When trying to identify new technologies that promise to transform the

First of all, note that this question is not your "typical paradox" question. We would club it with other paradox questions but it is slightly different.
Usually, your paradox questions have two positions A and B. You don't expect A and B to coexist but the answer explains how and why they do.

Here, you expect B to happen too. It seems that B would be more useful than A but still only A is done. The problem here is not why A exists but why B doesn't exist too. The manager's account may not be without exaggeration but that doesn't imply that the managers SHOULD NOT be interviewed. The real question is why the potential buyers are not interviewed even though their opinion would matter more. Option (D) addresses that concern.

Pre-thinking is usually helpful. The advantage lies not just in the fact that you may be able to arrive at the answer even before you read it in the options but also in the fact that you read the argument more closely when you expect yourself to answer the question on your own first. If it is throwing you off, avoid doing it. Not every strategy works for everyone.

Easy D.

Conclusion: Market researchers prefer talking to the technology developers rather than the technology buyers even though the developers exaggerate the capabilities of their respective technologies.

CR type: Resolve/Explain. - why do the market researchers prefer talking to developers rather than the buyers?

A - Hmmm....Maybe..Keep.
B - Out of scope.
C - this explains why the managers exaggerate, NOT why the researchers ask the developers.
D - YES!!! So thats why they dont ask the buyers...they don't know who they are!
E - eh?? even if it were within scope, it would weaken the argument

The answer is D

]A big budget movie was pirated and distributed 3 weeks before its release by a internet hacker. Now to figure out how that leak happen, who would you arrest, the people who downloaded it from the internet or the Hacker who uploaded it. Catching the hacker would be a better option because he would give information as to how he as able to get the movie. Is there some person inside the studio who helped him or Is the Digital security of the studio's server vulnerable or Did the editor who edited the final version of the movie forget the DVD on a train and the hacker found it. All such questions can be found mostly by catching the hacker. There is no use to catch people who downloaded the movie from internet. They will simply say, I found the copy on internet and I don't now how and who uploaded it on Internet.

Similarly Market Researchers survey the managers ; because it is easy to catch a manager and find out all about his product.
It is hard to figure out a potential customer of a future technology because you cannot know for sure which person is a consumer and which person is not. While talking to a random person ,there is a high probability that either :-
1) The person you talk to is not a user of the technology.
2) Even if the person is a user of similar technology or interested in it, he cannot tell you how exactly the technology works because he has not used that particular technology.. right ?

THREFORE D which says :- The potential buyers for not-yet-available technologies can seldom be reliably identified.

In a paradox question, you have to find what will explain the existence of the two apparently conflicting sides. You find one link that helps make sense of the situation. It doesn't matter which side you address. The two existing together should make sense with your answer.

Here, the paradox is that they survey managers (whose opinion may be a tad exaggerated) but not the buyers who decide commercial success. the problem is not that managers are surveyed. The argument doesn't say that their opinion is useless - just that their opinion may not be completely on the dot. The problem is that buyers, whose opinion perhaps matters the most, are not surveyed. (D) tells us why buyers are not surveyed. Now it makes sense. You cannot identify the buyers and hence not survey them though their opinion might be more important than the opinion of the managers. Now the situation makes sense.

D:The potential buyers for not-yet-available technologies can seldom be reliably identified.


The survey cannot poll the customers as the customers are not known. Therefore, it makes sense for the survey to talk only to the company managers.

Answer: D

D it is for the reason stated by hass_mba.
It is the reason why surveyers don't poll potential customers.

we want to explain why buyers are not included in the survey for new technology, one reason may be that they are not easily identifiable...

E it is

simple D. if you can't identify buyers, there's no chance of interviewing them.

D for me. How can one know who will buy the product, if nobody has seen the product before?
Going by the number of responses, I'm sure the other options have already been well discussed.

D:The potential buyers for not-yet-available technologies can seldom be reliably identified.

What happen when the companies survey potential buyers if they cannot (or seldom) be reliably identified. The result from the survey will be un-representative, and not conclusive.

