We have learned from an employee of Windfall, Ltd., that its accountin

Question

Need some genuine reviews on the below AWA

“We have learned from an employee of Windfall, Ltd., that its accounting department, by checking about 10 percent of the last month’s purchasing invoices for errors and inconsistencies, saved the company some $10,000 in overpayments. In order to help our clients increase their net gains, we should advise each of them to institute a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors. Such a recommendation could also help us get the Windfall account by demonstrating to Windfall the rigorousness of our methods.”
 
===================================================================

The argument states that as per a recent check done by the accounting department in Windfall Ltd, the accounting department was able to save some $10000 in overpayments which were present due to some invoicing errors and inconsistencies. The author further claims that to avoid such issues with other clients we should advise each of them to institute a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors. The arguments is flawed because of the below reasons.

Firstly the arguments wrongly assumes that a similar error will occur with other clients too and will occur again. There is no data pointing out that this has happened in the past or whether this is a trend in the company . There is a possibility that this might not repeat in future as the accountants will be more careful going forward. Assuming that the same issue might be present with other clients is also not correct. Just based on one incidence it shouldn't be assumed that this will be the trend with other clients too. Their accounts might be totally error free.

Secondly it states that the advice will help in net gains. How are we so sure that there will always be overpayments. There might be possibilities when the payment would be less than the actual amount. it can't be always assumed that an accounting error will always lead to gains. It all depends on the situation. Also if there is a net loss then apart from loosing more money we would loose relations with the seller too because we were not good with the calculations.

Finally the arguments claims that just by checking 10 percent of the last months purchasing invoices for errors and inconsistencies the company saved some dollars. This is not accurate. Why only 10 % was checked? Why did we stop? Analysis should be done completely to check if the difference amount was adjusted somewhere else. Just by analyzing few records the argument has jumped to the conclusion that there is error. There is a possibility that the difference amount would have been adjusted in some other bills. The method should be able to analyze all the invoices and then give a result . We never know we instead of paying less we might have to pay more after all the calculations are complete. Also there might be a possibility that post complete investigation of all the invoices the accounts might be clear, completely error free.

In conclusion I feel this claim or method suggested by the author is not accurate and is just based on a number of assumptions and lacks data supporting it. If the above suggested ideas can be incorporated into the method and the data is analyzed post thorough research and investigation. Then we can improve the method suggested by the author. But to approve it as a general method for all companies we will have to test it with different companies and then compare the results and then come to a conclusion

=========================================================================

Sajjad1994 
 bb 
 GMATNinja 
 VeritasKarishma

Sajjad1994 · Answer

AWA Score: 4-4.5 out of 6!

I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.

Coherence and connectivity: 2/5 
This rating corresponds to the flow of idea and expression from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analysed. This is deemed as one of the most important parameters.

Paragraph structure and formation: 4.5/5  
The structure and division of the attempt into appropriate paragraphs is 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 vocaubulary 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!

Good Luck

Veenu21 · Answer

Hi @Sajjad1194,

Could you please grade my first AWA

"We have learned from an employee of Windfall, Ltd., that its accounting department, by checking about 10 percent of the last month’s purchasing invoices for errors and inconsistencies, saved the company some $10,000 in overpayments. In order to help our clients increase their net gains, we should advise each of them to institute a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors. Such a recommendation could also help us get the Windfall account by demonstrating to Windfall the rigorousness of our methods.”

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

In this argument, the author concludes that advising the clients to institute a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors, will help clients to increase their net gains and will help them to get the Windfall account by demonstrating to Windfall the rigorousness of their methods. Stated in this way, the author fails to take into account some key factors which could call the conclusion into questions. It rests on some assumptions, for example, that implementing this method would impress Windfall Ltd., for which there is no clear evidence. Therefore, this argument is unconvincing.

