GMAT Verbal Quiz: Evaluate Plans And Strategies

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Evaluate Plans And Strategies, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for GMAT Verbal.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

Question 1

1. Whether most pedestrian–vehicle collisions on the targeted streets occur at points where vehicles would in fact have to cross the proposed speed bumps (correct answer)
2. Whether the city has enough qualified contractors available to install the speed bumps within the budget year
3. Whether drivers who frequently travel the targeted streets have expressed support for installing speed bumps there
4. Whether the police department intends to increase traffic‐law enforcement once the speed bumps are in place

Explanation: When evaluating whether a proposed solution will achieve its intended goal, you need to identify potential gaps between the solution's mechanism and the problem it's meant to solve. Here, the city council assumes that slowing traffic with speed bumps will reduce pedestrian collisions. The correct answer is A because it addresses a crucial gap in this logic. Speed bumps only slow traffic at specific points on the street. If most pedestrian-vehicle collisions happen away from where the speed bumps would be installed—say, at intersections, crosswalks, or mid-block areas without bumps—then the speed reduction at bump locations wouldn't prevent accidents. This information directly determines whether the plan's mechanism (slowing traffic with bumps) will actually address the problem (collisions at collision-prone locations). Answer B is irrelevant to whether the plan will work—it only affects implementation logistics, not effectiveness. Answer C focuses on driver opinions, but public support doesn't determine whether speed bumps will actually reduce accidents. Answer D introduces an additional variable (increased enforcement) that's separate from evaluating the speed bump plan itself. The key insight is that the plan assumes speed reduction anywhere on the street will help, but accidents happen at specific locations. If those locations don't coincide with where speed bumps would be placed, the entire premise fails. Strategy tip: In GMAT "evaluate the plan" questions, look for assumptions about how the proposed mechanism connects to the desired outcome. The right answer usually tests whether that connection actually exists in practice.

Question 2

1. the buildings' current air-conditioning systems already operate close to their minimum possible energy consumption levels (correct answer)
2. the firm owns the buildings outright or leases them from a commercial landlord
3. white roof coatings require more frequent maintenance than the dark coatings currently in place
4. energy prices in the region are projected to rise over the next five years

Explanation: When you encounter a "plan evaluation" question, you need to identify what information would most directly determine whether the proposed strategy will achieve its intended goal. The firm's goal here is to cut electricity costs by reducing air-conditioning usage through cooler roofs. Choice A is correct because it addresses the fundamental assumption underlying the entire plan. If the air-conditioning systems are already operating at peak efficiency (minimum energy consumption), then even cooler roofs won't significantly reduce electricity usage. The systems would barely decrease their already-optimized energy draw, making the roof painting ineffective at cutting costs. Conversely, if the systems aren't operating efficiently, cooler roofs could meaningfully reduce their workload and energy consumption. Choice B is wrong because ownership versus leasing affects who pays for implementation, not whether the plan will work. The physical effectiveness of white roofs doesn't depend on ownership structure. Choice C introduces a cost consideration but doesn't help evaluate whether the core strategy will succeed. Higher maintenance costs would affect net savings but wouldn't determine if the cooling effect actually reduces air-conditioning usage. Choice D focuses on future energy prices, which would affect the dollar value of any savings but doesn't address whether the plan will generate energy savings in the first place. Strategy tip: On GMAT evaluation questions, prioritize answer choices that test the plan's fundamental assumptions or mechanisms. Ask yourself: "What could prevent this plan from working as intended?" rather than focusing on secondary factors like costs, timing, or ownership details.

