normative model of strategic decision making

[harpreet1205]

Use the sentence structure to help you out:

(D) The normative model of strategic decision-making suggests that executives examine (a firm’s external environment and internal conditions) and, (using the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses,) decide on a strategy.

Notice that the modifier "using the set..." comes after the parallel marker "and" and so the modifier must modify the second parallel element:

Executives (examine X) and, (using ABC, decide on Y).

Here the modifier "using the set" modifies second parallel element.By this statement do you intend to say that it modifies "decide on y"?
If not and if it modifies "executive decide on ..." as per my understanding isn't there a problem with the structure of the sentence as the executive decide on something using the set(modifier)...

using+comma+noun
shouldn't executive(noun) follow comma??

Also there is a problem regarding placement of executive as someone said that in D "executive" is implied after "and" then it does makes sense to have a modifier immediately after "and" but again if we look at the structure as it is doesn't it look as though modifier "using the set modifies" decide on something?
I am utterly confused by the placement of modifier....Please clarify..

Thanks in advance:)

[RonPurewal]

Here the modifier "using the set" modifies second parallel element.By this statement do you intend to say that it modifies "decide on y"?

Basically, when you have "and", or "but", or anything else that separates two thoughts from one another, that word forms a "boundary" that modifiers can't cross.

E.g.,
You should fill the form out, with blue or black ink, and then sign your name at the bottom.
--> "With blue or black ink" describes how you should fill out the form. It doesn't necessarily describe how you should sign the form.

You should fill the form out and then, with blue or black ink, sign your name at the bottom.
--> You should sign the form with blue or black ink. No information about how you should fill it out.

[RonPurewal]

Also there is a problem regarding placement of executive as someone said that in D "executive" is implied after "and" then it does makes sense to have a modifier immediately after "and" but again if we look at the structure as it is doesn't it look as though modifier "using the set modifies" decide on something?
I am utterly confused by the placement of modifier....Please clarify..

I'm sorry, but I can't read this. It's a giant wall of text, with no punctuation or sentence breaks.

Please break this up into shorter thoughts. Thanks.

[thanghnvn]

The normative model of strategic decision-making suggests that executives examine a firm’s
external environment and internal conditions, and in using the set of objective criteria they derive
from these analyses, can decide on a strategy.
A. conditions, and in using the set of objective criteria they derive from these analyses, can decide
B. conditions, and they use the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses in deciding
C. conditions and, in using the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses, deciding
D. conditions and, using the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses, decide
E. conditions and, in their use of the set of objective criteria they derive from these analyses, they
decide

OA: D
i chose B
i want to understand whats wrong with B. i think in B "they" makes it more clear..
but in D is it the "decide" is parallel with "examine".

experts, pls confirm the following

the pattern is that "suggest that sb do something" NOT "suggest that sb can do something". A is out.

the pattern is " suggest that ... and that ", we need to repeat "that" . B and E are wrong.

is my thinking correct?

[RonPurewal]

the pattern is that "suggest that sb do something" NOT "suggest that sb can do something". A is out.

Nope. Not a "pattern". Just an issue of meaning.

E.g.,
The cracks in the building's facade suggest that it can collapse at any time.
--> perfectly logical. we're talking about what might happen.

This sentence is talking about a hypothesis about what executives actually do -- not just about what they're capable of. So, here, you don't want "can".

the pattern is " suggest that ... and that ", we need to repeat "that"

1/
This is just parallelism. If things are simple, don't make them complicated!

2/
The "pattern" you're mentioning here is not present in any of the choices, so it is irrelevant.

[manhhiep2509]

Hello.
I tried to explain why the choice B is wrong.
Please take a look and see whether I am correct.

I find that choice B is wrong because it has ambiguous meaning, a result of a non-parallel structure.

A model suggests that X do xxxx, and they do yyyy.

It is not clear whether "they do yyyy" is also what the model suggests. It seems that "A model suggests that X do xxxx" and "they do yyyy" are separate thoughts. As a result, "they" does not clearly refer to the executives.

