Sales performance in a region has declined for three consecutive months, and the regional manager initially believes that "sales staff are insufficiently motivated." He wants to test this judgment using the hypothesis method. Which two of the following approaches meet the course requirements?

Answer: BC

• ATreat insufficient motivation as a definite conclusion and immediately ask the HR department to design a new commission plan.✗ This treats the hypothesis as a conclusion, jumping straight to resource investment without validation, contradicting the idea that a hypothesis is a checklist awaiting verification.
• BSimultaneously consider alternative explanations such as inaccurate target customer selection, unclear communication of the existing product's value, and mismatch between price and budget.✓ The first step in competing hypotheses requires generating at least three different explanations for the important issue, not just listing the one you favor most.
• CStipulate in advance: if performance does not improve noticeably after enhancing motivation, then reassess the original judgment instead of continuing to make excuses for insufficient motivation.✓ This embodies falsifiability: an effective hypothesis must specify what outcome would lead to its rejection; otherwise, if any result can be rationalized, it is not a good hypothesis.
• DOnly track the attendance hours of sales staff, believing that increased attendance proves that motivation has taken effect.✗ There is no necessary connection between attendance hours and performance growth; using attendance to prove motivation effectiveness is choosing evidence that supports one's bias but lacks discriminating power.