ESSAY QUESTION:
The following appeared in an article in a consumer-electronics magazine:"Company X's latest model of digital camera to be released next month, the TR12, is being promoted as the most portable, user-friendly digital camera available, and also an excellent bargain. It can be expected to live up to these claims, because Company X's previous model, the TR11, was universally lauded as setting the standard in these areas last year."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.
MY RESPONSE:
The author of the article in a consumer-electronic magazine claims that the latest model of digital camera TR12 is the most portable and user-friendly because the previous model of digital camera TR11 produced by the same company set standard in the area.
The mail flaw in the logic of the author is that the forecast of success of a new camera is based on the result of production of previous model of the company. There is no guarantee that the company X is able to repeat previous success second time. It can happen that photographers would prefer to use the previous model TR11. In case if there is no principal difference between TR11 and TR12 some customers would continue to use TR11. So, it can happen that sales of TR12 will be hurt by sales of TR11. And TR11 will be considered as the most portable, user-friendly digital camera available.
Also the author did not take into consideration the external competition in the market. It might be that any other rival company invested a huge amount of money in R&D and is ready to introduce to the market a new revolution digital camera.
Also author was not specific describing main advantages of the TR12. The qualities like "most portable, user-friendly" and "an excellent bargain" do not provide details about camera. What fixtures the camera should have to be considered as user-friendly? Being simple in operations? In this case the cheapest camera with only one button is more user-friendly than innovative professional camera. What means "excellent bargain"? Is that cheaper than a similar model? If yes, in what extent? I think that such an abstract description of advantages does not provide useful information to consumers.Also I would like to notice that the author is also imprecise in the description of the market or field in which TR11 set the standard. The author referred to "these areas", but for me, a person who is not an expert in consumer-electronics, is rather difficult to understand what areas the author was talking about.
I think that if author wants to make his argument more reliable he should be more precise in the choice of words and try to consider more factors which can influence on the final result. Also he can add more details about the models of camera. What quality made the TR11 the setting standard product? Does the TR12 is up to the standard? What is the advantage of TR12 in comparison with TR11? What made TR11 "the most portable, user-friendly digital camera available"? With all this details the argument will provide a clear description of the camera. And the knowledge about the models of digital camera will allow to reader to make all the inferences about the future of the TR12.
Friday, February 26, 2010
"Children today have an unprecedented number of options when it comes to entertainment.
ESSAY QUESTION:
"Children today have an unprecedented number of options when it comes to entertainment. Since no parent can be aware of all of these options, it falls to the entertainment media to ensure that their content is suitable for young consumers."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
MY RESPONSE:
Nobody likes high responsibility. And in situations when the lack of control can lead to serious consequences nobody wants to be responsible for the execution of control. One of the most important issues ever has been a problem of children's education and upbringing. It is really difficult to decide in general what children should be allowed to know and which information can be harmful for their development. The aggreviation of this problem is the fact that all children are different and their perception of the information can lead to different results.
Nevertheless, I think that the common standards of children's education and ledger should be developed. We know that school programs are already more or less unified. But most part of their time children spend at home. According to the recent statistics of the Times magazine the main sources of information for children are television, music and internet. And if parents know that most of their time young people spend watching entertainment channels, listening to radio and surfing into internet of course they are concerned about the content of information in those sources.
Everybody heard about cases when children downloaded porn from internet, watched racist programs and chatted with perverts in dating sites. How to avoid it? On the one hand, parents should control their children, because at the result they and only they are responsible for the future of their children and only they will struggle with the problems which potentially can occur. On the other hand, parents cannot control everything, they have also other responsibilities. At least, they have to go to work and provide money for their families.
So, I think that the best solution for this problem will be mutual control over content of entertainment media. Of course, people should understand that entertainment is not devoted to children only. There is a demand on programs designed for grown-up and media companies do not want to loose their profits. One of the solutions of this problem is to translate the grown-up programs on TV in the evening. By this time parents have to be at home and be able to check what show their children are watching. Also at day time media companies should be very careful about the content of the advertisement, because children are very sensitive to it. If children see the advertisement of alcohol or cigarettes they can get an impulse to try that. I have to admit, that in the most of countries this type of advertisement is not allowed. For example, in Russia it is prohibited to advertise beer at day time and the advertisement of strong alcohol drinks is not allowed at all.
I think that the responsibility for the content of entertainment media should be beard by parents and media companies simultaneously. But I know that there is an expression that in the situation where there are too many people are responsible for something it can happen that nobody will try to perform his duties properly. I would offer to separate responsibilities in the following way: at the day time entertainment media should be responsible for making the content suitable for young customers. But in the evening when the parents are at home, they have to be responsible for the information available for their own children. In this case entertainment media still will be able to make profits and children's education won't be hurt by improper information.
