GMAT Questions Up Close -- Analysis of an Argument

GMAT Home > GMAT Questions Up Close > Analysis of an Argument

T E A C H Y O U R S E L F
GMAT Questions Up Close—
Analysis of an Argument

HERE YOU'LL FIND a simulated GMAT Analysis-of-Argument question, along with my sample response to the question. Here are the key "specs" for the GMAT Analysis-of-Argument section:

NUMBER OF QUESTIONS:

TEST SECTION: As a separate 30-minute section—either section 1 or 2 of the exam

FORMAT: You use the built-in word processor to compose an essay response to a topic. (The CAT system does not allow you to choose among topics.)

SKILLS TESTED: (1) Your ability to identify important features of an argument and to analyze and critique the argument in an insightful and well-reasoned manner; (2) your control of the English language (word choice and usage) and the conventions (grammar and sentence structure) of standard written English

DIRECTIONS: Here are the directions that will appear on your screen at the beginning of the timed Analysis-of-Argument section (you'll dismiss these directions and move ahead to the writing task by clicking on the DISMISS DIRECTIONS button).

Directions: In this section you will need to write a critique of the argument presented. You are NOT being asked to present your own views on the subject.
Writing Your Response: Take a few minutes to think about the argument and plan a response before you begin writing. Be sure to organize your ideas and develop them fully, but leave time to reread you response and make any revisions that you think are necessary.
Evaluation of Your Response: College and university faculty members from various subject-matter areas, including management eduction, will evaluate the overall quality of your thinking and writing. They will consider how well you
organize, develop, and express your ideas about the argument presented
provide relevant supporting reasons and examples
control the elements of standard written English
To review these directions at any time during this section, click on HELP.

Here's a simulated Analysis-of-Argument question, which is similar to many of the ones in the testing service's official pool:

Simulated Analysis-of-Argument Question

The following appeared in a memo from the sales director of Aura Cosmetics Company:

"The best way to reverse Aura Cosmetic's recent decline in profitability is to require each new employee in Aura's sales division to enroll in the popular SureSale seminar. Last year, the software company TechAide began incorporating SureSale's week-long seminar into its training program for all new sales employees, and since that time TechAide's total sales have increased dramatically. Also, according to a recent article in a reputable business magazine, the SureSale sales system has been widely adopted among the nation's twenty largest companies, and the employee turnover rate at these companies is lower today than five years ago. Therefore, by enrolling Aura sales employees in the SureSale seminar Aura will also retain its highest caliber salespeople."

Discuss how logically convincing you find this argument. In your discussion, you should analyze the argument's line of reasoning and use of evidence. It may be appropriate in your critique to call into question certain assumptions underlying the argument and/or to indicate what evidence might weaken or strengthen the argument. It may also be appropriate to discuss how you would alter the argument to make it more convincing and/or discuss what additional evidence, if any, would aid in evaluating the argument.

Now here's a sample response to this question. As you read the response, keep in mind:

This response meets all the official criteria for a score of 6 (the highest possible score).

I didn't compose this response under timed conditions; the essay is intended as a model—or benchmark. Take heart: You can attain a top score of 6 with an essay that is a bit briefer and less polished than mine.
Sample Response (525 Words)
In this argument Aura's sales director relies on certain anecdotal evidence about one other company, as well as certain statistics about general trends among large companies, to convince us of the merits of enrolling certain ABC employees in the SureSale seminar. Close inspection of this evidence reveals, however, that it provides scant support at best for the director's argument.
Turning first to the anecdotal evidence, the director assumes too hastily that the SureSale seminar--rather than some other phenomenon--was responsible for the increase in TechAide's total sales. Perhaps the increase simply reflected general economic or supply-demand trends, or a misstep on the part of TechAide's chief competitor. For that matter, perhaps the increase is attributable to certain TechAide salespeople who are not new employees and who did not take the seminar. Without eliminating these and other plausible explanations for the increase in sales at TechAide, the director cannot convince me that the SureSale seminar was responsible for the increase--let alone that it would also enhance sales at Aura.
Even if TechAide's sales increase is attributable to SureSale, the director's argument rests on the additional assumption that the seminar would provide a similar benefit at Aura. However, the memo fails to account for possible differences between Aura and TechAide that might have a bearing on the seminar's effectiveness. For example, perhaps the SureSale system is effective for companies that provide services and/or are technology-oriented, but ineffective for companies such as Aura that offer traditional products. If so, the memo's recommendation would be indefensible--at least based on TechAide's experience.
Turning to the memo's statistics about the largest twenty companies, the director fails to account for any possible reason--other than the SureSale method--for the decline in employee turnover. Even if SureSale deserves credit for this decline, it is unreasonable to conclude on this basis that Aura would benefit similarly by adopting the SureSale method. The increase in employee turnover at Aura might be due to certain factors--such as working conditions--that would remain unaffected by the seminar. If so, then the proposed course of action might not suffice to retain Aura's best salespeople.
Finally, even assuming the SureSale seminar would serve to enhance Aura's profitability and reduce its employee turnover, the director has not convinced me that the proposed course of action is a necessary means toward these ends. Perhaps some other sales seminar, or certain cost-cutting measures, would prove more effective in enhancing Aura's profitability. By the same token, perhaps some other course of action--such as revising Aura's personnel policies or work environment--would be more effective in reducing employee turnover.
In sum, as it stands the director's argument is weak. To strengthen it the director should provide statistical evidence showing that companies similar to Aura that have adopted the SureSale program have tended to benefit from it--both in terms of profitability and employee turnover. To better assess the argument, it would be useful to compare the proven benefits of the SureSale seminar to those of similar seminars. It would also be useful to conduct a cost-benefit analysis of alternative courses of action--including various revenue-enhancing as well as cost-cutting measures.

Home | Top
.