GRE Argument Topic 119

NOTE: The above topic has wording similar to Argument Tasks 106, 120 and 153 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:

Companies are always looking for ways to improve the efficiency of their workers. Time is money, and the more that employees can accomplish in a workday, the more money the company is likely to make. Methods to increase productivity must be tailored to the type of work being done and the results desired by the company. Acme Publishing Company's owners need evidence of the benefit to be derived from the speed-reading course before investing both time and money.

The ability to speed read is important in some occupations. Students doing research can benefit from quickly reading through documents in order to extract pertinent facts. Lawyers frequently wade through volumes of documents or case law, and the ability to speed read can save them a lot of time. Acme Publishing Company should determine how many of its employees actually need to read more quickly in order to perform more efficiently. The focus of the business may not include voluminous reading, so spending the money on the course for all of Acme's employees would not be a wise use of resources. Committing to a three-week retreat for all employees may be unrealistic. If the retreat is scheduled for only one three-week period, Acme Publishing Company would have to shut down to send all of its workers, potentially leading to a loss of business. The company may decide that some of its workers could become more productive after taking the speed-reading course and attending the retreat which would cost much less while, perhaps, making those employees feel more positive about their jobs.

The personnel manager cites examples of employees at one or more other companies who increased their reading speed or got promotions after taking the course. It would be helpful to know how rapidly the first employee read 500 pages before taking the course and whether or not reading faster was the main objective of his job. Evidence should also be forthcoming that the assistant manager’s receiving a promotion was a direct result of taking the speed-reading course. That employee may have been in line to become vice president anyway based on his or her other qualifications. The president of Acme Publishing Company also needs evidence that the two employees cited work for a company whose goals and objectives are similar to those of Acme. If the other company involves vastly different work or product than Acme Publishing, then the examples are irrelevant. The ability to read rapidly may not be a factor in earning promotions at Acme Publishing. Evaluating the strength of this argument would be easier if the reader knows the criteria that Acme uses when selecting candidates for higher positions in the company.

Before accepting this recommendation, the company president should ask for evidence about his workers' level of productivity at all tasks required by Acme. The evidence may show that all of his workers meet established productivity levels, making the speed-reading course unnecessary. He may find that productivity levels are subpar in areas where the ability to read quickly is not a factor. On the other hand, he may find lower productivity in departments where a course in speed-reading would help those workers perform better. This evidence can help the president determine which of his personnel can help the Company move forward by completing the recommended course.

The president of Acme Publishing needs evidence that speed reading leads to the absorption of more knowledge. Because more knowledge is important in virtually every industry, this evidence could prove the value of the course to the company and its employees. Lack of this evidence negates the personnel director’s conclusion that the money spent on the speed-reading course would be a wise use of company resources.

Sample 2:

The argument given above by the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company favors Easy Read Speed-Reading Course. According to the personnel director, many companies have benefited from their employees taking this course and have shown an increase in productivity. There have been reports of graduates improving the reading speed and also getting promoted to higher ranks, and it is credited to the course since you can grasp more if you read faster. The course costs $500 per employee, including a three-week long seminar and a lifelong subscription of the Easy Read newsletter. This price, according to the personnel director, is not much compared to how beneficial the course proves to be. However, the assumption on which this argument is based is questionable due to which it seems to be lacking in logic.

The very fact that there is no first-hand experience of the course by the director and he relies on the result of other publishing companies to support his argument makes it week. It says that many other companies have stated that the course has proved to increase their productivity. What has proved beneficial for other companies may not prove the same to Acme because everywhere there are different working conditions. Moreover, there are other factors also that could have increased the productivity of the employees. It is possible that there has been a change in the composition of employees and the company has removed some of the employees who are old, inactive and unproductive. Such employees could have been replaced by young employees full of energy, which is bound to increase their productivity.

Increase in productivity is also a matter of the environment provided by the company. If the employees are given a healthy environment with enough time to rest, breaks between shifts and other incentives, there will be increased willingness amongst the employees to work. This can also increase productivity. Ignoring these issues and giving the credit of improved productivity only to the course can be foolish and a blind decision.

How much the employees benefit from the Easy Read Speed-Reading course depends from one employee to another. The argument mentions about one graduate who could read a five- hundred-page report in only two hours and another who rose from the position of an assistant manager to the vice-president of the company. However, these could be personal achievements and these employees could have been geniuses. It is possible that some employees have not been able to make use of the course as well as others because of their low aptitude. Moreover, it would be wrong to say that the faster a person reads the more he absorbs. Fast reading of the material does not ensure that the matter is being understood, it is likely that a person is reading the given material without paying attention to it and concentrating on reading it faster. This way there will be no use of reading and hence no improvement in the productivity.

Further, the director says that the fee of the course, which is $500, is not much compared to how beneficial it will prove for the company. He suggests that all the employees should be given this training, but in the excitement of the results he ignores many possibilities which might just prove the opposite. What if the employees take the course and leave the company later to join another company? In that case, after spending on the training of the employees, the company will not be benefited from it. Moreover, spending $500 on one employee may not sound too much, but when you take the total figure of expenditure, this could be a huge sum for which a decision should be taken only after a giving it a careful thought.

It can, therefore, be said that the argument is not logical and is based purely on shallow assumptions. While it is likely that the productivity increases after the course, it is also possible that it proves to be a disastrous decision.