Hi,
I did not do so well on the argument analysis I submitted for the AWA lab (3.5), mostly because I inadvertently turned it into an issue analysis rather than focusing on the argument. So, I read the sample essays in the OG and sample essays and critiques on this forum, both of which were helpful.
I would appreciate any critique of this essay and also a suggestion if I should stick with the structure - Intro, 3 paragraphs with separate points, Conclusion. Thank you!
MGMAT CAT Exam #4
The following appeared in a memo to executives at a company that manufactures industrial equipment:
"We are spending too much on free customer service after a sale has been made; we need to limit our warranty to two years in order to improve our profit margins. The current lifetime warranty can lead to costs decades into a product's life cycle. Also, we pay our customer service employees a premium because they must possess expert skills across the entirety of our very diverse product line, including products we no longer sell."
The argument focuses on how to improve profit margins by slashing customer service costs and lifetime warranties, but is flawed due to a lack of evidence and gaps in its reasoning. Additional facts and discussions would help the argument.
First, the argument is weakened because it does not substantiate its cost claims or its suggested solution with facts or evidence. For the cost claims, it only says that spending is "too much", and that the current lifetime warranty can have costs for "decades." The argument is implying that the costs are hard for the company to bear and that these costs stay high far into the future. This may be logical with evidence, but these are subjective phrases that disguise the lack of evidence. "Too much" per this argument may be turn out to be low cost for someone else, and if the future decade costs are only $1 a year, then the impact to costs and therefore profit may not as substantial as the argument would want to conclude.
Second, because the argument discuses profit margins, it is weakened by not discussing revenue in addition to costs. Costs, which the argument focuses on, is only one cause for profit. This argument does not discuss the benefits that come from free customer service, such as increased goodwill and reputation. Within the context of the argument, there may presently actually be increased revenue associated with the free customer service, and such revenue may offset the costs. Additionally, because the argument discusses the future, it should discuss how the positives of free customer may lead to future revenue or how the negatives of limiting the warranty to two years may decrease overall revenue. Because the argument concludes on profit margins, it must discuss both costs and revenues in order to be comprehensive.
Finally, because the argument mentions overall profit margins, and not just the margins as it relates specifically to customer service, the argument could be better served by discussing other ways to reduce costs. It is assuming that reducing customer service costs is the only, or at least the primary, way to increase profit margins. There may be other ways of cutting costs in areas such as production, marketing, advertising, finance, and office expenses that would actually increase the profit margins more than just customer service. The neglect of other ways of cutting costs is detrimental to the argument overall.
Because the argument does not substantiate its claims or focus , it relies on weak logic and assumptions that ultimately hurt it. If evidence of the actual costs or research on the profit results of the warranty were presented, then there would be support to show how much is "too much." In order to more completely address the profit portion, the argument would be better served by discussing the revenue that free customer service brings in or the other ways to cut costs.