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

This is an excerpt from the director of the Acme Publishing Company who cites the necessity of attendance in the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course for their employees to enhance their productivities based upon the series of reasons and samples from other companies. However, this recommendation cannot be accepted as it stands; whereas, it rests on a number of unsubstantiated presumptions, for the advocating of which there is not enough cogent evidence.

Firstly, the director fails to assure me about the accuracy of the samples, which presented in the memo. As it stated, there are two case-studies from the Speed-Reading Course, which have the improvement in there occupations, like being able to read 500 pages per hour or enhancing from an assistant manager to vice president of the company. However, there is no any concrete information and data about these samples' backgrounds, talents, and intelligences. Maybe, there are talented in the speed reading and this class does not present any vital role in their improvement. Moreover, the quantity of the case-study in this survey is doubtful, what is the ratio of the successful employees to hole, who participate in this class and bask form its benefit. In addition, even considering this course renders fundamental roles in the employees' productivities; is there any concrete clue to adhere this result will present the same out-come in the Acme's employees too?

Secondly, the assumption faces the shortcoming because of the scant evidence of the financial support of the Acme Company. The manager states the cost of which employee’s participation in this course will be 500$ for company, which can be disrespected due to its benefit. However, there is no any lucid schedule from the Acme's financial status. Maybe, they have another scheme for the company and there is not a monetary advocating for this investment. Moreover, as the result of the attending is obscure, it is not a respected clue to invest huge money for this scheme, which its failure can pave the path for knotty economic problems.

Finally, as it mentioned in the conclusion part, the director asking for all employees to participate in this course to enhance their productivity in the vocations; however, there are some doubt about the necessity of this class for all workers. Do all workers need this course? Or it is better to explain and ask in the other way; does this class have the same influence for the stuff manager and the floor-cleaner? The investment of the huge money for all workers seems as vague action with unwarranted results for all stuffs’ productivities.

To conclude, several facts do suggest, but only vaguely. The writer conclusion cannot be assumed to be accurate. In facts, the overlooking and over-presenting some significant points, which cited above put some doubts about the memo's accuracy.