The following appeared as part of an article in a magazine on lifestyles.
“Two years ago, City L was listed 14th in an annual survey that ranks cities according to the quality of life that can be enjoyed by those living in them. This information will enable people who are moving to the state in which City L is located to confidently identify one place, at least, where schools are good, housing is affordable, people are friendly, the environment is safe, and the arts flourish.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
The above passage quotes that two years ago City L was rated 14th in an annual survey and that this information will help people, who plan to move to this city, to choose a place where they can settle. Even though the claim may be true but there are few assumptions which need to be addressed. I will be addressing them in the following paragraphs.
First of all, author made an assumption that the ranking given to city L, two years ago, is still valid. It leads us to another assumption that there is no change in the conditions or living style of City L. Based on the same ranking, people can make decisions to move this year too.
Further, there was no detail of the survey made. It simply states it as an “Annual survey” without providing information such as, who participated in the survey, what were the various agenda in the survey and the like.
Finally, it goes on to make assumption that by the ranking alone, people can get a good picture of all the important aspects of daily life such as schooling, community, people, environment and so on, which can help them to decide whether they can move to city L .
To conclude, I would feel that the ranking of City L will make more sense if we get the most recent one. Additionally, the annual survey should provide details about the participants and the different criteria on which they are being surveyed. Further more, the ranking should provide more relavant and detailed information on the other factors like schooling and community. If all the above assumptions are addressed, people planning to settle in City L, will have lot more data in their hand to make a judicious decision.
MY Scrap :
Assumption
1) Ranking made before 2 years is still valid
2) Ranking gives a detailed picture of all the essential factors viz: housing, school, people, environment etc
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
The following appeared in a memo from the customer service division to the manager of Mammon Savings and Loan.
The following appeared in a memo from the customer service division to the manager of Mammon Savings and Loan.
“We believe that improved customer service is the best way for us to differentiate ourselves from competitors and attract new customers. We can offer our customers better service by reducing waiting time in teller lines from an average of six minutes to an average of three. By opening for business at 8:30 instead of 9:00, and by remaining open for an additional hour beyond our current closing time, we will be better able to accommodate the busy schedules of our customers. These changes will enhance our bank’s image as the most customer-friendly bank in town and give us the edge over our competition.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
In the above passage made by a bank executive claims that by providing excellent customer services the concerned bank can differentiate
itself from other banks and can get new customers. He also claims that average wait time per customer will be reduced. The executive also
predicts that customer service can be improved by providing customers more service time, so the bank timings should be extended. Even though,
all the predictions are optimistic but there are certain flaws present and without addressing them with proper assumptions, the bank’s plan will not be successful.
At the outset, author makes an abject assumption that the only area where the bank can improve upon is Customer Service and nothing else. On saying that, the passage makes an unspoken assumption that bank provides excellent services in all other areas like best Interest rate, Flexible loan plan, Vehicle loan and the type. In the same vein, it also assumes that customer service is the only means to get new customers.
Further it goes on to state that by increasing the bank working hour, customer average wait time can be reduced from six to three minutes. In fact, there was no data provided to calculate this figure. It may so happen that on certain day there are a lot of customers and some day its very low.
Additionally, it assumes claims that by extending the office timings, customer service can be improved.
To conclude, the bank executive has made a lot of assumptions, but they can be successful only if he addresses the hidden assumptions. For example, if the author can provide relevant data that the only area the bank is lagging behind other bank is customer service, so it may perfect sense to work in that area. Next only by increasing the work timing will do no good if the quality of service is not improved.
My scrap notes………….
Assumption
1) --Customer service need to be improved
2) --Customer wait time wil go down
3) --All other services like Interest rate, Flexible loan are perfect
4) --Customer Service is the only means to get new customer
5) That customer service can be only improved by extending the timing
“We believe that improved customer service is the best way for us to differentiate ourselves from competitors and attract new customers. We can offer our customers better service by reducing waiting time in teller lines from an average of six minutes to an average of three. By opening for business at 8:30 instead of 9:00, and by remaining open for an additional hour beyond our current closing time, we will be better able to accommodate the busy schedules of our customers. These changes will enhance our bank’s image as the most customer-friendly bank in town and give us the edge over our competition.”