Moreover, "use X in doing Y" seems to be not an idiom.
"use x to y" is correct.

---

I have a question about the use of "V-ing" in the middle of a sentence.

Even though "V-ing" modifies "the verb" next to it -- in the sentence the verb is "decide" -- "v-ing" need to refer logically to the subject of "the verb", isnt it?

Thank you.

[RonPurewal]

Hello.
I tried to explain why the choice B is wrong.
Please take a look and see whether I am correct.

I find that choice B is wrong because it has ambiguous meaning, a result of a non-parallel structure.

A model suggests that X do xxxx, and they do yyyy.

You're right. In fact, you're even more right than you're claiming here.
The meaning is not ambiguous. It's straight-out wrong. The punctuation (comma) precludes the correct meaning and allows only the incorrect interpretation that you've articulated here.

[RonPurewal]

It is not clear whether "they do yyyy" is also what the model suggests. It seems that "A model suggests that X do xxxx" and "they do yyyy" are separate thoughts. As a result, "they" does not clearly refer to the executives.

It's completely obvious that "they" = "executives" -- in fact, no other people are even mentioned -- so this complaint is not valid.

"Pronoun ambiguity" is NOT tested on the gmat.
If the intended noun is obvious, that's good enough (provided that the noun is actually there!).

[RonPurewal]

Moreover, "use X in doing Y" seems to be not an idiom.
"use x to y" is correct.

No, "use __ in __ing" is a perfectly respectable construction, provided that it actually makes sense.
If "x" is a tool or process that's directly involved in doing "y", then the second version is better, because it conveys that idea. However, if "x" is NOT such a tool and makes only an indirect contribution, then "use __ to __" is wrong, while the first version can work.

E.g.,
Matthew used nothing but Pepsi bottle caps to make his 100-foot-tall sculpture of Väinämöinen.
(i.e., the sculpture is actually made of bottle caps)

But...
Matthew, who is afraid of heights, made extensive use of meditation techniques in making his 100-foot-tall sculpture of Väinämöinen.
Here, "to make" would be wrong, because meditation plays no part in the actual construction of a sculpture. This version, on the other hand, correctly conveys the indirect contribution of meditation, presumably to counter the sculptor's fear of heights.

[RonPurewal]

I have a question about the use of "V-ing" in the middle of a sentence.

Even though "V-ing" modifies "the verb" next to it -- in the sentence the verb is "decide" -- "v-ing" need to refer logically to the subject of "the verb", isnt it?

Thank you.

If you're referring to the usage in choice D (= set off by commas), then, yes, the subject should be the agent of that action.

[rustom.hakimiyan]

D) The normative model of strategic decision-making suggests that executives examine a firm’s external environment and internal conditions and, using the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses, decide on a strategy.

Hi Jon,

I know you touched on this in the post above but i'd just like to clarify the meaning:

1) When a coordinating conjunction is preceded by a comma, it could serve two purposes: It will either introduce an independent clause and connect the two clauses or it could create a list. Correct?

2) On the other hand, if a coordinating conjunction such as "and" is followed by a comma, what purpose does it serve?

I can see from your example above what the "and" is doing and it seems like, it seems like it's setting up two independent clauses -- executives examine a firm and, executives decide on a strategy. Am I correct?

Does that mean that when "and" is preceded by a comma, there really isn't that big of a difference compared to when "and" is followed by a comma. It still serves as a separator of two clauses and requires a SV, before and after the coordinating conjunction?

Thanks!

[SC312]

Ron,

I know we have discussed this option B) before. I wanted to know if we can rule out B) just because it doesn't have the correct parallel structure.

The normative model of strategic decision-making suggests that X and Y [X and Y are clauses and therefore just going by the sentence structure they seem to be parallel]

Let me know if my understanding is incorrect.

The reason to not select B) is that I felt "in deciding" should be replaced by the verb "decide" while the verb "use" should be replaced by a modifier to make perfect sense of the two things that are been discussed.

