▶ Your Answer :
Claiming
that Climpson can increase profitability by monitoring its employees’ computer
use for private purposes, the author here tries to conclude that the company
should implement electronic monitoring on the employees workstations. However,
this argument relies on a series of unproven assumptions, regardless of stated
or unstated, thus is not persuasive enough. The argument needs more supporting
data to be more appropriate since several assumptions are not clearly analyzed
well such as: the correlation between installation of the software and
productivity, the possibility of employees’ new strategy on the monitoring
policy, and the impact from the expense of the software installation.
First
of all, the write here assumed that installation of the software will lead to
higher productivity since it can save more time from using computers for
private reasons. It might be true if the software does not have any other side
effects that can influence the employees’ productivity. However, what if the
software slows down the productivity? Common senses tell us that more programs can
cause slower system. Furthermore, when considering the “monitoring” function,
it is more likely that the software will slow down the personal workstations,
which will lead to lower productivity. Thus, the first assumption about that
installing software can address the concern is doubtful to some extent.
In
addition, even though the monitoring system is well designed and implemented, there
is still a possibility that workers use different strategies to do the private
tasks such as shopping or playing games. For instance, a majority of people
nowadays have smartphones that are connected to the Internet without a cable line.
By using those devices in a cafeteria or restroom, employees will be capable of
doing such recreational activities even though the monitoring system goes live.
Or perhaps some brilliant people may develop an anti-monitoring software to
bypass the program. Therefore, this unstated assumption about the employees’
reaction should be taken into account as well.
Lastly,
another unstated assumption is about the cost of the software. The author seems
to surely assume that the cost will be not a big concern; however, if the expense
for the software turns out more expensive than expected, it will probably
offset the company’s revenue. This is definitely not what the company wants to
encounter. Also, in order to maintain the monitoring system, they may need to
hire more people for the job. These expense issues are not stated in the claim,
yet are critical to the decision making, thus, should be analyzed with a full
attention.
In
sum, even though the HR vice president’s message seems persuasive, the claim
itself is not persuasive because its assumptions, both stated and unstated, are
based on scant evidence. Rather, the author should provide data and analysis
about the relationship between the monitoring software and productivity, foreseeable
employees’ reactions on the policy, and maintaining expense concerns. By adding
these thoughts, the claim would be more convincing to readers. |