-
mehravikas
- Legendary Member
- Posts: 1161
- Joined: Mon May 12, 2008 2:52 am
- Location: Sydney
- Thanked: 23 times
- Followed by:1 members
The following appeared in a memo to executives at a company that manufactures industrial equipment:
"We are spending too much on free customer service after a sale has been made; we need to limit our warranty to two years in order to improve our profit margins. The current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Also, we pay our customer service employees a premium because they must possess expert skills across the entirety of our very diverse product line, including products we no longer sell."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
The author concludes that the current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into product's life cycle. The author's line of reasoning is that the organization is currently spending too much on the free customer service and the customer service employees get a premium because they posses expert skills across the entirety of the very diverse product line, including the products organization no longer sells. The argument is unconvincing for several reasons.
First of all, the author's line of reasoning is based on a questionable assumption that the organization is spending too much on free customer service. The author does neither constitute a particular amount nor percentage of an amount with other services the organization provide. Again however it seems equally reasonable to assume that the total amount spent on the customer service is of a small margin compared with other services and products organization sells.
Secondly, the author assumes that current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Again the author does not highlight as to what percentage of the products purchased are returned to the organization. Moreover, the author reasons out that the customer service employees get a premium, however the author fails to assume that those employees are skilled in entirety to support numerous products offered by the organization. Moreover, it is not mentioned that what fraction of the products are outdated by the organization and does a major portion of training of the customer service employees is wasted into the outdated products. If this were so, it would a long way explaining the author's point of view.
Finally, the author fails to consider the most important reason behind the sale of products of the organization. For example, only because of this policy the organization might have been experiencing an upward trend in sales. However, the author does not shed visibility that why is the organization planning to decide that the free customer service can turn a nightmare for the organization. Is it because of a steep decline in sales or the organization has realised that despite huge sales within the last few years or months, the lifetime warranty and free customer service are eating too much of the organization's profits.
In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. The author would have to provide more facts and figures that could lead to assume the actual cause of organization's decision to not provide lifetime warranty and free customer service. Additionally the author would need to give more evidence that the customer service employees are really too much of an expense and the organization is not able to utilize those employees. Without the additional evidences the argument lacks several key issues that could make the argument more convincing.
"We are spending too much on free customer service after a sale has been made; we need to limit our warranty to two years in order to improve our profit margins. The current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Also, we pay our customer service employees a premium because they must possess expert skills across the entirety of our very diverse product line, including products we no longer sell."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
The author concludes that the current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into product's life cycle. The author's line of reasoning is that the organization is currently spending too much on the free customer service and the customer service employees get a premium because they posses expert skills across the entirety of the very diverse product line, including the products organization no longer sells. The argument is unconvincing for several reasons.
First of all, the author's line of reasoning is based on a questionable assumption that the organization is spending too much on free customer service. The author does neither constitute a particular amount nor percentage of an amount with other services the organization provide. Again however it seems equally reasonable to assume that the total amount spent on the customer service is of a small margin compared with other services and products organization sells.
Secondly, the author assumes that current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Again the author does not highlight as to what percentage of the products purchased are returned to the organization. Moreover, the author reasons out that the customer service employees get a premium, however the author fails to assume that those employees are skilled in entirety to support numerous products offered by the organization. Moreover, it is not mentioned that what fraction of the products are outdated by the organization and does a major portion of training of the customer service employees is wasted into the outdated products. If this were so, it would a long way explaining the author's point of view.
Finally, the author fails to consider the most important reason behind the sale of products of the organization. For example, only because of this policy the organization might have been experiencing an upward trend in sales. However, the author does not shed visibility that why is the organization planning to decide that the free customer service can turn a nightmare for the organization. Is it because of a steep decline in sales or the organization has realised that despite huge sales within the last few years or months, the lifetime warranty and free customer service are eating too much of the organization's profits.
In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. The author would have to provide more facts and figures that could lead to assume the actual cause of organization's decision to not provide lifetime warranty and free customer service. Additionally the author would need to give more evidence that the customer service employees are really too much of an expense and the organization is not able to utilize those employees. Without the additional evidences the argument lacks several key issues that could make the argument more convincing.
