The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company."Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One

The president makes a recommendation for Acme to require all its employees take the Easy Read Course in order to improve the overall productivity. He supports his argument with the help of achievements of graduates of the course and the benefits which outweigh the price of course. However, the premises contain flaws and need certain questions to be answered to make the argument reasonable.

Firstly, there is question of whether what succeeds in other companies also succeeds in Acme Publishing company. There is no evidence that many other companies quoted in the argument are actually similar to Acme in terms of their functioning. It may be that Acme differs from them significantly as it already has a well literate employees as their recruitment criteria are stringent and while others are a bit lax in this regard resulting in hiring illiterate or semi-literate workforce. May be this is a reason for great improved productivity in others due to taking the Easy read course and productivity may be already high in Acme.

Secondly, there is a question of whether more information a person absorbs due to fast reading actually translates into adequate understanding. Just because a graduate of the course is able to read 500-page document in two hours does not mean he understands it. There is need for further evidence regarding the understanding aspect to have a favourable conclusion without which it belies any claims of improved productivity . Furthermore, the person who raised from position of assistant manager to vice president may have done so because of other reasons like lack of people to fill the higher position which was vacant in the organisation.

Finally , there is a question o f whether $500 dollars is a small price to pay when compared to benefits. It may be possible that the company already pays very high salary for its highly qualified workforce. They may not require the course to improve their productivity which is benchmark in the industry. Any additional expense will be a drain on the company's profits with no useful rewards in the longer run. Moreover, three week seminar can actually mean paid holidays for the employees with no revenue being generated in the period. There is no evidence this cost is taken into account while weighing the benefits

In conclusion , the argument suffers from serious flaws due to inability to answer certain questions. There is need for further information regarding similarity, understanding aspect of graduates of the course and the probable cost-benefit analysis. Without this, the argument and the recommendation are at best suspect.