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.
Sep 2107:00 PM EDT
-10:00 PM EDT
Boost your GMAT score in less than one month in a live online class + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included!
Sep 1810:00 AM IST
-11:00 PM IST
Start your journey with a fully customized action plan and work with a dedicated mentor to achieve a 735+ score.
Sep 2601:00 PM EDT
-04:00 PM EDT
Top scores are possible when you enroll in a powerful GMAT course, taught live online + 6 months access to TTP OnDemand video courses included. Class starts Saturdays Sept. 26, 2026 - Dec. 19, 2026, 1:00pm-4:00pm ES
21 Feb 2026, 21:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
Over the past year, several customer service firms have adopted generative AI tools to automate client interactions. One firm, NexCom, whose customer base consists primarily of long-term enterprise clients, however, chose not to integrate such tools, citing concerns about response accuracy and brand tone. Despite this, NexCom’s customer satisfaction scores have remained stable, while some competitors serving a broader base of casual users have experienced a decline. Based on this outcome, NexCom’s executives argue that avoiding generative AI has preserved service quality and that the firm should continue relying solely on human representatives.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the executives’ conclusion?
A. Several firms that adopted generative AI tools saw increased response efficiency, though client sentiment about interaction quality was mixed.
B. Clients of competing firms who experienced declining satisfaction scores were more likely to be unfamiliar with the company’s support systems or interface.
C. NexCom’s human agents are better equipped than AI tools to handle the complex and nuanced concerns often raised by long-standing enterprise clients.
D. While NexCom’s clients reported stable satisfaction scores, they also expressed interest in features that AI tools could support, such as 24/7 assistance.
E. Some of NexCom’s competitors that experienced a drop in satisfaction also failed to retrain staff to adapt to the changes introduced by AI integration.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the executives’ conclusion?
A. Several firms that adopted generative AI tools saw increased response efficiency, though client sentiment about interaction quality was mixed.
B. Clients of competing firms who experienced declining satisfaction scores were more likely to be unfamiliar with the company’s support systems or interface.
C. NexCom’s human agents are better equipped than AI tools to handle the complex and nuanced concerns often raised by long-standing enterprise clients.
D. While NexCom’s clients reported stable satisfaction scores, they also expressed interest in features that AI tools could support, such as 24/7 assistance.
E. Some of NexCom’s competitors that experienced a drop in satisfaction also failed to retrain staff to adapt to the changes introduced by AI integration.
21 Feb 2026, 21:29
Kudos
Bookmarks
Official Solution:
Over the past year, several customer service firms have adopted generative AI tools to automate client interactions. One firm, NexCom, whose customer base consists primarily of long-term enterprise clients, however, chose not to integrate such tools, citing concerns about response accuracy and brand tone. Despite this, NexCom’s customer satisfaction scores have remained stable, while some competitors serving a broader base of casual users have experienced a decline. Based on this outcome, NexCom’s executives argue that avoiding generative AI has preserved service quality and that the firm should continue relying solely on human representatives.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the executives’ conclusion?
A. Several firms that adopted generative AI tools saw increased response efficiency, though client sentiment about interaction quality was mixed.
B. Clients of competing firms who experienced declining satisfaction scores were more likely to be unfamiliar with the company’s support systems or interface.
C. NexCom’s human agents are better equipped than AI tools to handle the complex and nuanced concerns often raised by long-standing enterprise clients.
D. While NexCom’s clients reported stable satisfaction scores, they also expressed interest in features that AI tools could support, such as 24/7 assistance.
E. Some of NexCom’s competitors that experienced a drop in satisfaction also failed to retrain staff to adapt to the changes introduced by AI integration.
A. Several firms that adopted generative AI tools saw increased response efficiency, though client sentiment about interaction quality was mixed.
This is basically saying, “AI made things faster, but people felt mixed about how good the experience was.” That’s not strong enough. NexCom’s argument isn’t about speed but it’s about maintaining service quality and satisfaction. Doesn’t really weaken their argument. Just adds neutral info.
B. Clients of competing firms who experienced declining satisfaction scores were more likely to be unfamiliar with the company’s support systems or interface.
This one hits the logic head-on. NexCom said: “Other companies used AI and their satisfaction scores dropped. So clearly AI is the problem.” But if those clients were casual users who didn’t know how to use the system properly, that could easily explain why satisfaction dropped. The issue might not be AI at all. This shows that the comparison isn’t fair. NexCom serves long-term clients who already understand the system. Other firms serve casual users. That difference, not AI, might explain the satisfaction gap. This directly undermines their argument.
