Statement–Assumption (Raising IIC Membership Bar to High Achievers): Statement: “For members at IIC, seek out those who have topped the services exams, distinguished themselves in graduate studies, or made a mark early in arts or media.” Assumptions: I) The current selection process for membership lacks transparency. II) The present mix/standard of IIC members is below the expectations of the institution, warranting higher entry benchmarks.

Introduction / Context:
The recommendation proposes actively recruiting “toppers” and early achievers for IIC membership. Such a recommendation presupposes that raising the calibre of entrants is desirable because the current or expected membership quality needs improvement relative to institutional aspirations (thought leadership, excellence, impact).

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Policy: target high-achieving candidates (services toppers, distinguished graduates, early achievers in arts/media).
• Objective: elevate/align member quality with IIC’s mission.

Concept / Approach:
To justify tighter entry criteria, one must assume a gap between current membership quality and desired standards, not necessarily a problem of transparency in how members are selected.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Assumption II: Necessary. Without presuming that existing membership quality is not fully satisfactory (or that higher benchmarks are desirable to meet institutional goals), raising the bar would lack purpose.Assumption I: Not necessary. The proposal does not hinge on whether the current process is transparent; it could be perfectly transparent yet still aim to improve quality.

Verification / Alternative check:
Negate II (members already meet or exceed expectations) and the recommendation loses rationale. Negate I (process is transparent) and the proposed targeting strategy still stands.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Only I” or “Either/Neither” misidentify the driver. The argument is about quality alignment, not procedural opacity.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing governance/process critiques (transparency) with quality/mission-fit objectives.

Final Answer:
Only assumption II is implicit.