Please review and rate my essay and let me know the flaws in this, so that I can rectify them.
Thank you in advance.
------------------------
"Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.
-------------------------
The argument that the cost of processing goes down overtime as the organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient, omits lots of issues to be addressed to substantiate the argument. The example that the argument follows made a wrong calculation as that cost has actually increased in the period from 1970 to 1984. Thus the points discussed and example in the argument does not constitute the success of the argument and failed to provide support to it.
Most conspicuously, the argument does not consider the reason to be successful. The argument firstly assumes as the time progresses the organization without any effort will learn to do things better and become efficient. Secondly, it assumes that becoming efficient might increase the profits of the organization. An organization to be successful mainly needs a proper management, good leadership or good efforts to make profits, it even needs to consider over all progress of the organization so far as the profits, efficiency and good work does not come in a day. The organization has to mark its progress at every step and should have taken steps to increase the efficiency, which would have helped them to gain profits. They even need to consider the increasing food costs, demand to their company and positive and negative response to their work from their customers. The argument above fails to consider all the above points which would constitute the success, rather it has referred an example which actually failed to draw the desired point. Just because it is going to complete 25 years or it is gaining experience would not lead profits to organization.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or persuasive. If it included the items discussed above instead of solely taking an example to judge it, the argument would have been more thorough and convincing.
Thank you in advance.
------------------------
"Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.
-------------------------
The argument that the cost of processing goes down overtime as the organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient, omits lots of issues to be addressed to substantiate the argument. The example that the argument follows made a wrong calculation as that cost has actually increased in the period from 1970 to 1984. Thus the points discussed and example in the argument does not constitute the success of the argument and failed to provide support to it.
Most conspicuously, the argument does not consider the reason to be successful. The argument firstly assumes as the time progresses the organization without any effort will learn to do things better and become efficient. Secondly, it assumes that becoming efficient might increase the profits of the organization. An organization to be successful mainly needs a proper management, good leadership or good efforts to make profits, it even needs to consider over all progress of the organization so far as the profits, efficiency and good work does not come in a day. The organization has to mark its progress at every step and should have taken steps to increase the efficiency, which would have helped them to gain profits. They even need to consider the increasing food costs, demand to their company and positive and negative response to their work from their customers. The argument above fails to consider all the above points which would constitute the success, rather it has referred an example which actually failed to draw the desired point. Just because it is going to complete 25 years or it is gaining experience would not lead profits to organization.
Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound or persuasive. If it included the items discussed above instead of solely taking an example to judge it, the argument would have been more thorough and convincing.
Last edited by rushitej on Tue Jul 17, 2012 9:33 pm, edited 3 times in total.
