Regarding Marie's potential hiring of an office assistant, which statement is correct?

To understand why the answer is focused on the first statement, it's important to consider the context and the implications of hiring an office assistant.

When evaluating the decision to hire an office assistant, one key consideration is the potential benefits to Marie's business. If the first statement outlines specific advantages that would directly lead to increased efficiency, productivity, or client satisfaction, it illustrates a strong justification for the hire.

For instance, if the first statement indicates that hiring an assistant would free up Marie’s time, allowing her to focus on more strategic aspects of her financial planning practice, this is indeed a valid point. The time saved could enable her to serve more clients or to enhance her service offerings, which is crucial in the financial planning industry where personal interaction and tailored advice matter significantly.

On the other hand, if the second statement does not provide a compelling reason or is misleading concerning costs or operational impacts, it would not support the decision effectively. Thus, focusing on the first statement aligns with understanding the fundamental concepts of operational efficiency and the importance of strategic decision-making in hiring.

Therefore, acknowledging the merits of the first statement is key, as it draws attention to the advantages that can significantly influence Marie's business positively.