Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
20 Jan 2021, 09:32
Kudos
Bookmarks
Prompt - The following appeared in a memorandum from the business department of the Apogee Company: “When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees.” Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
The memorandum is states that the company will become more profitable if it consolidates into one office versus' its current situation of multiple offices. This line of reasoning is based on faulty assumptions and lack of background to prove said assumptions
The writer assumes that, because in the beginning - having just one office - the company was more profitable and as the company expanded into multiple offices the profits have diminished as a result. This assumption relies on the notion that the dismissed profits specifically stem from having multiple offices. The writer does not take into considered that the lack of profits could be a result of Apogee taking on debt to expand operation. Typically, as a company grows cash flow takes a hit as funds are used to fuel a company's growth. If the expansion into more offices has caused an uptick in shipping or an increase in taxes - operating in more than one state - then blaming the loss in profit on multiple offices may be warranted
A second issues arises from the notion that the centralization back into one would be seamless. It may difficult to just shut down all the field offices in a timely matter. There may be leases on the field office buildings or if they were bought they would have to be sold, potentially at a lost creating a further dig at profits. It also doesn't mention if the company has grown since it was at just one office. What if the old central location cannot hold all the new employees? Apogee would have to buy, lease, or even building a new location. If the original location was capable of housing all the employees of the company this idea may be feasible
The final issues comes from the writer mentioning a better supervision of all employees and how it correlates to the profitability of the company. The writer doesn't mention if the lack of profits comes from a decline in productivity or not. If the company has seen the productivity of its employees decline since expanding into multiple field offices then this assumption correlates to diminished profits. However, the memorandum overlooks other such possibilities; Apogee may have been in an emerging market and seen a loss in market share, the product produces could of a been a trend, or there could have been a misstep in a business model. The writer also fails to mention whether or not the supervision of the employees has changed or loosen since the expansion
The conclusion of the memorandum relies too much on unwarranted and unproven assumptions. There is more to be desired about the previous profitability of Apogee and how it relates to the company being in one location
The memorandum is states that the company will become more profitable if it consolidates into one office versus' its current situation of multiple offices. This line of reasoning is based on faulty assumptions and lack of background to prove said assumptions
The writer assumes that, because in the beginning - having just one office - the company was more profitable and as the company expanded into multiple offices the profits have diminished as a result. This assumption relies on the notion that the dismissed profits specifically stem from having multiple offices. The writer does not take into considered that the lack of profits could be a result of Apogee taking on debt to expand operation. Typically, as a company grows cash flow takes a hit as funds are used to fuel a company's growth. If the expansion into more offices has caused an uptick in shipping or an increase in taxes - operating in more than one state - then blaming the loss in profit on multiple offices may be warranted
A second issues arises from the notion that the centralization back into one would be seamless. It may difficult to just shut down all the field offices in a timely matter. There may be leases on the field office buildings or if they were bought they would have to be sold, potentially at a lost creating a further dig at profits. It also doesn't mention if the company has grown since it was at just one office. What if the old central location cannot hold all the new employees? Apogee would have to buy, lease, or even building a new location. If the original location was capable of housing all the employees of the company this idea may be feasible
The final issues comes from the writer mentioning a better supervision of all employees and how it correlates to the profitability of the company. The writer doesn't mention if the lack of profits comes from a decline in productivity or not. If the company has seen the productivity of its employees decline since expanding into multiple field offices then this assumption correlates to diminished profits. However, the memorandum overlooks other such possibilities; Apogee may have been in an emerging market and seen a loss in market share, the product produces could of a been a trend, or there could have been a misstep in a business model. The writer also fails to mention whether or not the supervision of the employees has changed or loosen since the expansion
The conclusion of the memorandum relies too much on unwarranted and unproven assumptions. There is more to be desired about the previous profitability of Apogee and how it relates to the company being in one location
20 Jan 2021, 12:34
Kudos
Bookmarks
I have highlighted grammar/spelling issues below.
Overall, it is good volume of writing for the amount of time you had to write it. The content is great too! Well written but a few grammar issues such as Subject Verb agreement and confusing statements will likely take 1-1.5 points off your score. You need to build in time for a final proof-read (3-5 mins) so that means you strategize for 2-3 mins, write for 20 mins, and proof for 5 mins. (give or take).
P.S. I also noticed you did not have a single period at the end of your paragraphs. You may lose points for that too.... but not sure why you omitted them.
Overall, it is good volume of writing for the amount of time you had to write it. The content is great too! Well written but a few grammar issues such as Subject Verb agreement and confusing statements will likely take 1-1.5 points off your score. You need to build in time for a final proof-read (3-5 mins) so that means you strategize for 2-3 mins, write for 20 mins, and proof for 5 mins. (give or take).
P.S. I also noticed you did not have a single period at the end of your paragraphs. You may lose points for that too.... but not sure why you omitted them.
Donnieee3
Moderator:
