Was unsure of length & how many points to discuss.... Thanks!
"[/b]The Alpha Company has just reduced its workforce by laying off fifteen percent of its employees in all divisions and at all levels, and its encouraging early retirement for all its employees. As you know, the Beta Company manufactures products similar to Alpha's but our profits have fallen over the last few years. To Improve Beta's competitive position, we should try to hire a significant number of Alpha's former workers, since these experienced workers can provide valuable information about Alpha's successful methods, will require little training, and will be particularly motivated to compete against Alpha""
The argument that Beta Company should take on Alpha's ex-employees might make sense in an ideal world, both companies make similar products and the employees might bring Alpha's knowledge to Beta . However I feel that the reasoning provided in this argument is nonexistent as it really does not talk about why Beta's profits are falling or about any other external circumstances.
For any company, falling profits is something that definitely that needs to be addressed. However there is usually a solid reason behind any issue that a company might be facing and to take any action, Beta Company needs to know WHY exactly are profits falling and then to tackle the situation using that knowledge. The argument does not mention any reason why Beta Company's profits have fallen and jumps directly to hiring Alpha's ex employees. For all we know, the reason why Beta Company's profit's fell was because they currently have too many employees and need to let go off some and not take on more, leaving the recommended strategy very counter-productive.
The argument that hiring Alpha's ex employees will give them information about Alpha's successful methods is also flawed. First of all we have no information on how successful Alpha is; from the first few sentences of the arguments it seems that they are reducing their workforce which is usually a sign of hard times so there might be no 'successful methods' to gain knowledge of. Secondly, it is entirely possible that the products produced by Alpha and Beta are so commoditized that there is absolutely nothing that the two companies do differently and the differences in profit (if any ) are unrelated to their individual employees.
Lastly, we have no reason to believe why the employees who have been let go would be 'particularly motivated' to compete against Alpha. Although they did get laid off, there is no evidence to suggest that this was done in a inhumane or rude way and is totally possible that each employee got generous severance packages, rendering this argument useless.
In conclusion, the proposed does not make any sense without a very solid context. We are unaware of the source of falling profits and whether hiring employees will help or not, we also do not know about Alpha's own profitability and whether there any 'methods' to learn and lastly whether the employees are in fact 'particularly motivated' to compete against Alpha. Without each of these factors being present, there is no reason why hiring Alpha's employees will make sense to Beta.
"[/b]The Alpha Company has just reduced its workforce by laying off fifteen percent of its employees in all divisions and at all levels, and its encouraging early retirement for all its employees. As you know, the Beta Company manufactures products similar to Alpha's but our profits have fallen over the last few years. To Improve Beta's competitive position, we should try to hire a significant number of Alpha's former workers, since these experienced workers can provide valuable information about Alpha's successful methods, will require little training, and will be particularly motivated to compete against Alpha""
The argument that Beta Company should take on Alpha's ex-employees might make sense in an ideal world, both companies make similar products and the employees might bring Alpha's knowledge to Beta . However I feel that the reasoning provided in this argument is nonexistent as it really does not talk about why Beta's profits are falling or about any other external circumstances.
For any company, falling profits is something that definitely that needs to be addressed. However there is usually a solid reason behind any issue that a company might be facing and to take any action, Beta Company needs to know WHY exactly are profits falling and then to tackle the situation using that knowledge. The argument does not mention any reason why Beta Company's profits have fallen and jumps directly to hiring Alpha's ex employees. For all we know, the reason why Beta Company's profit's fell was because they currently have too many employees and need to let go off some and not take on more, leaving the recommended strategy very counter-productive.
The argument that hiring Alpha's ex employees will give them information about Alpha's successful methods is also flawed. First of all we have no information on how successful Alpha is; from the first few sentences of the arguments it seems that they are reducing their workforce which is usually a sign of hard times so there might be no 'successful methods' to gain knowledge of. Secondly, it is entirely possible that the products produced by Alpha and Beta are so commoditized that there is absolutely nothing that the two companies do differently and the differences in profit (if any ) are unrelated to their individual employees.
Lastly, we have no reason to believe why the employees who have been let go would be 'particularly motivated' to compete against Alpha. Although they did get laid off, there is no evidence to suggest that this was done in a inhumane or rude way and is totally possible that each employee got generous severance packages, rendering this argument useless.
In conclusion, the proposed does not make any sense without a very solid context. We are unaware of the source of falling profits and whether hiring employees will help or not, we also do not know about Alpha's own profitability and whether there any 'methods' to learn and lastly whether the employees are in fact 'particularly motivated' to compete against Alpha. Without each of these factors being present, there is no reason why hiring Alpha's employees will make sense to Beta.