Discuss how well reasoned... etc.
In the above passage made by a bank executive claims that by providing excellent customer services the concerned bank can differentiate
itself from other banks and can get new customers. He also claims that average wait time per customer will be reduced. The executive also
predicts that customer service can be improved by providing customers more service time, so the bank timings should be extended. Even though,
all the predictions are optimistic but there are certain flaws present and without addressing them with proper assumptions, the bank’s plan will not be successful.
At the outset, author makes an abject assumption that the only area where the bank can improve upon is Customer Service and nothing else. On saying that, the passage makes an unspoken assumption that bank provides excellent services in all other areas like best Interest rate, Flexible loan plan, Vehicle loan and the type. In the same vein, it also assumes that customer service is the only means to get new customers.
Further it goes on to state that by increasing the bank working hour, customer average wait time can be reduced from six to three minutes. In fact, there was no data provided to calculate this figure. It may so happen that on certain day there are a lot of customers and some day its very low.
Additionally, it assumes claims that by extending the office timings, customer service can be improved.
To conclude, the bank executive has made a lot of assumptions, but they can be successful only if he addresses the hidden assumptions. For example, if the author can provide relevant data that the only area the bank is lagging behind other bank is customer service, so it may perfect sense to work in that area. Next only by increasing the work timing will do no good if the quality of service is not improved.
My scrap notes………….
Assumption
1) --Customer service need to be improved
2) --Customer wait time wil go down
3) --All other services like Interest rate, Flexible loan are perfect
4) --Customer Service is the only means to get new customer
5) That customer service can be only improved by extending the timing
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
How to advice somebody ?
The best way to advice somebody is to find out what they want and advice them how to attain it?
An apt topic “How to advice somebody ? “ As a matter of fact, I WOULD take the same stance as the author descibes that its absolutely necessary to listen to somebody before I give him any piece of advice.
First of all, I feel its always important to undertsand whats going on in the mind of the person who seeks my advice. For example, few years back my younger brother came to me one day and questioned asked me whether he can join Army. I said Yes, Why not ? In fact, that’s not what he wanted to become. He wanted to become an engineer, but he was little afraid of the competitive exams that he has to undergo before he finally secure a seat in an engg college. I went on to tell him that everything is possible with hard work and diligence.
Another example that came to my mind was of US late president, John F. Kenedy. He mentioned in his memoir that his father Sr Kenedy was always there to guide him, but never forced upon his views; His father, rather listened to him patiently to discover whats going in his son’s mind and then helped him chalk a plan so that he can tread on that path.
Moreover, there is a fair chance that we may mislead the advisee if we don’t understand his mind. In the same scenario, if without listening to my brother, I would have started babbling on the Army and passed on whatever little knowledge I have on that subject, who knows, my brother could have choosen a different career path.
Nevertheless, I do agree that there are a few people, who are misled and have no aims or aspirations in life. They don’t know what to do next or in future or in their life. In such cases, I would say, those people need much more understanding and attention than an average guy needs. Deep in their heart they have something which they may not be able to bring out, so as an able advicer, it will be my duty to make sure that they come up with their inherent thoughts and ideas.
Finally, I would reiterate that its absolutely necessary to listen and understand the concerns of a advisee, before we can impart our knowledge.
An apt topic “How to advice somebody ? “ As a matter of fact, I WOULD take the same stance as the author descibes that its absolutely necessary to listen to somebody before I give him any piece of advice.
First of all, I feel its always important to undertsand whats going on in the mind of the person who seeks my advice. For example, few years back my younger brother came to me one day and questioned asked me whether he can join Army. I said Yes, Why not ? In fact, that’s not what he wanted to become. He wanted to become an engineer, but he was little afraid of the competitive exams that he has to undergo before he finally secure a seat in an engg college. I went on to tell him that everything is possible with hard work and diligence.
