|
|
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
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
06 May 2017, 07:42
Kudos
Bookmarks
Dear all,
this is my second try for AWA. I try to stick to the 6.0 AWA guide mentioned here in the GMAT Club. However, I did not memorize all the relevant statements and phrases.
If someone could look over the text and give me short suggestions for improvement. This would be much appreciated!
The argument claims that over time processing costs go down because organizations learn how to do things more efficiently.
Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. It furthermore fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which the argument could be evaluated.
The conclusion of the argument relies on weak assumptions. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the paragraph mentions that the cost of processing goes down over time due to increased efficiency. This is a bold statement. The argument fails to mention whether this statement applies to every industry or is only true for some industries. It might be true that over time costs can be decreased because of more streamlined processes. For example in the car manufacturing industry, the introduction of the assembly line significantly decreased costs. More cars could be manufactured in less time. However, it is unclear whether such an invention could be applied to every other industry. For example industries that are not actually producing things, but are focused on non feasible products, the cost of processing cannot be decreased easily. In the consulting industry, people rely on good ideas and pure knowledge. The process of coming up with a good idea might take time. There are no tools how to increase efficiency.
In conclusion, the argument should better state its underlying assumptions. Here it fails to do so, thus the argument is flawed.
Second, the argument is also based on the assumption that reducing processing costs does not reduce the quality of the products. This is another bold statement which needs to be analyzed. On the one hand, quality should always be key when producing things like 3-by-5-inch prints or producing food. Especially in the food industry, high quality is very important. It can become very dangerous for people to eat bad food or meals of lower quality because cost cutting and increased efficiency led to subpar quality. Thus, the argument fails to consider that a certain standard of quality has to be maintained at all times.
All in all, one must ask whether the argument really distinguishes between different industries when talking about increasing the efficiency in order to cut costs. Is this a realistic scenario? Furthermore, the argument does not mention whether the product quality remains the same or will suffer when during ongoing efficiency processes. Both questions should be clearly answered before coming to a conclusion.
The conclusion of the argument is flawed due to the above-mentioned arguments and thus is unconvincing. In order to analyze the argument correctly the author should clearly mention all relevant information. However, the paragraph does not present all relevant facts. Hence the argument is not well reasoned and somewhat illogical.
this is my second try for AWA. I try to stick to the 6.0 AWA guide mentioned here in the GMAT Club. However, I did not memorize all the relevant statements and phrases.
If someone could look over the text and give me short suggestions for improvement. This would be much appreciated!
The argument claims that over time processing costs go down because organizations learn how to do things more efficiently.
Stated in this way, the argument manipulates facts and conveys a distorted view of the situation. It furthermore fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which the argument could be evaluated.
The conclusion of the argument relies on weak assumptions. Hence, the argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the paragraph mentions that the cost of processing goes down over time due to increased efficiency. This is a bold statement. The argument fails to mention whether this statement applies to every industry or is only true for some industries. It might be true that over time costs can be decreased because of more streamlined processes. For example in the car manufacturing industry, the introduction of the assembly line significantly decreased costs. More cars could be manufactured in less time. However, it is unclear whether such an invention could be applied to every other industry. For example industries that are not actually producing things, but are focused on non feasible products, the cost of processing cannot be decreased easily. In the consulting industry, people rely on good ideas and pure knowledge. The process of coming up with a good idea might take time. There are no tools how to increase efficiency.
In conclusion, the argument should better state its underlying assumptions. Here it fails to do so, thus the argument is flawed.
Second, the argument is also based on the assumption that reducing processing costs does not reduce the quality of the products. This is another bold statement which needs to be analyzed. On the one hand, quality should always be key when producing things like 3-by-5-inch prints or producing food. Especially in the food industry, high quality is very important. It can become very dangerous for people to eat bad food or meals of lower quality because cost cutting and increased efficiency led to subpar quality. Thus, the argument fails to consider that a certain standard of quality has to be maintained at all times.
All in all, one must ask whether the argument really distinguishes between different industries when talking about increasing the efficiency in order to cut costs. Is this a realistic scenario? Furthermore, the argument does not mention whether the product quality remains the same or will suffer when during ongoing efficiency processes. Both questions should be clearly answered before coming to a conclusion.
The conclusion of the argument is flawed due to the above-mentioned arguments and thus is unconvincing. In order to analyze the argument correctly the author should clearly mention all relevant information. However, the paragraph does not present all relevant facts. Hence the argument is not well reasoned and somewhat illogical.
Moderators:
188 posts
