In the following question, a statement followed by three courses of action…

20242025

In the following question, a statement followed by three courses of action numbered I, II and III are given. You have to assume everything in the statement to be true and on the basis of the information given in the statement, decide which of the suggested courses of action logically follow(s) for pursuing.

Statement: The Company X has rejected first lot of valves supplied by Company A and has cancelled its entire huge order quoting use of inferior quality material and poor craftsmanship.

Courses of Action:

I. The Company A needs to investigate functioning of its purchase, production and quality control departments.

II. The Company A should inspect all the valves rejected by Company X.

III. The Company A should inform Company X that steps have been taken for improvement and renegotiate schedule of supply.

  1. A.

    Only I and II follow

  2. B.

    Only II follows

  3. C.

    II, and either I or III follow

  4. D.

    All I, II and III follow

Attempted by 2 students.

Show answer & explanation

Correct answer: A

Concept: A suggested course of action “follows” only if it is an immediate, practical step that responds directly to the stated problem, lies within the actor's own power to start right away, and does not presume that some other corrective step has already been completed. An action that assumes a result not yet established, or skips ahead of necessary groundwork, does not follow.

Application: Company A's own valves were the ones rejected for poor quality, so its immediate response has two independent parts: inspect the very valves Company X rejected to confirm the defect is genuine (Course II), and examine the purchase, production and quality-control departments to find out why substandard material and craftsmanship passed through in the first place (Course I). Neither step waits on the other to finish, and neither claims any improvement has already happened — so both are things Company A can and should do right away.

Cross-check: Course III assumes the opposite: that corrective steps have ALREADY been taken and that Company A can credibly ask Company X to renegotiate the supply schedule. Nothing in the statement supports that any correction has actually happened yet, so III presumes a fact not yet in evidence and cannot be an immediate course of action — it could only be considered once I and II have actually been carried out.

Result: Only Courses I and II follow.

Why the other combinations do not hold:

  • “Only II follows” leaves out the internal audit: confirming the defect in the rejected valves does not by itself explain why substandard material and craftsmanship passed through Company A's own processes, so restricting the response to inspection alone is incomplete.

  • “II, and either I or III follow” wrongly treats the internal audit and the renegotiation as alternatives. The internal audit does not depend on, or compete with, telling Company X that improvements are already in place — nothing in the statement forces a choice between the two.

  • “All I, II and III follow” wrongly admits the renegotiation as something Company A can announce right away. It requires the corrective work to already be complete, which the statement gives no basis for at this stage.

Explore the full course: Accenture Preparation