In a stage-3 analysis, "the CFO wants option B" is used as a reason B scores higher. This premise is:

Answer

An irrelevant appeal to authority — a fallacy

Options - A. A legitimate appeal to a relevant authority - B. An irrelevant appeal to authority — a fallacy - C. A constraint carried over from stage 1 - D. Tu quoque — the CFO does not follow it Why - A. The CFO's preference is not expertise on the criterion being scored. A preference is not evidence. - B. Correct — who wants an option says nothing about how it scores on cost or reliability. The CFO's goals belong in stage 4, where the recommendation revisits them. - C. A constraint limits the feasible set (money, time). A preference does not; it is an opinion about the answer. - D. Tu quoque dismisses an argument because the arguer does not practise it. Nothing here is being dismissed.

Van Cleave 4.3; Smith 10.2.4.2; concept map G10