The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a large, highly diversified company.
"Ten years ago our company had two new office buildings constructed as regional headquarters for two regions. The buildings were erected by different construction companies—Alpha and Zeta. Although the two buildings had identical floor plans, the building constructed by Zeta cost 30 percent more to build. However, that building'sepenses for maintenance last year were only half those of Alpha's. In addition, the energy consumption of the Zeta building has been lower than that of the Alpha building every year since its construction. Given these data, plus the fact that Zeta has a stable workforce with little employee turnover, we recommend using Zeta rather than Alpha for our new building project, even though Alpha's bid promises lower construction costs."
Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The argument recommends that the floor that Zeta company build is usually cost-effective and it has stable workforce. A casual reading of recommendation seems convinceing, but a careful inspection leads to some loopholes in the argument since the author ignores other interpretations of the assumeptions and the evidence given.
First, the author claimed that Zeta compan cost thirty percent more than Alpha's company for constructing similar building. However, the argument does not specifiy the general struacture of the buildings which Zeta company and Alpha company construct. If two buildings structure were almost identical, it would be the Zeta company's strategy to lower the price for marketing. Furthermore, Although the construction of a building is attributable to the energy consumption of the building, the number of people working in the building and the efficiency of their work are also contributes to the energy consumption. Author need to be explicit about nummber of people working in the premise and how efficiency their work is.If there were more peole working in the building constructed by Alpha's company, the energy consumption would be higher in the building. And also supposing number of people working in the premises were same, if people working in the the building constructed by Zeta company were more aware of efficiently consuming energy, the general energy consumption would, indeed, be lower.
Second, the recommendation indicates the fact that Zeta company has a stable workforce comparing to Alpha's company. However, the argument does not provide any convincing evidence or specify the reason. Zeta company might have stable workforce temporarily. The author should focus on their long-term stability, as well as financial situation, which is the main reason that cause the unstability. If Zeta's company were only stable for short-term, its workforce might be unstable during construction for any unforseen circumstances. Furthermore, it is likely that Alpha's company has trouble in their tight budget that causes unstable workforce, but from long-term prospective, it might have the capability of dealing the situation quickly, which would be more advantageous during the consrtucation.
In conclusion, the argument is mostly based on unproven assumptions and unconvincing evidence and consequently does not form a solid ground for recommendation.
Sentence: The author should focus on their long-term stability, as well as financial situation, which is the main reason that cause the unstability.
Description: The fragment that cause the is rare
Suggestion: Possible agreement error: Replace cause with verb, past tense
Sentence: A casual reading of recommendation seems convinceing, but a careful inspection leads to some loopholes in the argument since the author ignores other interpretations of the assumeptions and the evidence given.
Error: convinceing Suggestion: convincing
Error: assumeptions Suggestion: assumptions
Sentence: First, the author claimed that Zeta compan cost thirty percent more than Alpha's company for constructing similar building.
Error: compan Suggestion: company
Sentence: However, the argument does not specifiy the general struacture of the buildings which Zeta company and Alpha company construct.
Error: specifiy Suggestion: specific
Error: struacture Suggestion: structure
Sentence: Author need to be explicit about nummber of people working in the premise and how efficiency their work is.If there were more peole working in the building constructed by Alpha's company, the energy consumption would be higher in the building.
Error: nummber Suggestion: number
Error: peole Suggestion: people
Sentence: Furthermore, it is likely that Alpha's company has trouble in their tight budget that causes unstable workforce, but from long-term prospective, it might have the capability of dealing the situation quickly, which would be more advantageous during the consrtucation.
Error: consrtucation Suggestion: construction
flaws:
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
Attribute Value Ideal
Score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 1 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 9 2
No. of Sentences: 15 15
No. of Words: 362 350
No. of Characters: 1989 1500
No. of Different Words: 169 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.362 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.494 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.001 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 161 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 124 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 86 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 63 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 24.133 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 10.099 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.867 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.383 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.582 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.121 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 4 5