ANALYSIS OF ARGUMENT
ESSAY QUESTION:
The following memo was circulated by the management team of a retail company:
"We are very pleased to announce that the relocation of our inventory, which had been located in four different warehouses throughout the country, to a single new warehouse near Company headquarters in Boston. This consolidated location will cut the company's expenses for warehouse rent in half. As a result we expect our monthly profitability to go up by this amount."
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.
RESPONSE:
In the preceding statement, the memo circulated by the management team of a retail company states that company's inventory, which are located in four different warehouse throughout the country, will be relocated to single new warehouse near Company Headquarters in Boston. Thus the team is expecting that company's monthly profitability will go up by the amount saved through reduced rent. The team's claim may well have merit, it presents a poorly reasoned argument, based on several questionable premises and assumptions, and based solely on the evidence it offer, we cannot accept the argument as valid.
The primary issue with the team's reasoning lies in the unsubstantiated premises. The memo states that the amount saved through less rent because of centralization of inventory might increase the monthly profitability by the same amount. The team here fails to provide any evidence or data that might help in supporting or believing statements that are stated in the memo. It is also stated that the expenses on rent will be halved but the premise fails to provide evidence that will there be any other expenses because of centralization of inventory. The team's premises, the basis for its argument, lack any legitimate evidentiary support and render his conclusion invalid.
In addition, the team makes several assumptions that remain unproven. One such assumption is that there were no other expenses than the rent paid for different warehouses. It might be plausible that because of centralization of the inventory they might incur some other expenses like transportation of goods to dealers. The team fails to provide any substantial evidence stating that there will be no other costs because of centralization and thus they will be able to see their monthly profitability increasing by the same amount. Also the team assumes that while centralizing the inventory there will be no extra maintenance costs. Thus the team weakens the argument by making assumptions and failing to provide explication of the links between the centralization of the inventory and the increased monthly profitability it assumes exist.
While the team does have several issues in its argument's premises and assumptions, that is not to say that the entire argument is without base. There are some evidences or facts which can be provided in the argument to strengthen the reasoning. The team should state data such as the types of expenses which are reduced by centralization and which are increased. Also by providing what proportion of expenses are increased and what proportion decreased.There should be data of stating that the expenses are less than the savings, thus providing the evidence for increased profitability. Though there are several issues with the team's reasoning at present, with research and clarification, the team can improve its argument significantly.
In sum, the team's illogical argument is based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render its argument invalid. If the team truly hopes to change its readers' minds then it would have to restructure the argument, fix flaws in logic, explicate assumptions and provide evidentiary support. Without these, the team's poorly reasoned argument will likely convince few people.
ANALYSIS OF ISSUE
ESSAY QUESTION:
"Employees always perform better when given a say in determining the boundaries of their roles within a company."
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.
RESPONSE:
Every company have its own way of defining the boundaries of roles for each of its employees. The boundaries can apply to any of the employee of the company, may it be senior executives, managers or their sub-ordinates. The statement stating that the employees always perform better when they are given a say in determining the boundaries of their roles within a company is quite debatable. There are some who affirm with the statement and some who will go against it. The issue of whether the employees perform better when they have a say in determining their roles is a complex and a controversial one. Differnet people have differnet views due to their distinct backgrounds, distinct environment they come from and different experiences. Therefore there is no universal answer to this question, and whether one choice take precedence over other may quite depend on the specific situation. The decision, nevertheless, is not an easy one to make and should rely on case-by-case analysis. As far as I am concerned, however, I agree that employees do perform better when they are given chance to decide the boundaries of their roles. My view can be greatly substantiated by the following discussion.
Confidence is what the manager should showcase in you to make you feel better. This is true that its the confidence which is being built in the employee when they are given to chance to decide the boundaries of their roles. Just the same way a person gives you confidence to do work and you get motivation in the work, this chance do motivate the person to perform well. Taking an instance of a player who is practicing for an approaching tournament. If the coach just go on setting the roles and to-do things list for the player might just perform, but when a coach let the player also participate in defining the plan for their practice it build the moral suport of the player.
Its just not the confidence for the employee that makes him perform better, but the expectations set by him or his manager. Expectations when set by only manager tends to make a person just a machine to perform his task. It might be the case that the manager's expectation might be far below what the person can show or far above the person to accomplish. Under this circumstance the employee will not be enjoying the work. He will be working just for the sake of working. However, if we also let the employee also set some expectations it can be observed that the employee will be doing the work taking personal interest in it.
When we discussed confidence and expectations there are many other things which can also let the employee perform better. Responsibility is something given to the employee when he is asked to take part in decissions. All these three things confidence,expectations and responsibility collectively help the employee perform and these things are an indirect consequences of letting the employee take part in decisions.
Admittedly, it may be true that employee might not perform better in the stated situation. But that is the case only in very few situations. The situations can be that the employee might be a person who try to avoid taking any responsibility. For whom work is just to earn money. But this case far to be seen. Just because that there are a few people who dont want to work, it should not be applied that the efficient employees will not perform better when they are given the opportunity like this.
In sum, depending on few situations we cannot neglect the majority of cases. And by carefully examining the pros and cons of both the situations we can assert to one of the choice of the two conflicting ideas.[/list]
5-Day Free Trial
5-day free, full-access trial TTP
Available with Beat the GMAT members only code
MORE DETAILS
