Motorcycle Sales

The following appeared as part of an article in the business section of a local newspaper:

"Motorcycle X has been manufactured in the United States for more than 70 years. Although one foreign company has copied the motorcycle and is selling it for less, the company has failed to attract motorcycle X customers - some say because its product lacks the exceptionally loud noise made by motorcycle X. But there must be some other explanation. After all, foreign cars tend to be quieter than similar American-made cars, but they sell at least as well. Also, television advertisements for motorcycle X highlight its durability and sleek lines, not its noisiness, and the ads typically have voice-overs or rock music rather than engine-roar on the sound track."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The presented article speculates about the reasons behind the success of motorcycle X, despite it being copied by some foreign company. This is speculated to be because of the exceptionally loud noise made by the motorcycle. However, even though the article tries to find alternative explanation, it goes ahead to reason based on the premise that its speculation is,in fact, correct. Further, it tries to compare the sales of indigenous cars to foreign cars, completely ignoring the fact that the foreign cars are not necessarily a copy of American cars. Neither does it take into account any differences between the target audience for cars and motorcycles.

Initially the article tries to articulate a reason behind the success of motorcycle X in face of it being copied and sold at a lower price by a foreign company. The reason is said to be the exceptionally loud noise made by the motorcycle by some of the users. By the article's own admission, it is the viewpoint of some and not all (or even most, for that matter). The source of the data is not clear and hence the certainty attached with it is not warranted. To its credit, the article does cast a doubt on reason and states an intention to look for an alternative explanation. To its discredit, it goes on to base the argument on the reason that itself put to doubt, hence basing the examples and arguments around noise. By doing this it also completely fails to explore an alternative reasons (like better quality or brand value) behind the sales.

Further, the comparison used to illustrate the point is invalid as it does not address the same situation: foreign cars are not necessarily a copy of American cars. The foreign motorcycle, on the other hand, is a direct copy of its American counterpart. When motorcycles look essentially same, the end-user can compare everything feature-by-feature easily. Moreover, the target audience would also be similar. For cars the choice may not be that easy with the given parameters. Comparing a Mercedes to a Hummer or a Porsche is simply not possible as they are three different genres of cars. The choice may depend on if the person wants a luxury car, a land rover or a sports car rather than any other feature.

Finally, the article does not take into account the difference in expectations of a motorcycle buyer and a car buyer. While it is possible that a motorcycle buyer may be looking for brash, youthful, loud vehicle; a car buyer may be looking for a luxury vehicle as a status symbol. Since they may not be looking for the same thing, equating their buyer expectations may not lead to correct results.

Concluding, the presented article is logically flawed on many counts. In order to appear stronger, it needs to at least present a more relevant analogy besides actually exploring reasons behind success of motorcycle X. Otherwise it risks appearing poorly reasoned, hypothetical and incomplete.

Professional and Personal Fulfillment

"It is difficult for people to achieve professional success without sacrificing important aspects of a fulfilling personal life."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

There are no free lunches in this world. To gain something, one has to often loose something else. The same is true for professional success;it is hard to achieve it without sacrificing important aspects of a fulfilling personal life.

A fulfilling personal life needs enough time with the family, daily exercise and some time for leisure. However, there are only twenty-four hours in a day. Success demands persistent hard work, focus and vigilance. In fact, the more one becomes successful, the more responsibility one gets. Not only that, success also has the potential to attract all the wrong kind of people to one's life: it may be a gold-digger, a jealous rival who  or a fraudulent charity. This demands higher level of vigilance and takes its toll on the successful individual. 

A pertinent example I can think of is a report that I read in a health magazine on the rise of occurrence of diseases like high blood pressure, cardiac arrests, asthma and depression in young, working professionals. This is attributed to rising stress level in the fast-paced working environment of today. As individuals compete to out-perform the other in a zero-sum game, the entire focus shifts to  getting ahead. This leaves people with very less time with their family or themselves. Hence, when professional fulfilment takes precedence, personal fulfilment is often the first casualty.

Even if I had not read the report, my personal experience would have led me to reach the same conclusion. A friend of mine and his wife were two successful professional in the investment banking and sales sector respectively. While the husband worked long, unreasonable hours; the wife had to travel frequently across the country. As they wanted to grow in their respective careers, they also decided to delay having a baby. Over the years their interaction fell down drastically and now they are also facing a problem in conceiving a baby. The situation is so bad that it is likely that they may divorce each other. It is a clear example of how the pursuit of professional success often entails sacrificing important aspects of a fulfilling personal life. 

Concluding, I completely agree with the stated opinion. Obsession with the rat-race of achieving professional success often involves forgoing other things: personal fulfillment. This is not something that is planned, but is a consequence of having fixed number of hours in a day and the desire to excel professionally in today's fast-paced environment. 

A Language Course

The following appeared in an article in a college departmental newsletter:

"Professor Taylor of Jones University is promoting a model of foreign language instruction in which students receive 10 weeks of intensive training, then go abroad to live with families for 10 weeks. The superiority of the model, Professor Taylor contends, is proved by the results of a study in which foreign language tests given to students at 25 other colleges show that first-year foreign language students at Jones speak more fluently after only 10 to 20 weeks in the program than do nine out of 10 foreign language majors elsewhere at the time of their graduation."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The presented article aims to promote a model of foreign language instruction. It tries to achieve this by presenting the results of a study. However, it fails to talk about either the source or the methodology of the study. It also fails to address possible cost-handicaps associated with a course that involves living abroad for 10 weeks. 

The cornerstone of the reasoning is the result of the study conducted. Hence, it is extremely important to know how effective and authentic the study is as strength of the study will essentially determine the strength of the argument. If it was conducted by Jones University, its neutrality is questionable as the tests may have been designed to favor its own students. On the other hand, if the study was conducted by a neutral third-party, it would make the study highly credible.

Further, the background of students chosen for the test is also important to know. If they had a reasonable level even before they started the course, it would be unfair to compare them to students who were absolutely new to the language. The level of students on which the study was conducted has to be at a reasonably same level for the study to be credible.

