Beat The GMAT

hzone.iitian · Thu Jul 08, 2010 9:20 pm

1. The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by
Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen foods.
“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to
do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example,
the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20
cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of
food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its twenty-fifth birthday, we can
expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize
profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to
analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For
example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the
thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the
conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute
the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound,
and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.

My Response
The author concludes that Olympic Foods will be able to reduce the overall cost owing to its 25 years of operational experience. In support of this conclusion author provided two evidences, first, a general perception that organizations become efficient as they grow older and the second, in support of the general perception, he mentions example of color industry where cost came down by more than 50 percent between years 1970 to 1984. However, the prediction suffers critical flaws and evidences are not sufficient for conclusion.

The author provides example of color industry but fails to provide any substantial basis for comparison of food industry and color industry. In fact, these two industries are quite different in their business model and daily activity. For example, the raw materials used in color industry such as color, film, printing paper etc can be stored for long period of time. Hence, in this industry one can reduce cost by buying more raw materials at lower cost particularly when prices are low. However, the same is not true for food industry. In fact, the raw material for food industry cannot be stored beyond a specific short period. Many such differences between the industries make it difficult to compare the two.

Also, author’s evidence, that processing cost and time of print came down by more than 50 percent in 14 years, should be looked more closely. The author has almost concluded that the change in processing cost and time is result of operational experience only. However, the argument fails to provide the key information, which is whether cost and time has come down for experienced companies only or for all companies, irrespective of their experience in industry. It should be noted that 14 years are sufficient for technological innovation of the overall process. As a result it might prove that operational experience becomes immaterial in reduction of cost and time. However, one cannot expect similar innovation in cost and processing time in food industry.

As it stands, the argument is severely flawed and inconclusive. To support the conclusion better, author needs to provide similarities between two industries. Also, just mentioning general perception that experience will help reduce the cost, is not sufficient. Author needs to mention the changes that Olympic Foods brought in its operations from its experience to reduce the cost. Further, the author needs to compare the operation cost of Olympic Foods with new food processing companies to conclude that lower operation cost is result of experience only.

Recommend this topic

Back to top

grockit_andrea · Sun Jul 11, 2010 4:53 pm

I think this would be either a 3 or a 4. You gave a good detailed analysis of the two flaws you saw in the prompt, and that definitely helps your score. However, identifying and discussing a third flaw would help your essay seem more well-developed. For instance, your paragraph about comparing food processing to film processing could be split into two different flaws: 1. The author fails to provide evidence to support the analogy of food processing to film processing, and 2. The author doesn't sufficiently address the possible implications of raw materials used in food processing. By making that paragraph into two different paragraphs, and then filling those paragraphs out with specifics about the logical flaws and how the author could strengthen the argument, you give the impression of a more thorough consideration of the argument.
You might also want to focus on some of your writing mechanics; your syntax is scrambled in some places, and your grammar is sometimes flawed. A few mistakes won't hurt your score, but a consistent pattern of errors will, so be very careful about that.
Good luck with your continued essay practice!

Back to top

italian7745 · Wed Jul 14, 2010 2:14 am

Hi I would be grateful if u could analyze my answer...on the same question....

Minimizing Costs and Maximizing Profits seems to be the principle of every corporate company now a days .In the preceding statement , the author states that with time the cost of processing declines as every organization learns how to do things better and eventually become more efficient. The author cites an example from the color film processing industry and predicts that since Olympus foods shall be celebrating its 25th birthday , it can be expected that its long experience will enable it to minimize costs and maximize profits. Though his claim may have some merit , the author presents a poorly reasoned argument , and based solely on the evidence the argument offers we cannot accept his claim as valid.

The argument primarily consists of unsubstantiated premises. The author cites an example from the color processing industry although he fails to explain the how the decrease in cost of processing in color film industry ensures that the Olympic foods shall be able to achieve cost reduction. Moreover, the author fails to provide evidence that even if Olympus food is celebrating its 25th birthday and it has a long experience in the processes foods industry , how will the Olympus foods manage to minimize costs and maximize profits. The argument’s reasoning , the premises of the argument , lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render conclusion unacceptable.

In addition the author makes several assumptions that remain unproven. The author assumes that over time the cost of processing go down and this principle applies to the processing of food. The author fails to provide any explanation to prove this assumption. Furthermore , the author assumes that since it has experience in this field of roughly about 25 years , this will enable it to minimize costs and thus maximize profits. It is also possible that food processing industry is on the verge of decline and no more people prefer processed foods. The author weakens his argument by making several assumptions and failing to provide explication of the links between his assumptions.