First, the author assumes that their clients are not already following the policy to check all purchasing invoices for errors. This is very weak and unconvincing assumption as the argument does not state any information or data about how many clients are not following this policy and there is no evidence to support the claim that instituting this policy would result in finding all the errors. To illustrate, the author did not provide any information on what method to use to institute this policy, as if employees are going to re-check the invoices they may ignore the errors and inconsistencies. This would not help their clients at all. If the argument have provided evidence about the method used and the success rate of finding the errors and inconsistencies of that method then the argument would have been a lot more convincing.

Second, the argument claims that implementing such a policy will help clients to increase their net gains. This statement is a stretch. For instance, it is not necessary that if checking purchasing invoices for errors and inconsistencies helped Windfall Ltd. this would also help other companies. For example, Birla company has strict policies for employees making any errors while generating invoices, so there are very limited chances for any inconsistency or errors in purchasing invoices. Thus, even if they implement the new advised policy it will not increase their net gains. The argument could have been more clearer if it explicitly stated that this advice would help clients which currently take purchasing invoices for granted.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed or above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. It could be considerably strengthened if author clearly mentioned all relevant facts. In order to assess the merits of a certain decision, it is essential to have full knowledge of all contributing factors. In this particular case, if the author provided the information about how Windfall Ltd. implemented the policy to checking all purchasing invoices for errors and what is its output compared to the input, argument would have been strengthened.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

AWA Score: 6 out of 6! Wow

I have used a GMATAWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.

Coherence and connectivity: 5/5 
This rating corresponds to the flow of idea and expression from one paragraph to another. The effective use of connectives and coherence of assertive language in arguing for/against the argument is analysed. 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 is 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 vocaubulary 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!

Good Luck

Blair15 · Answer

Please review my essay!

Argument states that the financial management and consultig firm should advise its clients to institute a policy of checking all purchasing invoices for errors, as this action helped Windfall,Ltd. to save 10,000 dollars.Argument also mentions that the consulting firm could get the Windfall account by showcasing its rigorous methods. But argument fails to mention key factors that are needed to evalutate such a conclusion. Argument mentions weak and unsupported claims that make the argument more of a wishful thinking.

Fistly, argument readily assumes that the task of checking invoices is feasible and will be appreciated by clients.Checking invoices can lead to delayed outputs, increased costs. It is important to know whether the benefits surpass the efforts or not. Due to lack of such key factors, argument holds no weight.

Secondly, trying to get Windfall account by showcasing rigorous methods is another weak claim. Argument provides no premise as to why rigorous methods will help get the Windfall account. Windfall may not be looking for rigourous methods but for innovative solutions which expedite business produres. There's no way to evaluate such a claim and hence it's nothing more than a weak assumption.

Thirdly, Argument fails to answer questins such as "do companies already have a system for checking invoices", "do overpayments get returned?", "what methods can be adopted to check invoices cost effectively?". Absence of such pertinent points make this argument unsubstantiated.

Argument can be improved by mentioning all the points raised above. Until this is done, argument will remain weak and wishful.

#AWA Evaluation Request

Sajjad1994 · Answer

AWA Score: 4.5 out of 6

Coherence and Connectivity: 4/6

The essay generally maintains coherence but could benefit from smoother transitions between points and ideas. Some paragraphs lack clear connections between sentences.

Word Structure: 5/6

The essay demonstrates a reasonably varied and appropriate use of vocabulary and word structure. However, there is room for minor improvements in terms of word choice and sentence structure.

Paragraph Structure and Formation: 4.5/6

The essay includes distinct paragraphs, but the structure within some paragraphs could be improved for better organization and clarity. Some points could be presented more concisely.

Language and Grammar: 5/6

The essay generally follows proper grammar and language conventions. There are occasional minor grammatical errors and awkward phrasings that could be improved.

Vocabulary and Word Expression: 4.5/6

The vocabulary and word expression are generally appropriate, but there is room for enhancement in terms of using more precise and sophisticated language to convey ideas more effectively.

Overall, this essay provides a critique of the argument's flaws and unsupported assumptions. It offers reasonable language and grammar usage but could benefit from improved coherence, paragraph structure, and word choice. Therefore, I would assign it a score of 4.5/6.

We have learned from an employee of Windfall, Ltd., that its accountin

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards