|
|
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.
ZenYogi
Joined: 03 Jan 2016
Last visit: 02 May 2022
Posts: 100
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 59
Location: India
Schools: ISB '19 Goizueta '20 (A) Anderson '20 (D) Rotman '20 (WL) Kelley '20 (A) Kenan-Flagler '21 (A$)
GMAT 1: 640 Q49 V29
GMAT 2: 760 Q51 V41
GPA: 3.2
Schools: ISB '19 Goizueta '20 (A) Anderson '20 (D) Rotman '20 (WL) Kelley '20 (A) Kenan-Flagler '21 (A$)
GMAT 2: 760 Q51 V41
Posts: 100
Kudos:
25
10 Apr 2017, 14:04
Kudos
Bookmarks
The following appeared in a memorandum from the Director of Human Resources to the executive officers of Company X.
“Last year, we surveyed our employees on improvements needed at Company X by having them rank, in order of importance, the issues
presented in a list of possible improvements. Improved communications between employees and management was consistently ranked as
the issue of highest importance by the employees who responded to the survey. As you know, we have since instituted regular
communications sessions conducted by high-level management, which the employees can attend on a voluntary basis. Therefore, it is likely
that most employees at Company X now feel that the improvement most needed at the company has been made.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
========================================
In the memorandum to the executive officers of the company, the director of human resources has claimed that most employees of the company now feel that the improvement most needed at the company has now been made. However, the line of reasoning that the author has followed is problematic for several reasons.
First, the director assumes that the majority of the employees who responded to the survey, did so honestly. However, such an assumption is a stretch. To illustrate, if the employee anonymity was not maintained, and if this was known by the employees when they were participating in the survey, then they may not have felt safe in responding to the survey with utmost honesty, and therefore, the results of the survey would then not be accurate. The author can strengthen the argument by explicitly providing more evidence that the results of the survey can be completely trusted.
Second, the argument presented by the author is extremely flawed because it depends on the assumption that regular communication is synonymous with improved communication. But this is a highly questionable assumption. For instance, it may be that before taking the survey, the employees felt that the management communication was way too frequent. It could be that the management of the company broadcasts emails to all its employees far too frequently, and employees may feel that this distracts them from doing their daily duties. To corroborate the argument, the author must state that the reason that employees felt the communication was not up to the mark, was because it was highly irregular.
Finally, the author states that the management communication has improved just because improvement has been brought about in the communication from high-level management. This is not sound reasoning, as the author fails to consider that the employees might be dissatisfied with the communication from the mid-level or low-level management, instead of the high-level management. As no changes have been made in the communication from both the mid and low level managements, the employees might still feel that there is a need for improvement.
In summary, the argument is flawed for the aforementioned reasons and is, therefore, unconvincing. If the director had included the items discussed above, the argument would have been more thorough and sound.
“Last year, we surveyed our employees on improvements needed at Company X by having them rank, in order of importance, the issues
presented in a list of possible improvements. Improved communications between employees and management was consistently ranked as
the issue of highest importance by the employees who responded to the survey. As you know, we have since instituted regular
communications sessions conducted by high-level management, which the employees can attend on a voluntary basis. Therefore, it is likely
that most employees at Company X now feel that the improvement most needed at the company has been made.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.
========================================
In the memorandum to the executive officers of the company, the director of human resources has claimed that most employees of the company now feel that the improvement most needed at the company has now been made. However, the line of reasoning that the author has followed is problematic for several reasons.
First, the director assumes that the majority of the employees who responded to the survey, did so honestly. However, such an assumption is a stretch. To illustrate, if the employee anonymity was not maintained, and if this was known by the employees when they were participating in the survey, then they may not have felt safe in responding to the survey with utmost honesty, and therefore, the results of the survey would then not be accurate. The author can strengthen the argument by explicitly providing more evidence that the results of the survey can be completely trusted.
Second, the argument presented by the author is extremely flawed because it depends on the assumption that regular communication is synonymous with improved communication. But this is a highly questionable assumption. For instance, it may be that before taking the survey, the employees felt that the management communication was way too frequent. It could be that the management of the company broadcasts emails to all its employees far too frequently, and employees may feel that this distracts them from doing their daily duties. To corroborate the argument, the author must state that the reason that employees felt the communication was not up to the mark, was because it was highly irregular.
Finally, the author states that the management communication has improved just because improvement has been brought about in the communication from high-level management. This is not sound reasoning, as the author fails to consider that the employees might be dissatisfied with the communication from the mid-level or low-level management, instead of the high-level management. As no changes have been made in the communication from both the mid and low level managements, the employees might still feel that there is a need for improvement.
In summary, the argument is flawed for the aforementioned reasons and is, therefore, unconvincing. If the director had included the items discussed above, the argument would have been more thorough and sound.
Moderators:
188 posts
