"The package of benefits and incentives that Ready-to-Ware offers to professional staff is too costly. Our quarterly profits have declined since the package was introduced two years ago, at the time of our incorporation. Moreover, the package had little positive effect, as we have had only marginal success in recruiting and training high-quality professional staff. To become more profitable again, Ready-to-Ware should, therefore, offer the reduced benefits package that was in place two years ago and use the savings to fund our current research and development initiatives."

MY RESPONSE

The above argument concludes that Ready-to-Ware should revert to the previous benefits package offered to employees as the current package is too expensive and is hampering profits, without providing noticeable success in recruiting highly skilled and competent staff. The Director of research and development who authored the above conclusion in a memorandum has made several logical flaws and significant assumptions, leading to a weak and unpersuasive argument. These shortcomings are discussed in the below paragraphs

Cost carries different meanings to different companies or different individuals. The author states that the package of benefits and incentives are too costly but fails to mention what this costs consist of. For example a small company that is growing quickly and that has an owner unwilling to cede his control, valuable stock options may be considered costly. In such a scenario a company might rather pay employeers with cash, an option that might be considered costly by a business in a saturated market who may want to consider stock options. To strengthen the argument the author should detail the costs and the reasoning behind deeming these costs too high.

The author risks mistaking correlation for causation, i.e. he assumes that just because the quarterly profits declined since the package was introduced, the benefits package is to blame. In reality to the decline in profits could be due to numerous factors such as new entrants to the market, a lack of demand for Ready-to-Ware's products or even currency fluctuations if the company exports its products. By providing more evidence that the benefits package is the sole reason that the quarterly profits declined, the author would considerably strengthen the argument.

Lack of success in recruiting professionals is also stated as a shortcoming of the current benefit package. However, this has to be examined further as the author does not define success. Further the author concedes that there has been marginal success but states that greater success should have followed. This line of reasoning fails to preclude the possibility that in Ready-to-Ware's line of business, a marginal success is all that is required to make a difference. Furthermore, the author overlooks the possibility of other causes of marginal success, such as poor brand perception and unfavourable working conditions, If the author were to show that greater expectations regarding success in recruitment are justified and isolate the marginal success to purely the benefits package, this would greatly strengthen the argument.

Lastly the author fails to mention how the package compares to Ready-to-Ware's competitors and states that if this money was diverted to the research and development department the company would see greater success. However if competitors offer more beneficial packages then the company might find itself with very few employees to conduct the research and development. The argument would be strengthened if the author could further highlight the importance of increased research and development, in the current environment.

It is for the above reasons that the argument is weak and lacks conviction. If the author takes measures to address the above issues, for example by providing further information on the profit decline and lack of success in recruitment, this argument could be strengthened significantly.