问题如下图：
选项：
A. 
B. 
C. 
解释：
既然已经发现前面提到的有明显偏离ips要求、ipo不当修正等情况，为什么还要放任NGM继续投资呢，只要是return满足要求就可以吗？
NO.PZ201604030300004104 最后一句implication of political那句，来自政治的压力让他不能解雇这个基金经理，这样不违反独立客观性吗
Yes, because he allowepoliticfactors to influenhis cision. Yes, because he is obligateto immeately suspenNGM until he finishes his evaluation. A is correct. Until Locke’s investigation is complete, he hno obligation to suspenthe manager or take any other action. He believes the manager canes a value through superior returns anversification, antherefore it mreasonable to retain NGM if Locke csatisfieththe manager cawithin the constraints of the IPS anCFA Institute Stanr. Until the analysis is complete, it woulnot practical, anLocke woulviolating his ty to ain his clients’ best interests suspenng the manager anleaving the assets unmanageor to temporarily moving them to another manager for safe-keeping.既然已经发现前面提到的有明显偏离ips要求、ipo不当修正等情况，为什么还要放任NGM继续投资呢，只要是return满足要求就可以吗？韩韩_品职助教 · 28月前同学你好，虽然之前讲了有一些小问题，但是NGM在return上，versification上都是可以满足公司的要求的，这就是很充分的理由了。老师您好，这是我看到的之前同学的提问和老师的回答。我的问题是在return、versification满足的情况下，IPS未被遵守算是小问题？IPS都不当回事了，颠覆整个知识体系了吧？是不是有另一个角度来看这道题？
根据讲义211页，发现有potentiviolation，应该限制employees的activity，叫停业务等。继续留用应该是违反的吧。还是感觉应该选C，烦请能说服我，感谢。
