▶ Your Answer :
In
this recommendation written by the personnel director of Acme Publishing
Company, the author suggests all the employees to take the Easy Read course in
order to improve productivity based on the evidence of two successful cases and
outstanding benefit comparing to the cost. Although the conclusion may
partially hold true, a careful scrutiny reveals that it lacks solid evidence
and is based on incomplete assumptions making the claim unconvincing without
further examination.
First
of all, two successful cases of graduates are assumed to evidence productivity
of the all of the employees, but fail to do so conclusively. Although the
author provided a factual data, it might not be representative to the employees
since it was targeted to graduates. Furthermore, final decision of promotion is
not only reflected by one’s reading capacity, but some other aspects must be
also followed in order to evaluate one’s qualification. Moreover, it is not
apparent in how far the author presents a valid argument in this point as the argument
is based on vague evidence how long the graduates have practiced in the Easy
Read course. Thus, further evidence pertaining to detailed data could
strengthen the argument significantly.
Secondly,
the director of the recommendation presumes that 500 dollars is reasonable cost
for the course when considering improvement in productivity and a three-week
seminar included. However, the benefits of the course are not warrant and might
be overestimated. The course does not guarantee for all the employees’
productivity due to individual differences. In addition, while participates are
taking three-week seminar, it is concerned that the company might have critical
decline in productivity. The author is also necessary to figure out and provide
the number of employees, participating into the course because it is inadequate
to conclude that the Acme would produce significant benefit without a complete
cost-benefit analysis. Consequently, evidence pertaining to the number of
employs involving the course and estimated data which considered personal
differences and absence of seminar could substantially support the argument.
Lastly,
in order to improve productivity the author recommends that all of employees
take the Easy Read course. Nevertheless, work productivity would not
correspondingly increase as workers take the reading course; there should be a
third factor such as appropriate rest in between work shifts or after work, a commensurate
salary or an incentive and proper welfare after retirement. Which schemes would
employees greet: the policy that makes you work frantically or the policy that
embrace you? The answer to this question illustrates that the employees would
possibly refrain from working efficient. Thus, forcing them to enroll Easy Read
course may not the best way to improve productivity.
In
conclusion, the personnel director’s assertion suffers from several weaknesses
due to in complete assumptions and insufficient evidences. In order to bolster
the case, it would be necessary to clarify the author’s assumptions pertaining
to whether or not the course would enhance work effectiveness, 500 dollars
worth, and representativeness of two examples provided.
Word
count: 491 |