first argument. welcome your criticize

ambguy

AA 125

The following appeared in a memorandum from the human resources department of HomeStyle, a house remodeling business.

“This year, despite HomeStyle’s move to new office space, we have seen a decline in both company morale and productivity, and a corresponding increase in administrative costs. To rectify these problems, we should begin using a newly developed software package for performance appraisal and feedback. Managers will save time by simply choosing comments from a preexisting list;then the software will automatically generate feedback for the employee. The Human Resources department at CounterBalance,the manufacturer of the countertops we install, reports satisfaction with the package.”
Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

  In this argument, the author recommends the human resources department of HomeStyle to launch a newly developed software by employing two lines of reasoning. One of the reason provided is that because HomeStyle’s movement to new office space results in a decline in both company morale and productivity, and a corresponding increase in administrative costs, the new software will improve the performance appraisal and feedback,then bring in a great benefit for the deparment. Another evidence for this recommendation is that the HR department at CB, which has installed the same software, reports satisfaction about it, so undoubtedly, it will satisfy us too. This argument suffers from tow critical flaws.

  First, by base on the reason that the software package will have the same effect on different departments, the author rests on an assumption that HR in HS is analogous to HR in CB. However, this unwarranted assumption is weak, since although there are points of comoparison between them, there is much dissimilarity as well. For example, employees of the HR at CB may hold the required computer knowledge to make use of this software. However, the HR at HS may never provide any training to their staff in this aspect before. Either a training program or new recruit will cost a lot of time and money and will be nonviable during this hard time. So based on a uncertain analogy, it is dubious that HR will  change for the better as the author anticipates.

  Secondly, the author gives weak justification that if they begin using the software package, the HR will improve its situation and overcome all the difficulties mentioned in the memorandum. He fails to acknowledge the possibility that incompatible between the sofeware and the process or culture of the segment may even make it worse. Moreover, he fails to take into account whether the personnel welcome this change. They may refel it if their benefit is hurt or they don't want to change their work style. The argument can be sustained only if these and other possible factors can be completely ruled out as contributing to the failure of this new program.

  In conclusion, this argument is not convincing.The author not only makes a unreasonable analogy, but also fails to provide adequate justification for his suggestion that the new developed software is worthy to them.To strengthen the conclusion that it is necessary to bring in the software, the author should provide more evidence and factors about function of the software, the precise information and situation of the HR deparment in HS and absolute relevance between them.