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.
Apr 2711:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
Prefer video-based learning? The Target Test Prep OnDemand course is a one-of-a-kind video masterclass featuring 400 hours of lecture-style teaching by Scott Woodbury-Stewart, founder of Target Test Prep and one of the most accomplished GMAT instructors
Apr 2601:30 AM EDT
-02:30 AM EDT
Learn how Keshav, a Chartered Accountant, scored an impressive 705 on GMAT in just 30 days with GMATWhiz's expert guidance. In this video, he shares preparation tips and strategies that worked for him, including the mock, time management, and more.
Apr 2610:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
The Target Test Prep course represents a quantum leap forward in GMAT preparation, a radical reinterpretation of the way that students should study. Try before you buy with a 5-day, full-access trial of the course for FREE!
Apr 2808:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Whether you are just beginning your MBA journey or fine-tuning your path to a 700+ score, GMAT Day is designed to give you a competitive edge.
Apr 2912:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
Learn how Kamakshi achieved a GMAT 675 with an impressive 96th %ile in Data Insights. Discover the unique methods and exam strategies that helped her excel in DI along with other sections for a balanced and high score.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
May 0306:30 AM PDT
-08:30 AM PDT
Verbal trouble on GMAT? Fix it NOW! Join Sunita Singhvi for a focused webinar on actionable strategies to boost your Verbal score and take your performance to the next level.
06 Jun 2017, 06:30
Kudos
Bookmarks
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
The given argument is deeply flawed. It wrongfully assumes without proper logical and statistical proof that the falling revenues are because of the delays in manufacturing. The statements that follow also make conclusions based on unwarranted assumptions, like moving the purchasing manager to sales and replacing him with a scientist.
The evidence cited includes unambiguous language, for example, the argument asserts that the delays in manufacturing are “in large part” because of “poor” planning in the purchase of metals. The argument fails to provide any accurate data to support this statement. Moreover, delays can be due to various other reasons as well, for instance, transportation and delivery of the purchased metals. Moreover, the delay in manufacturing is said to be correlated to the revenues, but no actual proof of this is provided. Therefore, it isn’t right to assume so. There can be other factors affecting both the delays, and the falling revenues. Having been provided with additional data about the other related factors would've helped to come to a better solution. In addition to this, the manager with an “excellent background” is also a vague statement. It doesn’t clarify if it is even required for his job, eg: a background in sociology and psychology. At the same time, his so called “little” knowledge of the properties of metals might be sufficient for his job as a manager. Hence, moving him to sales wouldn’t guarantee any rise in revenues, even if they are correlated. The argument then wrongfully assumes that bringing in a scientist as his replacement would fix the problems. The scientist, even though might have in depth knowledge of metals, but wouldn’t be qualified to work as a manager.
Because the argument leaves out several key points and makes conclusions based on unwarranted assumptions, it is not sound or persuasive. If it included the statistical proof and more details as discussed above, the argument would’ve been more thorough and convincing.
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
The given argument is deeply flawed. It wrongfully assumes without proper logical and statistical proof that the falling revenues are because of the delays in manufacturing. The statements that follow also make conclusions based on unwarranted assumptions, like moving the purchasing manager to sales and replacing him with a scientist.
The evidence cited includes unambiguous language, for example, the argument asserts that the delays in manufacturing are “in large part” because of “poor” planning in the purchase of metals. The argument fails to provide any accurate data to support this statement. Moreover, delays can be due to various other reasons as well, for instance, transportation and delivery of the purchased metals. Moreover, the delay in manufacturing is said to be correlated to the revenues, but no actual proof of this is provided. Therefore, it isn’t right to assume so. There can be other factors affecting both the delays, and the falling revenues. Having been provided with additional data about the other related factors would've helped to come to a better solution. In addition to this, the manager with an “excellent background” is also a vague statement. It doesn’t clarify if it is even required for his job, eg: a background in sociology and psychology. At the same time, his so called “little” knowledge of the properties of metals might be sufficient for his job as a manager. Hence, moving him to sales wouldn’t guarantee any rise in revenues, even if they are correlated. The argument then wrongfully assumes that bringing in a scientist as his replacement would fix the problems. The scientist, even though might have in depth knowledge of metals, but wouldn’t be qualified to work as a manager.
Because the argument leaves out several key points and makes conclusions based on unwarranted assumptions, it is not sound or persuasive. If it included the statistical proof and more details as discussed above, the argument would’ve been more thorough and convincing.
06 Jun 2017, 07:14
Kudos
Bookmarks
Confused and not well organized.
