Statement — The General Administration Department has issued a circular informing all employees that henceforth they can take their lunch break at any half-hour slot between 1:00 pm and 2:30 pm.\n\nAssumptions —\nI. Employees will welcome the flexibility and actually use different time slots.\nII. Work will not fully stop, because staggered lunch will maintain continuity.

Introduction / Context:
A policy allowing staggered lunch slots aims to combine employee convenience with uninterrupted organizational operations. The decision presupposes that employees will distribute themselves across the available slots and that this distribution will help keep the workflow going. Without these two beliefs, the policy would not achieve its intended operational benefit and would offer only cosmetic change.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Policy: any half-hour lunch slot between 1:00 pm and 2:30 pm.
• I: employees will use different slots rather than clustering at the same time.
• II: staggered timing will prevent a total halt in work.

Concept / Approach:
Revenue, service, or workflow continuity in offices depends on overlapping presence. Staggering break times is a classic operations tactic. The policy makes sense only if employees both appreciate and adopt the flexibility (I) and if that adoption actually preserves continuity (II). Therefore both assumptions must be implicit for the policy rationale to hold.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
If employees ignore flexibility and still break together, continuity fails. If continuity were not improved by staggering, there would be no operational reason for the policy. Both contradictions confirm that I and II are needed.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

Common Pitfalls:
Overlooking that such policies rely on actual employee behavior, not just permission language.

Final Answer:
Both Assumption I and II are implicit.