2. The following appeared in a memorandum from the business department of the Apogee Company.
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 maintain better supervision of all employees.
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
In this argument the author concludes that the Apogee Company should close down field offices and conduct all its operations from a single, centralized location because the company had been more profitable in the past when all its operations were in one location. For a couple of reasons, this argument is not very convincing.
First, the author assumes that centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and streamlining supervision of employees. This assumption is never supported with any data or projections. Moreover, the assumption fails to take into account cost increases and inefficiency that could result from centralization. For instance, company representatives would have to travel to do business in areas formerly served by a field office, creating travel costs and loss of critical time. In short, this assumption must be supported with a thorough cost-benefit analysis of centralization versus other possible cost-cutting and/or profit-enhancing strategies.
Second, the only reason offered by the author is the claim that Apogee was more profitable when it had operated from a single, centralized location. But is centralization the only difference relevant to greater past profitability? It is entirely possible that management has become lax regarding any number of factors that can affect the bottom line such as inferior products, careless product pricing, inefficient production, poor employee expense account monitoring, ineffective advertising, sloppy buying policies and other wasteful spending. Unless the author can rule out other factors relevant to diminishing profits, this argument commits the fallacy of assuming that just because one event follows another , the second event has been caused by the first.
In conclusion, this is a weak argument. To strengthen the conclusion that Apogee should close field offices and centralize, this author must provide a thorough cost-benefit analysis of available alternatives and rule out factors other than decentralization that might be affecting current profits negatively.
拖延症基因找到了,只对女性有影响
数字时代的恋爱指南:分手了照片短信怎么办?
瑞典爸爸:两个月陪产假够用吗?
体坛英语资讯:All-Star guard Lillard withdraws from FIBA Mens World Cup: report
I am Curious 好奇心
英男子因看奥运面无表情 被警方逮捕
男子网购电视 却收到步枪一支
娱乐英语资讯:Spotlight: Universal Music Group may dance to Tencents tune
东西方女性的化妆不一样
体坛英语资讯:PSG launch new Parc des Princes experience to supporters
未来盆栽可控制电脑
体坛英语资讯:Belarus rider wins stage 9 at Tour of Qinghai Lake
英国夫妇环游世界举办22次婚礼
福岛核事故后日本蝴蝶明显变异
做最好的自己:每天要问自己的五个问题
闪电博尔特“双卫冕” 赛场自拍辉煌瞬间
与名人面对面教会了我们什么?
霍伊 四次奥运会老将再夺冠 成英国最佳
A Good Listener 一个好的聆听者
亚马逊推出纸质教科书租赁业务
Sharing is Caring 分享就是关爱
德国动物园狐狸野猪助袋鼠出逃
伦敦奥运闭幕式 辣妹重组掀高潮
探索英语辩论的奥妙
谷歌贴心“遗属福利”:员工去世后配偶再领10年工资
不能给学生买ipad的10个原因
刘翔出局引发中国网民热议
伦敦奥运会上谁最爱哭?
欧元创始人:欧元区有可能瓦解
暮光之城男主角复出 因工作关系重回戏场
不限 |
英语教案 |
英语课件 |
英语试题 |
不限 |
不限 |
上册 |
下册 |
不限 |