“When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintains better supervision of all employees.”
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
The argument claims that shutting down the field offices of Apogee Company will increase its profitability and will help maintain better supervision of employees. In support, the author has also stated that the company was more profitable in one location that it is today. The author fails to reveal key concerns, on the basis of which the argument can be evaluated. Thought the claim may well have merit, the author presents a poorly reasoned argument, for which the author has not provided any evidence. Hence argument is weak, unconvincing and has several flaws.
The primary issue with the argument is that the author does not provide the profitability data of the company when it had single operation and the data when the company has multiple operation offices. There could be slight fluctuation in profitability, which may be due to multiple reasons. It could be because the whole economy is on a downward trend or the company is in its initial phase where it has set up multiple operations.
Second, the author has based his conclusion on the assumption that the sole factor for the profitability is demographic position of the company. However the author did not mention any specific product type or service that company deals in. There could be reasons where Apogee Company has to deal with multiple offices to out reach the clients in respective location. Hence with this stretch assumption author, the conclusion remains unsubstantiated.
Finally, the author assumes that by centralization company will attain increase profits as well as maintain supervision of employees. Author also does not mention regarding the roles of employees in the company which directly co-relates to the nature of service or products provided by company. The duty of employees may include frequent visit for client interaction or may provide delivery at multiple locations, there cannot be any alternative way rather than to have multiple field offices to provide unobstructed service.
In conclusion, the argument is flawed for the above reasons and therefore not convincing and not persuasive. It could be strengthen if the author would have mention more details regarding the nature of product/service, the roles of employee and the analysis of profitability of the company. Without the information, the argument is unsubstantiated and open to debate.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-01 | mayurgandhi25895 | 63 | view |
| 2019-09-22 | jain.tarash | 55 | view |
| 2019-08-11 | preetish | 77 | view |
| 2019-05-15 | Divyansh Gupta | 89 | view |
| 2019-02-26 | tushar.borad123 | 74 | view |
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 3.5 out of 6
Category: Satisfactory Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 18 15
No. of Words: 376 350
No. of Characters: 1935 1500
No. of Different Words: 170 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.403 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.146 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.793 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 153 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 123 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 75 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 40 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 20.889 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 7.453 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.667 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.36 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.572 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.08 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 1, column 507, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...e author has not provided any evidence. Hence argument is weak, unconvincing and has ...
^^^^^
Line 9, column 146, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: However,
...is demographic position of the company. However the author did not mention any specific...
^^^^^^^
Line 9, column 368, Rule ID: SENT_START_CONJUNCTIVE_LINKING_ADVERB_COMMA[1]
Message: Did you forget a comma after a conjunctive/linking adverb?
Suggestion: Hence,
...ach the clients in respective location. Hence with this stretch assumption author, th...
^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, finally, hence, however, if, may, regarding, second, so, then, therefore, well, as to, in conclusion, as well as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 16.0 19.6327345309 81% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 14.0 12.9520958084 108% => OK
Conjunction : 11.0 11.1786427146 98% => OK
Relative clauses : 15.0 13.6137724551 110% => OK
Pronoun: 16.0 28.8173652695 56% => OK
Preposition: 45.0 55.5748502994 81% => OK
Nominalization: 22.0 16.3942115768 134% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 1994.0 2260.96107784 88% => OK
No of words: 375.0 441.139720559 85% => More content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.31733333333 5.12650576532 104% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.40055868397 4.56307096286 96% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.93277085516 2.78398813304 105% => OK
Unique words: 177.0 204.123752495 87% => More unique words wanted.
Unique words percentage: 0.472 0.468620217663 101% => OK
syllable_count: 630.0 705.55239521 89% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 2.0 4.96107784431 40% => OK
Article: 12.0 8.76447105788 137% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 4.0 4.22255489022 95% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 18.0 19.7664670659 91% => OK
Sentence length: 20.0 22.8473053892 88% => OK
Sentence length SD: 44.3018545999 57.8364921388 77% => OK
Chars per sentence: 110.777777778 119.503703932 93% => OK
Words per sentence: 20.8333333333 23.324526521 89% => OK
Discourse Markers: 6.55555555556 5.70786347227 115% => OK
Paragraphs: 5.0 5.15768463074 97% => OK
Language errors: 3.0 5.25449101796 57% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 8.0 8.20758483034 97% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 5.0 4.67664670659 107% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.203374528939 0.218282227539 93% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.063694005354 0.0743258471296 86% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0758760702226 0.0701772020484 108% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.11147737703 0.128457276422 87% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0525799606424 0.0628817314937 84% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.0 14.3799401198 97% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 42.72 48.3550499002 88% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.3 12.197005988 101% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.5 8.32208582834 102% => OK
difficult_words: 92.0 98.500998004 93% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 8.0 12.3882235529 65% => OK
gunning_fog: 10.0 11.1389221557 90% => OK
text_standard: 14.0 11.9071856287 118% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 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.