Outsiders in any field often believe that they can bring in fresh, useful solutions that have been overlooked by insiders.
Statements
On Inference questions, we're scanning for Conditional / Causal wording primarily (mathematical and pivot wording, secondarily).
3 conditionals
Universal: attempts at creativity .. are futile Rule: A's that are B are C A and B → C
Attempting ~Relevant creativity + experience → Futile
-------------
Trigger word: only Rule: A happens only by B A → B
~Really Und Problems → ~Solve problems
--------------
Trigger word: no one Rule: No one who is A is B A → ~B
~Experience → ~Really Understand Problems
When we have more than one conditional, we check to see whether they chain together (do they have an overlapping term?)
The last two both talk about "really understanding problems", so we look for a chain, and it's there.
~Really ~Solve ~Experience → Understand → Problems Problems
The first conditional basically gives us the same relationship (without relevant experience → attempt at solution is futile).
The other thing we look for with conditionals is a fact we can apply it to. Did they talk about people who lack experience? (or we could trigger the contrapositive if they talked about people who did solve problems)
The first sentence told us that outsiders, who by definition lack experience, often think they can bring fresh eyes to a problem that come up with a useful solution.
According to our conditional chain, though, these outsiders without experience won't really understand the problem, so they won't be able to solve them.
Goal
The correct answer will probably either reward us for connecting the chain by saying "If no experience, can't solve problem", or it will reward us for applying that fact to Outsiders by saying "Sorry, you can't solve these problems".