Self-study
Sociologist: Support Suggestions for improved efficiency that derive from employers are unlikely to elicit positive responses from employees, who tend to resent suggestions they did not generate. ██ ████████ ██████ █████████ ██████ ███ ████████ ██ █ ██████████████ ████████ ████ ██████████ ███ ████████ █████████████ ██ ███ ████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ ████ ██████ ████ ███ █████ █████████ ████ ██ ███ ████ ██ ███████████ ████ ███████ ███ ████████████
Summary
The author concludes that an employer should try to engage an employee in a dialogue that emphasizes the employee’s positive contributions to the development of ideas that improve efficiency. Why? Because the author believes doing this will get those ideas implemented more quickly and effectively. What's the support for this belief? Because employees don’t like efficiency suggestions that they didn’t come up with.
Notable Assumptions
The premise in the first sentence states that employees don’t like ideas they haven’t come up with. But we don't know that this implies employees are less likely to implement those ideas. Does resenting an idea imply that you won't implement it quickly or effectively? We don't know. So the author hasn't proven his claim that emphasizing the positive contributions of the employee toward an idea will help get the employees to implement the idea more quickly and effectively. One way to strengthen the argument is to help fill this gap — to establish that employees actually will be more likely to implement ideas when employers emphasize the employees' contributions toward those ideas.
Another way to strengthen the argument is to establish that if a technique will help employers more quickly and effectively implement an idea for improved efficiency, then an employer should use that technique.
26.
Which one of the following ███████████ ██ ██████ ████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ █████████████ ██████████
a
Employees are more ██████ ██ ██████ ███████████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ████ █████ ███████████ ███ ███ █████████ ████████ ██ █████
The argument is about ideas for improved efficiency. It's not clear to whom those ideas are directed toward. Even if we believe those ideas are directed toward employees, the author's main conclusion relates to those same ideas. So the distinction between ideas directed toward employees and ideas directed toward non-employees isn't part of the author's reasoning.
b
Employees are more ██████ ██ █████ ███ █████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ████ ████ ███████ ████ ████ ████████████ ██ ███████████
This helps establish that allowing employees to believe they participated in idea generation will lead to getting those ideas implemented more quickly and effectively.
c
Employees are more ██████ ██ █████████ █████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ████ ██████ ████ █ ████████ ██ █████ ████ ████ ████████████ ████ ████ █ ████████ ██ █████ ████ ████ ███ █████████████
Wrong trigger. What's important is not that the employees participate in a dialogue, but that the dialogue emphasizes the employees’ contribution to ideas. (B) focuses on this element, whereas (C) does not. With (C), we have no reason to think that an employer should try to emphasize the contributions of the employee. (C) gives employers a reason to have a dialogue with employees, but it doesn't give them a reason to have the kind of dialogue specified in the author's conclusion.
d
Employees are more ██████ ██ ████████ ████ █████ ███ ████████ ██████████ ████ ████ ██ ███ ████ ██████████ █████ ███ ███████ ████ ████████ ██ █████████ ████ ██████
Leads to the wrong conclusion. This will lead to the conclusion that allowing employees to participate leads to better ideas, but the argument doesn’t draw that conclusion - it only says the ideas will be implemented more easily.
e
Employees are more ██████ ██ ██████ █████████ ███ ███████ ██ █████████ ███ ██████████ ██████ ████ ███ ██████████ █████ ███ ████████ ███████████
We already know employees resent suggestions that come from employers, because the employees didn't generate those ideas. The author wants to show that we can get employees to implement these ideas more effectively and quickly if employers emphasize the employees' contributions to those ideas. (E) establishes that employers are more likely to be resented if they try to implement their own ideas rather than the employees'. But the argument is about the employers' ideas and getting those ideas implemented. The author never argues that we should implement different ideas; he argues that we should present the employers' ideas in a way that emphasizes how the employees contributed to them.