Hi All,
Can someone help me review this Assessment as a part of AWA section at GMAT? This is my first attempt, want to understand how can I do better.
"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."
My Assessment:
The argument that the cost of processing will be reduced over time is flawed and it fails to address several considerations that might affect the overall conclusion of the argument. The basis on which the argument rests, that efficiency is negatively correlated with the production costs, assumes that other factors which play a role in a production cycle are constant throughout.
Firstly, the argument describes that the processing rate for a 3-by-5 print fell by 60% over a span of 14 years, and this is resulted due to increased efficiency in colour film processing. However, the argument fails to address the possibility of increased competition among various organisations offering colour film processing services could attribute to a reduction in the production price. More and more discounts could be offered to win customers and experience a rise in the footfall at individual stores. Easy access to colour films printing at residentials by simply buying a colour printer could also attribute to reduction in the processing rate at different stores to encourage customers to get the printing done at their stores.
Considering the above flaws that might question the conclusion of the argument, the assumption that Olympic food processing costs will also be reduced by virtue of the long service period is not convincing. Experience in food processing is not the only factor that governs the efficiency, and in turn the cost of processing. The argument fails to address the importance of retaining the quality and hygiene of food, cost of raw materials required, and the expertise and diversity of the chefs brought in for the food processing, which together contribute to the overall production cost. Experience over years may streamline the accessibility of various components at a lower price, but it does not guarantee the overall minimisation of the production cost and maximisation of profit.
Lastly, the argument compares food processing with colour film processing under the same logical reasons, which is flawed. Processing of food requires several factors like hygiene, quality of raw materials used, number of days the food will last, and the food habits of the Olympic participants (as mentioned in the argument), whereas, processing of colour films does not involve human health factor, the risks that may account for low quality production and the sensitivity of the recipients of the service. Thus, assuming that reduction in production cost in colour film processing due to efficiency achieved rightly explains the desired reduction in production cost for the Olympic Food Processors is not justified.
To conclude, the assumptions made in the argument, if true, will weaken the conclusion drawn. If other factors that may impact the processing cycle, either food or colour film print are articulated in details, the logical reasoning of the conclusion will be thorough and convincing.
Thanks in advance!