The report states that the company 's revenues are falling due to delays in manufacturing and this in turn depends upon poor planning of purchase of metals. The argument further suggests that manager of the department who is well versed in general business, physcology should be replaced by a scientist from the research division who is better equipped about knowledge of metals. The argument in the report is based upon a number of unwarranted assumptions and has a flaw in the line of reasoning.

Firstly the argument attributes the decline in company's revenues to delays in purchase of metals, but provides no evidence to prove this. There may be several other reasons that can lead to decrease in revenues, the revenues may be falling due to fall in demand or due to increase in cost of raw materials and capital required for the company. There's no evidence to prove that the delay in purchase of metals led to fall in revenues.

Secondly, even if we assume that the delay in purchase of metals led to fall in revenues, there 's no reason to believe that poor planning of manager delayed the purchase of metals. To bolster this point, the argument should provide evidence to show that manager did not plan well in advance for purchasing metals. It is possible that manager had placed the orders, but the metals were unavailable in the market or there can be another possibility that demand for metals have unexpectedly risen and manager could not have anticipated it .

Thirdly the argument recommends that the manager should be replaced by a scientist from the research division. The argument confuses the role of the manager with the that of the scientist. The manager's role and responsibility is to plan purchase of adequate amount of metals well in time but there's no information given, that says that manager also needs to have knowledge about metals in great detail as a scientist has. A scientist may not be a good fit for the role of a manager inspite of the plethora of knowledge he may have about metals. He may be lacking the skills and experience required for a manager to perform this role.

To sum up, this argument is flawed and unconvincing as it stands. The report needs to provide more information and evidence to support its point that delay in purchase of metals and poor planning of manager led to decline in revenues. To support the claim that manager must be replaced by a scientist, the argument needs to provide more information and reasons that this change would counter the fall in revenue.