Critical Reasoning — Implicit Assumptions Personnel Manager’s argument: “The best way to solve workers’ dissatisfaction is cash rewards. This incentive solved the problem in CIDCO Company; therefore it should work here as well.” Assumptions to evaluate: I. The reasons for dissatisfaction in both companies were similar. II. Monetary incentives have universal appeal.

Introduction / Context:
This is an analogy-based recommendation: a solution that worked at CIDCO is proposed for another company. We must identify what must be true for the analogy to hold.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Cash rewards solved dissatisfaction at CIDCO.
• Assumption I: both companies share similar causes of dissatisfaction.
• Assumption II: money always works due to universal appeal.

Concept / Approach:
Analogical arguments require similarity on causal factors. Without similarity, extrapolation is weak. Universality is not required; the argument relies on relevant similarity, not on an absolute rule about money.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Negate I: causes differ—analogy collapses. Negate II: money is not always effective—analogy can still work if this case matches CIDCO’s cause. Hence only I is implicit.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• Only II / Either / Neither / Both: They either overstate the claim (universality) or fail to include the essential similarity condition.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing “worked once” with “works everywhere.” Transferability hinges on cause similarity, not universality.

Final Answer:
Only assumption I is implicit