"The falling revenues 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 manager of the purchasing department."


The author cites that the company's revenue is falling and it coincides with the delay in manufacturing. Further, the delays have been attributed to a large extent, to poor planning in procurement of materials. Author then asserts that the manager's skill sets, though very accomplished in themselves, do not suit the job, and claims that a scientist from R&D division would be a better fit. We do not agree with these arguments as they miss out on several important points.

Firstly, no evidence is furnished to prove that the dip in revenue is due to delay in procurement of material. There could be several factors like labor issues, poor customer support and inefficient manufacturing processes responsible for it. The author would do greater justice to his argument by presenting valid justifications.

Secondly, the author's inference that manager's ignorance of the properties of metal being a reason for his poor managerial skills is illogical. A manager is expected to have a holistic view of the process flow; a basic awareness is required but definitely not to the extent of what a scientist from R&D wing would have. Person in charge of decision making can always take opinion of his technical team in case of a doubt. The author should have presented a better evaluation of the incumbent's skill set.

In sum, the author's argument is fundamentally flawed; however it could be strengthened by taking note of aforementioned points.