Cot-Ten, a cotton production company, has recently faced profitability issues based on the use of
Chemical X in its manufacturing process. The main by-product produced when using Chemical X is
covered under stringent environmental regulations, making it very difficult and expensive to dispose of. A
similar processing product, Chemical Y, has recently been discovered, and can be used by Cot-Ten at a
minimal cost of switching. The CEO of Cot-Ten has declared that the company will increase profits by
switching to Chemical Y by the end of the month.
Cot-Ten is looking to improve its profitability by addressing the issues it has faced due to using Chemical X. There are several questions that must be addressed before confirming that switching to Chemical Y will resolve these issues.
First, this argument mentions that Chemical Y has “recently been discovered”. This could mean that the governing bodies that imposed regulations on the use of Chemical X may or may not have had the opportunity to evaluate Chemical Y yet. If the enviornmental regulations imposed on Chemical X are the main reason that it is prohibitively expensive and Chemical Y is a similar compound, how do we know that there won’t be similar regulations handed down regarding the use of Chemical Y? If Cot-Ten were to dedicate the resources to switching to Chemical Y only to face comprable challenges in the future, the ultimate cost of switching to Chemical Y could be higher than if Cot-Ten simply continued using Chemical X. Cot-Ten’s consumers could also be wary to purchase a product that is processed with a new, possibly unknown chemical. If consumers hesitate to purchase from Cot-Ten, there could be a decrease in revenue for this reason.
Additionally, this argument only states that Chemical Y is “a similar processing product” to Chemical X. Two similar products do not necessarily have the same effects or require the same level and process of usage. Without more information about exactly how Chemical Y would function in the place of Chemical X, it is impossible to fully evaluate the decision to switch. Perhaps Cot-Ten would actually have to use significantly more Chemical Y than Chemical X to achieve the same product, making the switch more expensive. Perhaps Chemical Y will create a product with slightly different qualities than the product created by Chemical X and Cot-Ten’s consumers will not want to purchase the new product.
This argument also notes that the cost of switching to use Chemical Y will be minimal, but does not indicate the ongoing cost of purchasing Chemical Y will be in comparison to the cost of purchasing Chemical X. As stated before, we also do not know if the amount of Chemical Y will needed will be equal to the amount of Chemical X Cot-Ten uses. Cot-Ten needs to obtain these two specific pieces of information in order to calculate the actual, recurring cost of using Chemical Y. If Chemical Y costs the same as Chemical X, but has to be used in a higher volume, the switch will be more expensive. If Chemical Y costs more than Chemical X but requires smaller quantities, then the switch could cost a comparable amount.
The CEO of Cot-Ten may also wish to consider the current climate of consumers demanding ethical practices and transparency of companies. Though this sentiment is perhaps harder to quantify, Cot-Ten could, through a survey, evaluate whether its consumers would increase their brand loyalty in response to Cot-Ten taking actions that the public perceives to be eco-conscious. Cot-Ten may not need to cut production costs if they can instead increase revenue. Consumers may respond positively to Cot-Ten committing to using Chemical X as outlined in the environmental regulations rather than switching to a new and unknown chemical. If so, the solution to this quandry may lie with Cot-Ten’s marketing department, rather than the production line.
Ultimately the CEO’s instinct to substitute a less regulated chemical in order to increase profits by saving on costs is an understandable one, but there are a number of questions that need to be considered before Cot-Ten moves forward. Researching the questions raised above could help Cot-Ten forestall unintended consequences of an ill-conceived decision.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2021-12-13 | goqvgpcmidkhqgjsry | 73 | view |
| 2020-11-16 | bubble tea | 66 | view |
Comments
e-rater score report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 4.5 out of 6
Category: Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 10 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 6 2
No. of Sentences: 20 15
No. of Words: 609 350
No. of Characters: 3037 1500
No. of Different Words: 250 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.968 4.7
Average Word Length: 4.987 4.6
Word Length SD: 2.874 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 242 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 203 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 144 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 76 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 30.45 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 17.554 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.7 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.411 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.63 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.196 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 6 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 835, Rule ID: ENGLISH_WORD_REPEAT_BEGINNING_RULE
Message: Three successive sentences begin with the same word. Reword the sentence or use a thesaurus to find a synonym.
... with a new, possibly unknown chemical. If consumers hesitate to purchase from Cot...
^^
Line 5, column 105, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...milar processing product” to Chemical X. Two similar products do not necessarily ...
^^
Line 7, column 211, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...on to the cost of purchasing Chemical X. As stated before, we also do not know if...
^^
Line 7, column 284, Rule ID: DID_BASEFORM[1]
Message: The verb 'will' requires the base form of the verb: 'need'
Suggestion: need
...t know if the amount of Chemical Y will needed will be equal to the amount of Chemical...
^^^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
actually, also, but, first, if, look, may, regarding, so, then, as to
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 25.0 19.6327345309 127% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 28.0 12.9520958084 216% => Less auxiliary verb wanted.
Conjunction : 12.0 11.1786427146 107% => OK
Relative clauses : 12.0 13.6137724551 88% => OK
Pronoun: 30.0 28.8173652695 104% => OK
Preposition: 80.0 55.5748502994 144% => OK
Nominalization: 11.0 16.3942115768 67% => OK
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 3129.0 2260.96107784 138% => OK
No of words: 608.0 441.139720559 138% => Less content wanted.
Chars per words: 5.14638157895 5.12650576532 100% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.9656475924 4.56307096286 109% => OK
Word Length SD: 2.9700172248 2.78398813304 107% => OK
Unique words: 260.0 204.123752495 127% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.427631578947 0.468620217663 91% => More unique words wanted or less content wanted.
syllable_count: 984.6 705.55239521 140% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.6 1.59920159681 100% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 6.0 4.96107784431 121% => OK
Article: 4.0 8.76447105788 46% => OK
Subordination: 8.0 2.70958083832 295% => Less adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 3.0 1.67365269461 179% => OK
Preposition: 2.0 4.22255489022 47% => More preposition wanted as sentence beginning.
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 25.0 19.7664670659 126% => OK
Sentence length: 24.0 22.8473053892 105% => OK
Sentence length SD: 48.7718935454 57.8364921388 84% => OK
Chars per sentence: 125.16 119.503703932 105% => OK
Words per sentence: 24.32 23.324526521 104% => OK
Discourse Markers: 2.76 5.70786347227 48% => More transition words/phrases wanted.
Paragraphs: 6.0 5.15768463074 116% => OK
Language errors: 4.0 5.25449101796 76% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 5.0 6.88822355289 73% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 8.0 4.67664670659 171% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.369343048461 0.218282227539 169% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.137472187151 0.0743258471296 185% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.0729413598871 0.0701772020484 104% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.224690099534 0.128457276422 175% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.0685629678528 0.0628817314937 109% => OK
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 15.0 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 47.12 48.3550499002 97% => OK
smog_index: 8.8 7.1628742515 123% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 12.7 12.197005988 104% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 12.89 12.5979740519 102% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.67 8.32208582834 104% => OK
difficult_words: 148.0 98.500998004 150% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 11.5 12.3882235529 93% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.6 11.1389221557 104% => OK
text_standard: 13.0 11.9071856287 109% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Write the essay in 30 minutes.
Rates: 66.67 out of 100
Scores by essay e-grader: 4.0 Out of 6
---------------------
Note: the e-grader does NOT examine the meaning of words and ideas. VIP users will receive further evaluations by advanced module of e-grader and human graders.