I wrote my first essay. It's an argument. Please take a look. I took the inputs from previous essay posts in this website. Please comment and poll. Comments are important to me. Please spot my mistakes.
######
The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen
foods:
"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."
########
Being efficient is one of the top goals for every organization to be successful. However the ways to acheive efficiency varies from organization to organization and it includes lots of factors like sector, domain, target customers, primary functions, demographics etc. In the preceding statement, the author of the annual report made a very important statment about efficiency and he is correct about it. A well managed organization will become more and more efficient as they grow older. But the reasoning behind his arguments and the example cited to substantiate his argument lack support and reasoning and we can not accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author's premises is when he tries to explain how an organization can do better over time. The example provided, shows a price drop for a better service over a period of fourteen years. The reasoning presented in the argument was based only with the time frame and ignored every thing else that sorrounds it. The other attributes which should have been considered to validate the reasoning for the price drop are research, technical advancements, management, focus and vision of the organization. With out all these taken in to consideration one can not conclude that a organization can do better over time.
The secondary issue with the argument is in the conclusion that the author makes and the assumption behind it. The argument claims that 25 years of experience will enable Olympic Foods to minimize costs and thus maximize profits. But this conclusion is again based on the experience of the company and not based on any other above mentioned parameters like management, vision and focus. It is true that over time an organization gets a chance to improve itself by correcting the errors made in the past and there by improve. But time is not the only factor behind improvement, it requires good leadership, vision, a long term goal and few short term goals.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid.
########
######
The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen
foods:
"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."
########
Being efficient is one of the top goals for every organization to be successful. However the ways to acheive efficiency varies from organization to organization and it includes lots of factors like sector, domain, target customers, primary functions, demographics etc. In the preceding statement, the author of the annual report made a very important statment about efficiency and he is correct about it. A well managed organization will become more and more efficient as they grow older. But the reasoning behind his arguments and the example cited to substantiate his argument lack support and reasoning and we can not accept his argument as valid.
The primary issue with the author's premises is when he tries to explain how an organization can do better over time. The example provided, shows a price drop for a better service over a period of fourteen years. The reasoning presented in the argument was based only with the time frame and ignored every thing else that sorrounds it. The other attributes which should have been considered to validate the reasoning for the price drop are research, technical advancements, management, focus and vision of the organization. With out all these taken in to consideration one can not conclude that a organization can do better over time.
The secondary issue with the argument is in the conclusion that the author makes and the assumption behind it. The argument claims that 25 years of experience will enable Olympic Foods to minimize costs and thus maximize profits. But this conclusion is again based on the experience of the company and not based on any other above mentioned parameters like management, vision and focus. It is true that over time an organization gets a chance to improve itself by correcting the errors made in the past and there by improve. But time is not the only factor behind improvement, it requires good leadership, vision, a long term goal and few short term goals.
In sum, the author's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid.
########