Finally, the proposed programme involves staying abroad for 10 weeks. This may make the programme prohibitively expensive when compared to other programmes. A proper cost analysis is important to determine how much more a student may need to spend to complete the programme and whether such an investment is warranted. Sending students abroad may be a good way to teach them, but they should be able to afford to do it as well.

Concluding, the presented reasoning is flawed in some ways. In fact, it looks like a marketing gimmick undertaken by Jones University to promote its course. If Professor Taylor wants the article to be credible, he can do so by clarifying the source and the methodology of the study and whether his programme would inflate tuition cost significantly. Barring, all prospective students should take the presented arguments with a pinch of salt.

Disappearing Courtesy

"Courtesy is rapidly disappearing from everyday interactions, and as a result, we are all the poorer for it."

From your perspective, is this an accurate observation? Why or why not? Explain, using reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

Courtesy used to be the hallmark of a gentleman or a lady, a mark of good upbringing and a way of respecting fellow human beings. Unfortunately, with each passing day such courtesies are abandoned in favour of a more direct and brash approach. Such a transition has indeed left us all the poorer for it.

Courtesy is to daily life as punctuation marks are to writing. Without them many, an interaction seem abrupt, confusing, unsolicited or downright rude. For anybody who has been a victim of road rage, air rage or someone in hurry to save a few seconds, the loss is self-evident. A discourteous society is a danger to itself and is stressful to live in. 

Courtesy is not just a sugar coated pill that is just "good to have": it can have a significant practical effect on the day-to-day life of people and businesses as well. Every year companies loose revenues and man-hours to discourteous employees who make the work-environment tougher. A discourteous population is a sure-shot way to kill tourism and local happiness alike. It is no surprise, then, that countries like Singapore have even gone to the extent of undertaking National Courtesy Campaigns that aim at making the populace more considerate towards each other and hence make the society a better place to live in. All this has gone a long way to project Singapore as a business friendly and safe place around the globe. Similarly, the British have long been envied for their flawless, polished politeness and, hence, seen as master diplomats. The position London enjoys in the international circuit is partly attributable to that.

Saying "please" is a recognition that we need help. Saying "thank you" acknowledges that somebody has taken out time to do something for us. Cutting someone to get ahead in line may save a few seconds, but is a blatant disrespect of people's time and sensibility. Respecting each other's space and time, while adopting a less selfish and less greedy attitude, can go a long way in cutting down tension, improving productivity and encouraging happiness. In fact, I would go as far to say that the ever-growing incidents of shooting rampages that the US suffers is a case-in-point of the falling level of respect for human life. The current President of US, hence, deeply stresses on "respect" when dealing with foreign relations.

Concluding, courtesy is indeed disappearing rapidly from everyday interaction. This in turn is pushing down human values, friendliness and compassion. Even when the immediate results of such changes may not be evident, over the long run it increases tensions and make societies rude and unlivable. The loss is not just moral but has practical ramifications in form of mental anguish, loss of productivity, deterioration of work atmosphere and loss of business. 

Improving University

The following appeared as part of a recommendation from the financial planning office to the administration of Fern Valley University:

"In the past few years, Fern Valley University has suffered from a decline in both enrollments and admissions applications. The reason can be discovered from our students, who most often cite poor teaching and inadequate library resources as their chief sources of dissatisfaction with Fern Valley. Therefore, in order to increase the number of students attending our university, and hence to regain our position as the most prestigious university in the greater Fern Valley metropolitan area, it is necessary to initiate a fund-raising campaign among the alumni that will enable us to expand the range of subjects we teach and to increase the size of our library facilities."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The recommendation traces the cause of decline in the number of enrollments and admission applications to the feedback from students that the university has poor standards of teaching and inadequate library resource. This methodology relies on current students rather than prospective students, while the suggested solutions are meant to attract new students rather than improving the "learning" experience of the current students. Further, only one method of fund-raising has been cited;there is no reason to simply believe that it would indeed be the best method. Finally, it is not clear that how increasing the number of subjects taught may lead to better teaching.

It is clear that the Fern Valley wishes to attract more students and re-vamp its brand image. Although the existing students may be able to tell the failings that they have experienced first hand while studying, such issues may not be obvious to people seeking fresh admissions. Hence, a survey that takes account of why students did not choose Fern Valley University may give a more useful insight into the university's perceived weaknesses. Similarly, a survey about the reason why the currently enrolled students chose the university may be helpful in understanding what prospective students look for in a University. Understanding current students' grievances may also help in the long run, but it is in no way a comprehensive set of data on which the university may base its plan of action.

Further, initiating a fund-raising campaign among the alumni is the method proposed to raise funds. Although credible, the reasoning neither attempts to explore alternative ways of raising funds, nor does it specify if the proposed method would be able to generate enough money in time. Why wouldn't it be better to raise money from, say, Government funds for education, educational charities, donations from trustees or some form of financial re-structuring? I feel a proper analysis of each method should be done so as the most reliable and cheap method is recommended.

Finally, it is implied that expanding the range of subjects taught will be able to address poor teaching. The logic behind the correlation is baffling. Is it hoped that simply increasing the number of subjects would lead to a miraculous improvement in teaching standards? In order to address poor teaching the university may need to recruit better teachers, train existing staff, get better teaching equipment and use new media, like computers and videos, in order to enhance the teaching experience. How increasing the number of subjects alone will improve the teaching is not clear at all.

Concluding, the presented recommendation is flawed on many counts. It uses insufficient data to derive arguably faulty conclusions. It also fails to explore alternative ways of raising funds and hence does not logically support the suggested method. Not only that, even one of the recommendations to address the ill-founded conclusions does not correlate convincingly with the deduced problem.  

Science, Arts and Humanities

"Since science and technology are becoming more and more essential to modern society, schools should devote more time to teaching science and technology and less to teaching the arts and humanities."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

Science and technology have revolutionized human existence. Right from invention of the wheel to the Internet; science has continuously changed the way human beings live- for the better or the worse. Today, science is so hopelessly entwined with our lives that to imagine an existence without it is extremely difficult, if not downright impossible. 

However, making schools devote more time to teaching science and technology and less to teaching the arts and humanities can be an overzealous, misguided obsession with science. In fact, it is akin to slitting the golden goose that lays golden eggs in hope of getting all the eggs at once.

