essay - GMAT: Argument 18

The following is an excerpt from a memo written by the head of a governmental department:

"Neither stronger ethics regulations nor stronger enforcement mechanisms are necessary to ensure ethical behavior by companies doing business with this department. We already have a code of ethics that companies doing business with this department are urged to abide by, and virtually all of these companies have agreed to follow it. We also know that the code is relevant to the current business environment because it was approved within the last year, and in direct response to specific violations committed by companies with which we were then working?not in abstract anticipation of potential violations, as so many such codes are."

Discuss how well reasoned . . . etc.

Answer:
The author, a head of a government department, concludes that the department doesn't need stronger ethics regulations and stronger enforcement mechanisms by stating that it has already had a code of ethics and that it is new and reliable. The argument, however, contains at least two major flaws.

First, the author insists that the ethnic code is relevant to the current business environment because of its newness, since it was approved within last year, but this is unconvincing in today's fast-changing business world. Any organization, especially governmental organizations, should keep its codes or procedures updated, since new types of violation come next to next not only with unintentional affairs but also with intentional malice. For instance, in my country, Japan, recently an affair was closed up. The incident was that government agents had been regularly bribed by taxi drivers that they use. Beer or snacks were served in the taxi they rode by using taxes. Surprising. Therefore, any organization needs to keep a close eye on any new violations possibly affecting the organization.

Second, the author says that the code was created in the form of responding to specific violations committed by companies and then the code is reliable in comparison with to other codes which are abstract. This is the same as the code is only for incidents that happened actually in the past and cannot respond to the others. That is, although being specific and realistic is a good thing, finite past experience has by nature a limitation. Therefore, the code should be created not only specifically but also comprehensively by taking examples from the past and by enforcing it from theories and lessons learned from other organizations.

To sum up, although the author tries to convince the readers that the origination the author belongs to, which is a government organization, already has an effective code for any violations, the argument fails to make it convincing owing to the flaws I mentioned above.