PrepTest 126, Section 3, Question 4
Cassie: In order to improve the quality of(72 more words not shown)
Of the following, which one,(14 more words not shown)
- ASince reducing client(21 more words not shown)
- BMany of the(15 more words not shown)
- CSeveral recently conducted(19 more words not shown)
- DHiring extra support(20 more words not shown)
- EOver the last(23 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
If an agent has a hundred clients at once, I can see why some clients might struggle to get attention. Fewer clients per agent could help. It wouldn't fix every possible service problem—an unhelpful agent could still be unhelpful—but Cassie's proposal makes sense as one possible improvement.
Melvin doesn't dispute that smaller loads would be desirable. He says we can't make them happen because we can't recruit the extra agents. Hold on: why must we hire more people? We could also accept fewer clients. Suppose some clients aren't seriously looking to buy and keep taking up agents' time. Turning those clients away could reduce the workload without adding an agent.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for Cassie's strongest counter to Melvin. I'd look for another way to reduce the load, such as being more selective about clients. More generally, the answer needs to challenge his claim that the proposal isn't feasible. Another reason to like the proposal won't answer that objection.
Working the answers
- ACorrect
This challenges a different part of Melvin's reasoning than I predicted. He treats our current difficulty recruiting agents as a reason we couldn't recruit enough under the proposed arrangement. But what if the lighter workload made the job more attractive?
A says it would. Better working conditions would help bring in additional qualified agents, weakening Melvin's claim that recruiting them is out of the question. We don't have to reduce the number of clients to answer him; we could change the conditions that currently make recruiting difficult.
- B
Clients wanting something doesn't show that the agency can provide it. Imagine a tutoring student wanting four hours of individual help every day. That preference doesn't create four extra hours in the tutor's schedule. Likewise, client support for lighter loads doesn't answer Melvin's concern about having enough agents.
- C
This supports the benefit of smaller loads, which Melvin already accepts. He can agree that clients would be happier and still insist that the agency cannot recruit the agents needed to make the change. We need a response to feasibility, not more support for desirability.
- D
Hiring support staff might be another useful way to improve service. But that doesn't show that reducing agents' client loads is feasible. D offers a different proposal while leaving Melvin's objection to Cassie's proposal in place.
- E
This reinforces Melvin's concern. If recruiting enough agents to handle even the current loads has become harder, that gives us more reason to take the recruiting obstacle seriously. It doesn't supply Cassie with a counterargument.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.