Science has no place for subjects like political science, business administration, product design and graphics. Science may make life better, but it does not teach people to deal with practical realities of life. Science is an essential building block of life. It is not, however, the only important part. Absence of arts and humanities has the potential of having a destabilizing influence on the society as a whole and may derail the progress of science itself. Ignoring them can be, hence, as catastrophic as ignoring science. 

A key thing to remember is that, historically, business and military have been the driving force behind technology. Without patronage of the Pentagon, the world would not have got either databases (Oracle) or Internet. Similarly, businesses and governments contribute more to technology than technocrats themselves. This brings in a stark reminder: however important technology may be, it is essentially a strategic tool in hands of people who can see life beyond the confines of a laboratory. And such people are not necessarily from science background. A good example is that none of the US Presidents that I can think of were either engineers or scientists, including our current President. This should be enough to convince most people that scientific education alone is not enough to build a modern, prosperous society.

Talking about arts, arts are a testimony to success of science and not a rival to be wiped off. As advances in science make life easier, people find more time to pursue art. The science also contributes to and enriches arts continuously: the mediums to express art have grown to include  paper, cloth, canvas, glass and , now, even computers. Arts make life enjoyable after science has made it livable. Promoting one on the expense of the other is neither advisable nor desirable. Imagine having a world without Sistine Chapel or Taj Mahal, without the music produced by Vivaldi, Mozart and Bach and without the mysterious smile of Mona Lisa. It would indeed be a dull world. 

Concluding, I do not agree with the stated opinion. Even though science is important, its importance cannot be overemphasized. The essence of life is balance, where each element has a unique place. Science depends on other disciplines as much as other disciplines depend on science. Hence, devoting more time to science on cost of arts and humanities can be an egregious decision.

Environmental Credit Plan

The following appeared as part of a plan proposed by an executive of the Easy Credit Company to the president:

"The Easy Credit Company would gain an advantage over competing credit card services if we were to donate a portion of the proceeds from the use of our cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on our card. Since a recent poll shows that a large percentage of the public is concerned about environmental issues, this policy would attract new customers, increase use among existing customers, and enable us to charge interest rates that are higher than the lowest ones available."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The proposed plan aims to help Easy Credit Company in gaining an advantage over competing credit card services by donating a portion of the proceeds from the use of the company's cards to a well-known environmental organization in exchange for the use of its symbol or logo on the company's cards. This argument is essentially based on a survey. The source of this survey, however, has not been made clear- putting into doubt the authenticity of the survey. The argument also assumes that the measure will not only attract new customers, it will also increase card usage and allow Easy Credit to charge higher interest rates. In the process, it completely fails to  cite the reason why people would increase usage of the cards or if higher interest rates may actually prove counter-productive by having unintended consequences. 

Taking the issues one at a time, the first in line is the survey that is the cornerstone of the whole argument. The credibility of the survey depends a lot upon the organization that conducted it and the methodology employed to achieve the same. If the survey was sponsored by the "well-known" environmental organization, the neutrality of the survey may be seriously questionable. On the other hand, a survey by a neutral, well-known third party may prove to be extremely credible.

Secondly, even though it may be fair to assume that such a policy may bring in some new customers, one is left to wonder how it would increase card usage? Can a company's policy change cause its customer to become a bit more reckless with their finances? Possibly: nothing is impossible. Nevertheless, it may help if the plan establishes the basis of this assumption more clearly: did people who said that they are concerned about environmental changes also asserted that they would not only support environment friendly products but will also increase usage and put up with incompetent interest rates? May be not.

This brings us to the assumption that this policy would allow the company to bring in new customers  and over-charge them as well.  A lot of current customers, who may not be that environmentally sensitive, may be lost to competition if such a change was made; such customers would not even have a far-fetched incentive to either increase usage or put with high rates. The resulting loss  of competitiveness and revenues has not been factored in the argument. Hence, The assumption is not only ungrounded, it also assumes that such an action would not have any unintended consequences.

Concluding, the presented plan is logically flawed on many counts. Before implementing it, the management should try to find more about the survey and examine if the suggested measures would indeed result in a competitive advantage. If implemented as it is, the plan risks loosing revenue and current customers in hope of winning more revenue and new customers.

Importance of Teamwork

"Businesses and other organizations have overemphasized the importance of working as a team. Clearly, in any human group, it is the strong individual, the person with the most commitment and energy, who gets things done."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

Have businesses and other organizations really overemphasized the importance of working as a team? Who really gets things done? A strong-willed individual or a team? I feel that such an emphasis is not unwarranted and totally justified: working in a team is of paramount importance. 

The basic reason that the team is important is that you cannot run a business or an organization alone- no matter how brilliant, strong or talented you are. True, it is often an individual who thinks of an idea or who pushes through revolutionary changes. There is no substitute for brilliance. Nevertheless, lasting success comes to a business only if all the stakeholders contribute and feel valuable. Moreover, any robust business or organization cannot afford to be dependent on any one individual if it has to deliver value consistently. One also needs to remember that an organization needs several talented people to work in unison to achieve any kind of success. For example, an organization may need engineers, accountants, lawyers, product managers, sales professional and marketing professionals. It is not possible for one strong individual to be able to either do or drive all of these functions alone.

A good example I can think of is of Mr. Thain, the erstwhile CEO or Merrill Lynch, about whom I read recently in Financial Times. The investment bank hired him as they thought him to be a capable leader as he had turned around NYSE. He tried to raise funds based on his personality and projected himself as the "face of the company". Although the strategy worked initially, it upset many key team members who thought they were working as hard and deserved recognition. This finally culminated into his key executives resigning from the company. Further, Mr. Thain's autocratic decisions caused significant losses to the organization. Finally, Bank of America acquired  the company and Mr. Thain was soon dropped unceremoniously (after he refurbished his office of $1.2 million). The incident clearly shows the pitfalls of not being able to work in a team and being dependent on a brilliant but headstrong individual. More often than not, the personal hubris of such strong individuals leads to the downfall of the business. Then, why should the businesses not overemphasize the importance of team work?

