GRE Argument Topic 107

NOTE: The above topic has wording similar to Argument Tasks 72, 109 and 110 of this Website. However, if you read carefully you will notice that the topic and the task instructions are different. Hence, it is very important to read the topic as well as its instructions completely before you start to write your response.

Sample 1:

It appears that the vice president of the food distribution company has had a change of heart concerning his choice of pest control at the Palm City warehouse. The facts that he presents, on the surface, appear reasonable. Upon closer examination of the information in the recommendation, the reader may identify several questions that need answers before agreeing with the vice president.

The vice president should ask himself why he changed companies in the first place. Without more detailed information, one might assume that this vice president was dissatisfied with the service provided by Buzzoff in the Palm City location. Other, similar businesses may have recommended Fly Away as an alternative, and this vice president, seeing the reduction in price, may have accepted the recommendation without carefully examining Fly Away's record of performance. The storage company has several other locations in addition to those in Palm City and Wintervale. Which pest control companies provide services for those warehouses? How successful are they at preventing losses? If Buzzoff successfully prevents pest damage in these other locations, the company would be advised to rehire them in Palm City. It may be that the warehouse company uses one or more other companies altogether. Answers to these questions may provide evidence that the vice president's recommendation is correct, or they may show that another company altogether would be a better candidate for pest control at Palm City.

How does last month's $20,000 loss compare to losses from prior months or the same month in previous years at the Palm City location? If it is significantly higher than the average of losses in the past, the warehouse company may be justified in making the recommendation to return to Buzzoff's service. If the figure represents an average loss for that month, however, the $20,000 figure becomes irrelevant to the argument and recommendation. The same scrutiny should be applied to the Wintervale loss of product. Is a $10,000 loss typical, lower than average, or higher than average? In order for the comparison between the two locations to be valid, these questions must be answered. Is the $20,000 loss significant at all? If the company stores 2 million dollars’ worth of food in Palm City, the loss is only 1%. How much product is stored at each of the two facilities? If both warehouses have product with the same dollar value, then Palm City has lost twice as much as Wintervale to pest damage during the same period of time, a fact that would lead to further scrutiny of both pest control companies' practices. If Wintervale stores considerably less product than Palm City, the $10,000 loss may represent a greater portion of the total lost to pest damage and raises the question of Buzzoff's ability to provide sufficient protection against pests.

Could some other event explain the loss at Palm City? The pest damage may have occurred prior to the product's arrival at the warehouse. Containers may have been improperly closed, or refrigeration functioned defectively. If so, Fly Away cannot be held responsible for the resulting pest damage, and should not be replaced. Workers at the warehouse itself may have mishandled the product, again relieving Fly Away of responsibility for the loss of product. The county in which Wintervale is located may have initiated an aerial spraying program that made it easier, perhaps even unnecessary, for Buzzoff to control pests and incur less damage. Conversely, the county that Palm city calls home may have suspended an aerial spraying program making it more difficult to control pests in that location.

The food distribution company owns several warehouses in a variety of locations, and pest control is important for profitability. The answers to the questions will help the owner make a considered decision about the most effective means of eliminating loss in Palm City. It may turn out that they should retain Fly Away, rehire Buzzoff or use another company entirely.

Sample 2:

The food- distribution company, as mentioned above, is associated with food storage warehouses in several cities. Recently it signed a contract for the pest-control services with Fly-Away-Pest-Control Company, thereby ending its contract with Buzzoff Pest-Control Company in some of the cities, after a year. The memo from the vice president of the food-distribution company, lays emphasis on returning to Buzzoff Pest-Control Company for its services in all the cities. This is based on the comparison between the losses incurred by the two pest control companies in terms of food destroyed by pest damage. In the first glance, this claim in the memo appears to be quite logical as the services of the company which is causing more monetary loss must be immediately terminated.

However, the rising competition with the nearby markets may not be entirely based on the organic value of the food available there. There seems to be no proof in support of the above mentioned assumption. It is quite possible that these food products are becoming popular due to their better quality or may be better taste. There is a fair possibility of better advertisement for these newly launched organic food products. The memorandum has not considered the role of media in giving hype to the organic content of these products. Correspondingly, the need of the hour may be met by better advertisements through various media channels.

Damage of food worth $ 20000 by The Fly -Away Pest-Control Company in Palm City can be due to bad weather conditions. The climatic conditions in both Palm City and Wintervale, must be compared. More damage in Palm City may have resulted due to the lack of adequate facilities or congenial environment provided by the food distribution company. One can not even rule out the likelihood of less efficient or inexperienced staff employed by the food distribution company itself. Consequently, the decision on continuation or termination of contract with Fly-Away Pest Control Company should be based on its performance in all the associated cities, and not just a single city.

Last but not the least, there must have been some factors responsible for transferring the contract from Buzzoff Pest-Control Company to Fly-Away Pest-Control Company, when the services of the former were received for many years. Those factors must have had a ground and therefore should not be ignored. For instance, the cost shared by both of the pest control services must be analyzed in detail. Since The Fly-Away-Pest-Control Company charges much less as compared to Buzzoff Pest-Control Company, separate records of the likely expenditure by both the companies should be evaluated side by side. This will give a true picture of the more profitable company, in the long run.

In other words, faith should be expressed and more time should be given to analyze the overall performance of Fly-Away-Pest-Control Company. Proceeding otherwise may harm the reputation of the food-distribution company, as switching from one company to another and back to the previous one seems to be an impulsive, immature and unethical action. Thus, the argument given in the memo proves to be quite unconvincing, owing to the various above mentioned aspects being ignored.