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 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 2512:30 AM EDT
-01:30 AM EDT
At one point, she believed GMAT wasn’t for her. After scoring 595, self-doubt crept in and she questioned her potential. But instead of quitting, she made the right strategic changes. The result? A remarkable comeback to 695. Check out how Saakshi did it.
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 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.
May 0111:00 AM PDT
-12:00 PM PDT
Free- full-length test + 15 concept videos + 150+ short videos + study plan!
09 Apr 2022, 05:54
Kudos
Bookmarks
"Three years ago, Medmaster, our nearest competitor in the field of Health Insurance, adopted a strong credo for Corporate Social Responsibility; its revenues have increased by 25% since then. The credo must have played a strong role in establishing goodwill- a much-needed virtue in our nature of business, and led to this increase in revenue. Hence, to improve our company's profitability, it is recommended that we must shelve our ongoing Corporate Social Responsibility initiatives and adopt a credo similar to that of Medmaster"
The argument states that Medmaster, Instar's nearest competitor in the field of health insurance, adopted a strong credo for corporate social responsibility and achieved 25% revenue increase. Hence, Instar should do the same to increase its revenues. Stated in this way, argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it can be evaluated. The argument is based on various unwarranted assumptions for which there are no clear evidences. Thus, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing and open to debate.
First, the argument readily assumes that Credo is the only reason for 25% increase in revenue of Medmaster. However, there is a high probability that there were various other reasons for increase in revenue. Revenue may have increased because of new marketing strategy, new product , after sale services etc. But the argument fails to consider these possibilities and made unsupported conclusion by assuming credo as the only reason for increase in sales.
Second, the argument assumes that what worked for Medmaster will also work for Instar. Each and every organization has its own strengths and weaknesses and has a very different structure. There is a high possibility that the strategy used by Medmaster will not work for Instar. For example, Medmaster may have changed its whole corporate social responsibility department structure for new strategy but it may not be possible for Instar to do so because of high cost involved. The argument would have been considerably strengthened if it had mentioned what strategy Instar would follow for adopting Credo.
Finally, the argument concludes that Instar must shelve its ongoing Corporate social responsibility initiatives and adopt a credo similar to that of Medmaster. But what if ongoing initiatives prove to be more successful than credo in long term ? Also, what if by making some changes in ongoing initiatives Instar is able to adopt a more stronger credo than that of Medmaster ? Without any satisfactory answer to above questions, author's conclusion is unjustified and irrational.
In summary, the argument has several flaws and therefore, is unconvincing. The argument would have been considerably strengthened if it had mentioned how Instar will make adjustments for Credo and answered the above mentioned question with evidence. In order to assess the merit of a situation, it is important to have a working knowledge of all aspects of that situation. Without this information, the argument is unsubstantiated and open to debate.
The argument states that Medmaster, Instar's nearest competitor in the field of health insurance, adopted a strong credo for corporate social responsibility and achieved 25% revenue increase. Hence, Instar should do the same to increase its revenues. Stated in this way, argument fails to mention several key factors on the basis of which it can be evaluated. The argument is based on various unwarranted assumptions for which there are no clear evidences. Thus, the argument is rather weak, unconvincing and open to debate.
First, the argument readily assumes that Credo is the only reason for 25% increase in revenue of Medmaster. However, there is a high probability that there were various other reasons for increase in revenue. Revenue may have increased because of new marketing strategy, new product , after sale services etc. But the argument fails to consider these possibilities and made unsupported conclusion by assuming credo as the only reason for increase in sales.
Second, the argument assumes that what worked for Medmaster will also work for Instar. Each and every organization has its own strengths and weaknesses and has a very different structure. There is a high possibility that the strategy used by Medmaster will not work for Instar. For example, Medmaster may have changed its whole corporate social responsibility department structure for new strategy but it may not be possible for Instar to do so because of high cost involved. The argument would have been considerably strengthened if it had mentioned what strategy Instar would follow for adopting Credo.
Finally, the argument concludes that Instar must shelve its ongoing Corporate social responsibility initiatives and adopt a credo similar to that of Medmaster. But what if ongoing initiatives prove to be more successful than credo in long term ? Also, what if by making some changes in ongoing initiatives Instar is able to adopt a more stronger credo than that of Medmaster ? Without any satisfactory answer to above questions, author's conclusion is unjustified and irrational.
