AWA 3rd Attempt - City of Helios... (please rate my AWA)
[#permalink]
01 Feb 2020, 13:40
Please rate my AWA:
The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine devoted to regional life:
“Corporations should look to the city of Helios when seeking new business opportunities or a new location. Even in the recent recession, Helios’s unemployment rate was lower than the regional average. It is the industrial center of the region, and historically it has provided more than its share of the region’s manufacturing jobs. In addition, Helios is attempting to expand its economic base by attracting companies that focus on research and development of
innovative technologies.”
The argument claims that corporations should locate their operations in the city of Helios. It argues that because Helios has lower than average unemployment that the region, it is the manufacturing core of the region, and the city is focusing on attracting innovative technology companies it is a good place for companies to locate. The argument without quantitative metrics to support it assumes that low unemployment is positive driver, although in many cases this is not the case. The argument also fails to account for alternative options exterior to the region. The argument claims that broadly companies should locate in the region, however use industry specific reasons to do so.
The argument claims that the low unemployment of the region is a core reason for a company to locate in Helios. However a low unemployment rate may indicate there is a lack of labor availability within the area, thus to find and hire staff may be difficult. Thus companies with large operations that require significant staff such as call centres, manufacturing plants, and others may not be able to source the talent they require. In contrast within towns with higher unemployment labor will tend to be cheaper and more available.
The argument uses evidence that contrasts the city of Helios with the broader region, but does not include any information about the desirability of other locations. There may be other cities exterior to the region that have high levels of staff availability, considerably better infrastructure than Helios, and better incentive programs to locate there. For these reasons Helios may be sub-optimal relative to a broader set of options, and the argument narrows the aperture too much.
Lastly the argument bases its rationale on the fact that Helios has a strong manufacturing sector and the city desires to attract companies that create innovative technologies. These drivers are assumed to be applicable to corporations broadly, however in fact may have contrasting effects on different types of companies. For large manufactures these considerations would be positive drivers as there is readily available skillet labor, however if the city has limited white-collar work it would be difficult for professional service firms to find talent in that market. Additionally for companies that are not creating innovative technologies, the city may not offer incentives for them to locate there as they are not its primary focus.
For the reasons above this argument makes generalizations about the benefits of Helios that may only apply to certain companies. The argument assumes these benefits apply broadly, doesn’t explore logical alternatives such as other markets, and views statistics such as the employment rate as benefits when in actuality they may be a drawbacks. For these reasons the argument is unconvincing and requires additional evidence to be supported.