-
seanceserene
- Junior | Next Rank: 30 Posts
- Posts: 26
- Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 8:56 pm
- Thanked: 2 times
"In general, a company's most valuable employees are those who are concerned more with efficiency than with quality."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
the following is my answer.
It is entirely reasonable to think as the speaker suggests, on the general ground, that a company's most valuable employees are those who concerned more with efficiency than with quality. I convince myself, however, that the most valuable one should use all means at his disposal to strike a balance between these two factors, which are both fundamental to a corporation.
When people refer to "profit", what immediately come to their mind are "efficiency" and "quality", two terms that are an integrated part of a business. When employees attempt to bring profits to their company, they shouldn't consider those two elements separately, but to prioritize one of them when counter different situations.
First and foremost, efficiency may outweigh quality when time is limited. In this case, if a concern wants to meet a large amount of demand in a short time, efficiency can solve the problem. For instance, when Christmas is approaching, thousands of companies launch Christmas products. It is true that most of these products are fast consuming goods and are in great demand. The employees who can, in this so short a period, enhance their efficiency, are bound to bring more profit.
In the other way, quality turn out to be more significant when comes to niche market. It is in the luxury sphere that the above claim is best exemplified. People purchase a bag from Prada because it is a vintage, a classic and a symbol of high quality. It is not only a good used in daily life, but also a piece of collection. Thus, it is not hard to conclude that employee in this kind of company should place great attention in quality. Undoubtedly, on the other hand, fast food restaurant such as McDonald's should not concern too much in quality like Prada does since instant service is key to win.
Some may say that if comparing the employees in the identical business, the idea I embraced above is not applicable. Why not bear the life cycle of a product in mind. The two elements play different roles in different phases as well. In the introduction stage, when the competitors are rare, efficiency speaks louder than quality since one can barely duplicate or produce a similar product the company is launching. In the saturation stage, however, fierce competition requires the company to emphasis quality so that it will stand out in the industry. I think my opinion is well evidenced in the mobile industry. When I was desired to buy a new launched Sony Ericsson music cell phone, it cost me quite a lot. Several months later, I found that the market was saturated with Nokia music ones and Motorola ones with relatively lower price and high quality.
In conclusion, to maximize profit, employees would better judge and analyze different situations they encounter, so that to prioritize "efficiency" and "quality".
is my conclusion ok? is it too short or too hasty?
i will be delighted if you can point out my weakness, untight logics, and idiomatic mistakes.
thank you in advance.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
the following is my answer.
It is entirely reasonable to think as the speaker suggests, on the general ground, that a company's most valuable employees are those who concerned more with efficiency than with quality. I convince myself, however, that the most valuable one should use all means at his disposal to strike a balance between these two factors, which are both fundamental to a corporation.
When people refer to "profit", what immediately come to their mind are "efficiency" and "quality", two terms that are an integrated part of a business. When employees attempt to bring profits to their company, they shouldn't consider those two elements separately, but to prioritize one of them when counter different situations.
First and foremost, efficiency may outweigh quality when time is limited. In this case, if a concern wants to meet a large amount of demand in a short time, efficiency can solve the problem. For instance, when Christmas is approaching, thousands of companies launch Christmas products. It is true that most of these products are fast consuming goods and are in great demand. The employees who can, in this so short a period, enhance their efficiency, are bound to bring more profit.
In the other way, quality turn out to be more significant when comes to niche market. It is in the luxury sphere that the above claim is best exemplified. People purchase a bag from Prada because it is a vintage, a classic and a symbol of high quality. It is not only a good used in daily life, but also a piece of collection. Thus, it is not hard to conclude that employee in this kind of company should place great attention in quality. Undoubtedly, on the other hand, fast food restaurant such as McDonald's should not concern too much in quality like Prada does since instant service is key to win.
Some may say that if comparing the employees in the identical business, the idea I embraced above is not applicable. Why not bear the life cycle of a product in mind. The two elements play different roles in different phases as well. In the introduction stage, when the competitors are rare, efficiency speaks louder than quality since one can barely duplicate or produce a similar product the company is launching. In the saturation stage, however, fierce competition requires the company to emphasis quality so that it will stand out in the industry. I think my opinion is well evidenced in the mobile industry. When I was desired to buy a new launched Sony Ericsson music cell phone, it cost me quite a lot. Several months later, I found that the market was saturated with Nokia music ones and Motorola ones with relatively lower price and high quality.
In conclusion, to maximize profit, employees would better judge and analyze different situations they encounter, so that to prioritize "efficiency" and "quality".
is my conclusion ok? is it too short or too hasty?
i will be delighted if you can point out my weakness, untight logics, and idiomatic mistakes.
thank you in advance.
it is not an "alice in wonderland". it is real! i am going to freak GMAT out!