Question 3

1. How many students currently miss the first class period but attend later periods on the same day (correct answer)
2. Whether teachers favor the proposed change to the daily schedule
3. Whether buses can be rescheduled without increasing transportation costs
4. How many schools in neighboring districts already begin classes later than the proposed start time

Explanation: When evaluating whether a proposed solution will work, you need to identify information that directly tests the underlying assumption. Here, administrators assume that starting later will reduce absences because students will sleep longer and be more rested. Choice A is correct because it directly tests this assumption. If many students currently miss first period but show up for later classes, this suggests that the early start time is indeed causing absences. These students are already demonstrating that they attend school when it starts later in the day, making the administrators' belief credible. Conversely, if very few students miss only first period, the early start time might not be the primary cause of absences. Choice B is wrong because teacher preferences, while important for implementation, don't reveal whether the policy will actually improve attendance. Teachers might oppose the change for personal reasons even if it would help students. Choice C focuses on logistical feasibility rather than effectiveness. Even if transportation costs increase, this doesn't tell us whether the later start time will achieve its goal of reducing absences. Choice D provides context about what other districts do, but doesn't indicate whether those later start times actually improve attendance. Other schools might have different reasons for their schedules, and their experiences don't necessarily predict this district's results. Strategy tip: In assumption-testing questions, look for answer choices that provide direct evidence for or against the proposed cause-and-effect relationship. Avoid choices that focus on implementation details, opinions, or tangential comparisons.

Question 4

1. whether donors who receive personalized emails tend to give larger amounts, on average, than those who receive generic emails (correct answer)
2. how much time staff members will need to create personalized messages for each prospective donor
3. what proportion of the organization's annual budget currently comes from small individual donations
4. whether the database software used by the organization can store customized donor profiles securely

Explanation: When evaluating business plans or strategic changes, you need to focus on whether the proposed change will actually achieve the stated goal. Here, the nonprofit's goal is to "raise more donations," and their strategy assumes personalization increases response rates. The correct answer is A because it directly addresses whether the plan will succeed in raising more donations. Even if personalized emails generate more responses, the plan only works if those responses translate into meaningfully higher donation amounts. If personalized emails get more replies but smaller donations, the strategy could actually reduce total fundraising revenue. Answer A gets to the heart of whether this approach will achieve the organization's primary objective. Let's examine why the other options miss the mark: B focuses on implementation costs rather than effectiveness - knowing the time investment doesn't tell you whether the strategy will raise more money. C provides background context about current funding sources but doesn't help evaluate whether personalization will improve results. D addresses a technical requirement for implementation but again doesn't speak to whether the approach will be successful in generating more donations. Remember that on GMAT Critical Reasoning questions asking what would be "most useful to determine," prioritize information that directly tests the core assumption or goal. Don't get distracted by operational details or tangential factors. Ask yourself: "What piece of information would most clearly show whether this plan will work as intended?" Focus on the primary objective, not the supporting logistics.

Question 5

1. Whether the additional cabin duties will delay flight attendants from performing mandatory pre-flight safety checks (correct answer)
2. Whether passengers will notice any decline in cabin cleanliness once flight attendants, rather than specialists, conduct the cleaning
3. Whether the contracted cleaning crews currently work for competing airlines at the same airport
4. Whether the airline's gates are usually available earlier than the scheduled boarding times for departing flights

Explanation: When you encounter a question asking what would be "most helpful to know" to assess a claim, you're dealing with an assumption or evaluation question. You need to identify what critical information could strengthen or weaken the managers' argument. The managers claim that having flight attendants clean cabins will reduce turnaround time and increase daily flights. For this plan to work, the flight attendants must be able to complete cleaning faster than the current crews AND still perform their other essential duties without delays. Answer choice A identifies the key potential flaw: if cabin cleaning delays flight attendants from completing mandatory pre-flight safety checks, the plan could actually increase turnaround time rather than decrease it. This directly challenges whether the proposed change will achieve its stated goal, making it the most relevant information needed to assess the claim. The wrong answers miss this crucial connection. Answer choice B focuses on passenger perception of cleanliness, which doesn't affect turnaround time or flight frequency. Answer choice C asks about the current cleaning crews' other contracts, which is irrelevant to whether the new system will be faster. Answer choice D addresses gate availability, but even if gates are available early, that doesn't help if the new cleaning process creates bottlenecks elsewhere in the turnaround process. Remember: in evaluation questions, look for information that directly tests whether the proposed cause will actually produce the claimed effect. The most helpful information typically reveals potential obstacles or confirms necessary conditions for success.

