argument149 NTU 站队

andycuiUID: 2132332

Argument 149:

149.The following is a memorandum from the director of personnel to the president of Get-Away Airlines.

"Since our mechanics are responsible for inspecting and maintaining our aircraft, Get-Away Airlines should pay to send them to the Quality-Care Seminar, a two-week seminar on proper maintenance procedures. I recommend this seminar because it is likely to be a wise investment, given that the automobile racing industry recently reported that the performance of its maintenance crews improved markedly after their crews had attended the seminar. These maintenance crews perform many of the same functions as do our mechanics, including refueling and repairing engines. The money we spend on sending our staff to the seminar will inevitably lead to improved maintenance and thus to greater customer satisfaction along with greater profits for our airline."
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Arguer asserts that Get-Away Airlines should send their mechanics to Quality-Care Seminar on maintenance in order to satisfy customers and thus increase profits. To support his assertion, he points out that mechanics from racing car industry who are performing similar functions have improved their performance much after the seminar. The assertion seems convincing and logical at the first glance. However, a careful examination reveals that it suffers from several fallacies which render it unpersuasive.

In the argument, the analogy that mechanics from airlines will benefit from the seminar because mechanics from racing car industry have improved the performance after that is invalid. From common sense, although racing car industry has many similarities with airplane industry, there are still huge gaps between them. In detail, airplane has much more complicated design and airplanes flying in the air will encounter different situations unlike cars which only race on land. So it has the possibility that the seminar only cover the maintenance concentrated on motion on land which will surely benefit mechanics from automobile industry. In that case, airplane engineers will not benefit much from the course. Before the arguer gets the hasty conclusion that the course is useful, he needs to research more on contents of the seminar in order to judge whether it can really help their mechanics.

Moreover, the correlation between improved maintenance and customer satisfaction needs to be further explored. Although the improved maintenance will raise the quality of service, to satisfy customers, other factors are also important. To be more specific, the quality of service in the air, ticket booking system and insurance scheme play significant roles for satisfying customers. For this reason, the arguer should take care of these factors and when the quality of these services becomes better, customer satisfaction will be achieved.

In arguer's conclusion, he believes that greater profits will come together with greater customer satisfaction. The conclusion lacks of evidence to support and sometimes greater customer satisfaction will not bring more profits. It could be the scenario that the cost for greater customer satisfaction is increased so that the price of ticket is higher than other airlines. For short journeys, some people will choose airlines with low price although the service is not very good because for them, it is not wisdom to spend so much to have better service for just several hours in the air. In order to have greater profits, airlines need to pay attention to lowering the cost as well as marketing to promote sales.

To sum up, the argument lacks credibility as analyzed above. In order to be more convincing, the arguer should elaborate more on details of the course so that people will believe the seminar can also help mechanics from airplane industry. In addition, the arguer needs to find supports and evidences to show that improved maintenance and other services can bring the customer satisfaction and airlines are competitive in price and service to attract more customers.  
--------------------------------------------------------
welcome for comments.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-30 at 14:49 ]

bayern_scienceUID: 2102974

The Arguer asserts that Get-Away Airlines should send their mechanics to Quality-Care Seminar on maintenance in order to satisfy customers and thus increase profits. To support his assertion, he points out that mechanics from racing car industry who are performing similar functions have improved their performance much after the seminar. The assertion seems convincing and logical at the first glance. However, a careful examination reveals that it suffers from several fallacies which render it unpersuasive. (New Oriental's opening? Personally I don't like it because it is prolix and takes much time. But if you are comfortable with it. Go ahead!)

In the argument, the analogy that mechanics from airlines will benefit from the seminar because mechanics from racing car industry have improved the performance after that is invalid.(You'd better be not so assertive here. I think "open to question/doubtful" is more appropriate) From common sense, although racing car industry has many similarities with airplane industry, there are still huge gaps(I prefer "hiatus". Check the Red Bible) between them. In detail, airplane has much more complicated design(structure) and airplanes flying in the air(better use "on flight") will encounter different situations unlike(better use "from those of") cars which only race on land. So it has the possibility("So it is possible that") that the seminar only cover the maintenance concentrated(no need to put "concentrated" here) on motions on land which will surely benefit mechanics from automobile industry. In that case, airplane engineers will not benefit much from the course. Before the arguer gets the hasty conclusion that the course is useful, he needs to research more on the contents of the seminar in order to judge whether it can really help their mechanics.(I think it is better to talk something more about the relation between the situations encountered by airplanes from those of cars and the difference in maintenance work since the link between them is, in my opinion, not so obvious.)

Moreover, the correlation between improved(delete "improved") maintenance and customer satisfaction needs to be further explored(established). Although the improved maintenance will raise the quality of service, to satisfy customers, other factors are also important. To be more specific, the quality of service in the air, ticket booking system and insurance scheme play significant roles for satisfying customers. For this reason, the arguer should take care of these factors and when the quality of these services becomes better, customer satisfaction will be achieved.(You'd better mention specifically in what scenario the improved maintenance work lead to greater satisfaction and in what scenario, it does not. Of course there are other factors that have some bearing on the customer satisfaction. But it is ENTIRELY possible that ALL of them contribute to greater satisfaction.)

In arguer's conclusion, he believes that greater profits will come together with greater customer satisfaction. The conclusion lacks of evidence to support(supportive evidence) and(-->since) sometimes greater customer satisfaction will not bring more profits. It could be the scenario(-->the case) that the cost for greater(-->improving) customer satisfaction is increased so that the price of ticket is higher than other airlines. For short journeys, some people will choose airlines with low price although the service is not very good because for them, it is not wisdom to spend so much to have better service for just several hours in the air(but what if ppl are rich say Americans.To decide which airline, Air China or Southern China Airline, they may, by common sense pay more attention to service quality). In order to have greater profits, airlines need to pay attention to lowering the cost as well as marketing to promote sales. (You mean the customer satisfaction is second to cost control and marketing? That would be controversial. So be careful in opining your proposition!)

To sum up, the argument lacks credibility as analyzed above. In order to be more convincing, the arguer should elaborate more on details of the course so that people will believe the seminar can also help mechanics from airplane industry. In addition, the arguer needs to find supports and evidences to show that improved maintenance and other services(and other service? No, you'd better cross it over) can bring the customer satisfaction and airlines are competitive in price and service to attract more customers. (Good conclusion!)

bayern_scienceUID: 2102974

It is very difficult to produce a critic that is better reasoned than the original argument!

Better revise it again!