Another example that is relevant is of Microsoft and Apple. One can argue that one talented designer of Apple has produced more beautiful products than a hundred industrial designers of Microsoft. True. What is also true, however, is that Microsoft has been a more successful organization than Apple. Even without Bill Gates, Microsoft has ploughed on. Apple, on the other hand, may find it tough to survive (like it did) without Steve Jobs. Relying on one single individual is not a good thing for a company.

Jim Collins in his book good to great emphasizes on having "leaders" and not just one strong "leader" if company has to succeed. After spending more than five years in the corporate world, I could not agree more. Works of art, consulting or may be even being a lawyer may absolve certain professions from giving any importance to team work. However, if one is working in a business that needs more than one kind of people to operate, success is not possible without teamwork.

Saving Environment

The following appeared in an editorial from a magazine produced by an organization dedicated to environmental protection:

"In order to effectively reduce the amount of environmental damage that industrial manufacturing plants cause, those who manage the plants must be aware of the specific amount and types of damage caused by each of their various manufacturing processes. However, few corporations have enough financial incentive to monitor this information. In order to guarantee that corporations reduce the damage caused by their plants, the federal government should require every corporation to produce detailed annual reports on the environmental impact of their manufacturing process, and the government should impose stiff financial penalties for failure to produce these reports."

Discuss how well reasoned . . .etc.

The presented editorial is logically flawed on many counts.

Primarily, the central assumption, that making managers aware about the pollution caused by manufacturing process can effectively reduce environmental damage, does not even attempt to establish the basis of its authenticity. Was there any survey by a neutral third-party that establishes this fact? Are there any strong environmental laws that can hold managers to account for knowingly polluting environment? Or is it simply the editor's personal view? Without establishing a clear cause-effect relationship, it appears to be an arbitrary assertion.

Further, the argument also assumes that there are no other possible ways to achieve the same goal. It may be possible to achieve the same by introducing tougher environmental laws, scheduling regular inspections, or by giving incentives to industries to switch to more environment friendly manufacturing methods. The reasoning neither tries to explore alternative solutions nor tries to explain why the chosen line of action is better. 

Finally, even if we concede that the assumption is right and a good way to achieve the desired goal, the way of implementing it is still questionable. While imposing stiff penalties may work, it is not necessarily the best way to provide financial incentives. Financial incentives can also be provided by giving tax breaks or government subsidies. It is not clear why imposing penalties is a better way. 

Concluding, on the whole the editorial appears to be more of an opinion rather than a well reasoned argument. Based on an arguably arbitrary assumption it goes on to reason that the government should impose stiff financial penalties for failure to produce some reports, the benefits of which are not clear. Although the intentions of the editorial may be good, the reasoning is definitely not. While taking note of its concerns, a more well thought course of action may be pursued to achieve the desired goals.

Short-sighted Business Relations

"Business relations are infected through and through with the disease of short-sighted motives. We are so concerned with immediate results and short-term goals that we fail to look beyond them."

Assuming that the term "business relations" can refer to the decisions and actions of any organization-for instance, a small family business, a community association, or a large international corporation-explain the extent to which you think that this criticism is valid. In your discussion of the issue, use reasons and/or examples from your own experience, your observation of others, or your reading.

It is said that if envy is the biggest vice of socialism, greed is that of capitalism. This is the first thought that comes to my mind after reading this criticism. I agree that business relations in our organizations, the back-bone of our capitalistic societies, are indeed infected through and through with the disease of short-sighted motives. So much so that they fail to look beyond immediate results and short-term results.

The doubting souls need not look any further than the nearest bank. The current financial crisis engulfing the world is a stark reminder of the extent of damage short-sighted decision can do. One of the columnists in Financial Times, in their recent series of articles on "Future of Capitalism", attributes the obsession with short-term results to the culture of "increasing" shareholder value spawned by GE's Jack Welsch in early 80's. Jack Welsch claims people misunderstood what he said. Nevertheless, since then people have been more concerned with increasing profits from quarter-to-quarter rather than taking a long-term perspective. This has skewed business planning grossly in favour of short  term gains. Hence, driven by profit, banks lent to people who they knew would not be able to pay. Institutional investors, lured by higher profits and fooled by rating agencies, bought into these debts without doing due diligence. In each case, the focus of business relations was on increasing profitability immediately rather than taking a fundamentally strong decision.

Deteriorating environmental conditions are another proof of callous, short-sighted business relations. Strong environment laws are needed to deter businesses from polluting environment. Left to their own device, most business organizations give two hoots about disappearing rain forests or greenhouse effect. As long as the current cycle is profitable, it is acceptable to most of them to pollute environment and they fight tooth-and-nail any new environmental legislation that can affect profit.

Lastly, we also see that corporates are often willing to do business even with dictatorial, genocidal regimes as long as it is profitable. Shell will happily work in Nigeria or Venezuela and Chinese business would back Sudan,  no matter if that wealth goes to coffers of an inept politician or dictator who exploits its citizens ruthlessly. Conversely, businesses will steer clear of any such regime like Burma if there is nothing of interest to be had. This complete lack of social responsibility among business organization fail to take a long term perspective of geopolitical events as they are too busy to get the profits in for the next quarter.

Concluding, the disease of short-sighted motives is a very real and concrete problem afflicting business relations throughout the world. The current financial crisis is the biggest example of its manifestation. The readiness of organization to, in absence of concrete laws, do business with rogue regimes or pollute environment recklessly also point in the same direction.

A Faulty Business Plan

The following is part of a business plan being discussed at a board meeting of the Perks Company:

"It is no longer cost-effective for the Perks Company to continue offering its employees a generous package of benefits and incentives year after year. In periods when national unemployment rates are low, Perks may need to offer such a package in order to attract and keep good employees, but since national unemployment rates are now high, Perks does not need to offer the same benefits and incentives. The money thus saved could be better used to replace the existing plant machinery with more technologically sophisticated equipment, or even to build an additional plant."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The reasoning behind the presented business plan is flawed on many counts.

