GMAT Essays (AWA)

The following is an excerpt from a memo written by the head of a governmental department:

"Neither stronger ethics regulations nor stronger enforcement mechanisms are necessary to ensure ethical behavior
by companies doing business with this department. We already have a code of ethics that companies doing business
with this department are urged to abide by, and virtually all of these companies have agreed to follow it. We also
know that the code is relevant to the current business environment because it was approved within the last year, and
in direct response to specific violations committed by companies with which we were then working-not in abstract
anticipation of potential violations, as so many such codes are."


Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc

*************************************************************************************************

Rules and regulations needs to be followed by all companies in any department, since it helps in the growth of that industry. The author claims that stronger ethics regulations or stronger enforcement mechanisms are not needed to ensure ethical behaviour by comapnies since the government already has a code of ethics that is followed by virtually all companies. The author says that the code is effective since it is relevant to the current business environment and was approved within last year. In the preceding statements, the author's claim in deeply flawed as it is lacks proper evidence and has unsubstantiated assumptions.

The primary issue with the author's argument is that the premise is not supported by proper evidence. The author's argument does not show how the department's codes are relevant to the current business environment. It may be possible that these laws are effective only for few companies and not for the majority. The author also says that the code is effective, but does not mention any details about the fine or a potential ban if any company violates these laws. If the fine is minimal and companies can easily afford it, then they will continue to break the rules and hence code of ethics will not serve its purpose. Such lack of evidence renders the author's conclusion invalid.

In addition, the author makes unsubstantiated assumptions which do not help his claim. The author assumes that the code of ethics issued by the department will be effective as it was approved within the last year, and was based on specific violations by companies. It does not include all violations by companies and also does not have any details about potential vilations which could hamper the department's growth. The author also assumes that codes of ethics or rules by independent or third party organizations will not be effective. It is very much possible that there are many loopholes in the departments coode of ethics, and an independent body can retcify these by adding few code of ethics.

While the author's argument has many flaws in it, it can be strengthened by issuing more details about the fine when rules are broken. The department should also add details regarding potential violations. If the author can include such details in his argument, then his claim can be accepted.

In sum, the author's claim is invalid as it contains various flaws, it has unsubstantiated assumptions, and his premise lacks evidence. The author needs to structure his argument properly, provide proper evidence, explain his assumtions in detail. If the author takes care of all this, his premise can lead to his claim.

I know that your exam is on the 12th, so I hope this reaches you in time.

I would give this essay a 5.0 just based on a few things in spelling and grammar.

It reads well. The logic is easy to follow. You do have perhaps 10 spelling errors that appeared as soon as I pasted this in Word and ran the spell check. There are a few minor grammar issues as well. But your transitions are good and you make your point.

I would not worry too much about AWA. Given this example you will do fine!