Hi Karishma,

Thanks for the response. I would like to discuss couple of follow up questions. Request you to provide your reasoning on them as well.

1. Veritas CR book says that you must select the answer choice that allows both parts of the stimulus to exist. Does this mean that even if an answer choice targets only one position of the paradox and the other position is logical outcome of the first position, then the answer choice will probably be correct.

Lets take an example of this question only.

Choice D) The potential buyers for not-yet-available technologies can seldom be reliably identified.

This answer choice is giving an explanation of buyers only and there is no relevant information of Managers. However, it does implicitly targets Managers as well i.e if we are not able to find the buyers, then the second best case is to approach Managers. I discarded this option, bcoz I thought it is not giving me a clear cut explanation about Managers.

2. I read that the best strategy to crack CR questions is to Pre -Think. I did analyzed the correct option before moving onto answer choices. However, I have a doubt on this approach. Many a times you do see your analysed answer choice in options and many a times you don't. And because of this on and off situation, when I see my analyzed answer choice in options, I become unsure of my answer. How to cope up with this situation.

Please suggest.

Thanks
H

I would like to echo this point as well. The CR Reasoning Bible by Powerscore states that resolve the paradox questions should address both ends. The OG solution doesn't.

Can someone clarify why that's the case?

Pre -Thinking :

The Question is , why do the researchers go to the producer and not the consummers ?
A valid Q !
Maybe many people dont have access to the technology?

A:If a new technology succeeds, the commercial benefits accrue largely to the producers, not to the buyers, of that technology.Out Of Scope
B:People who promote the virtues of a new technology typically fail to consider that the old technology that is currently in use continues to be improved, often substantially.Out Of Scope

C:Investors are unlikely to invest substantial amounts of capital in a company whose own managers are skeptical about the commercial prospects of a new technology they are developing.Out Of Scope
D:The potential buyers for not-yet-available technologies can seldom be reliably identified.
Hmm , lets keep it - Its somewhere similar to what we thought

E:The developers of a new technology are generally no better positioned than its potential buyers to gauge how rapidly the new technology can be efficiently mass-produced.
Well that would WEAKEN the statement .

Concluding with ans C

VeritasPrepKarishma

I had few additional queries.



In a typical paradox question, are we not supposed to resolve BOTH sides of discrepancy?
Here the discrepancy is between why surveying only managers and not buyers.

I agree that this choice addresses that it is difficult to survey buyers but what about advantage of surveying managers?



Quite opposite to one I wrote above, now this choice only addresses managers and not buyers.

(A) If a new technology succeeds, the commercial benefits accrue largely to the producers, not to the buyers, of that technology.
No:Its talking about the benefits to producers, but u have to account for Researchers-->Market survey

(B) People who promote the virtues of a new technology typically fail to consider that the old technology that is currently in use continues to be improved, often substantially.
No:This option is not telling anything about Researchers-->Market survey,whereas its talking about improvement and further improvement.

(C) Investors are unlikely to invest substantial amounts of capital in a company whose own managers are skeptical about the commercial prospects of a new technology they are developing.
NO:Here in this option the author is trying to give a gud reason(In a Way) on Researchers-->Market survey,but adding a additional view Ina managers point of view is not worth.

(D) The potential buyers for not-yet-available technologies can seldom be reliably identified.
Yes:There option showing a gud connection between Researchers-->Market survey and a gud reason why buyers review can't be taken.

(E) The developers of a new technology are generally no better positioned than its potential buyers to gauge how rapidly the new technology can be efficiently mass-produced.
No:how rapidly the new technology can be efficiently mass-produced-->Not bothered.

My thought process:

What is the goal of the question?
To strengthen on why market researchers survey the producers over the buyers when the prompt says, it is the buyers that are more influential?

D - provides the strongest reason for that.

The word "accounts for" in the stem really threw me off. Is this just basically a strengthen question?

Posted from my mobile device