The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a large, highly diversified company.
"Ten years ago our company had two new office buildings constructed as regional headquarters for two regions. The buildings were erected by different construction companies — Alpha and Zeta. Although the two buildings had identical floor plans, the building constructed by Zeta cost 30 percent more to build. However, that building's expenses for maintenance last year were only half those of Alpha's. In addition, the energy consumption of the Zeta building has been lower than that of the Alpha building every year since its construction. Given these data, plus the fact that Zeta has a stable workforce with little employee turnover, we recommend using Zeta rather than Alpha for our new building project, even though Alpha's bid promises lower construction costs."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The memo recommends using Zeta rather than Alpha for a new building project even with acknowledging that Alpha’s bid promises lower construction. The author’s recommendation is rested on flawed assumptions and is insufficiently supported. In order to examine or evaluate his remarks on his observations, more evidence is required.
The author begins by mentioning that Zeta cost 30 percent more to build than Alpha even with the identical floor plans. The author’s statement is predicated on inefficient information as there is no mention of how much did Alpha building construction costed while comparing the building cost. Without having a proper figure tying this 30 percent to total figure of Alpha company, we cannot determine how much cost did actual incur to build Zeta building because 30 percent more of 100 is significantly lower than extra 30 percent of a million. Without having proper figures tied to the total costs incurred by both companies, the argument fails in its validity to favour Zeta over Alpha.
Moreover, the energy consumption of Zeta building is lower than that of alpha every year since its construction. However, there is no evidence as to what number of energy consumption was less in Zeta than Alpha. Also, there is mention that building's expenses for maintenance last year were only half those of Alpha's. What were the maintenance costs of Alpha buildings prior to last year? How much of energy consumption was addressed by both buildings? What was the average energy consumption over the years? If Zeta building maintenance costs varied much over the years while Alpha remained constant, it would if not otherwise weaken the argument. The author again fails to give proper figure in order to evaluate the statement.
Additionally, the author also claims that Zeta has workforce with little employment turnover. This piece of information has no supporting evidences as to how much workforce was hosted by Zeta building compared to Alpha. What factors affected the workforce to prefer Zeta over Alpha? How much of the workforce means stable as addressed? How little was the employment turnover in Zeta building? If the ratio of workforce to employment turnover of Alpha was greater in the early years of construction, and the ratio of the same in Zeta is only increased recently, will hinder support to author’s argument. These are some questions needed to be answered in order to properly evaluate the argument.
While recommendation of using Zeta rather than Alpha for a building project might hold good considering several factors that were in support of the argument. The author’s suggestion is insufficient enough to support and examine the validity of the recommendation. With the answers to the additional questions discussed in the pervious paragraphs, the argument can be properly evaluated.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023-08-30 | mainulislamjoy | 47 | view |
| 2023-07-26 | Jonginn | 63 | view |
| 2023-03-08 | tedyang777 | 60 | view |
| 2023-01-08 | Sk. Tashrif Uddin | 50 | view |
| 2022-08-03 | Hanfeng Zhou | 73 | view |
- The following appeared as part of the Dean s newsletter The University of Wabash is considering a community service requirement for all undergraduate and graduate students We believe that the objective of any university is to produce well rounded and char 58
- The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner Over the past two years the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically Many Central Pl 72
- There is now evidence that the relaxed pace of life in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities Businesses in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual wo 68
- The following is an excerpt from a speech given to the School Board about a change to the curriculum Because the future will be dominated by technology we must make four years of computer programming mandatory for all high school students If our students 68
- The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a large highly diversified company Ten years ago our company had two new office buildings constructed as regional headquarters for two regions The buildings were erected by different construction c 62
Comments
Essay evaluations by e-grader
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, moreover, so, while, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 16.3942115768 195% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2402.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 455.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27912087912 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61852021839 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91373704082 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.43956043956 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 744.3 705.55239521 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.9617180676 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.08 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.8 5.70786347227 32% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.105787699338 0.218282227539 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0385663000293 0.0743258471296 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0418918333843 0.0701772020484 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0670139432552 0.128457276422 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0269003669837 0.0628817314937 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, however, if, moreover, so, while, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 23.0 19.6327345309 117% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 5.0 12.9520958084 39% => OK
Conjunction : 4.0 11.1786427146 36% => More conjunction wanted.
Relative clauses : 6.0 13.6137724551 44% => More relative clauses wanted.
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 67.0 55.5748502994 121% => OK
Nominalization: 32.0 16.3942115768 195% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2402.0 2260.96107784 106% => OK
No of words: 455.0 441.139720559 103% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27912087912 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.61852021839 4.56307096286 101% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.91373704082 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 200.0 204.123752495 98% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.43956043956 0.468620217663 94% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 744.3 705.55239521 105% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 4.0 4.96107784431 81% => OK
Article: 10.0 8.76447105788 114% => OK
Subordination: 3.0 2.70958083832 111% => OK
Conjunction: 1.0 1.67365269461 60% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 18.0 22.8473053892 79% => The Avg. Sentence Length is relatively short.
Sentence length SD: 47.9617180676 57.8364921388 83% => OK
Chars per sentence: 96.08 119.503703932 80% => OK
Words per sentence: 18.2 23.324526521 78% => OK
Discourse Markers: 1.8 5.70786347227 32% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 0.0 5.25449101796 0% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 10.0 8.20758483034 122% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 9.0 6.88822355289 131% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 6.0 4.67664670659 128% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.105787699338 0.218282227539 48% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0385663000293 0.0743258471296 52% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0418918333843 0.0701772020484 60% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0670139432552 0.128457276422 52% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0269003669837 0.0628817314937 43% => Paragraphs are similar to each other. Some content may get duplicated or it is not exactly right on the topic.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 12.5 14.3799401198 87% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 53.21 48.3550499002 110% => OK
smog_index: 3.1 7.1628742515 43% => Smog_index is low.
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.3 12.197005988 84% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.34 12.5979740519 106% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.21 8.32208582834 99% => OK
difficult_words: 106.0 98.500998004 108% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.5 12.3882235529 69% => OK
gunning_fog: 9.2 11.1389221557 83% => OK
text_standard: 9.0 11.9071856287 76% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 58.33 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 3.5 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.