Many corporations have begun decorating their halls with motivational posters in hopes of boosting their employees' motivation to work productively. However, Support almost all employees at these corporations are already motivated to work productively. So Conclusion these corporations' use of motivational posters is unlikely to achieve its intended purpose.
The author concludes that motivational posters in certain corporations are unlikely to boost employees’ motivation to work productively. She supports this by saying that most employees at these corporations are already motivated to work productively.
The author assumes that the motivational posters won’t increase employees’ motivation, just because employees at these corporations are already motivated. She overlooks the possibility that the posters could make employees even more motivated than they already are.
The reasoning in the argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that the argument
fails to consider whether corporations that do not currently use motivational posters would increase their employees' motivation to work productively if they began using the posters
The author’s argument only addresses “these corporations’ use of motivational posters,” referring to the many corporations who have already begun hanging motivational posters. Whether any other corporations might benefit from the posters is irrelevant.
takes for granted that, with respect to their employees' motivation to work productively, corporations that decorate their halls with motivational posters are representative of corporations in general
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of hasty generalization. The author doesn’t make this mistake. Her conclusion isn’t about corporations in general, it’s only about the corporations that decorate their halls with motivational posters.
fails to consider that even if motivational posters do not have one particular beneficial effect for corporations, they may have similar effects that are equally beneficial
Even if motivational posters do have other beneficial effects, this doesn’t impact the author’s argument. Her conclusion is simply that the posters are unlikely to achieve their intended purpose, which is to boost employees’ motivation to work productively.
does not adequately address the possibility that employee productivity is strongly affected by factors other than employees' motivation to work productively
The author’s argument is only about the posters’ effect on employees’ motivation to work productively. Whether their productivity is also affected by other factors is irrelevant.
fails to consider that even if employees are already motivated to work productively, motivational posters may increase that motivation
The author assumes that the posters won’t boost motivation, just because the employees at these corporations are already motivated. She fails to consider that the posters could increase employees’ motivation even more.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnostic