Please rate this AWA and help me improve the argument stated.

“We believe that improved customer service is the best way for us to differentiate ourselves from competitors and
attract new customers. We can offer our customers better service by reducing waiting time in teller lines from an
average of six minutes to an average of three. By opening for business at 8:30 instead of 9:00, and by remaining
open for an additional hour beyond our current closing time, we will be better able to accommodate the busy
schedules of our customers. These changes will enhance our bank’s image as the most customer-friendly bank in
town and give us the edge over our competition.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc


In the above argument the author is trying to establish different practices and solutions that can be brought into use in order to provide a leverage in the market. The author makes uses of sudden extreme words, such as 'best' and the premises used to support the conclusion don't stand on concrete grounds. The assumptions used may hold different, for different readers, thus leaving the above argument in an ambiguous situation. The premises in the above argument fail to connect properly with the conclusion provided and even if we try to re-conceptualise the conclusion with improved versions of the premises, it will be tough to fall for the same conclusion.

First of all, the author assumes that customer service is the best way possible for two causes, that are, to differentiate from the competitors and to attract new customers. This is a flawed assumption, because the premises following this position don't ensure that this will land the bank into the best position but rather may land into a better position. Not much information is provided to support the position of differentiating from the competitors and attracting new customers. Had the author provided some bits and parts, that would have helped in making such comparisons, then in a way we could have reinforced the point that the author is trying to make i.e. To be the best in the market. Also, if the author would have provided some information about the customer attracting policies of the competitors, then the point would have stood valid.

Secondly, reducing the average time doesn't ensure that all the customers will be satisfied. For instance, a customer might take half of a second to proceed the dealings and a customer might take more than ten minutes to proceed the dealings, thus the average might show a good overall situation but it is not a suitable parameter to draw a conclusion upon. Trying to match the opening time of the bank and the busy schedule is a flawed reasoning because not enough information is provided regarding the schedules of the customers and whether such measure will allow the banks to accommodate most of the customers in the given bracket. 'Busy schedules' thus turns out to be vague term due to the absence of a valid information. Had enough information been provided by the author to support this premise and had any assumptions been stated by the author then the given pointer would have acted as an improved evidence to ensure banks improve, but given the situation, not enough information has been given to establish a cause and effect relationship between the given premises and the required result, that is, turning the bank into customer friendly, this argument stands flawed.

To conclude, the author needs to provide enough information to bolster the required result- conclusion- and also to make sense to the vague terms such as customer friendly banks, best measures, busy schedules etc. The above listed flaws make the argument provided sensible to an extent and thus, this argument shows an aspect of improvement, but upto certain level, by making proper comparisons, using proper information and providing proper premises.