argument117 [Jet小组]第九次作业

x6xUID: 2180130

Argument117.The following is a memo from the business manager of Valu-Mart stores.

"Over 70 percent of the respondents to a recent survey reported that they are required to take more work home with them from the workplace than they were in the past. Since Valu-Mart has not seen impressive sales in its office-supply departments in the past, we should take advantage of this work-at-home trend by increasing at all Valu-Mart stores the stock of home office machines such as printers, small copy machines, paper shredders, and fax machines. We will also increase stock of office supplies such as paper, pens, and staplers. With these changes, our office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of our stores."

最近一次调查超过70％的回应者报告说他们被要求回家完成的工作量比 以前多。由于Valu-Mart在过去并没有发现办公用品部销量的显著上升，我们应该利用这种在家办公的趋势，在所有Valu-Mart商店增加家庭办公 机器比如打印机、小型复印机、碎纸机和传真机的存货。我们也将增加办公用品比如纸笔和钉书机的存货。通过这些变革，我们办公用品部将会成为我们商店中盈利 最多的部门。





提纲：
1.调查的普遍性、随机性、时效性
2.推不出：回家工作量多—X—>家用办公用品需求多
3.证据缺失：忽略了竞争
4.以偏概全：“盈利最多的部门”
5.错误概念 销量增加=/=利润增加




WORDS:523  TIME:60min  DATE:20/02/2008

In the memo, the business manager suggested to increase stock of office supplies and asserted that they will become the most profitable component of our stores. At first glance, this opinion seems to be somewhat convincing, but further reflection tells me that I cannot agree with it for the following reasons.

To begin with, information about the suvey's catholicity, randomicity and timeliness is not available. We just know more than 70 percent of the respondents hold similar opinion, but are aware of nothing about how many people engage in this survey, what's the constitute of the informant, and whether the result last for a long time. Firstly, suppose there are 100,000 office clerks in the local place, but only 100 staffs were investigated. Then over 70 informants share opinions. Whereas, relative to total quantity of 100,000, base number of 100 is too few, so the result will be free from persuasive.  Secondly, if investigator make inquiries just in one company, the result also losses representational meaning. The incremental requirements of Company A cannot assure the increasing demands of the whole market. Company A may encounter a huge business recently, but other companies may run into depression and even want to decrease the stocks of office commodities. Thirdly, the market is full of changes, staffs may just have more work home recently. After Valu-Mart changes selling policy, they may have no work home at all.

In addition, there exists a non-causal relationship -  more work home does not necessarily mean more needs on office-supply departments. In fact, more work home may cause voluntary overtime, less rest time or less dinner-making time. It may follows the increasing needs of fast food, instead of more office-supply departments. People may choose to do their works on computers and leave over the printing work in the office the next day. As a result, the demands of printers, small copy machines, paper shredders don't rise as the manager imagined.

Besides, the manager was ignorant of the competition of other office-supply stores. The manage didn't mention whether the result of the survey was hold only by Valu-Mart or acknowledged by the whole market. It followed that competitors will also change their selling policies. If one other company sells the same goods with lower prices, the increasing demands will mostly flow to that company.  

Furthermore, the manage seems easy to get a hasty conclusion. Selling conditions of other departments is not provided, so it's dogmatical to conclude that office-supply departments will become the most profitable component of all stores. Other departments may also meet developing opportunities and win a lot of extra profits. Since so many significant facts are not available, the conclusion is cursory.

What's more, inconsistent conclusion and extension exits - the increase of sale amount is not equal to the increase of profits. It is possible that facing fierce competitions, Valu-Mart have to drop the prices in order to increase sale amount. Therefore, it may not achieve remarkable increase of profit.

In sum, this is a weak argument. The statement given merely scratches the surface of what must be said about whether to increase stock of office supplies.





[ 本帖最后由 x6x 于 2008-2-20 22:55 编辑 ]