Question 6

1. whether the profit margin on discounted pastries will still exceed the cost of producing them
2. whether most pastries left unsold by 2:00 p.m. are currently discarded at the end of the day (correct answer)
3. whether rival cafés in the area already offer afternoon pastry discounts
4. whether afternoon customers typically purchase beverages even when they do not buy pastries

Explanation: When evaluating business reasoning on the GMAT, you need to identify what additional information would most directly test the core assumption behind the proposed strategy. The executives assume that discounting pastries after 2:00 p.m. will boost sales by attracting new customers. The key insight is understanding what happens to those pastries currently. If most pastries left unsold by 2:00 p.m. are discarded at the end of the day (choice B), then the discount strategy makes strong economic sense—the café can generate some revenue from items that would otherwise produce zero income. However, if those pastries aren't typically wasted, the discount might cannibalize full-price sales without providing the assumed benefit. Choice A focuses on profit margins, but even if discounted pastries remain profitable, this doesn't tell us whether the strategy will actually increase overall revenue or just reduce margins on existing sales. Choice C about competitor pricing is relevant to market positioning but doesn't evaluate whether the core assumption—that discounts will attract new customers—is sound. Choice D about beverage purchases by afternoon customers is interesting for cross-selling analysis, but again doesn't directly test whether the pastry discount will work as intended. The critical question is whether there's currently waste that this strategy could convert into revenue. Choice B provides exactly the information needed to evaluate this assumption. Strategy tip: In GMAT critical reasoning questions asking you to "evaluate" an argument, look for the choice that tests the most fundamental assumption underlying the proposed plan, not just related factors.

Question 7

1. Do most employees cite commuting stress as a primary reason for considering leaving the company? (correct answer)
2. Will the company's information-technology budget increase to support additional remote-access infrastructure?
3. How many competing firms already permit their employees to work remotely full-time?
4. Has the corporation previously experimented with flexible scheduling policies during holiday seasons?

Explanation: When evaluating whether a proposed solution will achieve its intended goal, you need to identify the key assumption linking the proposed action to the desired outcome. The corporation assumes that remote work will improve job satisfaction and reduce turnover, but this only works if the current workplace conditions that remote work addresses are actually driving employees to leave. Choice A directly tests this crucial assumption by asking whether commuting stress—something remote work would eliminate—is actually a primary reason employees consider leaving. If employees are leaving for reasons unrelated to what remote work solves (like poor management, low pay, or limited advancement opportunities), then the remote work policy won't address the real causes of turnover. Choice B is incorrect because IT budget concerns are about implementation costs, not whether the plan will be effective at reducing turnover. The question asks about achieving the goal, not about feasibility or expenses. Choice C is wrong because what competitors offer doesn't determine whether this company's specific remote work policy will solve their turnover problem. Even if competitors offer full remote work, partial remote work could still be effective if it addresses the root causes of this company's turnover. Choice D is irrelevant because holiday scheduling flexibility is different from regular remote work policies, and past experiments don't indicate whether this current plan addresses the actual reasons employees leave. Strategy tip: In evaluation questions, focus on whether the proposed solution actually addresses the underlying problem. Look for answer choices that test the key assumptions connecting the action to the intended result.

Question 8

1. What percentage of current peak-hour riders have flexible work schedules that would permit them to travel at off-peak times (correct answer)
2. Whether other large cities that adopted similar pricing structures experienced increases in overall ridership
3. Whether the cost of collecting fares will change under the new pricing system
4. Whether the city council must approve any future changes to transit fares

