Strong/Weak Points the Strongest Element

¶ … Strong/Weak Points

The strongest element of this response, which is not to say that the other elements are not strong, is the organizational clarity of the paper. It is very easy to see exactly what the argument is at each phase, not only because of the clear subheadings but also because of the cohesiveness and focus of each paragraph in the paper. Progression of information within paragraphs was also very clear and helped to build the arguments in a logical, consistent, and detail-oriented manner. The weakest point of this paper, if one has to be selected, would be the content. Most of the content is very strong, but there are certain considerations that the argument ignores and that should have been addressed. The points that are made very well, and the content as a whole is quite lucid, detailed, and rational, but the pieces that are missing detract from the strength of the overall argument presented.

Argument

The situation that is being addressed is very clearly described, with abundant specific details and yet with a brevity that makes the case and issues easily understandable. Additional information regarding other possible alternatives or in-house solutions to the pollution problems would have made an interesting addition that possibly could have expanded options. The major problems, identified as the need to somehow adapt manufacturing and react to potential pollutant issues, were well supported. No additional information was necessary to thoroughly understand the issues the company was facing in this case.

Very clear recommendations have been made as proposed solutions to both of the identified problems in this case. The recommended solution to the manufacturing issue is to add a second manufacturing line to the current facilities, to be operated during normal business hours and supervised by the current plant supervisor; though costing more in equipment, this will save the company money in labor and time delays. The recommendation for the pollution issue is to ignore governmental regulations and possible safety and environmental concerns. The analyses of these issues and their proposed solutions are very well developed, with quantitative details and qualitative concerns both expressed quite clearly. The major lack in the recommendations for the environmental issue, however, is the major issue in the paper as a whole -- there is very little concern for the ethicality of the situation. This could be strengthened by exploring the issue of whether or not governmental guidelines were established on firm science and not simply using anecdotal evidence of perceived safety and a low risk of getting caught as reasons to pursue this course of action.

Format/Organization

The format very clearly and directly follows the guidelines given, and is quite clear in its argument because of this. Each section and each paragraph develops its own focused idea, while at the same time each of these individual ideas serve the central ideas and arguments of the paper quite well and logically flow, building information and ideas in a logical manner. No irrelevant information is included, though again certain issues are ignored.

Grammar