"Children today have an unprecedented number of options when it comes to entertainment. Since no parent can be aware of all of these options, it falls to the entertainment media to ensure that their content is suitable for young consumers."
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the opinion stated above. Support your point of view with reasons and/or examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.
MY RESPONSE:
Nobody likes high responsibility. And in situations when the lack of control can lead to serious consequences nobody wants to be responsible for the execution of control. One of the most important issues ever has been a problem of children's education and upbringing. It is really difficult to decide in general what children should be allowed to know and which information can be harmful for their development. The aggreviation of this problem is the fact that all children are different and their perception of the information can lead to different results.
Nevertheless, I think that the common standards of children's education and ledger should be developed. We know that school programs are already more or less unified. But most part of their time children spend at home. According to the recent statistics of the Times magazine the main sources of information for children are television, music and internet. And if parents know that most of their time young people spend watching entertainment channels, listening to radio and surfing into internet of course they are concerned about the content of information in those sources.
Everybody heard about cases when children downloaded porn from internet, watched racist programs and chatted with perverts in dating sites. How to avoid it? On the one hand, parents should control their children, because at the result they and only they are responsible for the future of their children and only they will struggle with the problems which potentially can occur. On the other hand, parents cannot control everything, they have also other responsibilities. At least, they have to go to work and provide money for their families.
So, I think that the best solution for this problem will be mutual control over content of entertainment media. Of course, people should understand that entertainment is not devoted to children only. There is a demand on programs designed for grown-up and media companies do not want to loose their profits. One of the solutions of this problem is to translate the grown-up programs on TV in the evening. By this time parents have to be at home and be able to check what show their children are watching. Also at day time media companies should be very careful about the content of the advertisement, because children are very sensitive to it. If children see the advertisement of alcohol or cigarettes they can get an impulse to try that. I have to admit, that in the most of countries this type of advertisement is not allowed. For example, in Russia it is prohibited to advertise beer at day time and the advertisement of strong alcohol drinks is not allowed at all.
I think that the responsibility for the content of entertainment media should be beard by parents and media companies simultaneously. But I know that there is an expression that in the situation where there are too many people are responsible for something it can happen that nobody will try to perform his duties properly. I would offer to separate responsibilities in the following way: at the day time entertainment media should be responsible for making the content suitable for young customers. But in the evening when the parents are at home, they have to be responsible for the information available for their own children. In this case entertainment media still will be able to make profits and children's education won't be hurt by improper information.
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Should the government regulate fast food industry?
| ESSAY QUESTION: |
| The following appeared in an article in a medical journal: "The major increase in new cases of adult-onset diabetes during the past decade is the result of poor nutrition, which is itself the result of a lack of government control over the quality of foods available at low prices. If the government placed more emphasis on proper nutrition by requiring that food manufacturers include more vitamins and minerals in their products, the rate of adult-onset diabetes would be reduced significantly." Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound. |
MY RESPONSE: |
| The article in medical journal includes a statement which claims that the rate of adult-onset diabetes would be reduced if the government took control over the quality of the cheap food. I have to notice that this argument contains several flows. The first flow I would like to stress is the fact that the author wrote that poor nutrition is "itself the result of a lack of government control over the industry". There is no evident logical connection between cheap food available for sale and existing eating habits. It can be that adults like to eat cheap and unhealthy food instead of cheap and nutritious. For example, they prefer to buy a hamburger instead of cereals. In this case even if government controls the food industry people still will try to select the food which tastes better. For example, they can choose only limited number of even healthy products, which will also lead to unbalanced diet and diabetes in a consequence. Also, the author of the statement did not specify the source of financing of the "healthy enriched food". It is understandable that adding of more vitamins and minerals in food will lead to raise of prices. This means that food won't be cheap anymore. And some people cannot allow to purchase expensive food. What will they do? Probably they will eat less. But we know that the major reason of adult-onset diabetes is poor nutrition. So, at some point it can happen that the control over the food industry will lead to increase of number of people suffering from diabetes. I would advise the author to be more careful with inferences. It can be that he did not provide all the available assumptions. Maybe he missed some points which are necessary for the inferences he did. If so, he should add the details in the article. Also instead of blaming the government for not executing control over the industry he could write a business plan. Statements without any solid background cannot be taken seriously. Statistical data would help to understand and estimate the level of the problem. Does the rate of adult-onset diabetes increase during the past decade? If it did, what changes occurred in the industry? Was the industry regulated before? If there are any other solutions of the problem? Also a economically developed model with estimations based on the verified data would be useful for estimation of the government project proposed. So, I think that the author of the article should make his argument more complete adding all the relevant facts and intermediate inferences. It will make the article more scientific and give the reader a chance to evaluate the information. |
"Employees always perform better when given a say in determining the boundaries of their roles within a company."
There is an opinion that employees always perform better when their tasks used as a basis for determination of their roles within a company.
I agree with this opinion in general, but I would like to present to your attention some exemptions of this rule. For better understanding of the concept, let's see what factors influence of the employees performance? The most important factors are the following: the amount of money compensation, the career perspectives and the climate withing the working team. In case if employee knows that the result if his work will determine his role within company, what means his weight in the collective and his position, he is motivated to improve his performance. But let's admit that this way of employees motivation is challenging for the company which is not in the stage of the constant growth. So, it is a good but rather short term strategy. Roles within a company will be determined at some point and this stimulus will disappear. Of course, the company can changes the roles of its employees from time to time but it will not only increase costs on staff trainings but also crate the atmosphere of anxiety what can actually constrain motivation level.
I would like to provide an example. In Ernst and Young after the results of every year the employees who met or exceeded management expectations get promotion. The level of management expectations is standard and staffs know them in advance. Actually this means that doing every single task employees of Ernst and Young are aware that they will be evaluated and promoted according to results of their work. So, they should always perform better because the result of the work determines their roles within the company. Auditors are motivated to get a higher position, respect of their colleagues and bonuses. But do you really think that it is possible to perform better all the time? Even if we admit the fact that there is always a place for improvement, what is the size of the improvement? What is the difference between two consequent tasks performed? Is always the next one better than previous? If yes, how much better? As I know from my own experience, there is no gradual improvement until infinity. The results of several projects within a year can be different. Work results can be determined by other factors like health condition, family considerations, team building. And in case of a constant process of evaluation most of auditors are not able to consider this factor as a prevalent. Even the formal evaluation process with calculation of all the KPIs (key performance indicators) can be understood by employees like a formality.
So, I think that employees do preform better when the task they are completing determines their roles within a company. But I think that this policy strategy of the raise of motivation should not be abused. yes, it works in short term, but in long term it becomes just an additional and time consuming formality.
I agree with this opinion in general, but I would like to present to your attention some exemptions of this rule. For better understanding of the concept, let's see what factors influence of the employees performance? The most important factors are the following: the amount of money compensation, the career perspectives and the climate withing the working team. In case if employee knows that the result if his work will determine his role within company, what means his weight in the collective and his position, he is motivated to improve his performance. But let's admit that this way of employees motivation is challenging for the company which is not in the stage of the constant growth. So, it is a good but rather short term strategy. Roles within a company will be determined at some point and this stimulus will disappear. Of course, the company can changes the roles of its employees from time to time but it will not only increase costs on staff trainings but also crate the atmosphere of anxiety what can actually constrain motivation level.
I would like to provide an example. In Ernst and Young after the results of every year the employees who met or exceeded management expectations get promotion. The level of management expectations is standard and staffs know them in advance. Actually this means that doing every single task employees of Ernst and Young are aware that they will be evaluated and promoted according to results of their work. So, they should always perform better because the result of the work determines their roles within the company. Auditors are motivated to get a higher position, respect of their colleagues and bonuses. But do you really think that it is possible to perform better all the time? Even if we admit the fact that there is always a place for improvement, what is the size of the improvement? What is the difference between two consequent tasks performed? Is always the next one better than previous? If yes, how much better? As I know from my own experience, there is no gradual improvement until infinity. The results of several projects within a year can be different. Work results can be determined by other factors like health condition, family considerations, team building. And in case of a constant process of evaluation most of auditors are not able to consider this factor as a prevalent. Even the formal evaluation process with calculation of all the KPIs (key performance indicators) can be understood by employees like a formality.
So, I think that employees do preform better when the task they are completing determines their roles within a company. But I think that this policy strategy of the raise of motivation should not be abused. yes, it works in short term, but in long term it becomes just an additional and time consuming formality.
Friday, February 12, 2010
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
coming snowfall
So, people are talking that it is going to be a strong snowfall tomorrow. Some schools cancelled classes, in the gym they told us that some training sessions would not be conducted...About 2 feet of snow are expected.
As for me I would prefer two extreme scenarios:
#1
A lot of snow. Crazy snowfall. No work. Can enjoy studing my favorite GMAT until headache.