Explanation: When you encounter a question asking what information would be "most useful to know" for evaluating a proposed solution, you're being tested on your ability to identify the critical assumption underlying that solution. The transit agency's plan assumes that people can shift their travel times in response to price changes, but this assumption needs validation. Choice A directly addresses this core assumption by asking about rider flexibility. If most peak-hour riders have rigid work schedules and cannot travel at different times, then changing fare prices won't redistribute ridership regardless of how attractive the off-peak pricing becomes. This information is essential to assess whether the strategy can work at all. Choice B focuses on overall ridership increases in other cities, but the agency's stated objective is redistributing existing ridership, not necessarily increasing total ridership. This data wouldn't directly indicate whether overcrowding was reduced during peak hours. Choice C examines administrative costs of fare collection, which is irrelevant to whether the pricing strategy will achieve the stated goal of evening out ridership patterns throughout the day. Choice D addresses procedural requirements for future fare changes, but the question asks about assessing the current proposal's likelihood of success, not about implementation logistics. Strategy tip: In "useful to know" questions, look for the answer choice that tests the plan's fundamental assumption. Ask yourself: "What must be true for this solution to work?" The choice that addresses whether that crucial condition exists is typically correct.

Question 9

1. Whether consumers of luxury goods in the state can easily purchase such goods in neighboring states or online to avoid the tax increase (correct answer)
2. Whether the last sales tax increase on non-luxury goods produced the expected revenue gain
3. Whether the luxury-goods tax will be easier to collect than other forms of taxation
4. Whether the state's luxury-goods retailers have publicly supported the proposed tax increase

Explanation: When evaluating predictions about policy outcomes, you need to identify what critical information could make the prediction succeed or fail. The government predicts that raising luxury goods tax from 8% to 10% won't meaningfully reduce sales, allowing them to collect more revenue. The correct answer is A because consumer alternatives directly threaten this prediction. If luxury goods buyers can easily avoid the tax by purchasing online or crossing state borders, sales within the state would indeed drop meaningfully, undermining the revenue increase. This information is crucial for evaluating whether the prediction holds true. Let's examine why the other options are less relevant: B focuses on past performance of different taxes (non-luxury goods), but different product categories have different demand elasticities, making this comparison unreliable for predicting luxury goods behavior. C addresses tax collection efficiency, which affects administrative costs but doesn't help evaluate whether sales will remain stable—the core of the government's prediction. D considers retailer support, but their public position doesn't determine actual consumer purchasing behavior or sales outcomes. Remember that "evaluate the prediction" questions require you to identify what unknown information would most directly confirm or refute the stated prediction. Look for factors that could fundamentally alter the assumed relationship—in this case, between tax rates and sales volume. The ability to avoid the tax entirely represents the most direct threat to the government's assumption that higher rates won't reduce in-state luxury goods purchases.

Question 10

1. Whether early interventions based on the assessment data can be implemented at a lower cost than typical hospital treatments (correct answer)
2. Whether policyholders will find the online assessment difficult to complete without assistance
3. Whether the insurance company's competitors already offer discounts for completing health-risk assessments
4. Whether the online assessment platform meets industry data-privacy standards

Explanation: When evaluating an argument that proposes a causal relationship—like "health assessments will lead to cost savings through early interventions"—you need to identify what information would test whether that causal chain actually works. The analysts' argument has a clear logical structure: assessments → early interventions → reduced expensive hospitalizations → cost savings. To evaluate this argument, you need to determine whether the proposed solution actually costs less than the problem it's trying to solve. Choice A directly tests this core assumption by asking whether early interventions cost less than hospital treatments. If early interventions are more expensive than hospitalizations, the entire cost-saving argument collapses, regardless of how effective the assessments are at identifying risks. This comparison is essential to validate the economic logic of the plan. Choice B focuses on user experience with the assessment, but difficulty completing it doesn't address whether the intervention strategy will save money—it's about implementation, not economic effectiveness. Choice C examines competitive practices, which might be relevant for marketing strategy but tells you nothing about whether this particular approach will actually reduce costs. Choice D addresses data privacy compliance, which is operationally important but irrelevant to evaluating the cost-effectiveness argument. Strategy tip: In argument evaluation questions, always identify the core causal claim first, then look for answer choices that test the most critical assumption in that causal chain. Focus on what could make the entire argument succeed or fail, not peripheral implementation details.

