Which of the following situations would not represent a potential default by the Contractor?

In the context of potential defaults by a contractor, increasing workforce efficiency is not a situation that would represent a default. Default refers to the failure of a contractor to meet their obligations as defined in the contract, which can include failure to pay debts, going bankrupt, or consenting to a custodian appointment, as these all indicate a breakdown in the contractor's ability to fulfill their responsibilities.

Increasing workforce efficiency demonstrates proactive behavior that can benefit the contractor and the project overall, suggesting an improvement in quality, productivity, or cost-effectiveness. This action does not indicate any failure to perform obligations and, instead, aligns with the contractor's commitment to meet project goals effectively.

On the other hand, actions like filing for bankruptcy, consenting to a custodian appointment, and failing to pay debts clearly indicate an inability to meet contractual obligations and are often seen as serious warning signs of potential default. These actions reflect an incapacity to sustain business operations or fulfill financial commitments, whereas enhancing efficiency is a positive development.