The only reason I was skeptical of selecting D) was the missing "NOUN" after or before the modifier "using the set of objective criteria.. ". Now that I know the subject is implied, I believe this option makes the perfect sense.

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

The problem with choice B is that, at best, it's ambiguous. At worst, it suggests an incorrect interpretation.

B has 2 possible meanings:

1/
(a) The model suggests that executives do xxxx, and (b) they do yyyy.

2/
The model suggests (a) that executives do xxxx and (b) that they do yyyy.

Either interpretation is possible. Worse, the punctuation of choice B strongly suggests the first (incorrect) interpretation.

The correct answer, with its two parallel verbs, has no such ambiguity.

[JhanasC520]

Dear Ron,

Sorry to bring this post up again. I have read all the replies and explanations in this post and conclude that the key issue this queston focus on is the use of "comma and" or "and" which discussed a lot in other posts.

Following is my understanding towards this question, Ron, Could you please correct me if I misunderstood.

The normative model of strategic decision-making suggests that executives examine a firm’s external environment and internal conditions, and in using the set of objective criteria they derive from these analyses, can decide on a strategy.

A. conditions, and in using the set of objective criteria they derive from these analyses, can decide

A is wrong becuase "comma and" here suggests that the sentence "can decide" is in parallel with the setence "the normative model of....". the meaning expressed here is wrong.

B. conditions, and they use the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses in deciding

B is wrong because "comma and" here suggests that the sentence "they use the set of..." is in parallel with the setence "the normative model of....". the meaning expressed here is wrong.

C. conditions and, in using the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses, deciding

the mistake in C is obvious. the sentence after "and" is fragment.

D. conditions and, using the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses, decide

D is correct because the comma before using does not belong to AND. so if we exclude "using....", the sentence is : Sentence A(executives examine....) and Sentence B((executives) decide...) and these two sentences share one same subject-executives.


E. conditions and, in their use of the set of objective criteria they derive from these analyses, they decide

In E, the expression of "in their use of..." is not idiomatic.

Ron, as you mentioned in your previous posts that when we do SC problems, It's better that we see the forest rather than focus on the trees.
I have no idea whether in this post, the rule of " and comma" be the forest in this question ?

Look forward to your reply and Many thanks!

[jlucero]

Dear Ron,

Sorry to bring this post up again. I have read all the replies and explanations in this post and conclude that the key issue this queston focus on is the use of "comma and" or "and" which discussed a lot in other posts.

Following is my understanding towards this question, Ron, Could you please correct me if I misunderstood.

The normative model of strategic decision-making suggests that executives examine a firm’s external environment and internal conditions, and in using the set of objective criteria they derive from these analyses, can decide on a strategy.

A. conditions, and in using the set of objective criteria they derive from these analyses, can decide

A is wrong becuase "comma and" here suggests that the sentence "can decide" is in parallel with the setence "the normative model of....". the meaning expressed here is wrong.

B. conditions, and they use the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses in deciding

B is wrong because "comma and" here suggests that the sentence "they use the set of..." is in parallel with the setence "the normative model of....". the meaning expressed here is wrong.

C. conditions and, in using the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses, deciding

the mistake in C is obvious. the sentence after "and" is fragment.

D. conditions and, using the set of objective criteria derived from these analyses, decide

D is correct because the comma before using does not belong to AND. so if we exclude "using....", the sentence is : Sentence A(executives examine....) and Sentence B((executives) decide...) and these two sentences share one same subject-executives.


E. conditions and, in their use of the set of objective criteria they derive from these analyses, they decide

In E, the expression of "in their use of..." is not idiomatic.

Ron, as you mentioned in your previous posts that when we do SC problems, It's better that we see the forest rather than focus on the trees.
I have no idea whether in this post, the rule of " and comma" be the forest in this question ?

Look forward to your reply and Many thanks!

This looks 100% correct and 100% forest. You're focusing on the main idea of the sentence than any particular -ed vs -ing split or whether or not you would include an extra word somewhere. This is exactly the process I recommend for students.