The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery.
" The falling revenue that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be the manager of the purchasing department."
The writer assumes that the company should move purchasing manager to the sales department because of his poor planning. The author claims that work of purchasing manager causes revenue to fall. However, the argument of the author is based on assumption, for which there is no clear evidence.
First the writer concludes that falling revenue is caused by poor planning. This alone does not constitute a logical argument. In fact, many different factors could influence decreased revenues. If, for example, there was major decline in industry itself, the revenue would be falling anyway. The author would strenghten the argument considerably, if he provided evidence proving that falling of revenues is caused by poor planning.
In addition, the writer falsely assumes that scientist from the research division would be better manager than purchasing manager. But the author provided no evidence for that. In fact, scientist might be much worse manager than somebody with excellent background in general business, psychology and sociology. The knowledge itself is not sufficient for managing people. This in fact, is the reason, why business schools focus more on soft skills than on theoretical knowledge. In order to better support his ideas, the writer would need to provide evidence stating that this scientist have some previous experience in managing of people.
Finally, the author concludes that poor planning in the purchasing metals is the cause of delays in manufacturing. But the author fails to provide evidence for this assumption. For example, the workers in manufacturing department could be striking because of low wages. However, the purchasing manager might not be responsible for this problem as wages for manufacturing workers are set by their managers or human resources department. The author would strengthen his argument if he provided evidence proving that delays in manufacturing are caused by poor planning in purchasing.
Using simple statements and poor reasoning, the writer failed to prove that falling revenue are caused by poor planning in purchasing department.
" The falling revenue that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be the manager of the purchasing department."
The writer assumes that the company should move purchasing manager to the sales department because of his poor planning. The author claims that work of purchasing manager causes revenue to fall. However, the argument of the author is based on assumption, for which there is no clear evidence.
First the writer concludes that falling revenue is caused by poor planning. This alone does not constitute a logical argument. In fact, many different factors could influence decreased revenues. If, for example, there was major decline in industry itself, the revenue would be falling anyway. The author would strenghten the argument considerably, if he provided evidence proving that falling of revenues is caused by poor planning.
In addition, the writer falsely assumes that scientist from the research division would be better manager than purchasing manager. But the author provided no evidence for that. In fact, scientist might be much worse manager than somebody with excellent background in general business, psychology and sociology. The knowledge itself is not sufficient for managing people. This in fact, is the reason, why business schools focus more on soft skills than on theoretical knowledge. In order to better support his ideas, the writer would need to provide evidence stating that this scientist have some previous experience in managing of people.
Finally, the author concludes that poor planning in the purchasing metals is the cause of delays in manufacturing. But the author fails to provide evidence for this assumption. For example, the workers in manufacturing department could be striking because of low wages. However, the purchasing manager might not be responsible for this problem as wages for manufacturing workers are set by their managers or human resources department. The author would strengthen his argument if he provided evidence proving that delays in manufacturing are caused by poor planning in purchasing.
Using simple statements and poor reasoning, the writer failed to prove that falling revenue are caused by poor planning in purchasing department.