Another example that came to my mind was of US late president, John F. Kenedy. He mentioned in his memoir that his father Sr Kenedy was always there to guide him, but never forced upon his views; His father, rather listened to him patiently to discover whats going in his son’s mind and then helped him chalk a plan so that he can tread on that path.
Moreover, there is a fair chance that we may mislead the advisee if we don’t understand his mind. In the same scenario, if without listening to my brother, I would have started babbling on the Army and passed on whatever little knowledge I have on that subject, who knows, my brother could have choosen a different career path.
Nevertheless, I do agree that there are a few people, who are misled and have no aims or aspirations in life. They don’t know what to do next or in future or in their life. In such cases, I would say, those people need much more understanding and attention than an average guy needs. Deep in their heart they have something which they may not be able to bring out, so as an able advicer, it will be my duty to make sure that they come up with their inherent thoughts and ideas.
Finally, I would reiterate that its absolutely necessary to listen and understand the concerns of a advisee, before we can impart our knowledge.
Friday, May 9, 2008
Following the Colorado massacre of schoolchildren, many lawmakers have proposed that an
international body regulate the internet so that sites which provide information to terrorists should be eliminated.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the above opinion. Support your opinion
with reasons and examples.
The above statement claims that by regulating internet activities, terrorism can be eliminated. I think this is an oversimplied solution for a worldwide problem. I will not agree with the soltion provided because of certain reasons.
The foremost reasoning is that the above statement assumes that terrorists use only internet for getting information or planning their activities. It seems there are no other medium apart from internet to coordinate and plan terrorist activities. How would you then justify the terrorist activities at Iraq who are illiterate and has no knowledge or access to internet service, but still they have troubled US for decades. Are we oblivion of the fact that we are living in a world of hitech communication ?
How many sites are we going to close? An average of 100-200 new sites come up everyday. It likes trying to stop the water from leaking from a huge water tank which has multiple holes opening up as soon as you close one. Further, lets accept the assumption that the terrorist depend heavily on internet for their hidden operation, but how does it make sense that by regulating Internet will eliminate terrorism. How do you filter the contents in the ocean of internet world where milions of information traverse from one end of the world to the another end of the world.Further more, terrorist would not simply publish on their website something like "Mass destruction on America on 9/11". They will definitely encode the info and decoding it from our end would require extraordinary skillset and expertise. This further calls for major research and development involving millions of dollars.
Finally, not every nation in this world is affected with terrorism, so how can we assume that international bodies will cooperate us in curbing the internet access. For a moment say that they may do it, but are the major nations ready to invest in such an ambitious project?
Next question is how do you distinguish what kind of information to be barred from view. Even wikipedia contains a lot of info on guns and weapons which any Internet Users either terrorist or a non-terrorist would be generally interested.
After penning all my thoughts above, I want to conclude that in the current scenario, controlling internet activities and contents is not only impractical but not advicable too. Govt. bodies need to come up with alternative and sound measures to curb the terrorist activities.
international body regulate the internet so that sites which provide information to terrorists should be eliminated.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the above opinion. Support your opinion
with reasons and examples.
The above statement claims that by regulating internet activities, terrorism can be eliminated. I think this is an oversimplied solution for a worldwide problem. I will not agree with the soltion provided because of certain reasons.
The foremost reasoning is that the above statement assumes that terrorists use only internet for getting information or planning their activities. It seems there are no other medium apart from internet to coordinate and plan terrorist activities. How would you then justify the terrorist activities at Iraq who are illiterate and has no knowledge or access to internet service, but still they have troubled US for decades. Are we oblivion of the fact that we are living in a world of hitech communication ?
