AWA - When the Apogee Company ...

This topic has expert replies
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 3
Joined: Wed Sep 10, 2008 12:33 am

AWA - When the Apogee Company ...

by pawone » Fri Sep 19, 2008 5:00 am
The above argument seeks to establish that Apogee is less profitable due to decentralization. I believe that to establish the conclusion that centralization will improve profitability, enough arguments have not been put forth - first to establish that decentralization is the biggest reason for decrease in profitability and secondly centralization again would help improve the productivity.

The argument need to explore the reasons why the decision to decentralize Apogee company was taken up. The reasons could be increasing footprints, faster growth, moving into different geographies which require local presence, etc. It is also possible that Apogee is in investment mode and expansion is part of the current business strategy. To find the answers to these questions Apogee operations data, customer spread, target market, revenue split geography wise need to be analyzed.

On analyzing the second part of the author’s argument where he advocates that returning to centralization will improve productivity in not well found. It needs to see the problem areas where the operational effectiveness is low and whether cost benefit analysis of centralizing that pocket makes sense. Also impacts on customers and prospects should be account for before taking a call on centralizing all or pockets of inefficiencies Apogee field offices. .
Source: — GMAT Essays (AWA) |

Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
Posts: 28
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 10:28 pm
Thanked: 5 times

Re: AWA - When the Apogee Company ...

by sanjaysmart » Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:34 pm
Hi Pawone,
Your critique shows potential but you have not adressed the statistical fallacy committed by the author. S/he is confused between the ratio (profitability) and the integar (profit). Increased profitability does not automatically mean more profits. After all, a local business may have a high profitability but earn much less than a business with a large network and widespread operations BUT with lower profitability.
You have also not been able to address the non sequitur fallacy in the stimulus (centralization will automatically lead to better supervision and more profitability). Non sequitur (it does not follow) is a common fallacy in the pool and I believe that fallacies MUST be addressed when they are committed by the auhtor.
Cheers

pawone wrote:The above argument seeks to establish that Apogee is less profitable due to decentralization. I believe that to establish the conclusion that centralization will improve profitability, enough arguments have not been put forth - first to establish that decentralization is the biggest reason for decrease in profitability and secondly centralization again would help improve the productivity.

The argument need to explore the reasons why the decision to decentralize Apogee company was taken up. The reasons could be increasing footprints, faster growth, moving into different geographies which require local presence, etc. It is also possible that Apogee is in investment mode and expansion is part of the current business strategy. To find the answers to these questions Apogee operations data, customer spread, target market, revenue split geography wise need to be analyzed.

On analyzing the second part of the author’s argument where he advocates that returning to centralization will improve productivity in not well found. It needs to see the problem areas where the operational effectiveness is low and whether cost benefit analysis of centralizing that pocket makes sense. Also impacts on customers and prospects should be account for before taking a call on centralizing all or pockets of inefficiencies Apogee field offices. .

• Page 1 of 1