10 argu 186.。。 真的越写越烂了

raisebenUID: 2867978

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: 496
TIME: 01:32:37
DATE: 2011/2/12 20:24:31

The argument appears to be convincing at the first glance. The arguer asserts that the Professional Printing Company can enhance their productivity and save money by a way of hiring mainly older employees owing to the reduced cost for supervisors. The conclusion results from the survey, conducted by an automobile factory that older employees are less likely to report that having a supervisor present increases their productivity. The study also shows that the young person would have good performances in productivity. Several logical flaws, however, make it unstable as it stands.
To begin with, this argument does not give an explanation for the possibility that the survey samples themselves are flawed. There is no information given about how many factory workers are surveyed, the proportion of older workers at the whole factory and whether the respondents express their inner realities. Statistically speaking, it is entirely possible that only small part of the employees are surveys so that those surveyed cannot be representative of the staff, or most of the older workers are not willing to respond to these question, as a result we cannot guarantee the reliability of the proportion. Without ruling out all the possibilities, the author cannot draw any firm conclusion.
In addition, the writer indicates that young workers do much better than older people in productivity, but the comparison between them is imperfect. According to the recommendation presented, the author does not clearly point out what is productive for young workers and old ones respective. Perhaps young workers' productivities in the presence of their immediate supervisors are much higher than older ones under no supervisor. Without taking into account all these existing factors, the proposal might be rather unconvincing.
Last but not least, even if the survey of automobile factory workers could be reliable, there is no assurance that survey will just work as well in Professional Printing Company. Yet this argument fails to take into consideration other possible reasons for the disparity between two different companies in the mode of production, various requirements for employees and other environmental variables. Common sense tells us that automobile factory need more workers that have more accumulated experiences at work, therefore, more old workers are required to increase its productivities. Similarly, in the printing company, there must be plenty of physical work, which young people are good at. If PPC provides more offers to older people, productivity may be not increased. So we cannot safely assumes that the printing company will increase productivity and save money by hiring older people because the author gives no basis for a direct comparison between the two companies, but his personal ideas.
In short, the evidence provided by the author is too vague to be either well-argued or revealing. The arguer fails to build any relationship between the printing company and the automobile factory. To make his assumption cogent, more comprehensive surveys should be made in Professional Printing Company, and more data need to be given to demonstrate his indication.