How many sites are we going to close? An average of 100-200 new sites come up everyday. It likes trying to stop the water from leaking from a huge water tank which has multiple holes opening up as soon as you close one. Further, lets accept the assumption that the terrorist depend heavily on internet for their hidden operation, but how does it make sense that by regulating Internet will eliminate terrorism. How do you filter the contents in the ocean of internet world where milions of information traverse from one end of the world to the another end of the world.Further more, terrorist would not simply publish on their website something like "Mass destruction on America on 9/11". They will definitely encode the info and decoding it from our end would require extraordinary skillset and expertise. This further calls for major research and development involving millions of dollars.
Finally, not every nation in this world is affected with terrorism, so how can we assume that international bodies will cooperate us in curbing the internet access. For a moment say that they may do it, but are the major nations ready to invest in such an ambitious project?
Next question is how do you distinguish what kind of information to be barred from view. Even wikipedia contains a lot of info on guns and weapons which any Internet Users either terrorist or a non-terrorist would be generally interested.
After penning all my thoughts above, I want to conclude that in the current scenario, controlling internet activities and contents is not only impractical but not advicable too. Govt. bodies need to come up with alternative and sound measures to curb the terrorist activities.
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Food service workers be periodically trained or not ???
Statement
The food service workers in our fast food restaurants supervise the ordering, preparation and serving of breakfast, lunch and dinner to people of all ages. The federal government should implement a program of continuing education for these people. If food service workers were required to attend a three-day workshop each year, covering topics such as recent developments in nutritional theory and new methods of food preservation, as a condition of employment, the quality of the food eaten by the general public would be greatly improved.
How persuasive do you find this argument? Explain your point of view by analyzing the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. Discuss also, what, if anything would make the argument more persuasive or would help you better to evaluate its conclusion.
My Argument :
I fully agree with the proposal of periodic training for the food service workers (from now will be called FSW).
With growing commercialization people have more money to spend a lot on recreation activities, out of which eating outside along with children has became very popular. So it becomes mandatory that the quality of food be really good, safe, uncompromising and eco-friendly. Keeping these things in mind, we need professional FSW to regularly oversee the quality of food. This will offer FSW more exposure and they can make better judgments in future. The 3 day training should be mandatory as mentioned, because this will give a chance to various FSWs to share their work experiences along with the other benefits they gain. The training should be more interactive in nature. Another suggestion would be to rotate the FSWs among the restaurants in certain intervals. Like in any profession, a person working for a long time tend to forget a lot of theoretical aspects, so a 3 day training program like this will act as a refresher course and it would yield better result.
Last but not the least, not only the above suggested practice will implicitly strengthen the safety aspect of the general public but it will also give a boost to FSW’s career to remain updated.
The food service workers in our fast food restaurants supervise the ordering, preparation and serving of breakfast, lunch and dinner to people of all ages. The federal government should implement a program of continuing education for these people. If food service workers were required to attend a three-day workshop each year, covering topics such as recent developments in nutritional theory and new methods of food preservation, as a condition of employment, the quality of the food eaten by the general public would be greatly improved.
How persuasive do you find this argument? Explain your point of view by analyzing the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. Discuss also, what, if anything would make the argument more persuasive or would help you better to evaluate its conclusion.
My Argument :
I fully agree with the proposal of periodic training for the food service workers (from now will be called FSW).
With growing commercialization people have more money to spend a lot on recreation activities, out of which eating outside along with children has became very popular. So it becomes mandatory that the quality of food be really good, safe, uncompromising and eco-friendly. Keeping these things in mind, we need professional FSW to regularly oversee the quality of food. This will offer FSW more exposure and they can make better judgments in future. The 3 day training should be mandatory as mentioned, because this will give a chance to various FSWs to share their work experiences along with the other benefits they gain. The training should be more interactive in nature. Another suggestion would be to rotate the FSWs among the restaurants in certain intervals. Like in any profession, a person working for a long time tend to forget a lot of theoretical aspects, so a 3 day training program like this will act as a refresher course and it would yield better result.
Last but not the least, not only the above suggested practice will implicitly strengthen the safety aspect of the general public but it will also give a boost to FSW’s career to remain updated.
Advancing technology : good or bad ???
