A software company, seeking to shorten product-development cycles, proposes replacing extensive upfront documentation with brief, continuously updated online notes, arguing that developers will spend less time writing and more time coding.
To evaluate the company's proposal, it would be most useful to know
- whether the majority of development delays are currently due to documentation rather than to code-review processes (correct answer)
- whether customers ever request access to the company's internal design documents
- whether the new online notes platform integrates with the company's existing version-control system
- whether similar companies that reduced documentation found it easier to recruit software engineers
Explanation: When evaluating business proposals on the GMAT, you need to identify what information would actually test whether the proposed solution addresses the real problem. The company assumes that reducing documentation time will meaningfully improve development cycles, but this assumption needs verification. Choice A is correct because it directly tests the proposal's core assumption. If documentation isn't actually causing the majority of delays—if code reviews or other bottlenecks are the real culprits—then switching to brief online notes won't achieve the goal of shorter development cycles. This information would reveal whether the company is solving the right problem or just rearranging deck chairs while the real issues persist. Choice B is wrong because customer access to internal documents is irrelevant to whether reducing documentation time will speed up development cycles. This addresses a different concern entirely. Choice C is wrong because platform integration, while operationally important, doesn't evaluate whether the fundamental premise is sound. Even if the notes integrate perfectly, the proposal could still fail if documentation isn't the main source of delays. Choice D is wrong because recruitment ease doesn't address the proposal's goal of shortening development cycles. A company might recruit better while still failing to speed up their actual development process. Remember that "evaluate" questions ask you to identify information that would test whether a plan will work as intended. Look for choices that examine the underlying assumptions behind the proposal, not just peripheral operational details.