In summary, the argument has several flaws and therefore, is unconvincing. The argument would have been considerably strengthened if it had mentioned how Instar will make adjustments for Credo and answered the above mentioned question with evidence. In order to assess the merit of a situation, it is important to have a working knowledge of all aspects of that situation. Without this information, the argument is unsubstantiated and open to debate.
10 Apr 2022, 03:44
Kudos
Bookmarks
AWA Score: 5.5 - 6 out of 6
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 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: 4.5/5
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: 4.5/5
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!
I have used a GMAT AWA auto-grader to evaluate your essay.
Coherence and connectivity: 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: 4.5/5
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: 4.5/5
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!
Good Luck
Ravin25
17 Apr 2022, 14:59
Kudos
Bookmarks
Can you please assess mine? Thank you very much in advance!
In this argument, the argument presents the conclusion that the company should adopt a credo similar to that of Medmaster, in order to improve the company's profitability. The basis of this recommendation is that the company's nearest competitor, Medmaster, adopted a strong credo 3 years ago and their revenues have increased by 25% since then. At first glance, the argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but further scrutiny reveals that it omits some important concerns that should be addressed to substantiate the argument.
Most conspicuously, the argument commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification by attributing the increase of Medmaster's revenues to its adoption of credo 3 years ago. However, no evidence is stated to prove that the adoption of credo 3 years ago solely led to the increase of the revenues. What if Medmaster's revenues were increased because the company had better products in the market, or the company had gained a larger market share? The argument would have been more convincing if it had clearly illustrated the correlation between the adoption of credo and the increase of the revenues.
Moreover, the argument falsely depends on an assumption that what worked for Medmaster will also work for the company. Different companies might have totally different organizational structures, product strategies, operation guidelines, etc. A strategy that worked for one company does not necessarily mean that it will work for another company. Hence, without providing evidence to illustrate why the company will also increase its revenues by doing what Medmaster did 3 years ago, this assumption is unfounded.
Finally, the argument unfairly made another assumption that an increase in revenue will lead to an increase in profitability. While the revenue is an important element in determining the overall profitability of a company, it is hardly the only element. In fact, there are also many other factors that contributing to a company's profitability, such as operation cost, production cost, sales, market share, etc. Unless these possibilities are ruled out, it is unwarranted to make the assumption that the company's profitability will be higher when the revenues are increased.
To sum up, the conclusion that the company should adopt the credo just like how Medmaster did before is seriously undermined by numerous flaws in the reasoning identified above. If the reasoning can be taken into account, the argument will be much more thorough and convincing.
In this argument, the argument presents the conclusion that the company should adopt a credo similar to that of Medmaster, in order to improve the company's profitability. The basis of this recommendation is that the company's nearest competitor, Medmaster, adopted a strong credo 3 years ago and their revenues have increased by 25% since then. At first glance, the argument appears to be somewhat convincing, but further scrutiny reveals that it omits some important concerns that should be addressed to substantiate the argument.
Most conspicuously, the argument commits a fallacy of causal oversimplification by attributing the increase of Medmaster's revenues to its adoption of credo 3 years ago. However, no evidence is stated to prove that the adoption of credo 3 years ago solely led to the increase of the revenues. What if Medmaster's revenues were increased because the company had better products in the market, or the company had gained a larger market share? The argument would have been more convincing if it had clearly illustrated the correlation between the adoption of credo and the increase of the revenues.
Moreover, the argument falsely depends on an assumption that what worked for Medmaster will also work for the company. Different companies might have totally different organizational structures, product strategies, operation guidelines, etc. A strategy that worked for one company does not necessarily mean that it will work for another company. Hence, without providing evidence to illustrate why the company will also increase its revenues by doing what Medmaster did 3 years ago, this assumption is unfounded.
Finally, the argument unfairly made another assumption that an increase in revenue will lead to an increase in profitability. While the revenue is an important element in determining the overall profitability of a company, it is hardly the only element. In fact, there are also many other factors that contributing to a company's profitability, such as operation cost, production cost, sales, market share, etc. Unless these possibilities are ruled out, it is unwarranted to make the assumption that the company's profitability will be higher when the revenues are increased.
To sum up, the conclusion that the company should adopt the credo just like how Medmaster did before is seriously undermined by numerous flaws in the reasoning identified above. If the reasoning can be taken into account, the argument will be much more thorough and convincing.
