The following appeared in a memo from the customer service division to the manager of Mammon Savings and Loan. “We believe that improved customer service is the best way for us to differentiate ourselves from competitors and attract new customers. We can

The argument claims that their bank has the improved customer service and can be easily differentiated from other banks. In order to reduce the waiting time of the customers, the argument offers to reduce the time of teller lines from an average of six minutes to three. Furthermore, the author states that the business should be opened by 8.30 instead of 9:00 and to open an extra hour so that the bank can accommodate the customer timings. The argument is unconvincing and has several flaws.

Firstly, just by reducing the teller time from six minutes to three minutes will not help the bank in any way. Reducing the teller time will moreover increase the confusion of the customer. As the teller will be in a hurry to solve the customer’s problem within time, the customer may not be able to understand what the teller is explaining. As a result more confusion is created. Hence, the idea of reducing the teller time will not be efficient to enhance the bank’s image.

Secondly, the author assumes that by opening the business half an hour earlier and closing it after an additional hour would help the bank to retain its image and help the customers having busy schedules. This is again an unclear assumption made by the author. Many customers may not be convenient with the bank’s timing. Some customers might also be busy during the additional hours extended by the bank. Moreover, extending only one hour or so would not be helpful for the customers. Instead the bank should adopt such plant where it can be opened during holidays, say on Sundays. Opening the bank on holidays will enable the customers to come freely and carry on with their work.Hence without convincing answers to the question, one is left with the impression that the argument is more of a wishful thinking rather than substantive evidence.

In conclusion, the argument is flawed due to the above-mentioned reasons and is therefore unconvincing. The argument could have been considerably strengthened if the author had mentioned some other ideas which would practically help the bank to enhance its image and gives edge over the competition. Without full knowledge of the facts, the argument remains unsubstantiated and open to debate.