Forum Home > GMAT > Quantitative > Problem Solving (PS)
Events & Promotions
|
|
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.
Dec 1310:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Have you ever wondered how to score a PERFECT 805 on the GMAT? Meet Julia, a banking professional who used the Target Test Prep course to achieve this incredible feat. Julia's story is nothing short of an inspiration.
Dec 1410:00 AM EST
-12:00 PM EST
Think a 100% GMAT Verbal score is out of your reach? Target Test Prep will make you think again! Our course uses techniques such as topical study and spaced repetition to maximize knowledge retention and make studying simple and fun.
Dec 1411:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this session to learn how to Deconstruct arguments, Pre-Think Author’s Assumptions, and apply Negation Test.- Dec 15
11:00 AM IST
-01:00 PM IST
Attend this free GMAT Algebra Webinar and learn how to master the most challenging Inequalities and Absolute Value problems with ease. 
Dec 1608:00 AM PST
-11:59 PM PST
GMAT Club 12 Days of Christmas is a 4th Annual GMAT Club Winter Competition based on solving questions. This is the Winter GMAT competition on GMAT Club with an amazing opportunity to win over $40,000 worth of prizes!
20 Jun 2022, 07:24
Kudos
Bookmarks
Question
The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery.
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
Response
The argument claims that a manufacturer for heavy metals should move a purchasing manager to the sales department and bring a scientist from the research department to head the purchasing department. This the argument claims is required to reduce delays in manufacturing caused by poor planning due to lack of knowledge of the current purchasing manager. This will in turn aid in curbing falling revenues. Presented in this way, the argument reaches a hasty conclusion based on inconclusive evidence and conveys a distorted view of the situation.
Firstly, the argument claims that the falling revenue coincides with delays in manufacturing. The argument is implying that the delays in manufacturing is a a reason for falling revenue. How are we sure about that? The argument does not give any details about other factors that could be responsible for falling revenues. What if there is a economic recession in the economy which has depressed revenues of all companies. Is this sector as a whole facing falling revenues? Are there other major reasons for this fall? Without providing adequate data about other potential factors that could be affecting revenue, we cannot draw a conclusion that the delays in manufacturing is a major reason for the falling revenue.
Secondly, the argument claims that the delays can be reduced with proper planning and knowledge about properties of metals. This claim is a stretch. Knowledge about raw materials cannot be the only requirement for planning and coordinating purchasing raw materials for manufacturing. General business acumen, people connections, relationships with suppliers and so on could be just as important for the timely completion of the manufacturing process. Without the other reasons we cannot be sure if it is a good decision to remove the current manager.How do we know if the incoming scientist will have the other skills required in coordinating the planning (other than knowledge about properties of metals)? Scientists tend to be concentrated on specific areas of research; we do not know if we can find a manger who will have in-detail knowledge about all the raw materials. Without answers to these questions, we are made to believe that the argument is wishful thinking, rather than substantiated evidence.
In conclusion, the argument remains inconclusive because of the above-mentioned reason. Conclusions based on more concrete evidence will go a long way in substantiating the argument. Until that is done, the argument remains weak and open to debate.
The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery.
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
Response
The argument claims that a manufacturer for heavy metals should move a purchasing manager to the sales department and bring a scientist from the research department to head the purchasing department. This the argument claims is required to reduce delays in manufacturing caused by poor planning due to lack of knowledge of the current purchasing manager. This will in turn aid in curbing falling revenues. Presented in this way, the argument reaches a hasty conclusion based on inconclusive evidence and conveys a distorted view of the situation.
Firstly, the argument claims that the falling revenue coincides with delays in manufacturing. The argument is implying that the delays in manufacturing is a a reason for falling revenue. How are we sure about that? The argument does not give any details about other factors that could be responsible for falling revenues. What if there is a economic recession in the economy which has depressed revenues of all companies. Is this sector as a whole facing falling revenues? Are there other major reasons for this fall? Without providing adequate data about other potential factors that could be affecting revenue, we cannot draw a conclusion that the delays in manufacturing is a major reason for the falling revenue.
Secondly, the argument claims that the delays can be reduced with proper planning and knowledge about properties of metals. This claim is a stretch. Knowledge about raw materials cannot be the only requirement for planning and coordinating purchasing raw materials for manufacturing. General business acumen, people connections, relationships with suppliers and so on could be just as important for the timely completion of the manufacturing process. Without the other reasons we cannot be sure if it is a good decision to remove the current manager.How do we know if the incoming scientist will have the other skills required in coordinating the planning (other than knowledge about properties of metals)? Scientists tend to be concentrated on specific areas of research; we do not know if we can find a manger who will have in-detail knowledge about all the raw materials. Without answers to these questions, we are made to believe that the argument is wishful thinking, rather than substantiated evidence.