#2
No snow. Work is a must but I will go to the gym after work. Not my home gym, but they gym 15 blocks away. And work out until I pass out. The last time I felt exactly like it after this session.
BTW, I did ask the trainter how to avoid overtraining. She answered that overtraining is my purpose and only pushing myself I can get a new level. Then I have to get enough carbohydrates and some sleep.
But I am afraid that in frames of the normal distribution theory it will be something in the middle. It will be possible to go to work and too cold and snowy for anything else.
As for me I would prefer two extreme scenarios:
#1
A lot of snow. Crazy snowfall. No work. Can enjoy studing my favorite GMAT until headache.
#2
No snow. Work is a must but I will go to the gym after work. Not my home gym, but they gym 15 blocks away. And work out until I pass out. The last time I felt exactly like it after this session.
BTW, I did ask the trainter how to avoid overtraining. She answered that overtraining is my purpose and only pushing myself I can get a new level. Then I have to get enough carbohydrates and some sleep.
But I am afraid that in frames of the normal distribution theory it will be something in the middle. It will be possible to go to work and too cold and snowy for anything else.
Saturday, February 6, 2010
Madame Tussauds Museum
Was in Madame Tussauds Museum today.
I have to admit that it's the genius business idea. They let people for an entrance ticket price stare at singers, sportsmen and politics as long as they want, do the pictures with them and even touch the wax celebrities everywhere.
It was incredibly interesting to explore the famous folks by looking at them (have to admit that all of them are keeping themselves in nice shape, or were in shapes at some point of their life at least) and making pictures with them (the number of pictures you can make is unlimited and lines are only near Obama couple and Michael Jackson).
What I noticed all the figures are of people famous for achieving something positive. What if open a museum of negative people? Famous criminals, politics who lead their countries to disasters, thieves... At the first floor Berney Medoff willl salutate the visitors... Also people will have a chance to see Al Capone, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Medici, Vlad Dracula, Mark Chapman, Ben Laden...
I think this Museum would provoke different emotions. Maybe somebody will be too emotional and try to destroy sculptures, maybe people will find this Museum offensive, maybe .... What about people who happened to occur in that Museum? Will they get mad and sue me? Or it will be easy to pay some amount of fees to them? Is that ethical to pay them fees for their vices?
Well, this business plan needs a lot of details to be planned but anyway it will be a sensation....)
I have to admit that it's the genius business idea. They let people for an entrance ticket price stare at singers, sportsmen and politics as long as they want, do the pictures with them and even touch the wax celebrities everywhere.
It was incredibly interesting to explore the famous folks by looking at them (have to admit that all of them are keeping themselves in nice shape, or were in shapes at some point of their life at least) and making pictures with them (the number of pictures you can make is unlimited and lines are only near Obama couple and Michael Jackson).
What I noticed all the figures are of people famous for achieving something positive. What if open a museum of negative people? Famous criminals, politics who lead their countries to disasters, thieves... At the first floor Berney Medoff willl salutate the visitors... Also people will have a chance to see Al Capone, Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Medici, Vlad Dracula, Mark Chapman, Ben Laden...
I think this Museum would provoke different emotions. Maybe somebody will be too emotional and try to destroy sculptures, maybe people will find this Museum offensive, maybe .... What about people who happened to occur in that Museum? Will they get mad and sue me? Or it will be easy to pay some amount of fees to them? Is that ethical to pay them fees for their vices?
Well, this business plan needs a lot of details to be planned but anyway it will be a sensation....)
Fitness in US
Yesterday took a day off. Overtrained in the gym. I have never been sick from sport before .. Honestly, I never was really up to sport and realized the need to go to the gym after I started work only. I have to admit that office has bad influence on the health of clerks...In Russia a lot of people think that American race suffers form obesity. But I have to admit that fitness and sport technologies here are well developed. Well, there are also body builders in Russia, but here sport is cheaper, what makes it easily accessible for regular people. I had never been able to do push-ups before...Jumping? What about Jumping with 10 pound dumbbells? What about squats with 12,5 pound dumbbells? I can do all those things after 4 months of having gym membership. My whole body structure changed - muscles, muscles...But I want to get more...More perfect shapes, more physical abilities....But I do not want to take days off because I am feeling sick after a great work out. Have to talk to my trainer on Tuesday. Cannot wait to get to know how to do it right!PS. It is a prejudice that American people are fat in general. Like every country America has fat and lean people. But what I have to notice is that everything is more acute here. If a person has extra pounds it is more than 20 extra pounds. If a person goes to the gym he or she is almost perfect.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
