GRE Argument Topic 32

NOTE: The above topic has wording similar to Argument Tasks 55 and 87 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:

Climpson Industries, to improve its overall profits, is proposing to monitor its employees' Internet use. Although there appears to be no concrete evidence, the company assumes that its employees are wasting time on the Internet for personal and recreational activities during work hours. The vice president of human resources is suggesting a Big Brother approach to ensure that company employees are doing what they’re supposed to be doing in the workplace.

The company assumes that its employees are using the Internet for personal and recreational activities. Simply asking the employees about Internet use may be more efficacious than assuming the worst? Done in a respectful and professional manner, an interview with each employee may confirm or belay the company’s suspicions. A lack of productivity would result in deadlines being missed or orders being left unfilled. Is that happening at Climpson? If not, then current productivity is not in question. If the company seeks to improve productivity, it would do so in response to an increased demand for its products or services.

In conjunction with the assumed lack of productivity is the belief that employees are wasting time. Do the employees have enough meaningful work to fill their days? If current quotas are being met, the employees must be working efficiently. If they have time to waste, it is because their time is not filled by employer demands. The additional assumption of a poor work ethic would also be reflected in work going undone. Employees with a poor work ethic are apt to call in sick, arrive late to work, take extended lunch breaks, and/or leave early at the end of the day. If such behavior exists at Climpson Industries, it would be blatantly obvious and easy to check by reviewing time cards.

The desire to punish the slackers on the company payroll is counterproductive. What form would the punishment take that would not have deleterious consequences for the company itself? It would, in the long term, cause discontent and dissatisfaction with the managers. Knowledgeable and profitable employers know that incentives are a more effective means of increasing productivity and employee loyalty. In turn, company profits are likely to increase.

The changes in technology over the past couple of decades have created new challenges for business. A proactive approach would be to adopt policies before implementing changes. Does Climpson Industries have a policy manual that outlines what are and are not acceptable activities regarding Internet use? When the rules are clear, employees will generally have no trouble obeying them. Rather than taking on the role of Big Brother, the management would be better served by acting as coaches and leading their employees and, concomitantly, their company to greater success.

Sample 2:

The above article was sent as a recommendation from the vice president for human resources at Climpson Industries to the company’s president. The arguer wants to recommend the implementation of electronic monitoring of employee’s internet use from their work stations to improve employees’ productivity. The arguer gives various arguments in favor of his recommendation. The first argument which the arguer gives in support of his recommendation is the identification and punishment that needs to be levied on employees who use internet from their work stations. This would reduce the number of working hours spent on personal or recreational activities. The second argument presented by the arguer is that by installing software that detects employee’s internet use on company computers wastage of time can be prevented and it would yield better profits for the company. The arguer fails to justify his stand and therefore his recommendation falls short of relevant proofs.

The first argument presented by the arguer is absolutely baseless as the arguer mentions about punishing those employees who use internet from their work place. The arguer has not mentioned in the argument why there was internet in the work place. The internet facility must be for employees to help them to perform their work better. The arguer has also not mentioned whether the employees were using internet in their rest hours. It is very much possible that the usage must be more during rest hours. Even if the employees are using more internet then that must be to aid their work. If spending time on internet was such a waste then instead of punishing employees internet should be removed from the work place. The arguer mentions about punishing those employees who would use internet for their personal use but this step would be too harsh on the employees. This would stop employees from using internet for office use also as it is very difficult to determine how much internet is used for office and personal use.

The second argument presented by the arguer is the software that would detect an employee’s internet usage and help in stopping wastage of time and thus help in company profits. The arguer fails to bring into notice that if such a facility of using internet would be debarred then out of monotony the employee would not be able to work better which would result in decreased productivity and hence less profits. The arguer also mentions about good work ethics but fails to bring into notice that employees need recreation too and if there is no other source of recreation then there would be fall in productivity.

The arguer fails to convince us in regard to his recommendation. The recommendation has a very negative approach as it can be detrimental for the personal interest of an employee. Therefore, this recommendation should not be accepted as instead of increasing the productivity for the organization this step can decrease the productivity of the organization.