Please grade my first AWA Essay...thank you in advance!

The following appeared in a memorandum from the director of research and development at Ready-to-Ware, a software engineering firm:
“The package of benefits and incentives that Ready-to-Ware offers to professional staff is too costly. Our quarterly profits have declined since the package was introduced two years ago, at the time of our incorporation. Moreover, the package had little positive effect, as we have had only marginal success in recruiting and training high-quality professional staff. To become more profitable again, Ready-to-Ware should, therefore, offer the reduced benefits package that was in place two years ago and use the savings to fund our current research and development initiatives.”


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The argument claims that the current package of benefits and incentives offered to Ready-to-Ware employees is too expensive therefore, it is causing a decline in the company’s quarterly profits. The author of the memorandum, Ready-to-Ware’s director of research and development, suggests that the company revert back to the reduced benefits package that was in place two years earlier. In this way, the company will return to its former profitability. Stated in this way, the argument provides poor reasoning, conveys a distorted view of the situation, and fails to mention several key factors, on the basis of which it could be evaluated.

First, the argument readily assumes that the company’s quarterly profits have declined due to the introduction of the package of benefits and incentives. The author fails to mention any other business factors. How many products is Ready-to-Ware selling? Which of those products are the most or least profitable? Also, the author conveniently fails to provide information on how much money the R&D department spends per year and how much of a profit it generates. The argument would have been much clearer if the answers to these questions were provided.

Second, the argument claims that the current benefits package has had little positive effect because the company has only seen marginal success in recruiting and training high-quality professional staff. The author is assuming that a great benefits and incentives package will only motivate new employees who are recruited and trained as part of the professional staff. He implies that the package had minimal effect on enticing new employees. Yet, the director fails to mention whether the package has had a positive or negative effect on the company’s current employees. Not enough evidence is provided for the argument to be convincing.

Finally, the author of the memorandum, Ready-to-Ware’s director of research and development, seems to have an ulterior motive. In order to become more profitable, the director suggests that the company offer a reduced benefits package and use the savings to fund its current research and development initiatives. The director is using this memo as a ploy to gain more funds for the R&D department. Is the research and development department low on funds, possibly due to many failed design initiatives? Information on the revenue of the R&D department should also be provided to make the argument more convincing.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed for several reasons. The author consistently provides insufficient information. It could be considerably strengthened if the author clearly mentioned how the benefits package affected all employees, not just new recruits. Also, in order to assess the argument properly, statistics on the company’s financials should be present. What are they selling? Which departments are the most profitable? Which departments spend the most money and see the least amount of return? Without convincing answers to these questions, one is left with the impression that the claim is a ploy for more funding and not an employee’s concern over the well-being of the company.