The business plan presumes that it is no longer cost-effective for the Perks company to continue offering its employees a generous package of benefits and incentives year after year. The basis of this statement (high unemployment rate) is neither strong nor clear. If employees loose motivation due to package cuts and,hence, do not perform well, the proposal may not prove to be very cost-effective. In fact, it could cost the company more than it would save. A high unemployment rate not necessarily prevents dissatisfied employees from not working hard.

It can be further said that the stated correlation between national unemployment rates and employee packages may or may not be true. 

Firstly, a general high unemployment does not mean high unemployment in all sectors. For example, only the auto sector may be doing bad causing an exceptionally high number of lay-offs but the finance sector may be doing good and still hiring aggressively. Hence, the company needs to look at the data more closely and verify that indeed it is relevant to their sector. 

Secondly, the higher rate of unemployment may be specific to a particular type of employees rather than to all employees. For example, if a market has too many engineers, it is possible that many of them are unemployed due to large supply. But if,say, there were too few accountants, their demand would still be high. Hence, by taking a blanket approach the business plan actually risks alienating employees that may have specialized skills that are in demand. This, in turn, may lead to a "brain drain" from the company with many talented individuals leaving for good.

Finally, the plan assumes that there are no alternative ways of financing additional equipment and plants. The company could pay less dividend, cut wasteful expenditures or pay it top brass a little less bonus. Why or how the suggested course of action is superior to other alternatives has not been discussed.

Concluding, the business plan appears short-sighted and weakly reasoned. It tries to take a generalist approach without bothering with details or reasons that could explain the basis or show the strength of the logic employed. Clearly, if implemented as it is, the plan would surely alienate some employees and may even cause loss to the company. The board should not pass this plan and should instead press for a better plan that explores various alternatives and presents stronger reasoning .

Compulsory Public Service

"All citizens should be required to perform a specified amount of public service. Such service would benefit not only the country as a whole but also the individual participants."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

Some say, "freedom is not free". That citizens owe their country a debt, that they should think "what "they can do for their country" rather than "what their country can do for them". The stated opinion is an extension of such sentiments, and I do not agree with it.

Supporting an inefficient, corrupt Government cannot benefit anybody. If military junta of Myanmar mandates that all citizens be required to perform a specified amount of public service, I cannot see how it would benefit the impoverished country or the participants. The citizens who barely manage to survive cannot be expected to pitch in while the well-off will bribe their way out of the situation. Such a proclamation would not amount to anything more than forced labour in disguise. If one thinks that this is fine, one may as well legitimize Pol Pot's worker camps in Cambodia that worked people to death in name of agrarian utopia! Such a blanket and generalist statement is not universally applicable.

Even for countries where Governments are better, say for countries in the European Union, expecting hard-working, tax-paying citizens to chip in while the Governments is entangled in bureaucracy does not sound that good to me. Most European countries have high taxes that are used to support generous welfare schemes. Citizens, who may be already caught in supporting a family and a mortgage, may rightly feel that their hands are too full to do anything more. I find it hard to digest that a government may expect a law-abiding, hard-working, tax-paying and over-stretched citizen to do more. Wouldn't the people be better off contributing to the economy the way they do?

Concluding, patriotism and hysterical propaganda are  not the same. A citizen has every right to disagree with the functioning of the government and living a free life. He cannot be forced to contribute to public services if he feels he is already doing so by paying his taxes and being a good citizen. The only time that this may not be true is during a time of national calamity like attack of an enemy nation. Barring such extra-ordinary circumstances, there is no strong case for the government to force its citizens to work for it. If anything, it would just highlight the inefficiency of a government that is willing to exploit its own people.

Choosing Ambulance Service

The following appeared in the editorial section of a West Cambria newspaper:

"A recent review of the West Cambria volunteer ambulance service revealed a longer average response time to accidents than was reported by a commercial ambulance squad located in East Cambria. In order to provide better patient care for accident victims and to raise revenue for our town by collecting service fees for ambulance use, we should disband our volunteer service and hire a commercial ambulance service."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The presented editorial is logically weak and flawed on many counts.

The first doubt that comes to the mind is about the alleged review that is the cornerstone of the argument. It has not been specified what is the source of the quoted review and how it was conducted. If the review was sponsored by commercial ambulance companies, the neutrality of the assertions would be highly questionable. On the other hand, if it has been conducted fairly by a neutral agency, one may give some weightage to it.

Secondly, it is implied that commercial ambulance service would definitely improve the service. The editorial conveniently forgets that if the volunteer ambulance service is disbanded, it would increase the volume of calls that the commercial service would have to handle. Whether the commercial services have the infrastructure to handle it is not clear. 

Thirdly, it is even possible that volunteer ambulance services take more time only because they get a high volume of calls. Hence, the claim that a longer average time necessarily means bad service on part of volunteer ambulances is not necessarily true.

Finally, it is not clear if the commercial services would gladly handle emergency services in case of a road disaster or fire when they may not get paid. Would they demand money from a man bleeding to death in a road accident or first drop him to the hospital? It is not clear how effectively they would be able to replace free services provided by volunteer ambulances and if people would even want such a service. 

Concluding, the reasoning is weak and cannot be taken on face value. The source of data used to derive the conclusion has not been quoted and many questions have been left unanswered. The editorial seems to be handiwork of commercial ambulance service providers who wish to discredit the volunteer services and get them out of the way.  

Leadership and Ability

"People are likely to accept as a leader only someone who has demonstrated an ability to perform the same tasks that he or she expects others to perform."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

There are many qualities that people look for in their leader. Hypocricy is definitely not one of them. Historically, the most popular leaders have been the ones who have had the courage to "walk the talk". Ability naturally commands respect. But does it make such a person likely to be accepted as a leader? 

Not always.

A leader is not necessarily a top-rank achiever. Yes, many successful leaders are known to have vision, charisma, forceful personality and ability to connect with the emotions of the people. On the other hand many successful leaders are also known to be power hungry, ruthless, populist, opportunistic, manipulative or plain lucky. Yes, ability also figures in the list sometimes; but it is not the case most of the times.

