The following appeared in a report presented for discussion at a meeting of the directors of a company that manufactures parts for heavy machinery:
"The falling revenues that the company is experiencing coincide with delays in manufac-turing. These delays, in turn, are due in large part to poor planning in purchasing metals.
Consider further that the manager of the department that handles purchasing of raw ma-terials has an excellent background in general business, psychology, and sociology, but knows little about the properties of metals. The company should, therefore, move the purchasing manager to the sales department and bring in a scientist from the research division to be manager of the purchasing department."
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. In your discussion be sure to analyze the line of reasoning and the use of evidence in the argument. For example, you may need to consider what questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and what alternative explanations or counterexamples might weaken the conclusion. You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what, if anything, would help you better evaluate its conclusion.
Understand the argument
The report states that the revenues of a manufacturing company are decreasing and delves into the causes for the same. It claims that the declining revenues of the company accompany delays in manufacturing, implying that the former is caused by the latter. The report cites inef-ficient planning by the purchasing manager to be responsible for the delays in manufacturing and the resultant slump in revenues. Though the report concedes that the manager possesses good business knowledge and is well-informed on general psychology and sociology, his lack of technical knowledge on properties of metals is identified as an impediment. To overcome this problem and consequently boost up revenues, the report suggests appointing a scientist from the research department as the new manager of the purchasing department and shifting the purchasing manager to the sales department.
Faulty assumptions
• Coincidence of declining revenues and delays in manufacturing imply a cause and effect relationship
• Delays caused in manufacturing can directly be attributed to the manager’s performance
• Knowledge of metal properties is enough for proper planning for purchasing metals
• The purchasing manager can fit in the sales department without affecting the perfor-mance of either department
• There are no other factors that have caused the decline in revenues
• The scientist would have or develop knowledge of general business, psychology, and sociology
Missing evidence
• Proof that delay in manufacturing is responsible for decline in revenues
• Proof that poor planning in purchasing of metals is responsible for the delay in manu-facturing and the manager is accountable for this poor planning
• Proof that it is the manager’s lack of knowledge about metal properties that has caused poor planning and delays in manufacturing
• Proof that the scientist has the necessary general business, psychology, and sociology know-how
Counter-examples
• What if there is no direct cause and effect relationship between delays in manufacturing and declining revenues?
• What if there are some other factors that have caused a decline in revenues?
• What if the delays were in fact being caused due to lack of funds arising out of declining revenues in the first place?
• What if the manager does not fit in the sales department and sales decrease resulting in further declining revenues?
• What if the scientist lacks knowledge in general business, psychology and sociology which may also result in poor planning of purchasing metals?
The essay
A company operating in the business of manufacturing heavy machinery is experiencing de-clining revenues. The report tabled in a meeting of the directors draws a correlation between the declining revenues of the company and delays in manufacturing. The report further states that these delays are caused by poor planning on part of the purchasing manager. His lack of knowledge on metal properties is cited as a reason for his poor performance. The report suggests bringing in a scientist from the research department as a solution for the problem.
It also suggests moving the purchasing manager to the sales department. The argument is riddled with numerous incorrect assumptions and suggests a solution without relying on sub-stantial evidence to support it.
The first flaw in the argument sets in when the report assumes that two things happening at the same time necessarily have to have a cause and effect relationship. The report only states that delays in manufacturing and decline in revenues are happening at the same time. This doesn’t mean that decline in revenues is due to the delays in manufacturing. The decline in revenues may be a result of other factors such as decline in sales, increased cost of raw mate-rials, changed market conditions, etc. It is in fact possible that the delay in manufacturing is a result of lack of funds arising out of declining revenues. The second flaw in the argument is the assumption that the purchasing manager is solely responsible for the delays in manufac-turing and none of the other employees or practices in the department can be responsible for this delay. Thirdly, the argument baselessly assumes that it is the manager’s lack of knowledge
on metal properties that has caused poor planning in purchasing metals and the subsequent delay. The report doesn’t provide any evidence which can support the claim that one has to have proper knowledge of metal properties to make successful purchase decisions.
As a solution, the report suggests appointing a scientist from the research department as a manager of the purchasing department and the purchase manager to be moved to the sales department. This suggestion is highly questionable as it relies on many faulty assumptions.
First, it fails to take into account the possibility that the scientist may not have the required business acumen to work successfully in the purchase department. The argument suggests that the former manager has excellent background in general business, psychology, and soci-ology, and it is not evident that the scientist possesses these qualities to run the purchasing activities efficiently. Secondly, the argument assumes that since the said person is a scientist, he/she ought to have knowledge on metal properties. Lastly, the argument doesn’t consider the other repercussions that this move may have, such as – the former manager may not fit in the sales department and this may cause declines in the sales in turn resulting in declining revenues, the scientist’s lack of general business knowledge may result in losses far greater than gains he may provide owing to his knowledge of metals, etc.
In order to address the problem of declining revenues, the directors of the company need to first assess the main reasons for this decline. Arriving at a solution is only possible when the right cause has been identified. After all the responsible factors have been identified, it pays to understand what corrective actions the company can take to remedy the situation.
The directors need to assess if they can reduce production costs, increase sales and plug any knowledge gaps that its employees may have. Presently, the argument only looks at one cause, whose link to the problem itself is questionable, and goes on to delve on unimportant aspects to improve the situation.