See here how to expand an effective essay.
https://gmatclub.com/forum/gmatclub-gui ... 36251.html
Regards
See here how to expand an effective essay.
https://gmatclub.com/forum/gmatclub-gui ... 36251.html
Regards
praneet87
Joined: 27 Aug 2014
Last visit: 03 Jun 2018
Posts: 43
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 6
Location: Canada
Concentration: Strategy, Technology
Schools: Tepper '20 Johnson '20 Ross '20 Ivey '19
GMAT 1: 660 Q45 V35
GPA: 3.66
WE:Consulting (Consulting)
07 Jun 2017, 10:36
Kudos
Bookmarks
Hi, I attempted the question myself and timed it. I took 32 minutes as its my first time writing one.
The above mentioned report claims that falling revenues are caused due to the delays in manufacturing and these delays are caused due to poor planning in purchasing metals. Even though the purchasing manager has good business sense, a scientist should be made in charge of the purchasing as the scientist would have better understanding of the properties of the metals as opposed to the manager. This conclusion is based on poor reasoning and has failed to take into account other possible key factors that might have caused the drop in revenues.
Firstly, the report readily assumes that the drop in revenue is caused by the delays in manufacturing. This statement was made without providing any evidence that connects both these events i.e. delays in manufacturing and drop in revenue. The only basis the argument uses is that the occurrences of these events coincide. Correlation does not imply causation. The drop in revenue could be a result of external factors such as market conditions or new competitors. In a scenario where the economic conditions are not favourable, manufacturing might have slowed down which in turn could have reduced the demand of machine parts. New direct competitors entering the market with better offerings or pricing also can be a directly impact the revenue of the company.
Additionally, the argument claims that the delays are caused by poor planning in purchasing raw materials. Just like the first claim the argument had assumed, it also fails to provide any evidence that poor planning of raw materials caused the delays in manufacturing. The delays could have been caused by a number of possible scenarios namely – a lack of labour availability, infrastructure issues such as loss of electricity during manufacturing hours or poor planning that is not related to purchasing of raw materials. The argument fails to take into account other key factors or the evidence of having done so.
Lastly it suggests replacing the purchasing manager with a scientist who has a better understanding of the properties of the materials. This suggestion is fundamentally flawed on many grounds. First of all, it tries to solve an issue for which the root caused is being assumed without any evidence, secondly it fails to take into account the possible implications of this suggestion. The manager even though has a good background in business, psychology and sociology might not have proven experience in sales. If the manager fails to perform in the sales team – he or she directly impacts the revenue of the company ,worsening the problem that is being fixed. Similarly a scientist who has the expertise on the raw materials might not be good at the business aspect of purchasing materials. An inexperienced manager could make bad deals that could have a strong impact on the cost and time of purchasing these materials – which can further cause a loss of revenue.
As the argument fails to take into account several key factors and makes conclusions without any concrete evidence, it is deeply flawed. This argument could be strengthened if it could provide facts that connects the loss in revenue to the incompetency of the purchasing manager.
The above mentioned report claims that falling revenues are caused due to the delays in manufacturing and these delays are caused due to poor planning in purchasing metals. Even though the purchasing manager has good business sense, a scientist should be made in charge of the purchasing as the scientist would have better understanding of the properties of the metals as opposed to the manager. This conclusion is based on poor reasoning and has failed to take into account other possible key factors that might have caused the drop in revenues.
Firstly, the report readily assumes that the drop in revenue is caused by the delays in manufacturing. This statement was made without providing any evidence that connects both these events i.e. delays in manufacturing and drop in revenue. The only basis the argument uses is that the occurrences of these events coincide. Correlation does not imply causation. The drop in revenue could be a result of external factors such as market conditions or new competitors. In a scenario where the economic conditions are not favourable, manufacturing might have slowed down which in turn could have reduced the demand of machine parts. New direct competitors entering the market with better offerings or pricing also can be a directly impact the revenue of the company.
Additionally, the argument claims that the delays are caused by poor planning in purchasing raw materials. Just like the first claim the argument had assumed, it also fails to provide any evidence that poor planning of raw materials caused the delays in manufacturing. The delays could have been caused by a number of possible scenarios namely – a lack of labour availability, infrastructure issues such as loss of electricity during manufacturing hours or poor planning that is not related to purchasing of raw materials. The argument fails to take into account other key factors or the evidence of having done so.
Lastly it suggests replacing the purchasing manager with a scientist who has a better understanding of the properties of the materials. This suggestion is fundamentally flawed on many grounds. First of all, it tries to solve an issue for which the root caused is being assumed without any evidence, secondly it fails to take into account the possible implications of this suggestion. The manager even though has a good background in business, psychology and sociology might not have proven experience in sales. If the manager fails to perform in the sales team – he or she directly impacts the revenue of the company ,worsening the problem that is being fixed. Similarly a scientist who has the expertise on the raw materials might not be good at the business aspect of purchasing materials. An inexperienced manager could make bad deals that could have a strong impact on the cost and time of purchasing these materials – which can further cause a loss of revenue.
As the argument fails to take into account several key factors and makes conclusions without any concrete evidence, it is deeply flawed. This argument could be strengthened if it could provide facts that connects the loss in revenue to the incompetency of the purchasing manager.
