求助

shawn2700

写了篇作文，中介老师给打了2.5分，这个郁闷啊，索性又写了一篇，请各位神牛们给修改一下，指出些修改意见，小弟不甚感激。

The following appeared in a memorandum from the business department of the Apogee Company:

“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.”

Discuss how well reasoned … etc.



The argument that the Apogee Company should close down its field offices or conduct all its operations from a single location omits some crucial concerns. To support the argument, the author indicates that the company is not as profitable as it was and the centralization of all operations will improve the profitability of the company by cutting down costs. With some important concerns omitted, this argument is not convincing.





Firstly, the author asserts that the Apogee Company should close down its field offices or conduct all its operations from a single location and thus will cut the costs and improve the company’s profitability. The author draws this conclusion by assuming that these field offices are not necessary or their work can be done anywhere. However, if the field offices are marketing management centers or product fixing centers which are crucial to the company’s market share and must be found at the places determined by the aimed consumers, the shutdown or the centralization of these field offices will lead the company to loose even more in profit. These marketing management centers and product fixing centers are necessary to the company because the marketing management centers can help the company known what kind of product the local consumers want and the product fixing centers can help to attract the consumers by provide convenient fixing for product which stopped working. Secondly, even though these field offices can be centralized to the location of the headquarters of the company, the centralization may not necessarily improve the supervision or profitability, because with an oversized organization, the manager may find it difficult to assure the organization work smoothly, not even to say a better supervision or an improved profitability. Finally, the argument does not refer the reasons why the company is not as profitable as it was before. The company is not such profitable may because of its outdated product, poor management or even a worldwide depression of the economy, with which the centralization of the offices may not help to increase the profitability as expected. The centralization can be even devastating to the company’s future when the company is investing large amount of money and trying to expand its market by locating its field offices all over the world, though the investment has made the company seem less profitable.



Because the argument leaves out several key concerns, it is not persuasive. If the author provides profound evidences that demonstrate these field offices are not necessary or their work can be done anywhere and discusses in detail how the centralization of the operations works to decrease the unnecessary costs, the statement can seems more convincing.

shawn2700

木有人会啊，自己顶个！