Question 11

1. What proportion of viewers who have abandoned the network cite excessive commercials as their primary reason (correct answer)
2. How much advertising revenue will be lost because of the reduced number of commercial breaks
3. Whether streaming services are likely to increase their subscription fees in the near future
4. Whether prime-time shows on the network are also available, with limited commercials, on competing cable channels

Explanation: When evaluating business plans on the GMAT, you need to identify what information would best help assess whether the proposed strategy will achieve its intended goal. The network's goal is to regain lost viewers by reducing commercial breaks, based on the assumption that excessive commercials drove viewers away. Choice A is correct because it directly tests the network's core assumption. If a high proportion of former viewers cite excessive commercials as their primary reason for leaving, this supports the plan's logic. If most viewers left for other reasons (poor show quality, better content elsewhere, etc.), then reducing commercials won't address the real problem and the plan will likely fail. Choice B focuses on revenue loss, which is important for overall business viability but doesn't help assess whether the plan will succeed in attracting viewers. You could lose significant ad revenue and still regain viewers, or lose little revenue while failing to attract audiences. Choice C about streaming subscription fees is too indirect and speculative. Even if streaming prices increase, this doesn't guarantee viewers will return to traditional TV, and it doesn't validate whether fewer commercials specifically will draw them back. Choice D about competing cable channels misses the point. The network is primarily competing with ad-free streaming services, not other traditional channels with commercials. Strategy tip: In plan evaluation questions, always look for the answer choice that most directly tests the key assumption underlying the proposed strategy. Ask yourself: "What would I need to know to determine if this plan's logic is sound?"

Question 12

1. Whether most patrons with low borrowing rates currently owe outstanding fines on their accounts (correct answer)
2. Whether eliminating fines will reduce the library's annual revenue enough to require budget cuts elsewhere
3. Whether libraries in other cities that discontinued fines have experienced increases in staff workload
4. Whether the public library system plans to extend operating hours in conjunction with the removal of fines

Explanation: When you encounter GMAT Critical Reasoning questions asking what would be "most helpful to know" for evaluating a plan, you're dealing with an assumption or evaluation question. You need to identify what missing information would most directly test whether the proposed strategy will work. The library's strategy assumes that fear of fines is what prevents people from borrowing books. To evaluate this assumption, you need to know whether the people who aren't borrowing much actually have outstanding fines that might be deterring them. Choice A is correct because it directly tests the library's core assumption. If most low-borrowing patrons do have outstanding fines, this supports the theory that fines discourage borrowing, making the strategy promising. If they don't have fines, then fear of fines isn't the real barrier, and eliminating them won't help circulation. Choice B focuses on budget implications, which doesn't help evaluate whether the strategy will increase circulation—that's a separate concern about implementation costs. Choice C examines staff workload at other libraries, but workload changes don't tell us whether circulation actually increased. Choice D asks about extended hours, but since that's an additional change beyond removing fines, it wouldn't help isolate whether eliminating fines alone boosts circulation. Strategy tip: In evaluation questions, look for the choice that most directly tests the plan's underlying assumption. Ask yourself: "What would I need to know to determine if this plan addresses the real problem?" The right answer usually provides a way to confirm or challenge the reasoning behind the proposed solution.

Question 13

1. whether the majority of current defects could have been detected visually at the stage when the inspection will occur (correct answer)
2. whether the inspection step will slow the production line enough to necessitate overtime work
3. whether the workers believe peer inspection shows management's lack of trust in them
4. whether similar firms that implemented peer inspection subsequently invested in additional automation

