Joined: 21 Mar 2011
, given: 0
It is unrealistic to expect individual- Review Please [#permalink]
02 May 2012, 09:44
“It is unrealistic to expect individual nations to make, independently, the sacrifices necessary to conserve energy. International leadership and worldwide cooperation are essential if we expect to protect the world’s energy resources for future generations.”
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.
In order to save energy resources for coming generations it is crucial for the world’s nations to take necessary steps for energy conservation. A close examination of the issue reveals that individual nations do need support from international leadership in doing so.
First of all, not all nations are equal on different parameters. Like individual states in a country or families in a town have varying financial means, countries too have different spending powers. For instance Somalia cannot invest as much on energy conservation as can United States. For this reason, it is important for United Nations or other such international organization to provide funds to needy nations to allocate on energy protection.
Secondly, supervision by an international authority calls for consistency in conservation standards. This makes it easier for individual nations to adhere to norms and know exactly what they need to do. For example, World Health Organization maintains standards for anti-AIDS campaigns and measures, and their national wings follow the same worldwide.
Additionally, not only international leadership and cooperation help in supervision, but also infuse a sense of competition in nations. Countries are able to measure their present performance as against their past efforts. Also, similar sized countries can compare their performance among themselves. For instance, certain tiers of performance measurement may be set by international leaders against which nations can measure their efforts on different parameters.
Worldwide cooperation and leadership are indeed essential to protect the world’s energy resources. Once the standards and laws are in place, it will be the responsibility of each nation to uphold them.
The following appeared in a memorandum from the business department of the Apogee Company:
“When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees.”
Discuss how well reasoned … etc.
The memorandum states Apogee company was more profitable when all its operations were centralized. As a result of this hypothesis, the company wants to close down its field offices and operate from a single location to improve its profitability. However, the argument is seriously flawed in making that conclusion as it fails to take into account a number of factors that may be important towards analyzing its profitability.
There is no mention of the time period when the company’s operations were centralized. What was true then may not be appropriate or possible today. For instance, if the company was profitable in the year 2005, then it’s not necessary the circumstances are the same today – post economic slowdown of 2008.
Additionally, the argument does not state whether the company’s scale of operations are the same as before. It may have happened that the company expanded its operations and it is now not possible to work centrally. What about the customers? Where are they located? Are they scattered? Is it imperative for Apogee to have field offices situated near the customers to service them promptly? If the customers are not happy, profitability will take a back seat.
The company may have employees in field offices that are well trained and experienced. Will Apogee fire the ones who are not willing to relocate to central office? Or will it bear the expenses of moving them? In both cases, company will incur costs to hire or move, which will be bad for profitability.
Relying solely on past performance to make future plans makes this argument weak. Apogee company must look at all the above considerations in order to ascertain what would be best to improve its profitability.