Introduction / Context:
This is an ordering problem based on seniority. The chairperson is chosen by seniority, but the most senior candidate (Mr. Temple) declines the role, so we must select the next most senior person.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Ms. West has less seniority than Mr. Temple, but more than Ms. Brody.
- Mr. Rhodes has more seniority than Ms. West, but less than Mr. Temple.
- Mr. Temple does not want the job.
- Chair goes to the most senior available candidate.
Concept / Approach:
Construct a strict ordering from the comparisons, then remove Mr. Temple from consideration and choose the top remaining person.
Step-by-Step Solution:
From “West < Temple” and “West > Brody,” place: Temple > West > Brody.From “Rhodes > West” and “Rhodes < Temple,” place Rhodes between Temple and West.Complete order: Temple > Rhodes > West > Brody.Temple declines; therefore, Rhodes is next in line and becomes chair.
Verification / Alternative check:
Double-check that each comparative statement is satisfied by the final ranking; all constraints hold.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Temple declined. West and Brody have less seniority than Rhodes. “Joint chair” is not part of the selection rule given.
Common Pitfalls:
Misplacing Rhodes relative to West or forgetting to remove Temple after his refusal.
Final Answer:
Mr. Rhodes
Discussion & Comments