Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations le

Hello everyone, may I ask for your evaluation of my essay? And also, if possible, could you score my essay as well?

I used @chineseburned's writing template and this is my second attempt to practice AWA. I got the prompts from mbadotcom (sorry I couldn't put the url bcs I'm new here)

Thank you.

The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozen foods:

“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.”

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

Essay:

The argument claims that when an organization shows improvement in its management, the process cost will be reduced. Stated in this way the argument reveals examples of a leap of faith, poor reasoning, and ill-defined terminology. The conclusion of the argument relies on assumptions for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore, the argument is weak and has several flaws.

First, the argument readily assumes that processing food is the same process as color film. This statement is a stretch because the process of producing foods is different from the process of color film printing. Writing the process of color film has no correlation with food as the film is not something edible, meaning that Olympic Foods should use a better analogue to write in the annual report. For instance, if Olympic Foods had learned how to do things better, it would be shown in their performance including writing a proper annual report. Clearly, Olympic Foods fails to elaborate its claim properly. The argument could have been much clearer if it explicitly gives the right analogue on cost decline and management improvement.

Second, the argument claims that improvement in management caused the cost of food processing is decreasing. This is again a very weak and unsupported claim as the argument does not demonstrate any correlation between the reduced cost and the management efficiency. To illustrate, when there is low demand in frozen food, the company will gain more loss if they produce the foods in the same numbers as usual. While, Olympic Foods needs to gain profit, hence, producing less food will be safer. Indeed, the cost of processing is declining. However, the cause of the reduced cost is not merely the improvement in the organization’s performance, indeed there are several factors that might contribute to the cost such as the technology of the processing machines, and the cheaper sources. In fact, it is not at all clear because the claim was too broad rather elaborated. If the argument had provided evidence of how the management improved their performance and linked it to the cheaper cost then the argument would have been a lot more convincing.

Finally, the argument concludes that the stockholders can expect that Olympic Foods can maintain minimal costs and maximize the profit with their improvement in the organization. From this statement again, it is not clear how the improvement sssss to the cheaper cost of the process. Without convincing evidence and explanation, one is left with the impression that the claim is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned all the relevant facts and elaborated an explanation. In order to assess the merits of a certain situation, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. In this particular case the factors which caused cost reduction.