Loading...
A study of project teams at professional service firms found that those teams feeling high levels of pressure to perform well for their clients tended to leave their clients less satisfied. The researchers hypothesized that this is because teams under higher pressure, regardless of the source, tend to deliberate less about important decisions and defer to the judgment of the members with the most seniority.
Which of the following would, if true, most help support the researchers' proposed explanation?
Those teams experiencing the highest levels of pressure tended to have the least interaction with clients.
The more-junior members of the project teams tended to have the most information about a project's needs and the expectations of clients.
The team members with the most work experience commonly had project histories with diverse ranges of clients.
Those teams experiencing less pressure tended to have less variation in age range among their members.
Many clients often have unrealistically high expectations of professional service firms, even when they do not pressure project teams directly.
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| A study of project teams at professional service firms found that those teams feeling high levels of pressure to perform well for their clients tended to leave their clients less satisfied. |
|
| The researchers hypothesized that this is because teams under higher pressure, regardless of the source, tend to deliberate less about important decisions and defer to the judgment of the members with the most seniority. |
|
The passage starts with a counterintuitive research finding, then presents the researchers' theory about why this happens
The researchers believe that pressure leads to poor decision-making (less deliberation and excessive deference to seniority), which causes client dissatisfaction
This is an explanatory argument where researchers observe an unexpected result (pressure hurts client satisfaction) and propose a causal mechanism (pressure → rushed decisions and senior deference → poor outcomes)
Strengthen - We need to find information that would make the researchers' explanation more believable or well-supported
The researchers claim that pressure specifically causes two behaviors: (1) less deliberation about important decisions and (2) more deference to senior members, which then leads to client dissatisfaction
To strengthen the researchers' explanation, we need evidence that directly supports their proposed causal chain: pressure → less deliberation + more senior deference → poor outcomes. We should look for information that shows this mechanism actually works in similar situations or confirms the key components of their theory.
Those teams experiencing the highest levels of pressure tended to have the least interaction with clients.
This tells us that high-pressure teams have less client interaction, but this doesn't help support the researchers' specific explanation about deliberation and senior deference. Even if true, this could be a separate cause of client dissatisfaction rather than evidence supporting their proposed mechanism of rushed decisions and excessive deference to seniority.
The more-junior members of the project teams tended to have the most information about a project's needs and the expectations of clients.
This directly strengthens the researchers' explanation. If junior members have the most information about project needs and client expectations, then the pressure-induced behavior of deferring to senior members becomes clearly problematic. When teams defer to senior members who actually have less relevant information, they're likely to make poor decisions that leave clients unsatisfied. This creates a logical connection showing why the researchers' proposed mechanism would lead to the observed outcome.
The team members with the most work experience commonly had project histories with diverse ranges of clients.
This tells us senior members have diverse client experience, but this actually might weaken the researchers' explanation rather than strengthen it. If senior members have extensive experience with different clients, this suggests their judgment might be valuable, making deference to them potentially beneficial rather than harmful.
Those teams experiencing less pressure tended to have less variation in age range among their members.
Information about age variation in less-pressured teams doesn't directly relate to the researchers' proposed mechanism about deliberation and senior deference. This doesn't help us understand why pressure would cause the specific behaviors the researchers identified or why those behaviors would harm client satisfaction.
Many clients often have unrealistically high expectations of professional service firms, even when they do not pressure project teams directly.
This discusses client expectations but doesn't address the internal team dynamics that the researchers focus on. Even if clients have unrealistic expectations, this doesn't support the specific explanation about how pressure affects team decision-making processes through reduced deliberation and increased senior deference.