When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would improve profitability by cutting costs and helping the company maintain better supervision of all employees.
The argument states that as per the memorandum from a business department of an organisation- In case when it has all its operations in one single location, it was more profitable than it is today. Thus, it argues that in order to improve its profitability (by cutting costs and improving better supervision of its employees), it should close down its field offices and should promote centralisation of all its operations to a single location. The argument is not based on proper evidence and reasoning. Thus, it is flawed, inconsistent, weak and unconvincing.
Firstly, the argument draws reasoning based on a piece of evidence from the past where it was working from a centralised location and was more profitable than it is today. This reasoning is incomplete as there could be various other factors like cheaper raw material, better output, favouring regulatory scenario etc. , which would have made it more profitable in past than today. Thus, in the absence of these data points, concluding that it was 'just' the centralisation of operations to be a responsible factor and generalising it in today's scenario is not a correct methodology. Author needs to analyse the role of centralisation keeping in mind all the other possible contributing factors for the observed results.
Secondly, the author does not do a very non-through analysis of the situation observed. The point here is, instead of analysing what is causing the profitability to be not so high as compared to past and considering all the possible factors like dis-satisfied workers, increased competition, poor quality of products etc. is just focusing on 'one' of the many possible factors. Also, keeping in mind its 21st century, in which world is highly connected and globalisation is playing a major role in the growth of economies and organisations, it is very likely that de-centralisation is a better technique than centralisation for Apogee(I am assuming here that Apogee is a Multi-National Organisation). Many organisation have used decentralisation as a core part of their growth strategy as it offers benefits such as better technology, cheaper labour, larger market to approach etc. Thus, in all probability centralisation is not going to lead any benefits for Apogee.
Thirdly, the argument fails to explain the reasoning behind how centralisation will lead to better supervision of all the employees which it considers as a major factor to improve profitability. It has been proven in various studies that centralisation leads to mismanagement of all employee as its a far big crowd the management has to take care off( No. of employee per manager is higher, thus he/she can't devote enough time to each member). De-centralisation solves this problem as it also decentralises the management layer. Thus, in the absence of any proper data, this reasoning is weak.
Thus, the argument sounds more like wishful thinking as compared to an evidence-based argument. Analysis of various factors mentioned above would help the reader to understand the reasoning better. However, due to lack, such factors have not been incorporated in the argument it right now weak and completely flawed.
| Post date | Users | Rates | Link to Content |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2019-11-01 | mayurgandhi25895 | 63 | view |
| 2019-09-22 | jain.tarash | 55 | view |
| 2019-08-11 | preetish | 77 | view |
| 2019-05-15 | Divyansh Gupta | 89 | view |
| 2019-02-26 | tushar.borad123 | 74 | view |
- When the Apogee Company had all its operations in one location, it was more profitable than it is today. Therefore, the Apogee Company should close down its field offices and conduct all its operations from a single location. Such centralization would imp 89
- The following appeared as part of an annual report sent to stockholders by Olympic Foods, a processor of frozenfoods:“Over time, the costs of processing go down because as organizations learn how to do things better, they becomemore efficient. In color 35
Comments
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 508 350
No. of Characters: 2595 1500
No. of Different Words: 239 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.748 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.108 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.183 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 189 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 147 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 107 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 71 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.737 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.498 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.318 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.535 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.07 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Essay evaluation report
Attribute Value Ideal
Final score: 5.0 out of 6
Category: Very Good Excellent
No. of Grammatical Errors: 0 2
No. of Spelling Errors: 0 2
No. of Sentences: 19 15
No. of Words: 508 350
No. of Characters: 2595 1500
No. of Different Words: 239 200
Fourth Root of Number of Words: 4.748 4.7
Average Word Length: 5.108 4.6
Word Length SD: 3.183 2.4
No. of Words greater than 5 chars: 189 100
No. of Words greater than 6 chars: 147 80
No. of Words greater than 7 chars: 107 40
No. of Words greater than 8 chars: 71 20
Use of Passive Voice (%): 0 0
Avg. Sentence Length: 26.737 21.0
Sentence Length SD: 13.498 7.5
Use of Discourse Markers (%): 0.737 0.12
Sentence-Text Coherence: 0.318 0.35
Sentence-Para Coherence: 0.535 0.50
Sentence-Sentence Coherence: 0.07 0.07
Number of Paragraphs: 5 5
Grammar and spelling errors:
Line 3, column 318, Rule ID: COMMA_PARENTHESIS_WHITESPACE
Message: Put a space after the comma, but not before the comma
Suggestion: ,
...tput, favouring regulatory scenario etc. , which would have made it more profita...
^^
Line 3, column 320, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
...ut, favouring regulatory scenario etc. , which would have made it more profitabl...
^^
Line 7, column 382, Rule ID: WHITESPACE_RULE
Message: Possible typo: you repeated a whitespace
Suggestion:
... one of the many possible factors. Also, keeping in mind its 21st century, in whi...
^^
Line 7, column 636, Rule ID: AM_I[1]
Message: Did you mean 'am I'?
Suggestion: am I
...chnique than centralisation for ApogeeI am assuming here that Apogee is a Multi-N...
^^
Line 8, column 47, Rule ID: MANY_NN[1]
Message: Possible agreement error. The noun organisation seems to be countable; consider using: 'Many organisations'.
Suggestion: Many organisations
...pogee is a Multi-National Organisation. Many organisation have used decentralisation as a core pa...
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Line 12, column 134, Rule ID: IT_IS[17]
Message: Did you mean 'it's' (='it is') instead of 'its' (possessive pronoun)?
Suggestion: it's; it is
...ads to mismanagement of all employee as its a far big crowd the management has to t...
^^^
Line 12, column 241, Rule ID: CANT[1]
Message: Did you mean 'can't' or 'cannot'?
Suggestion: can't; cannot
...oyee per manager is higher, thus he/she cant devote enough time to each member. De-c...
^^^^
Line 12, column 241, Rule ID: HE_VERB_AGR[1]
Message: The pronoun 'she' must be used with a third-person verb: 'cants'.
Suggestion: cants
...oyee per manager is higher, thus he/she cant devote enough time to each member. De-c...
^^^^
Transition Words or Phrases used:
also, but, first, firstly, however, second, secondly, so, third, thirdly, thus, as to, such as
Attributes: Values AverageValues Percentages(Values/AverageValues)% => Comments
Performance on Part of Speech:
To be verbs : 26.0 19.6327345309 132% => OK
Auxiliary verbs: 6.0 12.9520958084 46% => OK
Conjunction : 10.0 11.1786427146 89% => OK
Relative clauses : 11.0 13.6137724551 81% => OK
Pronoun: 37.0 28.8173652695 128% => Less pronouns wanted
Preposition: 68.0 55.5748502994 122% => OK
Nominalization: 35.0 16.3942115768 213% => Less nominalizations (nouns with a suffix like: tion ment ence ance) wanted.
Performance on vocabulary words:
No of characters: 2672.0 2260.96107784 118% => OK
No of words: 507.0 441.139720559 115% => OK
Chars per words: 5.27021696252 5.12650576532 103% => OK
Fourth root words length: 4.74517233601 4.56307096286 104% => OK
Word Length SD: 3.25295737191 2.78398813304 117% => OK
Unique words: 246.0 204.123752495 121% => OK
Unique words percentage: 0.485207100592 0.468620217663 104% => OK
syllable_count: 848.7 705.55239521 120% => OK
avg_syllables_per_word: 1.7 1.59920159681 106% => OK
A sentence (or a clause, phrase) starts by:
Pronoun: 9.0 4.96107784431 181% => OK
Article: 7.0 8.76447105788 80% => OK
Subordination: 0.0 2.70958083832 0% => More adverbial clause wanted.
Conjunction: 0.0 1.67365269461 0% => OK
Preposition: 6.0 4.22255489022 142% => OK
Performance on sentences:
How many sentences: 22.0 19.7664670659 111% => OK
Sentence length: 23.0 22.8473053892 101% => OK
Sentence length SD: 74.360760669 57.8364921388 129% => OK
Chars per sentence: 121.454545455 119.503703932 102% => OK
Words per sentence: 23.0454545455 23.324526521 99% => OK
Discourse Markers: 4.27272727273 5.70786347227 75% => OK
Paragraphs: 10.0 5.15768463074 194% => Less paragraphs wanted.
Language errors: 8.0 5.25449101796 152% => OK
Sentences with positive sentiment : 12.0 8.20758483034 146% => OK
Sentences with negative sentiment : 7.0 6.88822355289 102% => OK
Sentences with neutral sentiment: 3.0 4.67664670659 64% => OK
What are sentences with positive/Negative/neutral sentiment?
Coherence and Cohesion:
Essay topic to essay body coherence: 0.264894588196 0.218282227539 121% => OK
Sentence topic coherence: 0.069634853866 0.0743258471296 94% => OK
Sentence topic coherence SD: 0.112002810652 0.0701772020484 160% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence: 0.0987355247479 0.128457276422 77% => OK
Paragraph topic coherence SD: 0.128462317839 0.0628817314937 204% => More connections among paragraphs wanted.
Essay readability:
automated_readability_index: 14.9 14.3799401198 104% => OK
flesch_reading_ease: 39.67 48.3550499002 82% => OK
smog_index: 11.2 7.1628742515 156% => OK
flesch_kincaid_grade: 13.4 12.197005988 110% => OK
coleman_liau_index: 13.58 12.5979740519 108% => OK
dale_chall_readability_score: 8.61 8.32208582834 103% => OK
difficult_words: 123.0 98.500998004 125% => OK
linsear_write_formula: 12.0 12.3882235529 97% => OK
gunning_fog: 11.2 11.1389221557 101% => OK
text_standard: 12.0 11.9071856287 101% => OK
What are above readability scores?
---------------------
Maximum six paragraphs wanted.
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.