The following appeared in a memorandum from the directors of a security and safety consulting service.
"Our research indicates that over the past six years no incidents of employee theft have been reported within ten of the companies that have been our clients.
In analyzing the security practices of these ten companies, we have further learned that each of them requires its employees to wear photo identification badges while at work. In the future, therefore, we should recommend the use of such identification badges to all of our clients."
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
-------------
The author states that no incidents of theft has been reported within ten companies that have been the clients of a safety consulting service. The author concludes that the reason for this is because the companies require its employees to wear photo identification badges while in work. Though the argument has merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on questionable premises and assumptions, and based on the evidence the author provides, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
Firstly, the author states that there has been no reported thefts in the company. This does not mean that there were zero thefts. It may be the case that there are lot of minor thefts in the company and it's not reported. Also the author has not provided any definition of how a theft is calculated in the ten companies. Maybe the company indicates that a theft happened only if the dollar values of the stolen good is above a particular threshold. Thus in cases of thefts of smaller value, the thefts will not be reported and is wrote down as expected loss.
Secondly, the author assumes that since all the ten companies require employees to wear photo badges, it has led to a decrease in theft reported. While this can be a valid claim the author fails to provide evidence that the decrease in theft is only due to strict implementation of photo badges and not due to any other reasons. It may be the case that all these companies have high tech security devices, guards placed in important locations, X-ray scanners in the entrances, camera monitoring, restricted electronic access etc.. which leads to a decrease in occurrence of theft. To further strengthen his argument and fix the flaws the author needs to present more data which proves that only photo identification badges were responsible for the decrease in theft. Some studies which show that in spite of all other security measures the incidence of theft decreased to zero only when identification badges were introduced.
In sum, the author fails to convince that photo identification badges are responsible to for the zero incidence of theft. The claim can be made stronger by showing evidence that all thefts were reported. Also the flaws in the assumption can be fixed by showing studies which correlate the use of photo identification badges and the decrease in theft in the companies. As it currently stands the argument has unsubstantiated premises and assumptions which render the claim weak and unconvincing.
I have tried to spend more time proof reading the essay to fix the typos and sentence error. Hope I have done better this time after my disaster in the first essay
"Our research indicates that over the past six years no incidents of employee theft have been reported within ten of the companies that have been our clients.
In analyzing the security practices of these ten companies, we have further learned that each of them requires its employees to wear photo identification badges while at work. In the future, therefore, we should recommend the use of such identification badges to all of our clients."
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
-------------
The author states that no incidents of theft has been reported within ten companies that have been the clients of a safety consulting service. The author concludes that the reason for this is because the companies require its employees to wear photo identification badges while in work. Though the argument has merits, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument based on questionable premises and assumptions, and based on the evidence the author provides, we cannot accept his argument as valid.
Firstly, the author states that there has been no reported thefts in the company. This does not mean that there were zero thefts. It may be the case that there are lot of minor thefts in the company and it's not reported. Also the author has not provided any definition of how a theft is calculated in the ten companies. Maybe the company indicates that a theft happened only if the dollar values of the stolen good is above a particular threshold. Thus in cases of thefts of smaller value, the thefts will not be reported and is wrote down as expected loss.
Secondly, the author assumes that since all the ten companies require employees to wear photo badges, it has led to a decrease in theft reported. While this can be a valid claim the author fails to provide evidence that the decrease in theft is only due to strict implementation of photo badges and not due to any other reasons. It may be the case that all these companies have high tech security devices, guards placed in important locations, X-ray scanners in the entrances, camera monitoring, restricted electronic access etc.. which leads to a decrease in occurrence of theft. To further strengthen his argument and fix the flaws the author needs to present more data which proves that only photo identification badges were responsible for the decrease in theft. Some studies which show that in spite of all other security measures the incidence of theft decreased to zero only when identification badges were introduced.
In sum, the author fails to convince that photo identification badges are responsible to for the zero incidence of theft. The claim can be made stronger by showing evidence that all thefts were reported. Also the flaws in the assumption can be fixed by showing studies which correlate the use of photo identification badges and the decrease in theft in the companies. As it currently stands the argument has unsubstantiated premises and assumptions which render the claim weak and unconvincing.
I have tried to spend more time proof reading the essay to fix the typos and sentence error. Hope I have done better this time after my disaster in the first essay
