61. The following appeared as part of a recommendation by one of the directors of the Beta Company.
The Alpha Company has just reduced its workforce1 by laying off fifteen percent of its employees in all pisions and at all levels, and it is encouraging early retirement2 for other employees. As you know, the Beta Company manufactures some products similar to Alphas, but our profits have fallen over the last few years. To improve Betas competitive position, we should try to hire a significant number of Alphas former workers, since these experienced workers can provide valuable information about Alphas successful methods, will require little training, and will be particularly motivated to compete against Alpha.
企业的一个经理人的一份建议书：
公司通过在所有部门和所有层次裁减了15％的职员降低了员工，它还鼓励其他职员提前退休。如你所知，公司生产部分和公司类似的商品，但大家的价值在过去几年内降低了。为了提升的竞争优势，大家应该试着雇用大量的的前雇员，由于这类有经验的工人将提供关于成功办法的有用信息，而且基本无需培训，并将更有动力与角逐。
1. According to the common sense the workers who are laid off are always the least effective and well-experienced.
2. Whether the Alpha Company is successful or not is still open to doubt.
3. The recruitment will bring benefit to the company and cosplayt at the same time. No conclusion can be given until the benefit-cosplayt analysis has been made.
4. The products the two companies manufacture are just similar. The skills the Alpha company's workers own will not be applicable to the Beta company.
1. A企业的雇员是不是能提供有用信息还不了解。由于被说服退休的，非常可能是效率低下的，从事非核心的工作。
2. 没证据证明A公司是不是收益上升，大概也是降低，甚至降低的更快。所以A的雇员即便提供信息也未必有用。
3. A与B是不是有足够相似，非常可能差非常远。只有一些相似商品，不代表所有，而且非常可能并非这类商品致使的价值降低。
4. 非常可能得到的价值不可以补偿多雇佣的职员的cosplayt。
A director of Beta Company suggests that Beta can improve its competitive position by hiring a significant number of former Alpha Company employees who have recently retired3 or been laid off. The directors reasoning is that because Alpha manufactures some products similar to Betas, former Alpha employees would be experienced and need little training, could provide valuable information about Alphas successful methods, and would be particularly motivated to compete against Alpha. The directors argument is problematic in several respects.
First of all, the argument presupposes that Alphas methods are successful. This is not necessarily the case. To the contrary, the fact that Alpha has laid off 15 percent of its employees in every pision and at every level suggests that Alphas methods may have been unsuccessful and that downsizing was necessary for the company to minimize financial losses.
Secondly4, the director assumes that the former Alpha employees hired by Beta will be well-trained and valuable. During a typical lay-off, however, the best and most experienced employees are typically the last to be laid off. By following the directors advice, Beta would probably be hiring Alphas least efficient and least experienced employeesthat is, those who would be least valuable to Beta.
Thirdly, the author assumes that Alpha and Beta are sufficiently5 similar so that former Alpha employees could provide special value for Beta. However, we are informed only that Beta manufactures some products similar to Alphas. It is possible that former Alpha employees have experience with only a small segment of Betas product line, and thus have little inside information of any value to Beta.
Finally, the claim that former Alpha employees would be motivated to compete against Alpha is partially6 unwarranted. While many of those who were laid off may be so motivated, those who retired early from Alpha probably departed on good terms with Alpha, and would in any event be unmotivated to reenter the work force.
In conclusion, the argument fails to provide key facts needed to assess it. To better evaluate the directors suggestion, we would need more information about why Alpha reduced its work force, what type of workers left Alpha and under what circumstances, and how similar Alphas range of products is to Betas.
相关文章推荐