A good example I can think of is Mayawati, an Indian politician hailing from one of the most backward and most populous Indian state. She is in the race for Prime Ministership in the current elections. Majority of people from "backward" castes accept her as their de-facto leader and vote for her despite her corrupt nature. Her one-pointed agenda is to accrue benefits for her caste. Famously, when asked if she is a rightist or a leftist, the cheeky leader replied that she is an opportunist. Her acceptance has nothing to do with her ability to perform a task but her shrewd and opportunistic temperament.

Another example I can think of is of George W. Bush Jr. He was the President of US for 8 years. Yet it was on back of his conservative beliefs and luck rather than any ability to perform some task. If anything, he managed to drag US into a war on Iraq in search of non-existing weapons of mass destruction and saw the economy plunging to new depths. His appeal lies in his conservative values, simplicity and tenacity rather than an ability to perform some tasks.

On the same lines, many politicians around the world have won on back of their populist policies rather than any ability to achieve anything. Be it Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad or Venezuela's Hugo Chavez; the story is the same. This proves that it is not necessary for a leader to demonstrate an ability to perform the same tasks that he or she expects from others to perform; many times only propaganda and populism are also enough.

Concluding, I do not completely agree with the stated opinion. Of course it is possible for an able leader to be accepted: otherwise leaders like Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill would not have been able to come up. Nevertheless, ability to perform a task is rarely, if ever, critical in determining acceptance of a leader by the people.

Cola Vs Coffee

The following appeared as part of the business plan of an investment and financial consulting firm:

"Studies suggest that an average coffee drinker’s consumption of coffee increases with age, from age 10 through age 60. Even after age 60, coffee consumption remains high. The average cola drinker’s consumption of cola, however, declines with increasing age. Both of these trends have remained stable for the past 40 years. Given that the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years, it follows that the demand for coffee will increase and the demand for cola will decrease during this period. We should, therefore, consider transferring our investments from Cola Loca to Early Bird Coffee."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The presented business plan is unconvincing and logically flawed on many counts.

The first doubt that comes to mind is about the "studies" referred to assert that while a coffee drinker's consumption of coffee increases with age, that of a cola drinker declines over time. The  accuracy and reliability of the study depends on the neutrality of the organization that conducted it and the quality of methods employed to collect data. Until the plan does not specify the source explicitly, taking the data on face value is not advisable.

The second doubt is cast by the assertion that the number of older adults will significantly increase as the population ages over the next 20 years. This may or may not be true and will be determined by the birth-rate. The plan does not mention the basis of this assertion. It is not clear if it is simply the writer's hunch or based upon some concrete demographic statistics.

Thirdly, the plan does not take into consideration if cola may be popular in other age groups and the quantity of cola consumed. If the birth-rate of the country is high or cola is consumed in more quantity than coffee even when fewer people drink it, the demand of coffee will not necessarily increase. Again. without concrete and reliable demographic statistics and without taking into consideration the relative quantity consumed by each user, it is difficult to ascertain demand for which beverage would fall in the coming 20 years.

Finally, the projection assumes that people's drinking patterns will remain consistent over the next 20 years. It is possible that people may switch to some third beverage like green tea or fruit juices. That would make investment in either cola or coffee equally useless. It seems that the writer assumes that people would always have either coffee or cola to choose from.

Concluding, the business plan is quite narrow in scope and based on questionable data. It would be ill-advised to follow and act on it without chalking out the details and plugging the evident gaps in reasoning.  

Advertisements and the Country

"You can tell the ideas of a nation by its advertisements."

Explain what you think this quotation means and discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with it. Develop your position with reasons and/or specific examples drawn from history, current events, or your own experience, observations, or reading.

Is it possible to tell how far a frog jumps by just looking at it? May be not that accurately, but you could always make an educated guess. When looking to invest in stocks, investors often check some fundamental ratios to ascertain the "worthiness" of the stock. Is it always right? Perhaps not. Is it useful? Definitely. In the same way. one can tell the ideas of a nation to some extent just by its advertisements.

This is possible because advertisements are deeply influenced by the culture of the country and the attitude of its people. In fact, to be successful an advertisement needs to be culturally very sensitive and be aligned to the ideas of the nation. 

A good example I can think of is advertisements in Dubai. Advertisements there focus on the products and barely employ any human models. It clearly shows the sensitivity to and the influence of religion; Islam prohibits idolatry. I was told by my local friends that this principally discourages use of any models in advertisements. The rich dresses and the theme of advertisements give an overall impression of a conservative, prosperous and value-based society.

Another example I can think of is the famous advertisement campaign run by Cadburys in UK, the most famous being the one in which two children make their eyebrows dance. To the casual observer from a different culture there may not seem much correlation between the eye-brow dance and the chocolate. Nevertheless, to me it indicates a population that will not react to direct sales pitches but responds to clever correlations. I feel that to some extent it indicates a fun-loving, even a a bit eccentric, British interior beneath the formal and polite exterior. 

Similarly, advertisements in India, compared to those in UK or Dubai, revolve a lot around positive correlation between brands and celebrities coupled with value for money deals. This speaks a volume about how seriously the country takes its film stars and cricketers. It also indicates an audience that can be both emotional and practical. 

Concluding, the experience of living in three different countries has convinced me that even a small things like advertisements can tell about the ideas of a nation. This primarily happens as to be successful advertisements have to be constructed in that way. Metaphors, sense of humor and acceptable motifs change with borders. Advertisements capture these changes pretty effectively.

Bad Investment Advice

The following appeared in a newspaper story giving advice about investments:

"As overall life expectancy continues to rise, the population of our country is growing increasingly older. For example, more than 20 percent of the residents of one of our more populated regions are now at least 65 years old, and occupancy rates at resort hotels in that region declined significantly during the past six months. Because of these two related trends, a prudent investor would be well advised to sell interest in hotels and invest in hospitals and nursing homes instead."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The presented investment advice is logically flawed on many counts.

The most basic flaw is an attempt to correlate two unrelated pieces of information. On one hand, we have the percentage of people at least 65 years old in some part of the country. On the other hand, we have occupancy rates at resort hotels over a short period of time. It is implied that the demographics are responsible for fall in occupancy rates: this is not necessarily true. The rates could have fallen over 6 months due to end of tourist season in the area, falling standard of hotel resorts or a sudden increase in crime rate. Without more data it is difficult to say what really caused the decline. 

