Critical Reasoning — Implicit Assumptions Consultant’s opinion: “To make the company commercially viable, urgently prune staff strength and borrow from financial institutions.”

Introduction / Context:
The consultant recommends two actions: reduce staff and borrow funds, to restore commercial viability. We must identify the necessary assumptions for this recommendation to be rational.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I. Financial institutions lend money for such proposals.
• II. The company’s product has a potential market (revenue prospects).
• III. The employees of the company are inefficient.

Concept / Approach:
For the prescription to help, (a) funds must be obtainable and (b) the business must have market potential so that cost reduction plus capital infusion can lead to viability. Employee “inefficiency” is not necessary; pruning can be for cost structure, not competence.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:
Negate I or II and the recommendation loses practical or commercial sense. Negate III and the plan can still be justified on cost grounds.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:

• “All are implicit” incorrectly demands a claim about employee inefficiency.
• “None” is wrong because I and II are clearly required.

Common Pitfalls:
Equating staff pruning with incompetence; in turnarounds, cost right-sizing often addresses structure, not individual performance.

Final Answer:
Only I and II are implicit