Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 22 Oct 2014, 14:36

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Please rate my AWA :)

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2014
Posts: 1
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 0

Please rate my AWA :) [#permalink] New post 03 Apr 2014, 08:39
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“The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least outdated: a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to survey questionnaires expressed a high level of interest in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.”



The given argument that workers are interested in the restructuring of management in the workplace is flawed. Specificity in all facets of the argument is missing, thus causing the reader or listener to not believe what is said or written.

First, the argument states that a “recently published survey” is the deciding factor for the desire for change in the workplace. The unknown factor is where the survey is published. A truly dedicated high school student could have surveyed 1200 workers around his or her high school and then published the results in the school newspaper, or the survey could be a part of an Op-Ed in the New York Times. Understandably, there would be more credibility if the survey were in the New York Times rather than a school newspaper.

Additionally, the argument fails to mention who the 1200 workers are. Within companies, people’s desires will vary based on what rung of the ladder they are at. An entry level secretary or mail clerk will most likely be worried about restructuring benefits such as health insurance. Meanwhile, a high level manager (managers could still be interested in change in management within their own company) could be worried about restructuring the management system in order for there to be a more trustworthy and pleasing work environment for everyone.

Finally, solely mentioning “corporate restructuring” and “redesign of benefit programs” is too general of terms to use in today’s complex, mega-corporate world. People surveyed will undoubtedly be apprehensive to recommend “corporate restructuring,” since most likely that will end in layoffs, pay cuts, or other modifications that benefit the company, but not the employer. Also, it is strange for a survey to reveal that “corporate restructuring” and “redesign of benefit programs” are of the highest importance. The previous paragraph mentions how the argument fails to address who was surveyed. Mentioning “corporate restructuring” implies that upper level employees were surveyed and found interest in a big picture issue, while “redesign of benefit programs” suggests that lower level employees were surveyed with the result being interest in a more focused aspect.

Specific information will make the argument more believable. It should mention when the survey was published, and where it was published. The survey also needs more attention. The 1200 workers should be categorized based on their position in their company to see what trends may occur. Putting more detail in the survey will thus clear up who has a high interest in issues, including those of “corporate restructuring” and “redesign of benefits.” It is too general to be of any purpose as it currently stands.
Please rate my AWA :)   [#permalink] 03 Apr 2014, 08:39
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Rate my AWA please. a03b 0 30 Sep 2012, 10:59
Experts publish their posts in the topic Please rate my AWA :) Gmanski 4 03 Sep 2012, 11:01
Please rate my AWA rohitgoel15 0 31 Aug 2012, 03:50
1 Please rate my AWA vineetmhjn 2 15 Aug 2012, 11:05
1 Please rate my AWAs samidh 0 14 Oct 2010, 06:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Please rate my AWA :)

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  


GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.