Question

Mohan sought the help of five consultants, who give the following opinions:
I. Organic vegetables might be a big success at Connaught Place but awareness about organic vegetables is low among Panipat customers.
II. The Connaught Place model can be implemented in Panipat provided the business is prepared to face the consequences.
III. Many high-end restaurants in Panipat use organic vegetables. So, using organic vegetables will not be a differentiating factor.
IV. Selling prices of their dishes in Panipat are significantly lower. Using organic vegetables will bring down profits.
V. Premium quality organic vegetables are not easily available in Panipat.
Which of the following set of options would support Ram’s argument of {not using organic vegetables?}

• A. I, III, IV
• B. II, IV, V
• C. I, III, IV, V
• D. II, III, IV, V
• E. All of the above
• A. Training Kishan to replace Ram in a few months.
• B. Not worrying about ingredients as long as business grows.
• C. Bringing Ram to Connaught place branch.
• D. Naming the Panipat branch as ‘Ram’s’, and changing it back to ‘Mohan’, when needed.
• J. Asking Kishan to run the Panipat branch.
• A. Creating awareness campaign for organic vegetables in Panipat.
• B. Mohan himself should look after the Panipat branch.
• C. Close down the Panipat branch.
• D. Send Kishan to Panipat branch and bring Ram to Connaught place permanently.
• O. Hire a new person to run the Panipat branch.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is C

Step 1: Identify statements that {discourage using organic vegetables in Panipat.}
I — Low awareness in Panipat \Rightarrow weak demand \Rightarrow supports {not} using organics.
III — Many rivals already use organics \Rightarrow no differentiation benefit \Rightarrow supports {not} using.
IV — Prices in Panipat are low; organics would cut profits \Rightarrow financial disincentive \Rightarrow supports {not} using.
V — Poor availability of premium organics \Rightarrow supply risk/quality issues \Rightarrow supports {not} using. Step 2: Eliminate statements that don’t support the argument.
II — Says the CP model {can} be implemented (with conditions). This is not a reason {against} using organics; at best it’s conditional support, so exclude it. Therefore the set that supports Ram’s “do not use” stance is \[ \boxed{I,\ III,\ IV,\ V} \quad \Rightarrow \quad \boxed{\text{Option (C)}}. \]

Answer 2

- Based on the feedback, the customers in Panipat seem to be highly satisfied with Ram’s behaviour. Hence, naming the branch ‘Ram’s’ could reinforce this satisfaction.
- On the other hand, if Mohan wants to ensure his involvement, he can rename the branch to ‘Mohan’ when needed. This allows flexibility in maintaining the business’s image while adapting to customer preferences.
- This approach balances both customer satisfaction and the leadership role, thus making it the most suitable action. \[ \boxed{D} \]

Answer 3

The Panipat branch has been growing fast but faces quality concerns regarding ingredients. For the long-term success of the business, quality must be safeguarded, since compromising it may damage reputation.
- Option A: Awareness campaigns will not directly address quality control issues.
- Option B: Mohan personally supervising ensures that quality concerns are addressed directly by the owner, maintaining customer trust while also leveraging the fast growth of the branch. This is the best option for the future of the business.
- Option C: Closing down a fast-growing branch is not logical.
- Option D: Reassigning Kishan and Ram does not guarantee control over quality.
- Option E: Hiring a new person may take time and does not ensure immediate quality control.
Thus, the best action is for Mohan to personally take charge of the Panipat branch.
\[ \boxed{\text{Mohan himself should look after the Panipat branch.}} \]