Statement:\nA huge export order was cancelled because the company failed to adhere to the delivery timeframe. The company is now likely to incur losses this financial year.\n\nCourses of Action:\nI. Immediately suspend the production officer-in-charge.\nII. Sell the finished goods (produced for the export order) to other buyers.\nIII. Upgrade/replace time-critical machinery to reliably meet future delivery windows.\n\nWhich course(s) of action logically follow(s)?

Introduction / Context:
The problem is financial loss due to a missed delivery window. Sensible actions should minimize current loss (monetize inventory) and prevent recurrence (process/capacity improvements). Punishment without investigation rarely addresses root causes like bottlenecks, breakdowns, or unrealistic schedules.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Order cancelled strictly for timeline non-compliance.
• Inventory exists (finished or near-finished).
• Underlying constraints may include machinery downtime, capacity misplanning, or process issues.

Concept / Approach:
Apply immediate mitigation plus structural correction. Evaluate each course for relevance, feasibility, and proportionality relative to the stated cause (timeframe slippage).

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Standard responses include expedited secondary sales, renegotiation, OEE improvements, and critical equipment upgrades.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Scapegoating vs. systems fixes; ignoring salvage opportunities.

Final Answer:
Only II and III follow.