Joined: 05 Jun 2011
Location: Shanghai China
, given: 0
two princeton AWA test essay, pls help to rate. [#permalink]
28 Jun 2011, 21:34
Prompt: "Some have argued that the salaries of corporate executives should be linked to those of their lowest-paid employees. This, they argue, will improve relations between management and workers, reducing costly labor disputes and increasing worker productivity. What these people overlook, however, is that these high salaries are necessary to attract the best managers, the individuals whose decisions have the greatest impact on the overall well-being of the company."
Assignment: Which do you find more compelling, the contention that worker and executive salaries should be linked, or the response to it? Support your position with reasons and examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
Nowadays, there is a controversial issue about whether salaries of corporate executives should be linked to those of lowest-paid employees or be linked to those high-paid employees. Depending on personal experiences, beliefs and emtional concern, we may find that some people hold the opinion that those low-paid employees will improve relations between management and workers, reducing costly labor disputes and increasing worker productivity. While others have another opposite attitude. In fact, I disagree that what these people overlook, however, is that these high salaries are necessary to attract the best managers, the individuals whose decisions have the greatest impact on the overall well-being of the company. My viewpoint will be substantiated by the following discussion.
First of all, the most important reason for my view point is that high salaries are more important to attract talents to best serve for the company, they yeild high productivity and high profits for the company. To illustrate this, there is an approriate example that is very persuasive that the former president of Mircrosoft of China division TangJun. He is very diligent and smart employee and devote all his lifetime to better serve for the company. Based on high salaries and extra bonus offered by the company, he is more willing to work hard and trying to create a better workplace for his staff.
Under this situation, it is obvious that high salaries are prone to lure the best manager which originate greast impact on the company.
Another equivalent crucial ground that would have to be presented to develop my viewpoint is that low-paid employees aren't necessarily not helping for the company. For example, there are so many zero dollar salary CEO still committed to his company, because they vision a bright and broad future for the company despite of their good achievement on colleagiality and excellent sales volumn. So, as far as I am concerned, choosing a best executive candidate should some one who is very experienced, best qualified and loyal is a sagacious action.
Thirdly, it is probably true that in certain conditions those who get high salaries employees don't work hard to their employer and their productivity does refect equal to their salaries. Nonetheless, this alone does not generate a sufficient support to advocate that all the employees who get high pay will do the same.As matter of fact, these cases are rare and hence too weak to boost this conclusion. When advantages and disadvantages are carefully examined, more striking conclusion is that we should let those high-paid employees do their own work while we also should have our board of commitees of the company to supervise them on their daily work.
Consequently, if all the factors above are considered, we may find that advantages of choosing best qualified employee outweight those of simply choosing the best employees based on their salary expectation , therefore, from what we have discussed we may safely come to conclusion that choosing those salaries of corporate executive who is highly qualified and experienced is rather wise decision.
Prompt: "Without new ideas, any society will stagnate. New ideas can only be introduced in a society that permits freedom of expression. Therefore, if a society is to thrive, all limits on freedom of expression should be eliminated."
Assignment: 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 conclusion of this argument is that if a society is to thrive, all limits on freedom of expression should be eliminated. The author employs serveral lines of reasoning to reach this conclusion. For one thing, author reasons that without new ideas, any society will stagnate. For another thing, author reasons that new ideas can only be introduced in a society that permits freedom of expression. The argument is unconvincing for serveral reasons.
To begin with, the author assumes that there is relevance between new idea and freedom of speech. This assumption is clearly mistaken. It is also possible that new ideas created by a conservative society. Hence without weighing and eliminating these and other casual explanations contributing to long term trend endorsed in the argument. The author can't soly contribute new idea to free of speech while convincing us of a suspect conclusion.
Seconly, the author claims that if a society is to thrive, all the limitation of freedom of speech should eliminated. But he fails to support his argument because that the prosperity of a society is not soly depended on new ideas, there are many other factors contributing to the growth of a society. For example, good import and export conditions which lead to a stronger economy of a society ,quality of its citizens create a better city and harmonious envoirnment for all the mankind to travel or big international events stimulate the GDP in the city and make people live in better place.
In conclusion, the arguer, by leaving out all above factors, tries in vain to justify this argument. To better this argument, the argue needs more data and analysis to smooth out all the wrinkles in the lines of reasoning. In assessing whether society will thrive by following by freedon of speech and new idea introduced by freedom of expression, I would recommend, by business point of view, the research on business feasibility emcompassing all the factors will be instrumental in minimizing any potential risks.