Although there seems to be several key issues with author’s reasoning and assumptions , this is not to say that the entire argument is without base. The argument could have been strengthened had the author provided some information on how Olympic foods plans to minimize costs rather the causally linking the same with its long experience. Additionally , if the author had provided evidence to show that the principle stated directly applies to the processing of foods the argument would’t had seem this illogical. There are several issues with the author’s reasoning at present , with further data and clarification , the argument can be improved significantly.

In sum , the author’s conclusion is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantial assumption and renders the conclusion as invalid. If the author truly hopes to change his readers mind on this issue , he may have to restructure the entire argument , fix the flaws in the logic and provide evidentiary support to his premises. Without all these things , his poorly reasoned argument is likely to convince few people.

Back to top

grockit_andrea · Sun Jul 18, 2010 10:13 am

Italian7745, I think I would give your essay a 3 or a 4 as well. Your writing isn't very well-organized; although it looks like you tried to structure your 3 body paragraphs around unsubstantiated premises, assumptions, and ways to strengthen the essay, it ends up feeling cluttered. I would stick to one flaw per paragraph, and explain that flaw thoroughly, rather than putting several in one paragraph without much explanation.
Some of your sentences are either redundant or seem like "filler." Your introductory sentence, for instance, doesn't serve any clear purpose; you could eliminate it completely without changing the essay at all; similarly, the sentences that end each body paragraph are redundant. They do conclude the paragraphs, but they don't add anything new to the essay.
Finally, I'd suggest working on your grammar and syntax; there were a few sentences that I had to read more than once to figure out what you meant, because the phrasing was sometimes confusing or the errors were distracting.
You obviously had a lot of ideas about flaws in the argument, and that's great; you just need to work on clarity and organization, so your reader can easily follow along and appreciate the logic of your explanation.

Back to top

baotrang1308 · Mon Jul 26, 2010 11:23 pm

This is my first time on Beatthegmat and I'm so surprised how helpful the replies are to help us improve our AWA writing skills. I would love to share my essay on the same topic and I really appreciate your kind feedback to help me gain a 6 score..^^..

The argument confirms that the cost of processing products will be lowered after their organizations have gained experiences gradually after many years in business. The author has given an example of color film processing, which indicates the significant reduction in photo print processing cost from 50 cents in 1970 to 20 cents in 1984. However, the argument has been concluded based on many questionable assumptions and thus it does not provide credibility.

The most important flaw in the argument is that it oversees other factors that also affect processing costs besides the improvement in organizations’ effectiveness. These factors can be input raw materials costs, labor costs and transportation costs. Hence, the reduction in cost of processing can be attributed to these factors rather than just the enhancement in companies’ effectiveness alone. In the example, the cost of photo printing reduces from 1970 to 1984 might be caused by lower ink and paper costs, reduced labor salary or reduced transportation distance between suppliers and manufacturers. Thus, the argument only provides evidences that support the author’s conclusion instead of explaining other elements that might negatively affect the argument.

The second flaw is the comparison of processing costs between two totally different industries, which are color film processing and frozen foods processing. These costs of product processing for these industries also vary tremendously, based on variety of factors such as economical changes, raw materials supplies, and current labor force and so on. Thus, comparing two industries with different characteristics is awkward and not persuasive. As a result, the argument regarding frozen foods industry practices cannot base its conclusion on the evidences collected from color film processing industry.

In addition, the argument also stresses that the longer organizations are in the business, the more experiences they have gained and these experiences help them to minimize costs and maximize profits. However, this assumption is not persuasive and not always correct. As organizations grow larger, they usually become more hierarchical and thus, slowing down business processes. The cumbersome hierarchical company structure also prevents them from operating effectively even though they have gained many experiences in the field. However, some new companies with smaller structure, which is easier to manage, might have innovative ideas that significantly improve effectiveness and efficiency.

Because the argument has omitted some important issues as presented above, it is not sound or persuasive. If the argument has benchmarked frozen food industry with another type of food industry and mentioned that all other factors, such as raw material costs, labor costs and transportation costs remain the same, the argument would be more reasonable and convincing.

Back to top

Beat The GMAT

Help with AWA.. My first ..please rate

Free GMAT Prep Resources

GMAT Prep Discounts

Free Upcoming GMAT Events

Latest GMAT Articles

Latest GMAT Videos

Popular Resources

Course Reviews

Course Locations