Status: It always seems impossible until it's done!!
Joined: 29 Aug 2012
GMAT 1: 680 Q47 V34
, given: 208
Please rate my 1st essay [#permalink]
26 May 2013, 01:29
I request to please rate my essay. Thanks in advance.
This is the first essay i'm writing. I need your suggestions to improve my writing skills.(I'm kind of ok with my writing since i wrote for many newsletter in my college and company, also typing speed is good(i typed nearly 30-40 words per minute in my typing writing exam)).
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 you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The cost maintenance in a company has become vital for all company to increase profits and create better working environment for employee in recent years. The centralization is the more effective method which provide more benefits to increase this phenomenon. The author claims that if Apogee Company close its operations in other locations and move it to a single location it would increase the profit, reduce the cost and it will be better for effective supervision of all employees in the company. Though the author claims has more merit, He presents poorly reasoned argument, based on the questionable premises and assumptions, based solely on the evidence the author provides, we cannot accept the argument as valid.
Primarily The author fails to consider the consequences of the closing the field offices in other location. The main things that will direct to company to loss instead of the profit are the reduction in number of employee in the particular location where the it closes its operation since most of employees would prefer to work in the location where the reside and there are possible chances of the workers to find another job which will keep them in their own locality, This in-turn reduce the production for the company since loss in employee number directly affects the production. Another important aspect is that it will increase the cost for the company to build the new offices in the location where it want to move, this will definitely be a major factor to be considered before taking such moves since the company must have sufficient work place to accommodate the employees and the equipments as well. The third factor is that it will affect the company's global presence, where the company can lose a potential projects which can definitely increase the company profit in a particular location. If company decides to move to a single location, there may be chances for the company to lack in diversity, since diversity brings harmony in the company and it will leads to healthy competition among the employees. The author premise the basis for the argument lacks in these criteria's and any legitimate evidential support for his premise makes his argument unacceptable.
In addition the author makes several assumptions which remain unproven. He fails to provide more example of such centralization in a particular location to increase profit and better supervision of employees. He simply states that the company had more profits when it was in one location. But he fails to mention the employee number, company's products sales in the market. Since a good new products can initially attract more people to buy them. The author weakens his argument by making such assumptions and failing to provide proper links between the centralization in one location and profit he assumes to be exists.
While author does have several key issues in his argument's premise and assumptions, it doesn't mean that the entire argument is written without a base. The addition of some key factor to support his assumptions such as the evidence for the such improvement in the profit and reduction in cost could definitely strengthen the author's claim. Though there are several issues with the author reasoning of the argument at present, with research and clarification he could improve the argument significantly and rectify the gaps in the argument.
In sum the author illogical argument based on unsupported premises and unsubstantiated assumptions that render his conclusion invalid. If author truly hopes to change his reader's mind on this issue, he would largely reconstruct his argument, fix flaws, clearly explicate his assumptions, provide evidential support. Without these things, his poorly reasoned argument will likely to convince the some of the reader.