C. NexCom’s human agents are better equipped than AI tools to handle the complex and nuanced concerns often raised by long-standing enterprise clients.
This actually supports NexCom’s point. If their human reps are better at dealing with tough or detailed issues, then it makes sense that avoiding AI helped them maintain service quality. This doesn’t weaken their conclusion. It reinforces it.
D. While NexCom’s clients reported stable satisfaction scores, they also expressed interest in features that AI tools could support, such as 24/7 assistance.
This says that while customers are currently satisfied, they might want AI-supported features in the future. That’s helpful to know, but it doesn’t prove that avoiding AI in the past was a mistake. It just raises a question about future strategy. It slightly weakens their long-term plan but doesn’t damage the reasoning behind their current approach.
E. Some of NexCom’s competitors that experienced a drop in satisfaction also failed to retrain staff to adapt to the changes introduced by AI integration.
This suggests that maybe the real problem wasn’t AI itself but poor execution. That casts a little doubt on the idea that AI causes poor service quality, but the key word here is “some.” It’s not enough to disprove the overall comparison. NexCom could still say, “Even if some companies messed up the rollout, we played it safe and it worked.” So this one weakens the argument only slightly.
Answer: B
Over the past year, several customer service firms have adopted generative AI tools to automate client interactions. One firm, NexCom, whose customer base consists primarily of long-term enterprise clients, however, chose not to integrate such tools, citing concerns about response accuracy and brand tone. Despite this, NexCom’s customer satisfaction scores have remained stable, while some competitors serving a broader base of casual users have experienced a decline. Based on this outcome, NexCom’s executives argue that avoiding generative AI has preserved service quality and that the firm should continue relying solely on human representatives.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously undermines the executives’ conclusion?
A. Several firms that adopted generative AI tools saw increased response efficiency, though client sentiment about interaction quality was mixed.
B. Clients of competing firms who experienced declining satisfaction scores were more likely to be unfamiliar with the company’s support systems or interface.
C. NexCom’s human agents are better equipped than AI tools to handle the complex and nuanced concerns often raised by long-standing enterprise clients.
D. While NexCom’s clients reported stable satisfaction scores, they also expressed interest in features that AI tools could support, such as 24/7 assistance.
E. Some of NexCom’s competitors that experienced a drop in satisfaction also failed to retrain staff to adapt to the changes introduced by AI integration.
A. Several firms that adopted generative AI tools saw increased response efficiency, though client sentiment about interaction quality was mixed.
This is basically saying, “AI made things faster, but people felt mixed about how good the experience was.” That’s not strong enough. NexCom’s argument isn’t about speed but it’s about maintaining service quality and satisfaction. Doesn’t really weaken their argument. Just adds neutral info.
B. Clients of competing firms who experienced declining satisfaction scores were more likely to be unfamiliar with the company’s support systems or interface.
This one hits the logic head-on. NexCom said: “Other companies used AI and their satisfaction scores dropped. So clearly AI is the problem.” But if those clients were casual users who didn’t know how to use the system properly, that could easily explain why satisfaction dropped. The issue might not be AI at all. This shows that the comparison isn’t fair. NexCom serves long-term clients who already understand the system. Other firms serve casual users. That difference, not AI, might explain the satisfaction gap. This directly undermines their argument.
C. NexCom’s human agents are better equipped than AI tools to handle the complex and nuanced concerns often raised by long-standing enterprise clients.
This actually supports NexCom’s point. If their human reps are better at dealing with tough or detailed issues, then it makes sense that avoiding AI helped them maintain service quality. This doesn’t weaken their conclusion. It reinforces it.
D. While NexCom’s clients reported stable satisfaction scores, they also expressed interest in features that AI tools could support, such as 24/7 assistance.
This says that while customers are currently satisfied, they might want AI-supported features in the future. That’s helpful to know, but it doesn’t prove that avoiding AI in the past was a mistake. It just raises a question about future strategy. It slightly weakens their long-term plan but doesn’t damage the reasoning behind their current approach.
E. Some of NexCom’s competitors that experienced a drop in satisfaction also failed to retrain staff to adapt to the changes introduced by AI integration.
This suggests that maybe the real problem wasn’t AI itself but poor execution. That casts a little doubt on the idea that AI causes poor service quality, but the key word here is “some.” It’s not enough to disprove the overall comparison. NexCom could still say, “Even if some companies messed up the rollout, we played it safe and it worked.” So this one weakens the argument only slightly.
Answer: B
10 Aug 2026, 12:22
Kudos
Bookmarks
I like the solution - it’s helpful.
You had me there for a second. 
