argument180 [Jet小组]第十六次作业

x6xUID: 2180130

急！就要考了，JMXD们赐教啊！

TOPIC: ARGUMENT180 - The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee-a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
WORDS:597         TIME:          DATE: 2008-3-4 23:16:45

The director asserts that Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course. At first glance, this opinion seems to be somewhat convincing. However, further reflections tell me that I cannot agree with it for the following reasons.

To begin with, the example of the two graduates are not persuasive in proving that joining the course will improve productivity. Firstly, most results of the students taking the course are not available. The progress of just two students cannot represent the general consequences. It is possible that except for a small group of students like the two graduates, other students achieve no improvement. However, companies may just tell good results to the public but avoid mentioning those more bad ones. Secondly, for the graduate who was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours, what on earth did he or she read about? If the contents of the report were in the form of images or photos, it even seems to be a easy job to finish reading it within two hours. Thirdly, as regards to the graduate who rose from an assistant manager to vice president in under a year, we couldn't help questioning - Was there any other factors that also determine the promotion? In fact, he or she may be just a relative of the chairman. Since evidences proving causal relationships between promotion and the course are missed, we cannot safely believe the function of the course described by the director.

In addition, false analogy exists - for different companies, staffs and jobs, the course cannot always be effective. Firstly, it is possible that the staffs in Acme have mastered perfect reading skills, then requiring them to take the course will seem to be nothing more than waste of money. Secondly, different posts emphasize particularly on different working skills. For jobs such as logistics, printing and so on, there are fewer needs to improving reading speed.      

Besides, there is a non-casual relationship between benefiting from the course and taking the course. Even if the course is rather effective, it is not necessary for all staffs to join it. Some staffs may already have done well in reading, and some jobs require anything but swift reading. The director seems easy to get a hasty conclusion, what he should indicate is that the employees engaging collecting materials, witting, editing, checking, designing format and so on, had better join the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course in order to work more efficiently.

What's more, the cost of taking the course for each staff is much more than just $500, for during the time of three-week seminar, staffs could originally produce a large amount of value. The director is so careless to ignore the opportunity cost of taking the course. In fact, when chances to attend a long-time seminar appears, which can be even called an vacation, few staffs will refuse to join it. Then, since the they choose to attend it, the work planed will be laid aside. If the effect of the seminar cannot be assured, requiring all employees to take the course will even harm the productivity.

In sum, the director’s claim is not as persuasive as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, he/she would have to show stronger evidence in proving joining the course will indeed improve productivity. Additionally, the director must make the president who will read the recommendation assure that it will remain effective for Acme Publishing Company. Only with more convincing evidence could this argument become more than just an emotional appeal.