Last visit was: 11 Sep 2024, 10:21 It is currently 11 Sep 2024, 10:21
Toolkit
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

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

# When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as

SORT BY:
Tags:
Show Tags
Hide Tags
Manager
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 73
Own Kudos [?]: 332 [42]
Given Kudos: 24
Location: India
WE:Supply Chain Management (Consulting)
Retired Moderator
Joined: 16 Jun 2012
Posts: 869
Own Kudos [?]: 8653 [23]
Given Kudos: 123
Location: United States
General Discussion
Intern
Joined: 29 Dec 2012
Posts: 12
Own Kudos [?]: 77 [0]
Given Kudos: 32
Manager
Joined: 09 Apr 2013
Posts: 73
Own Kudos [?]: 332 [0]
Given Kudos: 24
Location: India
WE:Supply Chain Management (Consulting)
Re: When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as [#permalink]
schittuluri wrote:
I go with "E".
C and E are best contenders. In C it is saying about non founders which is not at all mentioned in the argument.

How can E be a contender?

Conculsion of the argument: companies founded by groups are more likely to succeed than companies founded by individuals.

E says a new company is likely to succeed if its technical experts are also skilled in management and marketing than if they lack management or marketing skills. Negating this answer choice would in no way hurt the conclusion that is mainly concerned with the likelihood of the success of companies founded by groups.

In contrast, choice C says that new companies are more likely to succeed when their founders can provide adequate funding and skills in marketing, management, and technical abilities than when they must secure funding or skills from nonfounders. Ah yes. Now this choice assures the success of new companies if their founders can provide adequate funding and skills in marketing, management and technical abilities. Moreover, if you negate this choice, the conclusion definitely falls apart. Hence this is the best choice.

Do you agree?
Manager
Joined: 30 Aug 2017
Posts: 69
Own Kudos [?]: 18 [0]
Given Kudos: 250
Location: Korea, Republic of
GMAT 1: 700 Q51 V31
GPA: 3.68
Re: When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as [#permalink]
pqhai wrote:
cssk wrote:
When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as sources both of funding and of skills in marketing, management, and technical matters. It is unlikely that a single individual can both provide adequate funding and be skilled in marketing, management, and technical matters. Therefore, companies founded by groups are more likely to succeed than companies founded by individuals.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?

A) A new company is more likely to succeed if every founding member contributes equally to the company’s initial funding than if some members contribute more funds than others.

B) Some founding members of successful companies can provide both funding and skills in marketing, management, or technical matters.

C) New companies are more likely to succeed when their founders can provide adequate funding and skills in marketing, management, and technical abilities than when they must secure funding or skills from nonfounders.

D) Founders of a new company can more easily acquire marketing and management abilities than technical abilities.

E) A new company is more likely to succeed if its technical experts are also skilled in management and marketing than if they lack management or marketing skills.

Nice defender assumption question.
First of all, when we see this kind of question, a correct answer is the one that could eliminate the weakness of a conclusion.

ANALYZE THE STIMULUS:

Fact: When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as sources both of funding and of skills in marketing, management, and technical matters.
Fact: It is unlikely that a single individual can both provide adequate funding and be skilled in marketing, management, and technical matters.
Conclusion: companies founded by groups are more likely to succeed than companies founded by individuals.

Pre-thinking: what if a single founder who only has funding can hire non-founder members who have skills in marketing, management and technical matters? Clearly, a company can be successful. <==This is a weakness of the conclusion.

Assumption: The defender assumption should eliminate the weakness above.
Thus, the assumption should be “it is likely that a company founded by an individual, who often hires non-founder members having skills in business, is less successful than a company founded by group of founders.

A) A new company is more likely to succeed if every founding member contributes equally to the company’s initial funding than if some members contribute more funds than others.
Wrong. The equal contribution does not help to bolster the conclusion. A can’t be an assumption.

B) Some founding members of successful companies can provide both funding and skills in marketing, management, or technical matters.
Wrong. B does not violate the conclusion. It’s true that some founding members can provide both funding and skills. But B does not help to elucidate why companies founded by groups are more likely to be successful than companies founded by individuals.

C) New companies are more likely to succeed when their founders can provide adequate funding and skills in marketing, management, and technical abilities than when they must secure funding or skills from non-founders.
Correct. C clearly ELIMINATES the weakness of the conclusion. C is the correct defender assumption.

D) Founders of a new company can more easily acquire marketing and management abilities than technical abilities.
Wrong. Nothing to compare here. D is out scope.

E) A new company is more likely to succeed if its technical experts are also skilled in management and marketing than if they lack management or marketing skills.
Wrong. Same error as in D. The comparison between each founding members does not help at all. E is not relevant.

Hope it helps a bit.

It seems logical.
But argument is

companies founded by groups are more likely to succeed than companies founded by individuals.

Founded by groups / Founded by individuals

So (C) which is about non-founders seems irrelevant for me.

mikemcgarry
Intern
Joined: 09 Mar 2017
Posts: 9
Own Kudos [?]: 1 [0]
Given Kudos: 22
Re: When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as [#permalink]
Can an expert please give an explanation as to why the answer is C? Thanks!
Senior Manager
Joined: 07 Jan 2018
Posts: 265
Own Kudos [?]: 277 [0]
Given Kudos: 161
Location: India
GMAT 1: 710 Q49 V38
Re: When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as [#permalink]
When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as sources both of funding and of skills in marketing, management, and technical matters. It is unlikely that a single individual can both provide adequate funding and be skilled in marketing, management, and technical matters. Therefore, companies founded by groups are more likely to succeed than companies founded by individuals.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the argument?

{Gaps that are evident in the argument: 1) What if individual founders are able to secure funding, expertise, etc. from outside? 2) What if ONLY people with more than adequate money, skills, and expertise start a company as individual founders?}

(A) A new company is more likely to succeed if every founding member contributes equally to the company’s initial funding than if some members contribute more funds than others.
- INCORRECT. Whether they contribute equally or not equally might not matter at all, as no such indication is given in the argument.

(B) Some founding members of successful companies can provide both funding and skills in marketing, management, or technical matters.
- IRRELEVANT.

(C) New companies are more likely to succeed when their founders can provide adequate funding and skills in marketing, management, and technical abilities than when they must secure funding or skills from nonfounders.
- CORRECT! This is in line with our pre-thinking.

(D) Founders of a new company can more easily acquire marketing and management abilities than technical abilities.
- IRRELEVANT

(E) A new company is more likely to succeed if its technical experts are also skilled in management and marketing than if they lack management or marketing skills.
- True in general, but doesn't need to be assumed in this argument.

Non-Human User
Joined: 01 Oct 2013
Posts: 17739
Own Kudos [?]: 877 [0]
Given Kudos: 0
Re: When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as [#permalink]
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.
Re: When a group of people starts a company, the founders usually serve as [#permalink]
Moderators:
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
7056 posts
GMAT Club Verbal Expert
234 posts
CR Forum Moderator
824 posts