normative model of strategic decision making

[RonPurewal]

The forest/trees analogy doesn't really capture the essence of what you need to do in SC. See, the problem with that analogy is that individual trees are ... well ... individual trees.

The true essence of SC is that the trees aren't "individual" at all.

EVERY important topic in SC is a RELATIONSHIP. The GMAT doesn't test "single-point decisions" at all!

What I mean is this: When you find a split/difference, you should have to look elsewhere in the sentence to resolve the issue.
E.g., if you see a split between a plural verb and a singular verb, you'll have to find the subject—which will be somewhere else.
If you see a pronoun issue, you'll have to find the noun referent—which will be somewhere else.
If you see one of two parallel structures, you'll have to find the other one—which will be somewhere else.
Etc.

If you do see a "single-point" split, it is nearly 100% likely to have been put there as a distraction.

[rustom.hakimiyan]

Hi,

A couple of questions:

1)When it comes down to a split between B and D, is there any difference between ",and" vs. "and," ?

2)I realize that this has been touched on earlier in the thread but i'm still having a hard time figuring out how to decipher this issue within the short time during the test. Meaning, how am I to realize that it's implying: "Executive examine X, and using something, decide Y" vs. "Executive examine X and use Y in deciding".

The only thing I can come up with is, in B, the statement says -- "The model suggests that executives examine, and they use some criteria in deciding something" -- by the count of parallelism, would "executives" have to be added to the second part to see if the ommitted word makes sense?

Meaning, would it read -- executives examine and executives they use something..." Is that why it's wrong? If the answer is yes -- i'm even more confused now because I thought that things cannot "jump" over ",and/,but"?

[tim]

There is definitely a difference between "and," and ",and", but if you look at the larger context in both cases you will see that each example uses the "and" and the comma in a way that works grammatically.

As to your question of "Executive examine X, and using something, decide Y" vs. "Executive examine X and use Y in deciding", these mean very different things; take a look at what is decided in each case. If there is more to your question than that, I'm afraid I missed it.

[RonPurewal]

the structure of choice B suggests that the second observation ("they use xxxxx in deciding...") is unrelated to the model.

analogy:

the law stipulates that i take a break for at least 30 minutes, and i often take one for much longer.

see how this works?
• the law stipulates that i take a break for at least 30 minutes
• i often take a longer break (which, of course, has nothing to do with the law)

same thing with B. but, unlike the sentence above, B doesn't work. (the model is a model of decision-making, so both things are clearly part of the model.)

[gmatkiller_24]

Hi, Ron.

is there something wrong with the " in using" in choice B?

is " in using" somewhat different from " using" in the correct choice?

Please clarify, Thank you!

[RonPurewal]

those are super different.

• "in __ing" describe something someone does, or experiences, as part of the process of "__ing".
In using a RPN calculator, you may initially encounter some frustration with the order of keystrokes.

• "using" (like other comma+__ing modifiers) just adds more information that describes the entire main action.
Using a RPN calculator, Mark was able to perform financial calculations very quickly.

one of these works in the context of the problem at hand; the other is nonsense.

[gmatkiller_24]

those are super different.

• "in __ing" describe something someone does, or experiences, as part of the process of "__ing".
In using a RPN calculator, you may initially encounter some frustration with the order of keystrokes.

• "using" (like other comma+__ing modifiers) just adds more information that describes the entire main action.
Using a RPN calculator, Mark was able to perform financial calculations very quickly.

one of these works in the context of the problem at hand; the other is nonsense.

got it~ Thanks a ton, Ron!

[RonPurewal]

those are super different.

• "in __ing" describe something someone does, or experiences, as part of the process of "__ing".
In using a RPN calculator, you may initially encounter some frustration with the order of keystrokes.

• "using" (like other comma+__ing modifiers) just adds more information that describes the entire main action.
Using a RPN calculator, Mark was able to perform financial calculations very quickly.

one of these works in the context of the problem at hand; the other is nonsense.

got it~ Thanks a ton, Ron!

you're welcome.

[niksdoon]

the structure of choice B suggests that the second observation ("they use xxxxx in deciding...") is unrelated to the model.

analogy:

the law stipulates that i take a break for at least 30 minutes, and i often take one for much longer.

see how this works?
• the law stipulates that i take a break for at least 30 minutes
• i often take a longer break (which, of course, has nothing to do with the law)

same thing with B. but, unlike the sentence above, B doesn't work. (the model is a model of decision-making, so both things are clearly part of the model.)

Hi Ron,

Thanks for the explanation !! To help me better understand the difference between ", and" AND "and ," , can you please explain what would be the meaning of sentence if I put comma before and in option D, i.e if sentence is:

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.

Thanks

[RonPurewal]

this issue has nothing to do with the placement of punctuation.

the issue is that 'X and Y' implies that 'X' and 'Y' are two separate things that are independent of each other.

also, this exam doesn't test the presence/absence of punctuation in the first place. so you should avoid going down that path altogether.

[RonPurewal]

the deal is here:
https://www.manhattanprep.com/gmat/foru ... ml#p115627

[aflaamM589]

Hello Ron/experts,
Can ABCE also be crossed because they refers to executives while these points to analysis?
A pronoun with all its form should have one single antecedent.
Is my analysis correct?
Many thanks.

[RonPurewal]

hm? "these" isn't a pronoun here at all -- it's an adjective.

[ShubhamG503]

Ron
Can I say this ?

CONJUNCTION + COMMA + VERBing implies that the present participle refers to the subject of the preceding clause like here

...the executives examine and, using the criteria, decide... (here using point to executives)

On other hand

COMMA + CONJUNCTION + VERBing implies that the present participle refers to the subject of the FOLLOWING clause:

Defense attorneys have argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators...

Please advise your thoughts. Thanks

[RonPurewal]

hm?
those two examples aren't even comparable to each other!

the second example has a following subject. the first one doesn't.
since the first one doesn't even HAVE a following subject, the difference clearly has nothing to do with punctuation!