Second attempt at an essay, please rate and review. Thanks everyone!
Sample Analysis-of-an-Argument Writing Prompt
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by the human-resources department of Capital Bank:
"Capital Bank has always required that its employees wear suits at all times while at work. Last month, Capital's employee absenteeism and attrition rates both reached all-time highs. In order to reverse these trends, Capital should adopt a company-wide "casual Friday" policy, under which all employees would be permitted, and even encouraged, to dress casually for work every Friday. After all, most companies in the software industry allow their workers to dress casually for work anytime they want; and those workers often remark that this policy enhances their job satisfaction. Moreover, most software firms experience lower rates of employee absenteeism and attrition than companies in other industries, including banking."
Discuss how logically convincing you find this argument. In your discussion, you should analyze the argument's line of reasoning and use of evidence. It may be appropriate in your critique to call into question certain assumptions underlying the argument and/or to indicate what evidence might weaken or strengthen the argument. It may also be appropriate to discuss how you would alter the argument to make it more convincing and/or discuss what additional evidence, if any, would aid in evaluating the argument.
Essay:
Though the memo claims that it's lack of a more casual dress code is proved to be the reason for it's high absenteeism and attrition, it however fails to say anything else might also be the cause for this problem. The memo from HR says that the way software companies comply with their dress codes which includes a more casual dress is seen as a positive thing that prevents the problems that Capital Bank has been facing. As a result, Capital Banks HR memo is not as logically convincing as it could be. One reason is simply not enough, the differences between the Software and Banking industries is not addressed such as the nature of the work, how one job is based on selling the self such as in finance compared to the product being the focus of the software industry. Simply put in Finance the dress codes does affect the bottom line.
Capital Bank fails in realizing that there is more at stake then simply making the dress code more leisurely. They assume a quick fix will resolve all their issues. The only evidence which is weak that is provided is "Moreover, most software firms experience lower rates of employee absenteeism and attrition than companies in other industries, including banking." Yes other industries do benefit but how much more will the Financial one improve. The evidence for the change is not only weak, there isn't much to contend with.
What the HR department at Capital Bank can follow up on is simply adding more proof as to how the absenteeism and attrition problem has been solved by other Financial companies, another thing HR can do is to simply survey it's own employees as to why they think the problem has been arising in the first place. This survey can create a sense of inclusion and also show that the company cares about the opinions of it's employees. If anything, this could help solve the problem, in addition to changing the dress code.
To summarize, the HR department at Capital Bank has the right idea however a weak argument that is stating that one cause will have the needed affect which can easily be hit or miss. Also the HR department is not able to provide enough evidence to say that yes changing the dress code will solve the problem of absenteeism and attrition. The HR department will need to provide more evidence to convince Capital Bank to go ahead and change their dress code. If there was a stronger argument and some more evidence than the HR department would have more weight to change the companies attitude on how to solve the present issue.
Sample Analysis-of-an-Argument Writing Prompt
The following appeared in a memorandum issued by the human-resources department of Capital Bank:
"Capital Bank has always required that its employees wear suits at all times while at work. Last month, Capital's employee absenteeism and attrition rates both reached all-time highs. In order to reverse these trends, Capital should adopt a company-wide "casual Friday" policy, under which all employees would be permitted, and even encouraged, to dress casually for work every Friday. After all, most companies in the software industry allow their workers to dress casually for work anytime they want; and those workers often remark that this policy enhances their job satisfaction. Moreover, most software firms experience lower rates of employee absenteeism and attrition than companies in other industries, including banking."
Discuss how logically convincing you find this argument. In your discussion, you should analyze the argument's line of reasoning and use of evidence. It may be appropriate in your critique to call into question certain assumptions underlying the argument and/or to indicate what evidence might weaken or strengthen the argument. It may also be appropriate to discuss how you would alter the argument to make it more convincing and/or discuss what additional evidence, if any, would aid in evaluating the argument.
Essay:
Though the memo claims that it's lack of a more casual dress code is proved to be the reason for it's high absenteeism and attrition, it however fails to say anything else might also be the cause for this problem. The memo from HR says that the way software companies comply with their dress codes which includes a more casual dress is seen as a positive thing that prevents the problems that Capital Bank has been facing. As a result, Capital Banks HR memo is not as logically convincing as it could be. One reason is simply not enough, the differences between the Software and Banking industries is not addressed such as the nature of the work, how one job is based on selling the self such as in finance compared to the product being the focus of the software industry. Simply put in Finance the dress codes does affect the bottom line.
Capital Bank fails in realizing that there is more at stake then simply making the dress code more leisurely. They assume a quick fix will resolve all their issues. The only evidence which is weak that is provided is "Moreover, most software firms experience lower rates of employee absenteeism and attrition than companies in other industries, including banking." Yes other industries do benefit but how much more will the Financial one improve. The evidence for the change is not only weak, there isn't much to contend with.
What the HR department at Capital Bank can follow up on is simply adding more proof as to how the absenteeism and attrition problem has been solved by other Financial companies, another thing HR can do is to simply survey it's own employees as to why they think the problem has been arising in the first place. This survey can create a sense of inclusion and also show that the company cares about the opinions of it's employees. If anything, this could help solve the problem, in addition to changing the dress code.
To summarize, the HR department at Capital Bank has the right idea however a weak argument that is stating that one cause will have the needed affect which can easily be hit or miss. Also the HR department is not able to provide enough evidence to say that yes changing the dress code will solve the problem of absenteeism and attrition. The HR department will need to provide more evidence to convince Capital Bank to go ahead and change their dress code. If there was a stronger argument and some more evidence than the HR department would have more weight to change the companies attitude on how to solve the present issue.
