-
nidzittude
- Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
- Posts: 5
- Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2012 10:21 pm
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in an article in a human resources magazine:
"Six months ago, in an experiment aimed at boosting worker productivity, Company Z started providing free gourmet lunches to its employees. The Company hoped that these office lunches would encourage employees to remain in the building during lunch-hour and motivate employees to work harder throughout the day. A survey found that soon after the lunch program was implemented, the average number of hours worked by most Company Z employees increased dramatically. During this same period, the Company's profits also increased substantially. Thus, it is safe to say that the lunch program was a huge success and that Company Z should make the program permanent."
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.
Argument:
In the preceding statement the author makes the claim that lunch program successfully boosted the employee productivity and subsequently, the company profits. Though the author's claim may very well have its merit, it is based on several questionable assumptions and premises, and with the lack of evidence provided, it is not conclusive.
The primary issue lies in the author's unsubstantiated premises. First, it fails to mention the percentage of employees that took the survey. It could be that the respondents of the survey were already spending the same amount of working hours before the lunch program. Also, the argument states that the number of working hours of employees has increased but the increase in the number of working hours does not necessarily translate to an increase in the employee productivity. The author's premises, the basis of the argument, lack legitimate evidence.
In addition, there are several assumptions the author makes in the argument. The author claims that the success of the lunch program led to the increase in the company profits. Even though it may have been one of the minor factors, the author fails to consider the impact of the global economy or increase in the production efficiency which could have been the bigger reasons for the increase in profits. The author weakens the argument by making these assumptions and failing to link the cause and the effect.
While the author does present several key issues in his argument, it cannot be said that the argument is completely off base. The argument could be strengthened by providing statistical evidence as to what percentage of employees took the survey and what percentage of those actually took part in the lunch program. The argument could also be strengthened had the author conceded that the lunch program was just one of the factors that led to an increase in the company's profits. Though there are several flaws in the author's argument, with more research and providing more clarification, he can significantly improve the argument.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly hopes to change his readers' minds, he would have to fix the flaws in logic, restructure the argument, clearly explicate his assumptions and provide more evidentiary support. Without these, his poorly structured argument would convince few people.
The following appeared in an article in a human resources magazine:
"Six months ago, in an experiment aimed at boosting worker productivity, Company Z started providing free gourmet lunches to its employees. The Company hoped that these office lunches would encourage employees to remain in the building during lunch-hour and motivate employees to work harder throughout the day. A survey found that soon after the lunch program was implemented, the average number of hours worked by most Company Z employees increased dramatically. During this same period, the Company's profits also increased substantially. Thus, it is safe to say that the lunch program was a huge success and that Company Z should make the program permanent."
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.
Argument:
In the preceding statement the author makes the claim that lunch program successfully boosted the employee productivity and subsequently, the company profits. Though the author's claim may very well have its merit, it is based on several questionable assumptions and premises, and with the lack of evidence provided, it is not conclusive.
The primary issue lies in the author's unsubstantiated premises. First, it fails to mention the percentage of employees that took the survey. It could be that the respondents of the survey were already spending the same amount of working hours before the lunch program. Also, the argument states that the number of working hours of employees has increased but the increase in the number of working hours does not necessarily translate to an increase in the employee productivity. The author's premises, the basis of the argument, lack legitimate evidence.
In addition, there are several assumptions the author makes in the argument. The author claims that the success of the lunch program led to the increase in the company profits. Even though it may have been one of the minor factors, the author fails to consider the impact of the global economy or increase in the production efficiency which could have been the bigger reasons for the increase in profits. The author weakens the argument by making these assumptions and failing to link the cause and the effect.
While the author does present several key issues in his argument, it cannot be said that the argument is completely off base. The argument could be strengthened by providing statistical evidence as to what percentage of employees took the survey and what percentage of those actually took part in the lunch program. The argument could also be strengthened had the author conceded that the lunch program was just one of the factors that led to an increase in the company's profits. Though there are several flaws in the author's argument, with more research and providing more clarification, he can significantly improve the argument.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If the author truly hopes to change his readers' minds, he would have to fix the flaws in logic, restructure the argument, clearly explicate his assumptions and provide more evidentiary support. Without these, his poorly structured argument would convince few people.
