The argument states that for the business to prosper, it should hire only those people who won't need more than 6 hours of sleep. While the conclusion might seem inferential, it is rooted in certain assumptions and overstretched conclusions that are more fallacious than warranted. The argument connects the sleep requirements of executives to the success of their advertising firms. While making a direct correlation between the average hours of sleep required per night for every executive, with the success of their firms, the argument fails to take into account many different things.
First of all, the biggest assumption in the argument that all things being equal, number of hours of sleep is the only factor influencing the success of the firms. It fails to take into account whether the executives who sleep less than 6 hours per night, also take an hour or two of nap in the evening or post lunch. The argument simply assumes that the executives who sleep less than 6 hours per night tend to work all day. There is a possibility that these executives take numerous breaks. There is a possibility that they sleep lesser, but consume more coffee to be awake and alert which can unduly influence the sleep. Some of these executives might have insomnia which could have affected the study. These are the unsaid assumptions that the argument doesn't take into account when presenting the conclusion.
The argument also fails to discuss the other reasons a business could have for the success. Here, the argument is focused only on the executives and their average hours of night sleep. The company could very well be successful because of other factors such as the effectiveness of the assistants of the executives, the people who work for them, the team that comes up with creative ideas, the marketing or sales team that does the core work, and even a combination of some or all of these. These could all be contributing towards the success of the firm, and take either of these away, the success may not be replicated. All these questions are unanswered, and these are all just taken for granted in the study.
Furthermore, the argument discusses only higher profit margins. It fails to disclose any information about the entire revenue of the companies. A company could be making a billion dollars out of 10 billion dollar investment, and another company could be making 100 million dollars out of a billion dollar investment, and saying that both companies make the same profit margin and so both are equal, would be fallacious. We don't see any information about all these companies that are studied and evaluated. The argument just tells that the profit margins are higher where the executives slept less than 6 hours per night, but fails to discuss what the actual numbers are, which would be much more influential in arriving at a decision. It's very difficult to achieve the same profit margin as the revenue and the size of a company keeps increasing. A company making a profit margin of 7% at a market-cap of 20 billion is probably better than a company making a profit margin of 70% at a market-cap of 20 million. We can't compare them both on just the margin basis, which would be faulty to begin with.
Finally, the conclusion that a business should hire only those sleeping less than 6 hours per night is riddled with faulty assumptions and conjectures, those that aren't rooted in unassailable logic. All these aforementioned reasons renders the conclusion invalid.
Essay evaluation report
argument 1 -- not exactly
argument 2 -- OK
argument 3 -- not OK
----------------
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.0 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 26 15
No. of Words: 595 350
No. of Characters: 2840 1500
No. of Different Words: 236 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.939 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.773 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.567 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 184 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 138 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 83 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 59 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 22.885 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 11.507 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.5 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.306 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.487 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.116 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 566, Rule ID: NUMEROUS_DIFFERENT[1]
Message: Use simply 'many'.
Suggestion: many
...the argument fails to take into account many different things. First of all, the biggest a...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 3, column 758, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: doesn't
...he unsaid assumptions that the argument doesnt take into account when presenting the c...
^^^^^^
Line 7, column 424, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: don't
...both are equal, would be fallacious. We dont see any information about all these com...
^^^^
Line 7, column 1015, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...f 70% at a market-cap of 20 million. We cant compare them both on just the margin ba...
^^^^
Line 9, column 164, Rule ID: EN_CONTRACTION_SPELLING
Message: Possible spelling mistake found
Suggestion: aren't
...assumptions and conjectures, those that arent rooted in unassailable logic. All these...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, finally, first, furthermore, if, may, so, well, while, such as, first of all, to begin with
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 16.0 12.9520958084 124% => OK
Conjunction : 18.0 11.1786427146 161% => OK
Relative clauses : 24.0 13.6137724551 176% => OK
Pronoun: 40.0 28.8173652695 139% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 60.0 55.5748502994 108% => OK
Nominalization: 18.0 16.3942115768 110% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2903.0 2260.96107784 128% => OK
No of words: 591.0 441.139720559 134% => OK
Chars per words: 4.91201353638 5.12650576532 96% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.93056706295 4.56307096286 108% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.63073592894 2.78398813304 94% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.416243654822 0.468620217663 89% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 891.9 705.55239521 126% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.5 1.59920159681 94% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 10.0 4.96107784431 202% => Less pronouns wanted as sentence beginning.
Article: 17.0 8.76447105788 194% => OK
Subordination: 2.0 2.70958083832 74% => OK
Conjunction: 7.0 1.67365269461 418% => Less conjunction wanted as sentence beginning.
Preposition: 1.0 4.22255489022 24% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 26.0 19.7664670659 132% => OK
Sentence length: 22.0 22.8473053892 96% => OK
Sentence length SD: 62.7922751816 57.8364921388 109% => OK
Chars per sentence: 111.653846154 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 22.7307692308 23.324526521 97% => OK
Discourse Markers: 3.92307692308 5.70786347227 69% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 5.0 5.25449101796 95% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 13.0 8.20758483034 158% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 10.0 6.88822355289 145% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.218666775459 0.218282227539 100% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.0759989180456 0.0743258471296 102% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0947684069788 0.0701772020484 135% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.140807977709 0.128457276422 110% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0898257795176 0.0628817314937 143% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 13.1 14.3799401198 91% => Automated_readability_index is low.
flesch_reading_ease: 57.61 48.3550499002 119% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 10.7 12.197005988 88% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 11.49 12.5979740519 91% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 7.53 8.32208582834 90% => OK
difficult_words: 105.0 98.500998004 107% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.8 11.1389221557 97% => OK
text_standard: 11.0 11.9071856287 92% => 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.