argument241

alickenUID: 2845947

1010G欢迎拍文作文互改小组 7月13日作业

TOPIC: ARGUMENT241 - The following appeared in a memo at the XYZ company.

"When XYZ lays off employees, it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating resumés and developing interviewing skills, if they so desire. Laid-off employees have benefited greatly from Delany's services: last year those who used Delany found jobs much more quickly than did those who did not. Recently, it has been proposed that we use the less-expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in place of Delany. This would be a mistake because eight years ago, when XYZ was using Walsh, only half of the workers we laid off at that time found jobs within a year. Moreover, Delany is clearly superior, as evidenced by its bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. After all, last year Delany's clients took an average of six months to find jobs, whereas Walsh's clients took nine."
WORDS: 365
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2010-7-13 15:32:10

In this memo, the writer assert the use Walsh Personnel Firm(Walsh) to replace Delany to service for the lays off employees is a mistake. To support his assertion, the writer repeatedly relates that the time that Delany clients use to find a job is less than that of Walsh. And the writer also cites other information to indicate Delany is better than Walsh, but these information cannot sustain the writer's point well.

First, quality of services is not only based on the time which clients use to find jobs. Whether employees have really job search skills is more important. For example, indeed clients in Delany find jobs more quickly than Walsh's, but Delany's guiders may just help clients finish their resumes, instead of guiding their clients to finish their resumes by themselves, contrary Walsh's guiders demand their clients to learn more to write resumes. It is obvious that the latter one is better, because these clients also get skills, not only a job. Also, just the time of finding jobs are not the really judgment of these two companies. Image, if clients in Delany find jobs more quickly indeed, but after several months, they consider that these jobs are not very or not suitable to them, can we say that Delany is good? On the contrary, although Walsh's clients takes more than 3 months to find jobs, the avenge qualities of jobs may better than that of Delany's.

Another fault in the memo is that the writer compares the circumstances of Walsh eight years ago and that of Delany now. This is ridiculous, how can he do this? In the eight years, many things have been change and there may more jobs for people than before. Although eight years ago Delany is better than Walsh, this makes no sense, because conditions in eight years ago cannot illustrate that the condition now. Maybe, after so many years' development, Walsh now is better than Delany.

In sum, the writer’s point is weak, though he repeatedly stress that the time cost to find jobs in Delany is shorter. Time cannot be the valid evidence to illustrate Delany’s good services, and this is the fatal flaw of this memo.

neverjustUID: 2848024

红色表示错误  蓝色表示建议

In this memo, the writer asserted the（换成that） use Walsh Personnel Firm(Walsh) to replace Delany to service for the lays off employees is a mistake. （这一句ms不太顺）To support his assertion, the writer repeatedly relates that the time that Delany clients used to find a job is less than that of Walsh. And the writer also cites other information to indicate Delany is better than Walsh, but these information cannot sustain the writer's point well.

First, quality of services is not only based on the time which clients use to find jobs. Whether employees have really job search skills（换个说法比较好） is more important. For example, indeed clients in Delany find jobs more quickly（换成quicker） than Walsh's, but Delany's guiders may just help clients finish their resumes, instead of guiding their clients to finish their resumes by themselves, contrary Walsh's guiders demand their clients to learn more to write resumes. It is obvious that the latter one is better, because these clients also get skills, not only a job. （这段的攻击性不强，你在攻击时间问题，用的却是“帮助方法”的例子。你可以使用这个例子，但是你要说teaching them skills spend more time.这样才能攻击到时间问题。）Also, just the time of finding jobs are not the really judgment of these two companies. Image, if clients in Delany find jobs more quickly indeed, but after several months, they consider that these jobs are not very or not suitable to them, can we say that Delany is good？（这个才是有用的论据，展开。） On the contrary, although Walsh's clients takes more than 3 months to find jobs, the avenge qualities of jobs may better than that of Delany's.

Another fault in the memo is that the writer compares the circumstances of Walsh eight years ago and that of Delany now. This is ridiculous, how can he do this? In the eight years, many things have been changed and there may （there be 句型少个be动词）more jobs for people than before. Although eight years ago Delany is better than Walsh, this makes no sense, because conditions in eight years ago cannot illustrate that the condition now. Maybe, after so many years' development, Walsh now is better than Delany.（这段你攻击一个问题，用了两个论据，但是两个都没有展开谈。虽然是有用论据，但应该再展开一点，说服力更强）

In sum, the writer’s point is （points are）weak, though he repeatedly stress that the time cost to find jobs in Delany is shorter. Time cannot be the valid evidence to illustrate Delany’s good services, and this is the fatal flaw of this memo.

alickenUID: 2845947

改了一下，把第一点重新组织了一下，另外加了一个点

In this memo, the writer asserts the proposal that to use Walsh Personnel Firm(Walsh) in replace of Delany to service for the laid-off employees is a mistake. To support his assertion, the writer repeatedly relates that the time that Delany clients use to find a job is less than that of Walsh. And the writer also cites other information to indicate Delany is better than Walsh, but these information cannot sustain the writer's point well.

First, just the time of finding jobs are not the really judgment of these two companies. Image, if clients in Delany find jobs more quickly indeed, but after several months, they consider that these jobs are not very good or not suitable to them, can we say that Delany is good? No, we cannot, because service qualities of personnel firms is not only in the speed of finding jobs, more importantly, these firms should ensure their clients get stable jobs. In contrast with Delany, Walsh's clients take more than 3 months to find jobs. It is entire possible that during the additional 3 months Walsh’s clients was imbibed more useful interview skills and after learning these skills they find more stable jobs than Delany’s clients.

Another fault in the memo is that the writer compares the circumstances of Walsh eight years ago and that of Delany now. Is it meaningful to compare in this way? This is nonsensical because in the eight years, many things have been changed and there may be more jobs for people than before. And perhaps at that time, half of laid-off workers find jobs within a year is big breakthrough. It is also perhaps that if at that time XYZ chose Delany instead of Walsh, the results were worse: less than half of workers find jobs within a year. Without details of employment conditions eight years ago, this comparison cannot explain that Delany is batter than Walsh.

In addition, the writer considers that a company which has bigger staff and larger number of branch offices is better than the one with less staff and small number of branches. This point is ungrounded because there is no necessarily link between companies’ sizes and strength. Perhaps precisely because of the myriad branches, using Delany is expensive.

In sum, the writer’s points are weak, though he repeatedly stress that the time cost to find jobs in Delany is shorter. Time cannot be the valid evidence to illustrate Delany’s good services, and this is the fatal flaw of this memo.