|
|
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.
13 Jan 2021, 22:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen foods:
“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
In this argument, the author claims that in compare to the beginning the cost of processing decrease and people of the organizations become more efficient because they have learnt to do things in a better way. A processor of Olympic Foods has stated an example of film processing company and compare the principles with their food organization. The conclusion cited that, as the color film processing had decreased the cost of processing from 1970 to 1984, the Olympic Foods will also can minimize costs and maximize profits because they have completed almost 25 years. However, the argument is flawed, because it fails to supply sufficient support in favor of the authors conclusion.
First of all, the argument readily assumes that the same principles of cost of processing can be applied by both food processing and film processing organization. But the assumption is questionable because
these two organizations have various factors of processing product such as different kind of machines, raw materials, utility costs, environment, market demand, quality etc. Hence, these organizations cannot use the same principles for their processing by considering above factors.
Secondly, the argument also implies that the processing cost is decreasing and the organization employee become efficient only because of the organizations have leant to do things in a better way. As this fact is one of the strong points but it undermines the other strong facts which can also an effective way to reducing cost processing and increasing employee efficiency. For example, if the raw materials prices have decreased over the time, there has high chance that the cost of processing also can deceased. In addition, a better work environment also can enhance the efficiency level of the employees. Therefore, these factors are equally influencing for cost reduction and efficiency incrassation.
In light of above unsubstantiated assumptions and poor evidence, the argument is flawed. It could be considerably strengthened, if the author mentions the different factors of these two organizations for which these organizations cannot use same principles. Also, they need to mention the other strong facts of the cost reduction and efficiency incrassation. Nevertheless, if the aforementioned concerns are not addressed the argument will still unconvincing.
“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they become more efficient. In color film processing, for example, the cost of a 3-by-5-inch print fell from 50 cents for five-day service in 1970 to 20 cents for one-day service in 1984. The same principle applies to the processing of food. And since Olympic Foods will soon celebrate its 25th birthday, we can expect that our long experience will enable us to minimize costs and thus maximize profits.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
In this argument, the author claims that in compare to the beginning the cost of processing decrease and people of the organizations become more efficient because they have learnt to do things in a better way. A processor of Olympic Foods has stated an example of film processing company and compare the principles with their food organization. The conclusion cited that, as the color film processing had decreased the cost of processing from 1970 to 1984, the Olympic Foods will also can minimize costs and maximize profits because they have completed almost 25 years. However, the argument is flawed, because it fails to supply sufficient support in favor of the authors conclusion.
First of all, the argument readily assumes that the same principles of cost of processing can be applied by both food processing and film processing organization. But the assumption is questionable because
these two organizations have various factors of processing product such as different kind of machines, raw materials, utility costs, environment, market demand, quality etc. Hence, these organizations cannot use the same principles for their processing by considering above factors.
Secondly, the argument also implies that the processing cost is decreasing and the organization employee become efficient only because of the organizations have leant to do things in a better way. As this fact is one of the strong points but it undermines the other strong facts which can also an effective way to reducing cost processing and increasing employee efficiency. For example, if the raw materials prices have decreased over the time, there has high chance that the cost of processing also can deceased. In addition, a better work environment also can enhance the efficiency level of the employees. Therefore, these factors are equally influencing for cost reduction and efficiency incrassation.
In light of above unsubstantiated assumptions and poor evidence, the argument is flawed. It could be considerably strengthened, if the author mentions the different factors of these two organizations for which these organizations cannot use same principles. Also, they need to mention the other strong facts of the cost reduction and efficiency incrassation. Nevertheless, if the aforementioned concerns are not addressed the argument will still unconvincing.
Moderators:
188 posts
