Please evaluate my essay

[debason.mj]

Dear Experts

Requesting, you to please evaluate my essay once and suggest any improvement. What score can I expect with this one.

The following appeared in a memorandum from the vice president of Road Food, international chain of fast-food restaurants.
"This past year, we spent almost as much on advertising as did our main competitor, Street Eats, which has fewer restaurants than we do. Although it appeared at first that our advertising agency had created a campaign along the lines we suggested, in fact our total profits were lower than those of Street Eats. In order to motivate our advertising agency to perform better, we should start basing the amount that we pay it on how much total profit we make each year."
Discuss how well the argument is reasoned


Success based payment has gained significant traction is recent years and many corporations are focusing on this approach to guarantee a return on their investments. This approach not only drives the service providers to deliver best in class service aligned to a specific cause, but also helps the corporation to define accurate vision of the to be state, in line with the change pointers. The author has utilized this concept in the given argument and asserts that a success based payment be negotiated with the advertising agency working with a restaurant chain, in order to maximize the performance of the advertising campaign, which will result in increased sales for the restaurant chain over its competitor. While the argument has some merit, it fails to mention several key points which could be taken into account while evaluating the usefulness of the given approach. The argument stated in this way reveal more of a leap of faith and poor reasoning while drawing the conclusion.

The primary issues with the argument lies with unsubstantiated assumption and unreliable interpretation of facts. The author readily assumes that nothing else and only the advertising campaign is solely responsible for competing effectively with competitors. This assumption is very much flawed as it does not substantiate any reasoning behind this. For example, it is very much probable, that the food quality in the mentioned restaurant chain has degraded substantially which has drove away many of its customers to rival chain, Street Eat. Also despite having fewer number of restaurant than the restaurant chain in question, the average floor space of Street Eat might be much larger, resulting in more number of customer. Also profit is not only dependent on total sales but also on total cost of generating those sales. If Street Eat is using more cost and time efficient processes in its day to day operations, it will substantially cut down the cost of operation, leading to maximization of profit. The argument could have been much more comprehensible if it elaborated how the advertising campaign can maximize the profit henceforth.

The secondary concern with passage originates from the unsupported claim made by the author that a success based payment will motivate the advertising agency to perform better. This is again a very weak claim as the argument does not draw any correlation between a successful advertising campaign and maximization of profit. Moreover, the advertisement strategy is created by the based on the guidelines given by restaurant chain officials. It could very well happen that these officials failed to understand the mood shift in their customers and derived a campaign which did not attract customers any more. Hence if the advertisement agency is not given enough freedom to independently carry out a market survey in order to understand the customer behaviors, the risk of failure is substantial. Also even if the campaign led to maximization of sales, increased operating cost can again strike down the profitability. Without these evidences, the argument remains widely unconvincing.

In order to strengthen the argument, the author needs to substantiate what extra measures Street Eat has taken to maximize its profit despite spending in advertisement as much as our concerned restaurant did. Also the advertisement strategy needs to be revaluated in order to understand its impact on the customer. Without this information the success of the proposed negotiation tactics with the advertisement agency remains more of a generalized theory than a fact driven proposition. As a result, the conclusion cannot be taken forward for implementation.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed based on the reasoning stated above and cannot be very convincing. In order to assess the complete merit of the argument it is essential to evaluate all the contributing factors. Without this the argument remains inconclusive and open to further discussions.