ARGU241

civilppUID: 2999177

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: 416
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2011/2/15 16:26:42

This argument seems well-presented, but actually suffers from several flaws. In this argument, the author claims that the XYZ company should continue to use Delany Personnel Firm instead of the less-expensive Walsh Personnel Firm to offer the employees in creating resumes and developing interviewing skills. To support his recommendation, the author compare the two company in how long the time of laid-off workers who found job after being offered with each assistance is. The author also claims that the Delany has more staff and branch offices and the Delany's client took relatively less time than Walsh's clients to find jobs.

To start with, the author unfairly assumes that the clients of Delany can find jobs more quickly than clients in Walsh do. However, only based on the fact that only half of the laid-off workers found jobs within a year when XYZ was using Walsh eight years ago cannot indicate Walsh is incompatible with Delany. First, we are not informed of how many of the laid of the workers enrolled in the Walsh at that time, so we can not judge the quality of service in Walsh. Second, even if all the laid-off workers participated in the Walsh, the author provide no evidence of whether Walsh has improved its quality of service during eight years, so we can not conclude Walsh still has low quality of service.
Secondly, the author's conclusion that Delany is worthy of investment based on the unwarrented assumption that the superiority of Delany is worthwhile. There's no information about the condition in last years is typical of all the other years, perhaps Delany's clients took more time than Walsh's clients in the other years. Only based on this case, we cannot conclude Delany is better than Walsh. Since no clear evidence show the exact cost of the bigger staff and larger number of branch office in Delany, Delany may not necessarily cost such money more than Walsh do. What's more, the larger number of branch offices and bigger staff may not suffice to a better quality of service. Perhaps it may be the result of overthrift management. Without ruling out these factors, I cannot be convinced that XYZ should continue to use Delany.
In sum, the author should provide more information about whether Walsh has improved over 8 years and the proportion of laid-off workers participated in Walsh. To better evaluate the recommendation, I would need more evidence of the cost of branch offices and staff, and comparison of two companies in other years.

long999UID: 3009171

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."



In this memo,the speaker concludes that Delany peforms better in offering employees effective assistance to find a satisfied job,which the XYZ conpany will be reasonable to
use.To support the conclusion,the speaker cites that last year, it was quicker to find a job than using Walsh ,and point out the advantage of Delany's bigger staff and larger number of branch offices .Although the reasons seem to appealing,we can find a series of unconvinced assumption in the argument.  

First,the author unfairly assumes a major premise that Personal Firm ,such as Delany ,is necessary in the procedure of haunting a job, but he does not provide any effective evidence to strengthen its convinction. According to the speaker,the conclusion is merely due to that those used Delany found jobs more quickly than the others last year. However, perhaps those ,who found jobs more quickly , extrmely need new job's salary to keep a fundmental life,and anxiously turn to a firm for help.Morever, the slowly ones may be more experienced and want a rarely satisfied one,which it is not very easy recently.So,the pace to found jobs is related to personal willings and needs,not essentially a help from Delany.So,the speaker must rule out all other feasible reasons for the disparity to show the personal firm really quick the pace of haunting a job.

Another problems undermines the argument is that,even Delany is benefited,the speaker unfairly assumes that Walsh is ineffecient in finding jobs,comparing to Delany.The mere facts that Walsh only help half of the workers find a job eight years ago can not indicate that Walsh is not as perfect as Delany with bigger staff and larger number of branch offices.Perhaps,the trend in 8 years ago might be an berration that's different from trends in all the other years later.As a resualt,the nationwide trends will soon reverse and don not follow the report's resualt any more.Moreover,the bigger staff and lager number of branch offices may lead to a ineffecient orgnazation and to the much increasing cost,when selecting Delany is not a wise way.Without thinking these possibilities,it is unfair to conclude Delany is better than Walsh.

Finaly,even Delany is much effecient than Walsh,we can not conclude it is both necessary and sufficient for this purpose.The arguments lack enough evidence to prove the assumption.It is entirly possible that other alternative personal firms are better choices than both Delany and Welsh for solving the employee's problems.Or even some government departments will contribute more help to find a job.Thus,to some extent,the author's recommendation is unwarranted.

To sum up,as it stands the argument is wholly unpersuasive.To bolster this conclusion the
author must show that Delany offer real useful measures to quick the pace of finding a job.To better assess the conclusion,we would need more detail that Delany is much valid than others.

long999UID: 3009171

我是纯新手 第一篇 ，希望你能提些意见~

civilppUID: 2999177

[b] [url=https://bbs.gter.net/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=
第一个理由的开头容易让人误解成是证明necessary 的问题而不是证明因果问题 可以再重新组织下语言
还有语法错误你可以再检查下
另外就是拼写错误 可以先拿到word文档里改一改 有好几处哈
其他都很有条理 比较清晰 作为新手真的很不错~