Loading...
When trying to identify new technologies that promise to transform the marketplace, market researchers survey the managers of those companies that are developing new technologies. Such managers have an enormous stake in succeeding, so they invariably overstate the potential of their new technologies. Surprisingly, however, market researchers typically do not survey a new technology's potential buyers, even though it is the buyers—not the producers—who will ultimately determine a technology's commercial success.
Which of the following, if true, best accounts for the typical survey practices among market researchers?
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| When trying to identify new technologies that promise to transform the marketplace, market researchers survey the managers of those companies that are developing new technologies. |
|
| Such managers have an enormous stake in succeeding, so they invariably overstate the potential of their new technologies. |
|
| Surprisingly, however, market researchers typically do not survey a new technology's potential buyers, even though it is the buyers—not the producers—who will ultimately determine a technology's commercial success. |
|
The argument starts by describing what market researchers currently do (survey managers), then explains why this approach is flawed (managers are biased), and finally points out what they surprisingly don't do (survey buyers) even though it would make more sense.
There's no explicit conclusion stated - this passage presents a paradox about market researchers' survey practices that needs explanation.
This is actually a premise-building passage that sets up a puzzle rather than making an argument. It establishes: Current flawed practice + logical alternative = unexplained contradiction that the question stem asks us to resolve.
Paradox - We need to explain why market researchers follow a seemingly illogical practice (surveying biased managers instead of unbiased buyers who actually determine success)
The argument makes absolute claims - managers 'invariably' overstate potential, buyers 'will ultimately determine' success, and researchers 'typically do not' survey buyers
For paradox questions, we need to find practical reasons that explain why researchers stick to this flawed approach despite knowing it's problematic. We should look for factors that make surveying managers easier/more feasible than surveying buyers, even if it's less accurate
This focuses on where commercial benefits go after a technology succeeds, but this doesn't explain why researchers would survey managers instead of buyers during the research phase. The distribution of future profits doesn't affect who can provide better information about market potential. This doesn't resolve the paradox of why researchers stick to a flawed information-gathering approach.
This talks about people promoting new technology failing to consider improvements to old technology. While this might be a general flaw in how people think about innovation, it doesn't explain the specific survey practices we're trying to understand. It doesn't address why researchers choose managers over buyers as information sources.
This explains why managers might overstate potential (to attract investors), but we already know from the passage that managers overstate potential. This choice doesn't explain why researchers continue surveying managers instead of switching to buyers, knowing about this bias. It actually reinforces the problem rather than explaining the paradox.
This directly explains the paradox! If potential buyers for not-yet-available technologies can seldom be reliably identified, then researchers literally cannot survey them effectively. This provides a practical reason why researchers stick with surveying managers despite the bias - they have no choice because they can't find the buyers. This makes the seemingly illogical practice completely logical given the constraints.
This states that developers aren't better positioned than buyers to gauge mass production speed. However, this doesn't explain survey practices since it suggests both groups are equally uninformed about production issues. More importantly, the passage focuses on commercial success potential, not production speed, so this addresses a different concern entirely.