本帖最后由 TEFouDAF 于 2010-2-17 17:31 编辑
TOPIC: ARGUMENT186 - The following is a recommendation from the director of personnel to the president of Professional Printing Company.
"In a recent telephone survey of automobile factory workers, older employees were less likely to report that having a supervisor present increases their productivity. Among workers aged 18 to 29, 27 percent said that they are more productive in the presence of their immediate supervisor, compared to 12 percent for those aged 30 or over, and only 8 percent for those aged 50 or over. Clearly, if our printing company hires mainly older employees, we will increase productivity and save money because of the reduced need for supervisors."
WORDS: 478 TIME: 0:30:00 DATE: 2006-2-6
In this argument, the author concludes that the productivity will be increased and the money will be saved by hiring mainly older employees. To buttress the argument, he also cites the result of a survey and other evidence which is appealing. However, the argument has several logical flaws and it is therefore unpersuasive as is stands.
Firstly, the author hardly convinces us the survey is reliable. There is scant evidence that the survey has taken a random select method and that the workers who respond the survey well represent the whole workers in the factory. The smaller the number of the worker it surveys, the less reliable the result the survey conducts. So we are better to suspend our judgment until more firm evidence on the reliability of the survey is provided.
Secondly, the author provides a obscure description about how workers in different ages regard the productivity in or out of the presence of their immediate supervisor. Without such confirmation on the consistence of the criteria of the productivity, it is entirely possible that even though the percentage of the young workers who claim the increase in productivity in the presence of the supervisor is greater than that of the elder ones, the increase of productivity in the elder workers are higher, for the reason that they are more accustomed to the working environment and less sensitive to the supervisor and even the increase in the productivity. Such logical flaw will undoubtedly undermine the validity of the argument.
Thirdly, the argument rests on the assumption that the elder workers are more productive in average. However, the author provides no evidence in support of this. Perhaps as the age grows the dexterity and proficiency may be declined accordingly. So the elder workers are less productive than the middle-aged workers who probably in the peak of their careers. Without evaluating the true productivity of the three groups of workers, it is inappropriate to come to the conclusion.
Finally, the author claims that the money will be saved by reducing the need of supervisors. However, he assumes that other factors that influence the profit are remain unchanged, which is open to doubt. The common sense tells that, as the company hires the elder workers, the salary of them will increase due to their long working periods, which may offset the saving. Since the author provides no evidence, he can hardly convince us into the feasibility of the measure.
In sum, it is imprudent for the author to solely base on the evidence that is too vague to lend support to what he claims. To strengthen the argument, the author should convince us that the elder workers are really the most productive among the three groups and increase their salaries will not undermine to save the total money. Moreover, he should also rule out all the possibilities that I have analyzed above.
| 
发表于 2010-2-17 14:31:26
发表于 2010-2-17 17:18:20
转发
签到领寄托币
GO
