Joined: 09 Nov 2009
, given: 0
would appreciate a rating of my essays and your thoughts [#permalink]
09 Nov 2009, 07:49
hello. im new to gmat club and have recently discovered the site. i find some of the tips here very helpful. I haven't focused too much on AWA and im taking the GMAT in a week. I would appreciate any thoughts of a rating or feedback you may have. Thank you! Below are essays I have written for a MGMAT CAT under the timed condition, for both argument and the issue. appreciate the help!
AWA ESSAYS: Analyze Argument
The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:
“The inflow of immigrant workers into our community has put a downward pressure on wages. In fact, the average compensation of unskilled labor in our city has declined by nearly 10% over the past 5 years. Therefore, to protect our local economy, it is essential to impose a moratorium on further immigration.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
The author claims that the influx of immigrants has caused average wages to decline, and hence, it is necessary to block further immigrants from coming into the community. Although an initial look at this argument could make sense, a closer examination reveals it is a very weak argument. It relies on faulty assumptions and does not have clear evidence to support its conclusion.
First, the author states that the inflow of immigrant workers has caused average wages to fall. The assumption is that this effect has made it necessary to impose restrictions on further immigration. However, the author backs up this claim with unsubstantiated evidence. He goes on to state that the average compensation of unskilled labor has declined by 10% over the half of the past decade. There is no information given on skilled labor in the city, causing doubt on this argument. For example, it could be possible that the inflow of immigrants caused local workers to move into skilled labor. Hence, in this scenario, the local workers are not affected by the immigrants, and on average, they may have a higher wage.
Second, the author claims that imposing restrictions on immigrant will protect the local economy. It is not clear in the argument how this action will help the economy. If the author gave specific examples and evidence on how this would benefit the economy, then the argument could have been strengthened. For instance, if the author mentioned that the immigrant restrictions would have a direct link with the rise of wages for many citizens, the benefits of such restrictions would be more clear. Without these examples, it leaves the conclusion very weak.
Third, the argument fails to take into account other possibilities for the decline on wages. For instance, the economic conditions could be weak, and hence, wages have fallen with respect to these conditions. The statistic used in the argument, in which the average compensation of unskilled labor has declined 10% over the past 5 years, is not a very strong figure. The author uses this evidence to lead to the conclusion on needing regulations on the number of immigrants, creating a very weak link between the two. If the author had more substantive reasons for why the economy is real danger, as a result of the immigration, then perhaps the argument would have more substance.
In conclusion, the author's argument is weak and invalid. The argument contains weak links between the evidence and the conclusion, and hence, has no legs to stand on. If the author had stronger evidence and utilized clear examples to support the conclusion, the argument could have strengthened.
"Employees always perform better when given a say in determining the boundaries of their roles within a company."
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.
Some people would agree that employees perform better on the grounds that they have a say on their role in the company. Other people would argue that employees do not perform as well when given this opportunity. This issue is controversial, but upon closer examination, it is clear that employees do in fact perform better when given a say.
One reason is that the employee would feel more valued at the company given an opportunity to discuss his or her role within the company. This way, if the employee feels that his or her responsibilities are too low at the company, the employer can give the employee increased responsibilities. This would be helpful from a productivity perspective, as the employer may be underutilizing the employees. On the contrary, the employee may feel that his or her responsibilities are too high. Again, it would be advantageous for the employee to have an opportunity to advocates these thoughts openly. If the employee felt unhappy about the amount of responsibilities given, he or she may unexpectedly quit, causing a burden on the company. In either of these scenarios, the employee can perform better on the job, knowing concerns could be raised if the amount of responsibilities is unfair.
Another reason is that there would be a stronger relationship between the employee and the manager. A better working relationship would likely lead to better performance on the part of the employee. If the manager allows the employee to discuss his or her boundaries of what he or she is responsible for and capable of at the company, it leads to better communication and increased productivity. An example also illuminates this notion. For example, many people are unsatisfied with their current positions because of their working relationship with their managers. This makes the employee frustrated, creating negative energy towards the company. If such energy continues to build, it is likely to affect the performance of the employee as he or she is not content working there. Hence, it is clear that a healthy partnership between the employee and the manager, starting from discussions on the role of the employee, will lead to a better-performing employee.
Finally, perhaps the best reason is that there are businesses today that allow employees to have a say in what their roles entail, and hence has led to better productivity. For example, Google has been rated as a top place to work and the company advocates for clear lines of communication. Thus, such a company would allow for employees to openly discuss concerns they have on the responsibilities they are given at work. This leads to a more fulfilling work environment for the employees. It is also evident that organizations that permit this type of dialogue would have a flatter structure. There is less bureaucracy and hierarchy in such an organization. This structure is better for the employees, as they can speak up and have a say in not only their own roles at the company, but also have a say in improving the company.
In conclusion, while there could be arguments made for both sides of the issue, it is clear that employees perform better when they have a say on what their role entails at the company based on the reasons above. The employee feels more valued at the company, has a stronger relationship with the manager, and is more fulfilled at the flatter organization.