Explanation: When evaluating whether a proposed solution will effectively address a problem, you need to identify what conditions must be met for that solution to work. This question tests your ability to distinguish between relevant and irrelevant factors when assessing a plan's potential effectiveness. For peer inspection to reduce defects, the fundamental requirement is that inspectors must be able to detect the defects that currently occur. Choice A directly addresses this critical assumption—if most current defects cannot be visually detected at the inspection stage, then peer inspection won't meaningfully reduce the overall defect rate, regardless of how well it's implemented. Choice B focuses on production speed and overtime costs, which relates to implementation costs rather than effectiveness at reducing defects. Even if inspection slows production, it could still successfully reduce defects. Choice C addresses worker morale concerns, which might affect implementation but doesn't determine whether the inspection process can actually catch defects. Choice D provides information about what other companies did after implementing peer inspection, but their subsequent investments don't tell us whether peer inspection itself was effective at reducing defects. The key trap here is confusing implementation challenges or side effects with core effectiveness. Choices B, C, and D all present factors that might matter for the overall success of the program, but they don't address the fundamental question of whether peer inspection can actually detect and prevent defects. Remember: when evaluating whether a proposed solution will work, first identify what basic conditions must be true for the solution's mechanism to function as intended.

Question 14

1. Whether students who are silent in class nonetheless perform well on written examinations
2. Whether past instances of graded pop-quizzes in similar courses led to measurable increases in classroom discussion (correct answer)
3. Whether faculty members are willing to write and grade additional quizzes each week
4. Whether the university honors program already employs frequent quizzes without requiring additional faculty compensation

Explanation: When you encounter an "evaluate the plan" question on GMAT Verbal, you need to identify what evidence would directly test whether the proposed strategy will work as intended. The university's theory is that pop-quiz threats will motivate students to prepare more and participate more in class discussions. The best evidence for evaluating this plan would be historical data showing whether this exact strategy has worked before. Choice B provides precisely that—it asks whether graded pop-quizzes in similar courses actually led to measurable increases in classroom discussion. This directly tests the causal relationship the university is betting on: quiz pressure → more participation. Choice A is tempting but misses the mark. Knowing that quiet students perform well on written exams tells us about their knowledge level, but doesn't help us predict whether quiz threats will make them speak up more. Students might stay silent regardless of preparation. Choice C focuses on faculty willingness to administer quizzes, which addresses implementation logistics but not effectiveness. Even if teachers are willing, we still wouldn't know if the plan works. Choice D examines an existing honors program's quiz structure, but this doesn't tell us whether those quizzes actually increase participation—and honors students may behave differently than typical students anyway. Remember: "Evaluate the plan" questions require evidence that directly tests the assumed cause-and-effect relationship. Look for answer choices that would provide data about whether the proposed mechanism has actually worked in comparable situations before.

Question 15

1. Whether transportation of the donated food to charities will cost less than the current expense of sending it to landfills (correct answer)
2. Whether the donated food must meet the same packaging standards required for retail sale
3. Whether employees will need additional training to separate edible products from those that must be discarded
4. Whether the grocer will receive public recognition that could boost customer loyalty

Explanation: When you encounter a question asking what information would help assess a specific outcome, focus on what directly impacts that outcome. Here, the grocer claims the donation plan will "lower disposal fees," so you need to evaluate what affects the total cost of waste disposal. The correct answer is A because it directly compares the two cost scenarios. The grocer's claim about reducing disposal costs only makes sense if transporting food to charities costs less than the current method of sending waste to landfills. Without this cost comparison, you can't determine whether the plan actually saves money on disposal. This gets to the heart of the economic argument. Choice B is wrong because packaging standards for donations don't affect disposal costs—they relate to food safety and charity requirements, not the financial comparison between disposal methods. Choice C focuses on employee training costs, which would be a one-time expense for implementing the program rather than ongoing disposal costs. While training might be necessary, it doesn't help assess whether the disposal cost claim is valid. Choice D addresses marketing benefits and customer loyalty, which are separate business advantages unrelated to the specific question of disposal cost savings. Remember that GMAT Critical Reasoning questions often test your ability to identify what's directly relevant to the conclusion. When a passage makes a specific claim (like cost reduction), look for answer choices that provide information needed to evaluate that exact claim, not broader or tangential considerations.

