ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in an article in a human resources magazine:
"Six months ago, in an experiment aimed at boosting worker productivity, Company Z started providing free gourmet lunches to its employees. The Company hoped that these office lunches would encourage employees to remain in the building during lunch-hour and motivate employees to work harder throughout the day. A survey found that soon after the lunch program was implemented, the average number of hours worked by most Company Z employees increased dramatically. During this same period, the Company's profits also increased substantially. Thus, it is safe to say that the lunch program was a huge success and that Company Z should make the program permanent."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The author states that providing free lunches in Company Z has led to more profit for Company Z because of the increase in number of hours the employees work. Although author's claim may well have merit, but the poorly reasoned argument is based on several questionable premises and assumptions. Based solely on the evidence provided in the argument one can't accept author's conclusion as valid. Below mentioned are the issues with the argument.
Firstly, the author states that profit of the company Z increased in the period in which it started providing free lunches to its employees. There could be other reasons such as increase in demand of a new product in market of Company Z, a new customer deal signed by Company Z , or new a marketing approach tried by Comapny Z that has increased its revenues by attracting more customers. Any other reason for increase in profits would undermine the author's assumption that free lunches lead to more profits.
Secondly. it is mentioned in the argument that working hours of the employees of Company Z increased after the free lunch scheme. But the author has failed to provide evidence which suggests that these increased working hours benefitted the company by gettinng more work done. For example, an employee who used to work eight hours earlier and used to take one hour lunch break, now eats free lunch at the company and spends ten hours in the company. If the employee takes a two hours lunch break, then he is actaully working for the same number of hours as earlier. Also, spending more hours at the office is no guarantee that more work is getting completed. Therefore, author needs to provide more evidence regarding how increase in working hours leads to more work getting done.
Thirdly, the passage states that free lunch is to make the employees feel motivated to work harder. The passage doesn't provide any information regarding the motivation levels of the employees who eat lunch at home. An employee may well look forward to a lunch break with his family or friends which may refresh him and helps in concentrating more on his job when he returns after the lunch break. Hence, author's suggestion that free lunches motivate the employee needs more explaination.
In sum, the argument is illogical and is based on unproved premises and unsubstantiated assumptions. In order to influence his reader's opinion, author has to restructure his argument, fix the flaws in logic, provide evedentiary support for the assumptions and explicate the premises. In absence of these the author is likely to convince few people.
The following appeared in an article in a human resources magazine:
"Six months ago, in an experiment aimed at boosting worker productivity, Company Z started providing free gourmet lunches to its employees. The Company hoped that these office lunches would encourage employees to remain in the building during lunch-hour and motivate employees to work harder throughout the day. A survey found that soon after the lunch program was implemented, the average number of hours worked by most Company Z employees increased dramatically. During this same period, the Company's profits also increased substantially. Thus, it is safe to say that the lunch program was a huge success and that Company Z should make the program permanent."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
YOUR RESPONSE:
The author states that providing free lunches in Company Z has led to more profit for Company Z because of the increase in number of hours the employees work. Although author's claim may well have merit, but the poorly reasoned argument is based on several questionable premises and assumptions. Based solely on the evidence provided in the argument one can't accept author's conclusion as valid. Below mentioned are the issues with the argument.
Firstly, the author states that profit of the company Z increased in the period in which it started providing free lunches to its employees. There could be other reasons such as increase in demand of a new product in market of Company Z, a new customer deal signed by Company Z , or new a marketing approach tried by Comapny Z that has increased its revenues by attracting more customers. Any other reason for increase in profits would undermine the author's assumption that free lunches lead to more profits.
Secondly. it is mentioned in the argument that working hours of the employees of Company Z increased after the free lunch scheme. But the author has failed to provide evidence which suggests that these increased working hours benefitted the company by gettinng more work done. For example, an employee who used to work eight hours earlier and used to take one hour lunch break, now eats free lunch at the company and spends ten hours in the company. If the employee takes a two hours lunch break, then he is actaully working for the same number of hours as earlier. Also, spending more hours at the office is no guarantee that more work is getting completed. Therefore, author needs to provide more evidence regarding how increase in working hours leads to more work getting done.
Thirdly, the passage states that free lunch is to make the employees feel motivated to work harder. The passage doesn't provide any information regarding the motivation levels of the employees who eat lunch at home. An employee may well look forward to a lunch break with his family or friends which may refresh him and helps in concentrating more on his job when he returns after the lunch break. Hence, author's suggestion that free lunches motivate the employee needs more explaination.
In sum, the argument is illogical and is based on unproved premises and unsubstantiated assumptions. In order to influence his reader's opinion, author has to restructure his argument, fix the flaws in logic, provide evedentiary support for the assumptions and explicate the premises. In absence of these the author is likely to convince few people.