In fact, it is fairly reasonable to expect that tourists and not locals would constitute the key customers of the resort. If that is true, local demographics may not have much bearing on the occupancy rates at all. Even if one assumes that locals are the key customers, old people constitute only around 20% of the population. Absence of their patronage alone may explain a small fall but would still fail to explain the reported significant drop in the occupancy rates. Moreover, is it reasonable to assume that old people do not go to resorts? The fact that the newspaper story makes such strong statements without backing them with any concrete data is surprising.

The story does not stop here, it further goes on to assume that old people in the region not only do not go to resorts, they also remain sick. The basis of such a dire assumption is,yet again, not clear. If people in the region are old but healthy, how would investing in hospitals and nursing homes prove beneficial to anyone? 

Concluding, the given advice is seriously flawed and circumspect. The advisor has clearly built a castle in the air and God only help anybody who takes this advice. All investors should be wary of following it until it is backed by a study that can verify its far-fetched claims.

Money or Work

"Financial gain should be the most important factor in choosing a career."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your views with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

We live in a material world. Even the candles that people burn in church cost money. Money is one parameter that can significantly impact an individual's quality of life, social standing and mental satisfaction. Yet, I do not agree that financial gain should be the most important factor in choosing a career.

Even if somebody is not an idealist who fervently believes that a man should follow his dream, how can one hope of making any money if one is not good at the work he is choosing? Money is important and financial gain can be a very important factor in choosing a career. Nevertheless making it the most important factor can be disastrous. 

A master plumber can make more money than a bad investment banker (will be good for the economy too!). The marketplace pays for skill. Further, according to demand-supply of talent and the level of skill people make different amount of money. Interest and skill play a pivotal role in determining the actual financial gain, success and recognition that an individual may hope to get out of his career. Hence, interest and skill should be the most important factor in choosing a career. Blindly choosing a career just because majority of professionals make a lot of money can prove to be counter-productive.

Focusing on money alone one can also easily overlook the moral aspect of an issue. The best example I can think of is of Somali pirates who capture ships for ransom. They easily make millions of dollars a month  which is more than most of the professionals (if there are any left) ever make in Somalia. Would we give this advice to youth of the country to become pirates just because financial gains are high?

Working and loving a work can be a deeply satisfying and meditative experience. Books like "The Alchemist" explore the importance of finding a work you love allegorically. Santiago, the main character of the story, embarks on a journey to fulfil his personal legend. The story points how being in one's nature and following one's dream one can find success. I completely agree with the writer's point of view.

Concluding, I do not think that one chooses a career only for money. One spends at least one-third of his life with the work he chooses. So being trapped in a job you don't like doing something that doesn't contribute to your growth can be a big punishment. Hence choosing a career on the basis of financial gain alone is ill-advised and even dangerous.

Organic Vs Synthetic Farming

The following was excerpted from the speech of a spokesperson for Synthetic Farm Products, Inc.:

"Many farmers who invested in the equipment needed to make the switch from synthetic to organic fertilizers and pesticides feel that it would be too expensive to resume synthetic farming at this point. But studies of farmers who switched to organic farming last year indicate that their current crop yields are lower. Hence their purchase of organic farming equipment, a relatively minor investment compared to the losses that would result from continued lower crop yields, cannot justify persisting on an unwise course. And the choice to farm organically is financially unwise, given that it was motivated by environmental rather than economic concerns."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc

The presented speech's reasoning is flawed on many counts.

A study has been cited to drive home the point that organic farming gives lower yield than synthetic farming. However, the source of the study has not been mentioned. If it was conducted by Synthetic Farm Products Inc., the chances of it being fair and unbiased are pretty low. On the other hand, if it was conducted by a neutral agency, one may take it seriously. Making the source of study clear would make the reasoning more credible.

Further, the speech tries to encourage farmers to switch to synthetic farming by claiming that the money wasted in buying equipment for organic farming is peanuts compared to losses that would result from continued lower crop yield. Again, it is not clear how much lower the yield from organic farming is. Will the "extra" yield pay for the loss in 5 years or 50 years? There is no way to know. The argument also fails to take into account the money that would be spent in buying new equipment for synthetic farming. Unless and until the difference in yield is quite significant, this argument does not hold true.

Finally the spokesperson has tried to label organic farming as a financially unwise decision due to low yield. This is highly questionable. Besides the point that the yield difference may not be significant, it is possible that the market is ready to pay a premium price for organic food. It also does not take into account the adverse effect synthetic farming may have on the soil as it is not environment friendly and hence negatively affect the yield in future. Considering these factors, organic farming may indeed be a better financial decision than synthetic farming.

Concluding, the speech's logical reasoning looks like a sales pitch devoid of any merit or good reasoning. It mentions a study but conveniently forgets to mention the source, ignores costs associated with buying equipment for synthetic farming, brushes asides environmental concerns and ignores the fact that market may be willing to pay more for organic products. No farmer should trust this reasoning on face value to switch to synthetic farming.

Working Long Hours

"Companies benefit when they discourage employees from working extra hours or taking work home. When employees spend their leisure time without ‘producing’ something for the job, they will be more focused and effective when they return to work."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion expressed above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

I completely agree with the expressed opinion.

The best of machines demand maintenance and care. Why should the human body be any different? The companies that discourage employees from working extra hours or taking work home  understand this fact very well. There is a limit to which any individual can do the same work continuously. After that fatigue sets in and productivity declines rapidly. If sustained over long periods of time, this can lead to a falling morale and deterioration in quality of work produced. It is much like a machine that can heat up if run continuously and can even break down if no break is given. And anybody can tell you that maintaining a machine is always less expensive than trying to fix it when it breaks!

Being a computer programmer, I can testify that in our team people working late hours, who are generally dead tired then, inadvertently produce a buggy code (code that fails to take care of all scenarios and produces errors when run). This often takes many hours of time to fix later. Hence, by discouraging people from working extra hours our engineering manager actually manages to increase productivity! It is a good example of why "extra work" can prove to be more harmful than useful in most cases. 

