PT1.S4.Q23 - Expert consultants are sort after by...

rhitt19

Help

I'm not sure that I understand why C is right and E is not. It seems to me even though E is not a "good" answer because consultants advice only didn't lead to good outcomes "at first," but it's still a negative outcome based on their advice.

I can reason out C being correct by countering Mr. Blatt's claim that expert consultants make "better decisions." It just seems off to me because it reads as the consultants' own firm, not an independent business they are giving advice to.

Can anyone give stronger reasons?

canihazJD

B: Consultants help executives make better decisions. So they are worth the fees.

F: No, consultants are hired to avoid responsibility. The more cost, the more they can be blamed.

Here in order to accomplish the task given in the stem you could either weaken B or strengthen F, or both.

I wouldn't say C weakens Blatt. They help executives make better decisions. But it strengthens Fring's claim that the appeal is more cost = greater ability to blame by indicating that when cost goes down (therefore less ability to blame), business volume drops.

E just requires too much help. We don't know that marginal initial profits are a negative... I mean this is planned into most businesses, if not a loss... typically starting off in the black would be awesome for a new location. Allowing that it is a negative, this is just one instance of debatable outcome vs the overall loss of business indicated in C. Additionally, we don't know if the marginal profits, if assumed to be a negative, are a result of the consultant's advice allowing for blame.