|
|
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.
05 Jan 2021, 19:07
Kudos
Bookmarks
“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.”
The presented argument is flawed for multiple reasons. Primarily, it does not consider whether the market conditions which were present when the Apogee Company operated from a single location have remained constant up to the present day. This essay intends to outline the characteristics of this argument that display its invalidity.
This argument does not state whether the present economic climate is similar to conditions during the company’s past. Therefore, it is plausible that the company may be reducing costs via operations in other jurisdictions. Furthermore, the company may reap profits in additional jurisdictions which were irrelevant to it in the past. Therefore, these field offices may carry out specialized operations which are unique to the locations they are based in.
The argument incorrectly assumes that the reduced profits of the company are due to its decentralized structure. Competitors may offer products or services which are more cost effective and suitable, leading to lacklustre sales performances. Additionally, it is not known whether the products or services provided by the company can be offered from a single location. For example, if this company offers package tours to exotic locales, it may need to maintain operational capabilities in various locations. In this case, closing down field offices may lead to further decreases in profits.
If the assumption that the company’s profitability is impeded by its field offices holds true, it is still not known whether the direct supervision of employees would yield the desirable results. No information is presented about the company’s management structure and how employees are currently supervised. If the company was centralized, it is unclear whether the its management is capable of fostering a productive work environment. Indeed, it is possible that employees may be micro-managed, leading to a culture of mediocrity in the company.
In sum, this argument can be declared as insufficient due to the various reasons presented in this essay. Further information is required to determine whether the plan presented in the memorandum will yield the desired results of minimizing costs and maximizing profits.
The presented argument is flawed for multiple reasons. Primarily, it does not consider whether the market conditions which were present when the Apogee Company operated from a single location have remained constant up to the present day. This essay intends to outline the characteristics of this argument that display its invalidity.
This argument does not state whether the present economic climate is similar to conditions during the company’s past. Therefore, it is plausible that the company may be reducing costs via operations in other jurisdictions. Furthermore, the company may reap profits in additional jurisdictions which were irrelevant to it in the past. Therefore, these field offices may carry out specialized operations which are unique to the locations they are based in.
The argument incorrectly assumes that the reduced profits of the company are due to its decentralized structure. Competitors may offer products or services which are more cost effective and suitable, leading to lacklustre sales performances. Additionally, it is not known whether the products or services provided by the company can be offered from a single location. For example, if this company offers package tours to exotic locales, it may need to maintain operational capabilities in various locations. In this case, closing down field offices may lead to further decreases in profits.
If the assumption that the company’s profitability is impeded by its field offices holds true, it is still not known whether the direct supervision of employees would yield the desirable results. No information is presented about the company’s management structure and how employees are currently supervised. If the company was centralized, it is unclear whether the its management is capable of fostering a productive work environment. Indeed, it is possible that employees may be micro-managed, leading to a culture of mediocrity in the company.
In sum, this argument can be declared as insufficient due to the various reasons presented in this essay. Further information is required to determine whether the plan presented in the memorandum will yield the desired results of minimizing costs and maximizing profits.
Moderators:
188 posts
