Unit quiz: Making the work transferable: a framework, a summary and your own worst objection

Check understanding, separately from reading

5 questions · 80% to pass · no timer. This quiz checks the lessons in this unit. These authored questions assess recognition and application of the taught distinctions, not professional qualification. You may review the lessons and retry. Repeat attempts reuse the question bank; a remembered answer is not proof of transfer to a new situation.

Saving a lesson records reading only. Previous lesson completions have not been converted into passing scores. You can continue reading without a pass; the assessment remains unpassed.

Question 1

You hand your screening framework to a colleague. On the first file, two fields require a document the merchant says he will send next week, and one judgment field is scored at an extreme. What does a working three-state framework output?Two unresolved fields and one flagged judgment field: the screen returns a not-yet note naming the two documents, placing the extreme judgment score with a named second reader, and stating the amount the evidence in hand actually supports.A pass with a note to collect the two documents if the file proceeds, since the merchant has committed to sending them and a not-yet answer will cost the advisor a week of the merchant's patience.

Question 2

A five-page memo contains fourteen ratios, a page of statement excerpts and a conclusion reading "the file looks sound". The committee sends it back within twenty minutes without a decision. What was missing?A longer financial information section, because a committee that returns a memo in twenty minutes has not been given enough data to reach a conclusion of its own.The decision line: an amount, an instrument, a term, a per-hundred-dollars cost, conditions, and the single measured assumption that would reverse the recommendation, with everything that neither supports nor defeats that sentence cut.

Question 3

A merchant with a coverage ratio of 2.10 asks for a discount from a factor of 1.36 to 1.30 on a schedule whose repayment period is eleven weeks, to finance a delivery van with a nine-year life. Which diagnosis applies?A product problem: the repayment period sits far outside the nine-year life of the asset, so the schedule is being paid out of working capital; instrument, amount and schedule shape are the questions, and price is the last one.A pricing problem, because a coverage ratio above two means capacity is not in question and the only remaining variable between the offers is cost.

Question 4

Your memo recommends $70,000 on a coverage ratio of 1.27 built on the annual average, and the file's own statements show the schedule's opening nine weeks run at 24 percent below that average. What must the memo say?The annual figure only, with a note that the merchant has two strong quarters ahead, because the seasonal dip is already reflected in the annual average that produced coverage of 1.27.The trough arithmetic: coverage of 0.97 in the opening weeks with a shortfall of $207.08 a week, the reversal point in dollars of weekly receipts, and a sized-down amount whose coverage holds in the trough rather than on the average.

Question 5

Seven weeks after funding, a merchant disputes a $1,150 duplicate debit and says the total repayment he agreed to was $6,250 lower than the file shows. Which evidence decides it?The dated record: the same-day note in dollars, the disclosure listing disbursement amount, total repayment, per-hundred-dollars cost, payment and frequency, and the other fees, and the merchant's written acknowledgement of it.The advisor's call log, which shows four contacts in the week before funding and establishes that the terms were discussed more than once.

Continuing does not mark this assessment passed.

Progress stays in this browser, on this device—not an account or cloud backup. Clearing browser data removes it. Visits never count as study. Previous untimed legacy completions are not invented as study days.