problem statement:
The following appeared in the editorial section of a corporate newsletter:
“The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least
outdated: a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to
survey questionnaires expressed a high level of interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of
benefits programs.”
Discuss how well reasoned … etc.


The conclusion the author draws regarding that the workers being apathetic to management issues, is flawed. The author fails to address the kind of issues and draws his conclusion on the statistics which may not be representative of the workers.
Firstly, the author fails to specifically mention the kind of issues, and how the interests shown by the workers towards corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits, relates to addressing these issues. The issues regarding management could be management of the company, or managing the company themselves. The interests shown by the workers towards the topics mentioned in the survey does not necessarily mean those topics address the management issues. However if the author had mentioned what issues he was referring to, or how the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits helped in resolving it, there would have been a clear evidence to support his conclusion.
Secondly, the statistical evidence of a survey fails to substantiate the conclusion. The survey represents only 1200 workers which may not represent the entire population of the workers which the author is referring to. The conclusion the author makes is based on the 79% of the workers being interested in specific topics. This 79% of the group of workers does provide a strong evidence to consider the common notion of workers being apathetic to management issues as false.
Thirdly the author fails to give us his clear stand against the notion. He says it can be regarded as false or outdated, the two of which when considered individually have completely different meanings. If the author considers it as false, then he is completely against the notion. If he considers it as outdated, then he means to say that the notion was true, but proven after the survey.
Hence due the reasons mentioned above, the validity of the author’s conclusion is questionable. Had the author specified the issues, mentioned the kind of workers he is referring to and provided more statistical evidence and how the subjects of interests of the workers aids to falsify the notion, his argument would have been more logical.