Rest refreshes the body and the mind. It also helps employees to maintain a better work - personal life balance. All this contributes to his happiness and health. This in turn ensures better performance when he works in the office. As many a human resource professional say, a happy employee is a productive employee.

Concluding, at the end of the day work is a part of life.Nevertheless, work is not the only thing in life as we are human beings and not robots. Every human being needs to "recharge his batteries" so as he can remain productive. Discouraging employees from working extra hours is, hence, a prudent decision that will go long way in ensuring happiness of the employees and the productivity of the company. 

Increasing Bus Shuttle Volume

The following appeared in the editorial section of a local newspaper:

"Commuter use of the new subway train is exceeding the transit company’s projections. However, commuter use of the shuttle buses that transport people to the subway stations is below the projected volume. If the transit company expects commuters to ride the shuttle buses to the subway rather than drive there, it must either reduce the shuttle bus fares or increase the price of parking at the subway stations."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The editorial suggests two alternatives to help the transit company to increase the number of people who ride shuttle buses to the subway station instead of driving there. The reasoning is flawed on many counts.

One of the assumptions is that people do not use the shuttle buses because they find the bus fares exorbitant. This may or may not be true. It is possible that the bus services run infrequently, are not punctual and are not well maintained. In that case lowering fares would not help. The basis of this assumption is not clear. If the editorial clarifies that, the argument will be strengthened.

The editorial also attributes low usage of shuttle buses to people finding it more convenient and cheap to drive to the station and park their vehicle. This reasoning assumes that there are no alternative parking space near the subway. Even if the transit company increases parking prices, it will have no effect if cheaper, alternative parking was available nearby. The reasoning also implies that all people come from far enough distance. There can be a huge volume of people who live nearby and hence either cycle or walk to the station. In that case, no solution would help. In fact, it would put in question the very need of shuttle buses!

Concluding, the presented argument is plausible but not entirely convincing. It fails to establish the basis of its two key assumptions and does not explore alternative solutions. Moreover, since the reasons behind the problem have not been explored fully, the suggested solutions are also limited in scope. For example, solutions could have included a marketing campaign to make people aware about the benefits of using public transport or the improvement of services, depending on what the real problem is. Hence, the reasoning is weak and merits further investigation.  

Worrying About Success

"Too many people think only about getting results. The key to success, however, is to focus on the specific task at hand and not to worry about results."

What do you think this piece of advice means, and do you think that it is, on the whole, worth following? Support your views with reasons and/or examples drawn from your own experience, observations, or reading.

I read somewhere that if winning is not important then why do we keep score? To work without a clear aim is unlikely to be productive. Imagine: in a stockholders meeting investors question the CEO  about the results he aims to get, and he says: "I don't know about that, I am just focusing on tasks at hand." Not only would he get fired, the company would be but through hell for hiring such an individual as CEO! Results matter.

However, there is a difference between having an aim and in being obsessed with it. The advice above does not ask an individual to not plan for results: it just asks to not worry about them. Often when people become obsessed with results, they often take decisions that are wrong at best and unethical at worst. Such a worry not only robs an individual of his peace of mind, ironically, it also prevents him from achieving the success that he worries about. If an individual charters the way to success with patience and diligence, focusing on specific tasks at hand and not worrying about results, much can be achieved. As it is said, feather by feather you can pluck a goose.

A good example of the perils of obsession with results can be seen in the origin of current economic crisis engulfing the world: its origin were bankers feverishly worrying to achieve their given targets and pocket fat bonuses. It was disclosed in Financial Times that the Royal Bank of Scotland dismissed concerns of a dutch risk analyst about the risk profile of the investments in mortgage based securities. Worry about achieving success blinded them to pitfalls of the road they were taking.

A recent health survey indicates a rise in stress generated diseases like asthma, depression and high blood pressure in young professionals. This gives me conviction that if people follow the above stated axiom in their lives, it can save them a lot of stress associated with worrying about results. 

Concluding, I sincerely feel that such an advice is wise and good to follow. Not only it ensures that one does not loose one's head (and health) to worry, but also that one achieves success. Even though success is the defining factor of all actions for most people, worrying about is counter-productive. The best way is to move towards it steadily, focusing on the task at hand as a step towards it. 

Violence and Movies

The following appeared in a newspaper editorial:

"As violence in movies increases, so do crime rates in our cities. To combat this problem we must establish a board to censor certain movies, or we must limit admission to persons over 21 years of age. Apparently our legislators are not concerned about this issue since a bill calling for such actions recently failed to receive a majority vote."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

The argument presented in the editorial is flawed on many counts.

The most basic flaw in the argument is that it attributes the increase in crime rates in the cities directly to the increase in violence in the movies. Such a comparison is ill-founded due to several reasons. Firstly, it is not clear that on what basis the editor has established such a correlation. Is it based on some survey undertaken by a neutral, unbiased agency of repute or is it simple, pure prejudice on the part of the editor? There is no way to know. Secondly, there can be many reasons behind increase in crime rate. It could be due to a low police-to-citizen ratio, powerful and organized local gangs, lack of strict laws to punish law offenders, high unemployment, abject poverty or state neglect. Blaming movies alone without any concrete basis seems to be too far-fetched and unreasonable.

Further, rating boards have been established in various countries and limits have been put on limiting admission to persons over a particular age  limit; there is nothing new about the suggestion. However, it is not clear why legislators rejected such a legislation. The rejection has been attributed to apathy, but the basis for this opinion is not stated. It again looks like a prejudiced opinion rather than any kind of reasoning. It is possible that the introduced bill encroached people's freedom to see the movies in an undesirable way. In that case it would be reasonable to expect its rejection due to concern and not apathy.

Finally, it seems that the editor sees legislation as the only way to curb crime rate (or stop people from seeing violent movies!). Other ways to achieve the same have not been explored. 

Concluding, the presented argument seems more opinionated than reasonable; the tone seems emotional, attacking and prejudiced. Until the editor clarifies the basis of attributing increase of crime rate to increase in violence in movies, presents alternative ways to achieve the same results and clearly states why, in his opinion, the reasons behind the rejection of the bill are pure apathy, the argument will remain weak and flawed.