The following appeared as part of an article in a business magazine."A recent study rating 300 male and female Mentian advertising executives according to the average number of hours they sleep per night showed an association between the amount of sl

The prompt recommends the recruitment of people who need 6 or less than 6 hours of sleep in order to ensure a business prosperity. To support the claim, it points out to the results obtained in study conducted lately which showed that executives of those businesses who sleep for 6 or less than 6 hours are boon for business. The claim’s chain of reasoning seems true at first sight, however, it is based on certain unwarranted assumption about the relationship between sleep and business prosperity. Therefore, in order to better evaluate the claim and analyse its logical soundness, additional explanation is required to examine the assumptions that are foundational to the line of reasoning.

First of all, are results of these 300 people comparable to other employees of a business? In other words, it is assumed that study of these 300 advertising executives are tenable for all other types of employees working in an organization. However, it may not be the case since every business has different departments and divisions, thus it requires people with different behavioural attributes. For example, a company such as Disney may not require its employees to concentrate on 6 or less than 6 hours of sleep since its advertisements are all online or through other digital channels, thus it is not required by its employees to spend extra working hours charting out door to door advertising campaigns. Further, every business is different from the other one, thus require varying amount of working hours. For example, a business concentrated on managing database of small business houses may not require its employees to put in extra working hours since they work on repetitive things and use technical tools to complete the work on time, thus it can be managed smoothly without putting in extra efforts. Therefore, without considering these details, the recommendation remains unsupported.

Secondly, are people sleeping for less than 6 hours contribute to success of a business? In other words, it is assumed that employees who sleep for less than 6 hours are actually utilising their time towards success of a business. However, it may be spurious since the research has shown that young graduates who join companies are willing to spend extra hours in office, thus making their sleeping hours less than 6, are those preparing for entrance exams for further studies but not for working towards the success of a business. Further, what and how the study covered may have an impact on the results. For example, it may find that study covered interview questions on number of sleeping hours necessary for employees of a big firm when the top management of companies were also present along with candidates, thus it may have the potential for the candidates to lie or misrepresent the facts lest would make employers cautious about the performance or intention of candidates. Therefore, unless the scope of study is not comprehensive, it cannot be used to support the claim.

Finally, are results of recent study tenable? In other words, it is assumed that this recent study explains the significant relation between sleeping hours and success of a business. However, it may find that earlier studies that were conducted with the same objective concluded that each employee should sleep for at least 7-8 hours as recommended by the medical professionals, otherwise it would impact the health and well-being of employees, thus, would have negative consequences on the performance of a business. Further, the study concluded that the business prosperity means profit margins and growth, though, it may find that businesses such as those based on engineering or IT solutions that are in start-up stage are focussed not on profit but on innovative ideas for making new products and services, thus required its employees to have recommended sleep of 7-8 hours in order to use their cognitive abilities to its optimum level. Therefore, until these unstated assumptions are verified, the argument is significantly weakened.

While concluding, the lack of comprehensive chain of reasoning, the recommendation as it stands now is considerably flawed. If it offers more evidence perhaps in the form of thoroughgoing study covering what type of employees are required for a business, employees intention for staying in the office beyond normal working hours and what constitutes prosperity for a business, then it will be possible to fully evaluate the viability of the claim.