The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company. “Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a 500-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read would cost Acme only $500 per employee—a small price to pay when you consider the benefits. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, to improve productivity, Acme should require all of our employees to take the Easy Read course.” 

• Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the advice and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the advice.

In this article, the personnel director of Acme Publishing Company advises that the company should require all its employees to take the Easy Read Course. Although his recommendation draws a tempting prospect, the author leaves at least three questions unanswered, which dramatically undermines his arguments.

First, we shall question the corrleation between reading speed and information absorption per day. Admittedly, capacity of text processing is crucial for publishing industry, but how would speed-reading enhance it?  The author lists two examples to support his claim , yet it’s dubious whether such isolated instances-presumably cherrypicked role models-would warrant such a bold conclusion. Those bright graduates of the course might acquire sufficent reading skills prior to taking courses, and the swift promotion of an assiatnt manager may result from proficiencies other than high-speed reading. Therefore, it’s unwise to follow their path to pursue fast reading training.

Moreover, the price adavntages of Easy Read program are unclear. Without comparative analysis of similar traing progframs, we can’t determine if Easy Read has the most favorable price and service quality. Maybe there’re training program that’s cheaper and more taliored to the needs of the company. As for additional benefits mentioned, such as available seminars and permannent subscription, we are still unable to fully evaluate its utility. Probably, the three-week seminar is lethargic lectures filled with hackneyed knowledge, while the Easy Read newsletters are self-repeating foolish advertisements pleading for furthe purchases. In this case, the 500 dollar price doesn’t justify taking the course as a profitable investment.

Furthermore, the author neglects comprehensive discussion of trade-off between the readopportunity costs of the company. To implement a training program for alll the employees require a coordinated effort inisde the company. As the author doesn’t descibe the timetable for trainees of the course, it’s diffcult to predict how much time should be allocated. Perhaps introducing this course would cause time mismanagemnts. Besides, the course context might be incompatible with the company’s system, giving rise to chaos rather than productivity improvements.

In a nutshell, the author offers an immature recommendation which lacks practical sense. More information shall be gathered and discussed before subsequent concrete actions are taken.