Question 16

1. Whether hotel occupancy rates in surrounding towns remain low during the winter despite hosting similar seasonal festivals (correct answer)
2. Whether the town's transportation infrastructure can handle the influx of vehicles during the festival week
3. Whether seafood is the region's principal culinary attraction during the more popular summer months
4. Whether winter weather conditions in the town are typically mild enough to allow outdoor events without frequent cancellations

Explanation: When evaluating whether a business strategy will achieve its intended goal, you need to look for evidence that directly tests the core assumption behind that strategy. Here, the town assumes that a winter seafood festival will draw visitors who wouldn't normally come during the off-season, thereby boosting tourism revenue. Answer choice A provides the most relevant test of this assumption. If surrounding towns have hosted similar seasonal festivals but still maintain low hotel occupancy rates during winter, this suggests that such festivals may not be effective at drawing significant numbers of visitors during the off-season. This evidence would directly challenge whether the strategy can work as intended. Let's examine why the other choices are less useful for judging revenue impact: B focuses on transportation infrastructure capacity, which addresses logistical concerns but doesn't help determine whether enough visitors will actually come to boost revenue. C asks about seafood's popularity during summer months, but summer visitor preferences don't necessarily predict whether seafood will attract winter visitors. D considers weather conditions for outdoor events, which affects event execution but doesn't address the fundamental question of whether the festival will draw enough visitors to increase revenue. The key insight is that A provides comparative data about similar strategies in similar contexts—exactly what you need to evaluate whether this approach works. Strategy tip: On GMAT Critical Reasoning questions about business plans or predictions, look for answer choices that offer relevant precedents or test the core assumptions, rather than those that address secondary logistical concerns.

Question 17

1. Whether nearby office workers currently have lunch breaks long enough to attend 30-minute readings without arriving late to work afterward (correct answer)
2. Whether the authors selected for readings have sizeable followings on social media platforms
3. Whether the bookstore can negotiate volume discounts from publishers on newly released titles
4. Whether other bookstores in the city have tried lunchtime events and found them profitable

Explanation: When evaluating business strategies, you need to identify the most fundamental assumption that could make or break the plan. This question tests your ability to spot the critical success factor among several plausible considerations. The bookstore's strategy hinges on a basic logistical assumption: that office workers can actually attend these events during their lunch breaks. If nearby workers don't have sufficient time to attend a 30-minute reading and return to work punctually, the entire strategy collapses before any other factors matter. Choice A directly tests this fundamental prerequisite, making it the best way to determine if the strategy can succeed. Choice B focuses on authors' social media followings, but this misses the point. Even popular authors won't draw crowds if the timing doesn't work for the target audience. Social media presence doesn't guarantee local, lunchtime attendance. Choice C examines volume discounts from publishers, which affects profit margins but doesn't determine whether people will actually show up. The strategy could fail even with great wholesale pricing if no one attends. Choice D looks at other bookstores' experiences with lunchtime events, but success elsewhere doesn't guarantee success here. Different neighborhoods have different office cultures, break schedules, and foot traffic patterns. Strategy tip: On GMAT Critical Reasoning questions about business plans, always look for the answer choice that addresses the most basic operational assumption. Before considering optimization factors like pricing or marketing, ask yourself: "What fundamental condition must be true for this plan to even be possible?"

Question 18

1. Whether the electricity used to charge EVs will come mainly from renewable energy sources rather than from coal-fired power plants (correct answer)
2. Whether automakers will be able to supply enough EVs to meet consumer demand created by the subsidies
3. Whether the average price of gasoline is expected to rise sharply over the next decade
4. Whether the government plans to invest in public transit systems in addition to promoting EV adoption

