirable, reducing client loads at our agency is simply not feasible. We already find it very difficult to recruit enough qualified agents; recruiting even more agents, which would be necessary in order to reduce client loads, is out of the question.
Of the following, which one, if true, is the logically strongest counter that Cassie can make to Melvin’s argument?
(A) Since reducing client loads would improve working conditions for agents, reducing client loads would help recruit additional qualified agents to the real estate agency. Correct
can be a counter argument and related with Melvin's arguments
possible answer
(B) Many of the real estate agency’s current clients have expressed strong support for efforts to reduce client loads. Incorrect
additional info
(C) Several recently conducted studies of real estate agencies have shown that small client loads are strongly correlated with high customer satisfaction ratings. Incorrect
argument is not related with high customer satisfaction ratings
(D) Hiring extra support staff for the real estate agency’s main office would have many of the same beneficial effects as reducing client loads. Incorrect
agency’s main office is irrelevant to argument, additional info
(E) Over the last several years, it has become increasingly challenging for the real estate agency to recruit enough qualified agents just to maintain current client loads. Incorrect
not a counter argument, support melvin's arguemnt
Melvin: Although smaller client loads are desirable, reducing client loads at our agency is simply not feasible. We already find it very difficult to recruit enough qualified agents; recruiting even more agents, which would be necessary in order to reduce client loads, is out of the question.
Of the following, which one, if true, is the logically strongest counter that Cassie can make to Melvin’s argument?
(A) Since reducing client loads would improve working conditions for agents, reducing client loads would help recruit additional qualified agents to the real estate agency. Correct
can be a counter argument and related with Melvin's arguments
possible answer
(B) Many of the real estate agency’s current clients have expressed strong support for efforts to reduce client loads. Incorrect
additional info
(C) Several recently conducted studies of real estate agencies have shown that small client loads are strongly correlated with high customer satisfaction ratings. Incorrect
argument is not related with high customer satisfaction ratings
(D) Hiring extra support staff for the real estate agency’s main office would have many of the same beneficial effects as reducing client loads. Incorrect
agency’s main office is irrelevant to argument, additional info
(E) Over the last several years, it has become increasingly challenging for the real estate agency to recruit enough qualified agents just to maintain current client loads. Incorrect
not a counter argument, support melvin's arguemnt
