Logical reasoning — Statements and Conclusions (governance and institutional appointments): Evaluate which conclusions logically follow from the claim that the Government has spoiled many top-ranking financial institutions by appointing bureaucrats as Directors, and identify whether expertise in finance should explicitly guide Director appointments and be commensurate with the institute’s financial work

Given data

• Statement: Government has spoiled many top-ranking financial institutions by appointing bureaucrats as Directors.
• Conclusions to test:
  • I: Government should appoint Directors considering the person's expertise in finance.
  • II: The Director of a financial institute should have expertise commensurate with the institute’s financial work.

Concept/Approach

In statement–conclusion questions, a conclusion “follows” if it is a necessary, reasonable inference or prescriptive remedy directly suggested by the stated cause–effect relationship. The statement blames unsuitable appointments (bureaucrats) for spoiling institutions, implicitly highlighting lack of relevant financial expertise as the root cause.

Step-by-Step reasoning
1) From “spoiled due to appointing bureaucrats” to “appoint by finance expertise”: The critique presumes that relevant domain expertise matters. Therefore, a corrective action (appoint based on finance expertise) logically follows ⇒ Conclusion I follows.2) If lack of suitability is the core problem, then suitability must match the financial work the institute undertakes. This makes “expertise commensurate with the work” a direct corollary ⇒ Conclusion II follows.

Verification/Alternative

Even if some bureaucrats may personally have finance expertise, the statement’s general blame implies systematic misfit, and the natural remedy is to demand appropriate, commensurate expertise for Directors (I and II).

Common pitfalls

• Assuming the statement recommends “no bureaucrats ever.” The logic concerns expertise fit, not labels; a bureaucrat with proven finance expertise could still satisfy the remedy.

Final Answer
Both I and II follow.