Introduction / Context:
Organizations stagger lunch breaks to maintain continuity of service. The circular introduces flexible lunch slots. We determine which beliefs must hold for this policy to be meaningful and effective.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- Policy: Flexible half-hour lunch slots between 1:00 p.m. and 2:30 p.m.
- Assumption I: Employees will distribute themselves across the slots.
- Assumption II: Staggering will prevent a halt in organizational work.
Concept / Approach:
For staggering to work, two conditions are necessary: staff actually choose varied slots, and coverage remains sufficient so operations continue. If everyone chose the same slot, the policy's purpose would be defeated.
Step-by-Step Solution:
If I is false (everyone still eats at one time), staggering fails to achieve continuity.If II is false (work still stops), the policy does not meet its operational objective.Therefore both are implicit.
Verification / Alternative check:
Common service desks, call centers, and admin offices use staggered breaks precisely to avoid downtime—matching both assumptions.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
I-only or II-only: Each alone is insufficient; both employee behavior and service continuity are required.Neither: Ignores the design intent of the policy.
Common Pitfalls:
Assuming employee behavior will automatically distribute without recognizing it as a necessary premise.
Final Answer:
Both I and II are implicit
Discussion & Comments