Statement:
Many electronics manufacturers intentionally create computers that will become obsolete within a few years. Consumer groups complain that this practice results in a waste of resources. Computer-makers claim that by shortening the product life cycle, they can quickly improve their products, incorporate rapidly-advancing technologies and ultimately lower the cost to the consumer.
Which position do you find more compelling? Explain your position using reasons and/or examples drawn from your personal experience, observations or readings.
My Argument :
I found the position of the electronics manufacturer more compelling. There is no denying of the fact that there will always be an incessant growth in any field you name whether it is electronics, aviation, motor-vehicles, communications, cell phones and what not. Even though, consumers are the one who have to bear the cost involved in the growth of the technology but it is them who are benefited largely at the same time.
For example, I bought a PC which costs me 1000$ in the year 1999 when I joined my Masters degree in computer application. It has 5 GB of hard disk space and only 433 MB memory. This system was pricey but served my purpose to learn programs like C, COBOL and PASCAL during my college days. Things changed very fast when I started looking for job. Microsoft has already introduced DOTNET and after few months of struggle I secured a job in DOTNET. In 2006 I planned to buy another system which can run DOTNET because it requires a lot more things which my older system could ever have. Eventually I bought a laptop for 1000$ which has 120 GB of hard disk space and 2GB memory which is enormous upgrade from my previous PC for the same price. This new system can run any memory-hungry programs along with DOTNET. The point is technology will keep upgrading but consumers have to be smart enough to know their needs and not their wants.
Moving o to the serious issue about the waste of the resources, I did a simple thing by selling my old PC for around 100$; which implies that there are people who can still use the older one or can get some valuable parts out of it. Additionally, most of the computer parts are inexpensive and recyclable too. Definitely it pinches when you found that the HDTV you bought 2 months ago is now 200$ cheaper but that is the cost you need to pay if you want to walk along with technology and get the maximum fun out of it. Sometimes technology is fancy but sometimes it’s really urgent. So I should conclude by saying that follow the technology when you feel that you cannot do away without it.
Many electronics manufacturers intentionally create computers that will become obsolete within a few years. Consumer groups complain that this practice results in a waste of resources. Computer-makers claim that by shortening the product life cycle, they can quickly improve their products, incorporate rapidly-advancing technologies and ultimately lower the cost to the consumer.
Which position do you find more compelling? Explain your position using reasons and/or examples drawn from your personal experience, observations or readings.
My Argument :
I found the position of the electronics manufacturer more compelling. There is no denying of the fact that there will always be an incessant growth in any field you name whether it is electronics, aviation, motor-vehicles, communications, cell phones and what not. Even though, consumers are the one who have to bear the cost involved in the growth of the technology but it is them who are benefited largely at the same time.
For example, I bought a PC which costs me 1000$ in the year 1999 when I joined my Masters degree in computer application. It has 5 GB of hard disk space and only 433 MB memory. This system was pricey but served my purpose to learn programs like C, COBOL and PASCAL during my college days. Things changed very fast when I started looking for job. Microsoft has already introduced DOTNET and after few months of struggle I secured a job in DOTNET. In 2006 I planned to buy another system which can run DOTNET because it requires a lot more things which my older system could ever have. Eventually I bought a laptop for 1000$ which has 120 GB of hard disk space and 2GB memory which is enormous upgrade from my previous PC for the same price. This new system can run any memory-hungry programs along with DOTNET. The point is technology will keep upgrading but consumers have to be smart enough to know their needs and not their wants.
Moving o to the serious issue about the waste of the resources, I did a simple thing by selling my old PC for around 100$; which implies that there are people who can still use the older one or can get some valuable parts out of it. Additionally, most of the computer parts are inexpensive and recyclable too. Definitely it pinches when you found that the HDTV you bought 2 months ago is now 200$ cheaper but that is the cost you need to pay if you want to walk along with technology and get the maximum fun out of it. Sometimes technology is fancy but sometimes it’s really urgent. So I should conclude by saying that follow the technology when you feel that you cannot do away without it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)