The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that
manufactures parts for heavy machinery:
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn,
are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that
handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology,
but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the
sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
From the argument, it is uncertain whether argument casually correlates failing revenue with manufacturing delay. It is not clear whether manufacturing delay causing decline in revenue. The argument asserts that cause of decline in revenue is poor planning in purchasing operation. At a same time, it assumes the other causes of effect do not exist. Additionally, to solve company problem, argument provides two solutions: First, that replace purchase manager with scientist, and second, that to move purchase manager to sales department. But both the solutions do not provide conclusive evidence that how these solutions can improve the sales for company. In short, the argument is not persuasive because it ignores assumptions and does not provide conclusive evidence to substantiate the argument.
First, from the argument, it is uncertain whether there is any cause and effect relation between delay in manufacturing and decline in revenue. The argument asserts that both the activities happen at a same time. Whether delay in manufacturing causes decline in revenue or decline in revenue is casually link to delay in manufacturing is uncertain.
Second, the argument asserts that poor planning in purchase is cause of delay without providing any evidence how it has come to conclusion. Additionally, it assumed that there is no other cause of decline in revenue possible. The argument fails to consider other cause of decline in revenue such as customer loyalty, features of competitor products and cost of competing products. If poor planning is the problem, then company needs production or planning manager who can take care of planning.
Third, the argument provides two solutions to resolve the issue within the organization. But both the solutions are irrelevant to problem in hand. First solution is that purchase manager should be moved to sales department. But it does not provide evidence that how it can resolve company’s problem. What if purchase manager can not handle the sales? In that case, the solution to problem becomes itself a problem. Additionally, argument provides information that purchase manager has experienced in business. So why can not he handle the purchase department? Specifically, this raised the question about company’s core policy about recruiting resources for various jobs. It raises the question about company’s core processes such as human resource, purchase. Moreover, what if purchase manager move to sales and can not handle sales operation? This, in turn, will create more problems for company. While resolving the issue, the argument is creating more problems in course of solution. Second solution is that scientist should be appointed as purchase manager. What if scientist can not resolve the issue of poor planning? The argument does not provide evidence that scientist can help to resolve the problem in poor planning. Additionally, it fails to provide evidence that how his experience can be useful to resolve the issue in hand.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not persuasive. To strengthen argument, it would have to support questionable assumption discussed above. Additionally, argument has to isolate the root cause of problem and provide specific evidence about appointments of scientist and shift of purchase manager to sales.
manufactures parts for heavy machinery:
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn,
are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that
handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology,
but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the
sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
From the argument, it is uncertain whether argument casually correlates failing revenue with manufacturing delay. It is not clear whether manufacturing delay causing decline in revenue. The argument asserts that cause of decline in revenue is poor planning in purchasing operation. At a same time, it assumes the other causes of effect do not exist. Additionally, to solve company problem, argument provides two solutions: First, that replace purchase manager with scientist, and second, that to move purchase manager to sales department. But both the solutions do not provide conclusive evidence that how these solutions can improve the sales for company. In short, the argument is not persuasive because it ignores assumptions and does not provide conclusive evidence to substantiate the argument.
First, from the argument, it is uncertain whether there is any cause and effect relation between delay in manufacturing and decline in revenue. The argument asserts that both the activities happen at a same time. Whether delay in manufacturing causes decline in revenue or decline in revenue is casually link to delay in manufacturing is uncertain.
Second, the argument asserts that poor planning in purchase is cause of delay without providing any evidence how it has come to conclusion. Additionally, it assumed that there is no other cause of decline in revenue possible. The argument fails to consider other cause of decline in revenue such as customer loyalty, features of competitor products and cost of competing products. If poor planning is the problem, then company needs production or planning manager who can take care of planning.
Third, the argument provides two solutions to resolve the issue within the organization. But both the solutions are irrelevant to problem in hand. First solution is that purchase manager should be moved to sales department. But it does not provide evidence that how it can resolve company’s problem. What if purchase manager can not handle the sales? In that case, the solution to problem becomes itself a problem. Additionally, argument provides information that purchase manager has experienced in business. So why can not he handle the purchase department? Specifically, this raised the question about company’s core policy about recruiting resources for various jobs. It raises the question about company’s core processes such as human resource, purchase. Moreover, what if purchase manager move to sales and can not handle sales operation? This, in turn, will create more problems for company. While resolving the issue, the argument is creating more problems in course of solution. Second solution is that scientist should be appointed as purchase manager. What if scientist can not resolve the issue of poor planning? The argument does not provide evidence that scientist can help to resolve the problem in poor planning. Additionally, it fails to provide evidence that how his experience can be useful to resolve the issue in hand.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not persuasive. To strengthen argument, it would have to support questionable assumption discussed above. Additionally, argument has to isolate the root cause of problem and provide specific evidence about appointments of scientist and shift of purchase manager to sales.
