- UID
- 819067
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2012-10-16
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
69. 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's expenses 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.
In the memo, the vice president recommends that the company should use Zeta rather than Alpha for our new building project. To support the recommendation, the author cites the following as evidence: (1) one example shows that the buildings built by Zeta has less expenses of maintenance and energy consumption even though the construction costs is higher; (2) Zeta has a stable workforce with little employee turnover. The argument seems to be well-presented and reasonable at first glance; however, I am afraid that it can hardly bear further consideration because there might be other multiple explanations to the evidence which leads the argument inconvincible and unsound.
First and foremost, author cites the data of expenses of building construction and maintenance of both companies, but he does not provide any information about the cities' situations and buildings themselves, such as the size and quality of building and the economic condition of two cities. As we know, even though the floor plans of two buildings are identical, there are many other factors that can decide the cost of building. For example, the building built with high qualified materials and refined decoration surely cost more than average one. Or consider another example: the building built by Alpha is eight-story and the five-story by Zeta; how can the author simply compare the cost and conclude that Zeta is better? Moreover, the factors of local economic situation, such as the average wage of workers, the cost of materials, the expenses of transportation and ect, decides the cost of building in a great extent. So, without taking account of these factors, it is hasty to make the conclusion that Zeta is better only by comparing the costs.
Furthermore, the data of energy consumption cited by the author cannot be substantiated evidence without considering specific condition. It is not surprising that building built in a place where has a mild climate use lower energy for heating or cooling comparing to a place where the climate is extreme and changeable. Actually, the situation of climate is only one factor to influence the energy cost, more factors, such as the number of workers in the building, the local price of energy source, also heavily influence the cost of the energy consumption. Before comparing the energy consumption, the author should make surveys about these specific situations in order to make a rational conclusion.
Last but not the least, the author cites that Zeta has a stable workforce with little employee turnover in order to show the stability and reliability of the company. However, this fact solely cannot be sufficient evidence. Little employee turnover could be a result of stability of company, but it can also result from the lack of innovation and competition in the company according to the different situations. To prove the reliability of the company, the author should investigate the level of management, corporate reputation, quality assurance and after-sale service of the company.
To sum up, after pointing out so many obvious flaws in the argument, we can say that the evidence cited by the author can hardly be relied on. Before reaching a final conclusion, the author should make comprehensive investigation of the two buildings and specific situations of two cities in the example and conduct surveys to assess the efficiency of two construction companies. |
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2012-10-29 12:43:49
收藏
收藏