In conclusion, the argument remains inconclusive because of the above-mentioned reason. Conclusions based on more concrete evidence will go a long way in substantiating the argument. Until that is done, the argument remains weak and open to debate.
20 Jun 2022, 08:46
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5 out of 6
Coherence and connectivity: 3.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
Coherence and connectivity: 3.5/5
This rating corresponds to the flow of ideas and expressions from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analyzed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.
Paragraph structure and formation: 5/5
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs are evaluated. To score well on this parameter, it is important to organize the attempt into paragraphs. Preferable to follow the convention of leaving a line blank at the end of each paragraph, to make the software aware of the structure of the essay.
Vocabulary and word expression: 4/5
This parameter rates the submitted essay on the range of relevant vocabulary possessed by the candidate basis the word and expression usage. There are no extra- points for bombastic word usage. Simple is the best form of suave!
PS: I expect you will follow AWA subforum rules before posting anything in the said forum, to read the rules please follow the link below.
https://gmatclub.com/forum/awa-forum-ru ... 64141.html
Good Luck
Elsa123
Question
The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery.
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
Response
The argument claims that a manufacturer for heavy metals should move a purchasing manager to the sales department and bring a scientist from the research department to head the purchasing department. This the argument claims is required to reduce delays in manufacturing caused by poor planning due to lack of knowledge of the current purchasing manager. This will in turn aid in curbing falling revenues. Presented in this way, the argument reaches a hasty conclusion based on inconclusive evidence and conveys a distorted view of the situation.
Firstly, the argument claims that the falling revenue coincides with delays in manufacturing. The argument is implying that the delays in manufacturing is a a reason for falling revenue. How are we sure about that? The argument does not give any details about other factors that could be responsible for falling revenues. What if there is a economic recession in the economy which has depressed revenues of all companies. Is this sector as a whole facing falling revenues? Are there other major reasons for this fall? Without providing adequate data about other potential factors that could be affecting revenue, we cannot draw a conclusion that the delays in manufacturing is a major reason for the falling revenue.
Secondly, the argument claims that the delays can be reduced with proper planning and knowledge about properties of metals. This claim is a stretch. Knowledge about raw materials cannot be the only requirement for planning and coordinating purchasing raw materials for manufacturing. General business acumen, people connections, relationships with suppliers and so on could be just as important for the timely completion of the manufacturing process. Without the other reasons we cannot be sure if it is a good decision to remove the current manager.How do we know if the incoming scientist will have the other skills required in coordinating the planning (other than knowledge about properties of metals)? Scientists tend to be concentrated on specific areas of research; we do not know if we can find a manger who will have in-detail knowledge about all the raw materials. Without answers to these questions, we are made to believe that the argument is wishful thinking, rather than substantiated evidence.
In conclusion, the argument remains inconclusive because of the above-mentioned reason. Conclusions based on more concrete evidence will go a long way in substantiating the argument. Until that is done, the argument remains weak and open to debate.
The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery.
“The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufacturing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals. Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw materials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department.”
Response
The argument claims that a manufacturer for heavy metals should move a purchasing manager to the sales department and bring a scientist from the research department to head the purchasing department. This the argument claims is required to reduce delays in manufacturing caused by poor planning due to lack of knowledge of the current purchasing manager. This will in turn aid in curbing falling revenues. Presented in this way, the argument reaches a hasty conclusion based on inconclusive evidence and conveys a distorted view of the situation.
Firstly, the argument claims that the falling revenue coincides with delays in manufacturing. The argument is implying that the delays in manufacturing is a a reason for falling revenue. How are we sure about that? The argument does not give any details about other factors that could be responsible for falling revenues. What if there is a economic recession in the economy which has depressed revenues of all companies. Is this sector as a whole facing falling revenues? Are there other major reasons for this fall? Without providing adequate data about other potential factors that could be affecting revenue, we cannot draw a conclusion that the delays in manufacturing is a major reason for the falling revenue.
Secondly, the argument claims that the delays can be reduced with proper planning and knowledge about properties of metals. This claim is a stretch. Knowledge about raw materials cannot be the only requirement for planning and coordinating purchasing raw materials for manufacturing. General business acumen, people connections, relationships with suppliers and so on could be just as important for the timely completion of the manufacturing process. Without the other reasons we cannot be sure if it is a good decision to remove the current manager.How do we know if the incoming scientist will have the other skills required in coordinating the planning (other than knowledge about properties of metals)? Scientists tend to be concentrated on specific areas of research; we do not know if we can find a manger who will have in-detail knowledge about all the raw materials. Without answers to these questions, we are made to believe that the argument is wishful thinking, rather than substantiated evidence.
In conclusion, the argument remains inconclusive because of the above-mentioned reason. Conclusions based on more concrete evidence will go a long way in substantiating the argument. Until that is done, the argument remains weak and open to debate.
