HBRI - Hogan Business Reasoning Inventory Qualitative Reasoning: Verbal Logic Questions and Answers — Questions and Answers
Question 1: A business report states: 'All successful marketing campaigns increase brand visibility. Some of our recent campaigns have not increased brand visibility.' Based on these statements, which of the following conclusions is logically certain?
- Some of our recent campaigns were not successful. (Correct answer)
- None of our recent campaigns were successful.
- All of our recent campaigns were unsuccessful.
- Successful campaigns are the only way to increase brand visibility.
Correct answer: Some of our recent campaigns were not successful.
This is a deductive reasoning problem. The first premise is a universal statement: ALL successful campaigns have a certain quality (increasing visibility). The second premise states that SOME recent campaigns lack this quality. Therefore, it must be true that those specific campaigns that did not increase brand visibility cannot be classified as successful.
Question 2: Complete the analogy: CEO is to Company as General is to ________.
- Soldier
- Army (Correct answer)
- Victory
- Strategy
Correct answer: Army
The relationship in the analogy is one of leadership over an entire organization. A CEO is the head of a Company, and a General is the head of an Army. The other options represent parts of the whole (Soldier), an outcome (Victory), or a tool used by the leader (Strategy), but not the organization itself.
Question 3: A manager is evaluating a new software implementation. The project lead states, 'The rollout will either be on-time or over-budget, but not both.' If the project lead's statement is true, which of the following scenarios is impossible?
- The rollout is late and under-budget.
- The rollout is on-time and under-budget.
- The rollout is late and over-budget.
- The rollout is on-time and over-budget. (Correct answer)
Correct answer: The rollout is on-time and over-budget.
The statement 'either...or..., but not both' establishes an exclusive disjunction. This means only one of the two conditions (on-time, over-budget) can be true. The option where the rollout is both 'on-time' and 'over-budget' directly contradicts the 'but not both' part of the premise, making it the impossible scenario.
Question 4: A focus group report includes the following statements: 1. Participants who value sustainability are more likely to prefer Product A. 2. Participants from urban areas tend to value sustainability more than those from rural areas. 3. Product A is selling better in rural areas than in urban areas. Which of the following is the most logical inference from these statements?
- The marketing for Product A is ineffective in urban areas.
- There must be another significant factor driving sales of Product A in rural areas. (Correct answer)
- Participants in rural areas are being misleading about their values.
- Product A is not actually a sustainable product.
Correct answer: There must be another significant factor driving sales of Product A in rural areas.
There is a contradiction in the premises. We expect Product A to sell well in urban areas (where sustainability is valued) but it's actually selling better in rural areas. This suggests that the preference for sustainability is not the primary driver of sales in the rural market. Therefore, some other factor must be influencing its success there, overriding the stated value preference.
Question 5: Which of the following is the most significant assumption made in the argument: 'Our competitor lowered their prices last quarter and their sales volume increased. Therefore, we should lower our prices to increase our sales volume.'?
- Our competitor's profit margins will decrease.
- Our products are of similar quality to our competitor's.
- The competitor's price drop was the sole cause of their sales increase. (Correct answer)
- The overall market for the product is growing.
Correct answer: The competitor's price drop was the sole cause of their sales increase.
The argument observes a correlation (price drop and sales increase) and concludes causation. The critical assumption is that the price drop was the only reason for the sales increase. It ignores other potential factors like a successful marketing campaign by the competitor, a decrease in quality from another competitor, or seasonal trends. The other options are potential outcomes or related facts, but not the core assumption of the argument itself.
Question 6: A company policy states: 'All client-facing employees must complete the annual security training. No employees in the accounting department are client-facing.' Based only on these two statements, what can be concluded?
- No employees need to complete the training.
- Some accounting employees might need to complete the training for other reasons.
- No accounting employee is required by this specific policy to complete the training. (Correct answer)
- All client-facing employees are in departments other than accounting.
Correct answer: No accounting employee is required by this specific policy to complete the training.
The first statement creates a requirement for a specific group ('client-facing employees'). The second statement explicitly excludes the accounting department from this group. Therefore, based strictly on this policy, no one in accounting is required to take the training. Other options make assumptions not supported by the text; for example, we don't know if other policies exist (B) or the departmental affiliation of all client-facing staff (D).
HBRI - Hogan Business Reasoning Inventory Qualitative Reasoning: Verbal Logic Questions and Answers
A business report states: 'All successful marketing campaigns increase brand visibility.
Some of our recent campaigns have not increased brand visibility.' Based on these statements, which of the following conclusions is logically certain?