A significant number of complex repair jobs carried out by Ace Repairs have to be reworked under the company's warranty. The reworked jobs are invariably satisfactory. When initial repairs are inadequate, therefore, it is not because the mechanics lack competence; rather, there is clearly a level of focused concentration that complex repairs require that is elicited more reliably by rework jobs than by first-time jobs.
The argument above assumes which of the following?
There is no systematic difference in membership between the group of mechanics who do first-time jobs and the group of those who do rework jobs.
There is no company that successfully competes with Ace Repairs for complex repair jobs.
Ace Repairs' warranty is good on first-time jobs but does not cover rework jobs.
Ace Repairs does not in any way penalize mechanics who have worked on complex repair jobs that later had to be reworked.
There is no category of repair jobs in which Ace Repairs invariably carries out first-time jobs satisfactorily.
一修修不好,二修就能修好,论证是二修比一修的人更focus,比较的主体可能不同
A. 没看懂,membership是入的什么邪门的会?membership是member的统称而已,不是什么会!如果二修比初修的员工牛逼,结论就不成立了
D. 如果初修员工修不好要被惩罚,会多一些focused concentration,但说不定二修修不好也罚呢,还是不确定谁focus多。但如果初修的员工真的太烂了,能力不行,focus还是修不好的
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论