-
AntonioRocha
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 3:58 pm
- Location: Brazil
Question:
The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine devoted to regional life. "Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helios's unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It is the industrial center of the region, and historically it has provided more than its share of the region's manufacturing jobs. In addition, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies."
Answer:
The author concludes that Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location based on some arguments about the city. The point is that these arguments do not clearly support the objective, since they miss relevant points or are not fully explained.
First, the author says that the unemployment rate in Helios was lower than the regional average. This argument, as it stands, can cause the impression that would be harder to find employees in Helios than in other cities, since there are less people unemployed. Additionally, one might think that, due to the low unemployment rate, the average wage would be higher than in another cities. Since the argument does not help to draw the conclusion desired, the author would better remove it out or mention something additional regarding lower than average wages (if it actually applies) or the broad range of technically skilled people that might be available in the city.
Second, the author cites that the region has more than its share of the region's manufacting jobs and, later, that the city is trying to expand its economical base by attracting companies focused on research and development of innovative technologies. The point is that the first part casts doubt about the city's capacity of attract more high skilled industries, since it looks so specialized in manufacturing. Instead of just saying that the city is interested in attracting new industries, the author should have stated clearly the actions that the city is taking in order to do that, such as investing in high quality education, for example.
In summary, the author would achieve a better result by focusing its argument of facts that the targeted audience (Corporations, in general) will be interested to know, instead of leaving spaces for unwanted conclusions.
Many thanks for the help!
The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine devoted to regional life. "Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helios's unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It is the industrial center of the region, and historically it has provided more than its share of the region's manufacturing jobs. In addition, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of innovative technologies."
Answer:
The author concludes that Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location based on some arguments about the city. The point is that these arguments do not clearly support the objective, since they miss relevant points or are not fully explained.
First, the author says that the unemployment rate in Helios was lower than the regional average. This argument, as it stands, can cause the impression that would be harder to find employees in Helios than in other cities, since there are less people unemployed. Additionally, one might think that, due to the low unemployment rate, the average wage would be higher than in another cities. Since the argument does not help to draw the conclusion desired, the author would better remove it out or mention something additional regarding lower than average wages (if it actually applies) or the broad range of technically skilled people that might be available in the city.
Second, the author cites that the region has more than its share of the region's manufacting jobs and, later, that the city is trying to expand its economical base by attracting companies focused on research and development of innovative technologies. The point is that the first part casts doubt about the city's capacity of attract more high skilled industries, since it looks so specialized in manufacturing. Instead of just saying that the city is interested in attracting new industries, the author should have stated clearly the actions that the city is taking in order to do that, such as investing in high quality education, for example.
In summary, the author would achieve a better result by focusing its argument of facts that the targeted audience (Corporations, in general) will be interested to know, instead of leaving spaces for unwanted conclusions.
Many thanks for the help!
