|
|
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.
03 Oct 2013, 00:09
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA
The following appeared in the editorial section of a corporate newsletter:
“The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least outdated: a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to survey questionnaires expressed a high level of interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs.”
Discuss how well reasoned….etc.
The argument claims that workers expressed a high level of interest in the corporate restructuring and redesigning from a recent survey. Hence, workers are not apathetic about management issues or until recently. However, the argument fails to mention important data, on the basis of which it could be evaluated and the conclusion is rather weakly supported by the evidence provided. The argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the sample of workers surveyed may not be apathetic towards management issues and probably through random surveying had missed out on the apathetic workers. Furthermore, workers who are unsatisfied with their wage structure and with the man management of workers tend to be interested in the management issues as these would affect them directly. Hence the result of the survey can’t be tagged as a general idea.
Second, the publisher of the survey is unknown to us. If the survey was presented by the corporate managers themselves, there exists the possibility that the survey was manipulated to promote sound culture in the company. The evidence provided is misleading and requires more clarity by specifying the source of the survey. In addition to this, the nature of questions in the survey is unknown. An insight on the type of questions asked would help us judge whether the questions asked were general management questions or specific management questions, which would help in understanding the workers understanding of management issues. If the author had provided more data the argument would have been logical.
Third, the number of workers surveyed that showed no interest about the management issues has not been described. This is again a flaw in the argument that does not demonstrate any difference between interested and non-interested workers. There might be a marginal difference between them in terms of numbers surveyed. Out of the 79 % surveyed the split could be of 40 % interested and 39 % non-interested workers. However, if 100 % of 1200 workers were surveyed the statistics could change the split and produce a different result. This outcome will seriously weaken the argument.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and is therefore logically weak. It could be considerably strengthened if the author had mentioned all the important facts and presented additional data about the survey to evaluate the argument. Without this information, the argument remains unconvincing.
The following appeared in the editorial section of a corporate newsletter:
“The common notion that workers are generally apathetic about management issues is false, or at least outdated: a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to survey questionnaires expressed a high level of interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs.”
Discuss how well reasoned….etc.
The argument claims that workers expressed a high level of interest in the corporate restructuring and redesigning from a recent survey. Hence, workers are not apathetic about management issues or until recently. However, the argument fails to mention important data, on the basis of which it could be evaluated and the conclusion is rather weakly supported by the evidence provided. The argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.
First, the sample of workers surveyed may not be apathetic towards management issues and probably through random surveying had missed out on the apathetic workers. Furthermore, workers who are unsatisfied with their wage structure and with the man management of workers tend to be interested in the management issues as these would affect them directly. Hence the result of the survey can’t be tagged as a general idea.
Second, the publisher of the survey is unknown to us. If the survey was presented by the corporate managers themselves, there exists the possibility that the survey was manipulated to promote sound culture in the company. The evidence provided is misleading and requires more clarity by specifying the source of the survey. In addition to this, the nature of questions in the survey is unknown. An insight on the type of questions asked would help us judge whether the questions asked were general management questions or specific management questions, which would help in understanding the workers understanding of management issues. If the author had provided more data the argument would have been logical.
Third, the number of workers surveyed that showed no interest about the management issues has not been described. This is again a flaw in the argument that does not demonstrate any difference between interested and non-interested workers. There might be a marginal difference between them in terms of numbers surveyed. Out of the 79 % surveyed the split could be of 40 % interested and 39 % non-interested workers. However, if 100 % of 1200 workers were surveyed the statistics could change the split and produce a different result. This outcome will seriously weaken the argument.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above mentioned reasons and is therefore logically weak. It could be considerably strengthened if the author had mentioned all the important facts and presented additional data about the survey to evaluate the argument. Without this information, the argument remains unconvincing.
Moderators:
188 posts
