Hi everyone!
I hope everyone is doing well. Please review my essay! Feel free to let me know if you think I should adjust my template. I'm short on time with my gmat prep so did not have enough time to work on the exact template.
Also, do we guys get the Integrated Reasoning and AWA score on the same day as Verbal and Quant on the test date?
Here's the essay ...
The following appeared in a memorandum from the business department of the Apogee Company:
"When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees."
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
In the following argument, the author states that Apogee should close down its field offices and conduct all of its operations from a centralized location. The argument can be strengthened but given the assumptions and lack of actual data, the argument has many flaws and is unconvincing for the most part.
First of all, the author believes that by closing down all of the field offices, Apogee would start making profits as it used to do in the past. The main flaw with this assumption is that there is no statistical data to back the assumption. We are unable to make an assumption about the exact profitability of the company. In order to make a logical assumption, the author should have provided us with some statistical data so one could compare the exact figures and facts in order to come to a logical decision.
Secondly, the author believes that by centralizing the organization, the company would be able to reduce costs and maintain better supervision of all employees. In drawing this conclusion, the author fails to take account into the fact that by centralizing the organization, the company would be taking the autonomy from the junior managers or field offices - by doing so, it would hurt the morale of the management at the field offices. There are numerous examples where we have seen that the organizations have done better by decentralizing the organization.
As it stands, the argument is flawed for the reasons indicated but the argument can be strengthened if we are provided with additional information to understand the exact decline in profits.
I hope everyone is doing well. Please review my essay! Feel free to let me know if you think I should adjust my template. I'm short on time with my gmat prep so did not have enough time to work on the exact template.
Also, do we guys get the Integrated Reasoning and AWA score on the same day as Verbal and Quant on the test date?
Here's the essay ...
The following appeared in a memorandum from the business department of the Apogee Company:
"When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees."
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
In the following argument, the author states that Apogee should close down its field offices and conduct all of its operations from a centralized location. The argument can be strengthened but given the assumptions and lack of actual data, the argument has many flaws and is unconvincing for the most part.
First of all, the author believes that by closing down all of the field offices, Apogee would start making profits as it used to do in the past. The main flaw with this assumption is that there is no statistical data to back the assumption. We are unable to make an assumption about the exact profitability of the company. In order to make a logical assumption, the author should have provided us with some statistical data so one could compare the exact figures and facts in order to come to a logical decision.
Secondly, the author believes that by centralizing the organization, the company would be able to reduce costs and maintain better supervision of all employees. In drawing this conclusion, the author fails to take account into the fact that by centralizing the organization, the company would be taking the autonomy from the junior managers or field offices - by doing so, it would hurt the morale of the management at the field offices. There are numerous examples where we have seen that the organizations have done better by decentralizing the organization.
As it stands, the argument is flawed for the reasons indicated but the argument can be strengthened if we are provided with additional information to understand the exact decline in profits.
