46. The following appeared in a memorandum from the directors of a security and safety consulting service.
“Our research indicates that over the past six years no incidents of employee theft have been reported within ten of the companies that have been our clients. In analyzing the security practices of these ten companies, we have further learned that each of them requires its employees to wear photo identification badges while at work. In the future, therefore, we should recommend the use of such identification badges to all of our clients.”
安全保險服務(wù)經(jīng)理的備忘錄：
我們的研究指出，過去的6年中作為我們客戶的10家公司沒有被報道出有任何事故或員工盜竊行為。分析這10家公司的安全經(jīng)驗，我們了解到他們每家公司都要求員工工作時佩戴有照片的身份證章。因此，未來我們將把這種身份證章推薦給我們所有的顧客。
1. 沒有報道出來不一定代表沒有，可能是為了公司聲譽(yù)reputation fame prestige沒有說也可能是因為沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)
2. 一定是佩帶了有照片的身份證起了作用嗎？這個很難說。兩者只是碰巧同時發(fā)生，沒有必然的因果聯(lián)系。
3. 不是所有公司的員工偷盜問題都是很嚴(yán)重的。例如服務(wù)產(chǎn)品提供的公司。
1. 不一定沒有reported就是沒發(fā)生?？赡苁枪境鲇趓eputation的考慮，隱瞞conceal了偷竊。
2. 沒有因果關(guān)系，胸牌不一定是原因。可能是管理的比較好，員工更加cautious等等。
3. 不一定其他的公司也適用一樣的政策。很可能其他的公司不適合使用胸牌——比如服務(wù)業(yè)company who provide service rather than product，顧客比較多，并不好管理。
In this argument the directors of a security-and safety-consulting service conclude that the use of photo identification badges should be recommended to all of their clients as a means to prevent employee theft. Their conclusion is based on a study revealing that ten of their previous clients who use photo identification badges have had no incidents of employee theft over the past six-year period. The directors’ recommendation is problematic in several respects.
In the first place, the directors’ argument is based on the assumption that the reason for the lack of employee theft in the ten companies was the fact that their employees wear photo identification badges. However, the evidence revealed in their research establishes only a positive correlation between the lack of theft and the requirement to wear badges; it does not establish a causal connection between them. Other factors, such as the use of surveillance cameras or spot checks of employees’ briefcases and purses could be responsible for lack of employee theft within the ten companies analyzed.
In the second place, the directors assume that employee theft is a problem that is common among their clients and about which their clients are equally concerned. However, for some of their clients this might not be a problem at all. For example, companies that sell services are much less likely to be concerned about employee theft than those who sell products. Moreover, those that sell small products would be more concerned about theft than those that sell large products. Consequently, even if wearing badges reduces employee theft, it might not be necessary for all of the firm’s clients to follow this practice.
In conclusion, the director’s recommendation is not well supported. To strengthen the conclusion they must establish a causal relation between the wearing of identification badges and the absence of employee theft. They also must establish that the firm’s clients are sufficiently similar to all profit from this practice.
“Our research indicates that over the past six years no incidents of employee theft have been reported within ten of the companies that have been our clients. In analyzing the security practices of these ten companies, we have further learned that each of them requires its employees to wear photo identification badges while at work. In the future, therefore, we should recommend the use of such identification badges to all of our clients.”
安全保險服務(wù)經(jīng)理的備忘錄：
我們的研究指出，過去的6年中作為我們客戶的10家公司沒有被報道出有任何事故或員工盜竊行為。分析這10家公司的安全經(jīng)驗，我們了解到他們每家公司都要求員工工作時佩戴有照片的身份證章。因此，未來我們將把這種身份證章推薦給我們所有的顧客。
1. 沒有報道出來不一定代表沒有，可能是為了公司聲譽(yù)reputation fame prestige沒有說也可能是因為沒有發(fā)現(xiàn)
2. 一定是佩帶了有照片的身份證起了作用嗎？這個很難說。兩者只是碰巧同時發(fā)生，沒有必然的因果聯(lián)系。
3. 不是所有公司的員工偷盜問題都是很嚴(yán)重的。例如服務(wù)產(chǎn)品提供的公司。
1. 不一定沒有reported就是沒發(fā)生?？赡苁枪境鲇趓eputation的考慮，隱瞞conceal了偷竊。
2. 沒有因果關(guān)系，胸牌不一定是原因。可能是管理的比較好，員工更加cautious等等。
3. 不一定其他的公司也適用一樣的政策。很可能其他的公司不適合使用胸牌——比如服務(wù)業(yè)company who provide service rather than product，顧客比較多，并不好管理。
In this argument the directors of a security-and safety-consulting service conclude that the use of photo identification badges should be recommended to all of their clients as a means to prevent employee theft. Their conclusion is based on a study revealing that ten of their previous clients who use photo identification badges have had no incidents of employee theft over the past six-year period. The directors’ recommendation is problematic in several respects.
In the first place, the directors’ argument is based on the assumption that the reason for the lack of employee theft in the ten companies was the fact that their employees wear photo identification badges. However, the evidence revealed in their research establishes only a positive correlation between the lack of theft and the requirement to wear badges; it does not establish a causal connection between them. Other factors, such as the use of surveillance cameras or spot checks of employees’ briefcases and purses could be responsible for lack of employee theft within the ten companies analyzed.
In the second place, the directors assume that employee theft is a problem that is common among their clients and about which their clients are equally concerned. However, for some of their clients this might not be a problem at all. For example, companies that sell services are much less likely to be concerned about employee theft than those who sell products. Moreover, those that sell small products would be more concerned about theft than those that sell large products. Consequently, even if wearing badges reduces employee theft, it might not be necessary for all of the firm’s clients to follow this practice.
In conclusion, the director’s recommendation is not well supported. To strengthen the conclusion they must establish a causal relation between the wearing of identification badges and the absence of employee theft. They also must establish that the firm’s clients are sufficiently similar to all profit from this practice.