Explanation: When evaluating policy effectiveness, you need to trace the complete causal chain from policy implementation to the intended outcome. Here, the goal is reducing nationwide emissions through replacing gasoline cars with electric vehicles. Choice A identifies the most critical factor because it addresses whether EVs actually produce lower emissions overall. If the electricity grid relies heavily on coal-fired power plants, charging EVs could generate substantial emissions at the power plant level, potentially offsetting much of the benefit from eliminating tailpipe emissions. Conversely, if the electricity comes from renewable sources, the emissions reduction would be dramatic. This directly determines whether the policy achieves its core objective. Choice B addresses supply constraints but doesn't question whether EVs reduce emissions—it only affects the speed of adoption. Even if supply is limited initially, the policy could still significantly reduce emissions over time. Choice C focuses on gasoline prices, which might influence consumer behavior but doesn't determine the emissions impact of the actual vehicle transition. Choice D considers public transit investment, which could enhance overall emissions reduction but isn't necessary to evaluate whether the EV transition itself will be effective. The key insight is distinguishing between factors that affect policy implementation (B, C, D) versus factors that determine whether the policy works as intended (A). Even perfect implementation means nothing if the underlying assumption—that EVs produce fewer emissions—proves false due to a dirty electricity grid. Remember: In policy evaluation questions, always identify what could undermine the basic logic connecting the proposed action to the desired outcome.

Question 19

1. whether corridor lights are currently left on continuously even during periods of very low occupancy (correct answer)
2. whether guests generally prefer brighter lighting in corridors than in their rooms
3. whether the local building code sets minimum illumination levels for emergency egress routes
4. whether other hotels that adopted motion-sensor lighting received favorable customer reviews regarding environmental initiatives

Explanation: When evaluating business decisions on the GMAT, you need to focus on information that directly impacts the core assumption. Here, the hotel assumes motion-sensor lighting will reduce operating expenses by turning lights on only when needed. Choice A is correct because it directly tests this assumption. If corridor lights are currently left on continuously even during low occupancy periods, then motion sensors would indeed reduce electricity usage and costs by turning lights off when corridors are empty. This information is essential to determine whether the cost savings will actually materialize. Choice B is wrong because guest preferences about brightness levels don't affect whether motion sensors will reduce operating costs. The question is about expense reduction, not lighting quality or guest satisfaction. Choice C is incorrect because building code requirements for emergency lighting would be a constraint the hotel must work within regardless of the motion-sensor decision. While important for implementation, this doesn't help determine if cost savings will occur. Choice D is wrong because customer reviews about environmental initiatives relate to marketing benefits, not operating expense reduction. Favorable reviews might provide other value, but they don't indicate whether electricity costs actually decreased. Remember that GMAT critical reasoning questions about business decisions often hinge on unstated assumptions. Always ask yourself: "What must be true for this plan to work as intended?" The correct answer typically provides information that either supports or challenges that underlying assumption. In cost-reduction scenarios, focus on data that directly measures the current situation against the proposed change.

Question 20

1. Whether the majority of the outlet's current readers typically read news on mobile devices where typing comments is less convenient (correct answer)
2. Whether the outlet has sufficient moderators to remove offensive or spam comments quickly
3. Whether advertisers prefer to place ads on pages that contain user-generated content
4. Whether articles on competing sites with comment sections tend to receive more social-media shares than articles without comments

Explanation: When you encounter a GMAT question asking what information would be "most useful to know" for evaluating a plan's effectiveness, you need to identify which factor would most directly impact whether the intended outcome will occur. The outlet's goal is clear: increase visit duration through comment sections. For this to work, readers must actually use the comment feature. Choice A addresses the fundamental prerequisite—whether readers can practically engage with comments. If most readers use mobile devices where typing is inconvenient, they're unlikely to participate in discussions, making the entire strategy ineffective regardless of other factors. Let's examine why the other options miss the mark. Choice B about moderation addresses comment quality, but poor moderation would likely become apparent only after implementation—it doesn't help assess whether the basic strategy will work. Choice C focuses on advertiser preferences, which relates to revenue rather than the stated goal of increasing visit duration. Choice D examines social media sharing on competitor sites, but sharing behavior doesn't directly indicate whether comment sections increase time spent reading individual articles. Notice how A directly connects to the causal mechanism the outlet is banking on: that interactive discussion will keep people on the site longer. If the primary user base can't easily interact, this mechanism fails from the start. Strategy tip: In "evaluate the plan" questions, prioritize information that tests the core assumptions underlying the proposed strategy. Ask yourself: what must be true for this plan to work as intended?